If it's Perfect
by Albert 1

# 1. 12/16/09 7:19 AM by Zjabs
Actually, my take is more that there is far too much government, and the less government, the better. And passing laws to clog my pipes is not a good use of government- let's protect the border and the Constitution- you know..the things the government is SUPPOSED to do (tell me again what the "interstate commerce" clause is supposed to cover given that I can't buy a Washington health insurance policy to cover me in New York....)

Editor's Note: Once Lieberman is finally dealt with we can work on letting you buy any health insurance you desire. I'm surprised you are complaining about a regulation that dollars to donuts is the result of lobblying by the indistry that as fra as I Am aware of is a stellar example of American Capitalism.

Report has it the Liberman's take over a twenty year period from lobbyists is one million plus.

All done without a mask and gun.

# 2. 12/16/09 10:20 AM by John
thumbsup.gif With limited liberty and no justice for no one at all. It's in WHOM we trust.(moment to moment)

Thanx John

Editor's Note: The rest of that saying is "all others pay cash".

# 3. 12/16/09 1:55 PM by Jay - OR
Interesting column. Taoism aside (imperfectly insightful in my view), I would characterize Zjabs, and this whole philosophy-of-government issue, somewhat differently.

I, like Zjabs, lean toward some absolutes--maybe not the same ones. For man, individually and collectively, to attain his full measure of creation, I too am convinced in clear limitations on government; and smaller is better in almost all areas.

Where I disagree, with Zabs and with you, is in the premises you so absolutely accept. Logic, based on false or imperfect premises, is due to fail ultimately. I'm not preaching relativism here, rather a bit broader view, and my conviction that truth can be better approached when "science" is not the only source. I'll leave it at that, for now.

Editor's Note: Nowhere in this column have I claimed that science is the only approach to Truth.

If you have gathered that from my previous writing you must have missed the ones where I stress the value of the "inner knowledge".

This approach is so abstract in its nature to clearly defies conventional logic.

I consider the human soul an inseparable part of God. Direction or guidance from it has nothing to do with logic.

It is why I consider Atonement as no more than the ridding of an illusion that our souls have ever been separated from God.

Science is a legitimate external method to arrive at Truth based on natural physical reality which the Eastern masters claim is no more than a high form of illusion.

I hope I haven't destroyed some mistaken impression you have of my paradigm when I claim here that there is an alternative path to Truth that is not what you see me as representing.

I have seen too many examples in the history of science and society where the truth was eventually found to be in one person's minority opinion that previously defied consensus.

If I had chosen the path of majority consensus to set my course through life most of my columns would now be absent.

I would probably be either a devout Catholic, Jew, or Hindu neither of which I Am not.

You seem to be confused by my obvious support of what you call "settled science".

I support science only when open ended as a tool of further discovery.

Where you seem to be missing a serious point is my support of your so called settled science theory is that I reject absolutes (absolutely)

The same can be said as to why I don't claim or have been judged by some very perceptive thinkers who know more of my being than you are exposed to via this keyboard.

They see a strong fiber of pragmatism in other material I have chosen not to post here.

The ism that is an integral part of most liberal idealists cause them to be just as absolute in their nature as any conservative.

# 4. 12/17/09 6:47 AM by John
thumbsup.gif Just a note of appreciation for your writing. The Amish X Marine Kamikazi of Peace with Honor who sees the ZEN in Citi-zen-ry-(e). Peace and Good Will Hunting. Thanx John

Editor's Note: I wonder how long it will take for you to get tired of it. Thanks John

# 5. 3/28/16 11:01 AM by little john - mount morris
thumbsup.gif In "A Perfect World", the movie,

[last lines]

Sally Gerber: You know you did everything you could. Don't you?

Chief Red Garnett: I don't know nothin'.


Chief Red Garnett: Not one damn thing.

Sally Gerber: The idea is that an understanding of the particular behavioral case histories should, in parole situations, help the subject to avoid habitual traps and, in penal escape situations could, conversely, identify those self-same traps as an aid to apprehension.

Chief Red Garnett: Let me tell you something, Miss Gerber.

Sally Gerber: Sally is fine.

Chief Red Garnett: Let me tell you something, Sally. This is not a 'penal escape situation', this here happens to be a manhunt. And no talkin' in circles is gonna fix all that.

Sally Gerber: And what will?

Chief Red Garnett: That's having a nose like a Blue Tick, pasa medulla, with an antenna and a helluva lot of coffee.

Editor's Note: :=)

# 6. 3/28/16 7:31 PM by Jay - OR
Looking back, lo these seven years, it appears to me that you and I were talking so far past each other that we could have been speaking a different language.

Editor's Note: Even that was useful in helping me know your position more clearly.

Perhaps my position was clarified a little more for you.

I do not and don't ever see our continuing dialog as any type of contest despite how sporadic it seems to be.

include comments