tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post6212955698672577189..comments2024-03-28T12:42:22.578-07:00Comments on CONTRARY BRIN: Science Fiction media and more David Brinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comBlogger39125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-70060080576451474512019-07-30T13:01:15.247-07:002019-07-30T13:01:15.247-07:00onward
onward
onward<br /><br />onward<br />David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-72813794190242824032019-07-30T09:00:25.168-07:002019-07-30T09:00:25.168-07:00Twinkle, twinkle, little star,
Now we know just wh...<i>Twinkle, twinkle, little star,<br />Now we know just what you are:<br />A ball of plasma bright, they say,<br />That is oh so far away -<br />Twinkle, twinkle, little star,<br />How can we get to where you are?</i><br /><br />Then again, my kids always preferred Voltaire's "Goodnight Demonslayer" as a lullaby. Perhaps not coincidentally, they had very few nightmares...Jon S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/13585842845661267920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-91259303829067989582019-07-30T05:15:41.530-07:002019-07-30T05:15:41.530-07:00Alfred Differ:
Irregardless always rubbed me wron...Alfred Differ:<br /><i><br />Irregardless always rubbed me wrong, but my mother taught me to react with more anger to "ain't".<br /></i><br /><br />I had a mother and a grandmother who were teachers. "Ain't" was always the traditional bugaboo of English teachers who insisted that it was not a real word. However, "irregardless" bothers me because there's no point. It means the same thing as "regardless", and the extra "ir-" would usually mean "a different thing, in fact the opposite thing" from the word that follows, but instead just means "the same thing as". I know this isn't really the case, but the <b>impression</b> I get when I hear someone say "irregardless" is that they're intentionally trying to sound illiterate. Same with "Democrat Party".<br /><br /><i><br />Progressives took 'liberal' and made it almost its opposite by enabling an authoritarian interpretation the right-wingers are using to bash them now. <br /></i><br /><br />Exactly what bothers me about "irregardless". :)<br /><br />But seriously, I grew up in the 60s, and I still think of "liberals" as more hippie "Do your own thing, man!" types than as the nanny state Thought Police that right wingers portray us as. I'm not convinced that Frank Luntz is entirely our own fault.<br /><br /><i><br />Not that right-wingers are less authoritarian, mind you. It's frustrating to face a ballot where my choices are between authoritarians and no one remembers the other option.<br /></i><br /><br />Here, I agree. Back in the late 70s/early 80s, before I had heard of Ayn Rand or any particular Libertarians, I thought of myself as a small-l libertarian because I thought government should stay out of personal business until and unless it was required to mediate between <b>competing</b> personal business. I stopped using the word when it became clear that the right had hijacked it to imply something more like "Government should not exist at all," which to me leads inevitably to the law of the jungle in which the richest and most powerful entities are free to use force and fraud all they wish.<br /><br /><i><br />As for tilting at the tribalism windmill, good luck with that...Think about all the people who will say good things about their spouses and marriages even though they know in their hearts that a flood is sweeping it all away.<br /></i><br /><br />I'm not trying to wipe out tribalism, but to point out the inevitable consequence. If you stand behind your wife even when you know she's being offensive, then don't be surprised when people find <b>you</b> offensive too. You can't say "Well, I defended her in public, but in my heart of hearts, I knew she was wrong, so don't blame me for <b>her</b> excesses." I mean, you can, but it won't have much credibility.<br /><br />That's what I was trying to say about the labels of both "Christianity" and "libertarian". If you line up behind the public faces of the tribe, then don't be surprised when the tribe is viewed by others as being like those public faces. It <b>is</b> being that way, even if individual members are lukewarm about that fact.<br /><br />And remember, this was simply in response to the question about <b>Why</b> people automatically ascribe the characteristics of the most visible members of a tribe to the tribe as a whole. I feel I've answered that question, and you just don't like the answer.Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-10334200082757138642019-07-30T04:46:23.654-07:002019-07-30T04:46:23.654-07:00Alfred Differ:
It's so nice to hear some empat...Alfred Differ:<br />It's so nice to hear some empathy and even camaraderie for those caught in a trap. Human nature has indeed ensnared us all. Happily, there is a ghost in this machine, and it ponders the stars. Hinted at by Mary Shelley, brought into full bloom during the Golden Age, and alive and well in the darkest corners of our little planet.<br /><br />First and last lines from a truly great lullaby:<br />Twinkle, twinkle, little star,<br />How I wonder what you are.<br />...<br />Though I know not what you are,<br />Twinkle, twinkle, little star.<br /><br /><br />Not who, where, or even why, but <b>what</b>. Where's Bill Nye when you need him?scidatahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04992209167553267488noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-23323453658501217022019-07-30T04:44:02.634-07:002019-07-30T04:44:02.634-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.scidatahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04992209167553267488noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-14359840722222532132019-07-29T22:24:28.520-07:002019-07-29T22:24:28.520-07:00Larry,
Okay. You are essentially saying the commo...Larry,<br /><br />Okay. You are essentially saying the common person builds a working definition of 'libertarian' that equates to the political party identity 'Libertarian' that equates to what the most vocal zealots lead them to believe it is. Glenn Beck said he was a libertarian, therefore…<br /><br />Very well. As long as you aren't trying to convince us that you've taken that approach, I'll live with it like I've had to learn to live with the theft of 'liberal'. You've actually met libertarians (online) who demonstrate the failure of that lazy working definition, so we won't let YOU do it without a challenge.<br /><br />[Irregardless always rubbed me wrong, but my mother taught me to react with more anger to "ain't". I waited many, many years into independent adulthood before I would use it in very informal settings.]<br /><br />Progressives took 'liberal' and made it almost its opposite by enabling an authoritarian interpretation the right-wingers are using to bash them now. Not that right-wingers are less authoritarian, mind you. It's frustrating to face a ballot where my choices are between authoritarians and no one remembers the other option. THAT'S what has many classical liberals annoyed. Blood was shed for that idea.<br /><br />As for tilting at the tribalism windmill, good luck with that. Who among us pointed out the lovely little book by Bob Altemeyer? That windmill is real and composed of bricks made of 'human nature.' The best I can offer you when people suggest Two Scoops is their standard bearer is they are making @#$T up too out of a desperate need not to look at the shape of the trap within which they are caught. Think about all the people who will say good things about their spouses and marriages even though they know in their hearts that a flood is sweeping it all away. Denial is a difficult river to cross and people rightly fear drowning. [I think I've merged and mangled enough metaphors for the night, don't you?] 8)Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-48459185534095785112019-07-29T22:11:31.559-07:002019-07-29T22:11:31.559-07:00"The plot-free TFA at least had some interest..."The plot-free TFA at least had some interesting characters whose backstories were worth expanding on."<br />Exactly. JJ Abrams is a GENIUS at characters and dialogue! And those are hard!!<br /><br />Alas, he has no sense of plot and I suspect he suspects this and resents it, refusing to hire people who could help him overcome a limitation. Our loss.<br /><br />Jerry E. I have spoken at libertarian events. Freedom Fests and once an LP convention! I try to wean some back to Adam Smith and to the c-word "competition," which in turn justifies liberal programs that uplift children an d empower them to compete.<br />David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-87037572732588625632019-07-29T19:14:48.235-07:002019-07-29T19:14:48.235-07:00I agree with David about how little it takes to re...I agree with David about how little it takes to redeem some of the SW films (I once tinkered a bit with <a href="http://randomised.blogspot.com/2005/09/redemption-of-darth-vader.html" rel="nofollow">Revenge of the Sith</a>). I can't say I can be bothered with the latest instalments. The plot-free TFA at least had some interesting characters whose backstories were worth expanding on. However, those backstories were comprehensively blowtorched by the equally plot-free Last Jedi, which reminded me of "Fury Road" in having the longest and *slowest* action vehicle sequences I've ever seen.<br />Anyway, have fun with Skywalker Rising. I don't I'll be going. (Gotta keep them porgs offa my lawn!)Tony Fiskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14578160528746657971noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-67183261077848631442019-07-29T17:18:48.437-07:002019-07-29T17:18:48.437-07:00I don't like for the conversation to drift too...I don't like for the conversation to drift too far away from David's original post, but since Larry brought up the subject yesterday, I should make one additional thing clear.<br /><br />The one and only reason that I am registered to vote with the state of Colorado as a Libertarian is so that no one will be confused about my personal philosophy. In the state of Colorado, voter registration records are very easily available to anyone on the internet.<br /><br />Most people are scientifically illiterate, and I have written a lot about scientific matters on the internet.<br /><br />I have been rather vocal about the seriousness of climate change. Many people seem to believe that human-caused climate change was invented by the Democratic Party. This is one way that many Republicans actively display their scientific illiteracy.<br /><br />I have also written very extensively on the internet about the dangers of nuclear EMP and severe solar storms and about the importance of disaster preparation and the development of resilient societies that can resist threats to the collapse of our fragile electrical and electronic infrastructures. Large numbers of people seem to believe that these are issues that were fabricated by the Republican Party members. This is the way many Democratic Party members actively display their ignorance of science and of modern technological fragility.<br /><br />Even though a lot of Libertarian Party candidates are crackpots, being registered with the state as a Libertarian Party voter is a way of distancing myself from the scientifically-illiterate crackpots of the major parties (who are far more dangerous). I know that it is a very imperfect solution, but it seemed to be the best of the other imperfect options.<br />Jerry Emanuelsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14401970213448886158noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-20492934495143338192019-07-29T16:12:34.560-07:002019-07-29T16:12:34.560-07:00Larry Hart said:
Same for libertarians. If you do...Larry Hart said:<br /><br /><i>Same for libertarians. If you don't take back your own word, or if you'll vote for the "Libertarian" candidate even if you disagree with his definition, then you're effectively part of the Libertarian Party.</i><br /><br />I essentially agree with everything that Alfred just said on this matter.<br /><br />I've been trying to take the word "libertarian" back for nearly a half-century. I sometimes regret not taking the ten-minute drive to the meetings where the Libertarian Party was being formed in order to make my doubts and objections to formation of the political party known more clearly and more emphatically. I was personally invited to participate, and I'm sure that I would have (at least) been welcomed as a neutral observer. <b>I don't believe, however, that my objections to what they were doing would have been taken very seriously at the time. They were pretty narrowly focused on what they were doing.</b><br /><br />I was sufficiently opposed to the formation of a "Libertarian Party" that, at the time, I just wanted nothing to do with it. Also, some of the most important meetings in the formation of the Libertarian Party happened to be scheduled on exactly the same nights that I was leading a libertarian discussion group, and I would have had to abandon that group to attend the political party meetings.<br /><br />Also, note that all of my postings on Contrary Brin last week were part of my decades-long effort to take back the more-inclusive meaning of the word "libertarian." If anyone doesn't like the present narrow definition of the word, then there are few people in the world than me who can more rightfully say, "Don't blame me. I told you so."<br /><br />Regarding my current involvement with the Libertarian Party, I don't have any direct involvement at all. I am, however, currently registered to vote with the state of Colorado as a Libertarian. I usually don't vote for individual candidates. (I usually leave most of those blank, only voting on questions on constitutional amendments, propositions, etc.) <br /><br />The only presidential candidate that I have ever voted for in my life is Gary Johnson. As for always voting for the Libertarian candidate, I did say on this forum last week that, of the candidates now running for president, the one I would vote for is Tulsi Gabbard. I stand by that statement. Last time that I checked, she was not a member of the Libertarian Party (although she does seem to be gaining a fair amount of libertarian support). <br /><br /> <br />Jerry Emanuelsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14401970213448886158noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-3731045044526546652019-07-29T16:02:27.299-07:002019-07-29T16:02:27.299-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Jerry Emanuelsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14401970213448886158noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-80763159047269727312019-07-29T14:04:08.707-07:002019-07-29T14:04:08.707-07:00Brian thanks for excellent news re the Expanse.Brian thanks for excellent news re the Expanse.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-60236592512024284982019-07-29T13:58:48.904-07:002019-07-29T13:58:48.904-07:00Alfred Differ:
I am not knocking you, but Jerry h...Alfred Differ:<br /><i><br />I am not knocking you, but Jerry has been at this long enough he could rightly say ‘I told ya so’ to everyone who wanted to create the actual political party and then lost control of it to the very people that worried Jerry. It is exhausting and at some point... we admit to the futility. As with taking back ‘liberal’, we make some small distinction and move onward.<br /></i><br /><br />I get that Jerry has history and that you are closely involved with it. I'm not trying to denigrate his frustration at watching exactly what he knew would go wrong going wrong with everyone else going, "Who could have known?" It's the story of my life too.<br /><br />I was just trying to answer his specific question about why outsiders seem to automatically equate "libertarians" with the worst excesses of big-L Libertarians, saying it's because that's what I've come to expect from anyone who announces himself as a libertarian without further clarification.<br /><br /><i><br />Hmm… How do you propose we take back the word? Language is notoriously difficult to own. <br /></i><br /><br />You probably can't. You just shouldn't be surprised each time someone perceives the word to mean what it means now. Just as I shouldn't be surprised each time someone uses "irregardless", even though doing so justifies homicide. :)<br /><br /><i><br />The word many of us would take back is ‘liberal’. Progressives should NOT be using it, but they outnumber us and made it their own. <br /></i><br /><br />Heh. Funny, I thought liberals came to use "progressive" because right-wingers had successfully turned "liberal" into a toxic label.<br /><br /><i><br />As for voting for someone when we disagree with his or her definition, everyone does that. It is the fundamental compromise people make in a political system that allows for parties.<br /></i><br /><br />Compromise is fine. Tribalism is not. It's one thing to vote for Trump even though you think he's uncouth because he gives you tax cuts and deregulation. It's another to vote for him even though you think he's uncouth because he's the standard bearer of conservatism and Christianity, and those are your team. I mean, you're <b>allowed</b> to do the latter, but when you do, you shouldn't be surprised why others think "conservatism" and "Christianity" are now exemplified by Donald Trump.<br />Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-72077785306263029842019-07-29T13:17:01.413-07:002019-07-29T13:17:01.413-07:00History rhymes, but people who think the parallel ...History rhymes, but people who think the parallel between Rome’s collapse into empire and a US collapse out of empire have a steep burden to argue.<br /><br />1. The US has more people in it today than the entire world had during the height of Roman power. That means our institutions have a great deal more inertia for resisting change AND preventing it from happening. [Ask your typical USian which nation has the most people and many can get it right. Ask about #2 and we might get it right. Ask about #3, though, and you will learn about our ignorance of ourselves.]<br /><br />2. Many in our institutions ARE educated, thus they will not miss the rhyming couplets.<br /><br />3. There is a great deal of truth in the notion that one person with a high velocity rifle can sow chaos and make a hash of the elaborate plans of powerful people. No conspiracies are necessary to explain events when a million people are individually powerful, thus the rhyming couplets might be statistical noise. We spot patterns in noise often enough we should assume a non-zero probability for doing it again.<br /><br />When presented with multiple-choice questions for why historical event X happened, I usually chose ‘all of the above’ if the setting is complex… which it usually is.<br />Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-30526827181532729132019-07-29T12:51:29.601-07:002019-07-29T12:51:29.601-07:00Larry,
Same for libertarians. If you don't t...Larry,<br /><br /><i> Same for libertarians. If you don't take back your own word, or if you'll vote for the "Libertarian" candidate even if you disagree with his definition, then you're effectively part of the Libertarian Party. And if you--Jerry--don't do that, then I'm not condemning you. Just explaining the terms that I'm using. </i><br /><br />Hmm… How do you propose we take back the word? Language is notoriously difficult to own. The word many of us would take back is ‘liberal’. Progressives should NOT be using it, but they outnumber us and made it their own. Nowadays we have to distinguish between ‘modern liberal’ and ‘classical liberal’ as though the differences were matters of degree. They aren’t that small when it comes to certain parts of the belief system.<br /><br />As for voting for someone when we disagree with his or her definition, everyone does that. It is the fundamental compromise people make in a political system that allows for parties.<br /><br />I am not knocking you, but Jerry has been at this long enough he could rightly say ‘I told ya so’ to everyone who wanted to create the actual political party and then lost control of it to the very people that worried Jerry. It is exhausting and at some point... we admit to the futility. As with taking back ‘liberal’, we make some small distinction and move onward.<br /><br />Jerry is a self-admitted libertarian, but not a Libertarian. If he is not registered with the party, he gets to make that small distinction and save himself from the association. I AM registered with the local (county level) party and avoid registration with the state and national parties. That too is a small distinction, but it matters because it is my way of signaling that the larger party groups have no business being on general election ballots… yet. Getting past primary season is difficult for small party candidates here in California, so that actually works as a TRUE distinction. Jerry argues they should not have organized. I argue that they should pay attention to local politics until party members can demonstrate they represent more than a sliver of the electorate.<br /><br />So… when y’all (progressives mostly) want to surrender ‘liberal’ back to us, let us know and we will be able to consider abandoning ‘libertarian.’ 8)Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-67359009058677016422019-07-29T11:06:24.720-07:002019-07-29T11:06:24.720-07:00Fascinating list, Dr. Brin, you've successfull...Fascinating list, Dr. Brin, you've successfully added multiple content to my "must consume" list that already far exceeds any reasonable projection of my lifespan (something in my household referred to as "literary mortality").<br /><br />Now, if nobody else is going to bring it up, I will. There have been exactly two television productions that have echoed the SF books of my youth--that approach (no TV will ever equal them, and given my emotional attachment, likely no other form of media either) those classics of Asimov, of Clarke, of Heinlein. The first was Babylon 5--I'll never forget the premiere of the pilot, where a couple of minutes in one of the StarFury fighters did a proper "flip and burn" maneuver. For some reason I was standing, and I immediately dropped to the footstool behind me, mouth agape. This of course on top of having a proper O'Neill colony... Hook, line and sinker. Sweated through the next five years with the rest of the fanbase wondering if Straczynski was going to get the chance to complete his story. Obviously he did--with predictable adjustments as he had to react to the vagaries of Warners and the rest. But he got it done. When it ended, I never thought I'd see its like again. At least not onscreen. Happily, I was wrong. It only took twenty years, but it seems to have the same nine-lives quality B5 had.<br /><br />The Expanse.<br /><br />Perfect? No. And having done my homework, the criticisms of our host were noted--and I hope he's correct by the way, given that the primary criticism consisted of it being too pessimistic about resource distribution with access to the riches of the asteroid belt...<br /><br />It's real, dyed-in-the-wool space opera in the grand tradition. It even has the advantage of adaptation from actual novels, rather than originating as a screenplay. This can annoy purists who complain of changes from the source material, but I heard an excellent description at Comic-Con (I forget which panel) that really struck me--that the written and filmed versions of a story are sisters, not twins. I like that--and it supports my approach of reading the novels before watching it brought to life.<br /><br />The first three seasons have been a delightful and compelling romp, and from what I've been hearing, the story gets even better from here. Say what you will about Bezos and Prime Video, they've got an impressive track record of quality content. The production values and storytelling of <i>The Man in the High Castle</i> has been some of the best <i>television</i> I think I've ever seen.<br /><br />And now, with the announcement of S5, before the release of S4, leads me to believe Amazon is all in on this one--esp. since Bezos himself is not only apparently a huge fan of the books, but was annoyed when SyFy picked it up initially. He can also have it made for his own amusement for what for him is pocket change. Producers seem pretty savvy, too. No spoilers here, as this was in the Comic-Con trailer; The <i>Rocinante</i>, (our main characters ship) was recently refitted to allow for planetary landing--using landing struts that appear to have been cribbed from those on <i>New Shepard</i>. Well played, Naren, well played.<br /><br />--BrianBrianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14790940811516767905noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-3756425569108681902019-07-29T09:43:02.443-07:002019-07-29T09:43:02.443-07:00Deuxglass, there's also a school of thought, w...Deuxglass, there's also a school of thought, with far more factual support behind it, that John F. Kennedy was killed by a lunatic who thought it would impress the KGB so much that they'd hire him, and that people since then have spun conspiracy theories around it because they don't like the thought that one crazy person in the right (wrong?) place can create so very much chaos.<br /><br />OTOH, given Bobby Kennedy's enthusiasm for nukes (he reportedly argued in favor of deploying them in Vietnam and using them to destroy the missile bases in Cuba), maybe Sirhan Sirhan was actually a time traveler here to stop RFK from being elected president and subsequently starting WW3...Jon S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/13585842845661267920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-8257308990455712002019-07-28T23:53:43.291-07:002019-07-28T23:53:43.291-07:00Heh, all the last 4...
Heh, all the last 4...<br />David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-23025338798355836752019-07-28T23:37:08.537-07:002019-07-28T23:37:08.537-07:00Thank you very much for the edit!Thank you very much for the edit!Quinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10915328269552072831noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-9525568787720030312019-07-28T20:22:07.016-07:002019-07-28T20:22:07.016-07:00Dali is what would have happened if Harpo could pa...Dali is what would have happened if Harpo could paint. Paint a foot long pencil thin mustache on Harpo and lose the fright wig. Have those two ever been seen together. For that matter, have they ever been seen separately? Zepp Jamiesonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03024670772812706971noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-56229802672686577452019-07-28T18:32:10.397-07:002019-07-28T18:32:10.397-07:00@Dr Brin:
Quin. Done! - Brin
I thought that was...@Dr Brin:<br /><i><br />Quin. Done! - Brin<br /></i><br /><br />I thought that was some allusion to Qui-Gon Jinn. :)<br /><br />Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-55202732678790861572019-07-28T18:26:45.976-07:002019-07-28T18:26:45.976-07:00@TCB,
Yes, they blame Jar-Jar, but they miss the ...@TCB,<br /><br />Yes, they blame Jar-Jar, but they miss the point that Qui-Gon was responsible for bringing Jar-Jar along. At the time, I wondered why he made that decision, and came to the conclusion that it was simply because it was funny. But maybe there was method to the madness?Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-41622533068817566262019-07-28T16:13:30.340-07:002019-07-28T16:13:30.340-07:00I agree with your assessment of Love Death and Rob...I agree with your assessment of Love Death and Robots. One of my favorite surprises of the last year in entertainment. Did not expect it to be good - instead it was great. I told all my friends to check it out. Not one would watch it. matthewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17757867868731829206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-34135347274010741622019-07-28T15:26:21.265-07:002019-07-28T15:26:21.265-07:00@ Larry Hart, re: Jar Jar Binks. Robot Chicken got...@ Larry Hart, re: Jar Jar Binks. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7Uc84U04Sk" rel="nofollow">Robot Chicken got you covered.</a>TCBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08153506222271955110noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-13539812904390976352019-07-28T11:30:49.328-07:002019-07-28T11:30:49.328-07:00Quin. Done! - BrinQuin. Done! - BrinDavid Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.com