SciFi Weekend: Torchwood to US; Kissograms on Doctor Who; Rebooting An Old Roddenberry Series; Caprica Premiers; Rob Lowe Leaving Kitty

The Hollywood Reporter has a story on the possibility of Fox picking up Torchwood. Russell T. Davis would write it and John Barrowman might still star, but I still have my doubts about this working as an American television show. Many shows with science fiction aspect have had difficulty making it in the United States. One of the features which makes Torchwood special is being a more serious show taking place in the Doctor Who universe which would be unfamiliar to many American audiences. Even under the best of conditions, far too many genre shows such as Firefly and Dollhouse have died quickly on Fox.

It also does not always work to try to translate successful British television series to the American networks. Some such as The Office have been successful but there have also been many flops. Two examples of such failures in recent years have been Life on Mars and Coupling. The American version of Coupling also showed that having the writer of the original BBC version does not guarantee success. Coupling, which NBC had hoped to be the replacement for Friends (and which was in many ways more like a combination of Seinfeld and Sex in the City) failed for several reasons in the United States. They used the same scripts as were used on the BBC–written by incoming Doctor Who show runner Steven Moffat.

The article also mentions the possibility of also rebooting Doctor Who for American television. That would be far, far worse than doing this with Torchwood. It isn’t clear if the idea for Torchwood is to pick up the series where it left off but with a more international background or if they would reboot it.

I’ve been impressed with Steven Moffat for doing such a great job on such different television genres. I’ve sometimes joked that I would like to see some of the characters from Coupling become The Doctor’s next companion. We don’t know very much about The Doctor’s actual upcoming companion, Amy Pond (Karen Gillan). TV Overmind has picked up a report that “everyone thinks she is this prim and proper policewoman… it’s going to be revealed early on that she works as a kissogram.” Reading that, she just might be a Steven Moffat character of the Coupling variety!

Personally I think this whole trend towards reboots is going a bit too far. I would primarily reserve it for shows which were so bad that they should be done entirely differently (such as Battlestar Galactica) or for shows which never made it and we have no emotional investment with the original. One such show which is being talked about for a reboot is an old Gene Roddenberry idea, The Questor Tapes. His son Rod has said, “My father always felt that Questor was the one that got away. He believed that the show had the potential to be bigger than Star Trek.”

TrekMovie.com has some information on the show:

Now 36 years later “Questor” is back. Gene’s son Rod Roddenberry will develop the project along with Roddenberry Productions COO Trevor Roth and Imagine Television’s President David Nevins and EVP of Development Robin Gurney. The team is currently in negotiations with writer, producer and show runner Tim Minear (Lois & Clark, The X-Files, Angel, Dollhouse) to produce. Of course there still is no guarantee that the new “Questor” will get picked up as a series either, but Imagine Entertainment, which was founded by Brian Grazer and Ron Howard, has a good track record on TV. Imagine developed shows like 24, Friday Night Lights, Lie To Me; Arrested Development, and many more (including JJ Abrams Felicity)…

Gene Roddenberry may never have got “Questor” as a series, but he didn’t forget the idea of that android on a quest. “Questor” influenced the creation of the character Data in Star Trek The Next Generation.

John Kennith Muir has more background, including a review of the original movie.

Caprica premiered on television this week. My original review from when it came out on DVD was posted here.

Rob Lowe, who left The West Wing before the series was completed to attempt to make it on his own show, has now decided to leave Brothers and Sisters at the end of this season. While his previous attempt with his own show failed it is more understandable that he wants to try again as opposed to remaining where he is as his role on Brothers and Sisters is not as substantial as his role as  Sam Seaborn on The West Wing. There is no word as to how he will exit the show. Possibilities include his character having another heart attack or a divorce from Kitty.

Continuing The Fight For Health Care Reform

Most of the talk about health care reform in the blogs since the loss in Massachusetts has been about ways to ram through health care reform despite losing the super-majority in the Senate. While I agree with the importance of passing health care reform, both in terms of public policy and politically, such arguments often overlook what really must be done first–win over the hearts and minds of the voters. We cannot afford to fail to pass health care reform, but nothing good will come out of ramming through unpopular legislation.

Some liberals think that once the health care plan is passed everyone will see that it is nothing like what is being portrayed by the right wing noise machine and will learn to love the new plan. Most key provisions of health care reform will not take effect until after the 2010 and 2012 elections. During this time people will continue to hear scare stories about the doom we will face. These scare stories about health care reform are no more true than the scare stories of planetary doom in 2012 based upon the Mayan calendar, but they will still be believed by far too many people.

Ramming through health care reform before obtaining the support of the voters is also a mistake as it would reinforce one of the right wing’s criticisms of Democrats as being arrogant in their exercise of power. Sure, it is true as Democrats counter that the Republicans have done far worse than this when in power, but voters will respond to what they see today. Acting like Republicans is no way to convince the voters that the Democrats are any better. Fortunately the Democratic leadership decided against actions such as delaying the seating of Scott Brown or quickly holding a vote before he was seated.

There are many obstacles to selling health care reform but the distortions from the right wing noise machine could have been predicted. Polling does prove that most Americans do not really understand what is in the bills and are more willing to support them once they understand. Obama needs to to campaign for his policies as strongly as he campaigned to beat Hillary Clinton and John McCain. He is now showing that he realizes this.

As Americans do support most of the individual aspects of the health care plan I have suggested that different portions be proposed and debated separately. Pushing everything at once provides too many avenues for the right to obfuscate the real issues. A majority would be likely to support eliminating restrictions on pre-existing conditions, eliminating rescission of policies after people become sick, offering the choice of a public option, establishing exchanges to provide a choice of health care plans, eliminating the Medicare donut hole, and even paying a little more in taxes to provide coverage for those who cannot afford it. Even if there are not enough votes in the Senate to pass portions such as the public option, we should have a public debate and a vote. Sooner or later the public will figure out who it is that is blocking the measures they want. Let the Republicans try to run on such a record.

At present Democrats have far too many points to defend at once, allowing the Republican to create their distortions such as claiming the massive bill contains death panels. Democrats  needed to do a better job of explaining that the Medicare Part D cuts being proposed are cuts in subsidies given to the insurance companies by George Bush, and not actual cuts in Medicare. It is astounding that the Democrats could ever wind up in the situation of allowing the Republicans to falsely portray themselves as the defenders of Medicare.

There is  increased hope that a deal might be reached to have the House pass the Senate bill in return for plans to fix the problems with separate legislation. If this was the fantasy world of The West Wing I would prefer to see a series of individual battles and victories for health care reform, but a deal such as what is being discussed is more realistic in this world.

If such a deal cannot be reached, and ideally even if one can, Obama should take advantage of the State of the Union Address to explain what is actually in the health care plan and to also tell the American people that he has heard their concerns and is recommending that Congress make some changes.

One mistake which Obama can still rectify is backing away from his opposition to the individual mandate. The mandate changes how people see individual fixes they might otherwise support, and plays into the talking points of the far right. Many independents voted for Obama because they realized after Katrina that we cannot have a government which ignores the need for government action when necessary. However, while many are willing to support government helping those who need assistance at obtaining health care, they are justifiably nervous about government programs designed to help people whether they ask for the help or not.

People who see this as a more voluntary plan to help either themselves or others would be more willing to support this as opposed to a plan which is mandatory for themselves. There are many other ways around the free rider problem which would not lead to opposition from many on both the left and the right as has occurred as a result of the individual mandate.

There are many other details I would change but this is already far too long for a blog post. I will end by repeating one of my other objections to the course the health care debate has taken even if, in this case, it might not be politically feasible to change course.

The Democrats have fallen into a trap of accepting the Republican dogma that taxes should never be raised, as most forget that even Ronald Reagan did raise taxes. They are forced to find ways to limit the people who pay for the health care reform measures, leading to opposition from certain groups and an overall impression that they are trying to sneak something by the American people. Everyone benefits from health care reform in the long run and far more money can be raised less painfully if there is a broad based tax. If Barack Obama had used his oratory skills from the start to explain to people exactly what they must pay and what they get in return I wonder if Americans would have understood this. Or perhaps I’m returning to the fantasy world of  The West Wing on this argument.

I Might Not Agree With Obama On Afghanistan But At Least He Seriously Considered The Issues

Obama Arlington

I might have my doubts about the strategy in Afghanistan, but I do appreciate the fact that Obama actually did think about the decision, in contrast to how decisions were made during the previous administration. The New York Times has an article on how the decision was reached:

The three-month review that led to the escalate-then-exit strategy is a case study in decision making in the Obama White House — intense, methodical, rigorous, earnest and at times deeply frustrating for nearly all involved. It was a virtual seminar in Afghanistan and Pakistan, led by a president described by one participant as something “between a college professor and a gentle cross-examiner.”

Mr. Obama peppered advisers with questions and showed an insatiable demand for information, taxing analysts who prepared three dozen intelligence reports for him and Pentagon staff members who churned out thousands of pages of documents.

This account of how the president reached his decision is based on dozens of interviews with participants as well as a review of notes some of them took during Mr. Obama’s 10 meetings with his national security team. Most of those interviewed spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations, but their accounts have been matched against those of other participants wherever possible.

Mr. Obama devoted so much time to the Afghan issue — nearly 11 hours on the day after Thanksgiving alone — that he joked, “I’ve got more deeply in the weeds than a president should, and now you guys need to solve this.” He invited competing voices to debate in front of him, while guarding his own thoughts. Even David Axelrod, arguably his closest adviser, did not know where Mr. Obama would come out until just before Thanksgiving.

Obama “peppered advisers with questions and showed an insatiable demand for information.” In contrast, George Bush was known for rarely asking questions and having no intellectual curiosity. The article further shows how Obama’s approach differed from Bush’s:

The episode underscored the uneasy relationship between the military and a new president who, aides said, was determined not to be as deferential as he believed his predecessor, George W. Bush, was for years in Iraq. And the military needed to adjust to a less experienced but more skeptical commander in chief. “We’d been chugging along for eight years under an administration that had become very adept at managing war in a certain way,” said another military official.

Besides trying to avoid the mistakes that George Bush made, Obama considered previous U.S.  mistakes:

Moreover, Mr. Obama had read “Lessons in Disaster,” Gordon M. Goldstein’s book on the Vietnam War. The book had become a must read in the West Wing after Mr. Emanuel had dinner over the summer at the house of another deputy national security adviser, Thomas E. Donilon, and wandered into his library to ask what he should be reading.

Among the conclusions that Mr. Donilon and the White House team drew from the book was that both President John F. Kennedy and President Lyndon B. Johnson failed to question the underlying assumption about monolithic Communism and the domino theory — clearly driving the Obama advisers to rethink the nature of Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

9/11 Mastermind To Be Tried in Manhattan

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who has admitted to being the mastermind behind the 9/11 terrorists attacks, is to be tried by a civilian court in lower Manhattan. Trying him around the scene of the crime raises thoughts of some creative forms of punishment assuming he is convicted. For example, there’s Josh Lyman’s idea from Issac and Ishmeal, the episode of The West Wing which dealt with the 9/11 attack:

I’d put ’em in a small cell, and make them watch home movies of the birthdays and baptisms
and weddings of every single person they killed, over and over, every day, for the rest
of their lives. And then they’d get punched in the mouth every night
at bedtime. By a different person, every night. There’d be a long list of volunteers…

Bartlets Urge Support For Health Care Reform Bill

Martin Sheen and Stockard Channing who played President Jed Bartlet and First Lady Abbey Bartlet on The West Wing urge support for passage of the health care reform bill tomorrow (video above).

Somehow I don’t think there’s much of a chance that Crazy Pete will change his vote if I call his office.

Update: Someone linking here from Craig’s List sums up how Americans should respond to the scare tactics from the right: “don’t react to fear. support freedom and health care!”

Zoe Bartlett Marries Barack Obama

Actors Fred Armisen and Elisabeth Moss arrive to the TNT/TBS bro

People bills this as Mad Men‘s Elisabeth Moss Marries SNL‘s Fred Armisen. While Moss’s role on Mad Men is currently more significant, her role as President Bartlett’s daughter on The West Wing is more interesting when connected to Armisen, who often portrays Obama on Saturday Night Live.

Donald Rumsfeld’s Crusade Against Islam

Who would have guessed that Robert Draper (hardly a liberal writer) would have this weekend’s must read article for liberals in GQ (hardly the most significant magazine for current affairs). Draper has some fascinating material on Donald Rumsfeld, especially with regards to the use of Crusade-like religious messages in reports on the war:

Donald Rumsfeld’s Pentagon prepared a top-secret briefing for George W. Bush. This document, known as the Worldwide Intelligence Update, was a daily digest of critical military intelligence so classified that it circulated among only a handful of Pentagon leaders and the president; Rumsfeld himself often delivered it, by hand, to the White House. The briefing’s cover sheet generally featured triumphant, color images from the previous days’ war efforts: On this particular morning, it showed the statue of Saddam Hussein being pulled down in Firdos Square, a grateful Iraqi child kissing an American soldier, and jubilant crowds thronging the streets of newly liberated Baghdad. And above these images, and just below the headline secretary of defense, was a quote that may have raised some eyebrows. It came from the Bible, from the book of Psalms: “Behold, the eye of the Lord is on those who fear Him…To deliver their soul from death.”

This mixing of Crusades-like messaging with war imagery, which until now has not been revealed, had become routine. On March 31, a U.S. tank roared through the desert beneath a quote from Ephesians: “Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand.” On April 7, Saddam Hussein struck a dictatorial pose, under this passage from the First Epistle of Peter: “It is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men.”

These cover sheets were the brainchild of Major General Glen Shaffer, a director for intelligence serving both the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the secretary of defense. In the days before the Iraq war, Shaffer’s staff had created humorous covers in an attempt to alleviate the stress of preparing for battle. Then, as the body counting began, Shaffer, a Christian, deemed the biblical passages more suitable. Several others in the Pentagon disagreed. At least one Muslim analyst in the building had been greatly offended; others privately worried that if these covers were leaked during a war conducted in an Islamic nation, the fallout—as one Pentagon staffer would later say—“would be as bad as Abu Ghraib.”

But the Pentagon’s top officials were apparently unconcerned about the effect such a disclosure might have on the conduct of the war or on Bush’s public standing. When colleagues complained to Shaffer that including a religious message with an intelligence briefing seemed inappropriate, Shaffer politely informed them that the practice would continue, because “my seniors”—JCS chairman Richard Myers, Rumsfeld, and the commander in chief himself—appreciated the cover pages.

As even at least one analyst at the Pentagon realized, the use of such language would have even worsened the belief in the Muslim world that the Bush administration was conducting a religious crusade against Islam. Rumsfeld felt it was more important to appeal to the mind set of George Bush:

The Scripture-adorned cover sheets illustrate one specific complaint I heard again and again: that Rumsfeld’s tactics—such as playing a religious angle with the president—often ran counter to sound decision-making and could, occasionally, compromise the administration’s best interests. In the case of the sheets, publicly flaunting his own religious views was not at all the SecDef’s style—“Rumsfeld was old-fashioned that way,” Shaffer acknowledged when I contacted him about the briefings—but it was decidedly Bush’s style, and Rumsfeld likely saw the Scriptures as a way of making a personal connection with a president who frequently quoted the Bible. No matter that, if leaked, the images would reinforce impressions that the administration was embarking on a religious war and could escalate tensions with the Muslim world. The sheets were not Rumsfeld’s direct invention—and he could thus distance himself from them, should that prove necessary.

So Rumsfeld thought he could impress his simple-minded boss by quoting the Bible.

(more…)

Aaron Sorkin’s Return to Television

studio60_102

Entertainment Weekly mentions John Wells’ new television show, Southland, but primarily uses this as an excuse to discuss his old partner Aaron Sorkin:

Privately, though, I wish that NBC was throwing its cash at Wells’ old producing partner, whose long-awaited comeback to television is about a year behind schedule. I speak of Aaron Sorkin, the man behind last year’s fabulously written Charlie Wilson’s War, who’s best remembered by boob-tube-o-philes as the genius who, along with Wells, gave us The West Wing (and, well, the sexy Brad Whitford). I miss Sorkin’s marvelous repartee, even when it came in the form of a blustery, behind-the-scenes look at a late-night variety show called Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip. Since the 2006-07 drama only lasted a season, Sorkin can’t be wanting that show to represent his final contribution to the TV dramas. It’s only a matter of time before he brings us more of that intelligent, rat-a-tat banter — right?

Well, it just so happens that we may be seeing him soon — just not in the way we’d expect. A source close to Sorkin says the uber-writer is in talks with Entourage to guest star on the comedy once it returns to HBO in July. And there may be more good news on the horizon: Although his dance card is filled with must-finish screenplays (a Facebook movie! A courtroom drama for George Clooney called The Challenge!) word is that Sorkin is mulling over the idea of a new TV drama that takes a behind-the-scenes look at a cable news program (think: Keith Olbermann’s show on MSNBC). Though I’m not all that thrilled at the prospect of yet another behind-the-scenes show, I’ll take what I can get if it means Sorkin will (finally!) be back on TV.

Sorkin’s behind the scene look at a late-night variety show failed partially because it wasn’t what Sorkin was really interested in. Sorkin moved the show increasingly into politics as opposed to show business. As I discussed, in response to criticism of Studio 60 when it was on:

The criticisms are largely true, but miss the point. Those looking for a show about a SNL-type show are inevitably going to be disappointed. It fails to capture how such a show is really written, and fails to show its humor. However, Studio 60 is no more about a comedy show than Sports Night was really about a sports show. Studio 60 is really just a way to continue The West Wing in a new venue. The ultimate tip off is having the White House Deputy Chief of Staff as producer of the show within the show…

Studio 60 is about Aaron Sorkin characters speaking Aaron Sorkin dialog about the issues which matter to Aaron Sorkin. It doesn’t matter whether these characters are in the White House or on the set of a television show. Those who want a funny show about making a television show should buy the DVD’s of The Dick Van Dyke Show. Studio 60 is a totally different type of show, but hopefully setting it in an SNL-like television show is enough to get enough people to give it a try and possibly get hooked.

On television it is difficult to build an audience when a show appears to be about one thing but is really aimed at a different audience. Similarly, look at how much trouble Friday Night Lights has had because many potential viewers never gave this excellent drama a chance thinking it was primarily about college football. (Fortunately their arrangement with Direct TV will be keeping it around for at least two more years despite its low ratings.) I don’t know if there is enough of an audience for Sorkin’s planned show, but at least having it about an Olbermann-type show is closer to Sorkin’s real interests than a show like Saturday Night Live and viewers will know what to expect.

Most importantly, I hope to see a return of Sorkin’s “intelligent, rat-a-tat banter” in some form. With both Sorkin and Amy Sherman-Paladino (of Gilmore Girls) being without current shows I do miss this type of dialog which nobody else comes close to matching.

Daschle Withdraws Nomination

Tom Daschle has withdrawn his nomination for Secretary of Health and Human Services. This comes as no surprise following both the ethical questions as well as expectations from Obama’s supporters that we see the types of changes in the way business is conducted in Washington which were promised.

Daschle was also given a West Wing office and his position as health-reform czar was considered to be more influential than his position in the cabinet. The initial report does not comment on this position, but presumably the withdrawing of the nomination also means that Daschle will not be the health-reform czar.

Will Daschle now emerge with a higher paying job as a lobbyist when any health reform legislation goes before Congress?

Update: From Daschle’s statement:

“If 30 years of exposure to the challenges inherent in our system has taught me anything, it has taught me that this work will require a leader who can operate with the full faith of Congress and the American people, and without distraction,” Daschle said. “Right now, I am not that leader, and will not be a distraction.”

“I will not be the architect of America’s health system reform, but I remain one of its more fervent supporters,” he said.

This appears to confirm my assumption above that he would not be kept on as a White House adviser with the withdrawing of his  nomination at HHS.

Tom Daschle’s Tax Problems Worse Than Initially Reported

Tom Daschle’s tax problems are looking a lot more significant today as additional errors have been revealed. Political Punch reports:

The report indicates that Daschle’s failure to pay more than $101,000 taxes on the car and driver a wealthy friend let him use from 2005 through 2007 is not the only tax issue the former Senate Majority Leader has been dealing with since his December nomination prompted a more thorough examination of his income tax returns.

Mr. Daschle also didn’t report $83,333 in consulting income in 2007.

The Senate Finance Committee Report also notes that during the vetting process, President Obama’s Transition Team “identified certain donations that did not qualify as charitable deductions because they were not paid to qualifying organizations.  Daschle adjusted his contribution deductions on his amended returns for 2005, 2006 and 2007 to remove these amounts and add additional contributions.” This adjustment meant a reduction in the amount he contributed to charitable foundations of $14,963 from 2005 through 2007. With the unreported income from the use of a car service in the amounts of $73,031 in 2005, $89,129 in 2006 and $93,096 in 2007; the unreported consulting income of $83,333 in 2007; and the adjusted reductions in charitable contributions, Daschle adds a total of $353,552 in additional income and reduced donations, meaning an additional tax payment of $128,203, in addition to $11,964 in interest.

On January 2 of this year, Daschle filed amended tax returns to pay the $140,167 in unpaid taxes.

After the initial reports came out which were limited to failure to pay taxes for the car and driver the conventional wisdom was that Daschle would still be confirmed. This was expected as Senators tend to go softer on those who have been in their club and he Daschle is close to Harry Reid. Now his fate is not as clear. So far the track record for cabinet nominees running into scandals has been 50:50 with Bill Richardson pulling out and Timothy Geithner being confirmed.

It is too early to say if these relevations will prevent Daschle’s confirmation as Secretary of Health and Human Services. If it does prevent confirmation it raises a couple of additional questions. If he is not confirmed, will he still keep his West Wing position as health-reform czar, which might be a more important post than being in the cabinet? In the event that Daschle winds up without either job, how will this impact Obama administration attempts at health care reform?