Monthly Archives: January 2012

Mike Wallace 1958 interview of Salvador Dali (Part 2)

January 19, 2012 – 4:35 pm
There was a very interesting interview with Dali by Mike Wallace. Here are the video clips and transcript below:
WALLACE: …in religion. Well now I spoke with you about a year ago and we talked about religion, and you said that as the years go by,you embrace Roman Catholicism more and more with your mind but not yet completely with your heart.DALI: This is true,WALLACE: Why not?

DALI: Because…perhaps it is my early intellectual training and information. But now every day is more approach of this real feeling of religion. Just one month ago– is one tremendous operation of appendix – a broken appendix. After this operation becoming three times more religious than before.

WALLACE: How old are you Dali?

DALI: Never remember exactly, but 54 or 53 or something.

WALLACE: Are you formally involved with your religion? Do you go to church a good deal – do you pray – do you….

DALI: Every day more, but is no sufficient…

WALLACE: Not sufficient….Have you ever had a supernatural vision?

DALI: Visionary things – but no supernatural.

WALLACE: No supernatural. An article about you – you mention your fear of death. An article about you in Life magazine once said that you’re afraid of almost everything from ocean liners to grasshoppers. The article said you won’t buy shoes because you don’t like to take off your shoes in public. And that when you go out you carry a little piece of Spanish driftwood which you keep to ward off evil spells.

DALI: Yes, because remind very very superstitious but this is- I’m sure is is common of every Spanish people, you know. Spanish people is very superstitious.

WALLACE: Do you know anything about politics at all? You say you don’t care about them. Do you know anything about them? Do you know, for instance who the prime minister of Great Britain is?

DALI: Yes, but no – not particularly care of this. Because, for me the important thing is look – the philosophical event of every moment. And now is absolutely sure for instance, monarchy is restored in Spain very shortly.

WALLACE: You think it will be?

DALI: Prince Juan Carlos and Franco agree on its restoration. Is absolutely convincing the monarchy coming back in France very shortly after one military mayor or perhaps one De Gaulle or another….

WALLACE: Do you know – do you know who the Vice President of the United States is? Can you name him…

DALI: Mr. Nixon. Yes, yes – but, but what is possible now – what is possible perhaps tomorrow you put this in quick question and…

WALLACE: And you will answer… What do you enjoy doing most? Do you like to talk, to paint, to eat, to think? What, what do you like to spend your time doing, Dali?

DALI: My manner of expend my time – is the more joy, the more delightful is becoming every day – a little more – Dali.

WALLACE: A little more Dali.

DALI: Because in the beginning of my life, you remember in like at becoming Napoleon…

WALLACE: First you wanted to be a cook – first you waited to be a cook, then you wanted to be a Napoleon.

DALI: Cook and woman – one woman cooking.

WALLACE: You wanted to be a woman, cooking?

DALI: Exactly … a woman cooking. Second, like of becoming Napoleon.

WALLACE: Napoleon.

DALI: A little one like it becoming Dali. And now is every day more Dali.

WALLACE: In a moment I’d like to ask you about an extraordinary power which you claim that you have. You’ve written that you can remember your thoughts and your feelings before you were born.

And I’d like to know what those thoughts and feelings were. And we’ll get Salvador Dali’s answer in just sixty seconds.

(COMMERCIAL)

WALLACE: Now then, Dali – you said that you can remember not only things that happened to you in your infancy, but even your feelings before you were born. What were they? What did you think about? What did you feel?

DALI: Well I remember very clearly many mansions. How so – not only in black and white but in glorious technicolor….technicolor.

WALLACE: I see, and what specifically.. What were some of these things?

DALI: At some phosphorous and x-luminous-x…..I told these visions to Doctor Freud in London. Freud tell me that it is absolutely true – is the region of intra-uterine memories. Probably my position – fetal position, my pupils is very hurt by my hands. Depend on my position.

WALLACE: Was it – well, what was it like? Was it, was it pleasant before you were born?

DALI: Ah – it was completely paradise.

WALLACE: Paradise…

DALI: From this moment the more divine nature – in the moment of born is the moment of the paradise is lost. This is an ethereal …

WALLACE: Well, under those circumstances I find it difficult to understand your fear of death. If the moment of being born was paradise-lost, perhaps death, for you will be paradise-regained. And therefore I would think that you would….

DALI: This is my hope. But is not absolutely sure. This is the trouble. You see, the death is again the regain of this paradise – this is excellent, but is not, not sure.

WALLACE: Do you, do you enjoy yourself as you live. Do you like yourself? You think – you say that you are a genius. Certainly you have had…

DALI: I enjoy my life every day more.

WALLACE: You do…

DALI: Every week more. Because of Sir Dali – and my admiration for Dali is becoming tremendous.

WALLACE: Yes, What kind of dreams do you have? What are they about, Dali?

DALI: Every time is very agreeable and creative. The last dreams is about the anti-matter angels. Perhaps for five months only dream about archangels, angels, kings and the most beautiful spectacular.

WALLACE: You seem to be a mild-mannered man. Are you?

DALI: I don’t understand – mild?

WALLACE: Are you, are you a mild man? Are you a pleasant man to deal with? Are you a friendly man? You seem to be a mild man.

DALI: Everybody love Dali very much.

WALLACE: Everybody loves Dali.

DALI: But they pick on him.

WALLACE: But your paintings – they’re frequently violent. And you’ve written, that in your private life you have had sudden impulses to injure people. As a child you kicked people – you threw a friend off a rocky ledge. As an adult you confessed that you once kicked a legless beggar along the street.

DALI: Exactly. But this is my adolescence period. Now becoming much more quiet in these kind of sadistic things.

WALLACE: Yes…

DALI: As a contrary – after my religious feelings becoming more strong – these sadistic things of my adolescence disappeared almost completely.

WALLACE: Is that so? And, and when you were a young man, too, you used to try to hurt – you were masochistic as well as sadistic. You used to try to hurt yourself…you’d bind your head until it hurt, because you felt that you could be more creative that way. You do not need that…..

DALI: No – now every of this has disappear because every of my libido now is simply made in the religion and the mysticism.

WALLACE: Well, there’s one story about yourself I’d like to ask you about before you go. When you were courting your wife, Gala you did an unusual thing. As you’ve described it, you smeared your body with your own blood from a cut. You tore your clothes and then you rubbed a jar of evil-smelling fish glue all over yourself. And you planned to present yourself this way in front of your future wife. Why did you do that?

DALI: Because in this moment of weakness in this moment Dali is true is almost crazy before met Gala. My, my brain is very close of one sick pathologic brain.

WALLACE: Your brain, yes…

DALI: In this moment liked seduce Gala in the most terrific manner. I believe from the smell is a more attractive manner for seduce Gala. Gala becoming in love with me appears as probably the real …Gala created the real mysticism or the real classicist of my adult life.

WALLACE: And you have been married now to Gala for how many years?

DALI: Oh perhaps 20 or more, but is still in love with Gala – more than in the beginning. That is something that nobody believe. Perhaps – Dali never make love avec one other woman than Gala.

WALLACE: In 20 years.

DALI: And the people never believe because – everybody….

WALLACE: Why – why shouldn’t we believe? It’s the most sensible thing in the world.

DALI: Yes, but there is no… you should believe – it’s very frequent. But the other people don’t think it’s very exceptional.

WALLACE: Well I don’t think perhaps as exceptional as…

DALI: And now my obsession is the chastity, because….

WALLACE: Chastity…

DALI: …is more important for religious belief.

WALLACE: Dali, I certainly thank you for coming and spending this time. I’m looking forward to the publication of your new book, “Dali” which will be published in the Fall and I understand will have a good many color plates of your paintings in it. Thank you Dali.

DALI: Merci.

WALLACE: To those who raise eyebrows or look down their noses at him, Salvador Dali bristles his remarkable moustache with equal disdain. As he puts it, “I cannot understand why human beings should be so little individualized. Why they should behave with such great collective uniformity.” He says, “I do not understand why, when I ask for grilled lobster in a restaurant, I’m never served a cooked telephone.” I’ll be back in a moment with a special announcement about future plans.

(COMMERCIAL)

WALLACE: Tonight’s interview ends my series which started a year ago for the Philip Morris Company, the makers of Philip Morris, Parliament, and Marlboro cigarettes and I want to thank the Philip Morris Company, sincerely, for helping me to bring you these programs.

WALLACE: Next Sunday evening – next Sunday evening at ten o’clock Eastern Daylight Saving Time, on many of these stations, I’ll start a new interview series devoted to the theme of Freedom and Survival. The series will be produced in cooperation with the Fund for the Republic and will be designed to encourage public discussion of freedom and justice. We’re going to talk about the problems of the individual in his relationship to big government, big business, and big labor.

WALLACE: We’re going to examine the growing power of political parties and pressure groups, we’ll talk about the responsibility of our mass media…newspapers, magazines, motion pictures and television. We’ll discuss these issues with such men as Supreme Court Justice William Douglas, Aldous Huxley, author of “Brave New World”, industrialist Cyrus Eaton. Next Sunday night on the first program, we’ll open the series with an examination of religious skepticism.

WALLACE: Of the conflict between church and state, of religion and morality in American life. Our guest, you see him behind me, will be one of the world’s leading religious thinkers, the Protestant theologian, Doctor Reinhold Niebuhr. We’ll ask Doctor Niebuhr why he charges that our current religious revival is essentially meaningless. We’ll find out why Doctor Niebuhr says that religion can never abolish injustice and evil in society. That’s next Sunday at ten on many of these stations. Until then, Mike Wallace – goodnight.

ANNOUNCER: The Mike Wallace Interview has been brought to you by the new high filtration Parliament. Parliament – now for the first time at popular price.

 
By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Comments (0)

Newt and Clinton:Both were Southern Baptists living hypocritcal lives

January 19, 2012 – 4:30 pm
Karen Santorum and Callista Gingrich

EXCLUSIVE: Ron Paul Has A Secret Plan To Win America

 

I used to go to the Immanuel Baptist Church (Clinton was member there) Luncheon every week in Little Rock and in 1995 I visited the large Southern Baptist Church in the Atlanta where Newt was a member.

Both men evidently shared some hypocritical habits which included cheating on their wife.  The Arkansas Times rightly pointed out that Newt is in trouble because of the news clip seen above. Christian leaders are now discussing what to do below in the Republican primaries.

With just days to go before South Carolina’s First In South Republican primary, the war over who should be the not-Mitt Romney candidate has gone completely nuclear. 

Desperate to settle on one conservative alternative, Religious Right leaders backing Rick Santorum and those backing Newt Gingrich are now resorting to vicious attacks against what have long been seen as off-limits targets in presidential campaigns — the candidates’ wives.

Influential evangelical leader James Dobson set off the fireworks at this weekend’s Christian Right summit, giving a speech that lavished praise on Karen Santorum and asked whether Americans really wanted Callista Gingrich — “a woman who was a man’s mistress for eight years” — as their First Lady, according to sources who attended the meeting.

Sources told Business Insider that Dobson’s speech was a “startling moment” that left many in the audience — particularly those who support Gingrich — floored. One source described Dobson’s tone as “angry,” and said it seemed like Dobson was blaming Callista Gingrich for the couples’ affair, which began while the former House Speaker was still married to his second wife (this is Callista Gingrich’s first marriage).

“It was clear that, to him, the villian in this story is Callista Gingrich,” the source said. “And he was announcing it to 170 ministers with huge mailing lists and television ministries.”

Needless to say, the Texas summit did little to unite the Christian Right. On Sunday, the day following the conference, reports began circulating about Karen Santorum’s six-year love affair with a Pittsburgh obsetrician and abortion provider 40 years her senior. (The Santorum campaign has yet to comment on the story.) 

The vitiriol of these attacks indicates that the schism in the Religious Right is only getting worse as the 2012 race drags on. Sources who attended this weekend’s summit — which was ostensibly held to unite religious conservatives behind one candidate — said that the conference was largely a charade, with the outcome predetermined in favor of Santorum. 

In the wake of the conference, Christian Right leaders have publicly split into two camps — a bad sign for a coalition whose strength has always come from its solidarity. In one camp, powerful evangelical scions like Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family; Family Research Council President Tony Perkins; and Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention, have thrown their support behind Santorum. On the other hand, influential California megachurch pastor Jim Garlow, evangelical activist David Lane, and Christian marketing guru George Barna have teamed up to support Gingrich.

Ultimately, the beneficiary of all this evangelical infighting is Romney, who has already been helped by the divided social conservative vote. But it is unclear if the former Massachusetts Governor — a Mormon with a history of flip-flopping on social issues — has what it takes to patch the Religious Right back together and convince them to go to bat for him as the Republican nominee. If he can’t reunite this powerful coalition, his path to the White House could be very difficult.

 
By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Comments (0)

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

January 19, 2012 – 12:36 pm

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 www.HaltingArkansasLiberalswithTruth.com I took you at your word and sent you over 100 emails with specific spending cut ideas. However, I did not see any of them in the recent debt deal that Congress adopted. Now I am trying another approach. Every week from now on I will send you an email explaining different reasons why we need the Balanced Budget Amendment. It will appear on my blog on “Thirsty Thursday” because the government is always thirsty for more money to spend.

In this paper below you will read:

America cannot raise taxes to continue overspending, because tax hikes shrink our economy and grow our government. America cannot borrow more to continue overspending, because borrowing puts an enormous financial burden on the American children of tomorrow. A BBA will help address this long-term problem because, after the multi-year process for securing ratification of the BBA by three-quarters of the states, the BBA will keep federal spending under control in subsequent years.

Washington has not been able to cut spending so the BBA is needed to force Washington to do the right thing. Your father David Pryor was the governor of Arkansas and he knew what it meant to have a balanced budget by mandate.

Thank you again for this opportunity to share my ideas with you.

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher, lowcostsqueegees@yahoo.com

Balanced Budget Amendment: Cut Spending Later, Cut Spending Now

March 31, 2011

Two key principles should govern congressional consideration of an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that requires the federal government to balance its budget:

  • First Principle: A Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA) is important to help bring long-term fiscal responsibility to America’s future when the BBA takes effect after ratification by three-quarters of the state legislatures; it is equally important for Congress to cut spending nowto address the current overspending crisis.
  • Second Principle: An effective BBA will include three elements to: (a) control spending, taxation, and borrowing, (b) ensure the defense of America, and (c) enforce the requirement to balance the budget.

Cuts for the Future, Cuts for the Present

Federal spending is out of control—both obligations for the future and spending right now.

Congress must get spending under control in the long term. America cannot raise taxes to continue overspending, because tax hikes shrink our economy and grow our government. America cannot borrow more to continue overspending, because borrowing puts an enormous financial burden on the American children of tomorrow. A BBA will help address this long-term problem because, after the multi-year process for securing ratification of the BBA by three-quarters of the states, the BBA will keep federal spending under control in subsequent years.

Congress also must get spending under control in the short term. Federal overspending is not simply about the future, but also about the present. Under the President’s Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Submission, measured by the Congressional Budget Office, the federal government will spend $1.2 trillion more than it will take in, a gargantuan burden of additional debt forced on future generations to pay current bills.

Thus, America needs both a Balanced Budget Amendment for the long term and deep cuts in federal spending starting right now, without waiting for a BBA to take effect. As Congress considers budget resolutions, appropriations bills, appropriations continuing resolutions, and debt limit bills, Congress should take every opportunity now to cut federal spending, including for the biggest overspending problem: the ever-growing entitlement programs.

Congress should recognize that the best way to encourage state legislatures to ratify a BBA is to demonstrate, through consistent congressional cuts in spending, that the American people have the will to accept spending cuts to balance the budget.

Elements of a Successful Balanced Budget Amendment

A successful BBA will:

  • Control spending, taxing, and borrowing through a requirement to balance the budget.The BBA should cap annual spending at a level not exceeding either: (a) a specified percentage of the value of goods and services the economy produces in a year (known as gross domestic product, or GDP), or (b) the level of revenues. To ensure that Congress cannot simply balance the budget by continually raising taxes instead of cutting overspending, the BBA should require Congress to act by supermajority votes if Members wish to raise taxes. Any authority the BBA grants Congress to deal with economic slowdowns, by waiving temporarily the requirement that spending not exceed the GDP percentage or revenue level, should specify the amount of above-revenue spending allowed and require supermajority votes.
  • Defend America. The BBA should allow Congress by supermajority votes to waive temporarily compliance with the balanced budget requirement when waiver is essential to pay for the defense of Americans from attack.
  • Enforce the balanced budget requirement. The BBA should provide for its own enforcement, but must specifically exclude courts from any enforcement of the BBA, so unelected judges do not make policy decisions such as determining the appropriate level of funding for federal programs. A government that spends money in excess of its revenues must borrow to cover the difference. Therefore, to enforce the requirement to balance the budget, the BBA should prohibit government issuance of debt, except when necessary to finance a temporary deficit resulting from congressional supermajority votes discussed above.

America is in a fiscal crisis. Our government spends too much. Overspending must stop immediately. Overspending will stop only if Congress cuts spending now, including with respect to the ever-expanding entitlement programs. For the future, Congress and three-quarters of state legislatures can adopt and ratify a Balanced Budget Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to anchor the American willingness to live within a balanced budget.

David S. Addington is Vice President for Domestic and Economic Policy, and J. D. Foster, Ph.D., is Norman B. Ture Senior Fellow in the Economics of Fiscal Policy, at The Heritage Foundation.

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in spending out of control | Comments (0)

Keith Green Story (Part 2)

January 19, 2012 – 12:20 am

The Keith Green Story pt 3/7

Keith Green had a major impact on me back in 1978 when I first heard him. Here is his story below:

Spiritual Conversion

 

Keith had a Jewish and Christian Science background, but grew up reading the New Testament. He called it “an odd combination” that left him open minded but deeply unsatisfied. His journey led him to drugs, South Asian mysticism, and “free love.” After experiencing what Green described as a “bad trip,” he abandoned drug use and became bitter towards philosophy and theology in general. Green would later state, however, that in the midst of his skepticism, he felt that God “broke through calloused heart,” and he became a born-again Christian. Soon afterward, Keith’s wife Melody (whom he had married on Christmas Day 1973) also became a born-again Christian. It was during this time that the newlyweds became involved with the Vineyard Christian Fellowship in Southern California.

 

Ministry

 

In 1975, the Greens began an outreach program in the suburbs of Los Angeles, California, in the San Fernando Valley. Purchasing the home next door to their own and renting an additional five in the same neighborhood, Keith and Melody provided a environment of Christian teaching for a group of young adults, the majority of whom were of college age. Much to the consternation of neighbors, those living in the Green’s homes included former drug addicts, the homeless and even some prostitutes who had been referred to the Greens by other ministries and shelters. In 1977, the Greens outreach was officially named Last Days Ministries.

 

Keith Green’s initial tone of ministry was largely influenced by Leonard Ravenhill, who pointed Keith to Charles Finney, a nineteenth century revivalist preacher who preached the law of God to provoke conviction in his hearers.  During his concerts he would often exhort his listeners to repent and commit themselves more wholly to following Christ.  Green later softened his approach, and this transition is evident in his music beginning with So You Wanna Go Back To Egypt in 1980.
Recording

Green was signed to Contemporary Christian music label Sparrow Records in 1976 and worked on the album Firewind (1976) with Christian artists 2nd Chapter of Acts, Terry Talbot, John Michael Talbot, and Barry McGuire. His first solo project, For Him Who Has Ears to Hear, was released in 1977 and his second solo release, No Compromise, followed in 1978.

 

In 1979, after negotiating a release from his contract with Sparrow, Green initiated a new policy of refusing to charge money for concerts or albums. Keith and Melody mortgaged their home to privately finance Green’s next album, So You Wanna Go Back To Egypt. The album, which featured a guest appearance by Bob Dylan, was offered through mail-order and at concerts for a price determined by the purchaser. As of May 1982, Green had shipped out more than 200,000 units of his album ? 61,000 for free. Subsequent albums included The Keith Green Collection (1981) and Songs For The Shepherd (1982).

 

When his music was carried by Christian bookstores, a second cassette was included free of charge for every cassette purchased to give away to a friend to help spread the Gospel.

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Comments (0)

Mike Wallace 1958 interview of Salvador Dali (Part 1)

January 18, 2012 – 4:31 pm
There was a very interesting interview with Dali by Mike Wallace. Here are the video clips and transcript below:

Salvador Dali – Mike Wallace interview 1958 – Part 1/2

THE MIKE WALLACE INTERVIEW
Guest: Salvador Dali
4/19/58WALLACE: Good evening…Tonight we go after the story of an extraordinary personality. He’s Salvador Dali, the great surrealist painter who sees the world through surrealist eyes. If you’re curious to hear Salvador Dali talk about decadence, death and immortality, about his surrealist art, his politics and his existence before he was born,we’ll go after those stories in just a moment. My name is Mike Wallace, the cigarette is Parliament.

(COMMERCIAL)

WALLACE: And now to our story. Salvador Dali is a self-confessed genius with an ingenious flair for publicity. An internationally renowned modern artist, he’s also designed fur lined bathtubs, he’s lectured with his head enclosed in a diving helmet and he claims that at the basis of his ideas are, as he puts it, cauliflowers and rhinoceros horns.

WALLACE: He paints like this, here you see perhaps his most famous work. It’s called “Persistence of Memory”. In contrast to this dream like picture, here is Dali’s surrealistic commentary on the horrors of war. It’s called “The Face of War”. And now an example of Dali’s latest phase, “The Crucifixion” showing his current preoccupation with religious subjects. Now let’s try to find out some more about the enigma of Salvador Dali.

WALLACE: Dali, first of all let me ask you this, you’re a remarkable painter and you’ve dedicated your life to art, in view of this, why do you behave the way that you do? For instance, you have been known to drive in a car filled to the roof with cauliflowers. You lectured, as I mentioned, once with your head enclosed in a diving helmet and you almost suffocated. You issue bizarre statements about your love for rhinoceros horns and so on. You’re a dedicated artist, why do you or why must you do these things?

DALI: Because for this kind of eccentricities correspond with more important and the more tragical part of my life.

WALLACE: The more important and the more tragical part. I don’t understand.

DALI: The more philosophical.

WALLACE: Well, what is philosophical about driving in a car full of cauliflowers or lecturing inside a diving helmet?

DALI: Because discover and make one tremendous speech, a most scientific in the Sorbonne in Paris… of what my discovering of the logarithmic curve of cauliflower.

WALLACE: The what?

DALI: logarithmic curve of cauliflower.

WALLACE : Oh yes, the “logarithmic curve”… yes…

DALI: And if in time the logarithmic curve in the horns of rhinoceros — in this time discover, this is a symbol of chastity, one of the most powerful symbols of modern times.

WALLACE: Chastity is one of the most powerful symbols of modern times?

DALI: In my opinion it is the more… urgent and the more dramatic because the chastity represents the force of spirit…. chaste in any religion, you know because of promiscuity, the people make love, there is no more the spiritual strength, no more the spiritual thoughts.

WALLACE: Well, we’ll get to your spirituality your increasing spirituality over the years in just a moment. About lecturing with your head enclosed in a diving helmet, why? why?

DALI: Because I think there is nothing like it. The audience understand Dali when penetrate in the bottom of the sea…

WALLACE: What’s that?

DALI: Penetrate.

WALLACE: Penetrate ?

DALI: In the bottom of subconscient mean… sea… In– inside the sea.

WALLACE: Yes, down in the sea?

DALI: In the depth of the sub-conscious.

WALLACE: In the depth of the sub-conscious?

DALI: Exactly. The sea is one very clear symbol for arriving this stage of…

WALLACE: We try to understand in all seriousness…We try to understand you and you try to explain but earlier this week you told our reporter, “I like to be a clown, a buffoon, I like to spread complete confusion.” Before we were on the air, you said to me. “Ask embarrassing questions, ask embarrassing questions”. Why?

DALI: Because incidentally, make one movie in France, only it is movie of myself dance Charleston and my friends look this piece of movie at all, Dali in this part is much better than Charlie Chaplin. For me is very interesting…

WALLACE: Well are you…

DALI: …because you see in Dali is one marvelous painter, in living time is one marvelous clown… much more interesting for everybody

WALLACE: You want to be a marvelous clown as well as a marvelous painter?

DALI: If it is possible, live two together is very good, you know. Charlie Chaplin is one genial clown but never painted like Dali, Charlie Chaplin’s living times paint masterpieces. Or is thousand times much more important to Charlie Chaplin.

WALLACE: Well now wait. Wait. Despite your hi-jinks, time and again you have called yourself a genius and you’re very serious about this. Now you want to be evidently, you want to be a genius in two fields. First of all, you have called yourself a genius?

DALI: In many different fields, you know.

WALLACE: You?

DALI: Yes.

WALLACE: What else besides an artist?

DALI: The most important in my life, modern clown, modern painting, modern draftsmanship is my personality.

WALLACE: Draftsmanship?

DALI: My personality?

WALLACE: Oh yes.

DALI: My personality is more important than any of these little facets of my activities.

WALLACE: In other words, what is most important to you…

DALI: Is my personality.

WALLACE: …..is expressing Dali, not the painting, not the clowning, nothing but…

DALI: The painting, the clowning, the showmanship, the technique – everything is only one manner for express the total personality of Dali.

WALLACE: I see, I see. Let’s take a look at one of your major paintings, Dali. It’s called “Sleep”. There it is now on the monitor. What’s the point of this picture? Is there any point?

DALI: This is very important because myself work constantly in the moment of sleep… Every of my best ideas coming through my dreams and the more Dalian activity consists in this moment of sleep.

WALLACE: In other words, you conceive a good deal of your…

DALI: The most important things happen in the moment of myself in sleep…

WALLACE: I was going to ask if there was any major theme, any powerful idea which inspires all your work, could you tell us what it was? Evidently what it is, is simply an expression of Dali, period. There is nothing more in it or am I wrong?

DALI: No, Dali. Of course, the cosmogony of Dali.

WALLACE: The what?

DALI: Cosmogony of Dali.

WALLACE: What is the cosmogony of Dali? What does that mean?

DALI: This is in advance of a new nuclear physics, because every of my paintings, everybody laugh in the moment of look for the first time but almost after twelve years every scientific people recognize the area of this painting is one real prophecy in the moment of painting my soft watches, the more rigid object for everybody, and myself paint these watches in the soft Camembert– everybody laugh. The last development of nuclear physics proved to a new conception of space-time is completely flexible. Now it is in microphysics the time brought in reverse and this proved that this object of completely surrealistic approach of soft watches for what is completely true and scientific…

WALLACE: Dali, I must confess, you lost me about half way through and I’m not sure I’m not sure that we can let me try it another way.

What does a painter, what does any painter contribute to the world and to his fellowmen? Any painter, not just Dali. What does a painter contribute?

DALI: Every painter paints the cosmogony of himself.

WALLACE: Of himself, and it’s as simple as that? Which contains…..

DALI: Raphael paint because of the cosmogony of Raphael. Raphael is the Renaissance period. Dali paint the atomic age and the Freudian age nuclear things and psychologic things.

WALLACE: Which contemporary painters, if any, do you admire?

DALI: First Dali, after Dali, Picasso, after this, no others.

WALLACE: Of these, Dali and Picasso are the only two that really excite you?

DALI: The two geniuses of modern painting.

WALLACE: The two geniuses of modern times are Dali and Picasso? In your autobiography, you wrote this, you said, “I adore three things, weakness, old age and luxury”. Why?

DALI: Because luxury is one product of monarchy, and myself every day becoming more monarchy, not in a political way because never is Dali interested in political… but…

WALLACE: In politics.

DALI: In the philosophical and cosmological…

WALLACE: Way?

DALI: Yes, because in the modern sense, the new discoveries of chromosomes and physics and biology, everything through the monarchy is the most luxurious things in life…

WALLACE: The most luxurious, all right. Now, old age…

DALI: …..and the most perfect.

WALLACE: And the most perfect? And old age? Why do you adore old age?

DALI: Because the little young peoples completely stupid, you know.

WALLACE: Young people are stupid?

DALI: They all only believe geniuses are old people (like) Leonardo de Vinci or arrive at some real achievement.

WALLACE: And weakness, why do you adore weakness?

DALI: Because in the modern physics everything is weak, every proton and neutron is surrounded of weakness, of nothing. In this moment the most fantastic thing in physics is le anti-matter. Every new physician talk about anti-matter, and Dali paint, 20 years ago, le first anti-matter angels.

WALLACE: You write in your biography that death is beautiful. What’s beautiful about death? Why is death beautiful?

DALI: This is one feeling everything is erotic in my opinion.

WALLACE: Everything is what?

DALI: Erotic.

WALLACE: Erotic?

DALI: …is ugly, in the middle of everything ugly so arrive the feeling of death, everything becomes noble and sublime.

WALLACE: Oh, in other words, life is erotic and therefore ugly. Death is not erotic but sublime, therefore beautiful?

DALI: And beautiful. You know for instance, you, Micky Wallace, now is you a little good pay, a little handsome, but essentially, you becoming death, everybody tips his chapeau to you, you become fantastic man, everybody respects you a thousand times much better.

WALLACE: Is this by way of a suggestion?

DALI: Exactly. See you make one strip tease, you become ugly in one second.

WALLACE: Oh, I agree, I agree. Tell me this, what do you think will happen to you when you die?

DALI: myself not believe in my death.

WALLACE: You will not die?

DALI: No, no believe in general in death but in the death of Dali absolutely not. Believe in my death becoming very — almost impossible.

WALLACE: You fear death?

DALI: Yes.

WALLACE: Death is beautiful but you fear death?

DALI: Exactly……because Dali is contradictory and paradoxical man.

WALLACE: Well yes indeed, Dali is paradoxical and contradictory but why — why this fear of death? What do you fear in death?

DALI: Because there is no sufficient convenience of my faith in religion. In the moment of myself believe more ?

WALLACE: You’re not sufficiently convinced of your faith….

DALI: Exactly.

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Comments (0)

The nation of Israel and Genesis 12:3 (Series on Israel part 1)

January 18, 2012 – 12:47 pm

The Birth Of Israel (2008) – Part 1/8

I can’t say I agree with every word from Chuck Colson’s words below but it is a good article though.

Covenant and Conflict

Israel’s Place in the World Today

By Chuck Colson|Published Date: February 18, 2003

When our BreakPoint Managing Editor Jim Tonkowich returned from this year’s National Religious Broadcasters convention, he told me that what struck him most was the emphasis on Israel. The Israeli tourist bureau had the largest booth at the trade show. Menorahs, Sabbath candles, and ram horns were being marketed to Christians. And unswerving political support for the contemporary state of Israel was trumpeted.

Ariel Sharon was repeatedly called a “hero.” All the land, they said, belongs to the Jews, and the Palestinians don’t belong at all. One speaker at a pro-Israel press conference told the cheering audience that the first question to ask any candidate running for any office is, “What do you think of Israel?” Somehow God’s covenant with Abraham in Genesis 12:3 has become a carte blanche for Ariel Sharon and his government. And what’s more, some Christians have been arguing that we should never evangelize Jews since they are already a covenant people and, thus, saved.

As a Christian and believer in the Abrahamic covenant, I’m a strong supporter of Israel and the Jewish people. I take Genesis 12:3 literally. I also believe that Jesus will return and rule the earth for one thousand years from Jerusalem — a pre-millennial perspective on the second coming. I believe that God has a special plan for the Jewish people and the land of Israel.

But I think it is problematic to relate prophecy to current events unfolding in the nation-state of Israel. There may be some relationship, of course. Only God knows. But the secular state of Israel created in 1948 is not, in my understanding, identical with the Jewish people as God’s chosen and called-out covenant people.

God clearly has a distinct plan for the Jewish people that the secular state of Israel helps carry out. I don’t rule that out, of course. And I strongly support Israel because it is a haven for persecuted Jews — not because I think it fulfills biblical prophecy.

I also support a Palestinian state both from historical and prudential considerations. Given the state of affairs in the Middle East, a Palestinian state is the only practicable solution for peace.

By that, I do not mean a Palestinian state headed by Yasser Arafat, who is a terrorist and continues to allow — or at least refuses to discourage — brutal, vicious, unprincipled attacks on Israeli citizens. Instead we need an independent, self-governing Palestinian state living in peace alongside Israel. Prison Fellowship has a ministry with Palestinian Christians living in Israel who are working for peace and justice, and I’ve met many of them. They are beautiful brothers and sisters.

We need to remember that even God’s covenant people — a people to whom we in the Church belong — sin. And even if we could equate the covenant people of God with the state of Israel, we could be sure that like all states, churches, and people, it would be filled with sin. Human rights violations and violence occur on both sides of the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. And all sinners, Jews included, need repentance and faith in Christ in order to enjoy full membership in God’s covenant.

Israel is a free nation, the only democracy in the Middle East, and a reliable ally. Politically, we stand with them. But our true hope for peace lies only in the warring parties’ turning to the one, true Prince of peace.

For further reading:Caryle Murphy, “Evangelical Leaders Ask Bush to Adopt Balanced Mideast Policy,” Washington Post, 27 July 2002.

“The First Freedom of the Soul,” remarks by President George W. Bush to the American Jewish Committee, White House Office of the Press Secretary, 3 May 2001.

J. Budziszewski, “Loaded Questions,” Boundless, 12 September 2002 (see “Jerusalem, Jerusalem”).

Philip Jenkins, The Next Christendom: The Coming of Global Christianity (Oxford University Press, 2002).
By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Comments (0)

Romney must embrace some of Ron Paul’s ideas or take Rand as VP

January 18, 2012 – 10:10 am

There is no other way around this problem for Romney. If he wins the Republican Nomination for President then the must embrace some of Paul’s ideas (as suggested below by Senator Demint) or get Rand Paul to be the VP candidate.

GOP Should Heed Ron Paul

by Michael D. Tanner

Michael Tanner is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and author of Leviathan on the Right: How Big-Government Conservatism Brought Down the Republican Revolution.

Added to cato.org on January 18, 2012

This article appeared in National Review (Online) on January 18, 2012.

The warnings are coming from the unlikeliest of places.

First Sarah Palin tells Fox News that “the worst thing that the GOP establishment can do is marginalize Ron Paul and his supporters.” Then that sentiment was echoed by Sen. Jim DeMint, speaking on The Laura Ingraham Show, when he warned that it would be to the party’s detriment to ignore Paul and his supporters. DeMint even gave permission for Paul to use the senator’s voice in a radio ad.

In the two Republican contests so far, Paul consistently won about 20 percent of the vote. Polls show that even in South Carolina, which is not considered hospitable territory for the Texas congressman, he is expected to take about one-sixth of the vote. It is very likely that he will reach the Republican convention with the second-highest number of delegates.

What can Republicans do to keep Paul’s supporters in the tent?

Yet, large portions of the Republican party seem torn somewhere between reading him out of the party entirely and hoping that Paul and his supporters will quietly fade away.

Many of Paul’s detractors belittle his vote totals by pointing out that much of his support has come from non-Republicans. It is true that Paul won in both Iowa and New Hampshire among independents and people who had never before voted in a Republican primary. In New Hampshire, for example, roughly 63.5 percent of his vote came from independents.

But why is that a bad thing? Given that just 35 percent of voters are registered Republicans, it stands to reason that any GOP candidate is going to have to attract the votes of independents and possibly even disaffected Democrats. Moreover, at a time when many Republican voters are holding their nose in the voting booth, Paul’s supporters are nothing if not enthusiastic. Furthermore, Paul is probably the only Republican candidate who can eat into President Obama’s hold on the youth vote.

But that enthusiasm and those votes are not going to be easily transferred to the eventual Republican standard bearer. Worse, a potential Paul third-party candidacy, while unlikely, would almost certainly guarantee Obama’s reelection.

Paul is unlikely to be bought off with a prime-time speaking spot at the Republican convention. And neither he nor his son Rand is realistically going to end up as the vice-presidential candidate. What then can Republicans do to keep Paul’s supporters in the tent?

Well, to start with, instead of deriding Paul as a RINO or some sort of a crank, and hoping his supporters go away, they might begin to take some of his ideas seriously.

As Senator DeMint says:

I don’t agree with him on everything, but he is right about the out-of-control and unaccountable Federal Reserve. He’s right about the need for limited constitutional government and the importance of individual liberty. And I really think the Republican who is going to win this thing — if they capture some of what Ron Paul’s been talking about for years. And more and more we can see that what he’s been talking about is true. Again, you don’t have to agree with everything he’s saying, but if the other candidates miss the wisdom in what he’s been saying about our monetary policy and limited government, then I think we will see it’s to their detriment because the 20 percent or 25 percent or so that are supporting him are people that we need in the Republican party. A lot of them are libertarians, but they’re our natural base. We shouldn’t ignore them.

That would mean putting forward detailed plans to reduce the size, cost, and intrusiveness of government. It would mean the candidates explaining in detail how they would reform entitlement spending and dismantle Obamacare. It would mean talking about how they will reduce the authority of unelected bureaucracies, including the Fed. It would mean ending corporate welfare, farm supports, ethanol subsidies, and bailouts. It would mean recognizing that, as Sarah Palin noted, “Americans are war-weary,” before proposing the next intervention overseas. It would mean that protecting individual liberty is important, even in an age of terrorism.

For years, Republican candidates have worried that if they didn’t hew to the hardest line possible on social issues, religious conservatives would stay home on Election Day. Economic conservatives, libertarians, and believers in smaller, constitutional government were never given similar deference. The result was a Republican party that drifted ever further away from its Goldwater-Reagan roots.

But that may be about to change. If not, Republicans can’t say they weren’t warned.

Mitt Romney Needs Rand Paul on His Ticket

By CHQ Staff | 1/18/12

The CHQ Poll suggests that is the only way he can win over supporters of Ron Paul if he gets the GOP nomination.  And Ron Paul is the second-biggest vote-getter in the GOP race.

We asked you:  “Yesterday we asked if you would want Ron Paul to run for president as an independent, knowing that would throw the race to President Obama.  How would you vote, however, if Mitt Romney was the nominee and he picked Ron Paul’s son, Senator Rand Paul, as his vice presidential running mate?  Assuming that Ron Paul would not run against his son, how would you vote?”

Here is how you responded:

45%  I would vote for Romney-Paul.

30%  I would vote for some third-party candidate, or write in someone’s name.

16%  I am undecided.

8%  I would not vote.

1%  I would vote for Obama-Biden (or Clinton).

Given that previously 59% of our poll respondents said they would vote for Ron Paul as an independent candidate, this is an improvement for a Mitt Romney candidacy.  But he still would have a lot of convincing to do to win over the remainder of Ron Paul’s supporters

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Cato Institute | Comments (0)

Stephen C. Meyer:Does morality presuppose God’s existence?

January 18, 2012 – 8:43 am

Morality Presupposes Theism (1 of 4)

Uploaded by on Oct 15, 2010

Dr. Stephen C. Meyer argues that in order to make sense of morality you must presuppose the existence of God. Table of Contents: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=B324A88301858151

____________________________

 

Below is more on the bio of Stephen C. Meyer:

Dr. Stephen C. Meyer

Dr. Stephen C. Meyer

Stephen C. Meyer is director of the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture (CSC) and a founder both of the intelligent design movement and of the CSC, intelligent design’s primary intellectual and scientific headquarters. Dr. Meyer is a Cambridge University-trained philosopher of science, the author of peer-reviewed publications in technical, scientific, philosophical and other books and journals. His signal contribution to ID theory is given most fully in Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design, published by HarperOne in June 2009.

[…]Graduating from Whitworth College in Spokane, Washington, in 1981 with a degree in physics and earth science, he later became a geophysicist with Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO) in Dallas, Texas. From 1981 to 1985, he worked for ARCO in digital signal processing and seismic survey interpretation. As a Rotary International Scholar, he received his training in the history and philosophy of science at Cambridge University, earning a PhD in 1991. His thesis offered a methodological interpretation of origin-of-life research.

[…]Prior to the publication of Signature in the Cell, the piece of writing for which Meyer was best known was an August 2004 review essay in the Smithsonian Institution-affiliated peer-reviewed biology journal Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington. The article laid out the evidential case for intelligent design, that certain features of living organisms–such as the miniature machines and complex circuits within cells–are better explained by an unspecified designing intelligence than by an undirected natural process like random mutation and natural selection.

[…]Meyer’s many other publications include a contribution to, and the editing of, the peer-reviewed volume Darwinism, Design and Public Education (Michigan State University Press, 2004) and the innovative textbook Explore Evolution (Hill House Publishers, 2007).

Meyer has been widely featured in media appearance on CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, Fox News, PBS, and the BBC. In 2008, he appeared with Ben Stein in Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed.  He’s also featured prominently in two other science documentaries, Icons of Evolution and Unlocking The Mystery of Life.

Related posts:

Good without God?

(The signs are up on the buses in Little Rock now and the leader of the movement to put them up said on the radio today that he does not anticipate any physical actions against the signs by Christians. He noted that the Christians that he knows would never stoop to that level.) Debate: Christianity […]

“Woody Wednesday” How Allen’s film “Crimes and Misdemeanors makes the point that hell is necessary (jh 14)

Crimes and Misdemeanors: A Discussion: Part 1 Adrian Rogers – Crossing God’s Deadline Part 2 Jason Tolbert provided this recent video from Mike Huckabee: John Brummett in his article “Huckabee speaks for bad guy below,” Arkansas News Bureau, May 5, 2011 had to say: Are we supposed to understand and accept that Mike Huckabee is […]

 

“Woody Wednesday” Allen realizes if God doesn’t exist then all is meaningless (jh 15)

The Bible and Archaeology (1/5) The Bible maintains several characteristics that prove it is from God. One of those is the fact that the Bible is accurate in every one of its details. The field of archaeology brings to light this amazing accuracy. _________________________- I want to make two points today. 1. There is no […]

Carl Sagan versus RC Sproul

At the end of this post is a message by RC Sproul in which he discusses Sagan. Over the years I have confronted many atheists. Here is one story below: I really believe Hebrews 4:12 when it asserts: For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the […]

Review of Carl Sagan book (Part 4 of series on Evolution)jh68

Review of Carl Sagan book (Part 4 of series on Evolution) The Long War against God-Henry Morris, part 5 of 6 Uploaded by FLIPWORLDUPSIDEDOWN3 on Aug 30, 2010 http://www.icr.org/ http://store.icr.org/prodinfo.asp?number=BLOWA2 http://store.icr.org/prodinfo.asp?number=BLOWASG http://www.fliptheworldupsidedown.com/blog _______________________ This is a review I did a few years ago. THE DEMON-HAUNTED WORLD: Science as a Candle in the Dark by Carl […]

Review of Carl Sagan book (Part 3 of series on Evolution)

Review of Carl Sagan book (Part 3 of series on Evolution) The Long War against God-Henry Morris, part 4 of 6 Uploaded by FLIPWORLDUPSIDEDOWN3 on Aug 30, 2010 http://www.icr.org/ http://store.icr.org/prodinfo.asp?number=BLOWA2 http://store.icr.org/prodinfo.asp?number=BLOWASG http://www.fliptheworldupsidedown.com/blog ______________________________________ I was really enjoyed this review of Carl Sagan’s book “Pale Blue Dot.” Carl Sagan’s Pale Blue Dot by Larry Vardiman, Ph.D. […]

Arkansas Times Blogger says Communists were not atheistic, but they were and they believed “might made right” jh48

Paul Kurtz pictured above. Norma Bates noted on the Arkansas Times Blog yesterday The most common justification throughout history – the elephant in everybody’s living room – is religion. “God is on our side.” “We are the chosen people.” “God gave us this land.” “God said to — .” Judaism, Christianity, or that relative Johnny-come-lately […]

Atheists confronted: How I confronted Carl Sagan the year before he died jh47

In today’s news you will read about Kirk Cameron taking on the atheist Stephen Hawking over some recent assertions he made concerning the existence of heaven. Back in December of 1995 I had the opportunity to correspond with Carl Sagan about a year before his untimely death. Sarah Anne Hughes in her article,”Kirk Cameron criticizes […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Comments (0)

“Midnight in Paris” has become Woody Allen’s most successful movie at box office (Woody Wednesdays)

January 18, 2012 – 7:23 am

The dvd sales of “Midnight in Paris” which went on sale in December have gone through the roof (look at the bottom of this post) and this summer we learned this fact below:

Paris: The Luminous Years

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgp4hGF_L3E

‘Midnight in Paris’ becomes Woody Allen’s all-time biggest hit. How the heck did that happen?

woody-allenImage Credit: Everett Collection; Roger Arpajou

It turns out that Owen Wilson, playing the last herringbone-jacketed screenwriter in Hollywood, wasn’t the only one who wanted to go back in time to meet the great expatriate writers and artists of the 1920s. This weekend, Midnight in Paris, Woody Allen’s time-machine-of-high-culchah trifle, crossed the line to become the filmmaker’s all-time biggest hit, surpassing the $40.1 million mark set 25 years ago by Hannah and Her Sisters. That movie made its money in two separate releases one year apart, so perhaps Allen’s real erstwhile biggest hit should be considered Manhattan. And, of course, if you factor in inflation, Midnight in Paris wouldn’t be number one by a long shot. That said, movie-land accountants don’t tend to do a lot of adjusting for inflation (they look at the raw numbers), and so the inescapable fact is that the top of Allen’s box-office track record will now look like this:

1. Midnight in Paris ($41.8 million, probably heading toward $50 million)

2. Hannah and Her Sisters ($40.1 million)

3. Manhattan ($39.9 million)

Summer Movies: Get the latest news, photos, and more

4. Annie Hall ($38.2 million)

Quick, can you say: “One of these things just doesn’t belong here?”

I’m never one to begrudge anyone a hit, and certainly not Woody Allen, who has always found a way to make a movie a year (forget the couch — making movies is his therapy), though not, in recent years, without jumping through a few hoops. His movies, when viewed next to the clattering roller-coasters of Hollywood, are almost legendarily “small,” which is why he has been forced to go to Europe for financing, and to set most of his recent pictures there, a trend that began with Match Point (2005), the nimble, devious, midnight-dark, Woody-meets-Hitchcock thriller that, to me, should have become his new all-time biggest hit.

Creatively, it’s been a good run for him, even if the novelty of Allen’s Euro-movies, at least in my eyes, has begun to wear off. To get that novelty back, here’s a suggestion: He should now set a comedy in Berlin, starring Ryan Gosling as a visiting American professor of Holocaust Studies torn between his devoted French Jewish girlfriend, played by Mélanie Laurent, and the 18-year-old goth German temptress, played by Emma Stone with a Marlene Dietrich accent, who turns out to be the great-granddaughter of a member of the SS. Talk about having your Nazi jokes, love-vs.-lust triangle, and moral ambiguity at the same time.

But I digress. Up until now, the movies that crossed over from Woody Allen’s core audience to become his major hits were also his greatest films. (That’s true even if you go back to his Early, Funny Films. The cathartically hilarious Borscht Belt-surrealist comedies that planted Allen on the cultural map were crowd-pleasers that raked in substantial amounts of money, from Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex, at $18 million, to Love and Death, at $20 million.) I’m well aware that Midnight in Paris is a movie that a lot of people seem to love, or at least like a lot. But to me it’s a minor shock that this movie, with its one-note flippancy and its Great Artist caricatures who seem to have walked in out of an old Saturday Night Live sketch, has gotten such a hold on audiences. The movie may on some level be charming, and it’s got that Paris-in-the-rain, summer-travelogue-from-heaven factor, but, I’m sorry, its slightly daffy la vie de bohème nostalgia is so, so thin. Which is why its all-time-biggest-hit status for Woody looms as quite a paradox in his career.

All you have to do is to say the titles of the three movies in Woody’s neurotic-romantic New York trilogy — Annie Hall, Manhattan, Hannah and Her Sisters — to conjure a spirit of filmmaking that, in addition to being immortally funny, is richly observant and psychological and dramatic. Those movies may have come out a long time ago, but they have never left us, and it was largely because of them that the phrase “Woody Allen movie” came to symbolize something so special. They were some of the most soulful comedies ever made.

Over time, however, the phrase “Woody Allen movie” has undergone a chemical change. For decades, Allen griped about what he saw as the clanking superficiality of contemporary Hollywood movies. His inspiration always came from somewhere else — from the art-house giants (Bergman, Fellini) he famously revered, or from the winsome sublimity of the silent clowns. Yet I would argue that the Hollywood brand of moviemaking that Woody Allen has always looked askance at is defined, more than anything, by its psychological thinness. And in that light, Midnight in Paris, while it certainly has the pleading earnest hero, the opening credits with the white-on-black Windsor EF-Elongated lettering, and the name-dropping cultural-studies chitchat, is less a classic “Woody Allen movie” than a comedy that masquerades as highbrow while delivering high concept. It’s the rare Woody Allen movie that’s not so much great enough to be a smash as slender-and-lite enough to be a smash.

So what did you think of Midnight in Paris? Are you surprised that it’s such a big hit? Do you think it deserves to be Allen’s new number one?

______________________________

Below are the top dvd sales and you can see that “Midnight in Paris” is in the top ten.

US DVD Sales Chart for Week Ending Dec 25, 2011

Rank Prev. Rank Title Units this Week % Change Total Units Sales this Week Total Sales Weeks in Release
1 (4) The Hangover Part II 756,287 11.6% 2,614,760 $7,555,307 $35,386,701 3
2 (3) The Help 725,959 -15.2% 3,185,006 $12,384,861 $54,592,230 3
3 (-) Dolphin Tale 715,371 -.-% 715,371 $10,723,411 $10,723,411 1
4 (2) Kung Fu Panda 2 670,070 -24.4% 1,556,157 $9,374,279 $24,942,828 2
5 (1) Rise of the Planet of the Apes 557,308 -39.5% 1,478,876 $9,708,305 $27,033,784 2
6 (5) Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2 480,242 10.1% 5,828,243 $4,797,618 $81,291,915 7
7 (-) Straw Dogs 404,386 -.-% 404,386 $6,235,632 $6,235,632 1
8 (6) The Smurfs 298,053 -7.1% 1,688,442 $5,063,920 $28,962,595 4
9 (20) Harry Potter: The Complete 8-Film Collection 295,081 170.7% 891,380 $14,456,018 $43,864,439 7
10 (-) Midnight in Paris 288,372 -.-% 288,372 $4,899,440 $4,899,440 1
11 (11) Bridesmaids 279,902 56.1% 3,873,255 $3,955,015 $52,753,009 14
12 (9) Mr. Popper’s Penguins 230,592 2.4% 974,854 $3,456,574 $16,295,205 3
13 (7) Cowboys and Aliens 209,643 -23.7% 1,012,645 $3,742,128 $17,385,132 3
14 (21) Super 8 193,761 96.7% 932,216 $2,613,836 $14,566,587 5
15 (-) Colombiana 192,475 -.-% 192,475 $2,885,200 $2,885,200 1
16 (12) Friends with Benefits 191,415 11.5% 764,804 $3,703,880 $13,919,240 4
17 (8) Cars 2 188,920 -25.3% 4,405,462 $2,994,382 $73,121,010 8
18 (10) Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1 186,803 -3.2% 7,066,706 $864,898 $85,930,362 37
19 (22) Crazy, Stupid, Love 178,966 94.4% 1,159,868 $1,698,387 $15,389,604 8
20 (13) The Lion King 168,954 5.4% – $2,292,841 – 878
21 (-) Warrior 152,392 -.-% 152,392 $1,979,572 $1,979,572 1
22 (-) Horrible Bosses 147,098 -.-% 1,194,516 $1,416,554 $16,762,368 11
23 (19) The Change-up 137,127 24.3% 754,747 $1,853,957 $12,448,104 7
24 (14) Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides 121,989 -12.3% 1,009,722 $1,645,632 $17,862,153 10
25 (25) Captain America: The First Avenger 100,284 25.5% 1,434,346 $1,503,257 $25,091,268 9
26 (-) Love Actually 98,439 -.-% – $681,198 – 400
27 (23) 30 Minutes or Less 93,958 5.3% 421,308 $1,766,410 $7,607,485 4
28 (27) Our Idiot Brother 93,676 47.1% 332,788 $1,444,484 $5,105,182 4
29 (-) The Debt 89,393 -.-% 201,584 $1,518,787 $3,424,912 3
30 (-) Green Lantern 81,981 -.-% 1,194,507 $818,990 $16,890,705 11
<<< Previous Week

Other posts with Woody Allen:

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 15, Luis Bunuel)

Belle de Jour Presentation In a film class my partner and I did a video presentation on the film Belle de Jour and the filmmaker Luis Bunuel. Bunuel was a surrealist, so if the video doesn’t quite makes sense, its not supposed to. ___________________________________________________ I am presently going through the characters referenced in Woody Allen’s […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 14, Henri Matisse)

I am currently going through the characters referenced in the Woody Allen movie “Midnight in Paris.” Today I am looking at Henri Matisse. Below is a press release from a museum in San Francisco:  the steins were known for their saturday evening salons, where artists, writers, musicians, intellectuals, and collectors gathered to discuss contemporary art, […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 13, Amedeo Modigliani)

Adriana and Gil are seen above walking together in the movie “Midnight in Paris.” Adriana was a fictional character who was Picasso’s mistress in the film. Earlier she had been Modigliani’s mistress and later Georges Braque’s mistress before moving on to Picasso according to the film story line. Actually Picasso had taken girls from others […]

The characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 12, Gabrielle “Coco” Chanel)

An article from Biography.com below. I am currently going through all the personalities mentioned in Woody Allen’s movie “Midnight in Paris.” Today I am spending time on Coco Chanel. By the way, I know that some of you are wondering how many posts I will have before I am finished. Right now I have plans […]

The characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 11, Rodin)

The Thinker (1879–1889) is among the most recognized works in all of sculpture. In fact, below you can see Paul who constantly is showing up Gil with his knowledge about these pieces of art. He shows off while describing Rodin’s life story when all four of them are taking in “The Thinker.” However, he is […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 10 Salvador Dali)

Artists and bohemians inspired Woody Allen for ‘Midnight in Paris I love the movie “Midnight in Paris” by Woody Allen and I am going through the whole list of famous writers and artists that he included in the movie. Today we will look at Salvador Dali. In this clip below you will see when Picasso […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 9, Georges Braque)

2011 Roger Arpajou / Sony Pictures Classics Lea Seydoux as Gabrielle in “Midnight in Paris.” Adriana and Gil are seen above walking together in the movie “Midnight in Paris.” Adriana was a fictional character who was Picasso’s mistress in the film. Earlier she had been Georges Braque’s mistress before moving on to Picasso according to […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 8, Henri Toulouse Lautrec)

How Should We Then Live 7#3 2011 Roger Arpajou / Sony Pictures Classics Owen Wilson as Gil in “Midnight in Paris.” Paul Gauguin and Henri Toulouse Lautrec were the greatest painters of the post-impressionists. They are pictured together in 1890 in Paris in Woody Allen’s new movie “Midnight in Paris.” My favorite philosopher Francis Schaeffer […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 7 Paul Gauguin)

How Should We Then Live 7#1 Dr. Francis Schaeffer examines the Age of Non-Reason and he mentions the work of Paul Gauguin. 2011 Roger Arpajou / Sony Pictures Classics Kurt Fuller as John and Mimi Kennedy as Helen in “Midnight in Paris.” I love the movie “Midnight in Paris” by Woody Allen and I am […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 6 Gertrude Stein)

Midnight In Paris – SPOILER Discussion by What The Flick?! Associated Press Gertrude Stein and Alice B. Toklas in 1934 This video clip below discusses Gertrude Stein’s friendship with Pablo Picasso: I love the movie “Midnight in Paris” by Woody Allen and I am going through the whole list of famous writers and artists that […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 5 Juan Belmonte)

2011 Roger Arpajou / Sony Pictures Classics Gad Elmaleh as Detective Tisserant in “Midnight in Paris.” I love the movie “Midnight in Paris” by Woody Allen and I am going through the whole list of famous writers and artists that he included in the movie. Juan Belmonte was the most famous bullfighter of the time […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 4 Ernest Heminingway)

  Woody Allen explores fantasy world with “Midnight in Paris” 2011 Roger Arpajou / Sony Pictures Classics Corey Stoll as Ernest Hemingway in “Midnight in Paris.” The New York Times Ernest Hemingway, around 1937 I love the movie “Midnight in Paris” by Woody Allen and I am going through the whole list of famous writers […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 3 Scott and Zelda Fitzgerald)

What The Flick?!: Midnight In Paris – Review by What The Flick?! 2011 Roger Arpajou / Sony Pictures Classics Alison Pill as Zelda Fitzgerald and Tom Hiddleston as F. Scott Fitzgerald in “Midnight in Paris.” 2011 Roger Arpajou / Sony Pictures Classics Owen Wilson as Gil in “Midnight in Paris.” 2011 Roger Arpajou / Sony […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 2 Cole Porter)

The song used in “Midnight in Paris” I am going through the famous characters that Woody Allen presents in his excellent movie “Midnight in Paris.” This series may be a long one since there are so many great characters. De-Lovely – Movie Trailer De-Lovely – So in Love – Kevin Kline, Ashley Judd & Others […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 1 William Faulkner)

Photo by Phill Mullen The only known photograph of William Faulkner (right) with his eldest brother, John, was taken in 1949. Like his brother, John Faulkner was also a writer, though their writing styles differed considerably. My grandfather, John Murphey, (born 1910) grew up in Oxford, Mississippi and knew both Johncy and “Bill” Faulkner. He […]

I love Woody Allen’s latest movie “Midnight in Paris”

I love the movie “Midnight in Paris” was so good that I will be doing a series on it. My favorite Woody Allen movie is Crimes and Misdemeanors and I will provide links to my earlier posts on that great movie. Movie Guide the Christian website had the following review: MIDNIGHT IN PARIS is the […]

Solomon, Woody Allen, Coldplay and Kansas (Coldplay’s spiritual search Part 6)

Here is an article I wrote a couple of years ago: Solomon, Woody Allen, Coldplay and Kansas What does King Solomon, the movie director Woody Allen and the modern rock bands Coldplay and Kansas have in common? All four took on the issues surrounding death, the meaning of life and a possible afterlife, although they all came up with their own conclusions on […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Comments (0)

RC Sproul and Stephen C. Meyer discuss evolution

January 17, 2012 – 8:26 am

RC Sproul Interviews Stephen Meyer, Part 1 of 5

Uploaded by on Mar 2, 2010

RC Sproul sits down with Stephen Meyer, author of the book, “Signature in the Cell”, and they discuss philosophy, evolution, education, Intelligent Design, and more.

Below is more on the bio of Stephen C. Meyer:

Dr. Stephen C. Meyer

Dr. Stephen C. Meyer

Stephen C. Meyer is director of the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture (CSC) and a founder both of the intelligent design movement and of the CSC, intelligent design’s primary intellectual and scientific headquarters. Dr. Meyer is a Cambridge University-trained philosopher of science, the author of peer-reviewed publications in technical, scientific, philosophical and other books and journals. His signal contribution to ID theory is given most fully in Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design, published by HarperOne in June 2009.

[…]Graduating from Whitworth College in Spokane, Washington, in 1981 with a degree in physics and earth science, he later became a geophysicist with Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO) in Dallas, Texas. From 1981 to 1985, he worked for ARCO in digital signal processing and seismic survey interpretation. As a Rotary International Scholar, he received his training in the history and philosophy of science at Cambridge University, earning a PhD in 1991. His thesis offered a methodological interpretation of origin-of-life research.

[…]Prior to the publication of Signature in the Cell, the piece of writing for which Meyer was best known was an August 2004 review essay in the Smithsonian Institution-affiliated peer-reviewed biology journal Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington. The article laid out the evidential case for intelligent design, that certain features of living organisms–such as the miniature machines and complex circuits within cells–are better explained by an unspecified designing intelligence than by an undirected natural process like random mutation and natural selection.

[…]Meyer’s many other publications include a contribution to, and the editing of, the peer-reviewed volume Darwinism, Design and Public Education (Michigan State University Press, 2004) and the innovative textbook Explore Evolution (Hill House Publishers, 2007).

Meyer has been widely featured in media appearance on CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, Fox News, PBS, and the BBC. In 2008, he appeared with Ben Stein in Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed.  He’s also featured prominently in two other science documentaries, Icons of Evolution and Unlocking The Mystery of Life.

R.C. Sproul Interviews Author of “Darwin’s Doubt” on Evolution, Intelligent Design

By LAUREN LEIGH NOSKE ( [email protected] ) Aug 05, 2013 03:41 AM EDT

Renowned theologian, author, and pastor R. C. Sproul interviewed Stephen Meyers, author of “Darwin’s Doubt: The Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the Case for Intelligent Design,” about his research on neo-Darwinian evolution and evidence for Intelligent Design. Sproul says that Meyer’s book is the most detailed analysis on the inconsistencies in evolution that he has ever seen.

Believers in neo-Darwinism think that creation was a result of natural selection acting on random genetic mutations; that all of life adapted from one “kind” to another, although there are no observable evidences of this. In his book, Meyers explains how Charles Darwin left one large question unanswered: he was puzzled by the abrupt appearance of animals in the fossil record known as the “Cambrian explosion” as opposed to small, incremental changes over a long period of time. “Within the ranks of evolutionary biology itself, there is now a tremendous skepticism being expressed about the creative power of the mutation-selection mechanism – the standard mechanism that is part of modern neo-Darwinian theory,” he said.

In “The Origin of Species,” Darwin himself admitted that the Cambrian explosion proposed “a valid objection to the views here entertained.” Meyers argues that it could not have been simply a “burst” of physical matter, but would also have had to produce reams of intricate genetic information that would be the basis of creation. What’s more, he believes that modern study of DNA reveals its intricate complexities and create much doubt – even among non-believers – that the evolutionary process could have formed something as complex as an animal.

Sproul had predicted that the theory of Darwinian Evolution would eventually be deconstructed by secular scientists because of its vast inconsistencies, and attested that neo-Darwinian macro-evolution presents “wild violations of the fundamental principles of the laws of immediate inference” in science. He argues that creating something out of nothing is “absolute absurdity … everything [coming from] nothing is the great magic [trick] –it’s the rabbit out of the hat, without a hat, without a rabbit, and without a magician.”

Intelligent Design is the concept that there is purposive intelligence behind all of creation – that a mind has intricately shaped all of the matter and genetic code that exists. It is based on the scientific method, and Meyers believes that it has significant theistic implications. While one does not have to be a Christian in order to agree with Intelligent Design, it presents a “powerful evidence of the activity of purposive intelligence acting in the history of life,” says Meyers. Macro-evolutionists may conclude that species have a common ancestor because of commonalities in the way their structures are designed, but Meyers argues that commonalities are instead evidence for a common Creator.

Many scientists feel as though they must limit their scientific conclusions to the material realm. Meyers called this pre-conceived idea a closed circle that by which some feel bound, “excluding from consideration the very explanation that makes most sense in light of our cause-and-effect experience of the world.” Excluding the immaterial from the possible set of solutions for the existence of the universe creates a “sub-rational historical biology” by refusing to consider one possible true answer, he said.

Meyers wants to encourage Christians to not be intimidated by the “alleged ‘indisputable body of facts’” that evolutionists present, because there is so much scientific evidence now that supports the idea of a Creator. He agreed with Sproul that Intelligent Design is consistent with God’s word, and quoted Psalm 104:24:

“O LORD, how manifold are Your works! In wisdom have You made them all; the earth is full of Your creatures” (English Standard Version).

Ligonier Ministries is currently offering “Darwin’s Doubt” for a donation of any amount.

Related posts:

Carl Sagan versus RC Sproul

At the end of this post is a message by RC Sproul in which he discusses Sagan. Over the years I have confronted many atheists. Here is one story below: I really believe Hebrews 4:12 when it asserts: For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the […]

Review of Carl Sagan book (Part 4 of series on Evolution)jh68

Review of Carl Sagan book (Part 4 of series on Evolution) The Long War against God-Henry Morris, part 5 of 6 Uploaded by FLIPWORLDUPSIDEDOWN3 on Aug 30, 2010 http://www.icr.org/ http://store.icr.org/prodinfo.asp?number=BLOWA2 http://store.icr.org/prodinfo.asp?number=BLOWASG http://www.fliptheworldupsidedown.com/blog _______________________ This is a review I did a few years ago. THE DEMON-HAUNTED WORLD: Science as a Candle in the Dark by Carl […]

Review of Carl Sagan book (Part 3 of series on Evolution)

Review of Carl Sagan book (Part 3 of series on Evolution) The Long War against God-Henry Morris, part 4 of 6 Uploaded by FLIPWORLDUPSIDEDOWN3 on Aug 30, 2010 http://www.icr.org/ http://store.icr.org/prodinfo.asp?number=BLOWA2 http://store.icr.org/prodinfo.asp?number=BLOWASG http://www.fliptheworldupsidedown.com/blog ______________________________________ I was really enjoyed this review of Carl Sagan’s book “Pale Blue Dot.” Carl Sagan’s Pale Blue Dot by Larry Vardiman, Ph.D. […]

Arkansas Times Blogger says Communists were not atheistic, but they were and they believed “might made right” jh48

Paul Kurtz pictured above. Norma Bates noted on the Arkansas Times Blog yesterday The most common justification throughout history – the elephant in everybody’s living room – is religion. “God is on our side.” “We are the chosen people.” “God gave us this land.” “God said to — .” Judaism, Christianity, or that relative Johnny-come-lately […]

Atheists confronted: How I confronted Carl Sagan the year before he died jh47

In today’s news you will read about Kirk Cameron taking on the atheist Stephen Hawking over some recent assertions he made concerning the existence of heaven. Back in December of 1995 I had the opportunity to correspond with Carl Sagan about a year before his untimely death. Sarah Anne Hughes in her article,”Kirk Cameron criticizes […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Comments (0)