Blogs.4Bauer

That’s what Dennis Haysbert says, anyway.

Now, look. I know President Palmer (David, not Wayne) is a beloved figure in these here parts, and Obama’s, well, not…

But after I got past the thought that Haysbert has a really healthy ego, I thought he might have a point.

Palmer was beloved by looselugnut libs and right-wing nutjobs alike. He always had the day’s crisis to resolve and so never really expounded on his beliefs about tax breaks, social services or foreign policy (beyond wanting to make sure he was about to bomb the crap out of the correct unnamed nation, which I think pretty much everyone can agree is probably the right course). We have no idea what kind of policies he worked on as commander-in-chief.  He was too busy trying to stay alive or keep the nation from blowing up.

But all that aside, this country’s never had a black presidential candidate who actually stood a reasonable chance of being a major-party nominee, never mind of perhaps even being elected to the highest office.

Is that because seeing virtual black presidents such as Palmer or, maybe, Morgan Freeman in Deep Impact, has made people a little more color-blind? Huh. I dunno, but maybe Haysbert’s not so completely ego-centric?

I can just imagine the questions:

If Jack Bauer shoots someone in the knee but they’re already unconscious, does it still hurt?

If Chloe hacks into the DOD network to download SecDef Heller’s recent Amazon.com purchases so Jack can figure out what to buy him for Christmas, is it still illegal?

If Dennis Haysbert is playing an “elite counterterrorist” operative on CBS’ The Unit, does that mean that former President David Palmer can never rise from the dead on 24 on Fox?

If Kiefer Sutherland is serving time for drunk driving, does Jack Bauer now have a police record? Will he lose his top-secret clearance?

What the hell am I talking about?

Three philosophy professors from Tyndale University College and Seminary in Toronto, Canada, have edited a book called “24 and Philosophy: The World According to Jack.”

No, really.

It’ll be released tomorrow (Friday) in Toronto.

Dammit! What about Barnes & Noble? OK, it’s on Amazon.

Profs. Jennifer Hart Weed, Ronald Weed and Richard Davis put together this “witty but philosophical exploration of the methods and motivations used by Jack Bauer and other characters in the highly charged television drama.” They’re the three-person philosophy department at Tyndale and all are fans of the show. They recruited fans from around the world to write essays for the book.

A press release on the book (which is dedicated to Edgar! yay!) gives a taste:

‘What would Jack Bauer do?’ We find ourselves asking ourselves this question more and more often. In fact, it’s the title of one of the chapters. Most of us face moral dilemmas that have the same structure as the ones Jack confronts. Consequently, how he handles them is not only interesting, but could even be helpful in determining how we might handle some dilemmas of our own.

Such as?

• If radical terrorists from an unnamed country blow up a nuke outside of Los Angeles, which farmer’s market is the best one to shop at? What about liquor stores? Which ones will stay open?

• If my girlfriend is captured by the Chinese while searching for me and her brain is scrambled and she becomes even more of an idiot than she already was, is there something wrong with me if I still love her? (Jack, honey, you can do soooo much better, please. Two words: Kate Warner.)

• If I lose my key card for work, maybe, say, because my sister’s a junkie, do I report it immediately or try to get it back covertly?

Here’s a podcast of an interview Jennifer Weed did with a radio station in Connecticut.

These are my philosophical questions:

Is a book like this legit or just another example of how crass commercialism has crept into every single freakin’ aspect of our lives, even those of us in the seminary? (Added Friday 12/21: I was just re-reading this sentence and I just want to clarify — I am not, nor have I ever been, in the seminary. Just wanted to clear up that confusion.)

And, how does a book have a Facebook page?

Methinks Jennifer Hart Weed may have a wee bit of a crush on our dear Jack, too:

Service of the ideal is constant: a belief in protecting the innocent. We care about Jack. We like him. We believe in him. I would definitely sit down and have a beer with Jack Bauer because there are so few people left who believe in ideals anymore. To get somebody whose beliefs go beyond themselves – that’s somebody I want to have a beer with.

That’s very nice and all, Dr. Weed, but don’t tell Jack you want to get “bombed” with him. You’re liable to find yourself up against a wall, your neck firmly in Jack’s grip. And don’t drive with him after you’ve finished drinking, either. He doesn’t have a very good record when it comes to driving drunk.

Partially cross-posted on Remote Access.

Note: As promised, I’ve begun watching Season 1 of 24 and am blogging on one episode a week episodes after I see them, as a run-up to Season 7. Remember, I’m pretending I know nothing about Seasons 2-6, so blah blah blah, yackety schmackety.

I know, I’ve been very remiss in blogging on Season 1. Life’s been busy.

But this weekend, as all the sick people in my house napped, I watched episodes 5, 6 and 7 in a row and am back in the action.

And action it was!

I’ll deal with this character group by character group:

First up: The Palmers.

OK, what is up with this family? They make the Clinton and Bush families seem normal. The entire family knows that little Palmer accidentally killed the man who raped his sister and that family hatchet man “Carl” helped them cover it up and no one thought Papa Palmer should know?

Of course, if he had known, this storyline wouldn’t be nearly so dramatic, but still. I think he needs to rethink his relationship with his family. His son obviously has major father issues; his daughter obviously doesn’t want to do anything to harm daddy; and Sherry, well, I appear to have been wrong about her.

Sherry seems to have a very conniving side to her. I’m guessing we’ll see more of that as time wears on. The true character of many characters here seems to be coming out only now.

The big Q: Will all Palmers be by David’s side for the early morning breakfast? We shall see.

Next up: Kim and Terri Bauer

Kim has flashes of not being an idiot, but just can’t sustain them.

Now that her remaining kidnapper (in these three episodes, the meaner — and less attractive, how fortunate! — of the two kidnappers is shot point blank in the head by Gaines) is on her side (he has been sweet on her from the beginning) is on her side, she has the chance to get outta there.

While I understand that she doesn’t feel like she can leave her mom, she would have a much better chance of getting Teri free, it seems, if she escaped with kidnap boy and got to her dad, telling him where Teri was.

As for Teri, how shocked was she to realize the guy she thought she was with was actually dead? And what a blow to Jack to find that out. He’s totally screwed. I can’t even fathom how he’s going to get out of this one.

Then we have: Jack Bauer & CTU

I’m not sure how the bad guys have managed to hook into every single camera everywhere. In the hospital, in CTU, etc. OK, I understand CTU, given that there’s a spy there, but in the hospital? How’d they work that out?

It seems obvious that Gaines & Co. are going to try to either have Jack kill Palmer himself or at least be framed for his death. Can’t imagine why else Gaines would be having Jack head over to the breakfast.

Of course, we’re not all that far into the 24-hour cycle, so I’m not sure how that’s going to work. We have a lot of day ahead of us. Dennis Haysbert is listed as a star, not a guest star, so I can only think he’s not going to die. At least, not so early in the day.

As for CTU, it seems that George Mason has come to recognize that Jack is not a total rogue and actually knows a bit of what he’s doing. I’m glad he finally trusted Jack a bit. I think that Mason isn’t as bad a guy as he’s appeared to be up until this point — perhaps the bad things he did were for a reason; Jack’s done some iffy things already that we’ve accepted because we know he has a good reason.

Totally stunned when Jack shot Nina, and even more so when Tony discovered Jack had given Nina a flak jacket and she got up and walked away from her would-be grave. Talk about a dramatic moment when he shot her. I was on the edge of my seat!

He obviously wanted to shoot her in the back because there’d be less of a chance of him missing the jacket and hitting her; in the front, the jacket could have slipped open and he could have actually shot her for real.

But what about Jamie? She obviously is the spy. Teri calls, gets her, asks for help escaping her kidnapper and Jamie sends the bad guys to get her. Wow. She’s one of the only people Jack actually did trust in CTU. Makes it a little more clear as to why she didn’t want Milo working on that key card (what an annoying person he was! But Eric Balfour, the actor, looked better than he did when he was on Six Feet Under and had a shaved head.).

Wonder who’s going to figure out she’s on the wrong side. My money’s on Tony. He’s kind of a jerk, but he does seem to have his head on straight and seems to want to actually do his job and do it well. And actor Carlos Bernard has finally stopped that weird “voice” he was using, a half-whisper that just sounded like he had a cold.

I think that wraps it up.

In all, an excellent three-episode arc. Plenty of drama and payoff. Can’t believe the fake Alan York killed Janet after all she’d been through to survive. The Nina killing was utterly dramatic and fabulous. The show’s definitely picking up steam.