Thursday, February 03, 2011

The anonymous Australian editorialist makes a move through the middle, Costello comes up on the rails, but Joel Hodges wins the cup for god ...


The anonymous editorialist at The Australian - where's James Massola when he's needed most, to unmask a controversial anonymous scribbler, as he did with Greg Jericho? - leads the pack with a fine example of double edged logic, in NBN nirvana eludes Tasmania.

You see, the rag has breathlessly reported that some Tasmanians are fearful of missing out:

As we report today, the residents of the Tamar Valley support the NBN but fear they won't be connected. For them the network is close but could be 5km too far away. Without access to the NBN they believe they will be condemned to second-rate communications access, diminishing their economic, social and education prospects. As The Australian reported in December, this is the same frustration felt by the people of Brigalow in Queensland, who must endure the absurdity of seeing the NBN cable pass through their community without being able to connect.

Oh the poor Taswegians.

But not to worry. It turns out these very same Tasmanians are deluded, misguided, hopeless, useless losers and dropkicks, mislead by the government into believing that the NBN might in some way be helpful.

There are many ways to deliver adequate broadband, as the millions of Australians who currently use excellent wireless or copper-wire connectivity can attest. In his State of the Union address last week, US President Barack Obama focused on improved connectivity, but through a high-speed wireless network.

Excellent copper-wire connectivity. Waiter, bring me what that man is drinking, I need an alternative reality check.

Yep, and there are many ways to believe that the anonymous editorialist is fucked in the head, with his or her's ongoing support of copper or the unwavering notion that wireless is a better solution.

Not that this debate is a competition between technologies ...

Actually it is just that, oh mealy mouthed gherkinish editorialist, as you've just done. But do go on stirring the pot:

... rather the point is that a range of technologies can satisfy a variety of different needs. Australia is throwing all its eggs into the optical-fibre basket, dismantling legacy networks along the way, without a proper cost-benefit analysis, thereby taking a major technology risk with a staggering sum of taxpayers' money.

Oh yes, rather the point is The Australian's relentless crusade and inane talking points, same as it ever was, and you have to admire the anonymous editorialist's capacity for maintaing the rage, way beyond the level of even the most fundamentalist Whitlam supporter. But remember this, for anyone interested in teaching logic at high school level - perhaps in a plain English class - you're damned if you miss out on the NBN and damned if you get it when you might instead have the joys of excellent copper wire connectivity ...

Meanwhile, if you've got a strong stomach, you might care to read Miranda the Devine in full war cry over the war on drugs, in Every toke, snort, pop or line is a hypocrisy. But I was so over-whelmed, I immediately had to take a sip on a strong double scotch, as a way to drown out any thoughts of hypocrisy ... then got into my car and ran over a nun and a kid (bonus one hundred points) before crashing into a pre-school and finding myself in the emergency ward devouring taxpayers dollars.

Bring on prohibition, I say, and the sooner the better, and the first drink Miranda the Devine takes in secret, by golly let me be the one to nobble her and send her down ...

But the main course today must be the impeccable timing of Peter Costello offering up Flood tax a slap in the face for those who dug deep. Flood? Where's the old dinosaur been?

This week it's a cyclone, and as he rabbits on about the welfare state, and trots out all the standard ideological clap trap, to be expected as he saunters around his comfortable Victorian habitats, why there's Mal Farr gone all socialist and welfare state, in Yasi set to blow some perspective into levy debate.

Blow some perspective into Peter Costello and the levy debate? There's never been a big enough cyclone anywhere on earth to blow some perspective up Costello's pompous bum ...

Meanwhile, it wouldn't be a genuine crisis or a catastrophe, without - in much the same way as a Sarah Palin - a Christian trotting out the news that the cyclone is actually all about them and the existence of god, and Joel Hodge does a splendid job in A response: Disasters do not negate the existence of God.

Christianity has been contemplating the question of God and evil, including natural disasters, for centuries. There are different responses and approaches, but let me give a sample that may be helpful. Firstly, it should be stated that the existence of human freedom or natural disasters does not imply that God is not all-powerful or all-knowing.

Uh huh. So She's all powerful and all knowing and therefore completely responsible for everything going down at the moment. Talk about an act of god, please send the claim your friendly insurer recently rejected to your nearest friendly church, explaining that they should finally take some credit and responsibility for all these wanton, irresponsible acts of god (and blaming it on nature doesn't get her off the hook).

Oh wait, I see that's wrong:

To make this argument is to make a rational mistake by equating God with what God creates: the very fact that we have a created universe means that we have something distinct from God that God does not manipulate, control or envelope in himself. God’s power does not, then, rest on controlling creation.

Sheesh, you mean I wasted all that time on prayer, when the chief clock-maker, having created his clock, retreated to Olympus for a two thousand year time out? You mean the useless wretch isn't to hand to help control creation. Is that why my partner's football team loses week in and out?

There's a lot more blather, explaining how god moves amongst us, but doesn't move amongst us, but why ruin your fun with a spoiler. Meanwhile ...

... the question remains: if God is really loving, why allow suffering or disaster? We may not ever be able to give a complete answer to this, but part of the answer lies in recognising that love does not mean control.

As any parent knows, love can mean letting go even when it may result in their child suffering, because real relationships and personal maturity require freedom and a life not subject to constant manipulation.

Indeed. That's the very thing I said to my child when he clambered on to the roof in his Superman suit, and said he was going to fly.

I explained that he wouldn't actually fly, he'd fall to earth with a very large thump and do himself a serious injury, but that it was part of my theory of life that real relationships and personal maturity require freedom, and a life not subject to constant manipulation, and so he had to come to his own understanding of things.

And whaddya know, the silly bugger jumped, and he couldn't fly, and now he's with god, and she can take care of his toys ...

Now you might think this callous, or perhaps careless of me, but it seems that I was just doing god's work:

But doesn’t love also mean protecting us? Love does not involve protecting us from having a real and full life by locking us away and giving us the “good” parts and taking the “bad” parts, however much we would like that.

So next time your child clambers on to the roof, don't worry if he might fall off. You shouldn't lock him away from the good bits - a grand view of the city - up against the bad bits, which after all might only be a broken arm, a broken leg, or a premature trip to paradise to sit alongside the eternal She, who keeps punishing the world for putting useless men in charge of things and allowing them to scribble nonsense for The Punch ...

Meanwhile, there's a handy saving for the budget, which we offer free of charge, involving the $151 million spent on chaplain services for some 2500 schools, and pledged a further $222 million (by the atheist Gillard to extend the program for four years as an election boondoggle), thereby providing chaplains no doubt busy explaining to their charges how sojourning on the school roof is one of the good parts of life ... much better than having a fag or a shag or a joint in the toilet, though no doubt they're good bits too ...

Just don't tell Miranda the Devine ...


(Below: and now a couple of cartoons, found here for John Howard, and here at Maralyn Parker for Menai High).




1 comment:

  1. Marvellous. You'll be writing for The Daily, soon, I hope.

    ReplyDelete

Comments older than two days are moderated and there will be a delay in publishing them.