No Questions Asked

I have only recently been able to watch the television series “Commander in Chief” and after seeing the first six episodes I am convinced that this is the best propaganda tool that I have seen in the U.S. in a long time.

The Bush administration has done some good work and it is hard to top the pre-packaged PR pieces “reported” by former newswoman Karen Ryan. The Government Accountability Office called them “covert propaganda.” The Bush administration spent $254 million on public relations contracts in its first term and many more items have surely slipped past an unsuspecting public.

Still, “Commander in Chief” will be far more effective in rousing a nationalistic fervor among liberals, woman and those who are beginning to voice opposition to the president’s policies.

The program stars Gina Davis, a liberal independent Vice President who inherits the presidency after the conservative who holds the office dies suddenly. The President asks her to resign before dying, but she refuses and takes the oath of office.

The show is entertaining and appealing in many ways and its strength as a propaganda tool lies in the fact that it can easily be dismissed by conservatives who highlight the fact that Davis is a liberal, independent woman and applauded by liberal, independents (and especially women) for the same reasons. I would love to see a woman in the White House and for human rights to be an agenda item.

Davis plays a strong politician who is guided by her beliefs about what is morally right and wrong; not what is politically right and wrong. She is pitted against charismatic Donald Sutherland who plays a savvy Republican Speaker of the House guided by what is politically right and wrong with little consideration about morals. He believes morals do not have a place in politics, yet he continuously talks about his love for the country and its vision for the future. The mix makes for an entertaining program.

In the few episodes that I have seen, the President has overthrown a corrupt South American regime run by a drug lord and re-installed the democratically elected leader by calling for an uprising. Miraculously, the drug lord was removed without any mention of violence or bloodshed. The people of the country simply marched to the administration building, gained the support of the military and the drug lord was removed. Oh, and she destroys cocaine labs for good measure.

Davis rescued a woman in a Nigerian prison awaiting death by stoning for an adulterous affair. Again, the government handed the woman over without fanfare and no deaths or injuries were sustained by anyone. There was no political backlash by the humiliated Nigerian government and the apparently high-profile case simple disappeared from the headlines. The hidden message behind the episode was “when America talks, the world listens.”

God bless America! We spread democracy and freedom around the world, helping those who are oppressed by “evil” doers.

But the President didn’t stop there. She convinced the Russian government to free dissident journalists wrongfully imprisoned (I believe she said something like “what are we without a free press?”). She agreed to try to help fast-track Russia into the WTO in exchange for the journalist’s freedom, but said she couldn’t make any promises it would occur. The Russian President didn’t demand anything more.

She then thwarted a major terrorist attack on U.S. elementary schools by Muslim terrorists. This was done two ways: by swift action by members of the U.S. military who swooped down and found lists of targets and names of bombers, and by torturing a terrorist who was caught crossing the border with explosives.

This was meant to be a serious message to Americans and while Davis stated she was firmly against torture (and fired the woman who ordered it to be done) others repeatedly affirmed that torture was sometimes the only way to combat terrorists who want to harm our children.

The episode was fascinating — for those on the fence about whether torture was effective, this show affirmed that it is, indeed, exceptionally effective and often necessary. The reality is that it is often useless.

Those who oppose torture would applaud Davis’ stance but might acknowledge — as her liberal White House staffers did in the show — that they got lucky that the military found the information in time to stop the attacks. Even her purportedly liberal Palestinian assistant said he was “not big on terrorist having rights. I say blow the bastard alive” and if torture would “mean stopping him and nabbing other terrorists then why not do whatever it takes?”

It concluded with the Justice department official complaining that the military maneuver cost millions of dollars, a future intelligence post and left two soldiers injured. The torture yielded more information and cost nothing but a terrorist pain. The Justice representative told the President “we have limited resources and there are limitless threats” and in the end torture yielded more information more efficiently.

And later the President was congratulated by her nemesis for “understanding the burdens of the necessary evil.”

I was also offended by the many attempts to remind viewers that women really can’t handle the job because they are too naive and emotional. Davis’ character is cool and obviously unafraid to lead. But she often does come across as naive, especially since she has supposedly been in Washington for many years.

She should have known that when she told the Justice Department that she didn’t want to “hear” that the captured terrorist was tortured that it would be understood that she was ordering the torture and trying to maintain a distance by not being briefed about its outcome.

Much of the show concentrates on the fact that Davis is a woman. She is told Muslim nations would never accept a woman leader (I believe that was stated as a “fact’). Davis did not mention that many countries have women leaders or that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan had elected a woman (Benazir Bhutto was elected Prime Minister in 1988 and 1990) and that Great Britain thrived under Margaret Thatcher. Chile, Germany and Liberia recently elected women.

Worst of all, the program never addresses any of the many negative consequences of U.S. policy decisions worldwide. The President’s decisions to use military force in countries would have resulted in civilian casualties and deaths. These were never noted or discussed. It leaves the impression that the U.S. can do no wrong — that it is the world’s moral leader, spreading peace and democracy to the world. The U.S. doesn’t make mistakes in this series — which is where it is most dangerous.

Rather than whip the country into a nationalistic fervor, why not attempt to bring some reality into the public’s understanding of events and issues?

Why not show both sides of the story? Yes, the U.S. is a great nation (getting less great by the day, but that is another topic) and yes, it has done many positive things to help people around the world live a life free from oppression and disease. But (for a variety of reasons) the U.S. has also done the opposite.

I haven’t managed to watch “Sleeper Cell” yet but I can only imagine the propaganda value in it. I read an interview with one of the stars who said making the series has made him afraid that he may have terrorists living next door.

Fear is a great tool for a manipulative government. Combine fear and nationalism and you have an explosive mix.