Hawkeye is My President
Like Russell Roberts at Cafe Hayek, I caught a bit of the live presidential debate on The West Wing this weekend, and I'm about ready to slap on a "Vinick '08" button. That's the surprisingly secular Sen. Arnold Vinick, the GOP candidate played by Alan Alda, who actually is the die-hard free-marketeer that the liberals who make shows like The West Wing seem convinced all Republicans really are. Asked how many jobs he'd "create" as president, he fires back: "None," explaining that he'll cut (federal) jobs and leave job creation to the private sector. They couldn't totally resist caricatures—Vinick's secret to development in Africa, as to everything else, is "tax cuts" (though he does go on to explain that he means bloated and corrupt governments are blocking Africa's success), and he inexplicably refuses to agree he'll never "go to war for oil," though here too, adds the excellent point that in a global market, worries about who physically controls oilfields are overblown.
As Radley Balko observes, "It's a sad state of affairs when the most eloquent defense of free markets, private initiative, and limited government uttered by a politician in two decades has come from a fictitious presidential candidate played by an actor with leftist politics." Alas, a Zogby poll shows Vinick trailing by 30 points.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Alas, a Zogby poll shows Vinick trailing by 30 points.
I think the sample is sort of scewed given that people who would identify with the ficticous Vinick's politics wouldn't be caught dead watching the Democratic wet-dream that is "The West Wing."
Didn't he play the President in Michael Moore's Canadian Bacon?
Yet more proof that freedom should be free-after all, there's clearly no demand for it.
Didn't he play the President in Michael Moore's Canadian Bacon?
IMDB Saaaays...
Yes!
I'm standing behind David Palmer. He only served one term, he could always run for another!
You mean John Candy, not Moore.
Alan Alda also played the crooked GOP Senator whose name escapes me (Brewster?) in The Aviator. I do think it's interesting in a "nontraditional casting" way that Hollywood rarely hires actual Republicans to play Republican pols. James Woods, anyone?
Just don't stand next to David Palmer. That's a good way to get yourself mentioned in the news in a sentence starting "Also killed in the blast were..."
Er . . . Toxic?
Canadian Bacon (1995)
Directed by
Michael Moore
Writing credits (WGA)
Michael Moore (written by)
Moore made the movie, Candy starred in it.
Windypundit-
Yeah, I know. I'm still hoping it's not true. But, well, we'll see.
His wife was the coolest villain ever.
Another good way to get yourself killed is to date Jack Bauer. Teri: Dead. Nina: Dead. Kate: Alive. Claudia: Dead. Audrey: Really oughta be dead, dammit! Not a good track record.
Vinick was trailing before the debate. WaPo says he did well in the debate
Here's a list of fictional presidents. The list is very long, too long in my eyes. Fictional presidents outnumbers the real presidents by at least 4-to-1.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fictional_U.S._Presidents
Alan Alda also played Dr. Robert Gallo.
I don't think the WW writers believe that Republicans are all free market types--rather, I think they WISH they were so we could actually have people to vote for other than right wing religious fanatics. Many of us vote Democratic because the Rupublicans running are even more repugnant in the realm of personal liberties.
Jack Bauer always proves how ruthless he can be in the first episode---one time he decapitated a guy in the CTU interrogation room. What do you think it will be this time? I'm betting cannibalism. Any takers?
Windypundit-
Let's see....First he shot his boss with a tranquilizer. Then he decapitated a witness. Third season he showed a different kind of resolve when he put down the needle. Last year he tortured a guy.
I can't see cannibalism (how would it fit?), but I could see him killing an innocent person. (The guy he decapitated was a bad guy who'd negotiated a deal for himself, so he wasn't innocent.)
[Dobson]'d have come off as shallowly evil.
Well, only if the part was played well.
I do think it's interesting in a "nontraditional casting" way that Hollywood rarely hires actual Republicans to play Republican pols. James Woods, anyone?
I can see Drudge now: "Hollywood portrays Republicans as creepy, unbalanced"
Windypundit,
"I'm gonna need a hacksaw."
One of the best TV lines ever.
[Dobson]'d have come off as shallowly evil.
Anyone remember a few months ago when an old article of Dobson's got linked wherein he wrote about all sorts of things like catching teh ghey, and that a dad who's nekkid around his sons will keep them from catching teh ghey?
It was unintenionally hilarious, freaky, and skin-crawlingly weird all thrown together in a crockpot and simmered for 4-5 hours on high, or 6-8 hours on low.
You can tell it's fiction because the dems actually have balls and the reps don't bend over for the religious right.
I just realized that the WW writers were actually sending a coded anti-free-marketer message -- "Hawkeye" is an anagram for "Ew, Hayek!"
I don't watch West Wing, but knowing Alan Alda is playing a somewhat libertarian character makes me think the casting was designed to creep people out, like the South Park episode he was in.
Commander William "Husher" Adama is my president.
Tom Zerek: he's the Veep who acts like Cheney even when there's no Bush.
For my birthday my girlfriend shaved off her bush. It was awesome.
Gaius Baltar: Smart, sexy, but who the hell is he talking to?
"My title is doctor, or Mr. Vice President, if you don't mind."
Oh dear lord, when I first glanced at that headline I thought it said "Hakluyt is My President."
"My title is doctor, or Mr. Vice President, if you don't mind."
Of course, that episode begged the question: IS Starbuck a real blonde?
(Yes, I know, that's not a true indicator.)
My wife and I figured out that any time a mystery movie has Alan Alda in it, he's the killer. He's become typecast as the actor who is always cast against type.
Better yet...
MALCOLM REYNOLDS 08!
MALCOLM REYNOLDS 08!
Bad idea. He'd appoint Jane as Secretary of Defense and we'd be at war with EVERYBODY by Thursday.
Kill your televisions.
Maybe ABC should've gotten Loretta Switt to play the "Commander in Chief."
Frank Burns would be the logical choice for VP...
"Gaius Baltar: Smart, sexy, but who the hell is he talking to?"
Haha....can't wait 'til January.
Alas, a Zogby poll shows Vinick trailing by 30 points.
Of course the Democrat is going to win. The Republican winning would mean that they'd have to fire almost every actor they have. That's not only not the sort of thing you can't hide, it's a terrible idea when you have actors whose performances are fairly well liked by the viewers.
Gaius Baltar betrayed humanity for pussy. No doubt he'll get the Clinton voters.
I can't see cannibalism (how would it fit?), but I could see him killing an innocent person. (The guy he decapitated was a bad guy who'd negotiated a deal for himself, so he wasn't innocent.)
He came pretty close when he was about to toss Saunder's daughter into the infected hotel just to get him to talk.
I do think it's interesting in a "nontraditional casting" way that Hollywood rarely hires actual Republicans to play Republican pols.
Because 1) there aren't that many Republican actors and 2) a Republican actor is less likely to take the satirical or outright villainous role a Republican politician will usually play in a movie than has any politicians of a named party.
Eric, in that case I think the SGA should pass a bylaw that says James Woods gets to play all of them, unless:
1) It's on television, in which case it can be Ron Silver, because he just really isn't that great an actor, or
2) The character is a serial killer, in which case it can be Vincent Gallo.
Actually, not only did the horrible, caricaturing Democrats go out of their way to make Vinnick a sympathetic character by casting Alda and having him stand up to the forces of evil in the Republican Party, they made him a liberal Republican from California who is asked the question "Are you conservative enough to win the Republican nomination?" They answered the question in the affirmative, by having him actually win the nomination (there's some terrible stereotyping of Republicans right there, eh?) And they made him more sympathetic BY MAKING HIM MORE LIBERTARIAN.
Also, the "caricature" of him promoting development in Africa by suggesting tax cuts and bemoaning the development-squashing burden of taxes is 1) an argument I've seen made on this very site by actual, non caricature libertarians, and 2) the most convincing version of that argument I've ever seen.
A little quick on the draw to see yourselves persecuted there, methinks.
Damn that liberal media for casting a talented actor to play a sympathetic character who comes close to my viewpoint!
Yeah, what a buncha losers those Hollywood libruls are! Created such a despicable character as Vinnick that had avowed progresives saying THEY'D vote for him....
who's persecuting what and who now?
I fucking hate Alan Alda! I HATE HIM! I HATE HIM! I HATE HIM! First he totally ruined SA Frontiers by bringing his sub kindergarten intellect to the show. AND THEN the no-good low-down god-damned filthy motherfucker has the balls to portray the greatest human being what ever drew breath, one Richard P Feynman, on stage and infuse him with his own self befuddlement. FUCK YOU ALAN - FUCK OFF AND DIE!!!!
Having him play a libertarian type on the pinko 'West Wing' can't be good. I'm pretty sure I can see where this is going. He will win the election and then the country will go to hell in a handbasket.
... god I need a drink
Julian? I have a question regarding what you said up there about the Vinck character's "excellent point that in a global market, worries about who physically controls oilfields are overblown". Didn't the 1973 oil crisis have something to do with who physically controlled a plurality of oilfields?
Wouldn't an embargo by a good-sized bloc of OPEC member states lead to a substantial price increase? Isn't that how markets work when suppliers of a good that is poduced at 98% of production capacity withdraw from the market?
And if the 1970s scenario is less likely now because OPEC member states have more divergent foreign policies, wouldn't the Vinick character's hardline stances on immigration and the Mexican border make the Latin American member states more likely to stand with the Arab states in the event of another embargo initiative than they might presently?
S.M Koppelman,
If I learned one thing from high school economics (no really, we even watched a video on said oil crisis), the real problem, in this country anyway, was price controls crushing the incentive for finding and drilling new oil sources. OPEC certainly has the power to cut off a good share of our oil, and while the world might be a better place if oil production were safely in the hands of private enterprise, OPEC WANTS to sell us oil, as Vinich said in the debate. He also pointed out everyone's favorite foreign-oil fact, that we import the most from Canada. But even as much as that suggests a blood-for-oil campaign we could all get behind, that's not the point.
The point is, if OPEC or whatever entity, private or governmental, wants to cut us off from their oil, they sure can, but they like the profits they reap from selling petrol even more than they dislike. Again, its a situation that is far from ideal, but not as dire a threat to our economy and national security as some would suggest.
"I do think it's interesting in a 'nontraditional casting' way that Hollywood rarely hires actual Republicans to play Republican pols."
Republican actor is less likely to take the satirical or outright villainous role a Republican politician will usually play in a movie than has any politicians of a named party.
Damn that liberal media for casting a talented actor to play a sympathetic character who comes close to my viewpoint!
If I'm mistaking your reference to someone else's comments, sorry, but I miss your point, Thoreau. Are you saying that in general, if a character in a TV show or movie is supposed to be a Republican politician, the character is not more likely to be unsympathetic than sympathetic?
who's persecuting what and who now?
No idea.
OK, Hit and Run really wants me to go by that joke nick. It keeps resetting to it every time I put in "Eric the .5b".
Isn't that how markets work when suppliers of a good that is poduced at 98% of production capacity withdraw from the market?
OPEC may be able to cut the US off from their oil, but they can't cut the US off from everybody's oil. And US demand is much less than non-OPEC oil supply.
Once the oil gets put on a tanker, it costs no more to go to any one port in the world than to any other. The OPEC tanker bound for the US before the boycott gets rerouted to France. The UK tanker bound for France gets rerouted to the US.
It was the overreaction of the United States that turned the OPEC boycott from an annoying political statement into an economic disaster.
Eric-
Just a generic "Damn that liberal media!" joke. That's all.
Clever it is not, I know.
*shrug* I just don't get the reactions I see to a fairly uncontroversial point, Thoreau. No one's willing to say "Actually, Eric, most actors in film and TV are Republicans" or "Eric, you insensitive clod, most Republican politicians portrayed in films and TV are quite sympathetic characters who get their idea presented approvingly", because those are obviously absurd claims that no one would take seriously. But when I invoke the actual facts as part of a to-me unprovocative answer to an question, people start with the sarcastic "Hollywood libruls" bits.
You are worthwess, Awec Bawdwin
You are worthwess, Awec Bawdwin
You are worthwess, Awec Bawdwin
I wasn't responding to you, Eric. I was just having fun.
The most disappointing moment in all of 24 (leaving aside the second half of season 4 and Kim with the cougar) was the one and only time that they mentioned David Palmer's party affiliation. It's not that I expected him to be a third party candidate or anything like that. But, still, they created this awesome character, and to suddenly affiliate him with a real party was just disappointing. Know what I mean? It was a blemish on the character, associating him with a dishonorable institution (and that would be true regardless of which party it was).
Funniest political moment on 24? Season 3, when Palmer's GOP opponent suddenly lost the endorsement of major labor unions.
Awesomest political moment on 24? Season 2 finale, when Palmer rebuked the Cabinet for removing him from office, and then told the American people to go to work or school despite what had just happened. It was much more inspirational than "If you don't go shopping the terrorists will win." Too bad that Mandy put the kibbosh on his efforts to return things to normal.
Natty Bumpo is my President!
Speaking of Natty Bumpo, Quincy Adams cheated Andy Jackson out of his first election, and the wizards here in Sinincincinnati STILL named a nearby hill, MT. Adams, jerking the honor away from a woman by the name, Ida, whoever the hell she was. (Now we'll never know.) The whole affair still burns me up.
Moving on.
Alan Alda reminds me of Jane Fonda which makes me ask where the hell is the fart-powered bus tour for peace Jane promised? That was just to hype her book, wasn't it.
It ain't easy separating reality from book tour hype is it?
I wasn't responding to you, Eric. I was just having fun.
I'm sorry for ragging on you, then, Thoreau. I mistakenly grouped you with other respondents.
Eric the .5b,
If I read a comment about the Vinnik character in particular into a remark intended to comment just on the casting of Republicans as a whole, well, my bad.
I'm wondering how I can fix my ex-wife up with Jack Bauer...
Akira said, "given that people who would identify with the ficticous Vinick's politics wouldn't be caught dead watching the Democratic wet-dream that is 'The West Wing.'"
What are you talking about? "West Wing" is the show my wife and I love to hate! That is to say, we never miss it, we get caught up in the character interchanges and plot twists, but we gag in unison whenever the Bartletistas get their liberal way by riding roughshod over the Constitution.
The fact that Akira may be right in general may also go to explain why politics has become such a polarized bloodsport, in recent years. Nobody tries to walk in the other guy's moccasins anymore, much less watch the other guy's TV show.
"West Wing's" Bartlet was the kind of Democratic President that Democrats who were disgusted with Clinton's misbehavior wanted in the Oval Office: a liberal with integrity, brains, and an ability to "keep it in his pants." He was a flawed, but basically good man, whom even (principled) Republicans could respect, and with whom they could work.
Senator Vinick is the kind of Republican that Democrats (and probably a great many GOP who can't stand the fundies) wish would get the GOP nomination: also a mostly principled, basically good guy, who (like liberal democrats believe of themselves) wants the best for America but merely disagrees with the liberal Democrats about "how to get there." Interestingly enough, we are seeing that the West Wing liberals seem to like best those Republicans who have a strong libertarian streak. Congressman Santos asks, "where are the liberal Republicans, sir?" Although the implication is that Vinick doesn't qualify, from where I sit, he IS the liberal Republican -- so close to libertarian that his election might precipitate the implosion of the Libertarian party and any significant libertarian movement outside the GOP.
I have waited for years, for "The West Wing" to give us anything close to a real Libertarian. With Emily Procter's Ainsley Hayes character (whom I am still convinced was modeled after Virginia Postrel), they came very close indeed, but she didn't last. Now, with Arnold Vinick, they appear to be taking another shot (though I am also troubled by his refusal to pledge not to go to war over oil -- is he in the Intelligence or Foreign Relations committees, and does he know something that we and Santos do not about what's coming?).
On the other hand, the real GOP candidates, including GWB, did a pretty good job of talking libertarian talk in the past several elections, and we see how that worked out for America. Perhaps Vinick will eventually stand revealed as a poseur. You can bet I'll keep watching, just to see.
"Nobody tries to walk in the other guy's moccasins anymore, much less watch the other guy's TV show."
Hi!
I'd also like to point out that John Goodman's Speaker/Acting President character was presented as quite sympathetic, and made to be the "good guy" being lectured at by the intolerant (and oddly tall) Jimmy Carter-standin in the episode about the former president's funeral.
In addition, it was a Republican staffer and a Republican Senator who shut down the character-assassinating Republican who attempted to smear Leo, the Chief of Staff character, as a dangerous drunk.
On the other hand, the real GOP candidates, including GWB, did a pretty good job of talking libertarian talk in the past several elections,
I'm sorry, but anyone who paid attention to GWB's 2000 campaign or watched that election's debates knew he wasn't for small government.