The following took place between November6th, 2001 and May 24th, 2010.
The long running drama 24 is coming to an end this May after 8 seasons. You can read the Fox press release here.
I have a few thoughts on the show. I will admit that I didn't catch the 24 bug until 2006. When it first came on, I thought that Fox was taking advantage of the post 9/11 atmosphere (the show premiered on Nov. 6, 2001). So I steered clear of it. Later on I learned that Fox had in fact been filming it 6 months before the events of 9/11, and that the terrorists in the first season weren't even Muslims. They were Serbs.
In Summer of 2006, I was enjoying much needed time off from my first year of law school. I was over my brother's and saw that he had the first season on DVD. I asked if it was any good and he said it was O.K., so I started to watch it. Three weeks later, I had watched every season available on DVD. I haven't looked back since.
Like all T.V. shows, 24 reached its zenith a few years after it came on. I'm a firm believer in the precept that most T.V. shows stop being fresh after a hundred or so episodes. The same was true here. The best seasons were 1 through 5. After that, the luster started to wear off. How many times can we see Jack Bauer save the world? And how often can CTU be infiltrated by a mole before we start to wonder who is running the show over there? Not to mention the infinite changes in command. It seemed like every week, someone at CTU was being removed and replaced.
But in spite of its flaws, it was a fun show to watch. And for the first five years, it was gripping and tense. And it asked some questions that we thought about differently in the wake of 9/11. It appealed to Republicans and Democrats alike, with both Bill Clinton and Rush Limbaugh claiming to be fans. John McCain even had a walk on part in season 4.
And like it or not, it provoked your thoughts and it never was ambiguous about what some people will do to advance a political agenda, both friendly or otherwise. It was also controversial. Should our intelligence operatives use harsh interrogation if it means saving hundreds of thoousands of lives? Or is respect for the Constitution so important that innocent lives must be scrificed in the name of freedom and liberty? You can decide, but the point is that the show was almost a weekly behind the scenes look at the ongoing war on terror.
My personal favorite seasons were 2 and 4. Season 2 because the show was able to take advantage of being a hit and deliver a grest story and a fabulous production, as well as some writing that is the best I ever saw. Season 4 because the show was still fresh and edgy and introduced my favorite character, Bill Buchanan.
But, like all great shows, its time has come and gone. This one will be on my personal top ten list, along with Battlestar Galactica, That 70s Show, and Burn Notice.
To KeiferSutherland, Joel Surnow, Howard Gordon, Imagine Entertainment, Brian Grazer, and all of the cast and crew, I say Thank You for 8 years of great entertainment. Good Luck!
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Friday, March 26, 2010
The party of "Hell No"
So Sarah Palin, on the stump for John McCain in Arizona, tells us today that the Republican Party is the part of "Hell No." Her reference of course was to the current administration's efforts to increase health care benefits to millions of Americans who are either uninsured or under-insured. Palin's hypocisy on the issue of public spending is well documented. But in case you need a reminder, I have thre words for you: "Bridge to Nowhere."
You'll remember that the bridge was a proposed project that was to link Ketchikan, AK with Gravina Island. Palin was a big proponent of the bill while there were federal funds available to pay for the majority of the construction costs. However, when the federal funds were reduced, Palin decided that Alaska shouldn't have to foot the bill and decided that the current ferry service was adequate after all. Curiously, she kept the money that was already given to Alaska. I wonder why the Tea Party never talks about that?
The point is that the money that went to Alaska's bridge project came from the federal government, which came from taxpayers. The majority of those taxpayers will never visit Alaska, let alone live there. But the party of "Hell No" is really the party of "Hell Yes" when it comes to funds that will benefit them politically.
And lest we forget that the Republicans came into a federal budget surplus in 2001. The National Debt Clock was running backwards so fast 2000, that it was unplugged and covered with a curtain. After roughly 2 years of the "Hell No" party being in power, the clock resumed running in 2002, with a figure of 6.1 trillion dollars. It is now out of digits, because the national debt is at 10 trillion and counting. And the Republicans can't play the blame game here.
The FACT is that after 8 years of Bill Clinton, the country was doing well. A budge surplus for the first time in 40 years, and a reducing national debt. The GOP had the White House, Congress, and the Supreme Court for 6 years.
From where I'm sitting, they did a pretty crappy job.
You'll remember that the bridge was a proposed project that was to link Ketchikan, AK with Gravina Island. Palin was a big proponent of the bill while there were federal funds available to pay for the majority of the construction costs. However, when the federal funds were reduced, Palin decided that Alaska shouldn't have to foot the bill and decided that the current ferry service was adequate after all. Curiously, she kept the money that was already given to Alaska. I wonder why the Tea Party never talks about that?
The point is that the money that went to Alaska's bridge project came from the federal government, which came from taxpayers. The majority of those taxpayers will never visit Alaska, let alone live there. But the party of "Hell No" is really the party of "Hell Yes" when it comes to funds that will benefit them politically.
And lest we forget that the Republicans came into a federal budget surplus in 2001. The National Debt Clock was running backwards so fast 2000, that it was unplugged and covered with a curtain. After roughly 2 years of the "Hell No" party being in power, the clock resumed running in 2002, with a figure of 6.1 trillion dollars. It is now out of digits, because the national debt is at 10 trillion and counting. And the Republicans can't play the blame game here.
The FACT is that after 8 years of Bill Clinton, the country was doing well. A budge surplus for the first time in 40 years, and a reducing national debt. The GOP had the White House, Congress, and the Supreme Court for 6 years.
From where I'm sitting, they did a pretty crappy job.
Friday, March 12, 2010
Public Option
Health Care Reform-- The very words make insurance companies shudder. Let's face some cold hard facts:
1. Health Insurance Companies are businesses. Businesses are focused on selling goods or services and through that process realizing profits.
2. Government provided health care would cut into the profit margins of the insurers. That is a fact.
3. Health insurers are happy with the status quo, which is to collect premiums and be very stingy when it comes to handing out benefits.
So... Is there a solution? Yes.
The United States is the Land of Opportunity. Nothing stands in your way except air and opportunity. For every person out there who says that America is slanted against the people who are wage earners, there is a counter story of a person who came here with nothing and is now extremely successful. Hard work does pay off. It's that individualist spirit that played a large and vital part in building this nation.
But we are also a collection of people who know how to work together for the common good. A shining example is our space program. In 1958, NASA didn't exist. 11 years later we walked on the moon. Raytheon, Grumman, North American Aviation, Lockheed, and McDonnell-Douglas just to name a few got us there. That is just one instance of America's ability to do what it wants when it puts its mind to it.
So why can't we get it together when it comes to providing a basic social service such as health care? The answer depends on whether you consider health care a commodity, to be sold at a market price, or a right.
I consider health care to be a right. I don't think that a citizen of this country should have to choose between paying monthly bills such as rent and electricity, or going to the doctor.
I think that there should be a combination of ideas to provide quality affordable health coverage to all American citizens. Tax incentives to insurance companies to provide care to high risk patients combined with an option for those who can't otherwise find coverage to be able to buy in at a low price would go a long way to alleviating the problems we face on this issue.
To those who would scream "socialism" I would ask this:
If one of your loved ones became seriously infirmed and the only available solution was public assistance, would you turn it down based on you principles of "less government?" I would hope that your answer is a resounding "no."
1. Health Insurance Companies are businesses. Businesses are focused on selling goods or services and through that process realizing profits.
2. Government provided health care would cut into the profit margins of the insurers. That is a fact.
3. Health insurers are happy with the status quo, which is to collect premiums and be very stingy when it comes to handing out benefits.
So... Is there a solution? Yes.
The United States is the Land of Opportunity. Nothing stands in your way except air and opportunity. For every person out there who says that America is slanted against the people who are wage earners, there is a counter story of a person who came here with nothing and is now extremely successful. Hard work does pay off. It's that individualist spirit that played a large and vital part in building this nation.
But we are also a collection of people who know how to work together for the common good. A shining example is our space program. In 1958, NASA didn't exist. 11 years later we walked on the moon. Raytheon, Grumman, North American Aviation, Lockheed, and McDonnell-Douglas just to name a few got us there. That is just one instance of America's ability to do what it wants when it puts its mind to it.
So why can't we get it together when it comes to providing a basic social service such as health care? The answer depends on whether you consider health care a commodity, to be sold at a market price, or a right.
I consider health care to be a right. I don't think that a citizen of this country should have to choose between paying monthly bills such as rent and electricity, or going to the doctor.
I think that there should be a combination of ideas to provide quality affordable health coverage to all American citizens. Tax incentives to insurance companies to provide care to high risk patients combined with an option for those who can't otherwise find coverage to be able to buy in at a low price would go a long way to alleviating the problems we face on this issue.
To those who would scream "socialism" I would ask this:
If one of your loved ones became seriously infirmed and the only available solution was public assistance, would you turn it down based on you principles of "less government?" I would hope that your answer is a resounding "no."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)