Yearly Archives: 2011

Van Gogh Portrait Purchased for a Mere $3,000

vincent-van-gogh-portrait-jeanne-donnadieuThe art world is buzzing after news broke that a British couple reportedly purchased the only full-length Vincent Van Gogh portrait in existence for a mere 1,500 pounds ($3,000).

The potentially priceless picture was originally listed on an auction website as simply ‘portrait of a man,’ but after extensive research, Michael and Mandy Cruickshank believe the work – thought to have been drawn by Van Gogh’s neighbor – is of the legendary Dutch impressionist, who died in 1890.

The Cruickshank’s, who call themselves “amateur collectors,” aren’t the only ones that think their find is the “real deal” – several art historians, who found several clues in the drawing (and behind it) that point to its authenticity, also share their feelings.

“We compared the painting with a well known self portrait, two other portraits and a photo of Van Gogh from the period. We were hampered slightly because it was a pastel drawing which is less clear, but there is a good case for it being Van Gogh,” the Daily Mail quoted Caroline Erolin, a lecturer in medical and forensic art, as saying.

Among the clues that could possibly validate the artwork is the phrase “L’Incompris” (“The Misunderstood”) – words Van Gogh himself was famous for writing on his own walls – scrawled on the wall in the pastel.

Another is apparently the address scrawled on the back of the paper, 17 Rue Victor Massi.

The Cruickshanks discovered that the road’s name – changed in 1887 – was previously Rue Laval, the same Paris street where Van Gogh and his brother Theo lived.

“There is no way to prove for certain that the subject is Van Gogh, but the evidence is so strong that we are quite certain it is him,” Mrs Cruickshank said regarding the clues.

The portrait is currently being displayed in Abbey Walk Gallery, Grimsby, UK, until September 3. If authenticated, the Cruickshanks say the drawing (seen below) could be worth millions.

I have been going through the characters referenced in Woody Allen’s latest film “Midnight in Paris.” I only have a few characters left. Today is Vincent van Gogh who actually is not mentioned but his painting “The Starry Night” is featured in the poster to promote the movie.

The Starry Night

Vincent van Gogh (Dutch, 1853-1890)

Saint Rémy, June 1889. Oil on canvas, 29 x 36 1/4″ (73.7 x 92.1 cm). Acquired through the Lillie P. Bliss Bequest

Vincent van Gogh. The Starry Night. Saint Rémy, June 1889

Van Gogh Brings Color to Woody Allen’s ‘Midnight in Paris’ Poster

March 17, 2011
Source: Yahoo
by Alex Billington

Woody Allen's Midnight in Paris

While I’ve been covering Woody Allen films these last few years, I haven’t been that impressed by any of the posters. His last film, You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger, had a rather boring poster and Whatever Works’ was bland, too. Now we finally have a poster that is at least colorful, though it borrows from the brilliance of another artist. Yahoo has debuted the poster for Woody Allen’s Midnight in Paris, his new rom-com with a cast of: Owen Wilson, seen strolling the streets below, Rachel McAdams, Marion Cotillard, Kathy Bates, Adrien Brody and Léa Seydoux. And if you don’t know, that’s Vincent van Gogh’s Starry Night they’re using.

Woody Allen's Midnight in Paris Poster

Midnight in Paris is a wonderful love letter to Paris“, declared Festival director Thierry Frémaux in the press release. “It’s a film in which Woody Allen takes a deeper look at the issues raised in his last films: our relationship with history, art, pleasure and life. His 41st feature reveals once again his inspiration.” You may also remember it was officially announcedthat Woody Allen’s Midnight in Paris will be the opening film of the upcoming 64th Cannes Film Festival this summer. As always, I’m not sure what to expect with every new Woody Allen movie, but at least they’re starting off quite well.

Review: Midnight in Paris

Notre Dame. Montmatre. Sacre Coeur. It would be unfair to say that the streets of Paris serve as a backdrop for Woody Allen’s latest romantic comedy Midnight in Paris. Rather, the city itself takes center stage, playing the role of life-changer to Owen Wilson’s neurotic screenwriter/novelist/lovable doofus/youthful Woody Allen-substitute. Paris walks into the protagonist’s life, overwhelms the screen, and tricks the audience into believing that Midnight in Paris is Woody Allen’s return to his 1970s heyday (it’s not). Nevertheless, I’ll be the first to admit that I am more than happy to be tricked by Allen’s magical characterization of the City of Lights in Midnight in Paris.

Early on in the film, Owen Wilson’s character Gil and his fiance Inez (played by Rachel McAdams) visit the Versailles Palace on a sunny afternoon. They are accompanied by Inez’s former professor Paul (Michael Sheen) and his girlfriend Wendy (Mimi Kennedy). Inez flirts with Paul, who pedantically serves as unofficial tour guide. It’s all so familiar to Allen fans. Meanwhile, Gil, a successful screenwriter working unsuccessfully on his first novel, takes in the palace with a warm sentimentality that drives the film through the heart of Paris marked by nostalgia and the romantic past.

The same adulterous entanglements that occupy much of Allen’s filmography are at work here, and McAdams’ Inez is the “obnoxious shrew” at her worst (and I don’t mean that in a complimentary, Penelope Cruz in Vicky Cristina Barcelonakind of way). Paris’s female actors struggle with their surface-only, flat characters, and the adultery is worthy of an eye roll among tired audiences.

Shortly after the scene at Versailles, Midnight in Paris picks up the pace when Gil finds himself wandering the Parisian streets at midnight. He whimsically joins a friendly party in their vintage car and soon discovers that he is now in 1920s Jazz Age Paris, carousing with artists and expatriates including Scott and Zelda Fitzgerald, Ernest Hemingway, Gertrude Stein, Pablo Picasso, and Salvidor Dali. In the wrong hands, such a scenario would never have worked, but Allen lets the campy atmosphere simmer and the absurdity never seems unreasonable. Gil takes the advice of his new friends and revisits the problematic novel he’s been working on. The more Allen pushes the boundaries into 1920s Paris, the more enchanting and endearing Midnight in Paris becomes.

Despite grating flaws in the female characters and a frustratingly contrived ending, all is forgiven for Midnight in Paris due to its nostalgic energy and the overwhelming charm of the main character—the city of Paris. Allen has proved time and again that he thrives in character studies about tourists in his favorite cities, and it’s safe to assume that he truly loves Paris.

_________________________________________________

Vincent van Gogh Biography

Vincent van Gogh (March 30, 1853 – July 29, 1890) is generally considered the greatest Dutch painter after Rembrandt, though he had little success during his lifetime. Van Gogh produced all of his work (some 900 paintings and 1100 drawings) during a period of only 10 years before he succumbed to mental illness (possibly bipolar disorder) and committed suicide. His fame grew rapidly after his death especially following a showing of 71 of van Gogh’s paintings in Paris on March 17, 1901 (11 years after his death).

(Properly the name rhymes with loch, but it is also pronounced ‘goph’, ‘go’ and ‘goe’.)

Van Gogh’s influence on expressionism, fauvism and early abstraction was enormous, and can be seen in many other aspects of 20th-century art. The Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam is dedicated to Van Gogh’s work and that of his contemporaries.

Several paintings by Van Gogh rank among the most expensive paintings in the world. On March 30, 1987 Van Gogh’s painting Irises was sold for a record $53.9 million at Southeby’s, New York. On May 15, 1990 his Portrait of Doctor Gachet was sold for $82.5 million at Christie’s, thus establishing a new price record (see also List of most expensive paintings).

Life and Work

Vincent was born in Zundert, The Netherlands; his father was a protestant minister, a profession that Vincent found appealing and to which he would be drawn to a certain extent later in his life. His sister described him as a serious and introspective child.

Vincent van Gogh Grave

At age 16 Vincent started to work for the art dealer Goupil & Co. in The Hague. His four years younger brother Theo, with whom Vincent cherished a life long friendship, would join the company later. This friendship is amply documented in a vast amount of letters they sent each other. These letters have been preserved and were published in 1914. They provide a lot of insight into the life of the painter, and show him to be a talented writer with a keen mind. Theo would support Vincent financially throughout his life.

In 1873, his firm transferred him to London, then to Paris. He became increasingly interested in religion; in 1876 Goupil dismissed him for lack of motivation. He became a teaching assistant in Ramsgate near London, then returned to Amsterdam to study theology in 1877.

After dropping out in 1878, he became a layman preacher in Belgium in a poor mining region known as the Borinage. He even preached down in the mines and was extremely concerned with the lot of the workers. He was dismissed after 6 months and continued without pay. During this period he started to produce charcoal sketches.

In 1880, Vincent van Gogh followed the suggestion of his brother Theo and took up painting in earnest. For a brief period Vincent took painting lessons from Anton Mauve at The Hague. Although Vicent and Anton soon split over divergence of artistic views, influences of the Hague School of painting would remain in Vincents work, notably in the way he played with light and in the looseness of his brush strokes. However his usage of colours, favouring dark tones, set him apart from his teacher.

In 1881 he declared his love to his widowed cousin Kee Vos, who rejected him. Later he would move in with the prostitute Sien Hoornik and her children and considered marrying her; his father was strictly against this relationship and even his brother Theo advised against it. They later separated.

Impressed and influenced by Jean-Francois Millet, van Gogh focussed on painting peasants and rural scenes. He moved to the Dutch province Drenthe, later to Nuenen, North Brabant, also in The Netherlands. Here he painted in 1885.

In the winter of 1885-1886 Van Gogh attended the art academy of Antwerp, Belgium. This proved a disappointment as he was dismissed after a few months by his Professor. Van Gogh did however get in touch with Japanese art during this period, which he started to collect eagerly. He admired its bright colors, use of canvas space and the role lines played in the picture. These impressions would influence him strongly. Van Gogh made some painting in Japanese style. Also some of the portraits he painted are set against a background which shows Japanese art.

In spring 1886 Vincent van Gogh went to Paris, where he moved in with his brother Theo; they shared a house on Montmartre. Here he met the painters met Edgar Degas, Camille Pissarro, Bernard, Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec and Paul Gauguin. He discovered impressionism and liked its use of light and color, more than its lack of social engagement (as he saw it). Especially the technique known as pointillism (where many small dots are applied to the canvas that blend into rich colors only in the eye of the beholder, seeing it from a distance) made its mark on Van Goghs own style. It should be noted that Van Gogh is regarded as a post-impressionist, rather than an impressionist.

In 1888, when city life and living with his brothers proved too much, Van Gogh left Paris and went to Arles, Bouches-du-Rh, France. He was impressed with the local landscape and hoped to found an art colony. He decorated a “yellow house” and created a celebrated series of yellow sunflower paintings for this purpose. Only Paul Gauguin, whose simplified colour schemes and forms (known as synthetism) attracted van Gogh, followed his invitation. The admiration was mutual, and Gauguin painted van Gogh painting sunflowers. However their encounter ended in a quarrel. Van Gogh suffered a mental breakdown and cut off part of his left ear, which he gave to a startled prostitute friend. Gauguin left in December 1888.

The only painting he sold during his lifetime, The Red Vineyard, was created in 1888. It is now on display in the Pushkin Museum in Moscow, Russia.

Vincent van Gogh now exchanged painting dots for small stripes. He suffered from depression, and in 1889 on his own request Van Gogh was admitted to the psychiatric center at Monastery Saint-Paul de Mausole in Saint Remy de Provence, Bouches-du-Rh, France. During his stay here the clinic and its garden became his main subject. Pencil strokes changed again, now into spiral curves.

In May 1890 Vincent van Gogh left the clinic and went to the physician Paul Gachet, in Auvers-sur-Oise near Paris, where he was closer to his brother Theo, who had recently married. Gachet had been recommended to him by Pissarro; he had treated several artists before. Here van Gogh created his only etching: a portrait of the melancholic doctor Gachet. His depression aggravated. On July 27 of the same year, at the age of 37, after a fit of painting activity, van Gogh shot himself in the chest. He died two days later, with Theo at his side, who reported his last words as “La tristesse durera toujours” (French: “The sadness will last forever”). He was buried at the cemetery of Auvers-sur-Oise; Theo unable to come to terms with his brother’s death died 6 months later and was buried next to him. It would not take long before his fame grew higher and higher. Large exhibitions were organized soon: Paris 1901, Amsterdam 1905, Cologne 1912, New York 1913 and Berlin 1914.

Vincent van Gogh’s mother threw away quite a number of his paintings during Vincent’s life and even after his death.  But she would live long enough to see her son become a world famous painter.

___________________________________________________________

How Should We Then Live 8#1

The above clip is from the film series by Francis Schaeffer “How should we then live?” Below is an outline of the 8th episode on the Impressionists and the age of Fragmentation. Vincent van Gogh was a post-impressionist and he is mentioned in this film series by Schaeffer

AGE OF FRAGMENTATION

I. Art As a Vehicle Of Modern Thought

A. Impressionism (Monet, Renoir, Pissarro, Sisley, Degas) and Post-Impressionism (Cézanne, Van Gogh, Gauguin, Seurat): appearance and reality.

1. Problem of reality in Impressionism: no universal.

2. Post-Impression seeks the universal behind appearances.

3. Painting expresses an idea in its own terms as a work of art; to discuss the idea in a painting is not to intellectualize art.

4. Parallel search for universal in art and philosophy; Cézanne.

B. Fragmentation.

1. Extremes of ultra-naturalism or abstraction: Wassily Kandinsky.

2. Picasso leads choice for abstraction: relevance of this choice.

3. Failure of Picasso (like Sartre, and for similar reasons) to be fully consistent with his choice.

C. Retreat to absurdity.

1. Dada , and Marcel Duchamp: art as absurd. (Dada gave birth to Surrealism).

2. Art followed philosophy but came sooner to logical end.

3. Chance in his art technique as an art theory impossible to practice: Pollock.

How Should We Then Live 8#2

II. Music As a Vehicle of Modern Thought

A. Non-resolution and fragmentation: German and French streams.

1. Influence of Beethoven’s last Quartets.

2. Direction and influence of Debussy.

3. Schoenberg’s non-resolution; contrast with Bach.

4. Stockhausen: electronic music and concern with the element of change.

B. Cage: a case study in confusion.

1. Deliberate chance and confusion in Cage’s music.

2. Cage’s inability to live the philosophy of his music.

C. Contrast of music-by-chance and the world around us.

1. Inconsistency of indulging in expression of chaos when we acknowledge order for practical matters like airplane design.

2. Art as anti-art when it is mere intellectual statement, divorced from reality of who people are and the fullness of what the universe is.

III. General Culture As the Vehicle of Modern Thought

A. Propagation of idea of fragmentation in literature.

1. Effect of Eliot’s Wasteland and Picasso’s Demoiselles d’ Avignon

compared; the drift of general culture.

2. Eliot’s change in his form of writing when he became a Christian.

3. Philosophic popularization by novel: Sartre, Camus, de Beauvoir.

B. Cinema as advanced medium of philosophy.

1. Cinema in the 1960s used to express Man’s destruction: e.g. Blow-up.

2. Cinema and the leap into fantasy:

 How Should We Then Live 8#3

The Hour of the WolfBelle de JourJuliet of the Spirits,

The Last Year at Marienbad.

3. Bergman’s inability to live out his philosophy (see Cage):

Silence and The Hour of the Wolf.

IV. Only on Christian Base Can Reality Be Faced Squarely

Part 4 of Tribute to and interview of Rev. Dr. John R. W. Stott (April 27, 1921 – July 27, 2011)

john stott 2007 Keswick

_____________________________________-

Uploaded by  on Aug 6, 2010

John Stott discussing how he would like to be remembered. This clip, and 5 others (found on LICC’s YouTube page), have been posted in memory of LICC’s founder John Stott, who passed away on 27th July 2011 aged 90. Visit the full tribute to John at http://www.licc.org.uk/tribute. The clips are all taken from 25 & On, a celebration DVD of the London Institute for Contemporary Christianity’s 25th Anniversary. The full interview is available from LICC on CD (www.licc.org.uk/shop/product/25-on).

Back in the 1970’s I read the book “Basic Christianity” by John Stott. While in London in 1979 I had the opportunity to attend a Tuesday evening prayer meeting where there were about 40 people and I got to hear John Stott speak. I was so thrilled to get to hear him speak in person.

I have included several clips on him because I wanted to honor him after the wonderful godly 90 years he lived.

Uploaded by  on Aug 19, 2008

John Stott’s classic book has introduced generations to Christianity with wisdom and clarity. This video celebrates the 50th Anniversary Edition of this important book by one of the world’s most important Christian voices.

__________-

[The

John Stott Funeral (edited version)

Uploaded by  on Aug 11, 2011

John Stott died on 27 July 2011 aged 90 years. This video contains highlights of his Funeral at All Souls Langham Place in London on Monday 8 August 2011. Produced and displayed with permission from John Stott’s family.
Music clips used by permission of All Souls musicians and Jubilate Hymns (www.jubilate.co.uk)

_______________

Al Molher interviewed John Stott several years ago and here is a portion of that interview:

The funeral for John R. W. Stott, one of the most famous evangelical preachers of the last century, will be held today in London at All Souls Church, Langham Place, where he served with distinction for so many decades of ministry. In honor of John Stott, I here republish an interview I conducted with the great preacher in 1987. The interview was first published in Preaching magazine, for which I was then Associate Editor.]

John R. W. Stott has emerged in the last half of the twentieth century as one of the leading evangelical preachers in the world. His ministry has spanned decades and continents, combining his missionary zeal with the timeless message of the Gospel.

For many years the Rector of All Souls Church, Langham Place, in London, Stott is also the founder and director of the London Institute for Contemporary Christianity. His preaching ministry stands as a model of the effective communication of biblical truth to secular men and women

The author of several worthy books, Stott is perhaps best known in the United States through his involvement with the URBANA conferences. His voice and pen have been among the most determinative forces in the development of the contemporary evangelical movement in the Church of England and throughout the world.

Preaching Associate Editor R. Albert Mohler interviewed Stott during one of the British preacher’s frequent visits to the United States.

We Belong in a Study, Not an Office

Mohler: You are probably as well known in America as in England. Furthermore, you know America — its churches and its preachers. What would be your word to the Servants of the Word on this side of the Atlantic?

Stott: I think my main word to American preachers is, as Stephen Olford has often said, that we belong in a study, not in an office. The symbol of our ministry is a Bible — not a telephone. We are ministers of the Word, not administrators, and we need to relearn the question of priority in every generation.

The Apostles were in danger of being diverted from the ministry to which they had been called by Jesus — the ministry of Word and prayer. They were almost diverted into a social ministry for squabbling widows.

Now both are important, and both are ministries, but the Apostles had been called to the ministry of the Word and not the ministry of tables. They had to delegate the ministry of the tables to other servants. We are not Apostles, but there is the work of teaching that has come to us in the unfolding of the apostolic message of the New Testament. This is our priority as pastors and preachers.

Jesus preached to the crowds, to the group, and to the individual. He had the masses, the disciples, and individuals coming to Him. He preached to crowds, taught the disciples, and counseled individuals. We must also have this focus. It is all in the ministry of the Word.


I am always glad to hear from readers. Write me at mail@albertmohler.com. Follow regular updates on Twitter at www.twitter.com/AlbertMohler

This interview is republished by the kind permission of Preaching magazine, Dr. Michael Duduit, editor. See http://www.preaching.com

Brantley and Brummett: Government needs to stimulate economy

John Brummett in his article, “More stimulus? Seriously?,” Arkansas News Review, August 29, 2011, observed:

The general point, though, is simple yet profound: We are in a self-perpetuating fix of serious proportion, and when you have only one tool in the box that might work, you need to figure out how best to use it.

Max Brantley on Arkansas Week in Review on August 26, 2011 said that he agreed with Paul Krugman that we don’t need to cut back on government spending now because the economy needs to be stimulated.

Brantley and Brummett will continue to say that the first stimulus did not work because it did not have enough money, but the private sector will have to get us out of this recession not inefficient government. Over and over you hear about political leaders saying that we must spend our way out of this recession, but that does not work. Below is an excellent article on this:

Is Obama Really Going to Propose Another Keynesian Stimulus?

Posted by Daniel J. Mitchell

Just last week, I made fun of Paul Krugman after he publicly said that a fake threat from invading aliens would be good for the economy since the earth would waste a bunch of money on pointless defense outlays.

Yesterday, there were rumors that Krugman stated that it would have been stimulative if the earthquake had been stronger and done more damage, but he exposed this as a prank(though it is understandable that many people — including me, I’m embarrassed to admit — initially assumed it was true since he did write that the 9-11 terrorist attacks boosted growth).

 But while Krugman is owed an apology by whoever pulled that stunt, the real problem is that President Obama and his advisers actually take Keynesian alchemy seriously.

And since President Obama is promising to unveil another “jobs plan” after his vacation, that almost certainly means more faux stimulus.

We don’t know what will be in this new package, but there are rumors of an infrastructure bank, which doubtlessly would be a subsidy for state and local governments. The only thing “shovel ready” about this proposal is that tax dollars will be shoveled to interest groups.

The other idea that seems to have traction is extending the current payroll tax holiday, which lowers the “employee share” of the payroll tax from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent. The good news is that the tax holiday doesn’t increase the burden of government spending. The bad news is that temporary tax rate reductions probably have very little positive effect on economic output.

Lower tax rates are the right approach, to be sure (particularly compared to useless rebates, such as those pushed by the Bush White House in 2001 and 2008), but workers, investors, and entrepreneurs are unlikely to be strongly incentivized by something that might be seen as a one-year gimmick. Though I suppose if the holiday keeps getting extended, people may begin to think it is a semi-durable feature of the tax code, so maybe there will be some pro-growth impact.

In any event, we will see what the President unveils next month. I’ll be particularly interested in how his supposed short-run jobs proposal fits in with his long-run plan for dealing with red ink. He has been advocating for a “balanced approach” and “shared sacrifice” – but that’sObama-speak for higher taxes, and we know that’s a damper on job creation and new investment.

As you can tell, I’m not optimistic. The best thing for growth would be to get the government out of the way. The Obama White House, though, thinks bigger government is good for the economy.

This stimulus video was produced last year and was designed for another jobs plan concocted by the Administration, but the message is still very appropriate.

Daniel J. Mitchell • August 24, 2011 @ 10:44 am
Filed under: GeneralGovernment and PoliticsTax and Budget Policy

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 26)

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 26)

This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but from a liberal.

Rep. Emanuel Clever (D-Mo.) called the newly agreed-upon bipartisan compromise deal to raise the  debt limit “a sugar-coated satan sandwich.”

“This deal is a sugar-coated satan sandwich. If you lift the bun, you will not like what you see,” Clever tweeted on August 1, 2011.

Burton Opposes Sham Deficit Reduction Deal

Posted by Joshua Gillespie on August 1, 2011

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                                                        CONTACT: Joshua Gillespie
August 1, 2011                                                                                                      (202)225-2276

Burton Opposes Sham Deficit Reduction Deal

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Representative Dan Burton (R-IN-05) issued the following statement after the House of Representatives’ approved the deficit reduction deal negotiated with President Obama and Senate Democrats:

“Our nation has never defaulted in its history and we must take action to continue to meet our financial obligations.  However, in good conscience I could not support the deficit reduction package worked out this past weekend.  I have said repeatedly that Washington does not have a revenue problem, it has a spending problem and this bill does nothing to change the spending culture ingrained in Washington. 

“First, A Balanced Budget Amendment is the ONLY way to finally force Washington to live within its means.  However, unlike the Cut, Cap and Balance Act or the Boehner proposal passed by the House of Representatives, the deficit reduction deal does not require a Balanced Budget Amendment be sent to the States for ratification before the President is granted a debt ceiling increase; it merely requires a vote on a Balanced Budget Amendment.  Passing a Balanced Budget Amendment requires a 2/3rds vote in the House and Senate and a majority of Democrats have already expressed opposition to a Balanced Budget Amendment, so obtaining the necessary votes without significant leverage – such as the threat of default – is highly unlikely;

“Second, the deficit reduction deal does not prevent future tax increases or reduce the size of government.   In fact, the deficit reduction deal assumes that all the Bush tax cuts expire in December 2012.  In other words the additional revenue is already built into the bill which would make it difficult if not impossible to meet the deficit reduction targets AND extend the Bush tax cuts beyond 2012.  In addition, the suggestion that it is impossible for the Joint Committee to raise additional tax revenue simply is not accurate, it’s false;

“Third, the automatic spending cuts placed in the deal to force Congress to maintain fiscal discipline are unrealistic and unworkable.  Half of the proposed automatic cuts would come from defense programs which will undermine our ability to project power, strengthen our adversaries, and weaken our alliances.  Additional automatic cuts will come from Medicare providers; already underpaid by Medicare.  Historically Congress has rolled back any proposed cuts to Medicare providers and there is no reason to believe Congress won’t do so again.  It is also unrealistic to believe Congress will allow substantial cuts to defense spending while our troops are engaged in three wars (Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya);

“Finally, the deficit reduction deal may be unconstitutional.  The deficit reduction deal allows the President to unilaterally raise the debt ceiling subject to a resolution of disapproval by the Congress (which the President can veto).  The debt limit is a statutory requirement and must therefore be changed by law.   ONLY Congress has the power to make law not the President; and Congress cannot, and most importantly should not, surrender this power to the president.

“The American people want a solution to this crisis, not a deal that allows Washington to kick the can down the road once again. Regrettably, the deficit reduction deal is not that solution.”

Park Street Church Boston, MA (Part 1)

Uploaded by on Nov 18, 2006

This is the “Nearer My God To Thee” scene from the movie “A Night To Remember” (1958).

_____________________________________

The Arkansas Times asked what are some of our favorite hymns. One of my favorites is “Near My God to Thee” which was written played on the Titanic while the passengers slipped into eternity.

Just last week on Sunday August 21, 2011, I got to worship at the historic Park Street Church where Lowell Mason, Park Street’s first organist, is considered by many to be the father of American Protestant church music.  He composed the music for many common hymns including “Nearer My God to Thee” and “Joy to the World.”

Actually the previous week on August 14th at Fellowship Bible Church in Little Rock, I met someone who had just graduated from Harvard and that is where I got the recommendation to attend Park Street Church.

history

Since its founding in 1809, Park Street Church has been the site of many historic events and has been a pioneer in many social, national and theological concerns. As a result, Park Street is widely known as a church of “firsts.”

The Handel and Haydn Society of Boston, America’s first oratorio society, was organized at Park Street in 1815.

In 1816, Park Street started one of America’s first Sunday school programs.

The first Protestant missionaries to Hawaii (formerly known as the Sandwich Islands) were sent from here in 1819.

On July 4, 1829, the famous abolitionist, William Lloyd Garrison, delivered his first anti-slavery address from the Park Street pulpit.

Lowell Mason, Park Street’s first organist, is considered by many to be the father of American Protestant church music.  He composed the music for many common hymns including “Nearer My God to Thee” and “Joy to the World.”

Samuel Francis Smith’s hymn, “America” (otherwise known as “My Country ‘Tis of Thee”), was first sung on the front steps of the church by Park Street’s Children’s Choir on July 4, 1831.

The Prison Discipline Society (America’s first prison ministry), the American Temperance Society, the Animal Rescue League (America’s first animal humane society), and the Boston Chapter of the N.A.A.C.P. all began here.

America’s oldest radio ministry began at Park Street Church in 1923.

The Billy Graham evangelistic crusades were introduced to Boston at Park Street in 1949.

Dr. Harold J. Ockenga, Park Street’s minister from 1936 to 1969, was co-founder and first president of the National Association of Evangelicals, Fuller Theological Seminary, and Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary.

File:ParkStreetChurch.jpg
Size of this preview: 449 × 599 pixels
Full resolution‎ (512 × 683 pixels, file size: 111 KB, MIME type: image/jpeg)


Senator Pryor asks for Spending Cut Suggestions! Here are a few!(Part 110)

Senator Mark Pryor wants our ideas on how to cut federal spending. Take a look at this video clip below:

Senator Pryor has asked us to send our ideas to him at cutspending@pryor.senate.gov and I have done so in the past and will continue to do so in the future.

On May 11, 2011,  I emailed to this above address and I got this email back from Senator Pryor’s office:

Please note, this is not a monitored email account. Due to the sheer volume of correspondence I receive, I ask that constituents please contact me via my website with any responses or additional concerns. If you would like a specific reply to your message, please visit http://pryor.senate.gov/contact. This system ensures that I will continue to keep Arkansas First by allowing me to better organize the thousands of emails I get from Arkansans each week and ensuring that I have all the information I need to respond to your particular communication in timely manner.  I appreciate you writing. I always welcome your input and suggestions. Please do not hesitate to contact me on any issue of concern to you in the future.

I just did. I went to the Senator’s website and sent this below:

Department of Labor

Print

Proposed Spending Cuts

by Chris Edwards

June 2011

The Department of Labor’s budget is dominated by unemployment insurance (UI) costs, which have soared in recent years. The UI system should be reformed because it raises hiring costs, encourages unemployment, and reduces incentives to save. One reform option would be to switch to a UI system based on personal savings accounts, as the nation of Chile has done. Another option would be for the federal government to fully devolve UI to the states.

Aside from UI, the largest spending area in the department is employment and training services for unemployed workers. Taxpayers have been funding these activities since the 1960s, yet the Government Accountability Office says that “little is known about the effectiveness” of the programs. The reality is that federal employment and training programs don’t fill any critical need that private markets don’t already fill in the modern economy. Congress should terminate these programs, including Trade Adjustment Assistance, Job Corps, and other programs under the Workforce Investment Act.

Congress should downsize the Department of Labor’s regulatory activities. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the Wage and Hour Division, and other agencies impose a thick web of rules on America’s employers. The main issue is not the federal budget costs of these agencies, but the damage to the economy caused by unneeded regulations such as the federal minimum wage.

Congress should also reform federal labor union laws. The 1932 Norris-LaGuardia Act and the 1935 National Labor Relations Act empower unions with unwarranted privileges such as “collective bargaining,” which is a euphemism for monopoly unionism. These laws are premised on the misguided idea that businesses and workers are enemies with opposite interests. They are also inconsistent with individual rights to freedom of association. Another misguided labor law is the 1931 Davis-Bacon Act, which pushes up the costs of federal construction projects. None of these union laws make sense in today’s economy, and they should be repealed.

The following table shows that devolving unemployment insurance to the states and terminating employment and training programs would reduce federal spending by $143 billion annually. In addition, Congress should cut Department of Labor regulatory activities, but savings from regulatory reforms are not estimated here.

Department of Labor
Proposed Spending Cuts
Program
Spending in 2011
($ million)
Unemployment Insurance $134,373
Employment and Training Services $4,785
Job Corps $1,712
Trade Adjustment Assistance $1,328
Community Service for Older Americans $818
Total proposed cuts $143,016
Total department outlays $148,011
Source: Estimated fiscal year outlays from the Budget of the U.S. Government, FY2012.

Pryor changing his views? Brummett says no!

Today in John Brummett’s article, “A Pryor offense? Surely not,” Arkansas News Bureau, August 28, 2011, noted:

Meantime, another e-mailer, a Democrat in Northwest Arkansas, was highly agitated that Pryor had sounded from press reports like a doctrinaire Republican in this Rotary address, advocating cuts to Social Security and Medicare while extolling a corporate giant like Wal-Mart as a generous federal taxpayer.

Yes, Pryor had told the Rogers Rotarians that we must cut spending and that Social Security and Medicare must sustain their fair share of reductions. But he thinks those can be made without much personal pain.

Brummett’s conclusion is that it is the same good ole boy in Pryor that we have always known. I wonder if that will be good enough for Arkansans since we know that the political climate has changed a lot the last few years here. Will the same political strategy of blaming the Republicans work this time around for Pryor. (In the clip above you see Pryor praising President Obama, will that go well in Arkansas?)

CaptainAmerica is the username for person who commented on Brummett’s article. I agree with CaptainAmerica that the same old Democratic strategies are not working. He points out that people are voting with their feet and going to states run by Republicans where lower taxes encourage business growth. Here is what CaptainAmerica had to say:

Hey Brummett, I hope will you read this column http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/08/27/census-data-shows-people-are-moving-from-blue-to-red-states.html

For years in this column, you extolled the virtues of the heavily unionized, heavily regulated, high tax states . . . I hope at some point you will address in this column how these states are now losing population in droves, are economically depressed, and are financially bankrupt . . .

______________________

Dale Bumpers praises Obama

___________________________

Below is the excellent article he talked about:

The Great Political Migration

Millions of people are, for good reason, abandoning big-government blue states for low-tax red ones. Michael Medved on the demographic shift shaking up the electoral map.

by | August 27, 2011 3:43 PM EDT

Conservatives yearn for a big, clarifying electoral victory in November 2012, but they’re already winning decisively whenever Americans vote with their feet—or their moving vans.

New Census numbers show citizens fleeing by the millions from liberal states and flocking in comparable numbers to bastions of right-wing sentiment. Call it the Great Political Migration.

 

Between 2009 and 2010 the five biggest losers in terms of “residents lost to other states” were all prominent redoubts of progressivism: California, New York, Illinois, Michigan, and New Jersey. Meanwhile, the five biggest winners in the relocation sweepstakes are all commonly identified as red states in which Republicans generally dominate local politics: Florida, Texas, North Carolina, Arizona, and Georgia. Expanding the review to a 10-year span, the biggest population gainers (in percentage terms) have been even more conservative than last year’s winners: Nevada, Arizona, Utah, Idaho, and Texas, in that order.

The shift in national demographics has already rearranged the playing field for the upcoming presidential election. States that Barack Obama carried were the biggest losers in the reapportionment that followed the 2010 Census, with New York and Ohio dropping two electoral votes each. Texas, meanwhile, gained a whopping four votes all by its Lone Star lonesome self. Even in the unlikely event that Obama carried exactly the same states he carried in 2008, he’d still win six fewer electoral votes in 2012. Even more tellingly, if the epic Bush-Gore battle of 2000 played out on the new Electoral College map, with the two candidates carrying precisely the states they each won 11 years ago, the result would have been a far more clear-cut GOP victory margin of 33 electoral votes (instead of the five-vote nail-biter recorded in history books).

political-migration-medvedHector Mata / AFP-Getty Images

If liberal approaches work so well, why are so many people choosing to pack their bags and desert some of the most big-government states in the union?

Fifty years ago, the United States saw a mass migration from east to west. Today we’re witnessing a comparable migration from left to right.

This significant shift in population not only presents progressives with significant problems in terms of practical politics, but also confronts them with profound ideological challenges.

If liberal approaches work so well, why are so many people choosing to pack their bags and desert some of the most progressive, pro-labor, big-government states in the union?

And if uncompromising conservatism is a cruel, fraudulent disaster, why do small-government, pro-business, low-tax, gun-toting, and churchgoing states draw such a disproportionate number of America’s internal immigrants?

In the emerging presidential campaign, it’s easy to see a version of these questions dominating the debate. Why should anyone choose to endorse liberal, Democratic policies when a single year (2009-10) saw 880,000 residents packing up their belongings to place Barack Obama’s Illinois in their rear-view mirror, while 782,000 new arrivals helped drive the robust economy in Rick Perry’s Texas?

Bill Clinton praises Obama

_______________________

During the bad old days of the Cold War, so many people tried to leave East Germany that the communists built a wall to keep them in. The world rightly took that gesture as evidence of failure and corruption in the Stalinist system.

California can’t raise a wall to prevent people from abandoning the Not-So-Golden State, or somehow deter or return the 2 million who decamped between 2009 and 2010. Doesn’t this overwhelming outflow of residents count as powerful evidence of the failure, corruption, and bankruptcy of the state’s leadership—long dominated by legislative leftists, even under the moderate GOP governorship of Arnold Schwarzenegger? For the first time since statehood in 1850, a new Census brought no increase in California’s representation in Congress (or the Electoral College).

California has become a sad symbol of dysfunctional government at its shabbiest, shadiest, most sclerotic, and irresponsible—an exquisitely painful irony for those of us who recall the Golden State’s onetime position in the national imagination. Not so long ago, the whole nation (or at least its most enterprising and adventurous elements) seemed to envy the state and to embrace the notion of “California Dreamin’.”

My late parents cherished that dream and made the trek from Philadelphia to my dad’s first job (after graduate school on the GI Bill) in San Diego. They loaded a battered, gray ’53 Plymouth with their possessions and their 5-year-old son (me) and drove across the country for a thrilling new life. Growing up in the ’50s and ’60s, nearly everyone we knew seemed recently arrived from somewhere else, thrilled to experience the electric atmosphere of a place that seemed to define America’s bright future.

After my parents’ divorce, my father eventually decided to leave California for a corner of the earth that promised even more excitement and significance—Israel—and he spent the last 19 years of his life in Jerusalem. As for me, I finally persuaded my wife, Diane (a fifth-generation Californian whose ancestors arrived in Gold Rush days), to move our family to Washington state in 1996, and there’s never been a day when I regretted that decision.

To some, this move from one center for liberal lunacy to another progressive outpost made no sense: Seattle offered the lefty politics of California but with considerably less sunshine. But there is one striking difference between these two Pacific Coast states: When it comes to income taxes, California’s top rate recently crested to an appalling 10.3 percent (on top of federal tax burdens, sales tax, property tax, and much more). Washington, on the other hand, imposes no income tax at all, and ongoing growth makes Washington the only blue state (that’s right, the only one) that added a congressional seat in the recent Census.

The impact of state income taxes helps explain the flow of business and families to those states with more hospitable, less-intrusive attitudes toward enterprise. The dollars involved are hardly trivial. California punishes the stinking, selfish, filthy rich by imposing the second-highest rate–9.3 percent—on every dollar an individual earns beyond the obscenely lavish sum of $46,766. New York takes similar aim at privileged plutocrats, with individual tax rates of at least 6.75 percent for any earnings above …$20,000. But if those hard-pressed wage-earners make their way to Nevada or Utah, they’ll pay nothing in state income tax, and revel in their residence in one of eight states that avoid punishing earning and effort. Even in left-tilting Washington, voters in 2010 rejected (by nearly 2 to 1) a state income tax placed on the ballot by Bill Gates Sr.

There are no real political refugees within the United States, and few families move from one state to another to search for more congenial political leadership. Climate, family concerns, and job opportunities are all factors. But the contrasting cultures that state politics help to shape make a big difference in determining which parts of the nation seem more or less promising to potential migrants. With the Gallup poll showing self-described “conservatives” outnumbering self-proclaimed “liberals” by nearly 2 to 1 (41 percent to 21 percent) it’s not surprising that states with pro-business, pro-family attitudes draw disproportionate numbers of new arrivals. At the same time, it makes sense that those states with aggressive, intrusive bureaucracies, high taxes, and relentless experiments in multiculturalism will encourage mass departures.

The millions of resettlers who move their families to more sympathetic venues surely feel motivated by personal considerations more than ideology, but they still play a role in reshaping the nation’s political future. For generations, conservatives tried to convince doubters that their ideas were right in some ultimate, philosophical sense. Now, with countless frustrated families making fresh starts in right-leaning states, they’ve obviously made the case that in the real world, it’s the conservative approach that works.

<:FOOTER>

August 27, 2011 3:43pm

Other posts dealing with Senator Pryor:

Senator Pryor asks for Spending Cut Suggestions! Here are a few!(Part 108)

Senator Mark Pryor wants our ideas on how to cut federal spending. Take a look at this video clip below: Senator Pryor has asked us to send our ideas to him at cutspending@pryor.senate.gov and I have done so in the past and will continue to do so in the future. On May 11, 2011,  I […]

Dear Senator Pryor, why not pass the Balanced Budget Amendment? (Part 2 Thirsty Thursday, Open letter to Senator Pryor)

Dear Senator Pryor, Why not pass the Balanced  Budget Amendment? As you know that federal deficit is at all time high (1.6 trillion deficit with revenues of 2.2 trillion and spending at 3.8 trillion). On my blog http://www.HaltingArkansasLiberalswithTruth.com I took you at your word and sent you over 100 emails with specific spending cut ideas. However, […]

Potential 2012 Headlines: Beebe beats Pryor, Hillary beats Obama

It is my view that if the economy keeps stinking that Republicans will have a field day  in November of 2012. However, the same principle holds true that challengers to Democrats will be  very successful in Democratic primaries. In Arkansas many have longed for another Clinton in the White House. Could it happen? It is my […]

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 25)

Uploaded by on Jun 14, 2011

Our country’s debt continues to grow — it’s eating away at the American Dream. We need to make real cuts now. We need Cut, Cap, and Balance.

The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 25)

This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but from a liberal.

Rep. Emanuel Clever (D-Mo.) called the newly agreed-upon bipartisan compromise deal to raise the  debt limit “a sugar-coated satan sandwich.”

“This deal is a sugar-coated satan sandwich. If you lift the bun, you will not like what you see,” Clever tweeted on August 1, 2011.

Congressman Walsh Issues Statement on His Vote Against Debt Deal

08/01/11

WASHINGTON–  Today, Congressman Joe Walsh (IL-08) voted against the latest debt ceiling deal brokered by President Obama and Congressional leaders.

“Last night’s deal shows how far the debate has moved in just a few months,” said Congressman Walsh. “At the beginning of this debate President Obama demanded a blank check increase in the debt limit with no spending cuts attached.  When that didn’t work, he insisted on huge tax increases on American families and job creators. The Republican Party, however, stood strong and refused to pay for reckless spending withmoretax increases.”

“While I give my Republican leadership all the credit in the world, I cannot support this latest deal: it spends too much and cuts too little.  While this deal will cut $2.4 trillion from the national debt over the next 10 years, Washington will still add another $7 trillion to the national debt over that same period.”

“The fact that there are only $7 billion in cuts next year, an election year, shows how blatantly political this bill is.  We need to be slashing reckless spending now and in the future, not just when it is politically convenient for the President.”

“Democrats still don’t get it and refuse to make the spending cuts necessary to avoid a credit downgrade. I have made it clear from day one that I will never vote for an increase in the debt ceiling unless it fundamentally and structurally changes the way Washington spends money. I believe that the way to do that is through statutory spending caps and a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution.”

Francis Schaeffer noted “If there are no absolutes by which to judge society, then society is absolute.” (“Schaeffer Sundays” Part 4)

photo

___________________________________________

Francis Schaeffer is a hero of mine and I want to honor him with a series of posts on Sundays called “Schaeffer Sundays” which will include his writings and clips from his film series. I have posted many times in the past using his material.

Philosopher and Theologian, Francis A. Schaeffer has argued, “If there are no absolutes by which to judge society, then society is absolute.” Francis Schaeffer, How Shall We Then Live? (Old Tappan NJ: Fleming H Revell Company, 1976), p. 224.

In the film series “WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?” the arguments are presented  against abortion (Episode 1),  infanticide (Episode 2),   euthanasia (Episode 3), and then there is a discussion of the Christian versus Humanist worldview concerning the issue of “the basis for human dignity” in Episode 4 and then in the last episode a close look at the truth claims of the Bible.

A Christian Manifesto Francis Schaeffer

Published on Dec 18, 2012

A video important to today. The man was very wise in the ways of God. And of government. Hope you enjoy a good solis teaching from the past. The truth never gets old.

The Roots of the Emergent Church by Francis Schaeffer

Francis Shaeffer – The early church (part1)

Francis Shaeffer – The early church (part 2)

Francis Shaeffer – The early church (part 3)

Francis Shaeffer – The early church (part 4)

Francis Shaeffer – The early church (part 5)

How Should We then Live Episode 7 small (Age of Nonreason)

#02 How Should We Then Live? (Promo Clip) Dr. Francis Schaeffer

10 Worldview and Truth

Two Minute Warning: How Then Should We Live?: Francis Schaeffer at 100

Francis Schaeffer Whatever Happened to the Human Race (Episode 1) ABORTION

Francis Schaeffer “BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY” Whatever…HTTHR

Part 1 on abortion runs from 00:00 to 39:50, Part 2 on Infanticide runs from 39:50 to 1:21:30, Part 3 on Youth Euthanasia runs from 1:21:30 to 1:45:40, Part 4 on the basis of human dignity runs from 1:45:40 to 2:24:45 and Part 5 on the basis of truth runs from 2:24:45 to 3:00:04

Dr. Francis schaeffer – The flow of Materialism(from Part 4 of Whatever happened to human race?)

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – The Biblical flow of Truth & History (intro)

Francis Schaeffer – The Biblical Flow of History & Truth (1)

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – The Biblical Flow of Truth & History (part 2)

____________________________________

Al Mohler wrote the article ,”FIRST-PERSON: They indeed were prophetic,” Jan 29, 2004, and in this great article he noted:   .

“We stand today on the edge of a great abyss,” they wrote. “At this crucial moment choices are being made and thrust on us that will for many years to come affect the way people are treated. We want to try to help tip the scales on the side of those who believe that individuals are unique and special and have great dignity.”

This year marks the 25th anniversary of “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” by Francis Schaeffer and C. Everett Koop. The anniversary serves to remind us just how unaware and unawake most evangelicals really were 25 years ago — and how prophetic the voices of Schaeffer and Koop were.

Whatever Happened to the Human Race? was both a book project and a film series, the fruit of an unusual collaboration between Francis Schaeffer, one of the truly significant figures of 20th-century evangelicalism, and C. Everett Koop, one of the nation’s most illustrious pediatric surgeons. They were an odd couple of sorts, but on the crucial issues of human dignity and the threat of what would later be called the “Culture of Death,” they were absolutely united.

Francis Schaeffer, who died in 1984, was nothing less than a 20th-century prophet. He was a genuine eccentric, given to wearing leather breeches and sporting a goatee — then quite unusual for anyone in the evangelical establishment. Then again, Schaeffer was never really a member of any establishment, and that is partly why a generation of questioning young people made their way to his Swiss study center known as L’Abri.

Big ideas were Schaeffer’s business — and the Christian worldview was his consistent framework. Long before most evangelicals even knew they had a worldview, Schaeffer was taking alternative worldviews apart and inculcating in his students a love for the architecture of Christian truth and the dignity of ideas.

Key figures on the evangelical left wrote Schaeffer off as a crank, and he returned the favor by denying that they were evangelicals at all. They complained that he did not follow their rules for scholarly publication. He pointed out that people actually read his books — and young people frustrated with cultural Christianity read his books by the thousands. They were looking for someone with ideas big enough for the age, relevant for the questions of the times, and based without compromise in Christian truth. Francis Schaeffer — knee pants and all — became a prophet for the age.

Dr. C. Everett Koop, on the other hand, is a paragon of the American establishment — a former surgeon-in-chief at the Children’s Hospital in Philadelphia and later surgeon general of the United States under President Reagan. In 1974 Koop catapulted to international attention by performing the first successful surgical separation of conjoined twins. A Presbyterian layman, Koop lives in quasi-retirement in Pennsylvania. His surgical procedures remain textbook cases for medical students today.

Whatever Happened to the Human Race? awakened American evangelicals to the anti-human technologies and ideologies that then threatened human dignity. Most urgently, the project put abortion unquestionably on the front burner of evangelical concern. The tenor of the times is seen in the fact that Schaeffer and Koop had to argue to evangelicals in the late 1970s that abortion was not just a “Catholic” issue. They taught many evangelicals a new and urgently needed vocabulary about embryo ethics, euthanasia and infanticide. They knew they were running out of time.

“Each era faces its own unique blend of problems,” they argued. “Our time is no exception. Those who regard individuals as expendable raw material — to be molded, exploited, and then discarded — do battle on many fronts with those who see each person as unique and special, worthwhile, and irreplaceable.”

Every age is marked by both the “thinkable” and the “unthinkable,” they asserted — and the “thinkable” of late-20th-century Western cultures was dangerously anti-human. The lessons of the century — with the Holocaust at its center — should be sufficient to drive the point home. The problem, as illustrated by those who worked in Hitler’s death camps, was the inevitable result of a loss of conscience and moral truth. They were “people just like all of us,” Koop and Schaeffer reminded. “We seem to be in danger of forgetting our seemingly unlimited capacities for evil, once boundaries to certain behavior are removed.”

By the last quarter of the century, life and death were treated as mere matters of choice. “The schizophrenic nature of our society became further evident as it became common practice for pediatricians to provide the maximum of resuscitative and supportive care in newborn intensive-care nurseries where premature infants were under their care — while obstetricians in the same medical centers were routinely destroying enormous numbers of unborn babies who were normal and frequently of larger size. Minors who could not legally purchase liquor and cigarettes could have an abortion-on-demand and without parental consent or knowledge.”

Schaeffer and Koop pointed to other examples of moral schizophrenia. Disabled persons were given new access to facilities and services in the name of human rights, while preborn infants diagnosed with the same disabilities were often aborted — with the advice that it would be “wrong” to bring such a baby into the world.

Long before the discovery of stem cells and calls for the use of human embryos for such experimentation, Schaeffer and Koop warned of attacks upon human life at its earliest stage. “Embryos ‘created’ in the biologist’s laboratory raise special questions because they have the potential for growth and development if planted in the womb. The disposal of these live embryos is a cause for ethical and moral concern.”

They also saw the specter of infanticide and euthanasia. Infanticide, including what is now called “partial-birth abortion,” is murder, they argued. “Infanticide is being practiced right now in this country, and the saddest thing about this is that it is being carried on by the very segment of the medical profession which has always stood in the role of advocate for the lives of children.” Long before the formal acceptance of euthanasia in countries like the Netherlands, Koop and Schaeffer saw the rise of a “duty to die” argument used against the old, the very sick and the unproductive. They rejected euthanasia in the case of a “so-called vegetative existence” and warned all humanity that disaster awaited a society that lusted for a “beautiful death.”

Abortion, infanticide, and euthanasia are not only questions for women and other relatives directly involved — nor are they the prerogatives of a few people who have thought through the wider ramifications,” they declared. “They are life-and-death issues that concern the whole human race equally and should be addressed as such.”

How did this happen? This embrace of an anti-human “humanism” could only be explained by the rejection of the Christian worldview. “Judeo-Christian teaching was never perfectly applied,” they acknowledged, “but it did lay a foundation for a high view of human life in concept and practice.” Through the inculcation of biblical values, “people viewed human life as unique — to be protected and loved — because each individual is made in the image of God.”

Two great enemies of truth were blamed for this loss of biblical truth — modern secularism and theological liberalism. The secularists insist on the imposition of a “humanism” that defines humanity in terms of productivity, arbitrary standards of beauty and health, and an inverted system of value. Theological liberalism, denying the truthfulness of the Bible, robs the church and the society of any solid authority. The biblical concept of humanity made in the image of God is treated as poetry rather than as truth. But, “if people are not made in the image of God, the pessimistic, realistic humanist is right: The human race is indeed an abnormal wart on the smooth face of a silent and meaningless universe.”

Everything else simply follows. “In this setting, abortion, infanticide, and euthanasia … are completely logical. Any person can be obliterated for what society at one moment thinks of as its own social or economic good.” Once human life and human dignity are devalued to this degree, recovery is extremely difficult — if not impossible.

The past 25 years has been a period of even more rapid technological and moral change. We now face threats to human dignity unimaginable just a quarter-century ago. We must now deal with the ethical challenges of embryo research, human cloning, the Human Genome Project and the rise of transhuman technologies. Even with many Christians aware and active on these issues, we are losing ground.

Francis Schaeffer and Everett Koop ended their book with a call for action. “If, in this last part of the twentieth century, the Christian community does not take a prolonged and vocal stand for the dignity of the individual and each person’s right to life — for the right of each person to be treated as created in the image of God, rather than as a collection of molecules with no unique value — we feel that as Christians we have failed the greatest moral test to be put before us in this century.”

In this new century, that warning is even more threatening and more urgent. The challenges of the 21st century are even greater than those faced in the century before. This should make us even more thankful for the prophetic witness of Francis Schaeffer and C. Everett Koop — and even more determined to contend for life. Humanity still stands on the brink of that abyss.
–30–
Adapted from the Crosswalk.com weblog of R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky.

What Ever Happened to the Human Race?

SEC East Football Preview jh11

I really think that if you took Georgia, Florida and South Carolina, you could not find ANY DIFFERENCE IN TALENT. To put South Carolina in that group in the past would have been silly. However, Steve Spurrier has them at that level now. Bringing in players the level of Marcus Lattimore is the difference. (Harry King thinks Lattimore may be Heisman material.)

I think about Tennessee’s famous November schedule. They have won about 98% of their November games in the last few years because they usually played Memphis, South Carolina, Vandy and Kentucky. Currently they hold the longest winning streak in the  country against Kentucky and everybody knows how pitiful Memphis and Vandy have been in football, but now SOUTH CAROLINA IS TOUGHER THAN THEY USED TO BE AND THERE IS NO FOR SURE WIN BY UT LIKE THEIR USED TO BE IN THE PAST.

Speaking of Tennessee, I did want to note that although I don’t think a team with only 25% of their team being upperclassmen can compete for a SEC East Championship, I do think they will upset some teams and probably make a run next year.

_______________________

Dr. Bob SEC East Preview

Posted: 8/23/11 05:55 PM ET

I’m excited for the start of another football season and I’ve spent the last month doing a team by team analysis and rating of all 120 Division 1A (aka FBS) teams. My early season ratings have proven more accurate than the Vegas odds makers and last year I pegged Stanford as the 9th best team heading into the season (they were unranked), Oklahoma State rated 19th (also unranked) and had Texas (#5 ranked in the polls) as my 34th rated team. I’ve used my early season ratings to give me an edge over Las Vegas over the years and this year I want to share some conference previews with you. I will also have free analysis of almost every College game in the free analysis section at drbobsports.com.

I’ll start my previews with the SEC East and I’ll post my analysis of the exciting SEC West later this week.

Georgia
(Projected SEC record 5.5 – 2.5, 1st Place East)
Georgia was much better last season than their 6-7 record suggests and the Bulldogs are my slight favorite to win the SEC East. The Bulldogs out-gained their opponents 6.3 yards per play to 5.5 yppl despite facing a schedule of teams that was 0.6 yppl better than average. Georgia was also +10 in turnover margin and had great special teams play, so going 6-7 while out-scoring your opponents by 10.0 points per game was a complete fluke aided by an 0-4 record on games decided by 7 points or less. Georgia’s offense will be led by sophomore quarterback Aaron Murray, who emerged as one of the best quarterbacks in the nation while being named 1st Team Freshman All-American.

Murray will have to adjust to life without star WR A.J. Green, who lifted the Georgia passing game from very good to great when he returned to the lineup after missing the first 4 games due to suspension. Murray was very good in the 4 games without Green, averaging 7.1 yards per pass play (against teams that would combine to allow 5.7 yppp to an average quarterback). Murray averaged 8.2 yppp (against teams that would allow 5.8 yppp) in 8 FBS games with Green in the lineup, so he’ll certainly miss his former star receiver.

I expect Murray to be a better quarterback this season but his numbers will probably be less impressive without Green’s dynamic playmaking ability. Georgia could get a boost in the running game with highly touted true freshman RB Isaiah Crowell as the main back thanks to the absence of last year’s top 2 rushers (Washaun Ealey transferred and Caleb King is out for the season with an injury). The Georgia defense hasn’t been too much better than average in recent years but this year’s stop unit has 7 returning starters and two major additions in run-stuffing DT Jonathan Jenkins (a JC transfer) and USC transfer Jarvis Jones. Georgia should improve significantly on the defensive side of the ball and their special teams will be among the best in the nation. The Bulldogs should be improved while being very likely to improve on their record in close games. Georgia will go from a losing team to a team that will be a major player in the hunt for an SEC Championship.

South Carolina
(projected SEC record 5.3 – 2.7, 2rd Place East)
South Carolina looks like the most well-rounded team in the SEC East from the line of scrimmage, but the Gamecocks will have to improve upon their horrible special teams if they want to return to the SEC Championship game. With their second game of the season being at Georgia, who has among the best special teams units in the nation, the Gamecocks will need to get it together soon if they want a leg up in the division race. There are no problems with South Carolina’s offense or defense, as the Gamecocks return the nucleus of last year’s strong attack (6.2 yards per play against teams that would combine to allow just 5.1 yppl to an average team) with QB Stephen Garcia coming back for his 4th year as the starter, sophomore RB Marcus Lattimore back after a very good frosh campaign (1197 yards at 4.8 ypr and 17 TDs) and 1st Team All-American WR Alshon Jeffery also returning after hauling in passes for 1517 yards at 17.2 yards per catch. Garcia can be turnover prone (14 interceptions last season), but South Carolina’s offense should be very good again this season.

South Carolina’s defense should be the unit that makes the difference this season, as the Gamecocks should fix some of the leaks in the secondary that allowed good quarterbacks to expose them last season. Overall, South Carolina was very good defensively in 2010, as the 5.4 yppl that unit allowed against FBS competition came against a schedule of teams that would combine to average 6.1 yppl against an average defense. The Gamecocks should be even better this season defensively with all of their key components back and with the addition of the top rated freshman defensive linemen (DE Jadeveon Clowney) and the return of LB Shaq Wilson, who led the team in tackles in 2009 but played just 1 game last season due to injury. South Carolina should be among the better teams in the nation from the line of scrimmage and they should improve their special teams enough to make a run at defending their SEC East championship. I actually have South Carolina rated as 1 point better than Georgia, but the Gamecocks face a tougher SEC schedule having to play at Georgia and having to visit Arkansas out of the West (Georgia’s tough SEC West opponent is their home game with Auburn, which is not nearly as tough).

Florida
(projected SEC record 4.5 – 3.5, 3rd Place East)
I expected Florida to be a very good team last season despite the absence of Tim Tebow, but the quarterback play was the worst in Urban Meyer’s coaching career, including his days at Bowling Green and Utah (even after compensating for level of opposing defenses faced). John Brantley was the top rated quarterback of his high school class and had two years in the system as a backup to Tebow, but Brantley was horrible in his first year as the starter. Brantley did connect on a better than average 61 percent of his passes, but the large majority of those completions were short passes (10.3 yards per completion is very low) and his 5.5 yards per pass play (including sacks) was well below even the lowest expectations (6.2 yppp is average). Overall the Gators averaged just 5.1 yards per play (against teams that would allow 5.1 yppl to an average FBS team) and the poor attack was too much to overcome, even with a very good defense (4.7 yppl allowed to FBS teams that would average 5.7 yppl against an average defense) and great special teams.

The Gators start a new regime with former Texas defensive coordinator Will Muschamp as the head coach, highly regarded offensive coordinator Charlie Weis as the OC and former NFL defensive assistant Dan Quinn taking over the defense (although Muschamp will no doubt has a strong influence on that side of the ball). Florida still has elite talent and I expect the offense to be much improved while the defense comes close to last year’s standards despite returning just 4 starters on that side of the ball. I have Florida rated only 2 points worse than South Carolina and just 1 point worse than Georgia, but the Gators have the toughest SEC schedule of those 3 teams and that will make it tough for them to win the East.

Tennessee
(projected SEC record 2.6 – 5.4, 4th Place East)
Tennessee will be better on both sides of the ball in year 2 of coach Derek Dooley’s tenure, but getting back to a bowl game after last year’s 6-7 season will not be easy. The Volunteers’ offense will be led by sophomore quarterback Tyler Bray, who played the last 8 games as a freshman and averaged an impressive 7.3 yards per pass play while facing teams that would allow 6.3 yppp to an average QB. I expect a slight drop in Bray’s production with the loss of his top 3 receivers, including Denarius Moore, who averaged 20.9 yards per catch, but Brey was much better than Matt Simms last season and overall the Tennessee passing numbers should be better.

The Vols were just mediocre running the ball last season, averaging 4.5 yards per rushing play (against teams that would allow 4.5 yprp to an average team) but I expect a slight improvement in the rushing numbers and the offense will be good if Bray cuts down on his interceptions (10 on just 224 pass attempts). The Tennessee defense allowed 5.7 yards per play (against teams that would average 5.8 yppl against an average defensive team) but that unit should be improved despite having just 5 returning starters. The run defense is still likely to be mediocre, but all 4 defensive backs return and the pass defense should be solid. Tennessee should be a few points better in 2011 than they were in 2010, but they’re another year away from contending for an SEC title and they will likely have to win all 4 of their non-conference games, or pull off an SEC upset, to make it back to a bowl game this season thanks to a brutal SEC schedule (they have to play the SEC West’s 3 toughest teams and two of those are on the road).

Kentucky
(projected SEC record 2.1 – 5.9, 5th Place East)
Kentucky has played in 5 consecutive bowl games, but I think that streak will end this season unless new quarterback Morgan Newton is much better than I expect him to be. Newton averaged just 4.5 yards per pass play (against teams that would allow 6.1 yppp to an average QB) on 145 pass plays as freshman in 09 and he was 0.4 yppp worse than average as the starter in Kentucky’s bowl game against Pittsburgh last season (4.9 yppp against a Pitt defense that would allow 5.3 yppp to an average QB). Without last year’s top receivers Randall Cobb and Chris Matthews I don’t see Newton being better than average on a compensated yards per pass play basis. The good news is that Newton has thrown only 3 interceptions on 191 career pass plays, as he usually tucks the ball and runs with it rather than forcing throws into traffic.

Last season’s rushing attack was way down even with 4 returning linemen and stars Derrick Locke (887 yards at 5.3 ypr) and Randall Cobb (424 yards at 7.7 ypr) combing for 1311 yards at 5.9 ypr. Overall the Wildcats were only slightly better than average running the ball in 2010 (4.9 yards per rushing play against teams that would allow 4.7 yprp to an average team) and they were 0.4 yprp worse than average without Cobb’s contribution running as a Wildcat quarterback. This season’s top returning back, Raymond Sanders, ran for just 254 yards at 3.7 ypr as a freshman last season and the Wildcats look like a below average rushing team even with 4 returning starters on offensive line. While I think Kentucky’s offense will go from 0.6 yards per play better than average to a bit worse than average, the defense should be much, much better with the loss of only one full-time starter from last year’s team. The Wildcats allowed 5.9 yards per play in 2010 (against teams that would average 5.6 yppl against an average defensive unit) but I project Kentucky at 0.3 yppl better than average this season. Overall, I don’t see Kentucky being much better than an average FBS team, and that’s not nearly good enough to compete in the SEC.

Vanderbilt
(projected SEC record 1.9 – 6.1, 5th Place East)
New head coach James Franklin insists he’s going to turn Vanderbilt’s football fortunes around and he has plenty of experience to work with (19 returning starters plus both kickers), but the Commodores need to greatly improve their pass attack if they have a chance at respectability this season. Incumbent QB Larry Smith was horrible as a sophomore, rating at 2.2 yards per pass play worse than average (3.7 yppp against teams that would allow 5.9 yppp to an average QB) and he was equally horrible last season (3.9 yppp against teams that would allow 6.1 yppp). Smith runs the ball pretty well (429 yards on 76 runs last season), but he’s simply not accurate enough (47.6 percent career completions) to lead the offense to much success.

There was hope that Jordan Rodgers could take over, but Rodgers hasn’t looked good in scrimmages, completing just 7 of 16 passes for a paltry 43 yards and 2 interceptions in the 1st scrimmage and he also struggled last Saturday in the final scrimmage. It looks like Smith will be back at quarterback and it doesn’t appear as if he’s gotten any better either based on the two scrimmages. Overall Vandy QB’s combined to complete just 23 of 48 for just 264 yards in first scrimmage and were even worse last Saturday. Vanderbilt does have two proven running backs in Warren Norman and Zac Stacy, who combined for 790 yards at 5.5 ypr last season, but the offense will only work if the quarterback play vastly improves. Vanderbilt’s defense should go from slightly worse than average (5.9 yppl allowed to teams that would average 5.7 yppl) to better than average against both the run and the pass with a much more experienced unit (8 returning starters this year and just 4 last year) and a good secondary. Vanderbilt gets Kentucky at home and that’s their chance to get out of the SEC East basement.

I’ll post my analysis of the exciting SEC West Division later this week and will post the other major conferences as the season approaches.

_______________________________________

Florida Gators’ Tim Tebow grips religion as firmly as a football

Antonya English, Times Staff Writer
In Print: Saturday, January 3, 2009

Tim Tebow had watched and admired Texas quarterback Colt McCoy from afar for quite some time, so when the two finally met last month, Tebow was excited about the opportunity. But their first conversation wasn’t about which country music star each has on his iPod (although that came later) or who plays on the better team. It was about God and the profound faith each publicly professes on a regular basis. “No. 1 what I like about him is his strength to show his faith and not be ashamed of that,” Tebow said. “We’re very similar in that way. And I wanted to compliment him on his beliefs and how he’s not ashamed to show it.”

A few days after that awards show at Lake Buena Vista, Tebow, McCoy and Oklahoma quarterback Sam Bradford were getting ready to step into the auditorium at the Nokia Theatre in New York before the Heisman Trophy ceremony began. McCoy and Bradford were nervous. They hadn’t been there before. Tebow, who won the Heisman last season, calmed them both by telling them to enjoy the moment. And if they should win, he reminded them, remember to give thanks to who deserved most of the credit.

“I just said give credit to God and represent for him,” the Florida quarterback said. “I really tried to (stress) that the whole time. I talked to them two or three times about it.”

And so when Bradford stepped onto the stage to accept his Heisman, one of the first things out of his mouth was giving thanks to God.

For Tebow, the son of Christian missionaries whose father, Bob, runs an orphanage in the Philippines, in good times and bad, no matter where he is or whom he meets, his faith is what guides the way. After the September loss to Ole Miss, Tebow gave the now-famous postgame speech to reporters in which he promised that he and the Gators would outwork every other player and team in the nation.

He ended it in much the same way he does many of his interviews — with “God bless.”

“Tim understands, we’re here for a reason,” said McCoy, the Heisman runnerup. “God has blessed us. He has given us the ability to play, to compete. And we just want to be a light for him out there.”

Holding firm to faith

On the September day the Gators walked off in agony after their loss to then-unranked Ole Miss, all eyes were on Tebow. It was he who had been stopped on a crucial fourth and 1 that ended the comeback hopes.

As he walked off the field, underneath his teary eyes, painted in white on his eye-black patches, was: Phil 4:13.

The Philippians 4:13 verse reads: “I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.”

He wears it in every game. It is, in essence, a guideline for his life.

“He doesn’t do it for show or for people to talk about,” sophomore offensive lineman Maurkice Pouncey said. “It’s just a way to show what he’s about, what he believes, how he lives. It’s really that simple.”

After that loss, Tebow reminded his teammates that everything happens for a reason. God has planned it that way. Their goal was to find the good in the loss and turn it to their advantage.

Again, his faith never wavered.

“It’s who he is,” senior receiver Louis Murphy said. “You don’t question that. You respect it.”

Which is why Tebow can walk the very fine line of always publicly professing his faith, yet somehow never offending.

“He doesn’t fear anything,” UF coach Urban Meyer said. “A lot of people take their heart out, rip it out of their chest and lay it on the table. I’m not willing to do that, and certainly not my family. But Bob (his father) is that way, and Pam (his mother) and their whole family. They have such a strong faith. In this world of hypocrisy, there’s none (with them).”

Meyer admits he had heard about Tebow’s strong beliefs, and when he first met him, he was skeptical.

“I was like okay, come on, the Philippines, c’mon give me the real gig here,” Meyer said. “You want a hat? What’s the deal? But it’s true. It’s all from the heart. I love that guy. I’ve never met one like him.”

Tebow understands that being the starting quarterback at Florida has given him a platform to tell others about his faith in a unique way. His high profile is what got him into Florida state prisons last summer to talk about Jesus. Talk of his faith is what caused a large group of men to convert.

“For me, I just want to be a good role model, like (former UF quarterback) Danny Wuerffel was for me and several other guys that I looked up to,” Tebow said. “I want to be someone that kids can look up to in today’s society.”

In this era, church attendance in many places has waned. Why has Tebow been able to stand out with his faith without opposition?

“I really think a lot of it is because he’s just a good person,” said Matt Hayes, national college writer for the Sporting News. “There’s so much negative about sports in general these days: from off-field issues, to coaches breaking contracts, to the daily police blotter report. Here you have a guy like Tebow who not only is one of the elite players in the nation, but is genuinely someone who looks for the good in people and wants to help. That’s not to say there aren’t other players who don’t think/feel/act the same way, but Tebow’s success on the field has put him in position to be recognized for what he accomplishes off it.”

And it’s not something Tebow takes lightly.

Just a regular guy

So how does a star player who is so grounded in his faith manage to remain the most popular guy on the team, never isolating himself from others?

By being just one of the guys.

In his rare off-time, Tebow isn’t standing on a corner waving a Bible and a sign condemning nonbelievers to hell. But he is working prison ministries, traveling to foreign countries to give his testimony and volunteering for those less fortunate. He holds Bible studies and participates in the Fellowship of Christian Athletes. Former roommate Tony Joiner often participated in the Bible study, which he admitted even surprised him. Tebow listens to Kenny Chesney and tells jokes like everyone else.

“He’s just a regular guy,” receiver Percy Harvin said. “To us, that (his religion) is just Tebow. That’s who he is, so it doesn’t seem unusual. And everybody understands that.”

Added Murphy: “I can’t explain it any better than this: He’s a great God man, and everything falls in line for him because of the way he lives.”

Antonya English can be reached at english@sptimes.com

Florida quarterback Tim Tebow’s eye-black patches remind him: “I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.”

Florida quarterback Tim Tebow’s eye-black patches remind him: “I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.”