I like certain aspects of this show enough that I plan to keep watching. The dialogue is unrealistically fast-paced and witty, but it's fun. And Sorkin is pretty good at dramatic tension, like last week's Gabby Giffords segment.
But it's frustrating to watch a show that rightfully laments partisan hackery descend itself into partisan hackery. It's great watching Sorkin expose the worst of Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Back, and various Tea Party types. But then he turns around and gives voice to positions advanced by their mirror images on the left. He has Will McAvoy misstate the holding of
Citizens United, for example, in a way that could only come from someone on the far left.
Will McAvoy: The
Citizens United decision allowed corporations to donate unlimited amounts of money to any political candidate without anyone knowing where the money is coming from.
Limits on donations to political candidates were not at issue in
Citizens United. The maximum amount that a corporation can give to a political candidate running for federal office is
zero.
Citizens United did not change that.
Citizens United allowed corporations to spend money publishing their own speech — producing movies, publishing books, writing editorials. It does not allow corporations to contribute money to campaigns. Moreover, all disclosure requirements at issue in
Citizens United were
upheld.There's also this exchange:
Jim Harper: The answer is yes, the Koch brothers had money in
Citizens United. A number of Koch-funded groups submitted amicus briefs to the court, including the Cato Institute, which the Kochs funded. They submitted a brief calling for unfettered corporate speech.
Maggie Jordan: So did the Institute for Justice, also funded by the Kochs. Their brief said that finance laws prohibiting unlimited corporate contributions trump the First Amendment. ...
Jim Harper: Justices Thomas and Scalia have both been frequent guests of the Kochs, and between 2003 and 2007, Virginia Thomas, wife of Justice Thomas, was paid $686,589 by the Heritage Foundation, which was funded by David and Charles Koch.
Maggie Jordan: For whatever reason, Justice Thomas didn't disclose the $686,000 on his Supreme Court financial disclosure form.
Mackenzie MacHale: Is it very unusual that Scalia and Thomas didn't recuse themselves from the case?
Will McAvoy: If they had, Citizens United would have lost 4-3.
The correct answer to that last question, Will, is "No."Scalia and Thomas were "frequent guests" of the Kochs — meaning that they attended seminars sponsored by Koch Industries. Note how loose that connection is to the
Citizens United case. The Kochs were not parties to the case. They were not shareholders of any parties to the case. They had no financial interest in the case. They donated money to organizations that filed
amicus briefs!! And they donated money to Virginia Thomas's former employer, which was also not a party to the case, and didn't even file an amicus brief. Um, whoop-de-doo?
If I were a far left-winger writing for a show depicting itself as promoting objectivity and accuracy over partisan hackery, I would have my scripts reviewed by a reasonable person on the right for accuracy. Somebody who's biases are opposite mine. It's pretty clear that Sorkin is using only sources that will confirm his own biases, which I think is a mistake.
Guess I'm not smart enough to spot the horrendous holes in this show.
I like all of the things you listed, pace, topics, inside battles (personal and professional) and Daniels absolutely nails this role. I didn't think the second episode was awful at all but the other three (and particularly the last two) are better. It's a fun show and I really enjoy it. There aren't many shows I watch that when they end I want to immediately watch the next episode but this is one of them.
