#1
Old 02-06-2003, 08:37 AM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Orlando(ish)
Posts: 21,291
West Wing 2/5

Okay, I have one question.

The Kundu people are sleeping in each other's homes. The Prez learns this, nods knowingly.

Whoosh to ivylass.

Prez mentions this to Toby, who also nods knowingly.

Whoosh II.

Prez mentions this to Josh, explains a bit more.

Sorry, still Whooshed.

Josh mentions it to Charlie. AHA, thinks ivylass, now we will get an explanation.

Josh explains they're swapping family members to rape to save their lives.

Okay, I still don't get it.

Ivylad thought it was a way for women to possibly get impregnated with biracial babies, but I can't believe the ethnic cleansers are going to wait nine months to see what color the child is.

Can anyone explain this one to me?

And isn't it a little late for an inauguration?
#2
Old 02-06-2003, 10:28 AM
C3 C3 is offline
Member
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 4,109
I think what's going on here is that the rebels (or whomever is attacking these people) are entering houses and demanding that the people in the houses rape each other in order to spare their own lives. They are swapping houses so that the people they are being forced to rape are not their own family members (so that, for instance, a brother would not have to rape his own sister, etc.)
#3
Old 02-06-2003, 10:50 AM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Orlando(ish)
Posts: 21,291
Oh, Dear God.

That thought hadn't entered my mind.

Please tell me such things don't really happen.
#4
Old 02-06-2003, 11:14 AM
BANNED
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Posts: 6,376
Yes, of course such things happen. What world do you think we live in?

The "Kundu" situation is obviously based on the civil war in Rwanda in 1994, in which (if I recall), about 400,000 people were slaughtered. A great deal of this was done with machetes. The incident mentioned on The West Wing, in which hundreds of people taking refuge in a church are systematically murdered with machetes, happened in Rwanda.

I don't know if the Hutus ever forced Tutsis to rape each other, but there was definitely plenty of raping going on.

While all this was going on, neither the U.S. nor any other major power chose to step in.

In the alternate world of The West Wing, we have a president who seems to be determined that America should project power based on core values and beliefs, and not just on our political/economic interests. In other words, the writers of the show seem to be developing a Looking-Glass counterpart to the policies of the Bush administration.

The "Bush Doctrine" is the proposition that the U.S. retains the right to attack any country it even thinks might be a threat, regardless of international opinion. It's a doctrine based on small-minded fear, with an admixture of base hypocrisy. (You may recall Bush telling troops that if we invade Iraq, it'll be because Iraq is a dictatorship and "America loves freedom".)
#5
Old 02-06-2003, 11:43 AM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 351
And just to drag down the tone of the thread, I thought this was one of the better episodes this season. (I don't even think we had a thread two weeks ago for that C.J. thing.) Everyone was with it: Will Bailey's idea to force the experience that would make him a good speechwriter for the President; Donna knowing enough to be aware that Jack's transfer wasn't all fun and games; Leo screwing up and Josh not letting him off the hook.

The only thing I found odd was that C.J. couldn't get Danny off her back about the pilot so she used her sexuality. Very un-C.J., I thought, but then, she's also in the very un-C.J. position of a) having no idea what's going on and b) knowing what's going on.
#6
Old 02-06-2003, 12:06 PM
Guest
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: overlooking ObamaNYC
Posts: 728
I can't recall the details but somewhere in Africa this all actually happened. In that society a woman who has been raped is considered unclean and unmarriable, and if you do that to entire villages you see an immediate decline in population and therefore a decline in your enemy's ability to fight back.

The idea makes me sick.
#7
Old 02-06-2003, 12:10 PM
Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Plattsburgh, NY
Posts: 4,385
Argh!! I missed it!! I wasn't home! Will they ever release any of the seasons on DVD?
__________________
Buy Whizzo butter.
#8
Old 02-06-2003, 12:16 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Emerald City, WA, USA
Posts: 9,486
Quote:
Originally posted by C3
I think what's going on here is that the rebels (or whomever is attacking these people) are entering houses and demanding that the people in the houses rape each other in order to spare their own lives. They are swapping houses so that the people they are being forced to rape are not their own family members (so that, for instance, a brother would not have to rape his own sister, etc.)
Why this order?

The mass rapes of women by soldiers in Bosnia makes sense (in a sick twisted way, but I can see why the order was given.) I can't see the logic behind the demand. What are the soldiers trying to accomplish with the order?
#9
Old 02-06-2003, 02:00 PM
Guest
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Stewing in my own juices
Posts: 1,730
amarinth, it's all about power. Whether it's raping women or having family members rape each other, it's all about what will you do to spare your own or your family member's lives. I don't see how any type of raping or killing makes sense in any book.

Back to the ep, I was also a little confused about why the inauguration was happening now. Admittedly, I hadn't seen all the shows this year since I am working nights and am VCR-less. At first I thought this was a re-run until the guy from Sports Night showed up. BTW, what a great casting choice, he is a perfect fit in this ensemble. Why not just get him hired on full time already!?

I missed the part about Donna's boyfriend. Who is he supposed to be, anyway?
#10
Old 02-06-2003, 02:58 PM
Guest
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: T-175 Flask
Posts: 1,493
I wasn't clear on the "neighbor's house" thing either. This story line is clearly a reference to the genocide in Rwanda where the genocide killed an estimated 500,000 to 1,000,000 Rwandans while the world looked on.

Sexual crimes against Tutsi women were particularly rampant with an estimated 250,000 to 500,000 rapes. For some background on this here is a very good website: http://academic.udayton.edu/race/06h...a/Rwanda01.htm This site also mentions why rape was so devastating. Although it says that the women were raped after watching their family members killed. So there is a chance that in the show what they were really doing was having the women stay in the neighbor's house so as not to have to witness the murder of their own family members before their own rape.

As to the timing of the Inaugural, remember, this is Bartlett's second term. Thus this is the second inauguration.

Donna's boyfriend is a Navy officer whom she met when she accidentally voted for the wrong candidate by absentee ballot, and went to the polls to "trade" votes with someone who was going to vote for the opposition. She got him to vote for Bartlett to cancel out her vote. He ended up working in the White House as an aide to some military big-wig.

This is one of those shows where TiVo is invaluable as the dialog is so often garbled, especially by Leo.
#11
Old 02-06-2003, 03:36 PM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Orlando(ish)
Posts: 21,291
Quote:
Originally posted by light strand
Donna's boyfriend is a Navy officer whom she met when she accidentally voted for the wrong candidate by absentee ballot, and went to the polls to "trade" votes with someone who was going to vote for the opposition. She got him to vote for Bartlett to cancel out her vote. He ended up working in the White House as an aide to some military big-wig.

Played by Christian Slater, right?

And he got transferred because he worked on the Force Depletion report the Prez asked for, bypassing the Sec of Defense?
#12
Old 02-06-2003, 04:45 PM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 351
Played by Christian Slater, yes. Character name of Jack Reese. He was an aide to Nancy McNally, who is Nat'l Security Advisor.

And yeah, that's exactly why he got transferred. Two for two, ivylass.

So, now the question is, how much longer can they hold off on the Josh/Donna thing? With Jack and Amy gone, and Josh clearly recognizing his jealousy, I think they're going to have to get together soon.
#13
Old 02-06-2003, 06:24 PM
Guest
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: central Florida
Posts: 6,347
Quote:
Originally posted by Baldwin
In the alternate world of The West Wing, we have a president who seems to be determined that America should project power based on core values and beliefs, and not just on our political/economic interests. In other words, the writers of the show seem to be developing a Looking-Glass counterpart to the policies of the Bush administration.

The "Bush Doctrine" is the proposition that the U.S. retains the right to attack any country it even thinks might be a threat, regardless of international opinion. It's a doctrine based on small-minded fear, with an admixture of base hypocrisy. (You may recall Bush telling troops that if we invade Iraq, it'll be because Iraq is a dictatorship and "America loves freedom".)
As opposed to which administration?
You are singling out Bush, but which administration did NOT act on America's political and economic interests?
Frankly, if a President or Congress DOESN'T act first and foremost for America's political and economic interests, they should be IMPEACHED because that's why they are in office. We elect representatives to act in OUR interest, not the interest of other nations. Acting in the interest of France is the job of France's politicians, not ours, for instance.
And in those rare cases where we've made half-hearted stabs at acting in the "best interests" of the locals without regard to our own it's invariably been a HUGE fiasco---witness Somalia, Kosovo, Lebanon.
I think you're right in that the West Wing is through the Looking Glass...anyone who thinks that our elected representatives should be acting in the best interests of other nations rather than our own is living in a fantasy world.
#14
Old 02-06-2003, 08:16 PM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: The Golden State
Posts: 10,565
So just why would Reese have to get transfered? If the Commander in Chief orders you to do something, you do it. So the Secretary of Defense is upset? Last time I checked, the President outranks him.

And if the Secretary of Defense seems to have such a fractious relationship with the White House, wouldn't he just be told to take his business elsewhere? I just don't see Donald Rumsfeld getting into a shouting match with Karl Rove and coming out the winner.

I also wonder now if we are actually going to see a real person playing the Secretary of State. So far that cabinet member doesn't have a name or face.
#15
Old 02-06-2003, 09:16 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Emerald City, WA, USA
Posts: 9,486
Quote:
Originally posted by bristlesage
Played by Christian Slater, yes. Character name of Jack Reese. He was an aide to Nancy McNally, who is Nat'l Security Advisor.

And yeah, that's exactly why he got transferred. Two for two, ivylass.

So, now the question is, how much longer can they hold off on the Josh/Donna thing? With Jack and Amy gone, and Josh clearly recognizing his jealousy, I think they're going to have to get together soon.
Whatever happened to Amy, btw?
#16
Old 02-06-2003, 10:23 PM
BANNED
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Posts: 6,376
Quote:
As opposed to which administration?
You are singling out Bush, but which administration did NOT act on America's political and economic interests?
Frankly, if a President or Congress DOESN'T act first and foremost for America's political and economic interests, they should be IMPEACHED because that's why they are in office. We elect representatives to act in OUR interest, not the interest of other nations. Acting in the interest of France is the job of France's politicians, not ours, for instance.
No.

We have values and principles as well as interests. When we act in ways that seem in the short term to protect our interests, but which go against our stated core values, it turns out badly. (E.g., the CIA helping to topple democratically elected governments in Guatemala and Chile in favor of military dictatorships.)

If we only at on the basis of short-term economic and political interests, without regard to the things we say we believe in, then we (as a nation) aren't worth defending. I don't believe that's the case, most of the time.
#17
Old 02-06-2003, 10:24 PM
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Schlaraffenland
Posts: 20,611
Ditto, missed the Amy gone thing, unless it was just meant that they're no longer dating. Personally I don't like Josh fawning over Donna like that; it's extremely unprofessional. Also found the bible storyline overplayed and distracting. I missed the first few minutes, but what did Leo screw up and Josh not let him get over on?
#18
Old 02-06-2003, 10:51 PM
Member
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 24,924
Quote:
Originally posted by BobT
So just why would Reese have to get transfered? If the Commander in Chief orders you to do something, you do it. So the Secretary of Defense is upset? Last time I checked, the President outranks him.
Yeah, but preparing the force depletion report pissed off the Sec. Def., and so now the Secretary has a personal dislike for Reese, and so he says, "Transfer Reese". The president, worried about the inaugaration and the situation in Kundu, hasn't noticed, or decided to worry about Reese's tranfer. Therefore, Reese is counting polar bears in Alaska.
#19
Old 02-06-2003, 11:37 PM
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 351
Leo screwed up by letting the Sec. of Defense know that the President had asked for the force depletion report. The idea was they were going to go below the radar and get the info, no harm, no foul. And Leo shot his mouth off, so there goes Reese.

And I agree, ShibbOleth, it was very unprofessional, but I thought that her disrupting his junk with her "what's happened to my boyfriend?" junk was not entirely in the office's best interest, either.

I think you guys are right, Amy hasn't been officially declared missing. I jumped the gun. Sorry.
#20
Old 02-07-2003, 01:59 AM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: The Golden State
Posts: 10,565
Quote:
Originally posted by Captain Amazing
Yeah, but preparing the force depletion report pissed off the Sec. Def., and so now the Secretary has a personal dislike for Reese, and so he says, "Transfer Reese". The president, worried about the inaugaration and the situation in Kundu, hasn't noticed, or decided to worry about Reese's tranfer. Therefore, Reese is counting polar bears in Alaska.
Well, it wasn't that bad. They sent him to Italy.

But the poor guy was put in a no-win situation. Someone was going to get pissed off by his preparing the report. And I would always err on not pissing off the president.

But it does seem that there is a lot of hostility between the Pentagon and the White House. A couple of episodes ago, Charlie was investigating a case of someone in the military who had to go on food stamps and the Pentagon sent back a whole report on how crappy its budget was.
#21
Old 02-07-2003, 02:33 AM
Guest
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Medford, MA
Posts: 21,422
Quote:
Originally posted by BobT
So just why would Reese have to get transfered? If the Commander in Chief orders you to do something, you do it. So the Secretary of Defense is upset? Last time I checked, the President outranks him.

And if the Secretary of Defense seems to have such a fractious relationship with the White House, wouldn't he just be told to take his business elsewhere? I just don't see Donald Rumsfeld getting into a shouting match with Karl Rove and coming out the winner.
There was a British comedy back in the 80s called "Yes, Minister" (along with its sequel, "Yes, Prime Minister"). It was a political satire, but it viewed government not as a battle between liberals and conservatives, but as a battle between the elected members of government (in particular, the Cabinet Ministers who headed the ministries, and changed with the majority in Parliament) and the civil servants who were more-or-less permanent within a ministry.

Quote:
From the "Editor's Note" at the beginning of "Yes, Prime Minister":
Unfortunately their conflicting roles generally ensure that they have opposing aims: the politician is seen by the civil servant as a squalid, vote-grubbing figure obsessed by opinion polls who will do anything for short-term electoral advantage; whereas the civil servant is seen by the politician as an unelected, unaccountable, bureaucratic empire-builder, unresponsive to the will of the people, determined at all cost to defend his own power and thus maintain the status quo. Both views are, of course, substantially correct.
It was hysterical, and I've never seen anything remotely like it on American television. And it had a fair degree of insight. The comedy was a bit broad, and I'm not sure I want to see "The West Wing" venture too far down that path.

Of course the first problem is that the Secretary of Defense would have been appointed by Bartlett. (And if I remember correctly, aren't Cabinet Secretaries expected, as a matter of courtesy, to submit a resignation even if the President is elected to a second term?) There was definitely a trace of this with the Assistant Secretary who met with Will Bailey; how dare the White House not show proper deference to someone of his seniority!
#22
Old 02-07-2003, 02:41 AM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: The Golden State
Posts: 10,565
I believe that CJ already mentioned that the Cabinet had tendered their resignations.

As for the Assistant Secretary, as Will pointed out repeatedly, he's the Assistant Secretary of the Public Affairs Section. It's not like that guy fills in for the Secretary of State. He was just a career civil servant. Actually that battle seemed realistic.

I just don't buy the idea of the Secretary of Defense getting all high and mighty with the Chief of Staff. A good president would cashier one of those two people.
#23
Old 02-07-2003, 07:22 AM
Guest
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: central Florida
Posts: 6,347
Quote:
Originally posted by Baldwin
No.

We have values and principles as well as interests. When we act in ways that seem in the short term to protect our interests, but which go against our stated core values, it turns out badly. (E.g., the CIA helping to topple democratically elected governments in Guatemala and Chile in favor of military dictatorships.)


Sorry, but you're simply wrong about that. It may turn out badly for THEM, but it didn't immediately turn out badly for US. We backed an undemocratic Shah in Iran and it worked well for US for years. It was only when Carter did "the right thing" and withdrew support for the Shah that we had the disaster of the Aytollah and the hostage crisis. You need to read some history.


If we only at on the basis of short-term economic and political interests, without regard to the things we say we believe in, then we (as a nation) aren't worth defending. I don't believe that's the case, most of the time.
It's the case for ALL nations, nearly all the time, throughout history. You seem to be living in a dream world, my friend. You may find it a pleasant dream, but it has no relation to reality.
#24
Old 02-07-2003, 06:41 PM
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Schlaraffenland
Posts: 20,611
Quote:
Originally posted by BobT
Well, it wasn't that bad. They sent him to Italy.
Here's where Jack was transferred. I recalled correctly that it was an Air Force Base (all that time spent listening to Armed Forces Radio during my daily commute finally paid off!), and I seem to recall that's where the guys were stationed that inadvertently cut a gondola cable while hotdogging, sending a bunch of people hurtling to their deaths.

But I digress. I can think of worse billets, but it seems strange that a Naval Officer would be sent to an AFB.
#25
Old 02-07-2003, 09:02 PM
Guest
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: South of Heaven
Posts: 9,246
My question about the whole Jack Reese/Donna situation is: what did Donna do exactly that pissed Leo off so badly? At the beginning of the ep, he's telling Josh that Donna did SOMETHING about which he was "going to speak to her." Anyone have an guesses? Was I supposed to know what Leo was alluding to, or did they not say?

Josh was acting like an idiot about Donna. I think she had a thing for him way back and is now over it-- she encouraged him about Joey Lucas, and seemed unfazed by Amy. Josh is the one carrying a torch, and it doesn't put him in the best light. I could hardly blame her for getting peeved at him for insinuating that Jack ASKED for a transfer. That was mean-spirited and beneath him. Don't get me wrong, I like Josh, but he needs to give it a rest.
#26
Old 02-08-2003, 01:25 AM
Lok Lok is offline
Charter Member
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northwest Ohio, USA
Posts: 2,986
Quote:
Originally posted by Rubystreak
My question about the whole Jack Reese/Donna situation is: what did Donna do exactly that pissed Leo off so badly? At the beginning of the ep, he's telling Josh that Donna did SOMETHING about which he was "going to speak to her." Anyone have an guesses? Was I supposed to know what Leo was alluding to, or did they not say?
They never said. I am sure we will find out in the next episode.
__________________
Lok
----------------
"I am madly in love with Lok and wish to have his beautiful children. I also wish to leave my entire (quite subsantial) estate to him when I die, which might now be quite suddenly." - auRa
#27
Old 02-08-2003, 10:12 AM
Guest
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: T-175 Flask
Posts: 1,493
Quote:
My question about the whole Jack Reese/Donna situation is: what did Donna do exactly that pissed Leo off so badly? At the beginning of the ep, he's telling Josh that Donna did SOMETHING about which he was "going to speak to her." Anyone have an guesses? Was I supposed to know what Leo was alluding to, or did they not say?
They never said, but I'm going to guess that Donna shoots her mouth off about the fax that Reese showed her.
#28
Old 02-09-2003, 09:37 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 29,351
Just saw it on tape. What a terrific episode this was.

Drama, humor, issues and a bunch of people overwhelmed by unimaginable responsibilities acting human. All with scripting that makes everything else on television seem simple-minded.

Can't wait for next week's show.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:49 AM.

Copyright © 2017
Best Topics: fingertip burns process pronunciation caius pronunciation prn meaning job sulfuric acid containers british superheroes gopher guts song keel hauled pre op trannies short for manufacturing moving to sc ww2 helmet net diy aerogarden pods camouflage digital immune to poison swlabr by cream dead blue jay wild hare expression camelback tips punta translation spanish doctor headgear go ahead touchdown lenscrafters transitions lens bakoni ruins judges wig mixers for tequila hockey plexiglass dune stillsuit faceoff season 6 reddit historyporn ghost email address bullhead clap shampoo for oily hair target nfl redzone online comcast can tinnitus be temporary transpose numbers in dyslexia ways to get honorable discharge early is deadliest catch real can incense set off smoke alarm sitting with legs tucked under stuck in the middle with you bob dylan no water coming out of bathroom faucet champagne with cranberry juice name amazon order shipped to wrong address what causes pitted acne scars mlb tv condensed game examples of dark humor awake for 20 hours pixels in a 8.5 x 11 page do trust funds gain interest lord of the rings ending national producers life insurance company personal touch razor handle how to tell if well pump is going bad glass fireplace doors with vents download unlimited music for a monthly fee can keflex treat chlamydia foot run over by car injuries how long is a quarter in the nba how do you get peggy from margaret what's the color of the boathouse at hereford how dangerous is rock climbing how to fluff a down comforter girl group christmas songs