Bush and Batman

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

Fantastic read.

What Bush and Batman Have in Common
By ANDREW KLAVAN
July 25, 2008; Page A15

A cry for help goes out from a city beleaguered by violence and fear: A beam of light flashed into the night sky, the dark symbol of a bat projected onto the surface of the racing clouds . . .

Oh, wait a minute. That's not a bat, actually. In fact, when you trace the outline with your finger, it looks kind of like . . . a "W."


Warner Bros. Pictures
There seems to me no question that the Batman film "The Dark Knight," currently breaking every box office record in history, is at some level a paean of praise to the fortitude and moral courage that has been shown by George W. Bush in this time of terror and war. Like W, Batman is vilified and despised for confronting terrorists in the only terms they understand. Like W, Batman sometimes has to push the boundaries of civil rights to deal with an emergency, certain that he will re-establish those boundaries when the emergency is past.

And like W, Batman understands that there is no moral equivalence between a free society -- in which people sometimes make the wrong choices -- and a criminal sect bent on destruction. The former must be cherished even in its moments of folly; the latter must be hounded to the gates of Hell.

"The Dark Knight," then, is a conservative movie about the war on terror. And like another such film, last year's "300," "The Dark Knight" is making a fortune depicting the values and necessities that the Bush administration cannot seem to articulate for beans.

Conversely, time after time, left-wing films about the war on terror -- films like "In The Valley of Elah," "Rendition" and "Redacted" -- which preach moral equivalence and advocate surrender, that disrespect the military and their mission, that seem unable to distinguish the difference between America and Islamo-fascism, have bombed more spectacularly than Operation Shock and Awe.

Why is it then that left-wingers feel free to make their films direct and realistic, whereas Hollywood conservatives have to put on a mask in order to speak what they know to be the truth? Why is it, indeed, that the conservative values that power our defense -- values like morality, faith, self-sacrifice and the nobility of fighting for the right -- only appear in fantasy or comic-inspired films like "300," "Lord of the Rings," "Narnia," "Spiderman 3" and now "The Dark Knight"?

The moment filmmakers take on the problem of Islamic terrorism in realistic films, suddenly those values vanish. The good guys become indistinguishable from the bad guys, and we end up denigrating the very heroes who defend us. Why should this be?

The answers to these questions seem to me to be embedded in the story of "The Dark Knight" itself: Doing what's right is hard, and speaking the truth is dangerous. Many have been abhorred for it, some killed, one crucified.

Leftists frequently complain that right-wing morality is simplistic. Morality is relative, they say; nuanced, complex. They're wrong, of course, even on their own terms.

Left and right, all Americans know that freedom is better than slavery, that love is better than hate, kindness better than cruelty, tolerance better than bigotry. We don't always know how we know these things, and yet mysteriously we know them nonetheless.

The true complexity arises when we must defend these values in a world that does not universally embrace them -- when we reach the place where we must be intolerant in order to defend tolerance, or unkind in order to defend kindness, or hateful in order to defend what we love.

When heroes arise who take those difficult duties on themselves, it is tempting for the rest of us to turn our backs on them, to vilify them in order to protect our own appearance of righteousness. We prosecute and execrate the violent soldier or the cruel interrogator in order to parade ourselves as paragons of the peaceful values they preserve. As Gary Oldman's Commissioner Gordon says of the hated and hunted Batman, "He has to run away -- because we have to chase him."

That's real moral complexity. And when our artistic community is ready to show that sometimes men must kill in order to preserve life; that sometimes they must violate their values in order to maintain those values; and that while movie stars may strut in the bright light of our adulation for pretending to be heroes, true heroes often must slink in the shadows, slump-shouldered and despised -- then and only then will we be able to pay President Bush his due and make good and true films about the war on terror.

Perhaps that's when Hollywood conservatives will be able to take off their masks and speak plainly in the light of day.

Mr. Klavan has won two Edgar Awards from the Mystery Writers of America. His new novel, "Empire of Lies" (An Otto Penzler Book, Harcourt), is about an ordinary man confronting the war on terror.

[Xyun]

rofl.

[Fash]

Haha.. Posting this here is like wearing an "I hate Niggers" shirt to an NAACP meeting.

I like it.

[miir]

I find it curious when right wingers try to project their political beliefs on examples/situations that are clearly non-partisan.
Why do so many right wingers feel the need to wear thier political leanings like a badge of honour?
Why do right wingers try so hard to antagonise by slapping labels on groups of people?

[Fash]

Are you making a joke? Do you really think that doesn't work the same replacing 'right wingers' with 'left wingers' ?

[miir]

Are you making a joke? Do you really think that doesn't work the same replacing 'right wingers' with 'left wingers' ?

Let's see some examples that don't involve that nutbag Michael Moore.

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

Are you making a joke? Do you really think that doesn't work the same replacing 'right wingers' with 'left wingers' ?

Let's see some examples that don't involve that nutbag Michael Moore.

Big picture, dumbass.

[Kilmoll the Sexy]

I find it curious when right wingers try to project their political beliefs on examples/situations that are clearly non-partisan.
Why do so many right wingers feel the need to wear thier political leanings like a badge of honour?
Why do right wingers try so hard to antagonise by slapping labels on groups of people?

And that is the ultra-liberal calling the neo-con black.

[miir]

So are you just gonna stroke each others cocks or are you actually going to post some links to back up what you're saying?

[Fash]

Do I need a link to prove that water is wet? I don't really know what you're looking for... Do you have any other examples of your original point?

[miir]

Uhhh, look at the first post in this thread.

[Fairweather Pure]

I see the opposite. Batman is breaking every record at making money and Bush has broke every record at losing money.

[miir]

Does Batman actually get to keep that money?

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

Uhhh, look at the first post in this thread.

He's not going to do your work for you. If you cannot go back and read what you wrote, then add in his response to you and figure it out, it says a lot about you. It's not difficult. Unless, of course, you're being Miir, which means being the very definition of being difficult.

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

What's shocking is no matter what side of the aisle you are on, no one can read the article and see the very cogent correlations being drawn here? It's really sad how you can't put your blind allegiance aside ever. Doesn't say much for you as intelligent beings, at all.

[Spang]

Just watch the movie and enjoy it, or don't enjoy it, but leave politics out of my fucking movies!

If I wanted to watch politics, I'd turn on C-SPAN.

[miir]

If you try hard enough, you can draw cogent correlations between George Bush and Jesus Christ.
If you try hard enough, you can draw cogent correlations between George Bush and Adolph Hitler.
If you try hard enough, you can draw cogent correlations between George Bush and Bill Clinton.
If you try hard enough, you can draw cogent correlations between George Bush and Tom Cruise.

[Fairweather Pure]

What's shocking is no matter what side of the aisle you are on, no one can read the article and see the very cogent correlations being drawn here?

I think it's comical to try and draw a correlation at all.

I mean, if you're going to compare him to a movie, stick with the ones that really drive the point home.

How's this? I think the Bush presidency is more like an iceberg, and America is the Titanic.

[Fash]

If you try hard enough, you can draw cogent correlations between George Bush and Adolph Hitler.

These have all been done, and I submit this one as my example in response to your request.

[Demags]

I think a better comparison would be the Bush administration to the movie "Misery".

[Spang]

Waterworld

[miir]

If you try hard enough, you can draw cogent correlations between George Bush and Adolph Hitler.

These have all been done, and I submit this one as my example in response to your request.

Did anyone try to pass that rubbish off as news or a current event?

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

If you try hard enough, you can draw cogent correlations between George Bush and Adolph Hitler.

These have all been done, and I submit this one as my example in response to your request.

Did anyone try to pass that rubbish off as news or a current event?

Were they done in an interesting way like this piece?

[miir]

Yes it was just as much a waste of time as this.

[Acies]

Well...

If there was a direct correlation, then as per the end of Dark Knight, Bush would be hunted by the authorities as a criminal. You draw all the stunning similiarities you want between the heroism of Batman and the actions of G.W., so long as I get that happy ending. Please.

[Xyun]

I wrote a jarring rebuttal where I eviscerate this nonsense here:

http://www.opinionazi.com/Opinionazi/Bl ... eroes.html


Enjoy!

edit: new link

http://www.progressivejunction.com/2008 ... eroes.html