Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

tavalon

(27,985 posts)
Tue Aug 14, 2012, 05:48 AM Aug 2012

SPOILERS WARNING: Newsroom

I don't know how many of you have been watching Newsroom, the new series by Aaron Sorkin that easily rivals his very successful and long running show, The West Wing. I have, until this evening, been overjoyed at this series and at seeing Aaron Sorkin at the top of his game and having such a great soapbox upon which to pontificate his views about current events. See, with the exception of tonight's episode, I have the same views as Aaron Sorkin, so I love having my points of view so elegantly portrayed on this witty, funny, exceptionally well done TV show.

Spoiler Alert, once again, stop reading now.














Tonight, the episode was about the killing of Osama Bin Laden. There wasn't a single person who reflected my point of view. There was one young woman who had family in the Twin Towers who was sad, but she was sad because it dredged up memories of the bombing for her, something I can certainly understand.

The day I heard Obama Bin Laden had been murdered, I was angry. He was a criminal who spent almost 10 years on the run after his crime was so successfully carried out. Or was he the criminal mastermind behind the attack? I certainly think he was and I think our criminal justice system or even an international court would have found him guilty, following a trial. What they would have chosen to do with him after a legitimate trial, I have no interest in.

But, are we such barbarians, that I am the only one who was sickened by this action by the American Military, sanctioned by our Government, to murder this man, this likely guilty, but innocent until proven guilty, person? If today's Newsroom is to be believed, I am. There wasn't a single person on the show who explored the anger that I, and I hope, a few others here at DU felt at the lawlessness of this murder. The way it brought us down to the level of a notorious terrorist saddens and sickens me. I was ashamed and I did not stay in the room to watch as President Obama confirmed the details of the "attack" which I choose to see as murder without a trial.

At the end of this episode, they faded to black with the same speech from Obama. I walked out of the room as angry and ashamed as I was the day it happened.

I remember back to when the Shrub was getting his hard on to invade Afghanistan on the way to Iraq. I felt that a police action and the quiet capture of Bin Laden was the correct course of action and invading Afghanistan was wrong. I was in a 10% minority back then and even had my house egged when I chose to put the world flag out when everyone else seemed to be flying the American flag like it was a goddamn baseball game. Remember those "banner" days?

I cannot remember a single time I disagreed so vehemently with Aaron Sorkin but, this episode I will not watch again. I believe that this always should have been a police action, ending in arrest, if possible and a trial. Americans aren't vigilantes, except when we are.

11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

davidpdx

(22,000 posts)
1. I disagree w/ you about the killing of bin Laden.
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 09:51 AM
Aug 2012

The point is the show demonstrated how the it should have been reported. Mackenzie said, "I don' want this to be reported like the Redskins won the fucking Superbowl" (I'm not sure if that quote is exact, but it is close).

I thought it was great how they cut to Obama's speech right over Jeff Daniel's shoulder. A very nicely choreographed move. It made you feel like you were once again back on that same day the announcement was made.

One of the key things Sorkin is doing is showing how out of hand the media has become. To do this, he has to pick important stories which were reported in the wrong way. The shooting of former US Congresswoman Giffords was a prime example of this.

tavalon

(27,985 posts)
2. The cut to the speech is what made me walk out
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 11:58 AM
Aug 2012

I was so ashamed of my country on that day. I didn't want to relive "good times" because for me, on that day, I just felt shame for America.

My husband made a fair argument that Sorkin is trying to do his part to help out Obama since Obama isn't really touting that he was the commander in chief who coordinated this.

From a political point of view, that makes sense, but that was far down the list when listing some of America's finer days.

One of those finer days, before the pretender to the throne, Shrub, fucked with it, was September 11, 2001. I had been painting my house and left my house with paint all over me, to go to the blood bank. I got there just before the lines became hour long waits. And as we waited, wanting desperately to help any of the survivors, we watched the TVs that the blood bank had set up. People who didn't know each other hugged and cried together watching our fellow Americans being murdered. And hoped and prayed that there would be survivors who could use our blood as well as our American bond. And nobody, that day, cared if the victims were jewish, arab, black, white, male or female.

Before Bush turned it into an obscene photo op, we Americans stood and without being told, went to the blood banks to help.

I get the main gist of what Sorkin is doing, though, the similarities to the transformation of MSNBC are pretty hard to ignore. He's doing a good job with that. I just don't agree that the day Bin Laden was murdered, instead of being captured and tried in an international court, is a day to remember proudly.

ag_dude

(562 posts)
3. The point I'll disagree with you on...
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 03:22 PM
Aug 2012

...is that a trial would have been the cluster fuck of the century.

Osama said himself that he was the mastermind behind the attack, I'm not sure what you hoped to learn in a trial.

The result would have been the same, Osama would have been put to death. The difference is it would have lead to an even larger issue with Pakistan demanding that he be returned to face trial there, it would have cost millions in security, and it would have likely lead to further terrorist threats/actual attacks.

I don't think feeling good about the process would have been worth the cost.

tavalon

(27,985 posts)
4. I didn't say it would or would not have been a clusterfuck, but I think I may
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 11:19 PM
Aug 2012

have misread or you may have mistyped, but anyway, it isn't about feeling good, it's about right action vs. wrong action. In our world, life rarely falls to such black and white terms. For me, the murder of Osama actually did fall along those lines and I believe our President and therefore America as a whole, chose wrong action.

ag_dude

(562 posts)
6. How did it fall along those lines?
Sun Aug 19, 2012, 11:19 PM
Aug 2012

The man said he did it numerous times over nearly a decade.

You can call is a murder if you wish but you know that's playing semantics.

tavalon

(27,985 posts)
7. So he convicted himself
Mon Aug 20, 2012, 11:24 AM
Aug 2012

No need for a pesky trial.

I'm quite sure he was involved. Whether he was the "mastermind", we will never know, will we? Unless we believe everything our government tells us. I pretty much got over that a while ago. You?

BTW, every time a terrorist act is committed, there are reams of people and groups clamoring for the "credit". Of course he said he did it. He probably did. I'd love to know if he did it before or after he was cut off the American payroll. Yet another reason that there was no need for a pesky trial. While many lawyers do their level best to keep facts out of trials, they aren't always successful. But dead men don't talk. Ask Saddam Hussein. Oh, wait, you can't.

His life was ended without benefit of trial or conviction. Call it murder or assassination. Either way, it wasn't right action and I don't choose to cheer just because the probable mastermind of 911 was murdered or assassinated.

Hey, did you know that even American citizens can be murdered or assassinated without benefit of a trial if the President (any President) signs off on it?

ag_dude

(562 posts)
8. I'm not talking about believing our government.
Mon Aug 20, 2012, 01:03 PM
Aug 2012

I'm talking about believing the person we're talking about who has proudly taken credit for masterminding the attacks numerous times over a decade.

edit:sorry, is this some '9/11 was an inside job' thing?

tavalon

(27,985 posts)
9. Not unless I want this thread to get locked.
Tue Aug 21, 2012, 11:32 AM
Aug 2012

Last edited Wed Aug 22, 2012, 04:28 AM - Edit history (1)

Bin Laden was many things, but he wasn't a stupid man. Whether or not he really was the one and only grand master of the plot and it's execution, and I certainly think he had his paws all over it, he would have been an idiot not to take credit. Especially if he understood (and again, I must remind people that Bin Laden was highly education and just plain smart) that he would make a fine boogieman for the previous administration. Bragging rights without fear of capture or murder. That worked out well for him under the previous administration.

Why this administration decided it was time to remove the boogieman is a discussion that would likely end up in the dungeon, but I think it's a very valid question. There are a lot of valid questions amidst the idiotic questions that have remained unanswered about what happened that day since the whole thing has been invalidated by the lunatic fringe, even very valid, interesting, possibly enlightening discussions are derided.

ag_dude

(562 posts)
10. Your questions make a lot more sense in that light.
Tue Aug 21, 2012, 02:31 PM
Aug 2012

At first I thought it was actually about Bin Laden. Sorry about that.

tavalon

(27,985 posts)
11. Smooth
Wed Aug 22, 2012, 04:27 AM
Aug 2012

I must compliment you on your skillful use of passive aggression with the written word. Well, done, sir!

tavalon

(27,985 posts)
5. I said I wouldn't watch this again
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 11:24 AM
Aug 2012

but when you have three partners (aw, poor me, I live in a fairly functional poly family) who are also wanting to see the same show and want company, inevitably, it's not only possible, but likely that I will end up watching the same episode more than one time. With the exception of this episode, that's a good thing, because I love Aaron Sorkin's style.

Anyway, the hubby in question, has very similar political leanings as me, and gets pissed off when his political POV is under represented, so I decided we decided he probably didn't want to watch it alone, like I did, yelling at the screen.

What I did do, to protect my boundaries, was tell him I would leave the room the moment Will Mackavoy made his announcement and before President Obama started his speech over Will's shoulder. I thought it was that whole episode I never wanted to see again, but it was our President's speech that night that I never, ever want to hear again. And I did. I went and played with my dog. He stayed because amazingly he had never heard the speech.

Unfortunately, he was so angry after, he couldn't talk about it, which was kind of why I watched it again, with him, so I could have someone to commiserate with.

Onward and Upward, Aaron Sorkin rocks and I hope Newsroom lasts twice and long as the equally deserving The West Wing. One episode that didn't work for me does not a reason to stop watching, make.

Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»TV Chat»SPOILERS WARNING: Newsroo...