When you hear the name Oliver Stone, surely you think of the director’s mind-blowing, entertaining films like “Alexander,” his unbiased political recounts of John F. Kennedy’s assassination or Richard Nixon’s involvement in Watergate. Right. The man has a tough time recouping the production costs of many of his films, yet he still continues directing. What’s more, his films are plagued with historical inaccuracies and are a target of constant criticism from newspapers and historians. Not exactly your model director.

Filming for another Oliver Stone classic is set to begin at the end of this month. The movie, entitled “W.,” is based on the life and presidency of George W. Bush. Stone claims the film will provide a fair description of the president’s life and the personal experiences that contributed to his leadership. Alcoholism, near-fistfights with his father, fraternity parties and religion are all slated to be a part of the film.

As word of this theatrical spectacle began to spread, controversy from both pundits and Bush scholars arose – and rightfully so. Pundits predict the film will be appallingly slanted to the left, and who could blame them? Journalists, news anchors and even the subjects themselves called out the director for blatant factual inaccuracies in previous films. And “W.” appears to be no different. A section of the script was recently leaked on the entertainment blog “Risky Business.” It describes Bush and his cabinet struggling to establish an appropriate label for what is now referred to as the “Axis of Evil.” Bush’s cabinet – including Karl Rove, Condoleezza Rice and Dick Cheney – appear to find it overly perplexing. Iran, Iraq and North Korea are not allies, and are in no way similar to Germany, Italy and Japan’s alliance in World War II. The scene quickly shifts to Bush’s college days as he and his fraternity brothers gorge themselves on vodka.

This portion of the script is insulting and inaccurate – Oliver Stone should be ashamed of himself. President Bush may suffer from a slip of the tongue during a speech now and again, but he is certainly not incapable of formulating a simplified nickname to describe America’s enemies in the war on terror. What’s more, to insinuate that the Bush presidency is in any way comparable to a drunken bender is a gross defamation of character and an exaggeration. All the while, Stone maintains the film will remain neutral in judgment.

Several Bush scholars who read drafts of the film’s script said parts of the movie are simply made up. For example, the way Bush discusses policy with his cabinet is made to look as though bumbling idiots run the government. But flawed claims seem to be no big deal to the director who misquoted Adolf Hitler in his movie on JFK. I can only imagine what kind of crap Stone managed to conjure up in his attempts to slander Bush’s reputation.

And if all of this wasn’t evidence enough to show Stone is cramming his political beliefs down viewers’ throats, the film is set for release in November – just before the 2008 presidential election, which is definitely not a coincidence. I guess Stone is counting on a difficult race for the Democrats, and as a last resort is making yet another crappy movie to try to boost his favorite party’s numbers. One thing is for sure, though: Political movies tend to be very unpopular when first released. I take solace in the fact that Americans won’t bother watching this liberal propaganda, at the very least until long after the election is over.

For those of you who do choose to subject yourself to “W.,” keep an open mind. Oliver Stone definitely has an agenda with his films, no matter how much he claims he doesn’t. From misrepresenting JFK’s assassination to inaccurately describing Nixon’s domestic and foreign policy decisions, the man has quite a reputation in spite of his claims of innocence. Even liberals understand the dangers of blindly believing what the media feeds us, so use common sense. And watch out Michael Moore – your spot as America’s biggest liberal douchebag director is in jeopardy.