Supposedly this was penned by one Kelley Kramer.
Not according to IMDB.com, which does have a listing for Bush, but only mentions his appearances before the camera.
I seem to remember hearing about some hard feelings in this country during the Vietnam War too. That would be my nomination for most divisive period since the Civil War, not now.
The “slasher movie” was the HBO movie The Hitcher (1986), which was financed by Silver Screen Management Co. George W. Bush served on Silver Screen’s board of directors 1983-1993. It’s a stretch to call him the movie’s “producer”, though. Normally, the board of directors of a film company does not concern itself with the production of individual movies. That’s the business of the company’s officers, not its board of directors.
Other films that Silver Screen financed in this period include Good Morning, Vietnam, Pretty Woman, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Dead Poets Society, Down and Out in Beverly Hills, Beauty and the Beast, and The Little Mermaid.
I am surprised that no one else has picked up on this - I am almost certain this has been lifted word for word from Michael Moore’s book, “Stupid White Men”… but I remeber some hoo-har about a different version being released in the US to what we got over here (Australia), and in the UK.
A friend has borrowed my copy of this title, so I cannot compare directly. Any dopers outside of the US have their copy handy? About a third of the way in, I remember…?
abby
I’m shocked by the number of items missing from the OP
65% approval, eh? His father had 90% approval ratings after the first Gulf War. And he still lost re-election.
Federal law enforcement functions fall under the Executive Branch, which is headed by you know who. While it may be a stretch to assign more responsibility to the President than to the FBI Director, it isn’t wacky.
A 65% approval rating, huh? So? Clinton had a ~62% rating while being impeached.
I’ve read “Stupid White Men” and this isn’t in it.
“Corporate campaign contributions” can refer to bundled personal ones which have the same effect, or to “soft money” contributions to parties or to ad-hoc front organizations promoting stands on issues, if not specifically to candidates.
This needs some sharpening up of the research, and less reaching, but it’s generally accurate.