xhonzi

BmB said:

You also need owen. Someone has to follow obi wan on that damn fool idealistic crusade you know.

You're suggesting the reason that Owen is so against Luke following Ben isn't because Anakin followed Ben on some damn fool idealistic crusade but that Owen himself did?

That's interesting.  I thought Bail should be involved in one of two ways:

1. A soldier/associate of Ben's/friend of Anakin's that is fighting the Clone Wars and gets so frustrated by both sides in the war that he decides to retire to a quiet life of farming and let the universe go hang.  Ben asks him to raise Anakin's son... which he does reluctantly, but with the idea of keeping him out of the pan-galactic politic as much as possible.

2. Not in it all.  He just appears in Episode 4.

Increasing the emotional attachment to Bail also makes Alderaan's demise more emotional.

I also can't click on the "bkev is ignored, reveal post anyways" links.  I had to break down and actually unignore him.

;)

*popcorn*

Bingowings:

But just then the master of ready wit and stunning repartee stood up, smiled sadistically and said

I can't see the picture... is that the joke?  There's no punchline?

C3PX said:

 

We are definitely in agreement with how ridiculous it is for religious laws to be held against those who do not share those beliefs.

From a fatalist perspective, religious beliefs are either correct or incorrect regardless of who does or doesn't believe them.  So... for the person who believes, if what he believes is in fact truth, he correctly applies religious law to all.

From a 'respect' perspective, he pretends that he does not.

C3PX said:

"Right" vs. "wrong" is another issue entirely. Though even that I think is mostly bunk. Without some universal truth, like a creator, how can "right" and "wrong" really exist as universals? If there is no such creator, and every thing just happened by chance, then like everything else, "right" and "wrong" are relative. I think at that point, "right" and "wrong" you'd have to assume right and wrong are simply culturally defined. In some cultures it may not be wrong to hack the limbs on a child, it could be part of some ritual sanctioned by that culture, a time honored tradition seen as somehow beneficial to that given society. Without some divine law or some higher power dictating what is right or wrong, could we still read about this culture and say that their barbaric acts were "sinful" or "wrong"?

 Right- social norms and mores.

;)

And this in a thread about David Lynch.

I never felt more positive about Return of the Jedi until I walked out of Revenge of the Sith.

So... I thought we invited Mr. & Mrs. 005 so that it would feel like less of a mandate between us, C3PX.  Then 005 has to come right out and call us a "couple" while we're shooting zombies in the face!

I've added L4D2 to my pile of shame.  :(  I mean, I will when it gets here in 4-7 business days.

(It's still on sale at gamefly for $20 + free shipping (360) if anyone else wants to get in on the OT.com Zombie Slaying League.)

117?  Same as MASTER CHIEF???  Awesome!

Also this- the way the whispers were revealed was terrible.  The explanation is one thing... but the way the show stopped long enough for Hurley to tell the audience the answer... man that was terrible!  Might as well as had the orangutan in an ascot tell us the answer!

Warbler said:

I suppose I could try to find some sort of heavy object to hit the guy over the head with. Maybe deck the guy. Maybe try to surprise him from behind.

xhonzi said:

Warbler said:

xhonzi said:

And Thomas Jefferson and I don't always see eye-to-eye either.  Such is life and politics.

remember this?

Sure.  It's another fabulous example of him and me not seeing eye-to-eye.  But the point was this: That's what small Gov't proponents wanted back in the day. 

When you say "a little bigger than the conservatives want and a little smaller than the liberals want"  we're already WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY past that point.

do you really think that Government is as big as the extreme liberals want?

Not today's liberals, no.  But the Gov't is bigger today than some of yesterday's liberals ever dreamed it could be.

Liberals will never be happy until it is a total socialist state.  That's why giving them inches, wherever they may be... is just one more step towards their eventual goal.

Oh, right....  I mean... Check again, bkev...

doubleofive said:

 

Hopefully actually talking to people from the boards over LIVE will help calm her.  Unless xhonzi and 3PX are as insane IRL as they are on the boards.  I know (hope) I'm not. ;-)

Uh-oh... I'm afraid I'm no more or less sane IRL.  But I'll try to put on a polite facade for your wife.

HE'S IGNORING US????  NO WAY MAN!  WE'RE IGNORING HIM!!!!!!

I just now found out (through the radio drama) that during the Cell Block escape Han shouts "He's the brains, sweetheart!" to Leia.  I always thought he said, "Peas for brains, sweetheart!"

I also never understood what Veers or whoever said to Vader during the first AT-AT scene on Hoth.  He says something to the effect of "You may start your landing." but with his strong British clip- I thought he said, "You may start your napping."  That didn't make any sense... but that's what I always heard.

I'll tell you about OTHER people's misconceptions.  When Jabba says that Han will become "Ban-tha poo-doo" and the subtitles say "bantha fodder"... this has caused many of the "Star Wars generation" to think that the English word "fodder" means "poop" rather than "food".  It sure doesn't help that the prequels turned it into a mild oath "Poodoo!" where a literal translation into "fodder" doesn't make much sense.  Maybe batha's eat their own poop.  That would solve this little conundrum.

May I humbly suggest the Star Wars Rock names as featured in my my Fake Star Wars Rock Band post:

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/My-Fake-Star-Wars-Band-Rock-Band/topic/10863/

Also, CollegeHumor had a webseries called "The Office: High Times" or something like that.  One of the characters on the show claimed he could take any Star Wars name and convert it into a "weed name."

Such as:

Boba Fattie
Luke Skytoker
Hans Rollo
Leia Organic
etc...

What you might be trying to say, and what I'd agree with you: They need to return to their basics.  They don't need fresh new ideas, they need to return to the ideas that are/should be at the core of their faith.

Erm... no.  I really am just pulling your leg.

Why would anyone object to changing the thread name? 

Warbler said:

xhonzi said:

And Thomas Jefferson and I don't always see eye-to-eye either.  Such is life and politics.

remember this?

Sure.  It's another fabulous example of him and me not seeing eye-to-eye.  But the point was this: That's what small Gov't proponents wanted back in the day. 

When you say "a little bigger than the conservatives want and a little smaller than the liberals want"  we're already WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY past that point.

If he's outraging... I wouldn't know...

ALSO: I object based on the GROUNDS OF DECENCY!

Alright, C3PX... be our 4th!

So.. it looks like my local zombie slaying mandate is officially: OFF.

Anybody up for some L4D this weekend?  I tentatively suggest 6:30M/7:30C/8:30E on Friday.

Buddhism is kind of new and fresh right now?