Two of my favorite players. My son Wilson actually got to see this goal below at a LA Galaxy game he attended in the summer.
The Daily Hatch
Two of my favorite players. My son Wilson actually got to see this goal below at a LA Galaxy game he attended in the summer.
The Heritage Foundation website does it again. Take a look.
By Diane Katz
November 28, 2011
Automakers would be required to double current fleet-wide fuel economy by 2025 under regulations proposed last week by the Obama Administration. Advocates contend that this crackdown on the internal combustion engine would reduce Americans’ “dependence on oil” and cut emissions of so-called greenhouse gases.
Whether the standard is achievable remains to be seen, but the effort would cost tens of billions of dollars, untold numbers of manufacturing jobs, and—most inexcusable—the loss of lives.
A Formula for Sticker Shock
The official proposal[1] unveiled last week—all 893 pages—by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) calls for a fleet-wide fuel economy average of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025. (The 2011 standard is 27.3 miles per gallon.) However, each manufacturer’s actual average would vary based on their vehicle mix. Every model would be assigned an individual standard based on its “footprint,” a formula that factors its wheelbase and track dimensions. Fines are levied for vehicles that do not meet the standard.
The government pegs the cost of compliance at $8.5 billion annually, on average,[2] with wide variation between the early and latter years. This translates into a spike in sticker prices of at least $2,000–$2,800, according to official projections,[3] which typically run lower than industry estimates.
That is hardly a prescription for reviving a moribund auto industry. According to Edmunds.com, auto sales declined 41 percent from a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 15.72 million in December 2007 to a low of 9.32 million in February 2009. Based on the current pace of recovery, auto sales for 2011 are expected to total 12.9 million—a decline of 17.9 percent from the onset of the recession.[4]
Yet the proposal has been endorsed by most major auto manufacturers. Their acquiescence may be explained, in part, by California’s tentative agreement to adopt the federal standard, thereby eliminating the prospect of patchwork production to comply with competing state regulations. Moreover, the Administration has agreed to evaluate in 2018 whether the standards for the years 2022–2025 are technically feasible and cost-effective—raising industry hopes of an escape. Whether the Obama bailout of General Motors and Chrysler played any role in their regulatory surrender is a matter of speculation.
Mandates Masquerade as Incentives
Compliance would almost certainly require increased production of electric, fuel-cell, and hybrid models to improve fleet-wide averages. For example, automakers would earn twice the credit for each electric vehicle in model year 2017, while a plug-in hybrid would count as 1.6 vehicles. Hybrid trucks, if sold in sufficient numbers, as well as vehicles fueled by natural gas, may also garner extra credits.
But these “incentives” would carry a considerable price. Alternative-fueled vehicles are much more costly to produce and thus far too expensive for the average consumer—even when accounting for fuel savings. Nor are they environmentally benign. As with all automotive products, there are tradeoffs. For example, additional emissions are generated by the manufacture of vehicle components from lightweight materials such as aluminum, plastics, or composites needed for downsizing. There are also environmental consequences to the manufacture of metal hydride batteries, as well as the electricity generated from the combustion of fossil fuels that is necessary to power electric vehicles.
Policy Drives Unintended Consequences
Some fuel-efficiency gains would likely result from drive-train re-engineering, improved aerodynamics, and reduced tire resistance. But as in past years, weight reduction would be unavoidable. And with downsizing comes risk.
In past years, the structure of the regulations induced automakers to dramatically downsize some vehicles to meet the standard, which increased traffic fatalities by the thousands.[5] The new standards would require downsizing to both small and large models, which the government contends will neutralize the risk. However, the NHTSA and the EPA disagree on the extent of the risk, while outside experts say that the danger would be heightened by the extreme stringency of the proposed standards.
Fatalities are not the only unintended consequence. To the extent that the standards increase sticker prices, consumers are more likely to continue using older, less fuel-efficient vehicles. A host of research also documents that increased fuel efficiency, by lowering the cost of driving, actually increases travel—thereby negating at least some of the supposed environmental effects.[6] The government accounts for this “rebound effect” in its benefit calculations, but its low-end assumptions are questionable.
Dubious Benefit Calculations
As with virtually all of its most costly regulations, the Administration is claiming that the benefits of the new standard, including fuel savings of $1.7 trillion, would far exceed the costs. But that is pure speculation given that actual savings would depend on the price of gasoline—which can hardly be accurately gauged 14 years in the future. And especially so given the regulatory obstacles to oil exploration and extraction.
Justification for fuel-efficiency standards has evolved over time, from ending “dependence on foreign oil” to reducing air pollution to mitigating global warming. While various premises are debatable, the supposed need to reduce greenhouse gases is wholly unsubstantiated.
Contrary to the claims of alarmists, there still exists considerable scientific uncertainty—if not rampant misinterpretation—about the supposed interplay between greenhouse gas emissions and global warming. Indeed, the EPA has been roundly criticized for its sloppy treatment of data. Two months ago, in fact, the EPA’s Office of Inspector General took the agency to task for violating federal peer-review requirements with respect to its “finding” that emissions of greenhouse gases constitute a threat to public health and welfare.[7]
Congressional Action Imperative
But even assuming that manmade emissions are warming the planet, the reductions actually achieved from the fuel-efficiency standards would have no meaningful effect, which renders the agency’s involvement entirely unnecessary. As it is, Congress has never authorized the EPA to set fuel-efficiency standards to combat global warming or for any other purpose. Absent any real justification for issuing a standard, the EPA is simply dictating to consumers the type of vehicles that agency regulators deem appropriate.
Consumer demand, by comparison, is a far more efficient and beneficial force for the manufacture of practical and affordable automotive products. In comparison, the latest fuel-economy standards are costly, unwarranted, and hazardous. Congress is thus obligated to bar both the EPA and the NHTSA from implementing and enforcing the new standards by either withholding funds or legislating an outright prohibition. Only by exercising these powers can lawmakers protect consumers from the Obama Administration’s regulatory extremism.
Diane Katz is Research Fellow in Regulatory Policy in the Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation.
Is the EPA out to help you? Take a look at this article from the Wall Street Journal.
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.
“Woody Wednesday” Allen acts silly in 1971 interview (Part 4)
Woody Allen interview 1971 PART 4/4
Uploaded by captainvontrapp on Jul 21, 2008
Woody Allen interview from 1971, just after the worldwide release of ‘Bananas’
________________________
March 1, 1993
This scene from Annie Hall typifies Woody Allen’s quest for understanding! Allen touches on various topics and themes in all his cinematic works, but three subjects continually resurface: the existence of God, the fear of death and the nature of morality. These are all Jewish questions or at least theological issues. Woody Allen is a seeker who wants answers to the Ultimate Questions. His movie characters differ, yet they are all, in some way, asking these questions he wants answered. They are all “Woody Allens” wrestling with the same issues. He explains:
Maybe it’s because I’m depressed so often that I’m drawn to writers like Kafka, Dostoevski and to a filmmaker like Bergman. I think I have all the symptoms and problems that their characters are occupied with: an obsession with death, an obsession with God or the lack of God, the question of why we are here. Almost all of my work is autobiographical—exaggerated but true.1
But Woody Allen does not allow himself to dwell too long on these universal problems. The mother’s response to her red-haired son’s angst is typical of the comedic lid the filmmaker presses over his depressing outlook to close the issue. True, Woody Allen has made his mark by asking big questions. But it is the absence of satisfactory answers to those questions that causes much of the angst—and humor—we see on the screen. Off screen we see little difference.
Allen’s (authorized) biography, published in 1991, sheds some light on his life and times. Woody Allen, whose given name was Allan Konigsberg, was born and raised in Brooklyn, New York. Allen describes his Jewish family and neighborhood as being from “the heart of the old world, their values are God and carpeting.”2 While he did not embrace the religion of his youth, his Jewishness is ever present in his characters, plots and dialogue. Jewish thought is intrinsic to his life and work.
One can see this in the 1977 film Annie Hall, where Allen’s character, Alvy, is put in contrast to his Midwestern, gentile girlfriend. In one scene he is visiting Annie’s parents. Her grandmother stares at him, picturing him as a stereotypical Chasidic Jew with side locks, black hat and a long coat. The screen splits as Alvy imagines his family on the right and hers on the left. Her parents ask what his parents will be doing for “the holidays”:
“We fast, to atone for our sins,” his mother explains.
Annie’s mother is confused. “What sins? I don’t understand.”
Alvy’s father responds with a shrug: “To tell you the truth, neither do we.”
Nothing worth knowing can be understood by the mind.3
Allen suggests that the greatest thinkers in history died knowing no more than he does now. He often uses humor to poke fun at pretentious intellectuals who spout textbook answers. In another Annie Hall scene Alvy is standing in line at a movie theater. The man behind him is trying to impress his date. Alvy is annoyed, and when the man begins commenting on pop philosopher Marshall McLuhan, Alvy turns and informs him that he knows nothing about McLuhan. To prove his point, he escorts McLuhan himself into the scene. The philosopher deftly puts the object of Alvy/Allen’s scorn (a Columbia University professor of TV, media and film) in his place. Alvy steps out of character and, as Woody Allen, he looks into the camera and sighs: “Boy, if life were only like this.…”
Allen’s films do not merely expose and poke fun at pseudo-intellectuals; they point out that no school of human thought can provide ultimate solutions. Allen’s lack of faith in the world’s systems generates some great one-liners:
He tells how he was caught cheating on a college metaphysics exam: “I was looking into the soul of the boy sitting next to me.”4
He also pokes fun at existentialism, commenting on a course he took in the subject: “I didn’t know any of the answers so I left it all blank. I got a hundred.”5
His first wife studied philosophy in college: “She used to prove that I didn’t exist.”6
Psychology also figures into Allen’s scripts—many of his characters are seeing a therapist.
In Sleeper, Allen’s character wakes up 200 years in the future, where he quickly discovers that the future holds the same old problems as ever. Lamenting the wasted years, he remarks:
“My analyst was a strict Freudian. If I had been going all this time I’d probably almost be cured by now.”7
In another film he describes the unproductive nature of his own therapy:
“My analyst got so frustrated he put in a salad bar.”8
So much for faith in therapy! And when it comes to science, Allen asks and answers the questions, “Can a human soul be glimpsed through a microscope? Maybe—but you’d definitely need one of those very good ones with two eyepieces.”9
The political process as a means of change is also shrugged off:
“Have you ever taken a serious political stand on anything?” he is asked.”Sure,” he responds, “for twenty-four hours once I refused to eat grapes.”10
And, finally, it is the questions of the human soul—its mortality and morality—that seem really to preoccupy the filmmaker.
I don’t want to achieve immortality through my work. I want to achieve it through not dying.11
In his early writings fear of death provided a great platform for a punch line:
“It’s not that I’m afraid to die, I just don’t want to be there when it happens.”12“It is impossible to experience one’s own death objectively and still carry a tune.”13
“Death is one of the few things that can be done as easily lying down.”14
“What is it about death that bothers me so much? Probably the hours.”15
Allen’s concern for his own mortality is ever present in his writings as well as his filmmaking. In one short story he dreams he is Socrates in ancient Greece, about to be executed for crimes against the state. His friend tries to calm his fear.
Friend: “What about all that talk about death being the same as sleep?”Woody: “Yes, but the difference is that when you’re dead and somebody yells, ‘Everybody up, it’s morning,’ it’s very hard to find your slippers.”16
The absurdity of Allen’s humor helps to cushion the seriousness of the subject. Could it be that his comments are so clever and funny that the laughter drowns out the genuine note of anxiety over those issues? In his later films Allen began dealing with death more realistically:
In Hannah and Her Sisters his character Mickey Sacks is tested for a serious medical problem. He agonizes over the possible results only to learn they are negative. Mickey is elated—he leaves the office literally jumping for joy. Yet the next scene shows him depressed again. He realizes that the encouraging test results are but a postponement of death which is still inevitable. In despair, he attempts suicide. Failing that, he goes to a movie theater. The Marx Brothers’ film Duck Soup, an old favorite of his, is playing. The film provides a temporary escape; it even cheers him. His immediate answer to depression is that one should enjoy life while one can. However, that answer apparently did not satisfy Woody Allen, the writer, as Hannah and Her Sistersis one of the few films in which Allen provides a happy ending. Later films raise the same concerns—and usually conclude on a less optimistic note.To you I’m an atheist, to God I’m the loyal opposition.17
Allen’s fear of death is inextricably linked to his uncertainty about the existence of God. He ponders in an early essay:
“Did matter begin with an explosion or by the word of God? And if by the latter, could He not have begun it just two weeks earlier to take advantage of some of the warmer weather?”18
Again, glibness is his antidote to grappling with the hard questions. The eternal is brought down to the level of the earthly, and therefore minimized.
Yet, Allen never fully embraces the position of atheist. Once, when asked if he believed in God, he replied with a typical Allenesque formula:
“I’m what you’d call a teleological, existential atheist—I believe that there’s an intelligence to the universe, with the exception of certain parts of New Jersey.”19
He ponders spiritual matters, but a punch line always yanks the focus to the sublime, then to the ridiculous. Other examples include:
“I keep wondering if there is an afterlife, and if there is, will they be able to break a twenty?”20“There is no question that there is an unseen world. The problem is, how far is it from Midtown and how late is it open?”21
Woody Allen is, in the words of his biographer, “a reluctant [he hopes there is a God] but pessimistic [he doubts there is] agnostic who wishes he had been born with religious faith [not to be confused with sectarian belief] and who believes that even if God is absent, it is important to lead an honest and responsible life.”22
Never kill a man, especially if it means taking his life.23
The existence of God is an issue which would not only answer the questions of death and an afterlife, but also the problem of how we ought to live now. Two of Allen’s films which best deal with this issue were made 14 years apart: the 1975 cinematic spoof on the Napoleonic wars and Russian novels, Love and Death, and the 1989 critically acclaimed piece, Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Love and Death was the last of his all-out, zany comedies and the beginning of his on-screen grappling with issues of God and morality. In it Allen plays the part of Boris who denies the existence of God but would truly like to have real faith.
“If I could only see a miracle,” Boris argues, “a burning bush, the seas part.…Uncle Sasha pick up a check.” Or, “If only God would give me some sign. If He would just speak to me once, anything, one sentence, two words. If He would just cough.”
Boris is often debating with his wife Sonia on these important issues of life:
Boris: What if there is no God?…What if we’re just a bunch of absurd people who are running around with no rhyme or reason?Sonia: But if there is no God, then life has no meaning. Why go on living? Why not just commit suicide?
Boris: Well, let’s not get hysterical! I could be wrong. I’d hate to blow my brains out and then read in the papers they found something!
Later in the film Boris attempts to assassinate Napoleon. Standing over the French emperor, he prepares to shoot. But his conscience (not to mention his cowardice) prevents him from pulling the trigger. His previous philosophical ramblings come to a halt when the rubber meets the road. Boris concludes that murder is morally wrong. There are universal standards and there is even a reason to act morally.
The film ends with Boris being executed for a crime he did not commit. Could it be that Woody Allen was punishing his own character for believing, even momentarily, that there are indeed moral standards and even accountability?
After all, the logical conclusion in following such a path would be to acknowledge the existence of God. Keeping his own role of skeptic intact, Allen gives the plot a twist. In the jail cell his character is visited by “an angel of God” who promises Boris that he will be released. Since the angel’s word proves to be false, Boris again has a reason to be cynical. But in his final scene he speaks optimistically (after all, this is a comedy),
“Death is not really an end; think of it as an effective way to cut down on your expenses.”
As always, Allen’s one-liners are successful in reducing or obscuring the seriousness of the subject matter.
In Crimes and Misdemeanors Woody Allen tackles the issue of morality on a much more serious level. Wealthy ophthalmologist Judah Rosenthal has been having an extramarital affair for two years. When he attempts to end his illicit relationship, his mistress threatens to tell his wife. When backed into an impossible corner and offered an easy way out, Judah finds himself thinking the unthinkable.
Judah’s moral confusion is presented against a backdrop of the religion of his youth. Though he has long since rejected the Jewish religion, he is continually confronted with memories that activate his conscience. He remembers the words of his childhood rabbi:
“The eyes of God are on us always.”
Judah later speaks with another rabbi, a contemporary of his. The rabbi remarks on their contrasting worldviews:
“You see it [the world] as harsh and empty of values and pitiless. And I couldn’t go on living if I didn’t feel with all my heart a moral structure with real meaning and forgiveness and some kind of higher power and a reason to live. Otherwise there is no basis to know how to live.”
These words are ultimately pushed aside, as Judah succumbs to the simple solution of hiring a hit-man to murder his demanding lady in waiting. After the crime, Judah experiences gut-wrenching guilt. Judah Rosenthal finds the case for morality so strong that after the murder he blurts out:
“Without God, life is a cesspool!”
His conscience pushes him to great despair as, again, he examines the situation from a past vantage point. He envisions a Passover seder from his childhood. The conversation becomes a family debate over the importance of the celebration. Some of the relatives don’t believe in God and consider the ritual a foolish waste of time. The head of the extended family stoutly defends his faith, saying, “If necessary, I will always choose God over truth.”
Perhaps this is why Judah rejected his religion—he could not see faith as anything other than some sort of noble delusion for those who refuse to accept life’s ugly truths. As Judah continues to dwell on his crime, he has another vision in which his rabbi friend challenges him with the question: “You don’t think God sees?”
“God is a luxury I can’t afford,” Judah replies. There is a final ring to the statement as Judah decides to put the entire incident behind him.
Judah almost turns himself in; however, the price is too high and so he chooses denial, the most common escape. “In reality,” he says in the last scene, “we rationalize, we deny or else we couldn’t go on living.”
Another character, Professor Levy, speaks on morality in one of the film’s subplots. Levy is an aging philosopher much admired by the character played by Woody Allen, a filmmaker. The filmmaker is planning a documentary based on Levy’s life, and we first see the professor on videotape, discussing the paradox of the ancient Israelites:
“They created a God who cares but who also demands that you behave morally. This God asks Abraham to sacrifice his son, who is beloved to him.…After 5,000 years we have not succeeded to create a really and entirely loving image of God.”
Levy eventually commits suicide. Despite his great learning, his final note discloses nothing more than the obvious: “I’ve gone out the window.”
Professor Levy’s suicide leaves Allen’s character stunned. Still, his humor ameliorates the situation as the filmmaker protests,
“When I grew up in Brooklyn, nobody committed suicide; everyone was too unhappy.”
The final comment on Levy’s suicide is a surprising departure from Allen’s security blanket of humor:
“No matter how elaborate a philosophical system you work out, in the end it’s gotta be incomplete.”
Remember, all of the dialogue is written by Woody Allen. Though his own character supplies comic relief to this dark film, his conclusions are just as bleak. Everyone is guilty of something whether it’s considered a crime or a misdemeanor.
Yet, Allen’s theological questions rarely address the nature of that guilt. The word “sin” is reserved for the grossest offenses—the ones that make the evening news—or would, if they were discovered. Judah Rosenthal’s crime is easily recognizable as sin, while various other infidelities and compromises are mere misdemeanors.
Sin against God is not something Allen appears to take seriously in any of his films. When evangelist Billy Graham was a guest on one of Allen’s 1960s television specials, the comedian was asked (not by Graham) to name his greatest sin. He responded:
“I once had impure thoughts about Art Linkletter.”24
However, when he distances himself from the personal nature of sin and looks to crimes or sins against humanity, Allen speaks with a passion.
In Hannah and Her Sisters the viewer is introduced to the character of Frederick, an angry, isolated artist who is disgusted with the conditions of the world. Of Auschwitz, Frederick remarks to his girlfriend:
“The real question is: ‘Given what people are, why doesn’t it happen more often?’ Of course, it does, in subtler forms.…”
In Allen’s theology, all have fallen short to a greater or lesser degree, but ironically, his view of human imperfection never appears in the same discussion as his thoughts about God.
He does admit to being disconnected with the universe:
“I am two with nature.”25
But he doesn’t mention a connection with a personal God because he doesn’t see a correlation between human failures and the question of connectedness to God.
While Allen is a unique thinker, he seems to be pedestrian when it comes to wrestling with problems of immorality and even inhumanity. While he calls the existence of God into question, he does not deal with our responsibility in acknowledging God if he does exist.
It is simple to analyze sin on a human level. The more people get hurt, the bigger the sin. But the biblical perspective is quite different: Any and all sin causes separation from God. One cannot view such a cosmic separation as large or small based on degrees of sin. Ironically, one of Allen’s short stories underscores the foolishness of comparison degrees of sin:
“Astronomers talk of an inhabited planet named Quelm, so distant from earth that a man traveling at the speed of light would take six million years to get there, although they are planning a new express route that will cut two hours off the trip.”26
The biblical perspective of separation from God is similar. Having “better morals” than the drug pusher, the rapist or the ax murderer makes a big difference—in our society. We should all strive to be the best people we can be, if only to improve the overall quality of life. But in terms of a relationship with God, doing the best one can is like being two hours closer to Quelm. God is so removed from any unrighteousness that the difference between “a little unrighteous” and a lot is irrelevant.
The question his films and essays never ask is: Could being alienated from God be the root cause of our alienation from one another…and even our alienation from our own selves?
“It’s hard to get your heart and your head to agree in life. In my case they’re not even friendly.”27
Woody Allen has a unique way of expressing the uneasy terms on which many people find their heads and their hearts. Perhaps that is why he has received 14 Academy Award nominations. Allen will shoot a scene as many as twenty times, hoping to capture the actors and scenery perfectly. His biographer says “he doesn’t like to go to the next thing until what he’s working on is perfect—a process that guarantees self-defeat.”28
Is filmmaking Woody Allen’s escape from the world at large? His biographer notes, “He assigns himself mental tasks throughout the day with the intent that not a moment will pass without his mind being occupied and therefore insulated from the dilemma of eschatology.”29
It is a continual process—writing takes his mind off of the ultimate questions, yet the characters he creates are always obsessed with those very same questions. Allen determines their fate, occasionally handing out a happy ending. And he seems painfully aware that he will have little to say about the ending of his own script.
There is much to be appreciated and enjoyed in Woody Allen’s humor, but it also seems as if he uses jokes to avoid taking the possibility of God’s existence very seriously. Maybe Woody Allen is afraid to find that God doesn’t exist, or on the other hand maybe he’s afraid to find that he does. In either case, he seems to need to add a comic edge to questions about God to prove that he is not wholehearted in his hope for answers.
Will Woody Allen tackle the problem of his own halfhearted search for God in a serious way in some future film or essay? Maybe, but if the Bible can be believed, it’s an issue that God has already dealt with. The prophet Jeremiah quotes the Creator as saying: “You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart.” (Jer. 29:13)
Related posts:
Several members of the 70′s band Kansas became committed Christians after they realized that the world had nothing but meaningless to offer. It seems through the writings of both Woody Allen and Chris Martin of Coldplay that they both are wrestling with the issue of death and what meaning does life bring. Kansas went through […]
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} […]
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 about climategate? Here is an article from the Wall Street Journal:
Last week, 5,000 files of private email correspondence among several of the world’s top climate scientists were anonymously leaked onto the Internet. Like the first “climategate” leak of 2009, the latest release shows top scientists in the field fudging data, conspiring to bully and silence opponents, and displaying far less certainty about the reliability of anthropogenic global warming theory in private than they ever admit in public.
The scientists include men like Michael Mann of Penn State University and Phil Jones of the University of East Anglia, both of whose reports inform what President Obama has called “the gold standard” of international climate science, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
The new release of emails was timed to coincide with the second anniversary of the original climategate leak and with the upcoming United Nations climate summit in Durban, South Africa. And it has already stirred strong emotions. To Rep. Ed Markey (D., Mass.), for example, the leaker or leakers responsible are attempting to “sabotage the international climate talks” and should be identified and brought “to justice.”
One might sympathize with Mr. Markey’s outrage if, say, the emails were maliciously rewritten or invented. But at least one scientist involved—Mr. Mann—has confirmed that the emails are genuine, as were the first batch released two years ago. So any malfeasance revealed therein ought to be blamed on the scientists who wrote them, rather than on the whistleblower who exposed them.
Consider an email written by Mr. Mann in August 2007. “I have been talking w/ folks in the states about finding an investigative journalist to investigate and expose McIntyre, and his thus far unexplored connections with fossil fuel interests. Perhaps the same needs to be done w/ this Keenan guy.” Doug Keenan is a skeptic and gadfly of the climate-change establishment. Steve McIntyre is the tenacious Canadian ex-mining engineer whose dogged research helped expose flaws in Mr. Mann’s “hockey stick” graph of global temperatures.
One can understand Mr. Mann’s irritation. His hockey stick, which purported to demonstrate the link between man-made carbon emissions and catastrophic global warming, was the central pillar of the IPCC’s 2001 Third Assessment Report, and it brought him near-legendary status in his community. Naturally he wanted to put Mr. McIntyre in his place.
The sensible way to do so is to prove Mr. McIntyre wrong using facts and evidence and improved data. Instead the email reveals Mr. Mann casting about for a way to smear him. If the case for man-made global warming is really as strong as the so-called consensus claims it is, why do the climategate emails show scientists attempting to stamp out dissenting points of view? Why must they manipulate data, such as Mr. Jones’s infamous effort (revealed in the first batch of climategate emails) to “hide the decline,” deliberately concealing an inconvenient divergence, post-1960, between real-world, observed temperature data and scientists’ preferred proxies derived from analyzing tree rings?
This is the real significance of the climategate emails. They show that major scientists who inform the IPCC can’t be trusted to stick to the science and avoid political activism. This, in turn, has very worrying implications for the major international policy decisions adopted on the basis of their research.
That brings us to the motives of the person calling himself “FOIA” who leaked the emails onto the Internet last week.
In his introductory notes, he writes: “Over 2.5 billion people live on less than $2 a day. Every day nearly 16,000 children die from hunger and related causes. One dollar can save a life. . . . Poverty is a death sentence. Nations must invest $37 trillion in energy technologies by 2030 to stabilize greenhouse gas emissions at sustainable levels. Today’s decisions should be based on all the information we can get, not on hiding the decline.”
For the service he has performed in pursuit of this larger end, FOIA deserves not opprobrium but gratitude.
Mr. Delingpole is a contributing editor of the Spectator and author of “Watermelons: The Green Movement’s True Colors” (Publius Books, 2011).
Yesterday at the Little Rock Touchdown Club meeting Rex Nelson during his SEC roundup mentioned the popular rumor that got started last week that Houston Nutt had been contacted by Memphis. Of course, at the time Larry Porter had not even been fired. I called someone I knew in Memphis and they told me that there was no word that the administration was withdrawing their support from Porter. I concluded the rumor was false. Then on Sunday Larry Porter was dismissed.
Below is an article I got off the internet:
Posted by C.J. Hurt on Friday, November 11, 2011 · Leave a Comment
1. It is too soon to give up on Coach Porter.
One of the most important reasons not to hire Coach Nutt if you are Memphis is because Coach Porter is still in the process of building a program. While the Tigers have struggled in Porter’s two year tenure, they are showing signs of improvement. Memphis has a lot of underclassmen contributing on this year’s team, and this year’s experience under Coach Porter’s guidance will prove invaluable and help the program out in the long run. He still has not gotten the depth necessary yet to compete at a top level, but he is only a few recruits away from making Memphis a threat.
2. Despite Coach Nutt’s success his conference record is not good.
Coach Nutt has an impressive resume, but he only has a 52-58 conference record spanning the last fourteen seasons with Arkansas and Ole Miss. Since he has been at Ole Miss his conference record is a pathetic 10-20. It certainly seems like teams that are familiar with Coach Nutt’s system have success against him, a fact that should concern every Tiger fan that wants Coach Nutt.
3. Houston Nutt may use Memphis as a stepping stone to get back to a major program.
Should Memphis hire Coach Nutt there is a possibility that Coach Nutt will leave as soon as a vacancy at a bigger program becomes available. He did it to Boise State in 1997 when he left the Broncos after only one season to go coach Arkansas. If you are curious about the damage a coach who leaves after one year can cause, look across the state to a Tennessee team that is still trying to rebuild after Lane Kiffin left to coach USC. Add to this issue the fact that the Tiger’s have recently been spurned by a certain basketball coach who left because of the money and prestige of another program and you have a leadership group who wants to make sure that does not happen again.
4. Coach Nutt is too expensive.
Houston Nutt is making almost 2.5 million dollars this season, while Larry Porter is only making about $316,500. When you compare their salaries, Houston Nutt is making almost eight times as much as Coach Porter, and thanks to Coach Nutt’s buyout clause Ole Miss has to pay him six million dollars next year to not coach. There is no way Memphis can afford to keep Nutt satisfied financially when bigger programs are always lurking and can shell out millions of dollars at a time for a coach.
5. Coach Porter is a better recruiter than Houston Nutt.
Let me remind everyone that Coach Porter is the 2007 and 2009 Rivals.com National Recruiter of the Year and he is bringing in talented players. Coach Porter only has one full recruiting class under his belt and he is getting talented players to commit to Memphis. On the other hand, Coach Nutt won early on at Ole Miss with Ed Orgeron’s players, but failed to bring in the talent necessary to continue to have success at Ole Miss.
Five Reasons to Hire Coach Nutt:
1. Hiring Coach Nutt will bring some energy and enthusiasm to a dwindling fan base.
There is no doubt that the hiring of Coach Nutt will create a buzz that will permeate throughout the city. Season ticket sales will increase, people will begin to take Memphis football more seriously, and Tiger fans will have a reason to be excited about their football program. It will also change the fans perspective of the Memphis football program, because right now the perception of most fans is that Memphis does not care about its football program. Hiring Houston Nutt will show that Memphis is willing to pay top dollar for an elite coach.
2. Coach Nutt has an impressive resume.
Coach Nutt has a notable resume that includes 19 years of head coaching experience; fourteen of those years are in the SEC, which is one of the best conferences in the nation. He has three SEC West titles and he is a three time SEC Coach of the Year. Also, Houston Nutt’s overall record as a head coach at the FBS level is 104-77 and he has four bowl wins too.
3. Hiring Coach Nutt will make Memphis more appealing to major conferences.
With conference realignment taking place Memphis needs to do everything it can to make itself more appealing to major conferences. Hiring Coach Nutt will show the nation that Memphis is committed to their football program and willing to pay top dollar for an elite coach. Houston Nutt has extensive experience coaching in a major football conference, and he will add instant credibility to a program that is desperate for a spot in an AQ conference.
4. Houston Nutt is undefeated against C-USA teams since becoming a head coach at the FBS level.
Since becoming a head FBS coach in 1996 Houston Nutt has dominated C-USA teams. He is an impressive 7-0 against Conference USA foes, and Memphis needs somebody who will get them wins inside their conference. The last time Memphis had a winning record in conference was in 2008 when the Tigers went 4-4 in conference play. In fact, Memphis is a staggering 2-19 in conference since 2009, and the Tigers are in desperate need of somebody who can led them to more conference victories. With his undefeated record against C-USA opponents Houston Nutt can bring a swagger to the Memphis program and make them belive that they can win games against conference foes.
5. If you cannot bet him, join him.
Memphis knows first hand how good a football coach Houston Nutt is after taking some severe beatings from him in the past. No Memphis football team has ever defeated Coach Nutt since he became head coach of Arkansas or while he was at Ole Miss. Houston Nutt’s Rebel teams have all but eradicated the once intense rivalry between Memphis and Ole Miss. In the two contests since Houston Nutt became the Rebel’s head coach he has beaten Memphis by a combined score of 86-38.
CJ Hurt covers college football for MemphiSport. Follow him @churtj09 for live tweets from games.
Photos by JD Meredith and Joe Murphy.
I enjoyed the Little Rock Touchdown Club and have posted a lot about it all fall. I have links below to earlier posts. Yesterday Wally Hall and Steve Sullivan had some good insights. Below are some of the thoughts of Jim Harris that he shared at the lunch.
BUILDING THE DEFENSE: How nice it would be if the state of Arkansas produced a handful of Parade All-American high school defensive stars or Rivals 4- and 5-star prospects like the states of Alabama and Louisiana have developed. Both Alabama and LSU have built their superb defenses mostly with homegrown talent. And, Donta Hightower’s case at ‘Bama, his Tennessee hometown is between Nashville and Birmingham and within an easy drive of Tuscaloosa.
Draw a circle with a 200-mile radius from Fayetteville, and do the same with Tuscaloosa and Baton Rouge. Then note where many of the top high school players in the country have been produced the past five years; you’d see the disadvantage Arkansas faces in recruiting.
Within the state, Arkansas has produced just a handful of defensive players, period, in the past six years.
Petrino’s job in building a defense to match his prolific offense isn’t the same as what Les Miles and Nick Saban face. Petrino has to employ a much wider net and, if he wants a defense as dominant as LSU’s, somehow convince a half-dozen stars from other states to snub their home university and play for Arkansas instead. To be fair, LSU under Miles has extended its reach for defensive talent from east Texas to the mid-Atlantic (Sam Montgomery, for example, was one of the top prep players in South Carolina in 2009).
Arkansas’ been lucky in its past if the Hogs pulled in a couple of those playmakers occasionally. Usually, the source of that talent was Texas.
It’s no accident that Oklahoma State is ranked No. 3 in this week’s BCS poll, as much time as the Cowboys have spent recruiting Texas for 75 percent of their roster. It didn’t just start with current coach Mike Gundy.
Les Miles got things rolling in his time in Stillwater before landing the LSU job. The guy can recruit.
He’ll also eat grass, and he’ll make indecipherable declarations and surprise fans with out-of-the-norm calls. But he won’t point across the field at Nick Saban or Bobby Petrino or any other coach and curse him, fully aware that the TV camera is on him.
He also wasn’t running the score up on Arkansas early in the fourth quarter when LSU was throwing the football. Arkansas was still using run blitzes to futilely stop the LSU rushing game. We’re certain if Petrino and Arkansas had played it vanilla in the fourth quarter, Miles would have done the same.
Related posts:
I remember when USC beat Arkansas 70 to 17 back in 2005. The score was 49 to 7 in the first half and USC could have made it 100 to 7 if they wanted to but they put in their subs in the 3rd quarter. However, Wally Hall said they ran up the score because […]
Earlier I wrote about where I think Arkansas could win a national championship with just two more wins. Below is a portion of an article by Jim Harris of the website Arkansas 360: AND ON BOBBY: Schlabach, on Arkansas’ coach: “I said when he was hired that Bobby Petrino would make Arkansas a contender for […]
A few days ago it looked like we would not have the opportunity to play into the national championship game, but now all that has changed. Life is funny that way sometimes. The Arkansas News Bureau reported: “I think we’ll have the opportunity,” Bequette said. “That’s what I believe.” All we got to do is […]
Earlier I wrote about where I think Arkansas could win a national championship with just two more wins. Below is a portion of an article by Jim Harris of the website Arkansas 360: STILL THERE’S LES AT LSU: Schlabach, in saying that LSU and Alabama are the two best teams in the country, had high […]
Wally Hall actually said on his radio program on Nov 22, 2011 that the Arkansas v. LSU game on Nov 25, 2011 is the most significant game in razorback history. I have to respectfully disagree. I will agree that it is in the top 5, but I will start a list today of other games […]
I saw the end of the Tennessee/Vandy game on tv and my brother-in-law went to the game (pictures from him below). I have written about the game earlier on this blog so I will not go into that again. I just wanted to comment on the video clip above. I think it is fine that […]
Earlier I wrote about where I think Arkansas could win a national championship with just two more wins. Below is a portion of an article by Jim Harris of the website Arkansas 360: What kind of college football polling world do we live in now that a No. 3 Arkansas could win Friday at No. […]
Mangino at a 2007 KU basketball game Eric Mangino is a fine coach. Here is a portion of an article by Jim Harris: Jim Harris’ Notebook: Mangino Ready To Return; Big Week For Central Arkansas by Jim Harris STRANGE YEAR: Mark Mangino noted the unusual college football season, from six more more teams being in […]
Mangino at a 2007 KU basketball game Eric Mangino is a very good speaker. Here is a portion of an article by Jim Harris: Jim Harris’ Notebook: Mangino Ready To Return; Big Week For Central Arkansas by Jim Harris 11/14/2011 at 3:37pm It’s easy for fans who don’t follow Kansas football closely to forget just […]
Uploaded by TheMemphisSlim on Sep 3, 2010 Johnny Majors from Huntland, TN tried out for the UT Football team weighing 150 pounds. His Father, Shirley Majors his HS Coach,encourage him and then 4 younger brothers all to be Vols. Johnny Majors was the runner-up in 1956 for the Heisman Trophy to Paul Horning, on a loosing Notre Dame […]
I got to ask Pat Summerall a question at the Little Rock Touchdown Club meeting back in October of 2010. Summerall had pointed out that Tom Landry was the defensive coordinator and Vince Lombardi was the offensive backfield coach when he played for the Giants. Summerall had shared how he had recovered from his […]
We have had some great speakers at the Little Rock Touchdown Club and Auburn’s Pat Dye has to be included in that list. Jim Harris: No Little Rock Touchdown Club Speaker Quite Like Former Auburn Coach Pat Dye by Jim Harris 10/3/2011 at 3:22pm The last time former Auburn head football coach Pat Dye addressed […]
Bobby Bowden was probably the best speaker I have ever heard at the Little Rock Touchdown Club. Here is an article about his Christian faith: Football and faith are big business for Bobby Bowden Tuesday, Jun 12, 2001 By Sandra Vidak TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (BP)–Whether it’s leading his team to a national championship on the gridiron, […]
2010 idllewild baptist church bobby bowden FSU head coach speaking sermon Uploaded by backflow3908 on Feb 7, 2010 2010 exciting Idlewild baptist church Bobby Bowden guest speaker FSU head coach speaking sermon pastor ken whiten talks about faith in Jesus Christ, God. small story about his mom. __________________________________ When I attended the Little Rock Touchdown […]
Yesterday I got to hear Lloyd Carr speak to the Little Rock Touchdown Club. Below is how the Arkansas Democrat Gazette covered it. LITTLE ROCK — Lloyd Carr coached Tom Brady at the beginning of his 13-year tenure as Michigan’s head coach and Ryan Mallett at the end. Now, Brady and Mallett are New England […]

Gene Simmons Family Jewels
In the sermon at Fellowship Bible Church at July 24, 2011, teaching pastor Brandon Barnard made a great point about the two choices that you have. You can walk down the pathway of purity or impurity. The pathway of impurity is both persuasive and inviting.
English Standard Version (ESV)
3For the lips of a forbidden[a] woman drip honey,
and her speech[b] is smoother than oil,
English Standard Version (ESV)
24to preserve you from the evil woman,[a]
from the smooth tongue of the adulteress.[b]
English Standard Version (ESV)
10And behold, the woman meets him,
dressed as a prostitute, wily of heart.[a]
11She is loud and wayward;
her feet do not stay at home;
12now in the street, now in the market,
and at every corner she lies in wait.
13She seizes him and kisses him,
and with bold face she says to him,
14“I had to offer sacrifices,[b]
and today I have paid my vows;
15so now I have come out to meet you,
to seek you eagerly, and I have found you.
16I have spread my couch with coverings,
colored linens from Egyptian linen;
17I have perfumed my bed with myrrh,
aloes, and cinnamon.
18Come, let us take our fill of love till morning;
let us delight ourselves with love.
19For my husband is not at home;
he has gone on a long journey;
20he took a bag of money with him;
at full moon he will come home.”
___________________________
After his marriage to Shannon will he be faithful? Is Gene Simmons going to continue to have affairs with other women that are evil? However, the Bible calls her an “evil woman.” What kind of future will have with an evil woman that is not your the wife of your youth? Later in chapter 7 Solomon says, “All at once he follows her, as an ox goes to the slaughter, or as a stag is caught fast[c] 23till an arrow pierces its liver; as a bird rushes into a snare; he does not know that it will cost him his life.27Her house is the way to Sheol, going down to the chambers of death. ”
Related posts:
Gene Simmons Proposes To Shannon Tweed Kiss singer/bassist Gene Simmons proposed to his longtime girlfriend Shannon Tweed in Belize recently, TMZ reports. The couple has been together 28 years and share two children, 22-year-old son Nicholas and 18-year-old daughter Sophie. Simmons popped the question on the A&E reality show ‘Gene Simmons Family Jewels,’ which has followed the life of the Simmons brood since […]
Last Tuesday night I watched Gene Simmons Family Jewels and I commented how I was struck by the good advice that his son Nick gave him. He told him that he grew up thinking that his father was the best. However, now that the marital infidility has come out, it has made Nick think long and hard […]
Last night I watched Gene Simmons Family Jewels and I was struck by the good advice that his son Nick gave him. He told him that he grew up thinking that his father was the best. However, now that the marital infidility has come out, it has made Nick think long and hard about what […]
I watched with great interest the first episode of Gene Simmons show two days ago when his wife left him because of his repeated unfaithfulness. Nerve editors are divided on the subject of Chelsea Handler, by which I mean that I find her kind of funny and Ben made a barfy face when I said […]
![]()
Dickens performing at the Grand Ole Opry in 2004
Little Jimmy Dickens: The oldest living member of the original Grand Ole Opry
James Cecil Dickens (born December 19, 1920), better known as Little Jimmy Dickens, is an American country music singer famous for his humorous novelty songs, his small size, 4’11” (150 cm), and his rhinestone-studded outfits. He has been a member of the Grand Ole Opry for 60 years and is a member of the Country Music Hall of Fame.
Born in Bolt, West Virginia, Dickens, who is related to Charles Dickens, began his musical career in the late 1930s, performing on a local radio station while attending West Virginia University. He soon quit school to pursue a full-time music career, and travelled the country performing on various local radio stations under the name “Jimmy the Kid.”
In 1948, Dickens was heard performing on a radio station in Saginaw, Michigan by Roy Acuff, who introduced him to Art Satherly at Columbia Records and officials from the Grand Ole Opry. Dickens signed with Columbia in September and joined the Opry in August. Around this time he began using the nickname, Little Jimmy Dickens, inspired by his short stature.
Dickens recorded many novelty songs for Columbia, including “Country Boy,” “A-Sleeping at the Foot of the Bed” and “I’m Little But I’m Loud.” His song “Take an Old Cold Tater (And Wait)” inspired Hank Williams to nickname him “Tater”. Later, telling Jimmy he needed a hit, Williams penned “Hey Good Lookin’” specifically for Dickens in only 20 minutes while on a Grand Ole Opry tour bus. A week later Williams cut the song himself, jokingly telling him, “That song’s too good for you!”
In 1950 he formed the Country Boys with musicians Jabbo Arrington, Grady Martin, Bob Moore and Thumbs Carllile and. It was during this time that he discovered future Hall of Famer Marty Robbins at a Phoenix, Arizona television station while on tour with Grand Ole Opry road show. In 1957, Dickens left the Grand Ole Opry to tour with the Philip Morris Country Music Show.
In 1962 Dickens released “The Violet and the Rose,” his first top ten single in 12 years. During 1964 he became the first country artist to circle the globe while on tour, and also made numerous TV appearances including The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson. In 1965 he released his biggest hit, “May the Bird of Paradise Fly Up Your Nose,” reaching number one on the country chart and number fifteen on the pop chart.
In the late 1960s he left Columbia for Decca Records, before moving again to United Artists in 1971. That same year he married his wife, Mona, and in 1975 he returned to the Grand Ole Opry. In 1983 Dickens was inducted into the Country Music Hall of Fame.
He joined producers Randall Franks and Alan Autry for the In the Heat of the Night cast CD “Christmas Time’s A Comin’” performing “Jingle Bells” with the cast on the CD released on Sonlite and MGM/UA for one of the most popular Christmas releases of 1991 and 1992 with Southern retailers.
Recently, Dickens has made appearances in a number of music videos by fellow country musician and West Virginia native Brad Paisley. He has also been featured on several of Paisley’s albums in bonus comedy tracks along with other Opry mainstays such as George Jones and Bill Anderson. They are collectively referred to as the Kung-Pao Buckaroos.
With the passing of Hank Locklin in March 2009, Dickens became the oldest living member of the Grand Ole Opry at the age of 90. He still makes regular appearances as a host at the Opry, often with the self-deprecating joke that he is also known as “Willie Nelson after taxes.” At the 2011 CMA Awards, Jimmy was dressed up as Justin Bieber, and made fun of Bieber’s recent paternity scandal.

Photo by The Commercial Appeal files
Conway Twitty (Left), Little Jimmy Dickens (Center) and Sammi Smith clown around while performing at the Mid-South Coliseum on November 2, 1968. Ms Smith is a member of the Waylon Jennings group.
| Birth name | James Cecil Dickens |
|---|---|
| Also known as | Little Jimmy Dickens Tater |
| Born | December 19, 1920 (1920-12-19) (age 90) |
| Origin | Bolt, West Virginia, United States |
| Genres | Country |
| Instruments | Guitar |
| Years active | 1936 – Present |
| Labels | Columbia Records, Decca Records, United Artists Records |
“Music Monday”:Coldplay’s best songs of all time (Part 12)
This is “Music Monday” and I always look at a band with some of their best music. I am currently looking at Coldplay’s best songs. Here are a few followed by another person’s preference.
My son Hunter Hatcher’s 9th favorite Coldplay song is “Clocks.” Hunter noted, “Best piano drive i’ve ever heard. Steady yet not over done. And the follow of the off beat drums is a perfect fit.”
Here are the 11 Best Coldplay Songs:
1. Don’t Panic (Parachutes)
2. Clocks (A Rush of Blood To The Head)
3. Easy To Please (Brothers and Sisters)
4. Talk (X&Y)
5. Spies (Parachutes)
6. White Shadows (X&Y)
7. Things I Don’t Understand (B-Side)
8. Green Eyes (A Rush of Blood To The Head)
9. Speed of Sound (X&Y)
10. The Scientist (A Rush of Blood To The Head)
11. Sparks (Parachutes)
Related posts:
Dave Hogan/ Getty Images This is “Music Monday” and I always look at a band with some of their best music. I am currently looking at Coldplay’s best songs. Here are a few followed by another person’s preference: For the 17th best Coldplay song of all-time, Hunter picks “42.” He notes, “You thought you might […]
The best band in the world. Below I have linked some articles I have earlier about the search for meaning in life the band seems to involved in. Chris Martin, Jonny Buckland, Guy Berryman, and Will Champion formed Coldplay in 1996 while going to University in London. The young band quickly established themselves in the […]
I am presently involved in the counting down of the best Coldplay songs of all time, but I am also in a series here reviewing the upcoming songs on Coldplay’s new cd that will be released soon. Here is a review from Rolling Stone: Coldplay Debut new song ‘Charlie Brown’ June 6, 2011 Coldplay debuted […]
Great documentary on Coldplay. I have written a lot on Coldplay the last few years and I see something spiritually happening with the group as they continue to search for a deeping meaning in life. Coldplay Max Masters – Part 1 of 7 Uploaded by thepostbox on May 6, 2009 The ASTRA Award winning music documentary […]
Several members of the 70′s band Kansas became committed Christians after they realized that the world had nothing but meaningless to offer. It seems through the writings of both Woody Allen and Chris Martin of Coldplay that they both are wrestling with the issue of death and what meaning does life bring. Kansas went through […]
This is “Music Monday” and I always look at a band with some of their best music. I am currently looking at Coldplay’s best songs. Here are a few followed by another person’s preference: Hunter has chosen the song “Viva La Vida” as his number 18 pick. Hunter noted, “The violin synth is a […]
Coldplay – Every Teardrop Is A Waterfall Published on Jun 28, 2011 by ColdplayVEVO The new single, taken from Every Teardrop Is A Waterfall EP (featuring two more new tracks). Download it from http://cldp.ly/itunescp Music video by Coldplay performing Every Teardrop Is A Waterfall. (P) 2011 The copyright in this audiovisual recording is owned by […]