Thank you.
I had never heard of Aaron Sorkin and I never would have guessed he was a lefty from watching it.
I am surprised you have never heard of Aaron Sorkin of West Wing and (with Rob Reiner) American President and A Few Good Men fame among others, that explains why you "never would have guessed he was a lefty". Yes, that movie was heavily edited and toned down and is being marketed this way, because of both recent flops of anti-American and anti-Iraq war movies and the legal action threatened by real hero of Charlie Wilson's actions regarding Afghanistan. They simply rewrite history by giving all the credit to Charlie Wilson, whose real part was being used to get the congressional funding for covert ops in Afghanistan. This IBD article is a small step in correcting the impression the movie and its promotion are trying to create, while not diminishing his role in it... Al Gore took credit for the "initiative in creating the Internet" when he voted for NFS and asked for bigger NFSnet funding, ergo Al Gore "invented the Internet" - should the movie be coming soon?
For example, Julia Roberts in the promo interview, couldn't even bring herself to say that it was about defeating Soviets in Afghanistan because of the ideology and the regime, rather she said they needed help "because the fight wasn't fair"...
Re THC program, I was looking forward to it and was quite disappointed that this was not an independent review of historic events along the lines of their Hollywood vs Reality program, but rather that it was the same story about Charlie Wilson "winning the war", told to us by same Charlie Wilson and same Aaron Sorkin - that, while, of course, toned down and a bit more humble for more sophisticated THC viewers, it nevertheless was more of a movie promotion and Charlie Wilson's promotion than real history and his place in it - so it's no wonder that they showed everything that promoted the perception that he singlehandedly "won the war" with the help of the "rogue" CIA agent ("and three other people") and a compassionate "Texas socialite" whose occasional job involved a belly dance in front of powerful Egyptian.
Please, read the rest of this thread, as well as posts by flattorney on this thread and what had been the intent of making the movie :
History Channel 2 Hour Documentary Premier: The True Story of Charlie Wilson ,
particularly his post #152 and #193, but entire thread is enlightening. Please, see the THC special again, maybe you'll see it now in different light.
Also, you can find my posts on why we should not be ecstatic about Hollywood failing to slime us this time (not for the lack of trying), and simply settling in the movie just for taking/stealing/giving most of the credit for success in Afghanistan and fall of the Soviet Empire to one of their own "flawed, boozing, snorting, southern" (D-TX). Oh well, a pat on the back to Reagan for finally giving go-ahead on the Stinger missiles, but then he and GHW Bush "abandoned" and "lost" Afghanistan to Osama bin Laden, which led to 9/11, as we all know... from "history", as written by Aaron Sorkin and Oliver Stone and Michael Moore...
Regards.
A Few Good Men is one of my favorite movies. I never even wondered who made it or what they thought about life. Movies aren't that important. I've never even seen a promo of West Wing. I don't watch any MSM.
... that explains why you "never would have guessed he was a lefty".
Implicit in that statement is the acknowledgment that I wouldn't have seen any evidence of Sorkin's leftist leanings in the interviews on THCs documentary.
They simply rewrite history by giving all the credit to Charlie Wilson, whose real part was being used to get the congressional funding for covert ops in Afghanistan.
That is your characterization of it. I saw plenty to show that he was the major mover of aiding the Mujahadeen effort. Including the enthusiastic praise of Joanne Herring’s, the other woman who helped him shmooz the right people and one of his CIA buddies. I didn't see anybody faking their admiration and gratitude to Charlie Wilson and those were just some of the people that were helping him. Those old Afghans weren't faking their respect and gratitude either. Those old guys never faked anything in their lives.
It's a movie, based on a book written about one person's unique life and highly successful personal mission to help the Afghans. That was his little gig in the Cold War. And his wild life. It's just sour grapes to complain that they didn't work Ronald Reagan into the 90 minutes of film.
The rest of your post is really a little condescending. I have read every post up until this one of yours. Every word. Including your personal drama theory.
There is no doubt that everyone involved in the movie and the documentary are Hollywood lefty types although I don't know if they're really the far-lefty hardcore types. But I am aware of spin when I see it. I can see very well what is substantive and what isn't and there is no doubt in my mind that CW carried the water on Afghanistan and deserves the credit and praise he's getting. The people that helped him and the people he was trying to help think so. They didn't exactly hide any warts on THC. Or at least they showed plenty.
I just don't see the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy here that you do.