Takei & Wheaton On Presidential Qualities of Kirk and Picard

Kirk v Picard script writing contest video bloggers George Takei and Wil Wheaton reflect on the presidential qualities Trek’s most famous captains. [Hollywood Media Elite Alert: the actors also opine on the current President]

Is Kirk Kennedy? Is Picard Churchill?
Politics aside the question of what leaders the captains are is an interesting one. In my view Kirk was a product of his day and he did have some Kennedy in him. I had a chance to ask Bob Justman if they were thinking Kennedy and he said ‘more Horatio Hornblower.’ For Picard I disagree with Wheaton on the Churchill thing. I see a more of Woodrow Wilson in him actually. An interesting point regarding the writers for the new movie is that they are both students of History. At a recent writers workshop with them I attended they talked about how they read a lot of biographies, specifically Presidential biographies. I hope to ask them what Presidents they see in Kirk and Picard (especially Kirk since they are writing him now).


NOTE: The views are those of the actors and not necessarily those of myself, this site, CBS or Fanlib. I know this site does not like to delve into politics, but in this one case (since they brought it up) it is allowed, just don’t attack your fellow posters and try and stay civil.


VOTE: Who would make a better President?

Vote for Kirk or Picard in the latest poll (right column)

UPDATE: If Trekkies Ruled

Reader Alasdair sends in a great link to a Photoshop Contest for "If Trekkies Ruled"…click image to see them all.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Yikes…politics cometh!!!

Since it’s allowed:

Did they have to be so douchy about expressing their politics. Yikes! Know your audience. There are as many Republican trekkies as Democrat trekkies. And for a show lauded, especially by the actors, for bringing people and cultures together, they were pretty divisive.

Perhaps I’m biased. But to be fair, are there any left-leaning thinkers on this site that found that unneccessary.

Take Cover!
Deflector Shields, full intensity!

Remember, IDIC, IDIC, IDIC.

Kirk was far from a womanizer… not sure where Takei got this from, especially having worked on the show.

Damn Wil Wheaton career has really taken a turn for the worse.

Capt Kirk (young) = JFK

Capt Kirk (old) = Bill Clinton

Spock (old) = Al Gore

It’d be nice if they’d stick to the topic of a President Kirk or Picard instead of jumping on the “Bush sucks” bandwagon. I’m not surprised that both men are liberal (Takei drones on and on about his political beliefs at the drop of a hat) but its just kinda annoying. And why not at least be more tactful about it? But oh well. Both actors have always annoyed me, so it doesnt really matter.

As far as Kirk and Picard, I’ve always viewed Kirk as more of a conservative and Picard more liberal. I’d vote for Kirk in a second, but even Picard would be a decent President.

Sometimes in history, events require rising above petty Democrat or Republican labels and viewing current events and the state of affairs as an American. I think the reason Bush recieves so much criticism, not just from Democrats, but also an increasing number of Republicans, is because he is polarized and creates a climate of division rather than unification. There is no middle ground with this man.
I consider myself a moderate Democrat, and since Bush has been in office, his policies, approaches, tactics, and overall demeanor is so utterly extreme alot of moderate people such as myself that try to find the best of both worlds, have been forced out of necessity to take a more left perception. Extremism is no ones friend, and moderation benefits all.
I personally think the sooner Republicans can detach themselves from the stigma of Bush and his legacy, the sooner we as a NATION can move forward with the business of getting things done as a unified whole rather than living in two distinct countries because of the great dividers policies.
Prior to Bush, Republicans and Democrats at the very least talked with each other.
When I attack Bush, I’m not attacking Republicans, as I do not feel Bush or Cheney in any wa,y shape, or form represents the Republican party neither in action nor words, but rather I attack someone that is no good for ANY of us, Republican, Democrat, Independent, Socialist, Communist, Fascist, whatever your political leanings may be.

Two out of work actors.Enough said

hmm oh no the americans are going on about Republicans and
Democrats again.

better stay out of this one ,

lol right guardian of forever for president ! , Enterprise as vice president

That was great! Loved the Nomad bit. And Wil Wheaton deserves major credit for being pretty much the only former child star I can think of who hasn’t robbed a liquor store, been arrested for drugs or tried to pick up a transvestite hooker. Or maybe he has done all those things and he’s just really, really good at them.

If Kirk and Picard ran against each other for a political office it would be George Washington vs Clinton with a WAY better taste in women. :P

the question is who would you have wanted president on 9/11 kirk or picard. obviously these 2 have forgotten that when they made their analogy as have most all liberals.

Good Brady.Let me answer.Kirk.Based on His job performance from “Balance of Terror”.When the Romulans attacked to test federation resolve before their next major attack.He pursued them and destroyed them insuring federation security.Kinda like when our most populated city was decimated on 9-11,after having previously being attacked during a different administration when (woops!) the president was kinda being like Kirk too except He was too busy playing grab-ass with young interns in the oval office.

Horta for President!
(in my best Brooklyn accent:) “Osama, just like the rest of them. Burned to a crisp!” (music stab)
There’s no way Kirk should be president. But, there’s no way someone that impulsive should be a starship commander. Having said that, it’s ALWAYS great to watch Kirk get in and out of trouble. I think Picard is less like Churchill and more like Tony Blair (or possibly Gordon Brown) — generally dull and methodic but with a good military backing him up.

OK, you guys are too slow…
Horta for President: “No Tax I”
Nomad for President: “Do-Nothing Congress? Sterilize!”
Ceti Alpha V slug for President: “Friends, Russians, Countrymen, lend me your ear.”
Salt Vampire for President: (uh, he’s already the Veep)

BTW: I’m not Blue State or Red State. I’m Gold State.

I’m still curious: Are there any left leaning thinkers here that think that bit with Wheaton and Takei at the end was uneccessary? Whether you found it funny or not?

#15–*Sigh* Yeah, “Balance of Terror” is quite the metaphor to support George Bush’s pre-emptive war policies, all right. Just a question, though: how many Iraqis attacked this country on 09/11? And while I’m certainly no fan of Bill Clinton (as young or old Kirk), he did in fact manage to bring the perpetrators of the original WTC bombings to justice–anyone know what’s up with the “hunt” for Osama Bin Forgotten lately?

Neither Wheaton or Takei has ever been shy about expressing their political views previously, so this latest example shouldn’t surprise anyone who’s followed this franchise. And the simple truth is that any fair reading of the interviews and occasional political activities of the actors and producers involved with Trek over the last four decades, from Gene Roddenberry on down, show the vast majority of them to be at least fairly liberal in their politics. (I was at Michael Piller’s funeral a couple of years back when Rick Berman related an anecdote about the Next Gen staff’s invitation to the White House–even as they were honored and thrilled to be there, Piller couldn’t stop fuming about its current occupants.) That doesn’t mean that the rare exceptions like Manny Coto are any less talented–Coto’s year at the helm of Enterprise was easily its best– or that you have to be of any particular stripe to enjoy TOS or any of the other series. But it is a fact.

Wheaton and Takei are uneccessary.Two silly men

I vote for Kirk. Stronger overall!

Anthony-Why no remastered preview this week? I see StarTrek.com doesn’t have it either. Any rumblings as to why?

#20 – Amen

and #21, that reasoning would render the vast majority of us posting on these boards unnecessary.

Talking about grasping, clutching and scraping. Wheaton’s Search For Relevancy’s is about as transparent as lead. Please.

God help me, that KvP Site, man, if ONLY the type of folks running it had been so desperate in the past 20 years to keep Kirk so relevant as they are trying to keep Picard on life-support now that the character’s pretty much well, you know.

Won’t work.

This thread rates one big yawn……

Mike :o

Re: 15
Problem is, it goes both ways. You see when conservatives want to liken Kirk to Bush, they’ll cite BoT. But lets look at another episode…..

Federation citizens are slaughtered, Kirk hunts the killers with the intent of killing them to make them pay. Both are stopped, and each leader (and no one else…as it should be) is forced into to combat. And as new data comes into play, Kirk is forced to evaluate the WHY behind the attack.

Once that comes into play, a new strategy and understanding is enacted. The deaths of millions is prevented as war is averted.

But see….in our current political climate, we’re not supposed to ask WHY people would do something like drive planes into buildings to kill our citizens. All we’re supposed to know is that we’re perfect good guys who never make mistakes. And people who want to do such things, such as drive planes into to buildings killing themselves and others, just hate us to hate us….with no more complex a reason than that. We are blameless in all ways. To sugest that we are otherwise means you hate this country.

Which I guess that means Kirk hates the Federation for implying that they could have done something, *anything* to provoke such a vicious attack.

Had Kirk been the man you describe, he would’ve killed the Gorn when given the opportunity, to teach them a lesson. He didn’t.

#20 *sigh* I guess I didn’t know that Mr Bill captured the terrorists who bombed the Cole ,Blew up our embassies and took down own towers.Must have been while He spent his whole presidency campaining and governing by approval ratings.That’s what I was referring to in my Balance of Terror remark.Capish.He also certainly didn’t pursue Bin Laudin or bring democracy to Afganistan(Taliban’s training ground).

Judging by the spelling and factual errors in many of these posts, AM radio is now the primary source of information in America.
Read, people. Form an opinion, but get some facts first.
More to the point, this was a satire on the presidency as seen from a Trek POV, not an open invitation to regurgitate Rush Limbaugh’s angry and fact-free diatribes. Clearly, many of these posters lack the ambition to read AND a sense of humor.

Oh man. Long wait for Comic con news I guess. Yikes, what a thread.

Bush sucks! Really?

I guess this is why Roddenberry stayed away from discussing the exact nature of Earth’s government during TOS. Maybe we should follow that lead. (I will try.)

Yeah .Just his “Stars.”

Squire trailer’s up. It’s the old NBC trailer. (No wonder the rating blew. NBC couldn’t be bothered to do much more than clip bits of the ep. Even a good one looks kinda dull when it’s just thrown out like hog slop.)


#27.They hate us because we support Isreal,and we’re in their way.

Oh. Cool. Thanks.
Squire is a great episode.

I tried to post earlier but the site was crapping out on me. My point was that Patrick Sterwart and Picard were not American and that the Shat was Canadian, so only Kirk, in all his Iowa splendor would be eligible for the Presidency. All in all, a fascinating thread.

Good Lord, I am a geek.

Lord Garth for President
Mute Andorian henchman for VP
Mute Tellerite henchman for Sec of State
Marta for Director of Homeland Security
Wesley Crusher for Camp David janitor

I voted for Bush twice. I gotta admit, I’m not proud of Bush in his second term. Why in the hell won’t he protect our southern border? Why did he create another gigantasaurus govt entity from hell (Dept Homeland Security)? I don’t hate the guy though, and as for the virulant Bush haters, I am more embarrassed for them, rather than angered by what they say. But I do have to reluctantly say that if Iraq won’t get it’s collective crap together pdq, then yeah, we should probably leave.

I do genuinely like both George Takai and Wil Wheaton, and always will, no matter what their views are. They are good people.

I want lower taxes, less government meddling, and smaller government. And I want to kick terrorist ass. I’ll always vote for the candidate that I think is more likely to do those things.

I think that would be Kirk (the Jack Bauer of Space) :D

CmdrR. –

You are one funny mofo.
TanRu/Nomad/V’ger ….. ” Sterilize”

Yup you called it
I think the enterprise would make a great president.

Or First Lady, since naval ships are always she.

Or a Woman President.

Now my head hurts.

In all seriousness, (is this topic serious?)

Kirk- If we’re in a Depression/Recession (great inspiration and rhetoric/bombast like FDR or Reagan)

Long term, thorny problems such as the deficit, global warming, immigration, or Ann Coulter, need to be solved by a Picard.

I’m genuinely curious when and how Republicans believe they somehow got the monopoly on military and religious people? Why and how alot of people automatically assume the Republican party somehow best represents you if you are affiliated with a church or in the military?

That is a fallacy in reason to me. It’s a notion propogated not by rationale but rather by emotion and tradition. Emotion and tradition are a recipe for disaster in any attempt at critical analysis and thinking.

On the subject of Captain Kirk being a conservative and always somehow being identified by conservatives as such, is entirely laughable.
The character is about as liberal in both actions and words as you can possibly get. The entire Star Trek ideology is liberal and progressive. It’s the difference between we can’t and shouldn’t vs. we can and should. All of collective society and who we are, is a product of liberal minded thinking, we can’t and shouldn’t vs. we can and should.

Kirk was a peace advocate and despised conflict. Being good at something does not make someone love it. Defending a frontier was Kirks JOB. Nothing more or less. Kirk was a diplomat and an explorer, he was a warrior least. Yet when push came to shove no one did it better. That doesn’t make Kirk a conservative, it makes Kirk a highly trained specialist with experience. Kirk routinely championed the little guy, defended those that can’t defend themselves, provided a voice for those that have no voice, and was a fair and courageous leader. Kirk accepted diversity and was never judgemental of other cultures or peoples, he certainly wasn’t a bigot or afraid of change. Kirk admitted his own faults and mistakes, errors in judgement, he certainly didn’t travel the path of ego where a course of action was never altered if it clearly wasn’t working. Kirk routinely sought the council of Spock and Bones to temper his own decision making impulses, he didn’t cowboy his way through situations without considering the ramifications of his actions.


Right. Perhaps you’d care to tell us all about Mohammed Mossadegh, or SAVAK, or the history of Brish Petroleum and ARAMCO. All fascinating subjects you won’t hear covered on Rush Limbaugh. For bonus points you can let us know which world leader was the first to employ poison gas against the Kurdish people. (Hint: it’s probably not who you think–in fact, it’s a Western head of state most conservatives venerate.)

Afghanistan, like Iraq, is completely fubar at this point, with poppy production at its highest levels in history, the Taliban on the march, and Hamid Karzai’s rule extending little further than Kabul’s city limits. No one’s talking much about liberating women from their burkas anymore, let alone spreading freedom and democracy.

Sheesh. Stupidity is pitiable, but willful ignorance, in this digital age of instantly accessible information both current and historic, is just inexcuseable.

#40–While I won’t claim to speak for all ‘Bush-haters” I can tell you for a fact that, the circumstances of his election aside, back in 2000 I had no particularly strong feelings about him one way or another. I was no fan of Al Gore, and like most voters, I think, I perceived Bush as an amiable lightweight whose election was regrettable but no long-term problem for a nation as politically resilient as ours, and who would soon be forgotten. Kinda like Warren G. Harding, in fact. Sadly, I’ve never been more wrong. And it’s the endless corruption and scandal, the loss of America’s standing in the aftermath of a horrible tragedy, the needless polarization of our citizenry and the unbelievable degredation of our institutions and the rule of law (in just six short years!)–not the tongue-tied nincompoop–that I will despise, now and forever.

#41–Anne Coulter, LOL. :-)

For the record–I lean pretty far redstate, do listen to Rush Limbaugh and think CmdrR’s rant in #16 was the funniest thing I have read this year!

Not to get into a Rush argument but his “facts” are mostly audio clips of Democrats talking. He uses your heroes’ own words against them and it burns up blue-state goobernauts worse than any Horta ever could.

Liberals use conservatism as a reference point.

Yes, considering that essentially all it’s good for.

Out of curiosity, did anyone else read the numerous Psychological study results released indicating the concept of “conservatism” is basically a mental illness? The inability to change, accept change, exchanging one vice or crutch such as booze, for religion, etc? It’s quite a revealing and enjoyable read, I highly recommend it.

Since Picard is French or English…hes pretty much out anyway. So the debate is pretty much a mute point on the subject. Kirk wins in a landslide. As for Bush I plead the fifth. I don’t want to get into a political debate online on this discussion.

Conservatives aren’t mentally ill; they’re just (mostly) wrong. Which doesn’t make them bad people. I do accuse those who still support Bush of bad faith, though, since by now it should be as obvious to them as it is to everyone else that his policies and practices bear no resemblance whatsoever to what has been known as classic conservatism.

Love your #42 post Josh T. This is why I love Kirk

#46 – I suspect your book was written by a liberal, who also has his mind made up, thus negating his point.

Speaking of points–Picard is so UN. Kirk is the president we need.