Bush assassination imagined...

Posted by Evan Derkacz at 1:51 PM on September 12, 2006.

Laura is dying to see the new "fictional documentary" about the assassination of President Bush and so, I gather, are many Americans.

Actually, according to one of the producers of Death of a President it's not just the wish-fulfillment promised in the title but "a look at what's going on inside of America as a result of its foreign policy."

Fox's Roger Friedman proves he hasn't eaten out, seen a movie, turned on the TV or walked on the street in years with this comment:

I’m guessing there are a couple of things Americans, no matter what their party affiliation or political ideology, really don't want to see in a movie. One would be the assassination of a sitting American president, and the other would be a black man getting pinned for his murder just to make a point about anti-Arab sentiment since Sept. 11.

Passion of the Christ distributor Newmarket Films begs to differ as they've paid a million dollars for U.S. distribution rights. Given their ties to the Passion, the Republican smear-machine faces an uphill battle.

Critics will cry foul and point to the controversy raging over ABC/Disney's crucifixion of history in Path to 9/11. The obvious differences will be obscured, but whatever. For finger-in-the-wind pols and pundits it's just another opportunity to trot out their plasticized patriotism and play indignant American for the camera. The differences, as if they need to be articulated, are a.) This won't be shown on a public network but rather by ticket sales at a movie theater and more importantly b.) That this film portrays an imagined future scenario, thereby avoiding slandering people involved in any actual incident by blaming them.

(If it turns out to show that Dick Cheney ends up assassinating Bush on the Senate floor and eating him with a mild eggplant relish and a side of delicately flakey cornbread with a whisper of cumin then I'll eat my hat.)

In the clip featured here, CNN obliges critics while giving no truck to opposing arguments. Always eager to wave the flag more vigorously than Fox, the report crows: "U.S. reaction, in a word: appalling."

Leaving aside the Freudian slip, CNN's conclusion may have something to do with those they've chosen to interview.

I mean, you take one guy from the Washington Post and white-Christian-terrorism supporter and all-around loony toon, congressman Peter King (R-NY), and yes, it is appalling. And yes, they are appalled.

But I don't recall hearing from a film critic, a historian, a Democrat, a progressive, a person on the street, etc. I also don't recall anything but polite curiosity marking the faces of network reporters when the issue of torturing humans is discussed -- and that's something that the real administration advocates doing to real people.

Incidentally, I also don't recall much outrage when Ann Coulter advocated assassinating Clinton for his sexual indiscretion...

Evan Derkacz is a New York-based writer and contributor to AlterNet.