Interview with Tim Foreman and Chad Butler airing February 26th, 2007.
Discuss: cowbell, Christianity, fan connection
_______________________________________
Switchfoot is a Christian Band with a great message (Part 2)
One of my favorite bands is Switchfoot. Tim Foreman is the front man and this band has always been very vocal about their Christian faith. I am really enjoying this series on their band.
Andrew Shirley – guitar – Birthday (married with a daughter)
Switchfoot Bio:
Switchfoot is an alternative rock band from San Diego, CA, that was formed in 1996 by brothers Jon and Tim Foreman and their surfing buddy, Chad Butler. Though they competed in national surf championships on weekends and were good enough to earn product endorsements from equipment companies, their real passion was music. The guys formed a band (originally known as Chin Up) and they released three albums before making their major label debut in 2003.In 2001, Jerome Fontimillas joined the band playing keys, guitar, and singing background vocals.
Drew Shirley started touring with the band as a guitarist in 2003. He officially joined Switchfoot in 2005.
My niece Mallory Nail went to see Switchfoot in concert at John Brown University on Oct 14, 2011 and I am very jealous. 969 Switchfoot Interview #2 Interview with Tim Foreman and Chad Butler airing March 13th, 2007. Discuss: idea of success, fan interaction ________________________________________ Switchfoot is a Christian Band with a great message (Part […]
Ms. Jackson’s agency takes over automobile design.
re’s one good way to consider the vote in 2012: It’s about whether to re-elect President Lisa Jackson, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, which these days runs most the U.S. economy.
The EPA heaved its weight against another industry this month, issuing a regulation to sharply increase fuel economy. Under this new rule, America’s fleet of passenger cars and light trucks will have to meet an average of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025, a doubling of today’s average of about 27 mpg. By the EPA’s estimate the rule will cost $157 billion, meaning the real number is vastly greater.
The fuel-economy rule is classic Obama EPA. Until this Administration, fuel standards were the remit of Congress, via its Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) program. In 2007, the legislative branch raised those standards with a bill requiring the U.S. fleet to hit 35 miles per gallon by 2020, a 40% increase. The industry is struggling to keep pace with those steep requirements.
President Jackson is now casting aside 35 years of Congressional prerogative. Because the Obama EPA has declared carbon dioxide a “pollutant,” and because cars emit CO2, Ms. Jackson is citing the Clean Air Act in her bid to commandeer Detroit. While the EPA officially worked with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (Nhtsa, the agency previously in charge of efficiency standards), it’s clear the EPA is calling the shots.
At least when Nhtsa was overseeing efficiency, it was charged by Congress with taking into account vehicle safety and a rule’s effect on the economy and consumer demand. The EPA can’t be bothered with such detail.
Associated PressEnvironmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson
The National Automobile Dealers Association, which has opposed the EPA rule, has compiled Obama Administration documents showing the average price of a new vehicle will increase by $3,100 by 2025, thanks to the cumulative fuel-efficiency rules. Vehicles that currently cost $15,000 or less will effectively be regulated out of existence. The rule will reduce the mass of a car by 15% to 25%, decreasing safety.
The only way Detroit can hit these averages will be by turning at least 25% of its fleet into hybrids. But hybrid sales peaked in the U.S. two years ago at 3% of the market and are declining. The EPA’s $157 billion price tag includes only the estimate of what manufacturers will have to invest in new technology, not the billions more that will hemorrhage when nobody buys their EPA-approved products.
Yes, 13 automakers agreed to this standard in July, confirming behavioral science on hostages. The industry has been living for years under the threat of California’s strict efficiency mandate. Federal law pre-empts states from setting their own standards, and the Bush Administration refused to grant California a waiver. But the Obama administration made clear to automakers that their choice was between one crushing EPA-devised rule, or a national patchwork of crushing rules from California and acolyte states. They chose the federal poison.
House Republicans are pushing to return efficiency standards to the one regulator Congress has decreed: Nhtsa. They note that not only are California bureaucrats dictating federal policy, but the EPA has wasted $25 million to duplicate or demolish Nhtsa rules.
The EPA is seeking to impose, by fiat, greenhouse gas reductions that even a Democratic Congress rejected with the Waxman-Markey bill in 2009, and that would drive policy at least 13 years past this Administration. It’s all more than a tad authoritarian. Welcome to the Obama-Jackson Presidency.
Francis Schaeffer discussed modern films and how they showed the state of man. That is why I like Woody Allen’s films so much. He knows what the big issues are in life and even though he present the right answers he does grapple with the right questions. Michelangelo Antonioni heavily influenced Allen and below is a picture from one of his best well known films.
<The Kobal Collection
Blow-Up (1966). Michelangelo Antonioni created waves with his first English-language film when he turned his camera on swinging London as personified by a cocky fashion photographer (David Hemmings) who believes his lens has accidentally captured a murder.
Allen’s observation: “Not in the same class as the other films, but interesting to see.”
Learning to Cry for the Culture Let’s remember Francis Schaeffer’s most crucial legacy–tears.
John FischerMarch 19, 2007He was a small man—barely five feet in his knickers, knee socks, and ballooning white shirts. For two weeks, first as a freshman and then again as a senior, I sat in my assigned seat at Wheaton College’s chapel and heard him cry. He was the evangelical conscience at the end of the 20th century, weeping over a world that most of his peers dismissed as not worth saving, except to rescue a few souls in the doomed planet’s waning hours. While Hal Lindsey was disseminating an exit strategy in The Late Great Planet Earth, Francis Schaeffer was trying to understand and care for people still trapped on the planet in The God Who Is There.Francis Schaeffer was hard to listen to. His voice grated. It was a high-pitched scream that, when mixed with his eastern Pennsylvania accent, sounded something like Elmer Fudd on speed. As freshmen, unfamiliar with the thought and works of modern man, we thought it was funny. As seniors, it wasn’t funny any more. After we had studied Kant, Hegel, Sartre, and Camus, the voice sounded more like an existential shriek. If Edvard Munch’s The Screamhad a voice, it would have sounded like Francis Schaeffer. Schaeffer, who died in 1984, understood the existential cry of humanity trapped in a prison of its own making. He was the closest thing to a “man of sorrows” I have seen.I grew up with a Christianity that was predisposed against sorrow. To be sad was to deny your faith or your salvation. Jesus had made us happy, and we had an obligation to always show that happiness. Then Francis Schaeffer came along. He could not allow himself to be happy when most of the world was desperately lost and he knew why. He was the first Christian I found who could embrace faith and the despair of a lost humanity at the same time. Though he had been found, he still knew what it was to be lost.How different from the perception of conservative Christians held by so many people today! Today, the Religious Right is caricatured in society as a theocratic movement with no concern for the poor and downtrodden. Of course, such an ugly stereotype, presented as fact in a spate of pre-election books ranging from American Theocracy to Thy Kingdom Come, overlooks crisis pregnancy centers, humanitarian work, and generous giving to causes sacred and secular by members of the Christian Right.Schaeffer’s Way
However, like most stereotypes, this one of politically engaged conservative Christians contains a painful element of truth. Too often we confuse our agendas with God’s agenda and demonize our opponents in a desperate attempt to score political points. What’s ironic is that many of today’s culture warriors look to Schaeffer as the man who fired the first shot.
Yes, in two of Schaeffer’s later works, How Should We Then Live? (1976) and A Christian Manifesto (1981), he took a strong stand against abortion and euthanasia and even called for serious measures, including political intervention, to stop what he saw as impending cultural suicide. But to conclude that this invocation to war was Schaeffer’s crowning achievement is to truncate the man and his work.
Though his last words may have resounded like a battle cry to the next generation of Christians locked in a culture war, everything leading up to them said something else. Schaeffer’s work is ultimately not a call to arms, but a call to care. Those who have taken up arms and claimed him as their champion have gotten only part of his message.
Schaeffer never meant for Christians to take a combative stance in society without first experiencing empathy for the human predicament that brought us to this place. Those who go back only as far as A Christian Manifesto—without also understanding Escape from Reason (1968), The God Who Is There (1968), and Death in the City (1970)—are doing Schaeffer’s life and work a great disservice. The later Schaeffer cannot be divorced from the former.
Weeping over the World
Schaeffer was the first Christian leader who taught me to weep over the world instead of judging it. Schaeffer modeled a caring and thoughtful engagement with the history of philosophy and its influence through movies, novels, plays, music, and art. Schaeffer was teaching at Wheaton College about the existential dilemma expressed in Michelangelo Antonioni’s 1966 film, Blowup, when movies were still forbidden to students. He didn’t bat an eye. He ignored our legalism and went on teaching, because he had been personally gripped by the desperation of such cultural statements.
Death in the City is the book of Lamentations in the Old Testament applied to America. It is all about weeping over the death of a culture. Schaeffer saw the most brilliant thinkers and artists of his day as trapped under what he called a line of despair—in a lower-story hopelessness without any access to upper-story revelation. Schaeffer taught his followers not to sneer at or dismiss the dissonance in modern art. He showed how these artists were merely expressing the outcome of the presuppositions of the modern era that did away with God and put all conclusions on a strictly human, rational level. Instead of shaking our heads at a depressing, dark, abstract work of art, the true Christian reaction should be to weep for the lost person who created it. Schaeffer was a rare Christian leader who advocated understanding and empathizing with non-Christians instead of taking issue with them.
Francis Schaeffer was not afraid to ask why, and he did not rest until he had an answer. Why are our most brilliant thinkers in despair? Why is our art so dark? Why have abortion and euthanasia become so easy on the conscience of a generation? What process of thinking has led to this ultimate denial of the value of human life? Though some may disagree with his answers, no one can gainsay the passion with which he sought them.
The normal human reaction is to hate what we don’t understand. This is the stuff of prejudice and the cause of hate crimes and escalating social evil. It is much more Christ-like to identify with those we don’t understand—to discover why people do what they do, because we care about them, even if they are our ideological enemies.
Jesus asked us to love our enemies. Part of loving is learning to understand. Too few Christians today seek to understand why their enemies think in ways that we find abhorrent. Too many of us are too busy bashing feminists, secular humanists, gay activists, and political liberals to consider why they believe what they do. It’s difficult to sympathize with people we see as threats to our children and our neighborhoods. It’s hard to weep over those whom we have declared enemies.
Perhaps a good beginning would be to more fully grasp the depravity of our own souls and the depth to which God’s grace had to go to reach us. I doubt we can cry over the world if we’ve never cried over ourselves.
To be sure, Francis Schaeffer’s influence has declined in recent years, as postmodernism has supplanted the modernity he dissected for so long. Schaeffer is not without his critics, even among Christians. But perhaps, in the end, his greatest influence on the church will not be his words as much as his tears. The same things that made Francis Schaeffer cry in his day should make us cry in ours.
Singer-songwriter John Fischer has recorded 12 albums and is the author of 15 books.
In 1955, Schaeffer founded L’Abri fellowship, “where individuals have the opportunity to seek answers to honest questions about God and the significance of human life.”
The Dissatisfaction of Francis Schaeffer (Parts 1 and 2) | Thirteen years after his death, Schaeffer’s vision and frustrations continue to haunt evangelicalism. (March 1997)
Here is an episode of Schaeffer’s film series that discusses the philosophic movies that show man’s desperation:
E P I S O D E 8
How Should We Then Live 8#1
I saw this film series in 1979 and it had a major impact on me.
T h e Age of FRAGMENTATION
I. Art As a Vehicle Of Modern Thought
A. Impressionism (Monet, Renoir, Pissarro, Sisley, Degas) and Post-Impressionism (Cézanne, Van Gogh, Gauguin, Seurat): appearance and reality.
1. Problem of reality in Impressionism: no universal.
2. Post-Impression seeks the universal behind appearances.
3. Painting expresses an idea in its own terms as a work of art; to discuss the idea in a painting is not to intellectualize art.
4. Parallel search for universal in art and philosophy; Cézanne.
B. Fragmentation.
1. Extremes of ultra-naturalism or abstraction: Wassily Kandinsky.
2. Picasso leads choice for abstraction: relevance of this choice.
3. Failure of Picasso (like Sartre, and for similar reasons) to be fully consistent with his choice.
C. Retreat to absurdity.
1. Dada , and Marcel Duchamp: art as absurd.
2. Art followed philosophy but came sooner to logical end.
3. Chance in his art technique as an art theory impossible to practice: Pollock.
II. Music As a Vehicle of Modern Thought
A. Non-resolution and fragmentation: German and French streams.
1. Influence of Beethoven’s last Quartets.
2. Direction and influence of Debussy.
3. Schoenberg’s non-resolution; contrast with Bach.
4. Stockhausen: electronic music and concern with the element of change.
B. Cage: a case study in confusion.
1. Deliberate chance and confusion in Cage’s music.
2. Cage’s inability to live the philosophy of his music.
C. Contrast of music-by-chance and the world around us.
1. Inconsistency of indulging in expression of chaos when we acknowledge order for practical matters like airplane design.
2. Art as anti-art when it is mere intellectual statement, divorced from reality of who people are and the fullness of what the universe is.
III. General Culture As the Vehicle of Modern Thought
A. Propagation of idea of fragmentation in literature.
1. Effect of Eliot’s Wasteland and Picasso’s Demoiselles d’ Avignon
compared; the drift of general culture.
2. Eliot’s change in his form of writing when he became a Christian.
3. Philosophic popularization by novel: Sartre, Camus, de Beauvoir.
B. Cinema as advanced medium of philosophy.
1. Cinema in the 1960s used to express Man’s destruction: e.g. Blow-up.
2. Cinema and the leap into fantasy:
The Hour of the Wolf, Belle de Jour, Juliet of the Spirits, The Last Year at Marienbad.
3. Bergman’s inability to live out his philosophy (see Cage): Silence and The Hour of the Wolf.
IV. Only on Christian Base Can Reality Be Faced Squarely
Questions
1. Explain what “fragmentation” means, as discussed by Dr. Schaeffer. What does it result from? Give examples of it.
2. Apart from the fact that modern printing and recording processes made the art and music of the past more accessible than ever before, do you think that the preference of many people for the art and music of the past is related to the matters discussed by Dr. Schaeffer? If so, how?
3. “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds… With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do.” Emerson wrote this over a century ago. Debate.
4. How far do you think that the opinion of some Christians that one should have nothing to do with philosophy, art and novels is a manifestation of the very fragmentation which is characteristic of modern secular thought? Discuss.
Key Events and Persons
Beethoven’s last Quartets: 1825-26
Claude Monet: 1840-1926
Poplars at Giverny, Sunrise: 1885
Paul Cézanne: 1839-1906
The Bathers: c.1905
Claude Debussy: 1862-1918
Wassily Kandinsky: 1866-1944
Arnold Schoenberg: 1874-1951
Picasso: 1881-1973
Les Demoiselles d’Avignon: 1906-7
Marcel Duchamp: 1887-1969
Nude Descending a Staircase: 1912
T.S. Eliot: 1888-1965
The Wasteland: 1922
John Cage: 1912-1992
Music for Marcel Duchamp: 1947
Jackson Pollock: 1912-1956
Karlheinz Stockhausen: 1928-
Sartre’s Nausea: 1938
Beauvoir’s L’Invitée: 1943
Camus’ The Stranger: 1942
Camus’ The Plague: 1947
Resnais’ The Last Year at Marienbad: 1961
Bergman’s The Silence: 1963
Fellini’s Juliet of the Spirits: 1965
Antonioni’s Blow-Up: 1966
Bergman’s The Hour of the Wolf: 1967
Buñel’s Belle de Jour: 1967
Further Study
Perhaps you have seen some of the films mentioned. You should try to see them if you haven’t.Watch for them in local art-film festivals, on TV, or in campus film series. They rarely return nowadays to the commercial circuit. The sex and violence which they treated philosophically have now taken over the screen in a more popular and crude form! Easier of access are the philosophic novels of Sartre, Camus and de Beauvoir. Read the titles Dr. Schaeffer mentions. Again, for the artwork and music mentioned, consult libraries and record shops. But spend time here—let the visual images and the musical sounds sink in.
Listening patiently to Cage and Webern, for example, will tell you more than volumes of musicology.
In an exclusive interview at The Heritage Foundation, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) sharply criticized President Obama for engaging in class warfare and accused him of shifting the focus away from his own failed policies in advance of next year’s election.
“My view is he’ll have a hard time convincing Americans he deserves four more years of this,” McConnell said. “There’s nothing he’s done the American people approve of, so of course, he’s trying to change the subject.”
__________
I love these videos from the Heritage Foundation. They include great interviews and very good illustrations. Below are some links.
School choice offers families the opportunity to select schools that meet their child’s needs. Watch the video from Heritage Foundation explaining school choice, how it benefits parents and children and why school choice is needed.
What is School Choice? Uploaded by HeritageFoundation on Aug 2, 2011 School choice offers families the opportunity to select schools that meet their child’s needs. Watch the video from Heritage Foundation explaining school choice, how it benefits parents and children and why school choice is needed.
1,000 Days Without A Budget Uploaded by HeritageFoundation on Jan 24, 2012 http://blog.heritage.org | Today marks the 1,000th day since the United States Senate has passed a budget. While the House has put forth (and passed) its own budget, the Senate has failed to do the same. To help illustrate how extraordinary this failure has […]
Sen. Mitch McConnell: Americans Don’t Approve of Anything Obama Has Done Uploaded by HeritageFoundation on Dec 8, 2011 In an exclusive interview at The Heritage Foundation, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) sharply criticized President Obama for engaging in class warfare and accused him of shifting the focus away from his own failed policies in […]
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 […]
Senator Lee Fights Back Against Obama’s Unconstitutional “Recess” Appointments Uploaded by HeritageFoundation on Feb 13, 2012 Few lawmakers have expressed as much outrage over President Obama’s unconstitutional “recess” appointments as Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT). He was among the first to warn about the consequences of the president’s unilateral action on Jan. 4. More than a […]
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 […]
David Barton on Glenn Beck – Part 3 of 5 Uploaded by ToRenewAmerica 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 is a historian […]
Rep. Paul Ryan Blames Obama for Dividing America Uploaded by HeritageFoundation on Oct 28, 2011 Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) is mighty disappointed with President Obama. The chairman of the House Budget Committee, who has bested Obama in head-to-head policy showdowns, blames the president for failing to outline a solution to the debt crisis while dividing […]
The Role of Economic Freedom Uploaded by HeritageFoundation on Jan 6, 2012 According to the 2012 Index of Economic Freedom, a joint publication of The Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal, global economic freedom has declined over the past year. But what does this mean for America and the world? Economic freedom empowers ordinary […]
Arkansas wide receiver Joe Adams (3) is held by guard Grant Cook (72) as they celebrate Adams’ touchdown with offensive tackle Grant Freeman, right, during the second half of the NCAA college football game in Fayetteville, Ark., Saturday, Nov. 12, 2011. Arkansas defeated Tennessee 49-7. (AP Photo/Danny Johnston)
_________
I have always been a firm believer in putting your best players on the defensive side of the ball because defense wins championships. The main reason I have always believed that is very simple. Offensive players seem to have off days more often than defensive players. How often have you seen a quarterback have an off day passing the ball?
However, I will be the first to admit that Arkansas last year was able to finish ranked in the top 5 with a subpar defensive team and an explosive passing game. Could Tennessee experience the same type of success this year?
The offense ranked 81st nationally in rushing. The defense was ninth in the SEC.
That’s no way to win a championship, right?
No. But Arkansas did OK for itself with a below-average running game and a pedestrian defense last season.
The Razorbacks passed their way to an 11-2 record and a fifth-place finish in both top-25 polls. Tennessee fans couldn’t ask for a better role model.
Arkansas had an accomplished passer in Tyler Wilson. UT has an accomplished passer in Tyler Bray.
The strength of Arkansas’ team was its receiving corps. The strength of UT’s team is its receiving corps.
So far, so good for the Vols. There’s a catch, though.
Although Arkansas proved you can pass your way to national prominence without honoring such traditional SEC virtues as running and defense, its special teams played a huge complementary role in its success.
You might remember Joe Adams, who seemingly became invisible in the face of five UT defenders on a touchdown punt return.
He led the SEC in punt returns last season, and two other Razorbacks ranked third and fourth in the conference in kickoff returns.
Arkansas’ Dylan Breeding led the SEC in punting average, and placekicker Zach Hocker ranked second in field goals made.
UT has a potentially explosive passing game like Arkansas’. Its defense could be just as good or better than the Razorbacks’ was last season. And its running game can’t help but be improved after outrushing only four other FBS teams.
But imagine if the Vols had special teams comparable to the 2011 Razorbacks. If that’s too much to ask, imagine what improvement top-40 special teams could provide.
The Vols ranked 61st last season in punt returns, 41st in kickoff returns, and 104th in net punting. They didn’t have any Lou Groza
candidates, either.
Maybe experience will help. Punter Matt Darr and placekicker/punter Michael Palardy, who wowed no one last season, return. Palardy needed only one scrimmage to boost special-teams optimism. He made all four of his field-goal attempts in Saturday’s first preseason scrimmage.
Punt/kick returner Devrin Young also returns. Though not in Adams’ class, he qualified as an upgrade for UT last season.
Recruiting could be a factor, too. Much has been made of the impact wide receiver Cordarrelle Patterson could have on the passing game. He also could impact the return game.
“It’s hard to find better than Devrin from what I saw,” UT special-teams coach Charlie Coiner said. “But CP brings something to the table.”
He brings track speed. That was evident last season at Hutchinson Community College, where he returned 10 kicks for 482 yards and three touchdowns.
“CP is one of those guys,” Coiner said. “How good is he? I can tell you he’s fast and we’re glad we have him.”
Adams repeatedly showed the difference a big-play return man could make, But you don’t need last season’s Razorbacks to appreciate the impact of special teams. Just check out the last two college games played in the Georgia Dome.
Auburn recovered an onside kick, blocked two punts and had a 62-yard kick return in beating Virginia 43-24 in last December’s Chick-fil-A Bowl. A few weeks earlier, LSU defeated Georgia 42-10 in the SEC championship game, thanks in part, to special-teams play.
LSU’s Tyrann Mathieu had a 62-yard return for a touchdown and averaged 29.8 yards on four punt returns. Tigers punter Brad Wing averaged 50.8 yards on eight punts.
Those are other examples worth following when the Vols open their 2012 season in the Georgia Dome.
Tenn Football Coach Derek Dooley’s Mom on the Radio Uploaded by jebusfubar4 on Oct 7, 2011 I really enjoyed hearing Vince Dooley speak a couple of years ago at the Little Rock Touchdown Club and he said that his son Derek would do a good job at Tennessee if given enough time. Evidently Derek’s mom […]
Photo by HEATHER STONE/KNOXVILLE NEWS SENTINEL University of tennessee football Coach Phillip Fulmer signals for a time out during an October 9, 1993 game against Arkansas. Here are the records for the first 11 eleven years in SEC: OpponentsW-L929394959697989900010203Alabama4-7LLLWLWWLWLL Auburn5-1-5TLLWLLWWLWW Florida0-3 LLL Georgia1-4LW LLL Kentucky1-2 WL L LSU5-6WWLLLLWLWLW Mississippi6-5LLWWWLWLLWW Mississippi State7-1-3LTLWWWLWWWW South Carolina7-4WWLWLLWWLWW Tennessee2-9WLLLLLLWLLL Vanderbilt2-0 WW Summary40-2-483-1-43-1-42-66-32-62-66-24-43-54-45-4 I hate to reveal this but Arkansas’ worst record against a SEC football foe […]
Third Saturday in October Uploaded by GrossE254 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 […]
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 Will Shelton […]
Vanderbilt Highlights vs. Arkansas – Oct. 29, 2011 Memphis 21 Tennessee 17 excerpt from “1996 Tiger Football Here is a list of the top football stadiums in the country. Power Ranking All 124 College Football Stadiums By Alex Callos (Featured Columnist) on April 19, 2012 When it comes to college football stadiums, for some teams, […]
Photo by HEATHER STONE/KNOXVILLE NEWS SENTINEL University of tennessee football Coach Phillip Fulmer signals for a time out during an October 9, 1993 game against Arkansas. I will never forget this game as long as I live. What a sad way for a great game to end for my razorbacks. Tennessee Volunteers’ 1998 National Championship: […]
Tennessee defensive back Izauea Lanier is unable to stop a touchdown run by Arkansas running back De’Anthony Curtis at Donald W. Reynolds Razorback Stadium in Fayetteville on Nov. 12, 2011. UT lost the game 49-7. (AMY SMOTHERMAN BURGESS/NEWS SENTINEL)
Tennessee quarterbacks coach Darrin Hinshaw sends in Matt Simms in the fourth quarter against Arkansas at Donald W. Reynolds Razorback Stadium in Fayetteville on Nov. 12, 2011. UT lost the game 49-7. (AMY SMOTHERMAN BURGESS/NEWS SENTINEL)
Six years ago, President Bill Clinton signed legislation overhauling part of the nation’s welfare system. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-193) replaced the failed social program known as Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) with a new program called Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF). The reform legislation had three goals: (1) to reduce welfare dependence and increase employment; (2) to reduce child poverty; and (3) to reduce illegitimacy and strengthen marriage.
At the time of its enactment, liberal groups passionately denounced the welfare reform legislation, predicting that it would result in substantial increases in poverty, Hunger, and other social ills. Contrary to these alarming forecasts, welfare reform has been effective in meeting each of its goals.
Overall poverty, child poverty, and black child poverty have all dropped substantially Although liberals predicted that welfare reform would push an additional 2.6 million persons into poverty, the U.S. Bureau of the Census reports there are 3.5 million fewer people living in poverty today than there were in 1995 (the last year before the reform).
Some 2.9 million fewer children live in poverty today than in 1995
Decreases in poverty have been greatest among black children In fact, the poverty rate for black children is now at the lowest point in U.S. history. There are 1.2 million fewer black children in poverty today than there were in the mid-1990s.
Hunger among children has been cut roughly in half According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), there are 420,000 fewer hungry children today than at the time welfare reform was enacted.
welfare caseloads have been cut nearly in half and employment of the most disadvantaged single mothers has increased from 50 percent to 100 percent.
The explosive growth of out-of-wedlock childbearing has come to a virtual halt The share of children living in single-mother families has fallen, and the share living in married-couple families has increased, especially among black families.
Some attribute these positive trends to the strong economy in the late 1990s. Although a strong economy contributed to some of these trends, most of the positive changes greatly exceed similar trends that occurred in prior economic expansions. The difference this time is welfare reform.
welfare reform has substantially reduced welfare’s rewards for non-work, but much more remains to be done. When TANF is reauthorized next year, federal work requirements should be strengthened to ensure that states require all able-bodied parents to engage in a supervised job search, community service work, or skills training as a condition of receiving aid. Even more important, Congress must recognize that the most effective way to reduce child poverty and increase child well-being is to increase the number of stable, productive marriages. In the future, Congress must take active steps to reduce welfare dependence by rebuilding and strengthening marriage.
PREDICTIONS OF SOCIAL DISASTER DUE TO WELFARE REFORM
Six years ago, when the welfare reform legislation was signed into law, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-NY) proclaimed the new law to be “the most brutal act of social policy since reconstruction.”1 He predicted, “Those involved will take this disgrace to their graves.”2
Marian Wright Edelman, president of the Children’s Defense Fund, declared the new reform law an “outrage…that will hurt and impoverish millions of American children.” The reform, she said, “will leave a moral blot on [Clinton’s] presidency and on our nation that will never be forgotten.”3
The Children’s Defense Fund predicted that the reform law would increase
child poverty nationwide by 12 percent…make children hungrier…[and] reduce the incomes of one-fifth of all families with children in the nation.4
The Urban Institute issued a widely cited report predicting that the new law would push 2.6 million people, including 1.1 million children, into poverty. In addition, the study announced the new law would cause one-tenth of all American families, including 8 million families with children, to lose income.5
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities asserted the new law would increase the number of children who are poor and “make many children who are already poor poorer still…. No piece of legislation in U.S. history has increased the severity of poverty so sharply [as the welfare reform will].”6
Patricia Ireland, president of the National Organization for Women, stated that the new welfare law “places 12.8 million people on welfare at risk of sinking further into poverty and homelessness.”7
Peter Edelman, husband of Marian Wright Edelman and then Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation at the Department of Health and Human Services, resigned from the Clinton Administration in protest over the signing of the new welfare law. In an article entitled “The Worst Thing Bill Clinton Has Done,” Edelman dubbed the new law “awful” policy that would do “serious injury to American children.”8
Peter Edelman believed the reform law would not merely throw millions into poverty, but also would actively worsen virtually every existing social problem. “There will be more malnutrition and more crime, increased infant mortality, and increased drug and alcohol abuse,” claimed Edelman. “There will be increased family violence and abuse against children and women.” Moreover, the bill would fail even in the simple task of “effectively” promoting work because “there simply are not enough jobs now.”9
WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED
In the six years since the welfare reform law was enacted, social conditions have changed in exactly the opposite direction from that predicted by liberal policy organizations. As noted above, overall poverty, child poverty, black child poverty, poverty of single mothers, and child Hunger have declined substantially. Employment of single mothers increased dramatically, and welfare rolls plummeted. The share of children living in single-mother families fell, and — more important — the share of children living in married-couple families grew, especially among black families.10
Opponents of reform would like to credit many of these positive changes to a “good economy.” However, according to their predictions in 1996 and 1997, liberals expected the welfare reform law to have disastrous results during good economic times. They expected reform to increase poverty substantially even during periods of economic growth; if a recession did occur, they expected that far greater increases in poverty than those mentioned above would follow. Thus, it is disingenuous for opponents to argue in retrospect that the good economy was responsible for the frustration of pessimistic forecasts since the predicted dire outcomes were expected to occur even in a strong economy.
Less Poverty Since the enactment of welfare reform in 1996, the poverty rate has fallen from 13.8 percent in 1995 to 11.7 percent in 2001. Liberals predicted that welfare reform would push an additional 2.6 million people into poverty, but there are actually 3.5 million fewer people living in poverty today than there were when the welfare reform law was enacted.11
Less Child poverty The child poverty rate has fallen from 20.8 percent in 1995 to 16.3 percent in 2001. In 1995, there were 14.6 million children in poverty compared with 11.7 million in 2001. Though liberals predicted that welfare reform would throw more than 1 million additional children into poverty, there are some 2.9 million fewer children living in poverty today than there were when welfare reform was enacted.12
Less Black Child poverty The decline in poverty since welfare reform has been particularly dramatic among black children. As Chart 1 shows, for a quarter-century prior to welfare reform, there was little change in black child poverty. Black child poverty was actually higher in 1995 (41.5 percent) than in 1971 (40.4 percent).
With the enactment of welfare reform in 1996, black child poverty plummeted at an unprecedented rate, falling by more than a quarter to 30.0 percent in 2001. Over a six-year period after welfare reform, 1.2 million black children were lifted out of poverty. In 2001, despite the recession, the poverty rate for black children was at the lowest point in national history.13
Less Poverty Among Children of Single Mothers Since the enactment of welfare reform, the drop in child poverty among children in single-mother families has been equally dramatic. For a quarter-century before welfare reform, there was little net decline in poverty in this group. poverty was only slightly lower in 1995 (50.3 percent) than it had been in 1971 (53.1 percent). After the enactment of welfare reform, the poverty rate for children of single mothers fell at a dramatic rate, from 50.3 percent in 1995 to 39.8 percent in 2001. In 2001, despite the recession, the poverty rate for children in single-mother families was at the lowest point in U.S. history.14
Dramatic Reduction in Child Hunger The number of children who are “hungry” has been cut roughly in half since the enactment of welfare reform, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The USDA reports that in 1995, the year before welfare reform was enacted, 887,000 children were hungry; by 2001, the number had fallen to 467,000.15 In percentage terms, the numbers fell from 1.3 percent of children in 1995 to 0.6 percent in 2001. Overall, there are more than 400,000 fewer hungry children today than at the time welfare reform was enacted. (See Chart 2.)
Decrease in “Severe poverty” Liberals predicted that welfare reform would increase “the severity of poverty.” However, the number of children living in “deep poverty” has declined appreciably. (Families in “deep poverty” have incomes that are less than half the poverty income level.) In 1995, there were 5.9 million children living in deep poverty; by 2001, the number had fallen to 5.1 million.16
Arkansas wide receiver Joe Adams runs back a punt for a touchdown against Tennessee at Donald W. Reynolds Razorback Stadium in Fayetteville on Nov. 12, 2011. (AMY SMOTHERMAN BURGESS/NEWS SENTINEL)
It appears the Tennessee Vols are very happy about one thing this coming season: THEY DON’T HAVE TO PLAY THE HOGS!!!!
John Adams noted:
Thanks to SEC expansion, the Vols won’t have to play Arkansas, which won 49-7 last season in Fayetteville and still has plenty of talent. Replacing the Razorbacks with Missouri is another plus for UT.
I totally agree with that point. Last year Tennessee is the only team in college football history besides Iowa St back in 1971 who had to play the top 3 ranked teams in the nation in one season as far as I know. (The only reason I knew about Iowa St was because Johnny Majors was the coach at Iowa St back then and he told that to the Little Rock Touchdown Club when he spoke here.)
Last year the Vols played 1. LSU, 2. Alabama and 3. Arkansas by the time they came to Fayetteville last year to play the third ranked Hogs.
The SEC caught itsbasketballcoaches off guard recently when it emailed them changes to the conference schedule that was supposedly set at June’s spring meetings. Imagine if it did the same thing infootball.
SEC commissioner Mike Slive would have to spend the rest of the day on the phone with football coaches, some of whom would have to be talked down from ledges.
The conference schedule matters in basketball. It matters so much more in football.
It’s not just whom you play outside your division. It’s when you play them.
Even open dates can be a source of anguish in football. Just a couple of years ago, Alabama officials spent the offseason whining about a conference schedule that gave so many of its opponents the week off before Alabama.
South Carolina coach Steve Spurrier has spent this offseason throwing darts at both the last conference schedule and the one to come. His point: Georgia won the East through scheduling and could win it again the same way.
Tennessee has no such complaints. The scheduling advantage gained from last season to this one is significant.
The Vols didn’t finish 5-7 last season solely through inept play. They played three of the top five teams in the country — all from the SEC West. And the open date, just three games into the season, provided no cushion.
Never mind how much UT might have improved from last season to this one through experience and recruiting. Its acquired advantage in scheduling could be just as much of a factor in what should be a much-improved record.
The only disadvantage might come against its one non-conference BCS opponent. Playing N.C. State in the season opener in the Georgia Dome is more challenging than playing
Cincinnati in the second game last season at Neyland Stadium. The rest of the non-conference fare is comparable to last season’s threesome, which Tennessee outscored 107-26.
But look how much the Vols will benefit elsewhere.
Thanks to SEC expansion, the Vols won’t have to play Arkansas, which won 49-7 last season in Fayetteville and still has plenty of talent. Replacing the Razorbacks with Missouri is another plus for UT.
The natural rotation of the conference schedule will offer another advantage. National championship contender LSU is off; middle-of-the road Mississippi State is on.
The open date also will work in UT’s favor. Last season, the Vols had to play four consecutive games against nationally ranked opponents — Georgia, LSU, Alabama and South Carolina — without a break. The 2012 schedule includes well-timed breaks.
The Vols will play Georgia State before Florida, and Akron afterward. The Georgia game is sandwiched between Akron and an open date. Troy will break up games against South Carolina and Missouri.
That leaves the last three weeks of October as the toughest stretch of the season. But at least the Vols will have an open date the Saturday before they play Mississippi State, Alabama and South Carolina in succession.
One more advantage: Tennessee won’t have to play Kentucky at Commonwealth Stadium this season.
Tenn Football Coach Derek Dooley’s Mom on the Radio Uploaded by jebusfubar4 on Oct 7, 2011 I really enjoyed hearing Vince Dooley speak a couple of years ago at the Little Rock Touchdown Club and he said that his son Derek would do a good job at Tennessee if given enough time. Evidently Derek’s mom […]
Bobby Petrino and Jessica Dorrell I was so happy a few months ago with the Razorbacks’ football future firmly in Bobby Petrino’s hands. Things were going so well. I mentioned to a friend that I was 16 back in 1977 when Lou Holtz led the Razorbacks that season to a 11-1 record and a third […]
I think that Derek Dooley has the biggest rebuilding of the coaches mentioned below. I heard Vince Dooley speak at the Little Rock Touchdown Club meeting in October of 2010 and he said that his son inherited a program that had been set back by defections. In fact, I read recently that the great recruiting […]
My son Wilson and I went to the Tennessee Vols at Arkansas Razorback game in Fayetteville last year. During a restroom stop in Ozark, Arkansas I got to hear a lot of Tennessee fans talking. One said that Dooley will be gone at the end of 2011 and the other said that they have to […]
Photo by Saul Young The fears surrounding the week after Alabama were realized in 2005 when the Vols lost to South Carolina on a night when the jersey of former Tennessee quarterback Peyton Manning, center, was retired. _________________ “It wasn’t his decision. It wasn’t my decision. Circumstances kind of dictated it,” Manning said. Manning did […]
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 […]
I have noticed that Arkansas never seems to have great recruiting years like Tennessee and Florida and Alabama do. However, the 2008 class that will graduate in 2012 for Arkansas included some great players like Joe Adams and has been re-ranked as the 5th best performing class. That class led Arkansas to a final ranking […]
House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) visited Heritage yesterday and sat down to talk about the high price of gasoline and why more energy production is the answer.
The House of Representatives did pass the bill that the Congressman is talking about but the Senate killed it. H.R. 2021, the Jobs and Energy Permitting Act of 2011
The bill would eliminate needless permitting delays that have stalled important energy production opportunities off the coast of Alaska. Rather than having exploration air permits repeatedly approved and rescinded by the agency and its review board, the EPA will be required to take final action – granting or denying a permit – within six months. The Jobs and Energy Permitting Act of 2011 would speed up the permit process to help create jobs.
________________
President Obama c/o The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
Liberals like Max Brantley of the Arkansas Times Blog have always been critical of any votes that would encourage more oil exploration in Alaska, but it is time to do so. We have to get these gas prices down. Take a look at this fine article from the Heritage Foundation:
There are an estimated 27 billion barrels of oil waiting to be tapped in the Arctic Ocean, off the coast of Alaska. But after spending five years and nearly $4 billion, Shell Oil Company has been forced to abandon its efforts to drill for oil in the region.
With gas at $4 per gallon and higher, one might think that more oil would be a good thing. So what’s the road block? The Environmental Protection Agency. Fox News reports that the EPA is withholding necessary air permits because of a one square mile village of 245 people, 70 miles from the off-shore drilling site. From Fox News’ Dan Springer:
The EPA’s appeals board ruled that Shell had not taken into consideration emissions from an ice-breaking vessel when calculating overall greenhouse gas emissions from the project. Environmental groups were thrilled by the ruling.
“What the modeling showed was in communities like Kaktovik, Shell’s drilling would increase air pollution levels close to air quality standards,” said Eric Grafe, Earthjustice’s lead attorney on the case.
The Environmental Appeals Board has four members: Edward Reich, Charles Sheehan, Kathie Stein and Anna Wolgast. All are registered Democrats and Kathie Stein was an activist attorney for the Environmental Defense Fund. Members are appointed by the EPA administrator.
President Barack Obama said in his weekly address on Saturday that “there’s no silver bullet that can bring down gas prices right away,” but that one thing America can do is pursue “safe and responsible production of oil at home.” Too bad his words and his actions are not one and the same. Aside for the EPA’s decision on Shell, the Obama administration has imposed a months-long moratorium on deepwater offshore drilling that curtailed domestic production and sent some seven drilling rigs elsewhere.
The Heritage Foundation’s Nicolas Loris recommends the following actions for Congress and President Obama if they truly want to expand access to America’s domestic energy supply:
Allow access to domestic reserves. Permitting exploration of reserves in Alaska, Colorado, Wyoming, and federal waters offshore would inject confidence into the market, create jobs, and stimulate the economy.
Roll back regulatory burdens on companies. Strapping companies with onerous regulatory processes only hinders access. Litigation opportunities should be limited and the permitting process made more rational.
Issue offshore drilling permits. Lifting the de facto moratorium on offshore drilling permits would gain companies access to domestic resources and increase our domestic energy supply.
Now it’s your turn. What do you think about the EPA’s decision? Join in the conversation by leaving a comment below.
____________
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
If you follow us on twitter then you won’t get overloaded. I tweet about 5 times a week and include links to my blog of the day. Tweets 51s thedailyhatchorg @everettehatcher The Founding Fathers believed that our leaders should believe in the afterlife and future rewards and punishments. https://thedailyhatch.org/2012/07/11/the … I got an email from […]
Canada
Amy Smotherman Burgess, ©KNS/2011
Amy Smotherman Burgess, ©KNS/2011
thedailyhatchorg 
The Daily Hatch 