[Arkinsaw]

The first two seasons the show raked the liberals over the coals. Now they are turning it around. I have no complaints with a show that whacks on both sides. My problem is with shows that whack only one.

[Lucius Cornelius Sulla]

As I said in the Official Battlestar Galactica thread, this show reads better as a WWII analogy, with the humans as the Resistance, and the Cylons as the Nazis, whatever the intents of the writers.

[unspun]

The first two seasons the show raked the liberals over the coals. Now they are turning it around. I have no complaints with a show that whacks on both sides. My problem is with shows that whack only one.

How many sides are you on? :-)

BTW, Season 2 had an episode that was decidedly pro-abortion in its sentiments and characterizations.

[Hacksaw]

It seems that any SF show today has to be politically correct. BS has the annoying Starbuck (who in any real military society would have been tossed out an airlock without a helmet long ago) and the equally annoying female president.

About the only show I saw that was able to pull off a kick butt woman superior was Babylon 5's Ivanonva. Unlike Starbuck, she was a likeable character as well.

[weegee]

I don't see how supporting the use of suicide bombers by "the good guys" is "turning it around" and raking conservatives over the coals or even "supporting liberals".

It is SUPPORTING terrorist bombings, at least in principle.

Put yourself in 1933 Germany, should Jews have gone on suicide bombing missions against marketplace families? Still would've been wrong. Okay, how about suicide bombers taking out Hitler and his buddies at the Olympics? Wait, there have been murders at the Olympics and WWI started with an assassination.

So what is the "good" case for a suicide bombing? Surrendering to the enemy troops and then detonating? I believe we've seen this too. We certainly have to check for it.