Category Archives: Current Events

Standard & Poor’s downgrades US credit rating

August 6, 2011 – 11:32 am

Over and over conservatives have warned that a US default was not the main thing we needed to fear but not cutting our budget enough to avoid a downgrade of the US credit rating. Now it has happened just as we feared!!!

Standard & Poor’s downgrades US credit rating

Standard & Poor’s has downgraded the credit rating for the US from AAA for the first time in US history.

By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, Associated Press / August 5, 2011

Credit rating agency Standard & Poor‘s on Friday downgraded the United States‘ credit rating for the first time in the history of the ratings.The credit rating agency said that it is cutting the country’s top AAA rating by one notch to AA-plus. The credit agency said that it is making the move because the deficit reduction plan passed by Congress on Tuesday did not go far enough to stabilize the country’s debt situation.

A source familiar with the discussions said that the Obama administration feels the S&P’s analysis contained “deep and fundamental flaws.”

S&P said that in addition to the downgrade, it is issuing a negative outlook, meaning that there was a chance it will lower the rating further within the next two years. It said such a downgrade to AA would occur if the agency sees less reductions in spending than Congress and the administration have agreed to make, higher interest rates or new fiscal pressures during this period.

S&P first put the government on notice in April that a downgrade was possible unless Congress and the administration came up with a credible long-term deficit reduction plan and avoided a default on the country’s debt.

After months of wrangling and negotiations with the administration, Congress passed this week a debt reduction package at the 11th-hour that averted a possible default.

In its statement, S&P said that it had changed its view “of the difficulties of bridging the gulf between the political parties” over a credible deficit reduction plan.

S&P said it was now “pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government’s debt dynamics anytime soon.”

Despite Dow ending the day up, it was a roller coaster all day at one point down 170 points. With the S&P downgrade, the release of the jobs report, and the roller coaster week on Wall Street, many are just holding their breath to see how the markets flesh out.

Debt Deal: Politicians Win, Middle Class Loses

by Daniel J. Mitchell

Daniel J. Mitchell is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank based in Washington.

Added to cato.org on August 2, 2011

This article appeared on CNN.com on August 2, 2011.

America is on a path to becoming a Greek-style welfare state. Thanks to the Bush-Obama spending binge, the burden of federal spending has climbed to about 25% of national economic output, up from only 18.2% of GDP when Bill Clinton left office.

But that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Because of a combination of demographic forces and poorly designed entitlement programs, federal spending could consume as much as 50% of economic output by the time the baby boom generation is fully retired.

One symptom of all this excessive spending is that Washington is awash in red ink. We’re now in our third consecutive year of trillion-dollar deficits and the politicians just had to increase the nation’s $14.3 trillion debt limit.

Daniel J. Mitchell is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank based in Washington.

 

More by Daniel J. Mitchell

But it wasn’t easy getting there. Just as happened with the “government shutdown” debate in March, Republicans and Democrats had fierce disagreements over the right approach. They bickered until the last minute and then finally agreed to more than $900 billion of supposed spending cuts and the creation of a “supercommittee” charged with proposing another $1.5 trillion of deficit reduction.

So which side won this fight? Republicans are bragging that they got spending cuts today, a promise of spending cuts in the future, and no tax increases. Democrats, meanwhile, are chortling that they took the debt issue off the table until after the 2012 elections, protected their favorite programs and created a supercommittee that will seduce the GOP into a tax increase.

Ignore that bragging. The easy answer is that politicians of both parties were the victors and taxpayers are the ones left in the cold.

In other words, the budget deal was a victory for the political establishment.

Here’s why Republicans are winners. They get to tell their tea party activists that they forced Obama to cut spending. It doesn’t matter that federal spending will actually be higher every year and that the cuts were based on Washington math (a spending increase becomes a spending cut if outlays don’t climb as fast as some artificial benchmark).

They also get to tell their anti-tax activists that they held the line. Perhaps most important, the supercommittee must use the “current law” baseline, which assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts expire at the end of 2012. But why are GOPers happy about this, considering they want those tax cuts extended? For the simple reason that Democrats on the supercommittee therefore can’t use repeal of the “Bush tax cuts for the rich” as a revenue raiser.

This means that most Republican incumbents are well-positioned to win re-election.

Here’s why Democrats are winners. Thanks to the magic of government math, despite all the talk of budget cuts, discretionary spending will be more than $100 billion higher in 2021 than it is this year. And since defense spending in Iraq and Afghanistan presumably is winding down, this means even more money will be available for domestic programs.

In addition to telling the pro-spending lobbies that the gravy train is still on the tracks, they also get to tell the class-warfare crowd that there’s an improved likelihood of higher taxes for corporate jet owners and other “rich” people. Notwithstanding GOP assertions, nothing in the agreement precludes the supercommittee from meeting its $1.5 trillion target with tax revenue. The 2001 and 2003 tax legislation is not an option, but everything else is on the table.

This means that most Democratic incumbents are well-positioned to win re-election.

It’s worth pointing out that this doesn’t mean all Republicans and all Democrats are happy about the deal. The hard-core conservatives are upset that the deal is mostly smoke and mirrors on the spending side and that there may be a tax-increase trap on the revenue side.

The hard-core liberals, by contrast, are angry that there are any spending cuts, even ones based on Washington math. Moreover, they want higher tax rates on upper-income taxpayers today, not a supercommittee that may or may not follow through on soak-the-rich policies in the future.

One group of people, however, unambiguously got the short end of the stick in this budget deal. Ordinary Americans are caught in the middle. They’re not poor enough to benefit from the federal government’s plethora of income-redistribution programs. But they’re not rich enough to have the clever lobbyists and insider connections needed to benefit from the high-dollar handouts like ethanol subsidies and bank bailouts.

Instead, middle-class Americans play by the rules, pay ever-higher taxes, and struggle to make ends meet while the establishment of both parties engages in posturing as America slowly drifts toward a Greek-style fiscal meltdown.

By Everette Hatcher III | Also posted in Cato Institute, spending out of control | Tagged , , , , | Comments (0)

US Navy Seals killed in Afghanistan this morning

August 6, 2011 – 11:12 am
 

It’s a sad day for America.

In the largest single loss of U.S. troops since the war in Afghanistan started, the Taliban shot down a helicopter early this morning carrying 25 Navy SEALS and other special operations forces, killing total of 31 Americans.

A total of 38 people were on board the Chinook helicopter when it crashed overnight in the eastern Afghan province of Wardak.

Initial reports indicate up to 25 Navy SEALs were on the aircraft at the time.

It was also carrying seven Afghan Special Forces troops, one interpreter, five member helicopter crew and one dog.

Troops were apparently involved in a raid at the time.

“We are aware of an incident involving a helicopter in eastern Afghanistan,” U.S. Air Force Capt. Justin Brockhoff, a NATO spokesman, told the Associated Press. “We are in the process of accessing the facts.”

Although the Taliban have claimed to have shot the helicopter down, the exact cause of the crash is still under investigation.

God bless their souls, their families and may they rest in peace.

By Everette Hatcher III | Tagged , , , , | Comments (0)

W. Hatcher v. E. Hatcher top ten soccer videos (Part 3)

August 6, 2011 – 10:30 am

This is Wilson’s 4th pick

cristiano ronaldo

bad music, great video!

This is Wilson’s 3rd pick

Diego Maradona vs England ’86

The music fits it very well!

This is Wilson’s 2nd pick

The politics of the World Cup

It’s very funny!

__________________

This is Everette’s #4 pick:

George Best- ‘The Best Tribute’!

George Best is great.

_______________________________

Everette’s #3 pick:

Young Lionel Messi – Rare Clips HD

Only Ronaldo is better than Messi!!!

Lionel Messi 2011 – This is my life story

_____________________________

Landon Donovan Fantastic Goal 2-0 – USA vs Brazil – Confederations Cup Final 2009

Everette’s number two is:

USA MEXICO 1_8 FINAL WORLD CUP 2002

By Everette Hatcher III | Comments (0)

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

August 3, 2011 – 8:33 am

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 comments you may have.

By the way I am starting Woody Wednesday today and every Wednesday after today will include a post about Woody Allen and his work.

Corey Stoll as Ernest Hemingway in "Midnight in Paris." 2011 Roger Arpajou / Sony Pictures Classics

Corey Stoll as Ernest Hemingway in “Midnight in Paris.”

The New York Times

Ernest Hemingway, around 1937

Other posts concerning Woody Allen’s latest movie “Midnight in Paris”

What can we learn from Woody Allen Films?, August 1, 2011 – 6:30 am

Movie Review of “Midnight in Paris” lastest movie by Woody Allen, July 30, 2011 – 6:52 am

Leo Stein and sister Gertrude Stein’s salon is in the Woody Allen film “Midnight in Paris”, July 28, 2011 – 6:22 am

Great review on Midnight in Paris with talk about artists being disatisfied, July 27, 2011 – 6:20 am

Critical review of Woody Allen’s latest movie “Midnight in Paris”, July 24, 2011 – 5:56 am

Not everyone liked “Midnight in Paris”, July 22, 2011 – 5:38 am

“Midnight in Paris” one of Woody Allen’s biggest movie hits in recent years, July 18, 2011 – 6:00 am

(Part 32, Jean-Paul Sartre)July 10, 2011 – 5:53 am

 (Part 29, Pablo Picasso) July 7, 2011 – 4:33 am

(Part 28,Van Gogh) July 6, 2011 – 4:03 am

(Part 27, Man Ray) July 5, 2011 – 4:49 am

(Part 26,James Joyce) July 4, 2011 – 5:55 am

(Part 25, T.S.Elliot) July 3, 2011 – 4:46 am

(Part 24, Djuna Barnes) July 2, 2011 – 7:28 am

(Part 23,Adriana, fictional mistress of Picasso) July 1, 2011 – 12:28 am

(Part 22, Silvia Beach and the Shakespeare and Company Bookstore) June 30, 2011 – 12:58 am

(Part 21,Versailles and the French Revolution) June 29, 2011 – 5:34 am

(Part 16, Josephine Baker) June 24, 2011 – 5:18 am

(Part 15, Luis Bunuel) June 23, 2011 – 5:37 am

(Part 1 William Faulkner) June 13, 2011 – 3:19 pm

I love Woody Allen’s latest movie “Midnight in Paris”, June 12, 2011 – 11:52 pm

https://i0.wp.com/www.awardsdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/19.jpg

Alison Pill as Zelda Fitzgerald and Tom Hiddleston as F. Scott Fitzgerald in "Midnight in Paris." 2011 Roger Arpajou / Sony Pictures Classics

Alison Pill as Zelda Fitzgerald and Tom Hiddleston as F. Scott Fitzgerald in “Midnight in Paris.”

Owen Wilson as Gil in "Midnight in Paris." 2011 Roger Arpajou / Sony Pictures Classics

Owen Wilson as Gil in “Midnight in Paris.”

Marion Cotillard, Alison Pill, Owen Wilson and Director Woody Allen on the set of "Midnight in Paris." 2011 Roger Arpajou / Sony Pictures Classics

Marion Cotillard, Alison Pill, Owen Wilson and Director Woody Allen on the set of “Midnight in Paris.”

Associated Press

F. Scott Fitzgerald, center, with his daughter Scottie, left and his wife Zelda in Paris in 1925

By Everette Hatcher III | Comments (0)

Tea Party Governor

August 3, 2011 – 6:57 am

It is refreshing to read such an inspiring story about someone who overcame so much in his youth.

From the streets to the governor’s mansion, Paul LePage embraces fiscal conservatism for survival

By C.J. Ciaramella  12:07 AM 07/25/2011
ADVERTISEMENT

During the 2010 Maine gubernatorial election, Republican candidate Paul LePage told a local news outlet: “I’m more of a street fighter than an angry person. And when I go through the halls in Augusta, I’m going to float like a butterfly and sting like a bee.”

Six months after going from a small-town mayor to the governor’s mansion on a wave of anti-establishment fervor, LePage hasn’t pulled any punches.

The 62-year-old chief executive has rolled back business regulations, trimmed Maine’s welfare system, signed the biggest tax cuts in state history and annoyed just about every interest group along the way.

His first act as governor was an executive order ending Maine’s status as a sanctuary state for illegal immigrants. He also laughingly told the NAACP to “kiss my butt.”

Then there was the time when he removed a mural, depicting the history of Maine’s labor movement, from the lobby of the state department of labor, sparking protests from unions and art groups.

And the time, during his campaign, when he told an audience that when he became governor they could expect to see the newspaper headline: “LePage tells Obama to go to hell.”

Reading the news stories and seeing pictures of LePage — he’s bull-necked and has a mean-looking glower — one might think he’s some sort of angry partisan.

Sitting on a couch at the Capitol Hill Club lounge in D.C. for an interview with The Daily Caller, LePage was content to crack jokes and eat handfuls of popcorn rather than slam his shoe on the table. One gets the impression Paul LePage just says what Paul LePage thinks, for better or worse.

“There are two things that are important to me as an individual: honesty and integrity,” he said. “You don’t have to like what I say. You don’t have to agree with me. But whatever I say, I believe.”

Barry Hobbins, a Democratic state senator who has worked with six different governors, said LePage reminded him of another unconventional Maine politician — Jim Longley, the state’s first independent governor, elected in 1974.

“LePage isn’t an establishment Republican,” Hobbins said. “He’s not a pedigree. He’s tough as nails, and he can be gruff and rough. But he’s the governor. I’ve told my liberal and progressive friends we have to work with him.”

Of course, all politicians like to frame themselves as “not your average politician” — the straight-shooter, the maverick — but LePage’s bluntness seems less an affectation than a byproduct of his time in local politics and the private sector, and of his hardscrabble upbringing.

LePage was the oldest of 18 children in a dysfunctional family. At age 11, his father put him in the hospital with a broken nose and a dislocated jaw. When his dad showed up to the hospital, he flipped LePage a 50-cent piece and told him to say he’d fallen down the stairs.

Instead, LePage decided he’d had enough. He slipped out of the hospital and lived on the streets of Lewiston, Maine, for two years, sleeping where he could — cars, stairwells, hallways, even a brothel.

He’s kept that 50-cent piece in his pocket every day since 1960 as a reminder of where he came from. For LePage, fiscal conservatism wasn’t so much a political philosophy as a survival strategy.

“From then on, a dollar always meant something to me,” he said. “I had to save to get by. As governor I don’t feel I have the authority to raise taxes just because I feel [like] it.”

Two families took LePage in when he was 13. One of them was the family of Peter Snowe, the first husband of future U.S. Senator Olympia Snowe. The families helped get him through high school and into college.

He was accepted by Husson University, but only after Snowe convinced the school to allow LePage, a native French speaker, to take the entrance exam in French. After graduating from Husson, he earned his M.B.A. from the University of Maine.

Much to the ire of many conservative Republicans, he is supporting the centrist Olympia Snowe in the upcoming Senate election. In typical LePage fashion, he is completely up front about why, saying their relationship “transcends politics.”

“Am I enamored by all her votes? No,” Lepage said. “But I still love the lady, and I owe them a big debt for helping get me off the streets.”

In between leaving home and graduating from college, LePage held down a long list of odd jobs.

He shined shoes, worked in a rubber factory and a meat-packing plant, drove trucks, ran errands, cleaned horse stables at a racetrack, delivered newspapers (both morning and afternoon paper routes), washed dishes, delivered groceries, edited a college newspaper and bartended.

At one point, LePage dealt cards for a group of local card sharks who paid him 25 cents a hand because they didn’t trust each other to deal. The games started at 11 p.m. and then, when the bars closed at 2 a.m., often moved to a hotel.

“Sometimes I was dealing cards for 18 to 20 hours at a time,” LePage said.

After college, LePage went into business, first in the lumber industry, then as the general manager of Marden’s Surplus and Salvage, a chain of Maine discount stores. After LePage came on in 1996, Marden’s expanded in sales and size by 100 percent.

In 1998, he decided to get involved in local politics in Waterville, a central Maine town of about 15,000 people.

“I ran because the mayor was going to sell 14 acres of riverfront property for a dollar to a relative,” LePage said. “Sort of pissed me off.”

LePage served two terms on the Waterville City Council and three terms as mayor, running as a Republican in the heavily Democrat-leaning town. He lowered taxes 6 out of his 8 years as mayor and issued 13 vetoes. But he kept getting re-elected.

“One thing I found about human nature is if you allow people to put more money in their pocket, that’s a good way to get re-elected,” LePage said.

And then came the run for governor. As an outsider with little financial backing, LePage was seen as a long-shot at best in the crowded Republican field of seven. But 2010 was a year for outsiders.

LePage pushed a platform of hard-nosed fiscal conservatism — job creation, less regulations and spending cuts. He famously pledged to put a five-year cap on welfare benefits, and told Maine residents that if they didn’t like it he’d buy them a bus ticket to Massachusetts.

Although the Maine media and his opponents blanched at his language (his political consultant Brent Littlefield said the media didn’t get LePage’s “tongue-in-cheek” style), it resonated deeply with disaffected voters, especially those who identified with the Tea Party.

LePage won the Republican primary with 38 percent of the vote, despite being outspent 10 to 1 by his closest opponent. He spent just $190,000 on his primary campaign.

Littlefield said the campaign emphasized what they called “the three onlys”: LePage was the “only candidate with a dramatic personal story, the only candidate with successful business experience and the only candidate with executive experience.”

The campaign also specifically targeted Francophone voters, sending volunteers deep into rural Maine to hand-deliver large posters with a personal message from LePage.

“I told [LePage] when we started working together, I’m going to come up with a strategy, but it’s going to be so bizarre and unusual,” Littlefield said. “We’re either going to win, or we’re going to get crushed.”

LePage went on to win the general election with 38 percent of the vote in a four-way field, taking 14 of 16 counties and becoming the first Republican Maine governor elected since 1990.

For his work on the campaign, Littlefield won a Pollie Award from the American Association of Political Consultants.

It’s a long jump from mayor of Waterville to governor of the entire state, though. LePage had some trouble out of the gate — several staff problems, a minor scandal when he hired his daughter to a $41,000 per year position. The new legislature was still getting used to the new normal as well.

Hobbins said it “took a while for everyone to get their sea legs.”

Maine had not had a Republican governor since 1994, and it had not seen a Republican House since 1974. Everyone had to relearn the art of compromise, from the Republicans, who weren’t used to leading, to the Democrats, who weren’t used to being in the minority.

And there was LePage, who came in with no experience navigating the bicameral legislature. His touted tax cuts were part of a budget that needed approval from Democrats as well.

“We passed a two-thirds budget, and we were crossing our fingers that he wouldn’t veto it,” Hobbins said. “It could have been much worse, but we had a very responsible committee that worked hard and came up with a balanced approach.”

But old habits die hard. LePage scours budgets for business fees to lower and spending to cut, no matter how small.

For example, when LePage thought a $75 fee for temporary restaurant licenses was too high, he sent the entire bill that contained it back to the state legislature — House and Senate — where it had passed unanimously. The fee came back $50 lower.

He’ll talk at length about the amount of red tape he’s nixed — like a regulation prohibiting boats from putting their lobster traps on docks because the shadows cast by the cages allegedly killed seaweed. LePage commissioned a study proving the traps didn’t, in fact, kill seaweed.

Small but tangible victories for a man whose pocket has weighed heavy with a 50-cent piece since 1960.

“Most of state government is really an attitude,” LePage said. “We can do anything we want as American people if we sit down, put the plan out and move forward.”

 
By Everette Hatcher III | Tagged , , , , | Comments (0)

Mike Ross: This debt deal “forces touch decisions to reduce our national debt”

August 2, 2011 – 8:14 am

Above you will see the liberal spin on what has happened and it is that the Republicans won!!! However, no serious cuts were made.

“Thus, this deal achieves far too little by way of spending cuts, keeps open the possibility of new taxes, and hikes the debt ceiling substantially — all of which constitutes a clear and predictable kicking of the can past the November, 2012 elections… In related news, credit ratings agencies have signaled that that a small deal — which this is — is unlikely avoid a downgrade of U.S. Treasury securities. If a ratings downgrade actually occurs, the negative economic fallout will interrupt this deal’s framework of achieving spending cuts — by forcing future lawmakers to renege on the cuts. Today’s failure to deliver deeper spending cuts will then be correctly viewed as the missed opportunity that it is“

Jagadeesh Gokhale is senior fellow at the Cato Institute, member of the Social Security Advisory Board, and author of Social Security: A Fresh Look at Reform Alternatives, by the University of Chicago Press.

________________________________

The words above are very important. The markets were looking for a deal that would turn us away from the path of Greece, but we did not get it.

Basically President Obama if he had got everything he wanted would have raised our debt under his 10 yr plan from 14 to 23 trillion. Under this plan we go to 20 trillion. How can I get excited about a 3 trillion cut over 10 years when the budget deficit this year alone will be 1.5 to 1.7 trillion?

Now let’s look at the response of Democrat Mike Ross (retiring representative from Arkansas):

1. “At last, cooler heads prevailed and we were able to pass a bipartisan agreement that secures America’s financial standing in the world..”

How can it secure “America’s financial standing in the world” if we are heading to Greece with 20 trillion in debt?

2. “forces tough decisions to reduce our national debt”

Nothing gets cut now and this year’s budget of 3.8 trillion gets 22 billion cuts in projected increases. 

3. “..and makes meaningful spending cuts that protect seniors’ Social Security and Medicare benefits.”

Where does it do anything like that?

4. “While this bill is a step in the right direction…”

We are still heading toward Greece!!

5. “…we still have a lot of work to do to get this nation’s fiscal house back in order.”

I haven’t seen any work yet on it.

6. “As a fiscal conservative, I will continue to be a moderating voice in this debate, bringing everyone to the table as we find commonsense ideas that help us return to the days of a balanced budget and a stronger economy.”

You are not a fiscal conservative and you let Obamacare out of committe. Way to go!! You could have killed it and now it will kill our businesses.

7. “This entire debate has demonstrated just how dangerous partisan bickering has become.”

The Tea Party was the only sane group that knows that we are heading to Greece.

8. “For months now, both sides have played political games with this issue, catering to their own respective extremes, and bringing our economy to the brink of a financial crisis.”

Who brought this country to financial crisis? It was not the Tea Party, but it was the liberals in Congress who are addicted to overspending.

9. “It’s become clear that we need more centrist members of Congress who are willing to reach across the aisle, compromise and work together.”

If Mike Ross is a centrist member of Congress then we are in big trouble. Heading to Greece will not be avoided!!

10. “This nation needs bipartisan, long-term solutions if we are ever going to truly solve our fiscal crisis.”

We don’t need bipartisan solutions if they are going to look like this debt deal that leads us to Greece!!!

11. “Job creators and the American people need the certainty of a strong, stable economy and it’s our job to work together and make that happen as soon as possible.”

“As soon as possible?” This budget deal would not get us anywhere close to the balanced budget in the next decade. It is classic kicking the can down the road.

_______________________________________

This debt deal stinks. It is a failure of leadership and resolve.

The Debt Deal: Failures of Leadership and Resolve

by Jagadeesh Gokhale

Jagadeesh Gokhale is senior fellow at the Cato Institute, member of the Social Security Advisory Board, and author of Social Security: A Fresh Look at Reform Alternatives, by the University of Chicago Press.

Added to cato.org on August 1, 2011

This article appeared on Cato.org on August 1, 2011.

The President and leaders in Congress have basically thrown in the towel.

Democrats are unwilling to endure the political risks of agreeing to sorely needed spending cuts. House Republicans are holding out against revenue increases. The final deal announced Sunday includes just $1 trillion in cuts to discretionary spending, with an increase in the debt limit sufficient to carry through next year. Thus, this deal achieves far too little by way of spending cuts, keeps open the possibility of new taxes, and hikes the debt ceiling substantially — all of which constitutes a clear and predictable kicking of the can past the November, 2012 elections.

The deal, therefore, does not reduce the economic uncertainty that is keeping the country mired in recession. The major deficit drivers — Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security — are not addressed. That task is dispatched to a special committee of 12 senators and House members to be convened by congressional leaders. The joint committee is to report back by November 23, 2011 on further deficit reduction measures. But its members may be unable to agree on sensible deficit-cutting measures, or its recommendations may be voted down by Congress. If that happens, deficit reduction will be triggered through automatic and haphazard cuts to discretionary programs — but Social Security, Medicaid, defense, veterans programs, and civilian and military pay will remain walled off. That leaves a lot of red ink completely off the negotiating table, and spending on two out of the three major deficit drivers will continue to escalate.

Jagadeesh Gokhale is senior fellow at the Cato Institute, member of the Social Security Advisory Board, and author of Social Security: A Fresh Look at Reform Alternatives, by the University of Chicago Press.

 

More by Jagadeesh Gokhale

In related news, credit ratings agencies have signaled that that a small deal — which this is — is unlikely avoid a downgrade of U.S. Treasury securities. If a ratings downgrade actually occurs, the negative economic fallout will interrupt this deal’s framework of achieving spending cuts — by forcing future lawmakers to renege on the cuts. Today’s failure to deliver deeper spending cuts will then be correctly viewed as the missed opportunity that it is.

The media is calling this deal a victory for Republicans, especially for the Tea Party. How so? None of the targets of the House Republicans’ Cut, Cap, and Balance legislation is included in it. It does not remove tax increases from consideration by the new joint committee. Republicans also were not able to push through their preferred shorter-term increase in the debt limit to hamper President Obama’s re-election effort. Finally, although the deal schedules a vote on the Balanced Budget Amendment after October, 2011, nothing — not even a future debt-limit increase — is contingent upon it. Thus, a crucial element of guaranteeing fiscal discipline beyond 2021 has been bargained away.

The deficit cutting debate will now be pushed under the rug until the joint committee concludes its deliberations. That committee is charged with recommending deficit reduction to the tune of only $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years. As I’ve noted elsewhere, even cuts of $4 trillion over 10 years that were under consideration earlier would be insufficient to prevent the federal government’s fiscal condition from worsening by 2021.

The “Skirmish on the Precipice” that we just witnessed yields little by way of long-term fiscal discipline, contrary to the claims of the Obama administration and congressional leaders. We seem trapped in a particularly vexing Catch-22: the current Congress is bound to pay the bills incurred by past Congresses, but it is unable to bind future Congresses to rules that would guarantee continued fiscal discipline.

It’s been a frustrating two months watching politicians alternately squirm and spin only to achieve a damp squib of a deal. But that frustration will pale to insignificance when all of us are reeling in the vortex of a continuing economic decline, from which this deal appears unlikely to rescue us. The President is being excoriated for failing to lead. But if this deal is enacted, conservatives would also deserve some blame for a failure of resolve — to win more concessions on spending cuts and substantively redirect the nation’s wayward fiscal course.

By Everette Hatcher III | Also posted in Cato Institute | Tagged , , , , | Comments (0)

Pete de Freitas of Echo and the Bunnymen is a member of the “27 club” (Part 9)

August 2, 2011 – 6:53 am

Amy Winehouse died last week and she joined the “27 club.” Pete de Freitas of Echo and the Bunnymen is also a member of the “27 Club.” This is group of rockers that have died at age 27.

A tribute to the amazing drummer of one of our biggest influences, Echo & The Bunnymen. We figured this would be a nice tribute to put on here.

Pete de Freitas
1961-1989

Echo & the Bunnymen perform “Killing Moon” on the Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson. Aired July 12, 2006

Echo & the Bunnymen – Rescue / Never Stop – 18 July 1983 (4 of 7)

Perhaps the only moderately optimistic thing one can say about the untimely death of the underrated drummer of Echo and the Bunnymen throughout their formative years and greatest successes is that he never had to endure the reunion period -- which persists to this day. Of course, that is grasping at straws. Peter de Freitas was a rock-steady element in a difficult-to-classify rock group, more famous in the U.S. for their look than for their sounds, which is a pity. Overshadowed by temperamental singer Ian McCulloch and ingenious guitarist Will Sergeant, de Freitas was a journeyman flanked by a loudmouth and a visionary. But he proved the old maxim that a band can't be great without a great drummer (he should know, Echo's original drummer was a machine). He died in a motorcycle crash on June 14, 1989. (AP Photo)

Larger image

AP Photo

Perhaps the only moderately optimistic thing one can say about the untimely death of the underrated drummer of Echo and the Bunnymen throughout their formative years and greatest successes is that he never had to endure the reunion period — which persists to this day. Of course, that is grasping at straws. Peter de Freitas was a rock-steady element in a difficult-to-classify rock group, more famous in the U.S. for their look than for their sounds, which is a pity. Overshadowed by temperamental singer Ian McCulloch and ingenious guitarist Will Sergeant, de Freitas was a journeyman flanked by a loudmouth and a visionary. But he proved the old maxim that a band can’t be great without a great drummer (he should know, Echo’s original drummer was a machine). He died in a motorcycle crash on June 14, 1989.

_______________________

Pete de Freitas: The Human Metronome behind Echo & the Bunnymen

November 16th, 2009 → 6:58 pm @ admin

0

 
Pete de Freitas: The Human Metronome behind Echo & the Bunnymen

 

Pete de Freitas (“Mad Louis,” “Boomerang Pete”)

Born: August 2, 1961, in Port of Spain, Trinidad & Tobago
Died: June 14, 1989, in England
Bands: Echo & the Bunnymen, The Sex Gods

Pete was recruited as a replacement to Echo and the Bunnymen’s drum machine. De Freitas proved quickly that he was much more than an average drummer. Opting for tribal rhythms and shunning excessive cymbal use, de Freitas established himself as an original rock drummer in the reverb-drenched eighties music scene. He was the backbone of Crocodiles, Porcupine, Heaven Up Here, and the brush-laden Ocean Rain.

In early 1986, Pete de Freitas left for New Orleans where he set a new record in rock ‘n’ excess. He consumed vast quantities of LSD, molly, cocaine, and booze while pretending to create music with his new band The Sex Gods. Instead of creation it was a macabre display of destruction. De Freitas totaled two cars, two motorcycles, and nearly himself. He stayed manically awake for eighteen days straight. The party ended when his money ran out and his compadres-in-excess drifted home. Pete de Freitas returned to Liverpool like a burnt-out shell and asked for a second chance. The Bunnymen took him back in, albeit on a salary, but the Bunnymen never found the way back to its creative glory (not just because of Pete). Vocalist Mac left and the three started recording with a new singer. In 1989, Pete de Freitas died on his Dukati motorcycle on the way to the studio in a head-on accident with a car.

_________________________________

What is the Purpose of Your Life?

Discovering Your Purpose In Life

Like most people, you may have wondered why you are here on Earth. Do you think your existence is an accident or are you here for a reason? Is there some purpose for your life? According to the Bible, you are not a mistake and you were created by God for a reason.

Created For A Reason

The main reason God created you is to make you part of His eternal plan (Romans 8:28-29). God wants us to be in Heaven with Him and to tell people about Him. His plan is for every person to be saved from their sin and Hell and to spend eternity with Him (2 Peter 3:9). Unfortunately, some people choose to live their own way and abandon God’s plan for their life (Proverbs 14:12).

What Are You Living For?

Most people seem to believe that the main purpose of life is enjoyment and personal fulfillment. Are you living for things such as money, fame, success, fun, possessions and power? The wise King Solomon accomplished many great things and had all that anyone could desire, yet described it all as meaningless (Ecclesiastes 1:2). How about you? Are you more consumed with the pleasures of life than what happens to your soul when you die? The Bible says “For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul” (Mark 8:36)?

Life Is Short Compared To Eternity

Hopefully, you would agree that what happens to you eternally is far more important than what happens to you on Earth. Think about the word eternity. That is far beyond trillions and trillions times longer than our earthly life. It is so hard to even comprehend that concept because it never ends. You may have a great life or a terrible life on Earth, but either way it will come to an end someday. Then, you will spend everlasting life in either Heaven or Hell (Matthew 25:46). Please think carefully about where you will go after you die as it can happen any day.

The Problem

Too many people assume they will go to Heaven when they die based on their own concept of God. The reason why everybody can’t spend eternity in Heaven is because sin separates people from God (Isaiah 59:2). You have rebelled against God and committed a sin every time you broke one of God’s commandments by stealing something, telling a lie, hating somebody, disobeying your parents, having a lustful thought, or countless other things. God hates sin and will severely judge each and every one of your sins. Just being a good person or believing in God won’t erase your sin either. The Bible says that “the wages of sin is death” (Romans 6:23).

The Good News

The good news is that no matter how severe your sins are, God made a way for you to be forgiven and be declared innocent on judgment day. “But God demonstrates His own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 5:8). Being a good person or being religious won’t rescue you from your sin. “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith–and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God–not by works, so that no one can boast.” (Ephesians 2:8-9) The word grace means “undeserved favor”. Your sin separated you from a perfect and sinless God, but Jesus died on the cross to pay for your sins and later rose back to life (Matthew 28:5-6) so you can have everlasting life in Heaven. Even though none of us deserve Heaven, God was kind enough to make a way for us.

Receiving Forgiveness

It is not enough to just believe that Jesus died for your sins. You must personally trust in Jesus to save you from the penalty of your sin (Romans 8:1-4). You must also be willing to repent (turn from) your sin (Luke 13:5) and follow Jesus as Lord of your life (Romans 10:9-10). Doing this mends your broken relationship with God and allows you access into Heaven.

Live For God

You were created to know God and to live for Him. That is why you exist. Only then does your life have the meaning and purpose God intended for you. “So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God” (1 Corinthians 10:31). To live your life for the glory of God means that you will love, obey, worship, please, and trust Him. This should not be a burden, but a pleasure because of what He means to you.

The Choice Is Yours

You never know how much time you have left on this Earth and nothing is more important than where you spend eternity. Hopefully, you will decide to follow Jesus so your life can be used to glorify God. Please make this choice right away, because after you die it will be too late.

Yes, I would like to know how I can become a follower of Christ
No thanks, I prefer to live life my own way

By Everette Hatcher III | Comments (0)

Arthur Brooks on Debt Ceiling

August 1, 2011 – 1:45 pm

I got a lot of useful information out of this article from the Wall Street Wall Street Journal  The Debt Ceiling ‘Skirmish‘  

 

MONDAY, JULY 25, 2011

The Debt Ceiling ‘Skirmish’

 
 
We couldn’t help but be impressed with a column by Arthur C. Brooks, President of the American Enterprise Institute which is appearing in the Wall Street Journal.   The column, The Debt Ceiling and the Pursuit of Happiness, probably won’t appear in the local daily but it sure spells out the reality of the current fight and what is at stake.   With that said we suggest the following is mandatory reading for our conservative and liberal friends:
_________________________

“The battle over the debt ceiling is only the latest skirmish in what promises to be an ongoing, exhausting war over budget issues. Americans can be forgiven for seeing the whole business as petty, selfish and tiresome. Conservatives in particular are beginning to worry that public patience will wear thin over their insistence that our nation’s government-spending problem must be remedied through spending cuts, not by raising more revenues.

But before they succumb to too much caution, budget reformers need to remember three things. First, this is not a political fight between Republicans and Democrats; it is a fight against 50-year trends toward statism. Second, it is a moral fight, not an economic one. Third, this is not a fight that anyone can win in the 15 months from now to the presidential election. It will take hard work for at least a decade.Consider a few facts. The Bureau of Economic Analysis tells us that total government spending at all levels has risen to 37% of gross domestic product today from 27% in 1960—and is set to reach 50% by 2038.

The Tax Foundation reports that between 1986 and 2008, the share of federal income taxes paid by the top 5% of earners has risen to 59% from 43%. Between 1986 and 2009, the percentage of Americans who pay zero or negative federal income taxes has increased to 51% from 18.5%. And all this is accompanied by an increase in our national debt to 100% of GDP today from 42% in 1980.

Where will it all lead? Some despairing souls have concluded there are really only two scenarios. In one, we finally hit a tipping point where so few people actually pay for their share of the growing government that a majority become completely invested in the social welfare state, which stabilizes at some very high level of taxation and government social spending. (Think Sweden.)

In the other scenario, our welfare state slowly collapses under its weight, and we get some kind of permanent austerity after the rest of the world finally comprehends the depth of our national spending disorder and stops lending us money at low interest rates. (Think Greece.)

In other words: Heads, the statists win; tails, we all lose.

Anyone who seeks to provide serious national political leadership today—those elected in 2010 or who seek national office in 2012—owe Americans a plan to escape having to make this choice. We need tectonic changes, not minor fiddling.

Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R., Wis.) budget plan is the kind of model necessary. But structural change will only succeed if it’s accompanied by a moral argument—an unabashed cultural defense of the free enterprise system that helps Americans remember why they love their country and its exceptional culture.

America’s Founders knew the importance of moral language, which is why they asserted our unalienable right to the pursuit of happiness, not to the possession of property. Similarly, Adam Smith, the father of free-market economics, had a philosophy that transcended the mere wealth of nations. His greatest book was “The Theory of Moral Sentiments,” a defense of a culture that could support true freedom and provide the greatest life satisfaction.

Yet today, it is progressives, not free marketeers, who use the language of morality. President Obama was not elected because of his plans about the taxation of repatriated profits, or even his ambition to reform health care. He was elected largely on the basis of language about hope and change, and a “fairer” America.

The irony is that statists have a more materialistic philosophy than free-enterprise advocates. Progressive solutions to cultural problems always involve the tools of income redistribution, and call it “social justice.”

Free-enterprise advocates, on the other hand, speak privately about freedom and opportunity for everybody—including the poor. Most support a limited safety net, but also believe that succeeding on our merits, doing something meaningful, and having responsibility for our own affairs are what give us the best life. Sadly, in public, they always seem stuck in the language of economic efficiency.

The result is that year after year we slip further down the redistributionist road, dissatisfied with the growing welfare state, but with no morally satisfying arguments to make a change that entails any personal sacrifice.

Examples are all around us. It is hard to find anyone who likes our nation’s current health-care policies. But do you seriously expect grandma to sit idly by and let Republicans experiment with her Medicare coverage so her great-grandchildren can get better treatment for carried interest? Not a chance.

If reformers want Americans to embrace real change, every policy proposal must be framed in terms of self-realization, meritocratic fairness and the promise of a better future. Why do we want to lower taxes for entrepreneurs? Because we believe in earned success. Why do we care about economic growth? To make individual opportunity possible, not simply to increase wealth. Why do we need entitlement reform? Because it is wrong to steal from our children.

History shows that big moral struggles can be won, but only when they are seen as decade-long fights and not just as a way to prevail in the next election. Welfare reform was first proposed in 1984 and regarded popularly as a nonstarter. Twelve years of hard work by scholars at my own institution and others helped make it a mainstream idea (signed into law by a Democratic president) and perhaps the best policy for helping the poor to escape poverty in our nation’s history. Political consultants would have abandoned welfare reform as unworkably audacious and politically suicidal. Real leaders understood that its moral importance transcended short-term politics.

No one deserves our political support today unless he or she is willing to work for as long as it takes to win the moral fight to steer our nation back toward enterprise and self-governance. This fight will not be easy or politically safe. But it will be a happy one: to share the values that make us proud to be Americans.”

Mr. Brooks is president of the American Enterprise Institute and author of “The Battle: How the Fight Between Free Enterprise and Big Government Will Shape America’s Future” (Basic Books, 2010).

By Everette Hatcher III | Also posted in President Obama, spending out of control | Tagged , , , , | Comments (0)

Ron “Pigpen” McKernan of the Grateful Dead is a member of “27 Club” because of alcohol (Part 8)

August 1, 2011 – 9:25 am

cc

‘Janis Joplin’ 2/5 from True Hollywood Story (Janis was having affair with Pigpen)

Jerry Garcia (guitar, vocals), Ron “Pigpen” McKernan (vocals, harmonica), Bob Weir (guitar, vocals), Phil Lesh (bass), Mickey Hart (drums), Bill Kreutzman (drums).

Grateful Dead
“Don’t Ease Me In”
Live @ Canadian National Exhibition Hall
Toronto, CA
June 27th, 1970

Grateful Dead Documentary – Can’t Take it With You – Pt 1

You have to drink a lot to develop cirrhosis at the age of 27. And unfortunately, singer and keyboard player McKernan, one of the founders of the Grateful Dead, drank a lot. Before his death, Pigpen was the definitive embodiment of the original, slapdash, wasted blues incarnation of the Dead, before psychedelia and experimental proficiency became their defining element. He helped form the group, but was surpassed in musical ability by later recruits. Even before he died, he represented a throwback to "the way things used to be" for fans to argue over — not unlike his fellow 27 clubber Brian Jones was for the Rolling Stones. (AP Photo)

Larger image

AP Photo

You have to drink a lot to develop cirrhosis at the age of 27. And unfortunately, singer and keyboard player McKernan, one of the founders of the Grateful Dead, drank a lot. Before his death, Pigpen was the definitive embodiment of the original, slapdash, wasted blues incarnation of the Dead, before psychedelia and experimental proficiency became their defining element. He helped form the group, but was surpassed in musical ability by later recruits. Even before he died, he represented a throwback to “the way things used to be” for fans to argue over — not unlike his fellow 27 clubber Brian Jones was for the Rolling Stones.

__________________________________

Amy Winehouse and the ‘Forever 27 Club’

Saturday, the first news headline I saw was:  “Amy Winehouse found dead at 27”.  For some reason, it felt a little more crippling that it was supposed to.

“It was a long-time coming”, is what most say (someone won an iPod by predicting the date on the website whenwillamywinehousedie.com) and maybe it was a long-time coming, but it doesn’t excuse the fact that however you look at it, the music industry has lost a really good singer and one of the most influential artists of the late part of this decade;  Lost a voice that embodied what Motown legends were made of;  And essentially, if you believe in the oddidy of the so-called Forever 27 Club – we lost another talented musician to the club of dead rock stars — those that never lived to see 28.  An age we cautiously outgrow, thinking of their fated (and un-fated) deaths at least once during the age of our own 27th year of life.

Essentially speaking, “27” seems to be rock and roll’s most unlucky number.  Sure there are those who have passed at this age due to overdoeses and drug addictions and battles with depression,  it’s the age that as we all know now took Kurt Cobain, Janis Joplin, Jimi Hendrix, Jim Morrison and now the second female in the club, Amy Winehouse.

There are more members of the Forever 27 Club;  some died because of medical conditions, car accidents and just plain, weird occurrences, and tragedies.  Any way you look at it, it is weird that so many musicians can’t seem to make it to the age of 28.  Other members of the Forever 27 Club include:  Ron “Pigpen” McKernan of the Grateful Dead, Brian Jones of the Rolling Stones, Chris Bell of Big Star, even Robert Johnson a famous blues musician died at 27, cited for unknown reasons.

The creepiness of the amount of rock stars that die at this age poses the question, what about the age of 27 has put so many rock stars into the ground?  Is it behavior we expect from them (abusing drugs and alcohol, making bad decisions, driving drunk, getting on small planes?).  Is 27 an exceptionally hard age to live through when you are that famous (mine was a good year, but I am not famous)?  Or is it a question of just wanting more and more and more.  Twenty-seven is an age, after all that is old enough to be an adult, but still not old enough to understand the world. Although I am not sure that has happened to me yet, and I am 31.

For Amy Winehouse, the tragedy of being part of the Forever 27 Club means not having to slide into a vauge mediocre music choices to keep up with the wretched”singers” who would outsell her lovely, husky sound with computer generated vocals and gyrated movements with snakes and backup dancers.

In her death, she has left us with a small collection of music to take from — all beautiful, all tragic and all for us to keep our arms tight around.  From her two Cd’s she inspired a sound that made music a little better, if only for a little while.  Her sound brought out the funk and beat of a broken heart in a time when hipster, gothic, hang-yourself love songs were topping the charts, paving the way for singers like Adele, Cee Lo Green and Bruno Mars to get a little funky with broken hearts.

You can hear her fate in the song that made her a household name, “Rehab,” a smart, self-aware song about her struggle with going to get help for drinking, drugs and depression.  A fight she would essentially lose.

Winehouse sounded wise and wounded beyond her years. And like Cobain, Hendrix and Joplin, Amy Winehouse’s music had a sense of strength and purpose that she — and they — failed to summon in their own lives.

I hope when I get to the pearly gates one day, I am greeted by the “Forever 27’s”, heaven’s best band ever.  Well, either them…or the Beatles.

_________________________________

Members of the Grateful Dead are pictured in this 1969 photo. After thirty years of making music, the Grateful Dead, once the house band of the 1960s counterculture, is breaking up. The move came four months after the death of its founder and guiding spirit, Jerry Garcia. From left in the back row are, Tom Constanten, Bob Weir, Bill Kreutzman, Ron "Pigpen" McKernan, and Phil Lesh. Jerry Garcia, left, and Mickey Hart, right, are in the front row. (AP Photo) // The ‘Forever 27’ Club: Rock stars dead at 27 (AP Photo)

Larger image

AP Photo

Members of the Grateful Dead are pictured in this 1969 photo. After thirty years of making music, the Grateful Dead, once the house band of the 1960s counterculture, is breaking up. The move came four months after the death of its founder and guiding spirit, Jerry Garcia. From left in the back row are, Tom Constanten, Bob Weir, Bill Kreutzman, Ron “Pigpen” McKernan, and Phil Lesh. Jerry Garcia, left, and Mickey Hart, right, are in the front row. (AP Photo)

The keyboardist, singer and harmonica player from The Grateful Dead died in 1973 from a stomach hemorrhage as a result of years of heavy drinking.

__________________________________

Musician Barry McGuire’s Testimony: Eve of Destruction

When I was a little boy, my grandmother told me something I’ve never forgotten. I was probably about five, maybe six years old. She used to take care of me during the day when my mom worked. One day she said to me, ‘you know, Barry, one day when you grow up, you’re gonna know the truth, and the truth is gonna set you free.’ Now, I didn’t know that came out of the Bible. I didn’t even know there was a Bible. I was just a little kid. My grandmother told me that. And I knew she loved me, and boy, I knew I loved her. And when I grew up, sure enough, I wanted to be free. I mean who doesn’t want to be free? And certainly, a lie has never set anyone free. So if anything was gonna set me free, it had to be the truth.

Eve of Destruction was written by 19-year-old songwriter P. F. Sloan in 1965 and eventually became Barry McGuire’s one and only big Billboard chart hit song.

______________________________

And along came the 60s. And boy, I was the right age at the right time in the wrong place, you might say. And hey, I wanted to be free. Boy, I sang ‘Eve of Destruction’ lookin’ to be free. I went to Broadway. I did a show on Broadway called HAIR. I played the male lead in the original Broadway cast, lookin’ to be free. And the very lifestyle that we were promoting was killing us all. I looked around me I saw my friends, one, two, three at a time goin’ down: drug overdose, suicide, sexually transmitted diseases.

So I left Broadway, I came back out to California. And I was livin’ with a friend of mine, Denny Doherty, up on the Appian Way. And he used to joke and tease me, ’cause I was still lookin’ for truth, and every time a new teacher or sage or somebody, Meyer Baba, Sai Baba, Hadji Baba, any Baba would do, I mean I was down there in the front row, ya know, ‘Humna Baba, lay the truth on me, man!’ I was hummin’ and bobbin’ and goin’ for it. And Denny says, ‘Ah, you belong to the Guru of the Month Club.’ I mean, anybody, I didn’t care. If they had a word, I was down there tryin’ to learn the truth. And they said a lot of things that were true, but I just couldn’t somehow get it right inside of me.

And I was just about to give up, and one day I went over to a friend’s house, Eric Hord. He used to be the lead guitar player for The Mamas and Papas, and he always had a big bowl of marijuana under his coffee table. And man, I had this bowl out that morning; I had three papers glued together. I figured he’s only gonna lay one joint on me, so I’ll make the biggest one I can roll. And I look down on this particular day, there’s a little paper back book layin’ on the table next to the grass, and it’s called Good News for Modern Man. And I thought, ‘Hey, I’m a modern man. I could use some good news.’ I mean, everybody was dyin’ all around me. So I took the book home with me, didn’t know what it was. I got by myself, opened it up, and right on the first flyleaf page in the book it says, ‘The New Testament in Modern English.’ I got so angry. ‘Ah, look at this! Them Jesus Freaks, man! They’re diguisin’ the Bible!’ Threw it on the floor, I didn’t wanna read the Bible! Give me a break! And it laid there for days. I was hopin’ someone would come along and throw it away. I didn’t wanna throw it away, ’cause I knew what it was, the Bible, and just in case, you don’t wanna be responsible. Who knows? But it laid there for days, weeks, and months actually. I mean, when somethin’ hit the floor in my house; the next person to pick it up was an archaeologist. I mean, that was some future dig.

And I was there one day by myself. And there this little book somehow kept surfacing above the trash. And the wind was blowing through the window catching the pages. It was flickin’ its pages, flick, flick, flick, flick, flick. ‘Read me!’ it said to me. And truthfully, just out of bored, sarcastic curiosity, I picked up The Life and Times of Jesus Christ. And for the first time in my life, I stopped looking at Christians; I stopped looking at denominations, organizations, Catholics, Protestants, ya know, all this stuff that goes on in His name. And I took a look at Him, examined what He had to say. How He treated His personal friends. What He had to say to the people in the street, the alcoholics, the prostitutes, the homosexuals, the thieves, liars, and robbers. What he had to say about the military people, the political leaders, and the spiritual leaders (which is about the scariest thing he had to say to anybody). How He treated the little children when they came around. And everything that Jesus had to say, as I put it to the test against what I knew to be true through my own life experience, I couldn’t find anything wrong with His words. There’s no double meaning, no hidden agenda. It was all out front. And then He said thirteen words that changed my life, because I saw this was the answer to my personal eve of destruction. He said, ‘Love God with all your heart, and love your neighbor as your self.’

How simple can it get? And I realized that if all of us in the whole world lived according to those two simple instructions — I don’t care what your concept of God is, you could be a Buddhist, you could be B’hai, you could be, ya know, whatever it is, Christian, just your concept of God — love God with all your heart and love your neighbor as your self, and our world would change. How simple can it get? We wouldn’t need a police force anymore, and we wouldn’t need armies and navies and prisons and welfare systems. We wouldn’t need lawyers and politicians. Two simple pieces of instruction: Love God with all my heart, and love my neighbor as my self.

And I wanted to be like Jesus. I thought, ‘Man, this is my guy!’ But I didn’t wanna be a Christian, see. I wanted to be like Him, but I didn’t wanna be like all them. I thought if I said yes to Jesus I’d have to get a powder blue leisure suit — remember those? — White shoes, ya know, walk around smilin’ a lot. I couldn’t do that.

But then I wrestled with it for nearly a year. And one day I was up just off Mulholland Drive in Stone Canyon in the Hollywood Hills. And I’m bangin’ my head on the wall, my friends are all smokin’ dope, eating peyote, psilocybin, ya know, drinkin’ champagne and orange juice. And I’m over in the corner; I can’t have fun anymore. See, once you’ve been busted by the truth, you’ve been busted. You can’t fake it anymore. You can’t go around sayin’, ‘Well, who really knows?’ ‘Cause you really know. You don’t wanna know. But I knew. Jesus is the Lamb of God. His death paid my karmic debt. See, I had a debt I couldn’t pay. I had debt I could not pay. I mean, I’m a murderer, I’m a liar, I’m a thief, I’m everything you’re not supposed to be. I did it all. One time I was doing a newspaper interview, and the reporter said, ‘Well, what did you do?’ I said, ‘Well, ya know the Ten Commandments?’ He said, ‘Yes.’ I said, ‘I broke ’em. All of ’em. A lot.’

That’s what I did. And that’s what we all did. And there has to be justice. How could God not allow justice to be? He couldn’t just arbitrarily say, ‘that’s okay, Barry. You’re forgiven.’ And Jesus said, ‘I will go. I will satisfy the demands of justice on his behalf.’ And now the Bible says if I should stumble, if I should sin, it says God is faithful and just. You know what that justice cost? It cost Jesus’ life. And He did that for me, He did that for you, He did that for every person that’s gonna ever hear these words. So that I could be forgiven and truly, truly be free. That happened in 1971. I fell on my face on the floor of that house in Stone Canyon. I said, ‘God, I don’t know why, how; if I wake up alive tomorrow I’ll follow You wherever You lead me.’ And within a week I was on a Greyhound bus out of Hollywood, and I’ve never looked back, except in awe and wonder at how He revealed Himself to me in my state of mind at that time.”

—

If you feel that your life feels incomplete or unsatisfying, please follow this link:
What is purpose of life?

By Everette Hatcher III | Comments (0)

What can we learn from Woody Allen Films?

August 1, 2011 – 6:30 am

Looking at the (sometimes skewed) morality of Woody Allen’s best films.

In the late ’60s, Woody Allen left the world of stand-up comedy behind for the movies. Since then, he’s become one of American cinema’s most celebrated filmmakers. Sure, he’s had his stinkers and his private life hasn’t been without controversy. But he’s also crafted some of Hollywood’s most thought-provoking comedies. Philosophical, self-deprecating and always more than a tad pessimistic, Allen adds another title to his oeuvre this Friday with Midnight in Paris. Whether it will be remembered as one of his greatest or another flop is too early to say, but its release gives us a chance to look back at some of his most indispensable works.

Love and Death (1975)

Allen’s Love and Death owes a lot to Tolstoy’s War and Peace and the films of Swedish director Ingmar Bergman. Death himself even makes an appearance, recalling the existential dread of Bergman’s The Seventh Seal. But despite the movie’s many highbrow allusions, Allen is more concerned with simply having a good time. Gags and one-liners abound, making it, if not a comic masterpiece, a pretty good way to spend an hour and a half.

Annie Hall (1977)

Like Love and Death, this Oscar winner paired Allen and Diane Keaton as a couple. But unlike Love and Death, it’s less concerned with throw-away gags. Instead, Allen uses humor to explore the complicated nature of relationships and the difficulties of love and communication. And of course, there’s also his trademark pessimism. The film begins with a joke about two women on vacation in the Catskills. One says to the other, “Boy, the food in this place is terrible,” and the other replies, “Yeah I know, and such small portions.” Allen’s character, Alvy Singer, goes on to say, “That’s essentially how I feel about life. Full of loneliness and misery and suffering and unhappiness—and it’s all over much too quickly.” In the end, Alvy’s salvation lies in art, for only there can he give life the happy ending it can’t have otherwise.

Hannah and Her Sisters (1986)

Allen continues the art-as-salvation theme in Hannah and Her Sisters, an ensemble drama about family and infidelity. The film tells three stories, one of which stars Allen as a hypochondriac named Mickey. Terrified of death, Mickey begins a search for meaning that takes him first to Catholicism and then the Hare Krishna movement. But it’s in a darkened movie theater playing the Marx Brothers’ Duck Soup that he finds all the meaning he needs to face life. From a Christian perspective, this is a far from ideal conclusion—and yet, it’s not without an element of truth. The bulk of the Bible is historical narrative, not a list of rules, and Christ often used stories to communicate His message. In this, and every other movie where Allen finds life’s ultimate answers in art, we can disagree—but only partly.

Crimes and Misdemeanors (1989) and Match Point (2005)

The sanctity of art plays a role in Crimes and Misdemeanors, but it’s a minor one compared to Allen’s interest in the human conscience. Does God exist, his characters wonder, and if He doesn’t, can there still be objective morality? His characters have asked these questions before, but never have the stakes been so high as when Judah Rosenthal (Martin Landau), a prominent New York ophthalmologist, finds his life turned upside by an act of violence he’s responsible for. In the aftermath, he’s plagued by guilt but still wonders if a guilty conscience is such a high price to pay for keeping his good name. His transformation as he struggles with this question is chilling to watch.

The same issue is at the heart of Match Point, Allen’s first movie set outside America. The particulars are different, but its trajectory is the same. When Chris Wilton (Jonathan Rhys Meyers) commits murder to preserve his status and good reputation, we wait for him to be caught. But Allen subverts our expectations again, as in Crimes and Misdemeanors—not because he condones murder, but to illustrate his belief that, if there’s no God, life is a crap shoot. Maybe you’ll get caught, maybe you won’t, but either way you’ll have to live with what you’ve done. In both films, he shows more pointedly than most other American filmmakers what hell on earth must look like.

Vicky Cristina Barcelona (2008)

The human conscience is also the focus of Allen’s Vicky Cristina Barcelona, though in a relatively smaller way. He’s also less concerned with the existence of God, but objective morality is still a question lingering in the back of his mind. As the two friends, Vicky (Rebecca Hall) and Cristina (Scarlett Johansson) consider their entanglement with the bohemian Spanish artist, Juan Antonio (Javier Bardem), they’re forced to re-examine the rules they each live by. Even though the movie unquestionably favors moral relativism, the character of Cristina, who was once so proud of her “liberated” spirit, comes away from her search for meaning with a more moral perspective. No longer content to live according to Juan Antonio’s eat-drink-and-be-merry philosophy, she ends her time in Spain determined to find “something else.” That something else isn’t likely to be conventional morality, but neither is it unrestrained passion. While still denying that life has any inherent meaning, Allen forces us to consider whether conventional morality is really so stifling after all.

Overall, Woody Allen can’t be called anything close to a Christian (or even a moral) filmmaker—his films often drip with pessimism (some would say nihilism). But most of his films also give viewers something to chew on, something all too rare at the movies.

Do you have a favorite Woody Allen movie?

Andrew Welch lives in Texas and has written for RELEVANT and Books & Culture.

By Everette Hatcher III | Comments (0)