I HATE it when the NY Times allows politics to creep into it's arts reporting.

In A.O. Scott's review of the new Star Wars movie, he proclaims:

Mr. Lucas is clearly jabbing his light saber in the direction of some real-world political leaders. At one point, Darth Vader, already deep in the thrall of the dark side and echoing the words of George W. Bush, hisses at Obi-Wan, "If you're not with me, you're my enemy."

Now Lucas is no fan of Mr. Bush, but in an this interview (and others like it) he did say:

Unlike Moore, whose Cannes visit came off like an anybody-but-Bush campaign stop, Lucas never mentioned the president by name but was eager to speak his mind on U.S. policy in Iraq, careful again to note that he created the story long before the Bush-led occupation there.

"When I wrote it, Iraq didn't exist," Lucas said, laughing.

This just goes to show why art reviews in general are meaningless except as studies of the critic's own biases and conceits.

Just for fun, here is FDR from the short, but famous "Day of Infamy" speech.

No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory....

With confidence in our armed forces - with the unbounded determination of our people - we will gain the inevitable triumph - so help us God.

"You're with us or with the enemy" all of sudden sounds like basic common sense, doesn't it?