THE WORLD ACCORDING TO BUSH

Original title: Le Monde selon Bush
Documentary

BACKGROUND
Originally produced for the French television network France 2 the film was inspired by journalist-author Eric Laurent's two books on the Bush administration. It is the fifth film by William Karel examining American political power.

REVIEW
As would be expected the film covers a lot of the same material we’ve seen or heard about before:
 how the September 11 attack gave a "clueless" Bush his raison d'etre, the "crusade" against terrorism
 the false pretext under which the second war on Iraq was waged
 the big lie linking Saddam Hussein to 9/11
 the overt connection Bush’s government has with Saudi Arabia
 that Bush is a puppet to corporate interests, to religious zealots
 that George Bush Sr., first as Vice-President and then as President from 1988 to 1992, armed and financed Hussein
 the Bush family's long term ties to the Bin Laden clan and Saudi Arabia

But the film also includes new material amongst the 26 people interviewed:
 Norman Mailer the well known author’s observation that “We have the worst President in U.S. history. He's arrogant. He's stupid in all ways but one: He's immensely shrewd about the American people, particularly the less intelligent half of America -- they're very happy with him because they realise how stupid he is and they say to themselves, 'If that stupid guy can be president, so can I.' "
 and it goes further back in history to the days when Prescott Bush, the president’s grandfather, was banker to Hitler's Third Reich
 in short, the film points out that the family has a history of dealing with people of questionable moral and ethical values despite their public display of religious rectitude (reminds me of Jim Baker and Tammy Faye)

CLASSIFICATION
for General Audiences

P.S.
Unlike Michael Moore’s documentary on the same subject, this one does not suffer from the filmmaker’s personal opinions and comic jibes. As such it is a more serious film with a lot more material for consideration. In light of this, voting for this man seems just plain daft (unless you have some personal gain in doing so … which might explain why he got elected in the first place?)