FU - FairAndUNbalanced.com

In response to Burr Deming's Jesus Catching the Wave

Ah Burr, you are exceedingly clever, sir! Mr. Myste, you of course realize what Mr. Deming is doing with his excellent and yet goading article towards us here, don't you?

Burr, let me start by saying that, like you, I am horrified at the thought of Christ "walking on driftwood" or other such nonsense to explain the miracle of him walking on water. If one accepts the premise that Christ is the second person of the Holy Trinity and therefore God, how small one's understanding must be of our Lord to think that the God that created all things and is beyond and outside of time could not possibly walk upon the Sea of Galilee simply by choosing to do so.

That said, there are absolutely mysteries of our universe that are becoming more and more understandable to our limited human minds where science does indeed explain what faith teaches us in the creation of all that is. Myste is correct that I have indeed argued that science and God are absolutely compatible and indeed one helps to explain the other often times. If I may be so boorish, here is a link to my blog on just such a topic: http://savingcommonsense.blogspot.com/2011/02/duality-of-god-and-science-in-creation.html Somehow, I was still unable to convince JMyste of the existence of a Divine Creator though.

As for that whole "love thing" that Christ teaches, well that was the very purpose of his coming to be with us on earth as fully man and fully God. He spoke of and taught us that we should indeed love our neighbor regardless of whether he is a Jew or Gentile, and I would submit that this absolutely applies to Muslims and gays as well. Indeed, are we not all creatures of God that are endowed with His divine spark, whether we each choose to acknowledge it or not?

Now, John Myste, I find myself chuckling at your analogy of a debate between Atheism and Christianity as being akin to one side having nuclear weapons and the other having a baseball bat. The thing is though, that if one takes that baseball bat and smashes the trigger mechanism of the nuke weapon, then Atheism is required to sit there and marvel at its magnificent piece of impotent hardware that might as well now be a coffee table while they are pummeled repeatedly by that bat of love about their head and shoulders.

I would submit to you that to the secular mind, one might initially find the sides of the debate to be even more unbalanced than nukes against bats though. You see one can have the most horrific weapon of mass destruction of all in one's possession and yet still be defeated by an unarmed man. Indeed, the most powerful force on earth at the time, the Roman Empire, was ultimately defeated along with sin and death, by the love of one unarmed man that gave his human life for us all. But of course, this is just my axiom and therefore not one to which you are subjected, my friend, despite the fact that is the God honest truth. :-)

From Reuters:

Italy foiled an attempt by North Korea to import tap-dancing shoes in breach of a U.N. ban on the sale of luxury goods to Pyongyang, according to a U.N. report on the enforcement of sanctions against the North.

- More -

In response to Burr Deming's
What to Call Republican Medicare Planning

AND

Mr Paine's "Damnable Lie", also by Mr. Deming

Dang it, Burr! I regret not having had the time to respond to the first "damnable lie" posting and you broadside me with a follow up article! :-) Well, let me say that I certainly can understand your frustrations at the lawyerly parsing and semantics game being played by the Republicans, as I see this happening on both sides of the political aisle. Yes, I suppose from a technical sense, the G.O.P. is indeed ending Medicare in its current format. The implications from the left and the scare tactics that have been employed though is to make the elderly and those approaching Medicare age think that the evil Republicans are doing away with government health care for the elderly altogether. We both know that this simply is not true.

Again, I am not really a big fan of the current G.O.P. plan and I do agree with you that their plan does indeed involve vouchers, despite their loathing to call them such. That said, I fail to understand why vouchers are necessarily a bad thing. I think the plan needs to be better adapted, but I suspect they are on the right track. Seniors of sound mind or those that have family or other such advocates that can help them "shop" for the best healthcare bang for their subsidized voucher buck will be fine. I think that perhaps a non-partisan, non-profit advocacy group can be formed to help those other seniors that might need help in shopping and determining which healthcare package is best tailored to their needs. If the amount of money for these vouchers is insufficient in some cases, I would hope that the amounts could be adjusted accordingly. Regardless, free market solutions will always hold down costs through competition far better than government price controls. That is simply fact that history has shown us repeatedly.

As for the damnable lie of that advertisement, well it is indeed just that. It is scare tactic politics. It is well done and very effective though. Their casting of Nana in the role was brilliant, and the fact that she voted for Bass in the past makes her argument seem objective and non-partisan when that simply is not the case. Yes, Medicare as we know it will eventually end. If left alone, it will also die long before I come of age to partake in it too. (I am 45.) It must be reformed so as to keep the promise made to our seniors now and those that will be seniors in the future. Again, I say, I don't see a viable Democrat plan on the table to secure that necessary healthcare for our seniors regardless.

Further, I am curious what data you would cite as your proof that the cuts from this program would be going to the wealthy in the form of tax cuts, Mr. Deming. Perhaps there are specifics of which I am unaware; however, I am almost certain that any money saved in Medicare payouts would not be transferred to the rich. Such wealth redistribution would indeed be egregious, even though it is a tactic in reverse that is employed by the progressives continuously. The only current cuts in Medicare of which I am aware are the $500 billion dollars that President Obama and his Democratic minions withdrew in order to fund his un-constitutional "Affordable Health Care Act". I am sure you will inform me otherwise if I am indeed in error, my friend.