Monthly Archives: May 2012

What are the permanent cross-division opponents in future SEC football schedules?

 Third Saturday in October

Uploaded by on Oct 24, 2006

The 2006 matchup proved to be another classic in the Tennessee Alabama rivalry.

____________

I like the new SEC schedule plan. Of course, the one permanent between divisions were hard to come up with although the Tennessee-Alabama game has a longtime history as does the Georgia-Auburn game.

SEC to discuss future football schedule format at Spring meetings

By Kevin Kelley – Tue, May 29, 2012

The 2012 SEC Spring meetings begin today at the Sandestin Hilton in Destin, Florida One of the topics this week will be the future schedule format for football.

Over the weekend, SEC schedule guru and consultant Larry Templeton indicated that the conference will likely go with the 6-1-1 format. This format means each team plays six divisional games, one permanent cross-division opponent and one rotating cross-division team.

The 6-1-1 model is what the SEC is using in 2012 after expanding to add Missouri and Texas A&M.

“I’ve been around this (SEC) group enough to know that when they get together for four days there’s a lot of things that change from Tuesday to Friday,” Templeton said, chuckling. “But I wouldn’t look for a lot of change in the permanents if truly the 6-1-1 is what we end up with.”

The 6-1-1 format allows for historical rivalries to continue, such as Auburn-Georgia and Alabama-Tennessee. But this model also means it will take 12 years for each team to play every team from the opposite division, compared to only five years under the old 5-1-2.

Another option for the 6-1-1 format is to play each team from the other division in succession, rather than playing one team home-and-home and then moving to the next team. In that scenario, each SEC team could play all of the other teams in the opposite division in six years rather than twelve.

The SEC should also set the permanent cross-division rivals this week. Based on comments made back in March, Arkansas will partner with Missouri while South Carolina will pair with Texas A&M. If that holds true, here is what the seven cross-division pairings will look like (East – West):

  • Florida – LSU
  • Georgia – Auburn
  • Kentucky – Mississippi State
  • Missouri – Arkansas
  • South Carolina – Texas A&M
  • Tennessee – Alabama
  • Vanderbilt – Ole Miss

After the 6-1-1 format and permanent cross-division rivals are agreed upon, Templeton needs to know how many years he can schedule that format. That could range anywhere from one to 13 years.

If the SEC does release a scheduling format for future seasons, we expect it to list the opponents for each year but not the dates. That is how the conference has historically released their football scheduling information.

Like FBSchedules.com on Facebook and Follow Us on Twitter.

Wednesday, October 17, 2001
The third Saturday in October
By Beano Cook
Special to ESPN.com

If you are a fan of Tennessee or Alabama football there are two rules to live by: Don’t get married on the third Saturday in October, and try not to die — because in either case, the preacher might not show.

  Bear Bryant
Paul “Bear” Bryant coached Alabama to a 16-7-2 record against Tennessee.

When the SEC went to 12 teams and a new format for scheduling, the Tennessee-Alabama game wasn’t always guaranteed to be played on the third Saturday in October like it is this year. For years, the best litmus test Tennessee had for a recruit was, “Will he be there to do the job on the third Saturday in October?” If the answer was yes, it was the highest compliment a coach could give a player.

This is one of the greatest rivalries in college football, mostly because of the great coaches and players who have taken part in it. Of course, the two coaches that come to mind are Paul “Bear” Bryant and General Robert Neyland.

  Classic Friday Tailgate
  This week’s Classic Friday Tailgate features Tennessee-Alabama and USC-Notre Dame.

I want to set the record straight about something. It was General Neyland who said, “When you throw the ball, three things can happen — and two of them are bad.” He doesn’t always get credit for the quote, as it is often attributed to Woody Hayes. But it was Neyland.

There are two stories that exemplify the effect Neyland and Bryant had as the coach of their respective programs. Lindsey Nelson, the famous announcer and Tennessee graduate, was waiting for Neyland with two former Tennessee players after the 1952 Sugar Bowl, which the Vols had lost, 28-13, to Maryland.

One of the former players was smoking, and the minute Neyland came out of the dressing room, the player dropped the cigarette and stomped on it so Neyland wouldn’t see him smoking. Nelson turned to the player and said, “You don’t have to do that — you don’t play for him anymore.” The player replied, “You know that, and I know that, but I don’t think the General knows that.”

After Joe Namath won the Super Bowl and was the toast of Broadway, Namath talked to Paul Zimmerman of the New York Post. In the interview he told Zimmerman, “The Bear always said defense won games.” The next time Namath saw Zimmerman, he claimed to he was mis-quoted. Zimmerman said, “That’s what you said about the defense.” Namath answered, “Yes, I said that about the defense, but I never said ‘Bear.’ I either called him Coach Bryant or Mr. Bryant, but I never called him ‘Bear’.”

  Chat with Beano
  Chat with Beano on Wednesday at 3 p.m. ET.

Alabama leads the series 42-34-7. Bear Bryant had an overall winning record against Tennessee (16-7-2), but there was a stretch (1967-70) where he lost four straight years.

You can’t lose this game consistently and expect to keep your job as the head coach of either team. It’s a bigger game to Tennessee than it is to Alabama, because ‘Bama’s true rival is Auburn. But for both teams, it has stood the test of time. It’s not only a great rivalry — it’s always a great game.

Beano Cook is a college football historian for ESPN.

Open letter to President Obama (Part 84.8)

Tim Sandefur Discusses ObamaCare’s Medicaid Expansion

Uploaded by on Mar 26, 2012

http://www.cato.org/event.php?eventid=9074

Tim Sandefur of the Pacific Legal Foundation explains some of the implications of the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion.

_________________________

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 thought that 98% of the people in the USA would be covered under your system of Obamacare?

Great chart from the Heritage Foundation:

Millions remain uninsured under Obamacare

Created on March 23, 2012

Millions remain uninsured under Obamacare

Slide 2 | Obamacare in Pictures

President Obama promised universal coverage under his health care overhaul. However, even with Obamacare, millions of Americans will remain uninsured. Those who do gain coverage will do so primarily through government exchanges or Medicaid.

_____________

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

Sincerely,

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

________

Related posts:

7 things wrong so far with Obamacare

Milton Friedman – Socialized Medicine at Mayo Clinic in 1978 Liberals think that people would just fall in love with Obamacare once they got a taste of it but it didn’t work out that way. Seven of Obamacare’s Biggest Failures from the Last Two Years Alyene Senger March 28, 2012 at 5:15 pm It has […]

Obamacare proponents say the Supreme Court should let it become law because the people want it!!!!

Randy Barnett Discusses ObamaCare at the Supreme Court Uploaded by catoinstitutevideo on Mar 26, 2012 http://www.cato.org/event.php?eventid=9074 Cato Institute Senior Fellow and Georgetown University law professor Randy E. Barnett discusses the arguments to be presented to the Supreme Court beginning March 26. I know that many people feel strongly that we live in a democracy and […]

Videos from Cato Institute on Obamacare

Cato’s Michael F. Cannon Discusses ObamaCare’s Individual Mandate Uploaded by catoinstitutevideo on Mar 26, 2012 http://www.cato.org/event.php?eventid=9074 The individual mandate to purchase health insurance is the linchpin of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. It is among the issues to be handled by the Supreme Court beginning March 26, 2012. Michael F. Cannon is the […]

Dan Mitchell of the Cato Institute takes on entitlement reform

It is the elephant in the room that nobody wants to talk about. Here Dan Mitchell takes it on. Everything You Need to Know about Entitlement Reform November 28, 2011 by Dan Mitchell Most people have a vague understanding that America has a huge long-run fiscal problem. They’re right, though they probably don’t realize the seriousness […]

Ryan’s plan better than Democrat’s plan but not as good as Rand Paul’s

Promote Federalism and Replicate the Success of Welfare Reform with Medicaid Block Grants Uploaded by afq2007 on Jun 26, 2011 The Medicaid program imposes high costs while generating poor results. This Center for Freedom and Prosperity Foundation video explains how block grants, such as the one proposed by Congressman Paul Ryan, will save money and […]

HERITAGE FOUNDATION INTERVIEW:Senator Blunt Vows to Keep Pressure on President Obama Over Contraceptive Mandate

Senator Blunt Vows to Keep Pressure on President Obama Over Contraceptive Mandate Uploaded by HeritageFoundation on Feb 13, 2012 http://blog.heritage.org/2012/02/13/sen-blunt-vows-to-keep-pressure-on-obama-… | Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO) introduced legislation to protect religious organizations from Obamacare’s overreach last summer. Now, as President Obama presses forward with his anti-conscience mandate, Blunt is prepared to keep the pressure on the […]

HERITAGE FOUNDATION INTERVIEW:Senator John Barrasso On the Fight Against Obamacare

Senator John Barrasso On the Fight Against Obamacare Uploaded by HeritageFoundation on Mar 26, 2012 Sen. John Barrasso earned the nickname “Wyoming’s Doctor” after working for 24 years as an orthopedic surgeon in Casper. Today he represents the state in the U.S. Senate and is one of the leading critics of Obamacare. More than two […]

HERITAGE FOUNDATION INTERVIEW:Senator Marco Rubio Talks Cuba, Budget and Obamacare

Senator Marco Rubio Talks Cuba, Budget and Obamacare Uploaded by HeritageFoundation on Mar 22, 2012 http://blog.heritage.org/2012/03/22/exclusive-interview-sen-marco-rubio-talks… | Pope Benedict XVI will visit the communist island of Cuba next week. But while there, the Catholic leader has no plans to visit Cuban dissidents who are fighting for freedom from the Castro regime. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), […]

Rand Paul v. President Obama

Sen. Rand Paul Urges Colleagues to Vote for his Budget Resolution – 05/16/12

What are our choices here in the USA with our huge budget deficit? We could head to Greece or cut our budget until we have it balanced. Obama would never even consider getting close to a balanced budget while Paul would put in the spending cuts that we need to get the job done.

A few months ago, I wrote some very nice things about a budget plan put together by Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, noting that:

Senator Paul and his colleagues are highlighting the fact that the plan generates a balanced budget in just five years. That’s a good outcome, but it should be a secondary selling point. All the good results in the plan – including the reduction in red ink and the flat tax – are made possible because the overall burden of federal spending is lowered.

Not surprising, one of the columnists at the Washington Post has a different perspective. In his hyperventilating column today, Dana Milbank says that Senator’s Paul’s proposal is “monstrous” and “nasty” for reining in the federal government.

The tea party darling’s plan would, among other things, cut the average Social Security recipient’s benefits by nearly 40 percent, reduce defense spending by nearly $100 billion below a level the Pentagon calls “devastating,” and end the current Medicare program in two years — even for current recipients, according to the Senate Budget Committee staff. It would eliminate the education, energy, housing and commerce departments, decimate homeland security, eviscerate programs for the poor, and give the wealthy a bonanza by reducing tax rates to 17 percent and eliminating taxes on capital gains and dividends. It is, all in all, quite a nasty piece of work.

Setting aside some of the inaccuracies (Social Security benefits would rise, for instance, but not as fast as they would under current law), I have two reactions to Milbank’s screed.

1. Milbank seems to think that Rand Paul’s budget is heartless and mean. Does that mean it would be nice and caring to let America descend into Greek-style fiscal chaos and economic decline? Should the United States be more like Europe, even though living standards are about 30 percent lower?

2. More amusingly, what does he think about the fact that the Senate voted against Obama’s tax-and-spend budget by a stunning margin of 99-0? That’s even worse than the 97-0 vote against the budget Obama proposed last year. The 16 votes for Rand Paul’s budget may not sound like much, but 16 is a lot more than zero.

Setting aside the snarky comments, all that Rand Paul is proposing is to limit the growth of government so that the federal budget grows by an average of about 2 percent annually.

Other nations, such as Canada and New Zealand were much more frugal when they solved their fiscal problems. But for leftists such as Milbank, any fiscal restraint apparently is “nasty” and “monsrous.”

Woody Allen’s career in pictures “Woody Wednesday”

 

Sleepers (1973)
 
Sleepers (1973)

Allen (left) wrote, directed and starred in this oddball love story, set 200 years in the future.  It was his first on-screen collaboration with Diane Keaton (second left), who went on to become one of the director’s muses in the early days of his career.

 
Bananas (1971) 
Bananas (1971)

en cast ex-wife, Louise Lasser (the duo were married from 1966 to 1969), as his romantic lead in this quirky comedy. When asked why he chose to title the movie Bananas, Allen quipped, “Because there are no bananas in it.” 

 
Take The Money And Run (1969)
 
Take The Money And Run (1969)

Allen’s second directorial foray (following 1966’s re-dubbed comedy, What’s Up, Tiger Lily?), also marked the second time he wrote, directed and starred in a film. The mockumentary chronicled Allen’s failed bank robber character, Virgil Starkwell. 

Related posts:

According to Woody Allen Life is meaningless (Woody Wednesday Part 2)

Woody Allen, the film writer, director, and actor, has consistently populated his scripts with characters who exchange dialogue concerning meaning and purpose. In Hannah and Her Sisters a character named Mickey says, “Do you realize what a thread were all hanging by? Can you understand how meaningless everything is? Everything. I gotta get some answers.”{7} […]

“Woody Wednesday” Part 1 starts today, Complete listing of all posts on the historical people mentioned in “Midnight in Paris”

I have gone to see Woody Allen’s latest movie “Midnight in Paris” three times and taken lots of notes during the films. I have attempted since June 12th when I first started posting to give a historical rundown on every person mentioned in the film. Below are the results of my study. I welcome any […]

What can we learn from Woody Allen Films?

Looking at the (sometimes skewed) morality of Woody Allen’s best films. In the late ’60s, Woody Allen left the world of stand-up comedy behind for the movies. Since then, he’s become one of American cinema’s most celebrated filmmakers. Sure, he’s had his stinkers and his private life hasn’t been without controversy. But he’s also crafted […]

Nihilism can be seen in Woody Allen’s latest film “Midnight in Paris”

In one of his philosophical and melancholy musings Woody Allen once drily observed: “More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.” Life tortures Woody Allen posted by Rod Dreher […]

Movie Review of “Midnight in Paris” lastest movie by Woody Allen

Midnight in Paris – a delightfully entertaining film of wit, wonder and love Have you ever thought that you were born in the wrong time? Since I was a child, I found my love for MGM musicals set me apart from my friends. Are we really out of place, or is a sense of nostalgia […]

“Midnight in Paris” movie review plus review of 5 Woody Allen classics (video clips from Annie Hall)

Five favorite Woody Allen classics Add a comment Sean Kernan , Davenport Classic Movies Examiner June 11, 2011 Woody Allen’s new film “Midnight in Paris” starring Owen Wilson, Rachel McAdams and Oscar winner Marion Cotillard opened Friday, June 10th at Rave Motion Pictures in Davenport, Iowa. “Midnight in Paris” stars Owen Wilson as a blocked […]

Hank Hanegraaff on the issue of abortion (Part 3)

What Ever Happened to the Human Race?

We really need some prolife judges appointed soon  that will respect the sanctity of human life including that of unborn children.

The Abortion Holocaust

Article ID: DA375

By: Hank Hanegraaff

The following is an excerpt from article DA375 by Hank Hanegraaff. The full article can be found by following the link below the excerpt.


For hundreds of years the Lord had warned the Israelites through His prophets. Now it was too late! Darkness had descended upon the Promised Land. The people of Israel had become the slaves of the mighty Assyrians. Although the tribe of Judah to the south had miraculously survived the initial onslaught, they somehow blithely managed to ignore the lesson of history.

2 Kings tells us that Ahaz, king of Judah, “walked in the ways of the kings of Israel and even sacrificed his son in the fire, following the detestable ways of the nations the Lord had driven out before the Israelites” (16:3).

The nation of Israel had indeed become a mirror reflection of the pagan culture by which they found themselves surrounded. True prophets continued to warn God’s people that their wickedness would inexorably lead to destruction, but their words fell on deaf ears. The rulers of the land had become so corrupt that they even hired false prophets to tell them what their itching ears wanted to hear.

Finally, the inevitable occurred. The ax of God’s judgment fell. Babylon leveled Jerusalem, and the people of Judah were driven from their land of promise.

Today America, like ancient Israel, is turning a deaf ear to the lesson of history. We have repeatedly violated God’s commands, as if we could do so with impunity. We have failed to heed the warnings of His prophets and have embraced the new paganism of our times. Indeed, our ways have become detestable to the Lord; we have forgotten His command: “When you enter the land the Lord your God is giving you, do not learn to imitate the detestable ways of the nations there. Let no one be found among you who sacrifices his son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. Anyone who does these things is detestable to the Lord, and because of these detestable practices the Lord your God will drive out those nations before you. You must be blameless before the Lord your God” (Deut. 18:9-12; emphasis added).

Christian philosopher Francis Schaeffer warned us that abortion would be the watershed issue of our era. He said, “Of all the subjects relating to the erosion of the sanctity of human life, abortion is the keystone. It is the first and crucial issue that has been overwhelming in changing attitudes toward the value of life in general.”1

Schaeffer’s warning has tragically fallen on deaf ears. For more than two decades we have sacrificed our children on the altars of hedonism. And even now, the ax of God’s judgment has been laid to the root.

Two thousand years ago Christ warned us that “the days are coming when they will say, ‘Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bore, and the breasts that never nursed!’” (Luke 23:29). The present day abortion holocaust has driven those words home in dramatic fashion. Consider the statements of some of the spiritual and secular leaders of our age:

• Beverly Harrison (professor of Christian ethics at Union Theological Seminary) — Infanticide is not a great wrong. I do not want to be construed as condemning women who, under certain circumstances, quietly put their infants to death” (emphasis in original).2

• Esther Langston (professor of social work at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas): “What we are saying is that abortion becomes one of the choices and the person has the right to choose whatever it is that is…best for them in the situation in which they find themselves, be it abortion, to keep the baby, to adopt it, to sell it, to leave it in a dumpster, to put it on your porch, whatever; it’s the person’s right to choose.”3

• Mary S. Calderone, M.D. (head of SIECUS — Sex Information and Education Council of the United States): “We have yet to beat our drums for birth control in the way we beat them for polio vaccine, we are still unable to put babies in the class of dangerous epidemics, even though this is the exact truth.”4

• Margaret Sanger (the late founder of Planned Parenthood): “The most merciful thing a large family can do for one of its infant members is to kill it.”5

• Nobel Prize laureate James Watson (co-discoverer of DNA) — “Because of the limitations of present detection methods, most birth defects are not discovered until birth. . . . However if a child was not declared alive until 3 days after birth . . . the doctor could allow the child to die if the parents so choose and save a lot of misery and suffering.”6

Perhaps most frightening of all, President Clinton signed into law the National Institute of Health Revitalization Act. As a direct result it is now legal not only to kill but also to carve up murdered babies and use them for fetal tissue research.7

While pondering this horrifying reality, remember that the present-day holocaust is government-funded. It means that you and I are footing the bill!8

Make no mistake: “Choice” advocates like Clinton, Congress, and the Courts are not the friends of children. America’s unthinking submission to their twisted arguments is moving us progressively toward social genocide of a magnitude eclipsing that of Hitler, Stalin, Somalia, and the Serb-Croate conflict.

The movement’s own label — “pro-choice” — is a twisted deception, covering up a nationally sanctioned holocaust in which the “right” to choose to kill a child reigns supreme over:

• the baby’s human rights;

• the rights of the parents of a pregnant minor;

• the rights of the preborn’s father;

• the mother’s right to accurate information about fetal development and the negative consequences of abortion;

• the rights of society to protect all its members — no matter what their social status, economic situation, or physical limitations.

David Barton: In their words, did the Founding Fathers put their faith in Christ? (Part 4)

1 Of 5 / The Bible’s Influence In America / American Heritage Series / David Barton

2 Of 5 / The Bible’s Influence In America / American Heritage Series / David Barton

3 Of 5 / The Bible’s Influence In America / American

Heritage Series / David Barton

4 Of 5 / The Bible’s Influence In America / American Heritage Series / David Barton

5 Of 5 / The Bible’s Influence In America / American Heritage Series / David Barton

__________________________________________

3 Of 3 / Faith Of The Founding Fathers / American Heritage Series / David Barton

__________________________

David Barton on Glenn Beck – Part 1 of 5

Uploaded by on Apr 9, 2010

Wallbuilders’ Founder and President David Barton joins Glenn Beck on the Fox News Channel for the full hour to discuss our Godly heritage and how faith was the foundational principle upon which America was built.

___________

David Barton on Glenn Beck – Part 2 of 5

Uploaded by on Apr 9, 2010

Wallbuilders’ Founder and President David Barton joins Glenn Beck on the Fox News Channel for the full hour to discuss our Godly heritage and how faith was the foundational principle upon which America was built.

___________________________

David Barton on Glenn Beck – Part 3 of 5

Uploaded by on Apr 9, 2010

Wallbuilders’ Founder and President David Barton joins Glenn Beck on the Fox News Channel for the full hour to discuss our Godly heritage and how faith was the foundational principle upon which America was built.

___________________________

David Barton on Glenn Beck – Part 4 of 5

Uploaded by on Apr 9, 2010

Wallbuilders’ Founder and President David Barton joins Glenn Beck on the Fox News Channel for the full hour to discuss our Godly heritage and how faith was the foundational principle upon which America was built.

______________________

David Barton on Glenn Beck – Part 5 of 5

Uploaded by on Apr 9, 2010

Wallbuilders’ Founder and President David Barton joins Glenn Beck on the Fox News Channel for the full hour to discuss our Godly heritage and how faith was the foundational principle upon which America was built.

There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at war with religion in our public life. WERE OUR FOUNDING FATHERS BELIEVERS IN CHRISTIANITY OR SECULAR HUMANISTS THEMSELVES?

I had a chance to take my kids to hear Ken Ham speak one time in Little Rock because I really respect him a lot. Evangelical leader Ken Ham rightly has noted, “Most of the founding fathers of this nation … built the worldview of this nation on the authority of the Word of God.”

Dr. Michael Davis of California has asserted that he has no doubts that our President is a professing Christian, but his policies are those of a secular humanist. I share these same views. However, our founding fathers were anything but secular humanists in their views. John Adams actually wrote in a letter, “There is no authority, civil or religious – there can be no legitimate government – but that which is administered by this Holy Ghost.”

David Barton has put together a great collection of quotes from the founding fathers about their faith in Christ:

The Founders As Christians

Jonathan Trumbull Sr.
Governor of Connecticut, Patriot

Principally and first of all, I bequeath my soul to God the Creator and Giver thereof, and body to the Earth . . . nothing doubting but that I shall receive the same again at the General Resurrection thro the power of Almighty God; believing and hoping for eternal life thro the merits of my dear, exalted Redeemer Jesus Christ.

Will of Jonathan Trumbull


John Witherspoon
Signer of the Declaration of Independence

I entreat you in the most earnest manner to believe in Jesus Christ, for there is no salvation in any other [Acts 4:12]. . . . [I]f you are not reconciled to God through Jesus Christ, if you are not clothed with the spotless robe of His righteousness, you must forever perish.

John Witherspoon, The Works of John Witherspoon (Edinburgh: J. Ogle, 1815), Vol. V, pp. 276, 278, The Absolute Necessity of Salvation Through Christ, January 2, 1758.

Tennessee Football’s 10 Most Heartbreaking Losses, 1989-2007 (The Hogs made the list twice!!) Part 1

Septermber 2, 1997 - University of tennessee football Coach Phillip Fulmer announced Monday, Nov, 3, 2008, his plans to step down. Here's Fulmer talks with then UT quarterback Peyton Manning on the sidelines.

Photo by BYRON SMALL/KNOXVILLE NEWS SENTINEL

Septermber 2, 1997 – University of tennessee football Coach Phillip Fulmer announced Monday, Nov, 3, 2008, his plans to step down. Here’s Fulmer talks with then UT quarterback Peyton Manning on the sidelines.

The hogs made the list twice:

Tennessee Football’s 10 Most Heartbreaking Losses, 1989-2007

By

(Senior Analyst) on August 12, 2008

2,722 reads

25

Use your ← → (arrow) keys to browse more storiesNext

Peytonmanning4a_crop_340x234

 

Part one of a two-day piece, where tomorrow we’ll look at something more uplifting…but as the 2008 season closes in, here’s one more look at the past.

You can’t fully appreciate the joy without the heartbreak, and so here’s a painful reminder of what might’ve been: the 10 most heartbreaking losses in the modern era of Tennessee football (we use 1989 as a starting point both because I’m only 26 years old, and because the Vols’ 11-1 SEC Championship season that year served as the modern genesis of the success the Vols have enjoyed in the last two decades).

10. 2002: No. 10 Florida 30 – No. 4 Tennessee 13 (Knoxville)

The worst five minutes of my life.  One year after finally beating Florida in The Swamp and sending Steve Spurrier packing, the Vols looked poised to take the SEC mantle from the Gators.  Florida had been beaten badly by Miami the week before.

As a driving rain fell in Knoxville, the teams were scoreless with under five minutes to play in the first half when the Gators scored on 4th-and-goal from the one-yard line.  From there, Casey Clausen put the ball on the ground three times in four minutes, and a defensive standoff turned into Rex Grossman taking advantage of the moment.

A game that was tied at zero with under five minutes to play in the second quarter became a 24-0 Florida lead at halftime.  The Vols never recovered.

9. 2000: No. 6 Florida 27 – No. 11 Tennessee 23 (Knoxville)

With most of the players from the national championship runs now in the NFL, the Vols started A.J. Suggs at quarterback and were given little chance to win.  But behind Travis Henry’s 175 yards and a defense that didn’t allow a first down until late in the second quarter, Tennessee gave themselves every chance to win.

However, those chances kept turning into field goals instead of touchdowns—five of them on the day—and Florida had life.  When the Vols couldn’t get one first down to ice it late, Florida drove the length of the field as time wound down, and Jabar Gaffney caught/didn’t catch a pass in the end zone to give the Gators the win.

8. 1996: Memphis 21 – No. 6 Tennessee 17 (Memphis)

The one and only time in history the Tigers have beaten the Vols.  Peyton Manning threw for 296 yards but had two interceptions.  Memphis had only 153 yards of offense, but (illegally) ran a kickoff back for a touchdown late in the third quarter to tie the game at 14, and then got the yards they had to have on their final drive.

It’s my understanding that this is still the single greatest event in the history of the Memphis Athletic Department.

7. 1995: No. 4 Florida 62 – No. 8 Tennessee 37 (Gainesville)

The one you absolutely can’t blame on Peyton Manning.  The Vols went to Gainesville and jumped all over Florida, scoring in two plays on the opening drive to begin a run that culminated in a Raymond Austin return of a Danny Wuerffel fumble for a score that put the Vols up 30-14 late in the second quarter.

But the Gators scored before the half to pull closer, Tennessee missed a field goal to open the third quarter, it started raining—and everything went wrong.

Consecutive fumbles by Jay Graham started a Gator run that saw them take the lead in the blink of an eye.  Then they simply kept scoring, putting 41 points up in the second half.  Quite possibly the worst half of football in Tennessee history.

6. 1992: Arkansas 25 – No. 4 Tennessee 24 (Knoxville)

Under interim head coach Phillip Fulmer, the Vols had stunned Georgia and Florida to become the lead horse in the first-ever SEC East race.  Johnny Majors had returned to the sideline by October, where Heath Shuler’s Vols were undefeated and staring down the barrel of a showdown with eventual National Champion Alabama.  Only 1-4 SEC newcomer Arkansas stood in the way.

The Vols held a 24-16 lead with under three minutes to play when Orlando Watters returned a punt 71 yards for a score.  But when Todd Kelly absolutely murdered the Arkansas quarterback on the two-point conversion, all seemed well.

Then Arkansas recovered an onside kick, drove inside the 30, and nailed a 41-yard field goal with :02 left to break the hearts of the Vol nation.  This was the beginning of the end for Johnny Majors.

Open letter to President Obama (Part 84.7)

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. That is why I am little confused why you still support Obamacare. Take a look at the article below.

____

Why Is ObamaCare Unpopular?

Posted by Roger Pilon

Today POLITICO Arena asks:

Was ObamaCare doomed from the start, an unpopular proposal that was unlikely to ever catch on with the public?

My response:

Let’s remember how ObamaCare was passed — without a single Republican vote, and after the “Cornhusker Kickback,” the “Louisiana Purchase,” the Florida Flim-Flam,” and countless other shenanigans, including a phony 10-year price tag of $938 billion that the CBO now tells us will be $1.76 trillion. And remember too that ObamaCare’s passage was followed by the massive repudiation of the 2010 elections. Is it any wonder that it continues to be unpopular?

But the Supreme Court next week will be looking not at ObamaCare’s unpopularity but at its unconstitutionality — or so 26 states and others have claimed, and for good reason. The Act, if upheld, would effectively end constitutionally limited government in America. A government that can order individuals to engage in commerce is limited only by politics, not law. A federal government that can compel states to expand their Medicaid roles on pain of losing the federal tax dollars the state’s citizens must continue to pay is no longer a government subject to checks by the states.

The American people aren’t stupid. They know a massive power-grab when they see it. What makes this power-grab special is that it concerns not retirement or education, or the many other areas in which the federal government has usurped constitutionally unauthorized power over the years but that most intimate of human concerns, health care. Bad as our health care system is today, due to government meddling in the past, ObamaCare will transform it into one massive bureaucracy — high costs, poor service — and the American people know it. That’s why it continues to be so unpopular.

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

Sincerely,

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

Randy Barnett Discusses ObamaCare at the Supreme Court

Uploaded by on Mar 26, 2012

http://www.cato.org/event.php?eventid=9074

Cato Institute Senior Fellow and Georgetown University law professor Randy E. Barnett discusses the arguments to be presented to the Supreme Court beginning March 26.

The Dissatisfaction of Francis Schaeffer Part 4

Church History & Abortion

Uploaded by on Sep 30, 2010

This 10.5 minute Power Point presentation gives statements from Church leaders (early and late) regarding the Christian Church’s opposition to abortion.

________________

I learned so much from the books and films of Francis Schaeffer. He really got me excited about the pro-life movement. In order to understand where I am coming from it is best to take a look at where Schaeffer was coming from and his thought processes. Take a look at this article below that appeared 13 years after his death in Christianity Today.

Looking back it seems now that many of the things that Schaeffer saw coming in the future if secular man continued down this path of humanism have actually happened. Michael Hamilton has commented:

The conceptual centerpiece of Schaeffer’s historical view is the triumph of relativism in the modern post-Christian world: “Modern men, in the absence of absolutes, have polluted all aspects of morality, making standards completely hedonistic and relativistic.” He would not have been surprised by the advent of “postmodern” thought, which has built countless altars to relativism across the intellectual landscape. Nor would he have been surprised by the resultant moral vacuum that characterizes much contemporary academic thinking. In a recent issue of the Chronicle of Higher Education,anthropologist Carolyn Fluehr-Lobban agonized over the fact that her discipline’s prime directive—cultural relativism—left her with no rationale for opposing rape or racial genocide in other cultures. One can almost hear Francis Schaeffer saying, “I told you so.”

In particular, he appears to have been prescient on the issue of human life. In 1976 he observed that “in regard to the fetus, the courts have arbitrarily separated ‘aliveness’ from ‘personhood,’ and if this is so, why not arbitrarily do the same with the aged? So the steps move along, and euthanasia may well become increasingly acceptable. And if so, why not keep alive the bodies of … persons in whom the brain wave is flat to harvest from them body parts and blood?” Schaeffer’s bleak vision is now daily news. “Cadaver Jack” Kevorkian has already killed more people than Ted Bundy, but the state of Michigan cannot muster the political will to stop him. A federal court has forbidden the state of Washington to pass laws preventing doctors from killing their patients, while the University of Washington is permitted to scavenge and sell the body parts of thousands of aborted children every year.

Thirteen years after his death, Schaeffer’s vision and frustrations continue to haunt evangelicalism.
by Michael S. Hamilton | posted 3/03/1997 12:00AM
 

The meaning of Francis Schaeffer
By the end of his life, Francis Schaeffer had come full circle. A ministry born in the ecclesiastical battles of the early twentieth century now completed its course by urging evangelicals on to another round of internecine warfare. And when all was said and done, evangelicals still did not know what to make of him. Commentators struggling to characterize him adequately have tried to attach a number of labels—pastor, evangelist, pre-evangelist, apologist, missionary to intellectuals, guru to fundamentalists, philosopher, prophet.

There is an element of truth in all these labels; each, by itself, reduces him beyond recognition. Clearly he was evangelicalism’s most important public intellectual in the 20 years before his death. Ideas were to him literally matters of life and death. History, thought Schaeffer, taught that the intellectual base on which a people build their society will determine that society’s laws and character: “There is a flow to history and culture. This flow is rooted and has its wellspring in the thoughts of people.” His singular message was that a society cannot hope for righteousness and justice without thinking the thoughts of God from the bottom up.

Despite Schaeffer’s errors of detail, some critics have recently allowed that his big picture has proven durable. The conceptual centerpiece of Schaeffer’s historical view is the triumph of relativism in the modern post-Christian world: “Modern men, in the absence of absolutes, have polluted all aspects of morality, making standards completely hedonistic and relativistic.” He would not have been surprised by the advent of “postmodern” thought, which has built countless altars to relativism across the intellectual landscape. Nor would he have been surprised by the resultant moral vacuum that characterizes much contemporary academic thinking. In a recent issue of the Chronicle of Higher Education, anthropologist Carolyn Fluehr-Lobban agonized over the fact that her discipline’s prime directive—cultural relativism—left her with no rationale for opposing rape or racial genocide in other cultures. One can almost hear Francis Schaeffer saying, “I told you so.”

In particular, he appears to have been prescient on the issue of human life. In 1976 he observed that “in regard to the fetus, the courts have arbitrarily separated ‘aliveness’ from ‘personhood,’ and if this is so, why not arbitrarily do the same with the aged? So the steps move along, and euthanasia may well become increasingly acceptable. And if so, why not keep alive the bodies of … persons in whom the brain wave is flat to harvest from them body parts and blood?” Schaeffer’s bleak vision is now daily news. “Cadaver Jack” Kevorkian has already killed more people than Ted Bundy, but the state of Michigan cannot muster the political will to stop him. A federal court has forbidden the state of Washington to pass laws preventing doctors from killing their patients, while the University of Washington is permitted to scavenge and sell the body parts of thousands of aborted children every year.

In Francis Schaeffer’s later years, he seemed to act as though the social order perhaps could be reformed from the top down, beginning with laws and proceeding toward intellectual foundations. This is almost certainly due to the fact that he was thoroughly radicalized by the merciless killing of millions of unborn children. If his later actions were inconsistent with his philosophy, they were certainly understandable. To echo pro-choice historian Garry Wills, if one really does think that abortion is the taking of innocent human life, surely Schaeffer’s response makes sense.

In trying to assess the meaning of Francis Schaeffer, it is instructive to compare him to Billy Graham. Both reached the peak of their influence at about the same time, and both had an immeasurable impact on American evangelicalism. Graham in many ways represents the moderate middle of evangelicalism—defusing controversy, wishing the best for everyone, friend of both Republicans and Democrats, slow to disturb middle-class conventions, willing to cooperate with anyone who will let him preach the gospel. As historian Grant Wacker once wrote, “When Graham spoke, middle America heard itself.” It was just as natural to see Graham and the President on the fairway together as to see Graham on a platform with a Bible in his hands.

But one can no more imagine Francis Schaeffer playing golf with the rich and famous than one can imagine Mother Teresa shopping for furs in I. Magnin. If Graham represents evangelicalism’s smooth center, Schaeffer represents its crushed-glass edges. Evangelicalism by its nature blurs denominational distinctions, but Schaeffer’s own version of Christianity was tightly sectarian. Graham lent his name widely and welcomed allies from all corners, but Schaeffer refused all alliances. Those who were not his followers but believed in his aims he categorized as cobelligerents in the war against the secularizing and dehumanizing trajectory of modern culture. While Graham appealed to the majority in the middle, Schaeffer attacked the middle for failing to see the direction it was headed. It is no accident that his strongest impact has been among those who have a bone to pick with the middle class—dropouts, intellectuals, and that remarkable recent phenomenon, formerly respectable citizens who have begun to perceive the American judiciary as a refuge for scoundrels.

In short, Francis Schaeffer represents that part of evangelical Christianity that has always been ill at ease with the world in which it finds itself. He once said, “In my teaching, I put a great deal of weight on the fact that we live in an abnormal world. I personally could not stand this world, if I did not understand it is abnormal—that it is not the way God made it.” Perhaps, then, this is his most enduring legacy—his crystalline vision of the vast difference between the world God designed and the world that is the work of our hands.

Michael S. Hamilton is coordinator of the Pew Scholars Programs and concurrent assistant professor of history, University of Notre Dame.

_____________

Francis Schaeffer February 21, 1982 (Part 1)

Uploaded by on Feb 21, 2008

READ THIS FIRST: In decline of all civilizations we first see a war against the freedom of ideas. Discussion is limited or prohibited. Speakers at universities are shouted down. Corruption takes over city governments and towns as dishonesty and corruption expands. Small stores have to shut down because none are honest enough to run a cash register. The stock of stores is looted by employees and pilfered and shop owners flee. Stock markets are rife with manipulation and the plague of dishonesty. We have learned that sound and lasting civilized ideas are built upon very rare and special foundations. Frances Schaeffer is one guy who has sparked my own thinking and study. He has influenced my writing and prison ministry greatly. Humans must be convinced intellectually, historically and reasonably as well as through the Biblical teachings. Francis Shaeffer has helped all of us wade through this vast propaganda sewer to approach fundamental questions, one of which is: “Why do nations and empires decline?”

_______________

Francis Schaeffer February 21, 1982 (Part 2)

U.S. Debt on Track to Fuel Economic Crisis

U.S. Debt on Track to Fuel Economic Crisis

Everyone wants to know more about the budget and here is some key information with a chart from the Heritage Foundation and a video from the Cato Institute.

Countries like Greece and Portugal have suffered or are anticipating financial crises as a result of mounting debt. If the U.S. continues federal deficit spending on its current trajectory, it will face similar economic woes.

PROJECTED U.S. PUBLICLY HELD DEBT AS PERCENTAGE OF GDP

Download

U.S. Debt on Track to Fuel Economic Crisis

Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and Congressional Budget Office (Alternative Fiscal Scenario).

Chart 27 of 42

In Depth

  • Policy Papers for Researchers

  • Technical Notes

    The charts in this book are based primarily on data available as of March 2011 from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). The charts using OMB data display the historical growth of the federal government to 2010 while the charts using CBO data display both historical and projected growth from as early as 1940 to 2084. Projections based on OMB data are taken from the White House Fiscal Year 2012 budget. The charts provide data on an annual basis except… Read More

  • Authors

    Emily GoffResearch Assistant
    Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy StudiesKathryn NixPolicy Analyst
    Center for Health Policy StudiesJohn FlemingSenior Data Graphics Editor