• The new B5TV.COM is here. We've replaced our 16 year old software with flashy new XenForo install. Registration is open again. Password resets will work again. More info here.

Commnader-in-Chief on ABC (SPOILERS)

Has anyone been watching Commander-in-Chief on ABC, the story of a female VP who takes the oath as president when the elected president dies in office? I'm pretty impressed so far. It seems to be everything that West Wing used to be, plus a little more.



SPOILERS



There's one thing about the setup that is a little far-fetched. I can believe that a woman could be vice-president or even president, but it's a little hard to believe that she could be an Independent and still win the VP nom. Regardless of the plausibility it puts an interesting twist on the show. Because she's a replacement president, and a woman, and an Independent, she knows she's gone in two years (the remainder of the dead Pres. Bridges' term). So, she's not out to please anyone politically; she's just out to get things done and do the right thing. If anything, it makes her even more ballsy, than the typical male president elected in the regular way.

Donald Sutherland does a great job as Speaker of the House. He tries his best to act supportive to Pres. Allen to her face, but secretly he wants her gone and is probably hiding some jealousy at not getting the president position himself.

So far, each episode has had an interesting hook at the end. In the first episode, Pres. Allen, just barely sworn into the office, sends troops to rescue a woman threatened with a death sentence in a foreign country for having a child out of wedlock.

In the 2nd episode, the Speaker pulls a sneaky move to undermine Pres. Allen's choice for VP. Allen remains aggressively persistent with her first choice who turns out to be the VP candidate who opposed her in the original election that Pres. Bridges won.

In last night's episode, some Americans are killed in San Pasquale whose legitimate democratic government has been overthrown by a military dictator, General Sanchez. Allen is determined to bring Sanchez to justice. Her staff gives her few options. She decides to destroy all the coca farms in San Pasquale. The Speaker reminds her that the country's entire economy depends on those plants and that not all of the product is used for bad purposes. Secretly planning a compromise, she goes off-text during her address to the nation and threatens to destroy only 25% of the crops per week until Sanchez is overthrown and the elected President returned to office. She encourages the citizens to take back their country (this shocks the Speaker of the House; he can't believe the pres. has called for a coup). The plan works within a few hours and she orders the crop dusters to turn around and not destroy the crops -- BUT she still authorizes the F-15's to take out the secret cocaine laboratories. Really good ending to a really good episode.

I think this show has potential. Geena Davis's voice is a just slightly annoying (and her lower jaw area looks oddly puffy), but the character is likable and believable.

I look forward to seeing if/how they handle future storylines about the Middle East. With Hillary Clinton and Condoleeza Rice being potential presidential candidates in 2008, it might be good to have an idea (even if a hypothetical, dramatized one) of how the Muslim world might react to a female U.S. president. I believe that if a woman is as qualified as any other male candidate, there's no reason she can't be president or at least VP. I just find it strange that the potential for it happening hasn't come to a head until this era. With the conflict in the Middle East, you'd think this would be the most dangerous time to make such a move. But, regardless of real life, the concept makes for good TV.
 
I've watched all three episodes so far, and am very fond of it. I wonder though, about the fuss of a female President not being able to handle the middle East. Pakistan is a Country with it's own share of Fundamental Muslims, and had a female leader (Who, by the way, was the one responsible for setting up the Taliban in Afghanistan), Hannah Ashrawi (SP?) has been a very strong voice in the PLO for a number of years, Queen Noor is highly respected, and I believe wouldn't have a very difficult time ascending to the leadership position if the King was to die (And she's not even of Mid-Eastern descent, although she is a Muslim). Indonesia has (or had) a female leader, and is the most populous Muslim Nation. So, I think the important thing is to know the mindset, and how to deal with the people, rather than a pre-requisite of being a man.
 
I look forward to seeing if/how they handle future storylines about the Middle East. With Hillary Clinton and Condoleeza Rice being potential presidential candidates in 2008, it might be good to have an idea (even if a hypothetical, dramatized one) of how the Muslim world might react to a female U.S. president.

Mrs Thatcher was treated as an honorary man.
 
I look forward to seeing if/how they handle future storylines about the Middle East. With Hillary Clinton and Condoleeza Rice being potential presidential candidates in 2008, it might be good to have an idea (even if a hypothetical, dramatized one) of how the Muslim world might react to a female U.S. president.

Mrs Thatcher was treated as an honorary man.

I was gonna mention Maggie, but, was unsure if she had much dealings with the Middle East as a Fundamentalist place. She was in Reagan's era, and Reagan's right arm, so, I thought her dealings with enemies would be with the Communists (as we found with Condi Rice's advice is not the same thing)
 
I was gonna mention Maggie, but, was unsure if she had much dealings with the Middle East as a Fundamentalist place. She was in Reagan's era, and Reagan's right arm, so, I thought her dealings with enemies would be with the Communists (as we found with Condi Rice's advice is not the same thing)

Britain has large interests in the Middle East, many separate from the USA. Her husband was also a director of Castrol Oil (he resigned when she became leader of the Conservative Party).
 
Andrew, the point I was making/question I was asking is about the Middle East seeing her as an enemy, rather than as a partner head of State. In my mind, that would seem to be a drastic distinction. I completely understand Britain has mnay dealings in the US, but, were they "heated" dealings, that needed to be handled with the proper balance of strength/force and understanding/compromise as enemies? Or simply business dealings with a partner.
 
Reread what I said. I was not talking about Thatcher's dealings with the USA but with the Arabs.

You may wish to look into the story behind the big airport BAE SYSTEMS built in Saudi Arabia.
 
Oops, my bad, that was a typo, that shouldn't have read:
I completely understand Britain has many dealings in the US,

it should have said in the Middle East.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Back
Top