The site's editors are getting a lot of mail about last Tuesday's egregious episode, which skipped over all the successes in Iraq to editorialize that our action there is a "disaster."

They link my cry for help, and report that the mail on "Witches of Mass Destruction" is running 50-50 pro/con. Apparently, however, a lot of the pro-war correspondents are being rude in their letters. I would like to remind war supporters that the stereotype of Republicans, conservative Democrats, and Libertarians is that we're less educated and thoughtful than the "intellectuals" who oppose us on this issue. Passion is fine, but if we want to persuade anyone we don't want to play into their preconceptions.

My recommendation for hawkish Boston Legal fans: When communicating with ABC or with those who run the fan site, concentrate on the fact that this show ignored our stunning successes in Iraq, and that any objective measurements demonstrate this success (the low civilian casualty rate, the fact of two elections with amazing turnout despite the citizenry taking great physical risk to vote, low Coalition casulties [particularly compared with Vietnam], the ratifying of the country's constitution, the diminishing insurgency, the progress in repairing Iraqi infrastructure, the accelerating rate of Sunni participation in the country's politics).

Alternatively, point out that we get saturation news coverage of all the so-called "setbacks" in the war, but virtual Heritage Media blackout on its stunning progress. The writers of Boston Legal assert that we're getting little or no news from Iraq, and that the war is garnering less attention than Vietnam did. That notion is simply laughable: what is meant is that those who penned Alan Shore's closing argument presume the American populace is ill-informed. Otherwise, more people would share their "enlightened" opinions.

This reflects the fact that the media and entertainment elites in New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Boston and all universities simply do not come into contact with smart people who don't see eye-to-eye with them. And when they do, these people—like me, and sometimes my husband—stay mute on the subject of politics. Because we're tired of losing jobs over it.

Memo to ABC: Hire some bright people who disagree with you. Or encourage those who are in the closet about their beliefs to come out. (Hint: they don't necessarily look like the ultra-vanilla Brad Chase, or the flamboyantly Old School Denny Crane.)

And you will stop losing viewers. Guaranteed. If you're at a loss, for crying out loud, e-mail me: I know the two funniest television writers out there— both them, of course, discreet about their GOP leanings.

Just because you jumped the shark doesn't mean you can't jump back. It can be done.

Posted by: Attila at 11:29 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 461 words, total size 3 kb.

1 three.... ahem

Posted by: MacStansbury at November 05, 2005 07:04 PM (FmdLR)

2 I stand corrected!

Posted by: Attila Girl at November 05, 2005 07:49 PM (x3SIT)

3 "doesn't mean you can't jump back" I hope you are correct. I love the show when it avoids trying to address pop culture politics. ABC's ability to do so remains to be seen, however.

Posted by: MrSpkr at November 05, 2005 09:47 PM (28QFs)

4 Hire some bright people who disagree with you. Excellent advice for anyone. Especially, say, a Presidental administration. (Sorry, couldn't resist.)

Posted by: Christophe at November 07, 2005 03:44 PM (2rBIo)

5 Well, I'm wounded, but I'll likely heal.

Posted by: Attila Girl at November 07, 2005 06:28 PM (x3SIT)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

I'm at a crossroad. Boston Legal is delightful, but I cannot stand the political stances the writers are taking. In a way, it gets worse when they pretend to be "even-handed," since their hearts clearly aren't in it. And who, exactly, would be the voice of patriotic reason in that series? The main ongoing Republican character is bigoted and befuddled, and a judge "stands up for the military" with a speech that begins by declaring the war in Iraq a "disaster."

Yet I find myself addicted to their fast cuts, sexiness, and moments of surrealism. Not to mention Candice Bergen and William Shatner.

They've really got a hold on me.

Can I talk the show's producers into knocking off the political material, or must I accept this weekly fix as a guilty pleasure, and my one real tie to popular culture? Or shall I begin attending SLAA meetings and shoot my television?

—Addicted to Law

UPDATE, 11/4/05: More ranting at ABC here, with a special plea for reasoned feedback from bright hawks.

Posted by: Attila at 12:01 AM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 176 words, total size 1 kb.