no, no, no ... it's a movie

i only have a minute ... and far be it for me to use that minute to defend dubya, but here goes ...

i read a headline this afternoon that asks if “Revenge of the Sith” is anti-bush.

if he looked any more like greedo, then obviously, yeah. it is. however! they have totally different snouts. here's the meat of the article:

“The Ottawa Sun asked Christensen [the actor who plays Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader] if the flick ‘takes metaphoric shots at the war-mongering politics of U.S. presidents Richard Nixon and the two George Bushes...’”

the actor, who clearly doesn't research his roles, said "absolutely."

honestly, i don’t think christensen is old enough to remember this, but the fourth part of the series was released 20 years ago. it’s called: "Star Wars: a New Hope." starring roles were given to mark hamil, harrison ford, carrie fischer, and a big hairy guy. (no, not him … the other one.)

how can anyone over the age of 12 not remember this movie? and! how can they be chosen to star in its prequel if they don’t?

part 4 opens in the throes of war. luke skywalker wants to fight in it. the rebels vs. the empire. does any of this ring a bell? what, then, does logic tell us happened before the start of the movie?

what? someone started a war?!

you’re kidding.

sadly, not everything is about the republicans … then again, i don’t yet know what a Sith is.