Monthly Archives: March 2012

“Tennis Tuesday” David Wheaton (Part 1)

March 6, 2012 – 7:28 am

Testimony David Wheaton Tennis

Uploaded by on Sep 23, 2011

Testimony David Wheaton Tennis

_______________

Wikipedia reports:

Country  United States
Residence Lake Minnetonka, Minnesota
Born June 2, 1969 (1969-06-02) (age 42)
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Height 1.93 m (6 ft 4 in)
Weight 84 kg (190 lb; 13.2 st)
Turned pro 1988
Retired 2001
Plays Right-handed
Career prize money US$5,238,401
Singles
Career record 232–191
Career titles 3
Highest ranking No. 12 (July 22, 1991)
Grand Slam results
Australian Open QF (1990)
French Open 3R (1995)
Wimbledon SF (1991)
US Open QF (1990)
Doubles
Career record 157–122
Career titles 3
Highest ranking No. 24 (June 24, 1991)
Last updated on: July 4, 2007.

1991 Wimbledon Jimmy Connors Michael Stich Boris Becker Final

Uploaded by on Feb 9, 2011

1991 Wimbledon Jimmy Connors David Wheaton Andre Agassi Michael Stich Boris Becker Final
________________

David Wheaton has an excellent show and website at www.Christianworldview.org Below is some material from his website:

Mission

The Christian Worldview has a two-fold mission: 1.) to help Christians develop a comprehensive biblical worldview about all matters of life and faith so that they, their families, and their churches will be strong, effective, God-glorifying ambassadors for Jesus Christ, and 2.) to share the good news that all people can be reconciled to God through repentance of sin and faith in Jesus Christ as their Savior and Lord.

This mission is pursued two ways:

  1. The Christian Worldview is a nationally-syndicated radio program hosted by David Wheaton that airs every Saturday from 8-9am Central Time on ~200 radio stations and is also available online via podcast, streaming, and TheChristianWorldview.org. Featuring compelling topics, notable guests, listener calls, and sound bites, the program focuses on current events, cultural issues, and matters of faith from a decidedly biblical perspective.
  2. TheChristianWorldview.org is an extensive website resource that provides audio, video, and written content from some of the most respected Christian leaders.

What is a Worldview?

A worldview is a personal collection of beliefs through which all of life is perceived and lived. There are several prominent worldviews — Christian, secular humanistic, Islamic, Hindu, Buddhist, New Age and others — including subsets of each and crossovers between two or more. Every person has a worldview.

The real question is: “Is your worldview true?” All worldviews are based on someone or something — a religious leader, philosopher, professor, writer, popular culture, organization, book, etc. The reason we believe the Christian worldview is worth following is because it is based on the Bible which claims to be entirely true and has never been proven otherwise.

Bad News – Good News

Rejection of the Christian worldview — or in other words, disobeying God’s will as written in the Bible, also known as sin — is ultimately the root cause of all the conflict and injustice within individuals, families, communities, nations, and the world.

The good news is that anyone who repents of their sin against God and places their faith or trust in His Son, Jesus Christ, as paying the required sacrifice for their sin and then follows Him as Lord, can be reconciled to God and then begin the life-long process of developing a Christian worldview to the praise and honor and glory of God.

Being in a right relationship with your Creator and then seeking to understand and live as He desires is the purpose of life. Hence our slogan: “Think Biblically, Live Accordingly.”

Until Christians are strengthened and non-Christians are reconciled,

David Wheaton, editor

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

Milton Friedman:“A Nobel Laureate on the American Economy” VTR: 5/31/77 Transcript and video clip (Part 2)

March 6, 2012 – 7:23 am

Milton Friedman on the American Economy (2 of 6)

Uploaded by on Aug 9, 2009

THE OPEN MIND
Host: Richard D. Heffner
Guest: Milton Friedman
Title: A Nobel Laureate on the American Economy VTR: 5/31/77
_____________________________________

Below is a transcipt from a portion of an interview that Milton Friedman gave on 5-31-77:

Friedman: General public ideas are much slower to move than intellectual ideas. That’s a fortunate thing. The public at large never moved as far in the direction of socialism and collectivism as the intellectual community did. They preserved a kind of a stability which kept us from going even faster than we did. One of the reasons in my opinion why Britain went so much faster toward a completely socialized state than we have gone is because the intellectual and ruling communities in Britain are more homogeneous and more nearly one. Well fortunately we have a much more diversified and varied set of elites. So I think the public at large never went as far as the intellectuals in that direction. And I am sure they are slow in turning around and going back the other way. I’m not saying that there has been any major trend in the public opinion at large, but only that in the intellectual community, in the community of the youngsters and young people who are coming up; no change in the older ones either.

You know, human beings have certain very common characteristics. It’s very hard for anybody to change his mind after he’s gotten to the age of 25 or 30 and gets set in his ways. It’s always fascinating to me. I had an interview this morning, a radio interview with a group of youngsters from a radio program called “Focus on Youth.” They were lively, energetic, bright; they were a wonderful group. They had a guest book in which they asked me to write a message and my name. And soothe message I wrote was “How is it that these bright, energetic, brilliant, dynamic young people turn within such few years into such deadly dull, unimaginative inactive adults?”

HEFFNER: You mean the rest of us?

FRIEDMAN: The rest of us. All of us. You’ve noticed this, I’m sure. You’re on the campus, on Rutgers. Haven’t you always been impressed by the contrast between…the liveliness and active minds of the young graduate students and of the opposite on the part of the settled, permanent tenured instructors?

HEFFNER: Well, we could argue that point out, Professor Friedman, at some point.

FRIEDMAN: I don’t want to overstate it. There’s an element to it. Well, going back to the main point, I believe it is true, and I’m sure you’re right and many people will believe that government owes them something. The point is that the first step in people’s conversion is never with respect to their own privileges but always with respect to somebody else. Everybody always knows he’s an exception. You ask people, “Do you think government should be cut down to size?” “Oh, of course.” “How about the program you benefit from?” “Oh, well, that’s a special case. That needs more money.” So I don’t believe there’s any contradiction between people saying “Gimme”, on the one hand; and these same people acting in another capacity to as to hold down the rate of growth in the state.

HEFFNER: You know, I would ask you the same question that I asked you a couple of years ago, and that is, why do you hold on, as it seems to me you do, hold on almost for dear life, to a kind of optimism despite all the things that you see and comment on in front of you? Why not recognize the situation for what it is, as you describe it so well, and then perhaps point ourselves in a different direction?

FRIEDMAN: Down the same road. There’s no different direction down that road. Don’t kid yourself. There just is no different direction down that road. This isn’t a strange road. We, you and I, who have been lucky enough to have been born in a free society, take freedom for granted as if it’s a natural phenomenon. But let me ask you, what fraction of the human race today lives in free societies?

HEFFNER: Tiny, tiny, tiny percentage.

FRIEDMAN: Over history, what fraction at any moment of time ever lived in free societies?

HEFFNER: Even tinier.

FRIEDMAN: Even tinier.

HEFFNER: I’m leading you down the garden path, Professor Friedman.

FRIEDMAN: No, you’re not. No, you’re not. It is true that the normal condition of mankind is tyranny and misery. We’ve escaped. We’ve been extraordinarily fortunate to escape into an island of freedom and prosperity. If we do not maintain that island of freedom, of prosperity, if we do not maintain the essential features of this society which made that freedom and prosperity possible, there isn’t a wide range of alternatives. We go to misery and tyranny, to the normal state of mankind. Why am I optimistic? Because we’re also ignorant. If we could really predict the future, you couldn’t be optimistic. But we’ve seen historically time and again that people have tried to make long-range predictions and not been very good at it. The human race is a funny thing. It’s always turning up surprises on you. People are capable of doing things you wouldn’t have expected to; of rising to the circumstance. And I suppose I maintain my optimism partly because my innate character is optimistic. But partly because the consequences of not recognizing our state of affairs, of not acting in time to check, seem to me so horrendous that I cannot but believe unless people realize the alternative before them they won’t take measures to make sure it doesn’t happen.

HEFFNER: Well, what took us into this little island of time in which we are so different or have enjoyed a difference from all the history of mankind?

FRIEDMAN: Well, that’s a very interesting question, and it’s one that can be spread more broadly. It’s a subject I’ve been very much interested in. From time to time in man’s history there have been golden ages. The fifth century B.C. in Greece, the Renaissance in Italy, the first Elizabethan period in England, the nineteenth century in Britain. We’re in the midst of what I regard as a golden age in the United States, the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Now, the interesting question is how is it here, to take it out of our own context, here’s the Greek peninsula. I refer to it as Peloponnesian, and somebody reminded me that it is not. What is it? It’s a different peninsula. At any rate, the area where…

HEFFNER: We’ll accept it as such.

FRIEDMAN: Okay. It was the same people there in the sixth century B.C. and in the fifth century B.C., the same people in the fourth century as in the fifth century. Why is it in the fifth century you have this sudden flowering, this enormously productive and brilliant period; it disappears in the fourth, third, second century B.C.? Why is it? Same people. Well, I think in many ways the fundamental explanation – and now I’m simplifying and conjecturing; this isn’t a solid, well-sustained hypothesis – is that some accident comes along which wipes the slate clean of restraints that have been holding people back. In our own golden age it’s very clear what that was. It was a new continent, with new people coming, with a new form of government, with a Constitution, the Declaration of Independence. It was an opportunity in which people were unrestrained and in which the natural instincts for people to improve their lot were given freest and fullest reign.

Well, what happens, and the reason these golden ages tend to be relatively brief, the reason they last 100 years, 150 years at most, is that as time passes the slate gets filled up. It’s very much easier to introduce restrictions and restraints than it is to remove them. It’s easier to pass a low than it is to repeal a low. And so over the course of time you tend to impose these chains and restraints on yourselves, mostly for good reasons. The initial objectives are always good. That doesn’t mean the outcome is. And finally, the slate becomes so full – if I may continue to use that image – that there’s no more room to write on, and you need somehow something which will provide for another removal of restraints.

HEFFNER: What do you think would provide now for a tabula rasa again, a wiping clear of the slate?

FRIEDMAN: Well, I think the first thing that’s necessary to wipe clear the slate is to set a limit to government spending. The thing that has been encroaching more and more upon that slate is that whereas until 1928 or 9, total government spending in the United States, federal, state and local, never exceeded ten percent of our income, except in the Civil War and the First World War. It has now risen to over 40 percent of our income. If that continues…well, 40 percent is an awful lot. In Britain now it’s reached somewhere between 50 and 60 percent. The first necessity, I think, as a tactical matter, is to set an end to that. As a strategic matter, the main necessity is to have a change in the intellectual climate of opinion which will substitute a belief in the individual responsibility for the false belief in social responsibility. Let me emphasize, the problems that have arisen for us have not come from evil people who were trying in conspiracy or anything like that to enslave us. That hasn’t been our problem. Our problems have arisen from good people who were trying to do good, but trying to do good is a fundamentally flawed way. The welfare state is in many ways a noble construct, a noble concept. It’s the concept that we ought to help our fellow men. What flaws it is that it’s one thing for you to help me out of your pocket; it’s another thing for your to help me out of his pocket. And the fundamental flaw of the welfare state, in my opinion, is the idea that you should do good with somebody else’s money.

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Milton Friedman | Comments (0)

An open letter to President Obama (Part 27 of my response to State of Union Speech 1-24-12)

March 6, 2012 – 7:21 am

Leader Cantor On CNN Responding To President Obama’s State of the Union Address

Uploaded by on Jan 25, 2012

President Obama’s state of the union speech Jan 24, 2012

Barack Obama (Photo by Saul Loeb-Pool/Getty Images)

President Obama c/o The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

I know that you receive 20,000 letters a day and that you actually read 10 of them every day. I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here.

I am an avid reader of the National Review and I remember watching those famous debates at Harvard between John Kenneth Galbraith and William Buckley. You probably were at some of those debates. Below is a portion of an article that talks about your recent State of the Union address:

NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE          www.nationalreview.com           PRINT

Obama’s Final SOTU?

BURTON FOLSOM
In President Obama’s State of the Union message, he expressed his vision for the future: We need bigger government, and more of it should be paid for by rich people.

Specifically, the president suggested greater federal involvement in manufacturing, bank lending, education, clean energy, and medical research, among other areas. And the top 2 percent, he said, need to pay higher taxes to help fund it all.

In style, the president’s speech was smoother than his past State of the Union addresses — no snub of the Supreme Court this time, and no dwelling on expensive extras, such as high-speed rail. But his constant assumption was that more government control means better lives for almost all Americans.

Has this approach worked so far? If it had, President Obama would have asked the question Ronald Reagan asked in the 1980 campaign: “Are you better off now than you were four years ago?” In January 2009, unemployment was 7.6 percent; now it is 8.5 percent. The national debt then was $10.6 trillion; now it is $15.2 trillion — almost a 50 percent increase. The Community Reinvestment Act failed; the stimulus package failed; Solyndra, the solar-panel company, failed. And if more than 40 percent of Americans pay no income taxes, how can it be “fair” to ask others to pay more?

In conclusion, President Obama wants us to focus on his promises, not his results.

— Burton Folsom is professor of history at Hillsdale College and, with Anita Folsom, co-author of FDR Goes to War.

Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your committment as a father and a husband.

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733, lowcostsqueegees@yahoo.com

Uploaded by on Jan 25, 2012

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) gives a conservative response to the 2012 State of the Union address.
By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in President Obama | Comments (0)

Brantley is wrong about Republicans losing debate on Obamacare and conscience

March 6, 2012 – 6:58 am

Religious Liberty: Obamacare’s First Casualty

Uploaded by on Feb 22, 2012

http://blog.heritage.org/2012/02/22/morning-bell-religious-liberty-under-attack/ | The controversy over the Obama Administration’s anti-conscience mandate and the fight for religious liberty only serves to highlight the inherent flaws in Obamacare. This conflict is a natural result of the centralization laid out under Obamacare and will only continue until the law is repealed in full.

___________________________

Max Brantley on the Arkansas Times Blog on 3-6-12 again claimed that the Republicans will lose this debate with the President on Obamacare and conscience. However, I don’t see how that is true and it clearly interferes unconstitutionally with the liberty of Americans. 

David S. Addington

February 29, 2012 at 12:31 pm

Congress recognizes more each day that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, known widely as the Obamacare statute, interferes unconstitutionally with the liberty of Americans.  From the Obamacare individual mandate to buy health insurance that awaits the action of the Supreme Court, to the Obamacare mandate that many religious hospitals, charities, and schools abandon the tenets of their faiths and include in their group health insurance for employees coverage of abortion-inducing drugs, contraception, and sterilization, Obamacare assaults the Constitution and American freedom.

Fortunately, Members of Congress and the American people are waking up to the need to repeal the Obamacare statute and move instead to market-based, patient-centered health care.  Action in Congress this week to defend religious liberty continues to highlight the need to repeal the Obamacare statute.

The Obama Administration continues to trample on religious liberty by applying the Obamacare statute to mandate that many religious institutions’ group health insurance for employees cover abortion-inducing drugs, contraceptives, and sterilization.  The Departments of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Treasury, and Labor published on February 15, 2012 final regulations that compel many religious hospitals, charities, and schools to abandon the tenets of their faiths and comply with that mandate beginning April 16, 2012, or pay fines for maintaining their religious faiths.  The final regulations did not include any changes to respect religious liberty that President Obama had led people to expect.

Although Secretary of HHS Sebelius has said that, for one year, she will simply not perform her duty to enforce the final regulations, her decision not to enforce the regulations temporarily as a matter of grace does not eliminate the mandate’s interference with religious liberty.  Indeed, her pronouncements reflect a failure to understand that religious liberty in America is an unalienable right with which our Creator has endowed us and a right that our Constitution’s First Amendment protects.  Our religious liberty does not arise from the discretion of the Federal Government to do Americans a “favor” and tolerate their religions.  Because President Obama and his agents continue to attack the constitutionally-guaranteed right of these religious institutions to free exercise of religion, Members of Congress are stepping forward to protect the Constitution.

Senator Roy Blunt (R-Missouri) has fought for religious liberty against the Obamacare assault.  He plans to offer this week Senate Amendment No. 1520 to S. 1813, the highway authorization bill, to protect the right to religious liberty against the Obamacare mandate.  The Blunt Amendment notes that, until the enactment of the Obamacare statute in 2010, “the Federal Government has not sought to impose specific coverage or care requirements that infringe on the rights of conscience . . . .”  The Blunt Amendment would override the Obamacare mandate that religious institutions provide coverage for abortion-inducing drugs, contraceptives, and sterilization when it is contrary to their faiths, allowing them to keep their faiths and provide health care coverage for their employees.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) has announced his intention to keep the Senate from voting on the Blunt Amendment by making a motion to “table” — that is, to refuse to consider — the Blunt Amendment.  Senator Reid said he considered the Blunt Amendment that  protects religious liberty to be a “distracting proposal.”  Senator Reid may treat legislation to protect religious liberty as a “distraction,” but hundreds of millions of Americans hold their right to free exercise of religion to be a precious freedom.

President Obama and Senator Reid can man the ramparts of Castle Obamacare against the people for only so long.  The American people want their liberty and they shall have it.  The Obamacare statute must go.

Click here to watch our new video, Religious Liberty: Obamacare’s First Casualty, to learn more about this issue.

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Healthcare, President Obama | Comments (0)

Our federal government is getting fat like “Chubby”

March 5, 2012 – 11:20 pm

Our federal government is getting fat like “Chubby”

When I think of “Chubby” I get really sad. He had a problem with his glands and he became real fat. Later he had to have an operation and he went from 300 lbs to 110 lbs when he died at age 21.

Unfortunately our federal government is getting bloated and eventually distract measures may be necessary. I wish we could find a good middle ground, but it doesn’t look like we will until all the liberals are kicked out of government.

______________

Here is a short film I enjoyed when I was a kid:

Norman Chaney

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Norman Chaney

Chaney as Chubby in School’s Out
Born Norman Myers Chaney
November 1, 1914(1914-11-01)
Baltimore, Maryland
U.S.
Died May 29, 1936(1936-05-29) (aged 21)[1][2][3][4]
Baltimore, Maryland
U.S.
Cause of death glandular ailment
Occupation Film actor
Years active 1929-1931

Norman Myers Chaney (November 1, 1914 – May 29, 1936) was an American child actor, notable for appearing in the Our Gang comedies as “Chubby” from 1929 to 1931.

Contents

[edit] Early life and career

According to some sources, Chaney was born on November 1, 1914 in Baltimore, Maryland, while according to “The Little Rascals, The Life & Times of Our Gang” written by Leonard Maltin and Richard W. Bann, he was born in 1918. He became a member of Our Gang at the dawn of the sound era. He relied on an affable personality, a flair for funny dialogue, and a priceless frown of frustration that seemed to swallow up his whole moon face. In fall 1928, Our Gang producer Hal Roach and director Robert F. McGowan began to look for an overweight child actor to replace Joe Cobb in the popular film series. Cobb was twelve years old, and the series was about to transition to sound. Roach and McGowan held a nationwide contest to find a replacement for Cobb. Chaney won this contest in early 1929 and was offered a two year contract. “He adapted gracefully, and we all liked him, he was a nice fellow,” said McGowan of Chaney.[4] The roly-poly youngster’s stay with the series was destined to be brief, but he still made a memorable impression on generations of fans. He was taught the expression of the “slow burn” by the comedian Edgar Kennedy.

At the time, Chaney was only 3′ 11″ and weighed about 113 pounds. He was nicknamed “Chubby” for the series and made his debut in the second sound entry, Railroadin’, appearing in two years’ worth of Our Gang films, including shorts such as Boxing Gloves and Teacher’s Pet. Norman Chaney and Joe Cobb appeared in three shorts together. Chubby’s meatiest moments are in Love Business, in which he competed with Jackie Cooper for the affections of their teacher, Miss Crabtree (bringing her flowers and candy, he coyly proposes, “Don’t call me Norman, call me ‘Chubsy-Ubsy'”).

By spring 1931, Chaney was getting taller and increasingly heavier. He finished out the 1930-31 season without being offered another contract. Both Chaney and his parents decided he would not pursue acting following his final Our Gang short, Fly My Kite (1931). Jackie Cooper, who had been in the series for about as long as Chaney, also departed Our Gang in early 1931, as did Mary Ann Jackson, a holdover from the silent era, and stalwart kid Allen Hoskins, a member of the original 1922 cast.

[edit] Later years and death

After leaving the series, Chaney returned to his native Baltimore and attended public school, where he excelled in his studies. He continued to gain weight and eventually topped 300 lb (140 kg), though he never grew beyond 4 ft 7 in (1.4 m). His weight continued to increase, and it was discovered that he had a glandular ailment. In 1935, Chaney underwent treatment for the ailment at Johns Hopkins Hospital; his weight then dropped from over 300 lb (140 kg) to less than 140 lb (64 kg).

Chaney became seriously ill afterward and died on May 29, 1936 at age 21. At the time of his death, Chaney weighed 110 lb (50 kg). He was the first of the regular Our Gang alumni to die and the only one not to live to see the end of the series in 1944.

Chaney is buried in an unmarked grave in Section ‘E’ of Baltimore Cemetery in Baltimore, Maryland. As recent as 2009, fans arose interest in collecting funds for a gravestone.

[edit] Filmography

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

Senator Pryor asks for Spending Cut Suggestions! Here are a few!(Part 137)

March 5, 2012 – 2:11 pm

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.

Here are a few more I just emailed to him myself:

GUIDELINE #6: Terminate corporate welfare and other mistargeted programs.
There is no justification for taxing waitresses and welders to subsidize Fortune 500 companies. Mistargeted programs, such as approximately $60 billion in annual corporate welfare spending, come in many formsdirect payments, low-cost loans or insurance, and subsidized servicesbut they all provide services to which special interests are not entitled and that they do not need.
These programs harm the economy. Operating subsidies and loans to private businesses overtax productive sectors of the economy and redistribute that money to less productive sectors, based on the fallacy that it will somehow create jobs. Programs subsidizing start-up companies represent a misguided attempt by government to pick the market’s winners and losers.
In addition, research subsidies for profit-seeking businesses, which already have an incentive to fund their own profitable research, merely displace private research funding with taxpayer funds. Emergency grant and loan programs encourage businesses to take irrational risks with the assurance that taxpayers will cover any losses.
Congress therefore should:
  • Eliminate direct corporate welfare payments by:
  1. Closing down the Minority Business Development Agency (2004 spending: $22 million, discretionary);26
  2. Disqualifying high-income farmers and agribusinesses from farm subsidies ($8,000 million, mandatory);27
  3. Eliminating the Small Business Administration ($3,978 million, discretionary);
  4. Terminating the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (-$157 million, discretionary);
  5. Shutting down the Trade and Development Agency ($62 million, discretionary);
  6. Eliminating the Market Access Program ($119 million, mandatory);
  7. Closing down the Export−Import Bank
    (-$1,582 million, mandatory);
  8. Repealing the Davis−Bacon and Service Contract Acts; and
  9. Terminating the Essential Air Service Program ($57 million, discretionary).

This is how bad it is getting:

Popular Programs Are Growing Rapidly

K-12 Education Spending Has Surged 219 Percent Since 2000

  • Lawmakers have had difficulty setting budget priorities in recent years. In addition to funding two wars and the largest anti-poverty budgets in American history, they have increased spending on popular programs like education, veterans benefits, and Medicare at unsustainable rates.
By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in spending out of control | Comments (0)

What the new SEC football schedule might look like in 2013

March 5, 2012 – 2:09 pm

I have been wondering what the result will be in the SEC football rotation in upcoming schedules after 2012. Basketball is working great and the old SEC football schedule rotation worked great but what are they going to do with the 14 schools now?

I think it will work best if they go to the one rivalry game between East and West (for instance, Alabama v. Tennessee in the famous 3rd Saturday in October rivalry) and then we could have one home game against the other division opponent and one road game with another one. However, both teams would rotate off the schedule every year.

This is the conclusion of this writer below from Chattanooga:

SEC could maintain Alabama-UT Vols tradition

Trent Richardson (3) runs through the line during of an NCAA college football game against the Alabama Crimson TideSaturday, Oct, 22 2011 in Tuscaloosa Ala. (AP Photo/John Bazmore)

Trent Richardson (3) runs through the line during of an NCAA college football game against the Alabama Crimson TideSaturday, Oct, 22 2011 in Tuscaloosa Ala. (AP Photo/John Bazmore)

Photo by Associated Press /Chattanooga Times Free Press.
 
 

A NEW WRINKLE

If the SEC’s cross-divisional rivalries are preserved on future football schedules, here is how they could look:

Alabama-Tennessee

Arkansas-Missouri

Auburn-Georgia

LSU-Florida

Ole Miss-Vanderbilt

Miss. State-Kentucky

Texas A&M-So. Carolina

The Southeastern Conference may have a home for traditionalists after all.

SEC athletic directors lobbying to maintain permanent cross-divisional football matchups such as Alabama-Tennessee and Auburn-Georgia feel better about their cause compared to a week ago. League ADs met last Wednesday in Nashville, the site of the SEC women’s basketball tournament, to begin discussing football schedules for the 2013 season and beyond, and they will resume talks Wednesday in New Orleans, the site of the men’s tournament.

Georgia athletic director Greg McGarity entered last week’s meeting fearing the 14 ADs might vote 10-4 against preserving permanent cross-divisional rivalries due to matchups such as Arkansas-South Carolina and Kentucky-Mississippi State not having the historical punch of Alabama-Tennessee and Auburn-Georgia.

“I do feel better,” McGarity said Sunday. “The tone of the conversations that everyone had sort of gave the impression that everyone had a sense, at least the majority had a sense, of liking the rivalry game with an opponent from the opposite division. The tone led us to believe that this has a good opportunity of moving forward.”

SEC associate commissioner Charles Bloom declined comment Sunday when asked about last week’s discussions.

The league is having to juggle concerns about traditional rivalries and members playing too infrequently as it moves from 12 teams following the additions of Missouri and Texas A&M. Missouri will compete in the East Division starting this year and Texas A&M in the West, and their arrivals instantly have altered the eight-game league format.

South Carolina president Harris Pastides told the ABC affiliate in Columbia on Saturday that he expects the permanent cross-divisional rivalries to remain but with a different look. The Gamecocks and Arkansas have met annually in football since 1992, when they gave the league a dozen members, but Pastides believes Arkansas will be replaced on his school’s schedule by Texas A&M.

“Arkansas and Missouri have kind of buddied up because they are neighboring states and wanted to play each other,” Pastides told station WOLO. “If all goes the way I think it will, we will probably be swapping Arkansas for Texas A&M.”

Pastides said an announcement on the new cross-divisional relationships could occur within a couple of weeks.

South Carolina and Texas A&M have never played in football, while Arkansas and Missouri have met just five times despite the proximity. Their most recent matchup occurred after the 2007 season, when the Tigers humiliated the Razorbacks 38-7 in the Cotton Bowl.

SEC athletic directors are studying models with eight and nine conference games, McGarity said, as well as ways to rotate the one opponent from the opposite division should ADs elect to maintain the format that was put in place for the 2012 season. One presented option that appears to have some traction is to play a rotating team from the opposite division at home one year and another rotating team from the opposite division away from home the next year, or vice versa, and go down the line.

Such a cycle would allow a fifth-year senior at a school the chance to see 12 of the 13 other league teams.

“I think everything is still on the table,” McGarity said. “We spent one full day on it, and I’m sure we’ll spend one full day on it in New Orleans once everybody’s had a week to think about it.”

Related posts:

Who will get 4th place in SEC basketball race?

SEC Basketball race for 4th places heats up Does anyone want 4th place? It seems that everytime a team gets a few wins under their belt and it appears they are going to sew up 4th place then they lose. Look at Tennessee. The Vols played against a Bama team that had their two leading […]

Loss to Vols is bitter in contrast to sweet victory in football

Photo by Adam Brimer, copyright © 2012 Tennessee guard Trae Golden (11) shoots a layup during the first half against Arkansas at Thompson-Boling Arena Wednesday, Feb. 15, 2012. (ADAM BRIMER/NEWS SENTINEL) ______________ I have to say that it was a sweet victory that the Hogs had over the Vols in football back in November. The […]

Vol Coach looks needs victory over Hogs on way to NCAA berth

I think that the hogs and the vols both need 10-6 conference records to get in the NCAA. I have said all year that we need two road victories to do that. I do assume that we will need to beat Florida in Fayetteville to accomplish that. Cuonzo Martin: 10-6 in SEC puts Vols ‘in […]

Vol coach “We’re getting there right now,” faces Arkansas on Wednesday

Florida’s Patric Young (4) goes to the basket as Tennessee’s Jarnell Stokes (5) tries to block the shot during the first half of an NCAA college basketball game in Gainesville, Fla., Saturday, Feb. 11, 2012. (AP Photo/Phil Sandlin) _____________________________ It appears the Arkansas Razorbacks will be facing a new and improved Tennessee Vols basketball team […]

When are the Razorbacks going to get road victory, maybe in Knoxville?

Arkansas must get a couple of road wins if we hope to make it to the NCAA Tournament this year. By reading the comments on Arkansas Sports 360 it appears the fans are anxious for one.  Looking at the schedule and there remains games at Tennessee, Auburn and Mississippi State. The Miss St game would […]

Briefs on all the SEC football recruiting hauls

I am glad that Petrino got more defensive players than offensive players but time will tell if he can develop these three star players like he did in 2008 when that class later turned the hogs into a national contender in 2011. Below is an article from http://www.ajc.com Alabama (26): The national champs added to their […]

Tennessee is upset at Peters for switching to the Hogs

It is nice to be feared by the Vols. They rejoiced when it was announced that they would not have to play the Hogs in 2012. Amy Smotherman Burgess, ©KNS/2011 In the article below you can see that the player who lived in Texas that switched to Texas could be explained away and the one […]

Arkansas gets help on defense in this class

I know that many of us are disappointed that Dorial Green-Beckham did not sign with the Razorbacks but we just have to move on. I am not interested in reliving the whole thing and going through all the negative things said about the Hogs during the process. That always happens in every recruiting case and […]

Tennessee forward Jeronne Maymon (34), right, fights for control of the ball during the game against Arkansas at Thompson-Boling Arena Wednesday, Feb. 15, 2012. Tennessee won 77-58 over Arkansas. (ADAM BRIMER/NEWS SENTINEL)

Photo by Adam Brimer, copyright © 2012

Tennessee forward Jeronne Maymon (34), right, fights for control of the ball during the game against Arkansas at Thompson-Boling Arena Wednesday, Feb. 15, 2012. Tennessee won 77-58 over Arkansas. (ADAM BRIMER/NEWS SENTINEL)

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

Tributes to Andrew Breitbart from Heritage Foundation Scholars (Part 3)

March 5, 2012 – 2:08 pm

These comments below were taken from the following article:

Todd Thurman

March 1, 2012 at 3:21 pm

___________

Rory Cooper:  One of the last times I saw Andrew Breitbart, he was charging into a ballroom at the Washington Marriott at CPAC wearing a Guy Fawkes mask and cape. He loved it. He was there to promote a new film exposing the Occupy movement, and ever the showman; he knew how to make a grand entrance. Every face in the room got the same mischievous smirk on it when they saw him, as if to collectively say ‘that’s our Andrew’.

Andrew’s courageous legacy will be infinite. He showed young activists and journalists that the mainstream media will ignore many stories unless you make the lack of coverage embarrassing in itself. Make a spectacle, put your integrity on the line, inspire others and demand an open and honest debate. And when the media still gets it wrong, compete with them. Build your own website, do your own investigating and seek to shine a brilliant light on the important issues of our day.

Many will hopefully carry his torch, but nobody will replace him. He was *the* muckraker of a generation. The cause of truth and justice has suffered a great loss. My family’s prayers are with his wife and children who mourn the loss of a compassionate father and husband, and his countless friends who mourn the loss of a great soul.

Todd Thurman: I had the privilege to speak on a panel with Andrew Breitbart at our annual Resource Bank conference in 2009. He was truly dedicated to the movement. It was a 3 hour panel on a Friday afternoon in Los Angeles. Instead of enjoying the weather outside, he was in a hotel room speaking to bloggers to advance the cause. During the discussion, I noticed him constantly looking at his phone. I asked him what was going on and he told me: He was checking his fantasy baseball team. Whatever he was involved in, whether it was baseball, music, or the conservative movement, he was passionate. His passion burned until the very end and he will be truly missed.

Andrew Breitbart at CPAC 2012 02102012 – FULL SPEECH

Uploaded by on Feb 10, 2012

Courtesy of Mediaite via the Right Scoop.

Related posts:

Sean Hannity’s tribute to his dear friend Andrew Breitbart

Uploaded by MrTimotheus85 on Mar 1, 2012 Sean Hannity – In My Fathers House There Are Many Mansion And I Know Andrew Is In One Of Them I got a chance to meet Andrew once and it was on May 25, 2011. He was very gracious and I really enjoyed visiting with him. Below are […]

Rep. Louie Gohmert Pays Tribute to Andrew Breitbart

Rep. Louie Gohmert Pays Tribute to Andrew Breitbart Uploaded by GohmertTX01 on Mar 1, 2012 Rep. Louie Gohmert (TX-01) spoke on the House floor about the life and legacy of his friend, conservative writer and American patriot, Andrew Breitbart. “Thank you, dear God, for sharing this extraordinary gift that was Andrew Breitbart with us. We […]

Andrew Breitbart spoke to Little Rock, Arkansas group May 25, 2011 (Part 4,the media world has changed with cable, Fox News, and the web)

Andrew Breibart spoke in Little Rock on May 25, 2011 Andrew Breitbart in Arkansas The second monthly luncheon with featured speaker Andrew Breitbart was excellent. (Check out the Tolbert Report for more coverage of this event.) First, we got to hear from Dave Elswick of KARN   who came up with the idea of this luncheon, […]

Andrew Breitbart spoke to Little Rock, Arkansas group May 25, 2011 (Part 3,one time default cultural liberal, but now a conservative )

Andrew Breibart spoke in Little Rock on May 25, 2011 Andrew Breitbart in Arkansas Dave Elswick Chicago and Introduction.wmv Conservative film activist Andrew Breitbart spoke in Little Rock on Wednseday May 25th at the Hilton Hotel. The room was packed with conservative activist and Tea Party members. Breitbart talked about dealing with the liberal media […]

Andrew Breitbart spoke to Little Rock, Arkansas group May 25, 2011 (Part 2, video clips )

Andrew Breibart spoke in Little Rock on May 25, 2011 to a packed room. The second monthly luncheon with featured speaker Andrew Breitbart was excellent. (Check out the Tolbert Report for more coverage of this event.) First, we got to hear from Dave Elswick of KARN   who came up with the idea of this luncheon, […]

Andrew Breitbart spoke to Little Rock, Arkansas group May 25, 2011 (Part 1, taking on Bill Maher was liberating)

  Andrew Breitbart speaking in Little Rock on May 25, 2011. Andrew Breitbart – Taking Down the Corrupt and Biased, Leftist Mainstream Media Andrew Breitbart joined Hannity to talk about his new book “Righteous Indignation: Excuse Me While I Save the World!”, and about his mission to take down the corrupt and biased, leftist mainstream […]

May 6, 2011 CBS News interview with Andrew Brietbart

Andrew Breitbart Andrew Breitbart CBS News reported on May 6, 2011: Conservative publisher Andrew Brietbart sat down for an extensive interview with CBSNews.com Friday in which he discussed his disdain for the mainstream media, offered his perspective on the Republican presidential field, said President Obama should have released a post-mortem photo of Osama bin Laden, and complained […]

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

Girl Likens Public School Failure to Ban on Teaching Slaves to Read

March 5, 2012 – 1:40 pm

Why have blacks that live in bad areas been condemned to inferior schools? A young lady floated an idea out there and was severly punished for her thoughts:

Girl Likens Public School Failure to Ban on Teaching Slaves to Read

Posted by Andrew J. Coulson

A 13-year-old black girl from Rochester likens the pedagogical malfeasance of her public school to the deliberate prohibition against teaching slaves to read–as recounted by Frederick Douglass in his autobiography. And she is hounded out of the school.

We can do better than this. We need a free marketplace in education with financial assistance to ensure universal access. Scholarship donation and personal use education tax credits can do that.

If you want the public school system to improve, it will take giving their captive audience an alternative. Many inner city parents would love to be given vouchers and get the same quality education that private schools are giving parents that have lots of money. How can you get around that logic. Meanwhile our inner city schools are becoming filled with violence.

Here is the video clip and transcript of the film series FREE TO CHOOSE episode “What is wrong with our schools?” Part 1 of 6.

 
Volume 6 – What’s Wrong with our Schools
Transcript:
Friedman: These youngsters are beginning another day at one of America’s public schools, Hyde Park High School in Boston. What happens when they pass through those doors is a vivid illustration of some of the problems facing America’s schools.
They have to pass through metal detectors. They are faced by security guards looking for hidden weapons. They are watched over by armed police. Isn’t that awful. What a way for kids to have to go to school, through metal detectors and to be searched. What can they conceivably learn under such circumstances. Nobody is happy with this kind of education. The taxpayers surely aren’t. This isn’t cheap education. After all, those uniformed policemen, those metal detectors have to be paid for.
What about the broken windows, the torn school books, and the smashed school equipment. The teachers who teach here don’t like this kind of situation. The students don’t like to come here to go to school, and most of all, the parents __ they are the ones who get the worst deal __ they pay taxes like the rest of us and they are just as concerned about the kind of education that their kids get as the rest of us are. They know their kids are getting a bad education but they feel trapped. Many of them can see no alternative but to continue sending their kids to schools like this.
To go back to the beginning, it all started with the fine idea that every child should have a chance to learn his three R’s. Sometimes in June when it gets hot, the kids come out in the yard to do their lessons, all 15 of them, ages 5 to 13, along with their teacher. This is the last one-room schoolhouse still operating in the state of Vermont. That is the way it used to be. Parental control, parents choosing the teacher, parents monitoring the schooling, parents even getting together and chipping in to paint the schoolhouse as they did here just a few weeks ago. Parental concern is still here as much in the slums of the big cities as in Bucolic, Vermont. But control by parents over the schooling of their children is today the exception, not the rule.
Increasingly, schools have come under the control of centralized administration, professional educators deciding what shall be taught, who shall do the teaching, and even what children shall go to what school. The people who lose most from this system are the poor and the disadvantaged in the large cities. They are simply stuck. They have no alternative.
Of course, if you are well off you do have a choice. You can send your child to a private school or you can move to an area where the public schools are excellent, as the parents of many of these students have done. These students are graduating from Weston High School in one of Boston’s wealthier suburbs. Their parents pay taxes instead of tuition and they certainly get better value for their money than do the parents in Hyde Park. That is partly because they have kept a good deal of control over the local schools, and in the process, they have managed to retain many of the virtues of the one-room schoolhouse.
Students here, like Barbara King, get the equivalent of a private education. They have excellent recreational facilities. They have a teaching staff that is dedicated and responsive to parents and students. There is an atmosphere which encourages learning, yet the cost per pupil here is no higher than in many of our inner city schools. The difference is that at Weston, it all goes for education that the parents still retain a good deal of control.
Unfortunately, most parents have lost control over how their tax money in spent. Avabelle goes to Hyde Park High. Her parents too want her to have a good education, but many of the students here are not interested in schooling, and the teachers, however dedicated, soon lose heart in an atmosphere like this. Avabelle’s parents are certainly not getting value for their tax money.
Caroline Bell, Parent: I think it is a shame, really, that parents are being ripped off like we are. I am talking about parents like me that work every day, scuffle to try to make ends meet. We send our kids to school hoping that they will receive something that will benefit them in the future for when they go out here and compete in the job market. Unfortunately, none of that is taking place at Hyde Park.
Friedman: Children like Ava are being shortchanged by a system that was designed to help. But there are ways to help give parents more say over their children’s schooling.
This is a fundraising evening for a school supported by a voluntary organization, New York’s Inner City Scholarship Fund. The prints that have brought people here have been loaned by wealthy Japanese industrialist. Events like this have helped raise two million dollars to finance Catholic parochial schools in New York. The people here are part of a long American tradition. The results of their private voluntary activities have been remarkable.
This is one of the poorest neighborhoods in New York City: the Bronx. Yet this parochial school, supported by the fund, is a joy to visit. The youngsters here from poor families are at Saint John Christians because their parents have picked this school and their parents are paying some of the costs from their own pockets. The children are well behaved, eager to learn, the teachers are dedicated. The cost per pupil here is far less than in the public schools, yet on the average the children are two grades ahead. That is because teachers and parents are free to choose how the children shall be taught. Private money has replaced the tax money and so control has been taken away from the bureaucrats and put back where it belongs.
This doesn’t work just for younger children. In the 60’s, Harlem was devastated by riots. It was a hot bed of trouble. Many teenagers dropped out of school.

Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “What is wrong with our schools?” (Part 1 of transcript and video)

Here is the video clip and transcript of the film series FREE TO CHOOSE episode “What is wrong with our schools?” Part 1 of 6.   Volume 6 – What’s Wrong with our Schools Transcript: Friedman: These youngsters are beginning another day at one of America’s public schools, Hyde Park High School in Boston. What happens when […]

 

Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “What is wrong with our schools?” (Part 4 of transcript and video)

Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “What is wrong with our schools?” (Part 4 of transcript and video) Here is the video clip and transcript of the film series FREE TO CHOOSE episode “What is wrong with our schools?” Part 4 of 6.   Volume 6 – What’s Wrong with our Schools Transcript: It seems to me […]

Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “What is wrong with our schools?” (Part 3 of transcript and video) Here is the video clip and transcript of the film series FREE TO CHOOSE episode “What is wrong with our schools?” Part 3 of 6.   Volume 6 – What’s Wrong with our Schools Transcript: If it doesn’t, they […]

Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “What is wrong with our schools?” (Part 2 of transcript and video)

Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “What is wrong with our schools?” (Part 2 of transcript and video) Here is the video clip and transcript of the film series FREE TO CHOOSE episode “What is wrong with our schools?” Part 2 of 6.   Volume 6 – What’s Wrong with our Schools Transcript: Groups of concerned parents […]

Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “What is wrong with our schools?” (Part 6 of transcript and video)

Here is the video clip and transcript of the film series FREE TO CHOOSE episode “What is wrong with our schools?” Part 6 of 6.   Volume 6 – What’s Wrong with our Schools Transcript: FRIEDMAN: But I personally think it’s a good thing. But I don’t see that any reason whatsoever why I shouldn’t have been required […]

 

Free to Choose by Milton Friedman: Episode “What is wrong with our schools?” (Part 5 of transcript and video)

Here is the video clip and transcript of the film series FREE TO CHOOSE episode “What is wrong with our schools?” Part 5 of 6.   Volume 6 – What’s Wrong with our Schools Transcript: Are your voucher schools  going to accept these tough children? COONS: You bet they are. (Several talking at once.) COONS: May I answer […]

 

 

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Vouchers | Comments (0)

“War on Women?”

March 5, 2012 – 10:03 am

Religious Liberty: Obamacare’s First Casualty

Uploaded by on Feb 22, 2012

http://blog.heritage.org/2012/02/22/morning-bell-religious-liberty-under-attack/ | The controversy over the Obama Administration’s anti-conscience mandate and the fight for religious liberty only serves to highlight the inherent flaws in Obamacare. This conflict is a natural result of the centralization laid out under Obamacare and will only continue until the law is repealed in full.

___________________________It is popular to talk about a “War on Women” and we hear it all the time now in the press (just today, 3-5-12, the Arkansas Times Blog went on and on about it)We need to put things in perspective.

The ‘War on Women’ — a Rhetorical Distraction

Posted by Roger Pilon

Today POLITICO Arena asks:

Now that Rush Limbaugh has apologized, will voters see the Democrats’ “war on women” language as overkill?

My response:

We’re in the season of rhetorical overkill. Rush Limbaugh’s vile attack last week on Sandra Fluke was reprehensible. So too is the Democratic campaign to paint a Republican “war on women” — not least because it treats women as a monolithic class, ignoring the many women who grasp what’s at issue here — liberty.

ObamaCare is a major step toward socialized health care. You can pretend otherwise — the “war on women” rhetoric aims at that — but the coercive elements inherent in any socialized scheme come to the surface when conflicts like the one before us arise.

And it’s only the beginning. Soon enough, as costs to “the public” mount (the only costs that matter in socialized arrangements), Republicans will be talking about a “war on the elderly,” and they’ll be right. After all, “We’re all in this together.” We have that on high authority. Welcome to the world of all against all.

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Healthcare, President Obama | Comments (0)