Mrebo

TV’s Frink said:

dahmage said:

Collipso said:

Making a mistake is human. Making the same mistake twice is foolish. (Or something like that)

maybe you mean “All men make mistakes, but only wise men learn from their mistakes.” - Winston Churchill

So Luke is a fool then in your eyes?

Obviously. He gave the nice pigman #1 a nap, and then did it again with pigman #2.

You can prosecute on behalf of the pig men and I’ll play defense lawyer for Luke. I’m betting Luke will walk if the standard is reasonable doubt. The pig men suffer from congenital conditions including narcolepsy and sleep apnea. Their heavy drinking doesn’t help either.

dahmage said:

Which would cause you more emotional trauma.

• Father who you never knew and who you thought was dead, and just found out he is this evil man
• Nephew who you knew from birth, and whom your sister (who was with you through all the previous trama about your vader daddy) entrusted to you to train correctly, is a dark dark soul, and you FAILED to save him.

The first one is trauma for sure, but I don’t think it compares at all the the extreme trauma of the second one. The second one brings back the first trauma, and then adds layers and layers of extra trauma on top.

So yeah, Luke was pretty upset that he failed Leah and Klyo.

And i posted this earlier, but there is a good chance i deleted the post. but in my take on things, the luke we saw in the OT was three movies of a young idealistic kid who valued his own take on things above anyone elses. He trusted himself to be right more than he trusted what anyone told him. When these types of people fail, the fail HARD. I am this type of person.

Notwithstanding the capitalization of “failed,” the notion that Luke failed to save Ben and that Luke came to that conclusion falls entirely flat. More is needed to establish such a reaction. If Luke is now that brittle, I’d want to know what happened to make him that way in the decades prior to sensing bad stuff in Ben’s mind.

I don’t like that some have a hard time engaging (whether in politics or other threads) and instead drop out with sarcasm or sniping when they’re challenged. That said, I can’t force someone to take different perspectives seriously or make them have the capacity to engage. So we’ve got to keep on rolling and not take it all too personally.

Relevant to this discussion, start from the 6:45 mark of this video suggesting 12 simple changes that would fix a lot of issues: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8ksEz8Qq1k

Some really interesting ideas throughout the video, but that part addressing Luke’s creepy hovering and contemplation of murder is only about a minute long.

Warbler said:

According to my phone, the government shutdown is officially over.

dahmage said:

TV’s Frink said:

Mrebo said:

I also was disappointed with Han’s and Leia’s characterizations in TFA where both were exactly where they were 40 years ago.

They both were broken people…not the same at all.

Other than that I suppose we’re treading the same old ground again so I’ll drop it…again.

I’m with you, no point going in the same circle.

I’m with you too.

CatBus said:

Disagree. IMO media has lots of biases, and they all affect political coverage:

1. Laziness: Analysis is hard, transcription is easy. Got a divisive topic? Call up representatives from both sides and repeat what they said. Even if one or both sides are provably lying, don’t call them out on it. Let the audience decide. The audience you’re helping them misinform.
2. Corporate: Most media organizations are also big businesses. Why run a story that would destroy a major sponsor or shareholder, when you could bury it and live to report another day?
3. Story: Stories are more interesting than lack of a story. So if something happens that turns out to be inconsequential, should you drop it, or should you spice it up and run it anyway?
4. Access: Stories depend on access to sources. If a government figure blackballs you, you lose all those lazy transcription stories. Will you defer them or stand your ground?
5. Tabloid: Got a sex or sleaze angle? It doesn’t matter if the story has any consequence, or even harms public debate. Run it.
6. Underdog/horse race: If you see an uneven competition, side with the loser, and try to make it a horse race by calling it neck-and-neck even when it’s not.

Some of these conflict with each other, but that’s how biases are. I’d say given these, and the types of stories the media’s been running for the past few decades, the major media tend to have a solidly conservative bias (disagree with Mrebo), one that often but not always aligns with the Democratic Party (agree with Mrebo). Media with more of a corporate (Wall Street Journal) or tabloid (Washington Times) lean will have an more pronounced conservative bias, and align more closely with the Republican Party.

But that was all before Trump. Now you’d have to go to something more like The Crusader to represent where Republican elected officials are today, and since the Democrats have also lurched right, they are probably now getting 50/50 favorable coverage from the WSJ.

American politics occupies a limited part of the full ideological spectrum, but I’m not convinced the Democratic Party is not liberal. I think the media is somewhat more liberal than the Democratic Party.

Laziness is a major problem in journalism, especially when emoting passes for deep thought and earns a big audience.

Maybe we should be blaming the audience/electorate. The Democrats would be a more liberal party if the electorate were more liberal. And journalism would be more balanced and thoughtful if the viewers cared about that kind of thing. It’s a lot easier to flip the TV on than to get involved in politics.

TV’s Frink said:

Mrebo said:

I also was disappointed with Han’s and Leia’s characterizations in TFA where both were exactly where they were 40 years ago.

They both were broken people…not the same at all.

Other than that I suppose we’re treading the same old ground again so I’ll drop it…again.

They’re all broken people. Another disappointing aspect of the film for me.

TV’s Frink said:

Mrebo said:

Collipso said:

You guys are acting as if Dre considered Luke to be some sort of legend in the OT. I share his opinion on several aspects regarding TLJ, and even though I can’t speak for him, I believe you guys are wrong.

Luke in the OT is not a legend, but a hero that you can clearly see that is as flawed as we regular people are, but he still managed to achieve greatness. Not by overthrowing the empire, not by literally being a hero to the rest of the galaxy, but by being a loving son and redeeming his father. He was Vader’s hero, not the alliance or the republic. The hero of his father and of the Jedi.

In A New Hope yes, he’s the big hero, he saved everyone, destroyed the big Death Star, he was the hero of the Rebels. But in the other two movies his victories (or defeats in the case of ESB (and even RotJ)) are so much smaller and yet so much bigger than the one in ANH.

Luke is far from perfect in the OT. Far from legend. At least that’s what I had always thought.

I’m not entirely sure about the comparison to drunk Santa Claus, but comparing it to a dad you admired a lot (and already knew he was flawed and that’s why you admired him) until you find out he’s a drunk farce who basically says he didn’t learn anything from the past because who cares if the future is always in motion or if he redeemed Vader, he’ll just ignite his laser sword to his own blood because he’s insane now because plot.

Right on. Maybe the EU made Luke out to be a legend/myth (and told stories that justified that view) but that wasn’t who he was at the end of ROTJ.

And IMO there’s your problem right there. The Luke of TLJ is 30 years removed from the end of ROTJ but you still want him to be in the exact same place for some reason.

You’re right, he wasn’t a legend at the ROTJ. The Battle of Endor had just ended. Why are you so sure he wouldn’t become a legend as the years passed, especially after he disappeared?

Nope. Didn’t want Luke to be in the exact same place.

I expected him to be a more learned and powerful Jedi, as I imagine anyone did. Maybe he would start his own Jedi order, maybe he wouldn’t. Maybe he would isolate himself, maybe he wouldn’t. Maybe he got married, or not. So many things could have happened. And depending on how big a change something was, I would expect the story to explain it. Good storytelling involves characterization, not merely saying, “well a lot of time passed and anything could have happened.” That’s a cop-out.

In terms of becoming a myth or legend, if you brought that expectation in with you then it worked for you. But based on how private most of his actions and beliefs were, and how large the universe was, the idea he was to become a legend/myth was very far from what we saw.

I also was disappointed with Han’s and Leia’s characterizations in TFA where both were exactly where they were 40 years ago.

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

They voted for a budget extension in exchange for a non-binding promise to just keep talking?

Ah, there’s the spineless Democratic Party I know!

I think it’s more of a matter of holding a finger to the wind and changing their position when it doesn’t seem to be popular. Same conclusion.

The New York Times and MSNBC were laying the blame pretty squarely at the Democrats’ feet, though.

Hey wait, I thought Mrebo proved that all media were just Democratic Party lapdogs though.

Maybe he just reads different articles. There’s lots of Op-Eds out there. Also, there was an infuriating amount of meaningless “Who will the voters blame?” articles, which leaned toward the Republicans without the media having to take a position at all.

Right. And I didn’t think I proved anything. I stated my observations that the media is generally biased against Republicans.

Collipso said:

You guys are acting as if Dre considered Luke to be some sort of legend in the OT. I share his opinion on several aspects regarding TLJ, and even though I can’t speak for him, I believe you guys are wrong.

Luke in the OT is not a legend, but a hero that you can clearly see that is as flawed as we regular people are, but he still managed to achieve greatness. Not by overthrowing the empire, not by literally being a hero to the rest of the galaxy, but by being a loving son and redeeming his father. He was Vader’s hero, not the alliance or the republic. The hero of his father and of the Jedi.

In A New Hope yes, he’s the big hero, he saved everyone, destroyed the big Death Star, he was the hero of the Rebels. But in the other two movies his victories (or defeats in the case of ESB (and even RotJ)) are so much smaller and yet so much bigger than the one in ANH.

Luke is far from perfect in the OT. Far from legend. At least that’s what I had always thought.

I’m not entirely sure about the comparison to drunk Santa Claus, but comparing it to a dad you admired a lot (and already knew he was flawed and that’s why you admired him) until you find out he’s a drunk farce who basically says he didn’t learn anything from the past because who cares if the future is always in motion or if he redeemed Vader, he’ll just ignite his laser sword to his own blood because he’s insane now because plot.

Right on. Maybe the EU made Luke out to be a legend/myth (and told stories that justified that view) but that wasn’t who he was at the end of ROTJ. The universe is a big place with a lot of important people. Aside from being the pilot to blow up the Death Star forty years ago, his exploits were mostly unknown as were his pretensions of being a Jedi, an ancient religion that many don’t give credence.

I keep coming back to “When Harry Met Sally,” which proved men and women can’t be just friends.

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

Well said, ender.

Particularly how certain views take on a popularity that shuts out dissent.

As for ignoring important issues, this caught my eye.

If the Republicans want me to judge them fairly, they need to stop supporting Trump.

ender’s point that I agree with goes far beyond treating Republicans fairly. It’s about debating global warming, net neutrality, religious practices, abortion, feminism, etc. I care about that more than a hang up with a particular politician.

America elected Trump. I have problems with him as you all seem to. But the idea that fairness is dead unless we eject the president from office is absurd.

Sorry but it is the way I feel. I can be fair and debate with you and Ender. But I refuse to be fair and refuse to debate with those that still support Trump. This has nothing to do with whether or not Trump has small hands, whether or not he and his wife share a room, whether or not his Vice President calls his wife “mother”, wears cheap deodorant, or picks his nose. This has to do with Trump being a complete and total disgrace to this nation and its history. Everyone that supports him and everyone that voted for him should be ashamed of themselves. You want to support conservative viewpoints? Fine. You want to support Trump, not fine.

Do you have any friends or family members (who you like) who support Trump? If so, do you tell them how you feel about them?

TV’s Frink said:

Mrebo said:

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

Well said, ender.

Particularly how certain views take on a popularity that shuts out dissent.

As for ignoring important issues, this caught my eye.

If the Republicans want me to judge them fairly, they need to stop supporting Trump.

ender’s point that I agree with goes far beyond treating Republicans fairly. It’s about debating global warming, net neutrality, religious practices, abortion, feminism, etc. I care about that more than a hang up with a particular politician.

The politicians make the laws and hire the judges though. You can’t ignore the politicians if you want to debate the things the politicians have a say in.

Right. I’m just contesting Warb’s idea that treatment of Pence or whoever hinges on Trump. Clearly you’re judging Pence for his positions and that’s fine.

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

Well said, ender.

Particularly how certain views take on a popularity that shuts out dissent.

As for ignoring important issues, this caught my eye.

If the Republicans want me to judge them fairly, they need to stop supporting Trump.

ender’s point that I agree with goes far beyond treating Republicans fairly. It’s about debating global warming, net neutrality, religious practices, abortion, feminism, etc. I care about that more than a hang up with a particular politician.

America elected Trump. I have problems with him as you all seem to. But the idea that fairness is dead unless we eject the president from office is absurd.

Well said, ender.

Particularly how certain views take on a popularity that shuts out dissent.

As for ignoring important issues, this caught my eye.

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

TV’s Frink said:

yhwx said:

Mrebo said:

TV’s Frink said:

Mrebo said:

oojason said:

‘From New York to Seattle, check out these aerial views of the Women’s March across the country’

article - http://cnn.it/2DuCjg4’

Aerial views - https://twitter.com/CNN/status/954900635316576256

Also see the March for Life!

Fuck those assholes.

Sorry you feel that way.

Ok?

He could have said plenty of things that I would have taken issue with, I don’t see how that should be one of them.

Glad it was taken as intended. And glad to have an ally in ender. Nobody has a monopoly on strong emotions and convictions and I am in agreement with ender on this topic. moviefreakedmind’s post made me smile.

Yes, but some people have events happen in their lives that make an issue way more personal than it is for the average person.

I think we should all be civil and sensitive to others’ personal experiences. However, politics would soon become difficult to discuss if we totally avoid topics relating to our personal experiences.

I was simply urging caution and sensitivity.

You cannot assume that the topic doesn’t also have personal significance to me.

You’re right. But here is the difference. I KNOW it has personal significance to Frink. I DON’T know that about you. It MAY be true for you as well, but it is not 100% certain, yet. Now if you tell it does and you tell us your story, than the “maybe” switches to “100% certain”.

There should be no such need. I mostly stay away from talking about personal things.

Understood, but if you don’t wish to talk about it, there is no way to be 100 certain that a given topic is very personal to you.

As long as people are being civil, no topic should be out of bounds.

I never said the topic was out of bounds.

Good.

Edit: out of morbid curiosity, if there was a very personal reason would you be more tolerant of me discussing a topic?

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

TV’s Frink said:

yhwx said:

Mrebo said:

TV’s Frink said:

Mrebo said:

oojason said:

‘From New York to Seattle, check out these aerial views of the Women’s March across the country’

article - http://cnn.it/2DuCjg4’

Aerial views - https://twitter.com/CNN/status/954900635316576256

Also see the March for Life!

Fuck those assholes.

Sorry you feel that way.

Ok?

He could have said plenty of things that I would have taken issue with, I don’t see how that should be one of them.

Glad it was taken as intended. And glad to have an ally in ender. Nobody has a monopoly on strong emotions and convictions and I am in agreement with ender on this topic. moviefreakedmind’s post made me smile.

Yes, but some people have events happen in their lives that make an issue way more personal than it is for the average person.

I think we should all be civil and sensitive to others’ personal experiences. However, politics would soon become difficult to discuss if we totally avoid topics relating to our personal experiences.

I was simply urging caution and sensitivity.

You cannot assume that the topic doesn’t also have personal significance to me.

You’re right. But here is the difference. I KNOW it has personal significance to Frink. I DON’T know that about you. It MAY be true for you as well, but it is not 100% certain, yet. Now if you tell it does and you tell us your story, than the “maybe” switches to “100% certain”.

There should be no such need. I mostly stay away from talking about personal things. As long as people are being civil, no topic should be out of bounds.

yhwx said:

I will not be dealing wit the issue further.

Well if you do, deal me in.

darth_ender said:

yhwx said:

Even if you discount all the stuff about abortion, Mike Pence is a massive dick. And a weirdo. For God’s sake, he calls his wife “Mother.”

Heaven forbid! Probably watches MLP too!

Not saying he’s a stellar individual, but come on!

Yeah…Pence’s idiosyncrasies pale in comparison to what so many politicians do, including cheating on their wives and calling them who-knows-what.

Nice.

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

TV’s Frink said:

yhwx said:

Mrebo said:

TV’s Frink said:

Mrebo said:

oojason said:

‘From New York to Seattle, check out these aerial views of the Women’s March across the country’

article - http://cnn.it/2DuCjg4’

Aerial views - https://twitter.com/CNN/status/954900635316576256

Also see the March for Life!

Fuck those assholes.

Sorry you feel that way.

Ok?

He could have said plenty of things that I would have taken issue with, I don’t see how that should be one of them.

Glad it was taken as intended. And glad to have an ally in ender. Nobody has a monopoly on strong emotions and convictions and I am in agreement with ender on this topic. moviefreakedmind’s post made me smile.

Yes, but some people have events happen in their lives that make an issue way more personal than it is for the average person.

I think we should all be civil and sensitive to others’ personal experiences. However, politics would soon become difficult to discuss if we totally avoid topics relating to our personal experiences. You cannot assume that the topic doesn’t also have personal significance to me. That said, I’m more interested in discussing the stupidity of social media and Russia scandal.

TV’s Frink said:

Seems like Ric Olie wrote that headline.

😄

Regarding being more conscious about what we share/like on social media: Social media is making us dumber.

TV’s Frink said:

yhwx said:

Mrebo said:

TV’s Frink said:

Mrebo said:

oojason said:

‘From New York to Seattle, check out these aerial views of the Women’s March across the country’

article - http://cnn.it/2DuCjg4’

Aerial views - https://twitter.com/CNN/status/954900635316576256

Also see the March for Life!

Fuck those assholes.

Sorry you feel that way.

Ok?

He could have said plenty of things that I would have taken issue with, I don’t see how that should be one of them.

Glad it was taken as intended. And glad to have an ally in ender. Nobody has a monopoly on strong emotions and convictions and I am in agreement with ender on this topic. moviefreakedmind’s post made me smile.