Right Wing Politics and TV's "24"

I'm just catching up on the debate over whether "24" is a right wing show endorsing torture.

Jane Mayer in the New Yorker devotes three pages to the right-wing politics of Joel Surnow, the shows creator and executive producer.

I just started watching the show this season. There's an African-American President who is sensitive to the Constitution even though sometimes conflicted about the right thing to do, his sister who is an ACLU type lawyer and a female high level advisor who advocates against internment camps and argues for constitutional rights to counterbalance the ridiculous positions of the advisor who wants to trample rights (played by an ex- Ally McBeal co-star. There are also two former Six Feet Under characters and one from Commander in Chief now in "24".) There have also been scenes from detention camps revealing that many of the guys locked up had nothing to do with terrorism.

Last week, the show highlighted the absurd policy of making one of the CTU workers go through an extra clearance to log onto her computer because she was of middle eastern heritage. Also, there were plenty of American villains, including Jack Bauer's brother and father, and some guy named McCarthy who was willing to provide someone who could release the triggers on nuclear bombs in exchange for money.


I'm okay with the show so far, and again, I've only seen five episodes. Steve at the Carpetbagger Report says it's just television.

People will take from it the parts with which they identify. I like watching the CTU people work feverishly at their computers under impossible time deadlines and the parts about their inter-office relationships. But then, I'm partial to relationship shows like Grey's Anatomy, Brothers and Sisters, What About Brian and the like.

So, any "24" watchers out there? What do you say?

Update: Tim Grieves at Salon weighs in.

< Friday Open Thread | Anna Nicole Smith Autopsy Results: No Determination >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    You can't handle the truth (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Tom Maguire on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 12:20:40 PM EST
    What do you say?

    You can't make me talk unless... GAAWK!

    OK, I'll talk.

    It's a Fox Show, so its fair and balanced.  Naturally.

    And (as I guess you know), this is the second black President - David Palmer, Wayne Palmer's brother, was first.  (They would be second and third respectively if you count Bill Clinton, I suppose...).

    For several seasons the bad guys have been a far-right war-mongering oil-driven corporate cabal, and, as you noted, there are plenty of left-sympathetic themes.

    However, on the very specific question of whether torture is effective, the show is unequivocal - almost everyone talks (except Jack Bauer), and normally pretty quickly, so torture is always worth a try.  (OK, spoiler - last season Jack tortured a guy's wife becaue he knew the guy was too tough to talk in a timely fashion...)

    And since torture (on this show) always involves a ticking bomb, the ethical debate is framed in the most pro-torture way possible.

    That said, it is a television show.

    Have a great weekend.

    I'm in the process (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by glanton on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 12:38:49 PM EST
    of trying to get caught up on the show, I'm waiting for Season #1 to arrive as we write.

    But from the few episodes I've seen, and from every analysis from both liberals and the wingers, it has become obvious to me that the show is pro-torture.  

    "24" has been the most succesful of all mediums for lionizing American torture through the Ticking Time Bomb Scenario.  This alone makes it a thing of beauty for the Republican Party, although many of them would like it much better if it were only Arabs who were tortured.  

    To wit (none / 0) (#7)
    by glanton on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 12:50:27 PM EST
    Little Green Footballs regularly spews accolades about the show.  The threads are chock-full of admiration for Bauer's profience with and enthusiasm for torture.  But, alas, these threads also teem with diappointment that "24" does not consistently discharging every ounce of possible agression at Muslims.

    The little demented lizards, in between cries from their mother's basements, for "nuking Mecca," worry constantly that "24" is moving to the left.  But they are torn because they love the general celebration of torture and the fact that a lot of times, it is Muslims who get tortured.  

    Thus a real Shakespearean struggle for the lizards, what to do with "24."


    24 is the funniest show on TV (none / 0) (#2)
    by nolo on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 12:31:39 PM EST
    During the first two hours of the season premiere, my SO and I were howling like monkeys.  I love how torture is always effective -- UNLESS it's used on Jack Bauer.  Jack Bauer is the new Chuck Norris.  Just hours after having been dumped off a cargo plane by his Chinese captors, Jack's not only able to withstand the most heinous chemical torture, but he's able to escape by BITING ONE OF HIS CAPTORS TO DEATH and then crawling out of the room through a manhole.  And this is all in the first 20 minutes!!!

    As the season has progressed, it continues to deliver over-the-top goodies by the nuclear suitcase-load.  I thought the scene last season where Jack Bauer shot his former mentor's wife in the leg was pretty amazing, but we've already topped it this season, in which Jack Bauer TORTURES HIS OWN BROTHER and then their father actually KILLS HIM!!!  Yow!!!  And the latest Jack Bauer love interest appears to be the sister in law, who apparently married Jack's weaselly brother as a consolation prize or something.*

    Unfortunately, though, I don't think the White House intrigue is going to be anywhere near as interesting this time around.  The president is a mere shadow of his older brother, and the White House staffers are little more than single-dimension puppets delivering standard security vs. freedom monologues at each other.  I have some hope for the sister, but we'll have to wait and see.

     *The women in Jack Bauer's life are just as likely to show up as plot devices as real characters (Real characters -- Jack's wife, Chloe and the truly entertaining Nina.  Plot devices -- Audrey and the woman Jack was shacked up with while he was living the life of a oilfield roustabout.  Jack's daughter Kim has served in both roles).  We'll see how sis-in-law works out.

    P.S. (none / 0) (#3)
    by nolo on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 12:34:48 PM EST
    The first season definitely was the best for intra-office intrigue.

    LA Traffic (none / 0) (#5)
    by JT on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 12:44:50 PM EST
    What I want to know is how Bauer (and other characters) get from place to place so quickly through LA traffic?

    No one ever pees, either. (none / 0) (#10)
    by nolo on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 12:55:43 PM EST
    I just want one of their cell phones... (none / 0) (#26)
    by Slado on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 05:49:45 PM EST
    They are always talking on them, they never have to charge them, they never drop calls even on planes or in any building and they are constantly downloading huge files with important information.

    It's a great show.  If you are too partisan to appreciate it then too bad for you.

    With so many shows that glamorize gay lifestyle, sexual promescuity and violence ( i watch all of them by the way) how can some complain about a show that portrays americans as the good guys?

    Last time I checked the constitution gave everyone the right to control there own remote control.

    It always scares me when liberals start sounding like christain conservatives complaining about Barney.


    Slado, get real (none / 0) (#28)
    by glanton on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 06:00:43 PM EST
    how can some complain about a show that portrays americans as the good guys?

    It's the pro-torture thing that people are most bothered by on this thread.  

    (BTW.  Being pro-torture and being pro-American, Slado, don't necessarily have to be the same thing.)


    It's a TV show! (none / 0) (#35)
    by Slado on Sat Feb 10, 2007 at 10:13:18 AM EST
    Not a political add.

    How many horrible things happen on the Saproano's, Rome, Deadwood, Law & Order etc... that have nothing to do with torture?

    You are applying your sensiblilites to a make believe show because torture is your biggest issue.

    No different then when right wingers complain about Will & Grace promoting a gay lifestyle.

    I'm just as annoyed by those people.

    Turn off your TV if it's so horrible.


    Slado (none / 0) (#36)
    by glanton on Sat Feb 10, 2007 at 10:37:36 AM EST
    How many horrible things happen on the Saproano's, Rome, Deadwood, Law & Order etc... that have nothing to do with torture?

    A lot of horrible things happen, and a lot of erstaz messages come across, on these and other television shows.

    You are applying your sensiblilites to a make believe show because torture is your biggest issue.

    An ignorant statement on many levels.  

    You think because something's make-believe that means it cannot make statements and arguments, cannot have huge cultural impact?

    And suddenly you think you know my "biggest issue"?  As if you know me at all well enough to make that claim.

    What a joke your post is.  As a response to my post, it totally failed.  First you claimed our problems with the show was because it treats "America as the good guy."  I pointed out you were being ridiculous, that it had nothing to do with nationality, it was the pro-torture thing. You cannot refute the obvious fact that it is a pro-torture show, so now you want to shift gears and start with the caveat, but it's just a tv show anyway.  

    Turn off your TV if it's so horrible

    Know thine enemy.


    It's like, Mannix always finding a parking space (none / 0) (#12)
    by scribe on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 01:29:33 PM EST
    open right in front of the bad guy's store-front (or store-rear) lair.

    And about as realistic....


    it was great to watch (none / 0) (#6)
    by Jeralyn on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 12:46:40 PM EST
    on my i-pod on the elliptical machine at the gym.   I sailed right through 45 minutes (a first for me.)  It was great not to have commercials.  I guess I'll download season one now.

    The first season (none / 0) (#9)
    by nolo on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 12:54:11 PM EST
    Definitely is the best, and I'm saying that with no irony whatsoever.  Just about everything since then has been on a straight train to Pure Camp, but the first season was truly gripping drama.

    Back to the current season, though -- after the Jack Bauer bites the terrorist scene, my SO and I couldn't stop with the "land shark" jokes.


    my wife and i (none / 0) (#8)
    by cpinva on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 12:53:40 PM EST
    made the mistake of watching a recent episode. i found the whole thing convoluted and contrived. as for the "right-wing, left-wing" issue, i couldn't tell you, it wasn't particularly apparent either way. in fact, very little of what was going on was apparent. maybe you just had to be there from the start, to get into it.

    with regards to torture, give me "Rome" any day of the week: truth isn't really the issue, so much as politics and fun are. it's just damn fun to torture someone! not to mention, it's just much more believable than "24". also, "Deadwood" rates right up there as well, for most of the same reasons, though they don't torture people a lot, they just shoot them.

    granted, both those shows are on HBO, so they have more latitude, but so is the "Sopranos", and it seems to be doing well, in its expurgated version, on A&E (i think).

    There definitely was a bit of torture (none / 0) (#13)
    by nolo on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 01:37:09 PM EST
    in Deadwood.  But there was no pretense that it was about obtaining information.

    The Fox networks reshaping of America (none / 0) (#11)
    by Aaron on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 01:25:16 PM EST
    This is the show that devoted an entire season to convincing its viewers of the necessity of torture.

    How disturbing that this fascist right wing propaganda disguised as entertainment is watched by millions of American children and young people.

    Fox is the same network that killed Joss Weldon's Firefly, because it promoted dangerous ideas like personal freedom, individuality, women expressing their sexuality openly, and the questioning of authority, ideas that the corporate interests at Fox find dangerous, and well they should give their ultimate aims in this country.

    And (none / 0) (#14)
    by Che's Lounge on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 01:39:00 PM EST
    It's now true that you can look directly at a fireball and it won't cook your retinas. Thank goodness. The scary part of this show is the way so many of the viewers believe a lot of what is shown as reality.

    I met Sutherland in Murphy's bar in LA in 1988. We were playing pinball. We were both pretty drunk. Nice guy. Short. Never watched a full episode of 24. Ridiculous show.

    Rome rocks! Season 2 in progress.

    I love Rome!! (none / 0) (#16)
    by nolo on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 02:05:51 PM EST
    And the second season has been a rollercoaster ride so far, for sure.

    Glen Yuck promotes it every chance he gets. (none / 0) (#15)
    by 1980Ford on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 01:56:31 PM EST
    Man, that "thinker" is sleazy. There's no saint like a reformed sinner, as Machiavelli said.

    Wouldn't matter anyway (none / 0) (#17)
    by Ron Brynaertro on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 03:02:35 PM EST
    If the show was what many make it out to be it wouldn't matter to me, since it's one of the best shows running, and I've never held John Milius' politics against him - for example - when I rewatch some of his best films (could give a million examples of art over politics such as Richard Wagner), but Jeralyn is right on with her analysis.

    As I recently wrote about it:

    Although many critics slam the show as being slanted to the right or anti-Muslim, the current storyline also touches on the importance of civil liberties to democracies, and even the scenes regarding torture aren't so clear-cut. Sutherland's character, Jack Bauer, is often portrayed as wracked with guilt when forced to resort to brutality in order to get people to talk, and sometimes the show suggests that he went too far.

    Mayer's take is way off.

    I still can't get over the New York Post article near the end of last season, which ran with a headline about how the actor playing the president  channelled Clinton - just in a presidential sense - and yet the article said nothing about his uncanny physical resemblance to Nixon nor to the obvious similiarities to the Bush Administration the whole season long.

    And the third season is still the best....two different stories basically and they both rocked.

    Some cop shows (none / 0) (#18)
    by jondee on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 04:21:03 PM EST
    now seem to portray physical abuse of suspects as standard procedure too; in the name of "gritty realism" I suppose. I would suggest that another  latent content of all this is simple sadism and the audiences vicarious enjoyment of the spectacle. Hell, maybe it's the latent content of Regime Change too. One things for sure, from prisoners to homeless people to convention protesters, the Right seems to have a pronounced proclivity to find excuses to kick a man when he's vulnerable.

    Life's too short to waste on propaganda (none / 0) (#19)
    by scribe on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 04:40:56 PM EST
    I've never watched it;  when it first came out I saw it was about terrism and was on Fox and, to me, that meant I didn't have to look any further, esp. when I started hearing reviews about it's reliance on torture as an infallible means of "educing information" quickly (that's the new buzzword, "EI" is this month's hot new acronym du jour), just in time to save the [insert name of terrist objective].  And, I don't get much enjoyment from government-hero-saves-in-the-nick-of-time shows.  This is for two basic reasons - first and foremost, in these shows, everything works and never is broken, out for fixing, or loaned out to some buddy of the guy who's supposed to operate it and everyone does their job with the razor-sharp precision needed to save the day.  Second, the screenwriters always tie things up in nice, tidy bows all done in 44 minutes.  On both counts, life ain't like that.

    Life's a lot more like this.  But, we won't catch TV writers going in for poetry.  Not when they can get an hour of alone time with Karl "I don't want my kid picking tomatoes" Rove, smoke cigars with Rush Limbaugh,and have private dinners with Justice Thomas and his wife.  Nuh-uh.  
    Not when the Vice President's wife and daughter feel free to break secrecy to tell that they are super fans of the show.

    Aside:  Why do I get the feeling "24" night at Casa Cheney features their eyelock on the show like the cast of Cronenberg's 1996 Crash watching crash-test footage.  If you've seen the flick, you know what I'm talking about....

    The gist of the NYer article, which I think may have been missed in the main post, is that "24" serves both to normalize and legitimate torture, and further to undermine both the idea and the respectability of The Rule of Law.  It matters not whether it's good TV.  Watching torture - and a lot of what goes on in that show is torture by any rational definition - desensitizes the viewers to torture.  Watching the attitudes of the players in that drama toward law and The Rule of Law - mocking it, or having terrists ("ironically") come back and bite these principles' defenders in the behind (or worse) - tells the viewers that neither law nor the Rule of Law are worthy of respect, and insisting on it is a waste of time and effort.  Just get in there, find the designated bad guy (and, similar to much of the criminal justice system, they don't need the Right Bad Guy, rather they just need A Bad Guy) and then take out rage on the bad guy.

    That, and the fact that when responsible authorities - the Dean at West Point and senior FBI officials - asked the producers to dial back the torture because it was making their job of inculcating the correct information into their charges, the producers blew them off.

    That sort of anti-law and anti-Rule of Law propaganda is designed and intended to generate support for the sort of Rethuglican wet dream which boiled to the surface in this exchange yesterday between Tweety and the Rethug House Whip, Cantor of Virginia[my transcription]:

    Tweety (T): Well, how many wars are we going to have to fight in our lifetime;  you want to go to war with Iran now?
    Rethug Cantor (R): Well, Chris, I'm not the one saying we should take anything off the table.
    * * * [Cantor blather] * * *
    T This is not a multiple choice question;  right now, February 8, 2007, do you think we should go to war with Iran?
    R Chris, I'll leave that decision up to the commanders on the ground and those in our military establishment.  [watch Tweety's eyes and jaw from about 00:32 in the clip, right before they cut from split screen!]
    T  Commanders on the ground whether to go to war with another country?!
    R  I will leave the decisions in the military arena - and this is exactly the point ...
    T  This is Barry Goldwater talking!  He used to say that:  regional commanders can decide whether to use nuclear weapons!  You're honestly saying that soldiers should decide which country to go to war with!
    R  I'm certainly here to say that the military experts are those which come up with the recommendations to the Commander-in-Chief to make the decision.  I mean, it's silly for us to expect that we're going to have five [cross-talk by T directed at Dem. guest to the effect of "you're going to leave peace and war to the soldiers and commander-in-chief?  Never in my life have I ever heard...."] hundred thirty five commanders-in-chief.
    Dem Guest:  No.  Congress has a constitutional responsibility to decide whether we going to go to war or not.  That's what we're elected to do.  Those are the debates we should have.
    R:  E---very president since....
    T:  [cuts him off] The idea of declaring was as a soldier is unimaginable.  We'll be right back... break...

    T  Congressman Cantor, let me ask you very clearly to clear up our little discussion [in other words, you've made a fool of yourself and here's a lifeline] , if the US Congress were to vote tomorrow morning whether to declare war on Iran, would you vote "yea"?
    R  [very definitively] This Congress is not gonna do that because it is the Commander-in-Chief's role, Chris, and Steve [Dem guest] knows that as well.  It's not Congress that will ask for that, it is the Commander-in-chief that will make that decision.  Every president, whether Republican or Democrat since the War Powers Act [n.b. - It's not an Act, it's a Resolution] was in place has interpreted it as being the Commander-in-Chief's role to do that.
    T  Would you support the President if he declared war on Iran tomorrow morning?  As things are right now?
    R  Well, I will support what is in the best interests of securing this homeland and providing our troops with what they need.  And, if there is a threat on the ground in Iraq and in the region and our troops need it, I will support them.  And that is exactly the point on this Iraqi resolution, because the Democrats want to have their cake and eat it, too.  This is a non-binding resolution, it is a sense of Congress, it doesn't mean anything and in fact it pollutes the message and it sends a wrong message to our troops [Tweety cuts him off]
    T  Congressman, what's the role of Congress in war and peace?
    D:  Congress, under the Constitution of the United States, authorizes war, and the War Powers Act requires Congress to vote on whether we should insert troops into hostile situations.  The law is clear ...
    R:  Absolutely not...
    D:  C'mon, Eric.
    R:  Absolutely not;  the Commander-in-chief ... the Constitution gives the Commander-in-chief ... [Tweety, exasperated]
    T  Congressman Cantor, why did the President ask for approval before he went to Iraq?
    R  Well, I think that his counsel certainly gave him guidance as to why he needed to do that.  But, at the end of the day the Constitution gives the Commander in chief the right to send out troops into battle.
    T  Ok, well, maybe when it comes to war we don't need a Congress according to that.  Thank you ...

    So, in case you were wondering, a military dictatorship, probably along the lines of a S. American banana republic, is the Bush/Cheney/Rethuglican model.  And that should go a long way toward explaining why they get so hard when thinking about torture on "24".

    Life's too short to spend it watching propaganda (none / 0) (#20)
    by scribe on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 04:43:23 PM EST
    so I go and write a 500 or 750 word screed on the topic.

    Smuckin' fa*t.


    Life's too short (none / 0) (#25)
    by Edger on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 05:29:20 PM EST
    That's why I rarely turn my TV on... to any channel.

    Well done, scribe... (none / 0) (#24)
    by Edger on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 05:27:20 PM EST
    Yeah (none / 0) (#21)
    by Che's Lounge on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 04:57:00 PM EST
    but that's some quality screed. Very enlightening.

    i wasn't going to mention that scribe. :) (none / 0) (#22)
    by cpinva on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 05:12:01 PM EST
    btw, cantor's an idiot. an opportunistic idiot, but an idiot all the same. eventually, his constituents will die out, and he'll have to move to another old area, to get re-elected.

    If the wingnuts love it... (none / 0) (#23)
    by Quite Contrary on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 05:16:38 PM EST
    I have a co-worker who is a devoted Kool-Aid drinker: she mutes Fux Noose in the morning (closed captioned) so she can listen to Rush.

    She basically plans her life around "24."

    Given that recommendation, I think I'll pass on it.

    For Some? It's Winger Porn (none / 0) (#27)
    by Harley on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 05:55:33 PM EST
    And Surnow does little to dissuade anyone when it comes to his intentions, etc.  He toils in the same fever swamp that produced the atrocious 9/11 docudrama.   He subsists on the aggrieved victimhood that drives so much conservative thinking.  He's an authoritarian fanboy who wouldn't know the business end of a rifle if it was inserted...

    Oh, never mind.  That's entertainment!

    Double-edged sword (none / 0) (#29)
    by scarshapedstar on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 06:26:11 PM EST
    Fox certainly likes 24's enthusiastic use of torture. However, to be technical about it, almost none of the information Jack gets after he kneecaps a guy somebody proves useful. They just start making stuff up.

    Kinda like in the real world, oddly enough.

    a guy / somebody (none / 0) (#30)
    by scarshapedstar on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 06:26:39 PM EST
    Pick your favorite!

    24 Can't Be Defined as Left or Right (none / 0) (#31)
    by Dymero on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 11:09:33 PM EST
    I've never posted here before, but had to chime in when I saw something about 24.  Yea, I've seen a lot in 24 that the far right might love to see in real life (or what might already exist, depending on what you believe), including torture.  Yet, I've also seen a lot of stuff that the right might bash.  This season alone they have the whole theme about trampling the Constitution in name of security (ring any bells?).  Then, in the end of the season before last and the beginning of the last, the President was the village idiot, and then show to be secretly a lier and a schemer.

    And yet, I know 24 attracts a wide audience.  I personally know some very liberal people who like, and watch it.  I don't condone torture, and yet, I like it too.  Personally, I think the powerful persona of Jack Bauer makes it so that people ignore some of the uglier aspects of the show.  I've been watching it since mid-season two.  After all that time, I still don't condone torture, and yet, I'm still watching it.

    Welcome (none / 0) (#32)
    by Jeralyn on Fri Feb 09, 2007 at 11:22:14 PM EST
    Welcome, Dymero, and thanks for your comment.

    Thanks (none / 0) (#37)
    by Dymero on Sat Feb 10, 2007 at 11:33:26 PM EST
    Thanks, Jeralyn.

    You gotta love it! (none / 0) (#33)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Feb 10, 2007 at 09:05:41 AM EST
    Okay... After all the talk last year I have watched the first three episodes, well I actually missed the first 10 minutes of episode one, so I missed the nuking of LA. (Darn it, but the many shots of the nuclear cloud helps.)

    What this is a very old recipe. The Saturday "Serial." Which was about 20 minutes of none stop action shown every Saturday at the end of the feature and had about 12 episodes. The heroes and villains were sharply defined and every week the show ended with the hero about to be blown up, or the wagon with the heroine running off the cliff, etc. Of course they always escaped.

    I'd guess that none of you actually ever watched one of these. If we missed an episode we would find someone who did and beg him or her for all the gory details... (We had a great female story teller in my class whose mother sold tickets at the theater. Naturally she never missed a Saturday and was immensely popular.)

    I don't know if you consider being tied up and made to watch a fuse burn towards kegs of powder abuse, or torture. I think it is abuse, with a very short period of torture as the explodee suffers the pain of very rapid burning, aka an explosion.

    We had no episodes of the villain having panties on his head, and if we had we would have been unable to understand it. In fact, the villains were always cleanly shot from a six gun that held at least a 100 bullets or trounced with the fists of the hero.

    It was about as real as a Saturday Evening Post cover and we loved them all.

    It took the Korean war to make cynics of us, brought to us by a national government that for the first time forgot that you fight only to win. This was further pounded into us during Vietnam and we see the fruits of this tree marching in the streets today.

    As I watched "24" last Monday I happened to think about  all the conversations about the show and I was further reminded of what Patton supposedly said while he was visiting a particular deadly battlefield.

    "God, I do love it so."

    Enjoy the thrill, folks. Theater and TV screens are so clean.

    Un-believeable. (none / 0) (#34)
    by Edger on Sat Feb 10, 2007 at 10:03:00 AM EST