Dear Senator Pryor, why not pass the Balanced Budget Amendment? (“Thirsty Thursday”, Open letter to Senator Pryor)

Sadly Senator Pryor has voted against the Balanced Budget Amendment over and over in his long time in the Senate. Senator Pryor: “There are a lot of people who think a balanced-budget amendment solves all the fiscal problems. I completely disagree.” (Peter Urban, Pryor Tilts Balanced Budget, Southwest Times Record, 11/17/11)

Dear Senator Pryor,

Why not pass the Balanced Budget Amendment? As you know that federal deficit is at all time high (1.6 trillion deficit with revenues of 2.2 trillion and spending at 3.8 trillion).

On my blog www.HaltingArkansasLiberalswithTruth.com I took you at your word and sent you over 100 emails with specific spending cut ideas. However, I did not see any of them in the recent debt deal that Congress adopted. Now I am trying another approach. Every week from now on I will send you an email explaining different reasons why we need the Balanced Budget Amendment. It will appear on my blog on “Thirsty Thursday” because the government is always thirsty for more money to spend.

New CBO Numbers Re-Confirm that Balancing the Budget Is Simple with Modest Fiscal Restraint

Posted by Daniel J. Mitchell

Many of the politicians in Washington, including President Obama during his State of the Union address, piously tell us that there is no way to balance the budget without tax increases. Trying to get rid of red ink without higher taxes, they tell us, would require “savage” and “draconian” budget cuts.

I would like to slash the budget and free up resources for private-sector growth, so that sounds good to me. But what’s the truth?

The Congressional Budget Office has just released its 10-year projections for the budget, so I crunched the numbers to determine what it would take to balance the budget without tax hikes. Much to nobody’s surprise, the politicians are not telling the truth.

The chart below shows that revenues are expected to grow (because of factors such as inflation, more population, and economic expansion) by more than 7 percent each year. Balancing the budget is simple so long as politicians increase spending at a slower rate. If they freeze the budget, we almost balance the budget by 2017. If federal spending is capped so it grows 1 percent each year, the budget is balanced in 2019. And if the crowd in Washington can limit spending growth to about 2 percent each year, red ink almost disappears in just 10 years.

These numbers, incidentally, assume that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts are made permanent (they are now scheduled to expire in two years). They also assume that the AMT is adjusted for inflation, so the chart shows that we can balance the budget without any increase in the tax burden.

I did these calculations last year, and found the same results. And I also examined how we balanced the budget in the 1990s and found that spending restraint was the key. The combination of a GOP Congress and Bill Clinton in the White House led to a four-year period of government spending growing by an average of just 2.9 percent each year.

We also have international evidence showing that spending restraint – not higher taxes – is the key to balancing the budget. New Zealand got rid of a big budget deficit in the 1990s with a five-year spending freeze. Canada also got rid of red ink that decade with a five-year period where spending grew by an average of only 1 percent per year. And Ireland slashed its deficit in the late 1980s by 10 percentage points of GDP with a four-year spending freeze.

No wonder international bureaucracies such as the International Monetary fund and European Central Bank are producing research showing that spending discipline is the right approach

Daniel J. Mitchell • January 27, 2011 @ 12:00 pm
Filed under: Government and Politics; Health Care; Tax and Budget Policy

June 14, 2012 – 7:02 am Categories: spending out of control | Post a comment

Spending still going up

Great article from Heritage Foundation:

Super Failure: No Spending Cuts, and the Debt Keeps Rising

Emily Goff

November 22, 2011 at 2:15 pm

With the failure of the super committee to recommend at least $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction, Congress’s latest attempt at budget control has collapsed. There will be many analyses of why the process did not work, but it’s worth stepping back to recall what generated the need for this extraordinary procedure and what the exercise actually produced.

From early in the year, it was generally accepted that the divided Congress would be unable to agree on a budget through regular procedures. Republicans chose to use a necessary vote on the debt limit to force the Administration to face the need for spending reductions. After a summer-long debate, rife with hyperbole about a potential government “default,” the Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA) was born, crafted in a way that at face value expressed the goal of fiscal prudence.

The BCA both imposed a set of discretionary spending caps to limit annually appropriated spending and established the super committee to recommend policies that would reduce the deficit by at least an additional $1.2 trillion through 2021. In return, the BCA included debt limit increases in three tranches: $400 billion, $500 billion, and then $1.2 trillion, as the chart below illustrates.

The debt limit hikes were ostensibly contingent on deficit reduction and a vote on a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. But in fact, under the language of the BCA legislation, they could be blocked only if Congress passed a joint resolution of disapproval. If passed, such a resolution would be subject to a presidential veto, requiring the usual two-thirds vote of both houses to override. Thus these debt ceiling increases up to $2.1 trillion were all but assured from the beginning. (Article continued below chart)

The first two increases totaling $900 billion have already occurred, and the debt limit now stands at an astounding $15.124 trillion. It is up from the $14.29 trillion limit set in early 2010 and follows a history of frequent and growing debt limit increases, as shown in this Heritage Budget Chart Book chart. (Article continued below chart)

The third increase of $1.2 trillion—projected to occur early in 2012 when the debt begins to again encroach upon the limit—would raise the debt limit to an unprecedented $16.324 trillion, or over 100 percent of GDP.

Thus, the debt limit will climb ever higher, accommodating the profligate spending of the President and Congress. As Heritage’s J. D. Foster wrote in January: “The need to raise the debt limit reflects an intention to continue deficit financing” and should signal to Congress that it should urgently reexamine its current policy decisions.

Policies that promote reckless spending—forcing the government to borrow about 40 cents of every dollar it spends, while pushing total debt past 100 percent of gross domestic product (GDP)—are flat-out irresponsible. This upward trajectory makes it crystal clear that the government’s spending priorities have deviated severely from what the Founders laid out in the Constitution.

Equally disappointing, both the existing spending caps and the automatic enforcement in the BCA are less than advertised. The caps contain flaws that may make them all but meaningless. The “sequester” mechanism that would impose spending cuts will not be triggered until January 2013, giving Congress plenty of time to rewrite or abandon it.

As The Heritage Foundation’s David Addington writes, “The overspending problem is still here. Congress must still act to get the federal spending under control, in a thoughtful, intelligent manner that meets the needs of the American people.” It should do this without succumbing to pressure to hike taxes on Americans and further weigh down an already struggling economy. Remember, the problem is Washington’s spending.

Congress should demonstrate that it is serious about tackling the problems of rising spending, debt, and deficits. That means reforms to Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security; transforming the maddeningly complicated tax system; and reducing the size and scope of government. In Saving the American Dream, The Heritage Foundation offers the kinds of bold solutions needed to put America back on a path toward fiscal sustainability and economic prosperity.

Posted in Entitlements, Featured
June 14, 2012 – 12:44 am Categories: Social Security, spending out of control, Taxes | Post a comment

Arkansas and Ole Miss football rivalry Part 2

Arkansas Razorbacks vs. Ole Miss 2010

Arkansas and Ole Miss football rivalry Part 2

Wikipedia talks about the Arkansas and Ole Miss football rivalry:

1980s to present

Since 1981, the two teams have played each other annually in football. The games have generally alternated yearly between a site in Mississippi (Jackson, or more recently Oxford) and a site in Arkansas (Little Rock, or more recently Fayetteville), except for one time in 1995 when the game was played in Memphis, Tennessee. Since Arkansas joined the Southeastern Conference in 1991 (first football season was 1992; previously a member of the SWC), the two teams have played annually as both conference and Western division rivals.

[edit] Recently (2000s)

In 2001, Arkansas and Ole Miss had an NCAA record seven-overtime game in Oxford, MS. Arkansas has had the overall advantage since 2000, winning 8 games to 4 for Ole Miss.

[edit] Houston Nutt controversy

Upon the conclusion of the 2007 regular season, Arkansas Razorbacks coach Houston Nutt was forced to resign amid several controversies and allegations that had arisen. [2] [3] Hours later, he was announced as the head coach of the Ole Miss Rebels football team,[4] replacing Ed Orgeron who had been fired after three consecutive losing seasons.

Ole Miss and Arkansas met in Fayetteville on October 25, 2008 with identical 3–4 records. This marked Nutt’s first return to the University of Arkansas campus as an opposing coach. Nutt led his Rebels to a 23–21 victory over the Razorbacks. The long-standing rivalry has become more interesting because of his association with both universities.

[edit] Game results

The results of games played between Arkansas and Ole Miss: [5] [6] [7]

Arkansas victories are colored ██ red. Ole Miss victories are colored ██ blue. Disputed outcome shaded in ██ grey. Ties are white.

Year Arkansas Ole Miss Location
1908 Arkansas 33 Ole Miss 0 Fayetteville, AR
1913 Arkansas 10 Ole Miss 21 Little Rock, AR
1914 Arkansas 7* Ole Miss 13 Little Rock, AR
1924 Arkansas 20 Ole Miss 0 Little Rock, AR
1926 Arkansas 21 Ole Miss 6 Fayetteville, AR
1928 Arkansas 0 Ole Miss 25 Oxford, MS
1937 Arkansas 32 Ole Miss 6 Memphis, TN
1938 Arkansas 14 Ole Miss 20 Memphis, TN
1940 Arkansas 21 Ole Miss 20 Memphis, TN
1941 Arkansas 0 Ole Miss 18 Memphis, TN
1942 Arkansas 7 Ole Miss 6 Memphis, TN
1944 Arkansas 26 Ole Miss 18 Memphis, TN
1945 Arkansas 19 Ole Miss 0 Memphis, TN
1946 Arkansas 0 Ole Miss 9 Memphis, TN
1947 Arkansas 19 Ole Miss 14 Memphis, TN
1952 Arkansas 7 Ole Miss 34 Little Rock, AR
1953 Arkansas 0 Ole Miss 28 Memphis, TN
1954 Arkansas 6 Ole Miss 0 Little Rock, AR
1955 Arkansas 7 Ole Miss 17 Oxford, MS
1956 Arkansas 14 Ole Miss 0 Little Rock, AR
1957 Arkansas 12 Ole Miss 6 Memphis, TN
1958 Arkansas 12 Ole Miss 14 Little Rock, AR
1959 Arkansas 0 Ole Miss 28 Memphis, TN
1960 Arkansas 7 Ole Miss 10 Little Rock, AR
1961 Arkansas 0 Ole Miss 16 Jackson, MS
1963 Arkansas 7 Ole Miss 13 New Orleans, LA[1]
1970 Arkansas 22 Ole Miss 27 New Orleans, LA[2]
1981 Arkansas 27 Ole Miss 13 Jackson, MS
1982 Arkansas 14 Ole Miss 12 Little Rock, AR
Year Arkansas Ole Miss Location
1983 Arkansas 10 Ole Miss 13 Jackson, MS
1984 Arkansas 14 Ole Miss 14 Little Rock, AR
1985 Arkansas 24 Ole Miss 19 Jackson, MS
1986 Arkansas 21 Ole Miss 0 Little Rock, AR
1987 Arkansas 31 Ole Miss 10 Jackson, MS
1988 Arkansas 21 Ole Miss 13 Little Rock, AR
1989 Arkansas 24 Ole Miss 17 Jackson, MS
1990 Arkansas 17 Ole Miss 21 Little Rock, AR
1991 Arkansas 17 Ole Miss 24 Jackson, MS
1992 Arkansas 3 Ole Miss 17 Little Rock, AR
1993 Arkansas 0 Ole Miss 19 Jackson, MS
1994 Arkansas 31 Ole Miss 7 Fayetteville, AR
1995 Arkansas 13 Ole Miss 6 Memphis, TN
1996 Arkansas 13 Ole Miss 7 Fayetteville, AR
1997 Arkansas 9 Ole Miss 19 Oxford, MS
1998 Arkansas 34 Ole Miss 0 Fayetteville, AR
1999 Arkansas 16 Ole Miss 38 Oxford, MS
2000 Arkansas 24 Ole Miss 38 Fayetteville, AR
2001 Arkansas 58 Ole Miss 56 Oxford, MS
2002 Arkansas 48 Ole Miss 28 Fayetteville, AR
2003 Arkansas 7 Ole Miss 19 Oxford, MS
2004 Arkansas 35 Ole Miss 3 Fayetteville, AR
2005 Arkansas 28 Ole Miss 17 Oxford, MS
2006 Arkansas 38 Ole Miss 3 Fayetteville, AR
2007 Arkansas 44 Ole Miss 8 Oxford, MS
2008 Arkansas 21 Ole Miss 23 Fayetteville, AR
2009 Arkansas 17 Ole Miss 30 Oxford, MS
2010 Arkansas 38 Ole Miss 24 Fayetteville, AR
2011 Arkansas 29 Ole Miss 24 Oxford, MS

*Arkansas claims “Won by forfeit” while Ole Miss claims “Won on field”.
^ Played in the Sugar Bowl.

June 14, 2012 – 12:25 am Categories: Current Events | Post a comment

SEC football champs in last 20 years

The SEC really did something that I thought was stupid twenty years ago when they put in a championship game, but I was wrong and it has served the SEC well.

Wikipedia notes:

SEC Overall Champs:

1992 – Alabama (Arkansas and South Carolina join; championship game starts.)
1993 – Florida
1994 – Florida
1995 – Florida
1996 – Florida
1997 – Tennessee
1998 – Tennessee
1999 – Alabama
2000 – Florida
2001 – LSU
2002 – Georgia
2003 – LSU
2004 – Auburn
2005 – Georgia
2006 – Florida
2007 – LSU
2008 – Florida
2009 – Alabama
2010 – Auburn
2011 – LSU

[edit] Divisional champions

Since the SEC expanded, Divisional Champions have been crowned. Occasionally, a tie between two or more teams occurs, requiring a tie-break. All teams involved in the tie breaker are considered Co-Divisional Champions, and the winner of the tie-breaker is the division’s representative to the Championship Game. Below is list of all Divisional Champions and Co-Champions; * denotes tie-break winner and subsequent division representative.

Year Eastern Division Western Division
1992 Florida*, Georgia Alabama
1993 Florida Alabama†
1994 Florida Alabama
1995 Florida Arkansas
1996 Florida Alabama*, LSU
1997 Tennessee Auburn*, LSU
1998 Tennessee Mississippi State*, Arkansas
1999 Florida Alabama
2000 Florida Auburn
2001 Tennessee LSU*, Auburn
2002 Georgia Arkansas*, Auburn, LSU‡
2003 Georgia*, Florida, Tennessee LSU*, Mississippi
2004 Tennessee Auburn
2005 Georgia LSU*, Auburn
2006 Florida Arkansas
2007 Tennessee*, Georgia LSU
2008 Florida Alabama
2009 Florida Alabama
2010 South Carolina Auburn
2011 Georgia LSU

†In 1993 Auburn finished first in the West standings but was ineligible due to NCAA probation and postseason ban. Alabama subsequently vacated the division title due to an ineligible player.
‡In 2002 Alabama finished first in the West standings but was ineligible due to NCAA probation and postseason ban.

June 13, 2012 – 9:47 am Categories: Current Events | Post a comment

Dan Mitchell of the Cato Institute takes on entitlement reform

It is the elephant in the room that nobody wants to talk about. Here Dan Mitchell takes it on.

Most people have a vague understanding that America has a huge long-run fiscal problem.

They’re right, though they probably don’t realize the seriousness of that looming crisis.

Here’s what you need to know: America’s fiscal crisis is actually a spending crisis, and that spending crisis is driven by entitlements.

More specifically, the vast majority of the problem is the result of Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security, programs that are poorly designed and unsustainable.

America needs to fix these programs…or eventually become another Greece.

Fortunately, all of the problems can be solved, as these three videos demonstrate.

The first video explains how to fix Medicaid.

Promote Federalism and Replicate the Success of Welfare Reform with Medicaid Block Grants

Uploaded by on Jun 26, 2011

The Medicaid program imposes high costs while generating poor results. This Center for Freedom and Prosperity Foundation video explains how block grants, such as the one proposed by Congressman Paul Ryan, will save money and improve healthcare by giving states the freedom to innovate and compete.

The second video shows how to fix Medicare.

Saving Medicare: Free Market Reforms Are Better than Bureaucratic Rationing

Uploaded by on May 17, 2011

This Center for Freedom and Prosperity Foundation video explains how a “premium-support” plan would solve Medicare’s fiscal crisis and improve the overall healthcare system. This voucher-based system also would protect seniors from bureaucratic rationing. http://www.freedomandprosperity.org

And the final video shows how to fix Social Security.

Saving Social Security with Personal Retirement Accounts

Uploaded by on Jan 10, 2011

There are two crises facing Social Security. First the program has a gigantic unfunded liability, largely thanks to demographics. Second, the program is a very bad deal for younger workers, making them pay record amounts of tax in exchange for comparatively meager benefits. This video explains how personal accounts can solve both problems, and also notes that nations as varied as Australia, Chile, Sweden, and Hong Kong have implemented this pro-growth reform. www.freedomandprosperity.org

_______________________

Regular readers know I’m fairly gloomy about the future of liberty, but this is one area where there is a glimmer of hope.

The Chairman of the House Budget Committee actually put together a plan that addresses the two biggest problems (Medicare and Medicaid) and the House of Representatives actually adopted the proposal.

The Senate didn’t act, of course, and Obama would veto any good legislation anyhow, so I don’t want to be crazy optimistic. Depending on how things play out politically in the next six years, I’ll say there’s actually a 20 percent chance to save America.

June 13, 2012 – 6:51 am Categories: Cato Institute, Healthcare, President Obama, Social Security, spending out of control, Taxes | Post a comment

Tagged |

Should the 10 Commandments be banned from public life?(Part 10, David Barton’s Affidavit in support on 10 Commandments)

I read back on Dec 8, 2011 that Tony Perkins, president of Family Research Council, a social conservative advocacy organization, said in 2011 that President Obama has been “hostile” and “disdainful” toward Christianity. Rick Perry actually said President Obama had a war on religion. One of the most basic things that our founding fathers did is base our laws on the ten commandments. At the Supreme Court there is one depiction showing Moses sitting, holding two blank stone tablets. There is one depiction showing Moses standing holding one stone tablet. There are two stone tablets depicted with Roman Numbers I-X carved in the oak doors.

David Barton has studied the history of the founding of our country for many years and I wanted to share a portion of adocument he wrote concerning the 10 Commandments:
David Barton – 01/03/2001
(View the footnoted version on Liberty Council’s website)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY

LONDON DIVISION

SARAH DOE and THOMAS DOE, on behalf

of themselves and their minor child, JAN DOE

Plaintiffs,

v Civil Action No. 99-508

HARLAN COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT;

DON MUSSELMAN, in his official capacity

as Superintendent of the Harlan Country

School District,

Defendents.

______________________________________________

AFFIDAVIT OF DAVID BARTON IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CONTEMPT, OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR SUPPLEMENTAL PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF PARKER

HOW THE TEN COMMANDMENTS ARE EXPRESSED

IN CIVIL LAW IN AMERICAN HISTORY

Do not murder.

56. The next several commands form much of the heart of our criminal laws, and, as noted by Noah Webster, one of the first founders to call for the Constitutional Convention, the divine law is the original source of several of those criminal laws:

The opinion that human reason left without the constant control of Divine laws and commands will . . . give duration to a popular government is as chimerical as the most extravagant ideas that enter the head of a maniac. . . . Where will you find any code of laws among civilized men in which the commands and prohibitions are not founded on Christian principles? I need not specify the prohibition of murder, robbery, theft, [and] trespass.

57. The early civil laws against murder substantiate the influence of the Decalogue and divine laws on American criminal laws. For example, a 1641 Massachusetts law declared:

4. Ex. 21.12, Numb. 35.13, 14, 30, 31. If any person commit any willful murder, which is manslaughter committed upon premeditated malice, hatred, or cruelty, not in a man’s necessary and just defense nor by mere casualty against his will, he shall be put to death.

5. Numb. 25.20, 21. Lev. 24.17. If any person slayeth another suddenly in his anger or cruelty of passion, he shall be put to death.

6. Ex. 21.14. If any person shall slay another through guile, either by poisoning or other such devilish practice, he shall be put to death.

58. Perhaps the point is too obvious to belabor, but similar provisions can be found in the Connecticut laws of 1642, the New Hampshire laws of 1680, etc.

59. Courts, too, have been very candid in tracing civil murder laws back to the Decalogue. For example, a 1932 Kentucky appeals court declared:

The rights of society as well as those of appellant are involved and are also to be protected, and to that end all forms of governments following the promulgation of Moses at Mt. Sinai has required of each and every one of its citizens that “Thou shalt not murder.” If that law is violated, the one guilty of it has no right to demand more than a fair trial, and if, as a result thereof, the severest punishment for the crime is visited upon him, he has no one to blame but himself.

60. Even the “severest punishment for the crime” is traced back to divine laws. As first Chief Justice John Jay explained:

There were several divine, positive ordinances . . . of universal obligation, as . . . the particular punishment for murder.

61. There certainly exist more than sufficient cases with declarations similar to that made by the Kentucky court above to demonstrate that the sixth commandment of the Decalogue exerted substantial force on American civil law and jurisprudence.
June 13, 2012 – 1:48 am Categories: David Barton, Founding Fathers | Post a comment

We got to control spending or we will end up like Europe

Great article below:

Europe’s Disaster Is Headed Our Way

Nov 14, 2011 12:00 AM EST

 

 
 

As an author who has just published a book on the crisis of Western civilization, I couldn’t really have asked for more: simultaneous crises in Athens and Rome, the cradles of the West’s law, languages, politics, and philosophy.

So why should Americans care about any of this? The first reason is that, with American consumers still in the doldrums of deleveraging, the United States badly needs buoyant exports if its economy is to grow at anything other than a miserably low rate. And despite all the hype about trade with the Chinese, U.S. exports to the European Union are nearly three times larger than to China.

Until March, it seemed as if exports to Europe were on an upward trajectory. But the euro-zone crisis has stopped that. Governments that ran up excessive debts have seen their borrowing costs explode. Unable to devalue their currencies, they’ve been forced to adopt austerity measures—cutting spending or hiking taxes—in a vain effort to reduce their deficits. The result has been Depression economics: shrinking economies and unemployment rates approaching 20 percent.

As a result, according to the new president of the European Central Bank, Mario Draghi, a “double dip” recession in Europe is now all but inevitable. And that’s lousy news for U.S. exporters targeting the EU market.

But there’s more. Europe’s problem is not just that governments are overborrowed. There are an unknown number of European banks that are effectively insolvent if their holdings of government bonds are “marked to market”—in other words, valued at their current rock-bottom market prices. In our interconnected financial world, it would be very odd indeed if no U.S. institutions were affected by this. Just as European institutions once loaded up on assets backed with subprime U.S. mortgages, so most big U.S. banks have at least some exposure to euro-zone bonds or banks. One institution—MF Global, run by former Goldman Sachs CEO Jon Corzine—just blew up because of its highly levered euro bets. Others are biting their fingernails because it is suddenly far from clear that the credit-default swaps they have bought as insurance against, say, a Greek default are worth the paper they are written on.

But the third reason Americans should care about Europe is more important even than the risk of a renewed financial crisis. It is the danger that what is happening in Europe today could ultimately happen here. Just a few months ago, almost nobody was worried about Italy’s vast debt, which amounts to 121 percent of GDP. Then suddenly panic set in, and Italy’s borrowing costs exploded from 3.5 percent to 7.5 percent.

Today the U.S. gross federal debt stands at around 100 percent of GDP. Four years ago it was 62 percent. By 2016 the International Monetary Fund forecasts it will be 115 percent. Economists who should know better insist that this is not a problem because, unlike Italy, the United States can print its own money at will. All that means is that the U.S. reserves the right to inflate or depreciate away its debt. If I were a foreign investor—and half the debt in public hands is held by foreigners—I would not find that terribly reassuring. At some point I might demand some compensation for that risk in the form of … higher rates.

Athens, Rome, Washington … The shortest route from imperial capital to tourist destination is precisely this death spiral of debt.

Like The Daily Beast on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for updates all day long.

Niall Ferguson is a professor of history at Harvard University and a professor of business administration at Harvard Business School. He is also a senior research fellow at Jesus College, Oxford University, and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University. His Latest book, Civilization: The West and the Rest, will be published in November.

For inquiries, please contact The Daily Beast at editorial@thedailybeast.com.

June 13, 2012 – 12:41 am Categories: Cato Institute, spending out of control, Taxes | Post a comment

Woody Allen’s worldview as seen in his movies

 
I love the movie Crimes and Misdemeanors and have written on it many times in the past. This quote below sums up Woody Allen’s worldview which I disagree with. In fact, the person who said this actually could not live with its conclusions in the movie and committed suicide.
 
Because Allen continues to ask the big questions I am hopeful that he will someday take a close look at the claims of the Bible and come to Christ.
 
—“We are all faced throughout our lives with agonizing decisions, moral choices. Some are on a grand scale. Most of these choices are on a lesser scale. But we define ourselves by the choices we have made. We are in fact the sum total of our choices. Events unfold so unpredictably, so unfairly. Human happiness does not seem to have been included in the design of creation. It is only we with our capacity to love that give meaning to the indifferent universe. And yet most human beings seem to have the ability to keep trying, and even to find joy from simple things, like their family, their work, and from the hope that future generations might understand more.”
—Louis Levi in Woody Allen’s Crimes and Misdemeanors
Related posts:
 

“Woody Wednesday” Biography of Woody Allen

Here is a great link on Woody Allen. With at least four distinct phases throughout his long career, writer-director-actor Woody Allen was one of the few American filmmakers rightly labeled an auteur. From the irreverent absurdity of his early satires like “Bananas” (1971) and “Sleepers” (1973) to his chronicles of neurotic New Yorkers in “Annie […]

Atheists have no basis for saying that Hitler was wrong!!!!!

On April 30, 2012 (67 years after Hitler killed himself) I stated on the Arkansas Times Blog: Hitler’s last few moments of life were filled with anxiety as they should have been. He went on to face his maker and pay dearly for his many sins. When I look at the never before released pictures […]

Did Hitler go to hell?

My debating opponent, Elwood, on the Arkansas Times Blog is at it again. He claims that the place hell is fiction. He stated, “… your imaginary place called ‘Hell.’ ” However, I responded that this life does count and those like Hitler that have done evil deeds will be punished in the afterlife. Early on […]

Hitler’s last few hours before entering hell (never before released photos)

Below are several never released before pictures of Hitler’s bunker. These are the sights that Hitler took in last before entering hell. How do I know he entered hell? Read below and you will see why I can say that with confidence. LIFE: Hitler’s Bunker On Monday, April 30, on the anniversary of the day […]

Woody Allen’s career in pictures “Woody Wednesday”

Vicky Cristina Barcelona (2008)  “I did have her in mind for it when I wrote it,” Allen said of casting Scarlett Johansson in the movie, (which also starred Javier Bardem and Penelope Cruz, who are now married). “She’s become a friend and I can think of her now and know that if I call her […]

Woody Allen’s career in pictures “Woody Wednesday”

September (1987) The director famously re-wrote, re-cast and re-shot this film after seeing his original finished product. The second go-round starred (from left) Jack Warden, Elaine Stritch and Mia Farrow (with Allen, second from right). “I usually reshoot tons of material,” he explained at the time. “The fact is, I’d like to shoot September a […]

“Woody Allen Wednesdays” can be seen on the www.thedailyhatch.org

 
June 13, 2012 – 12:02 am Categories: Current Events | Post a comment

Milton Friedman on school voucher system

Max Brantley of the Arkansas Times Blog reports today that Mitt Romney is for school vouchers. I am glad to hear that.

Over and over we hear that the reason private schools are better is because they don’t have to keep the troubling making kids. It reminds me of this short film that I saw many years ago.

Uploaded by  on Jun 14, 2010

Cleaned up (restored) version of the 1932 “Our Gang” short with just the scenes of Kendall McComas (Breezy), Bobby Hutchins (Wheezer) and Otto Fries (Blacksmith). Everyone wants this poor kid to grow up to be president, but all he wants to be is a streetcar conductor, ‘cuz boy, do they pick up the nickels!.

________________________________________

If you want to see how Milton Friedman’s school voucher system would work then check out these posts below:

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

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

Sweden’s Voucher Program Part 8

HALT:HaltingArkansasLiberalswithTruth.com Milton Friedman’s film series “Free to Choose” Episode on Education part 6. It was Friedman’s voucher plan that was put into practice in Sweden in 1993. I read an excellent article called “School Choice in Sweden: An Interview with Thomas Idergard of Timbro,” (March 8, 2010) by Dan Lips and I wanted to share […]

Sweden’s Voucher Program Part 7

HALT:HaltingArkansasLiberalswithTruth.com Milton Friedman’s film series “Free to Choose” Episode on Education part 5. It was Friedman’s voucher plan that was put into practice in Sweden in 1993. I read an excellent article called “School Choice in Sweden: An Interview with Thomas Idergard of Timbro,” (March 8, 2010) by Dan Lips and I wanted to share […]

Milton Friedman’s views on vouchers have not been tried?

On the Arkansas Times Blog the person using the username “Jake da Snake” noted, “Friedman also railed long and hard for school vouchers to be adopted, to little avail…” (June 11, 2011). Milton Friedman firmly believed, “competition is a way in which both public and private schools can be required to satisfy their customers.” Here […]


June 12, 2012 – 8:40 am Categories: Milton Friedman, Vouchers | Post a comment

The Berlin Wall Falls 1989 NBC Coverage

The Berlin Wall Falls 1989 NBC Coverage Pt1

Uploaded by on Nov 10, 2009

NBC News coverage of the fall of the Berlin Wall hosted by Tom Brokaw at the Brandenburg Gate, November 1989. Part 1 of 2. The exact date of this report is most likely November 10, 1989.

The Wall (1962) / Berlin Wall Documentary Film Video

Alert icon
Close
Upgrade to the latest Flash Player for improved playback performance. Upgrade now or more info.
374,160Show video statistics

I like thisLikeI dislike thisShareFlag as inappropriate

Loading…
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
 
 
Loading…
 
 

Uploaded by on Feb 28, 2009

The Wall (1962) / Berlin Wall Documentary Film Video. Creative Commons license: Public Domain. Government film about the erection of the Berlin Wall. From the holdings of the National Archives.Sponsor: United States Information Agency. The Berlin Wall (German: Berliner Mauer) was a physical barrier separating West Berlin from the German Democratic Republic (GDR) (East Germany), including East Berlin. The longer inner German border demarcated the border between East and West Germany. Both borders came to symbolize the Iron Curtain between Western and Eastern Europe and, ultimately, between USA and the Soviet Union. The wall separated East Germany from West Germany for more than a quarter-century, from the day construction began on August 13, 1961 until the Wall was opened on November 9, 1989. During this period, at least 136 people were confirmed killed trying to cross the Wall into West Berlin, according to official figures. However, a prominent victims’ group claims that more than 200 people were killed trying to flee from East to West Berlin. The East German government issued shooting orders to border guards dealing with defectors; such orders are not the same as shoot to kill orders which GDR officials denied ever issuing. When the East German government announced on November 9, 1989, after several weeks of civil unrest, that all GDR citizens could visit West Germany and West Berlin, crowds of East Germans climbed onto and crossed the wall, joined by West Germans on the other side in a celebratory atmosphere. Over the next few weeks, parts of the wall were chipped away by a euphoric public and by souvenir hunters; industrial equipment was later used to remove almost all of the rest of it. The fall of the Berlin Wall paved the way for German reunification, which was formally concluded on October 3, 1990. On Saturday, 12 August 1961, the leaders of the GDR attended a garden party at a government guesthouse in Döllnsee, in a wooded area to the north of East Berlin, at which time Ulbricht signed the order to close the border and erect a wall. At midnight, the police and units of the East German army began to close the border and by Sunday morning, 13 August 1961, the border with West Berlin was closed. East German troops and workers had begun to tear up streets running alongside the border to make them impassable to most vehicles, and to install barbed wire entanglements and fences along the 156 km (97 miles) around the three western sectors and the 43 km (27 miles) which actually divided West and East Berlin. The Soviets were not directly involved. The barrier was built slightly inside East Berlin or East German territory to ensure that it did not encroach on West Berlin at any point, and was later built up into the Wall proper, the first concrete elements and large blocks being put in place on August 15. During the construction of the Wall, NVA and KdA soldiers stood in front of it with orders to shoot anyone who attempted to defect. Additionally, chain fences, walls, minefields, and other obstacles were installed along the length of the inner-German border between East and West Germany. Due to the closure of the East-West sector boundary in Berlin, the vast majority of East Germans could no longer travel or emigrate to West Germany. Many families were split, while East Berliners employed in the West were cut off from their jobs; West Berlin became an isolated enclave in a hostile land. West Berliners demonstrated against the wall, led by their Chancellor Willy Brandt, who strongly criticized the United States for failing to respond. Allied intelligence agencies had hypothesized about a wall to stop the flood of refugees, but the main candidate for its location was around the perimeter of the city.

June 12, 2012 – 7:44 am Categories: Current Events | Post a comment