Was this country founded by Christians?

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

I really don’t think we need to be ashamed our Christian origins in this country. Abraham Lincoln wasn’t. In this discussion about the Christian origins of our country Greg Koukl quotes from President Lincoln:

After that you can reflect on Lincoln’s Thanksgiving Proclamation of October 3, 1863. It begins this way: “It is the duty of nations, as well as of men, to own their dependence upon the overruling power of God, to confess their sins and transgressions [By golly, how did that get in there?] in humble sorrow, yet with assured hope that genuine repentance will lead to mercy and pardon. And to recognize the sublime truth announced in the Holy Scriptures and proven by all history, that those nations are blessed whose God is the Lord.”

America’s Unchristian Beginnings?

  

Gregory Koukl

Greg responds to an L.A. Times Op-Ed article by this title (sans question mark), subtitled “Founding Fathers: Despite preachings of our pious Right, most were deists who rejected the divinity of Jesus.”divider

There has been a lot of confusion on the issue of whether or not we’ re a Christian nation, and I’m not exactly sure why. But it is hotly debated in our culture right now. The reason I say I’m not sure why is because the historical record is quite clear. I think that Christians, though, often make inappropriate, unfounded, or inaccurate applications of some of the information, and I want to speak to that in just a moment.As to the faith content of those who were our Founding Fathers, there can be absolutely no confusion about the fact that virtually every single one of them shared a Christian, biblical world view. There is some question as to whether every single one of them held to all the orthodox teachings of classical Christianity; but it seems to me that there is very little question as to what their religious persuasions and world views were.There was a piece in the L.A. Times on the third of this August on the Op-Ed page entitled “America’s Unchristian Beginnings.” It is subtitled “Founding Fathers: Despite preachings of our pious Right, most were deists who rejected the divinity of Jesus.” There are a couple things that trouble me about this article, the biggest thing is the word “most” in the subtitle. “Most of our Founding Fathers” apparently were deists, according to this person’s assessment. This is a canard that’s been tossed around even by some Christians who ought to know better. This piece was written by Steven Morris who is a professor of physics at L.A. Harbor College and he is also a member of the L.A.-based Atheists United.Some might say, what does a physicist know about history? Just because he is a physicist doesn’t mean that he can’t have an accurate opinion about this particular issue. I take issue with his research. It’ s simply bad.He goes on to reply to the Christian Right, who he says is trying to rewrite the history of the United States in its campaign to force its view of religion on others. His approach is to quote seven different people: Thomas Paine, George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Ethan Allen, James Madison, and Ben Franklin. His point is to quote these individuals who he thinks apparently are, first of all, Founding Fathers, and secondly, characteristic of the lot of them in rejection of Christianity and in acceptance of deism.

I am frustrated by this because it is characteristic of the way a lot of people want to treat this issue. They think that they can take names that we associate with that period and are well known, sift through their writings and find some things that they think are hostile to Christianity, and therefore conclude that not only these people are anti-Christian, but all of the rest of them are anti-Christian, as well.

It’s an example of Steven Morris turning the exception into the rule. Since he can find what he thinks are seven different people that are important personalities during this period of time, who at some time in their lives may have written something that can be understood to be non-Christian, then that characterizes the whole group of them as deists, ergo the subtitle “Most were deists who rejected the divinity of Jesus.”

Morris’ sightings are simply specious. Thomas Payne and Ethan Allen, for example, were in no- wise intellectual architects of the Constitution. Rather, they were firebrands of the Revolution. Was that important? Sure, they made an important contribution, but they weren’t Founding Fathers. Period.

Now, as for Washington, Sam Adams, Jefferson, and Madison. If one looks at the literature of the time–the personal correspondence, the public statements, the biographies–he will find that this literature is replete with quotations by these people contrary to those that Mr. Morris very carefully selected for us. Apparently, he also very carefully ignored other important thinkers: John Witherspoon, for example, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, John Adams, Patrick Henry. All individuals who were significant contributors to the architectural framework of this country and who had political philosophies that were deeply influenced by Christianity, especially Calvinism.

But there is another thing that he completely overlooks in this analysis. Something that makes a mockery out of his analysis, and also answers the question quite simply and directly and in the affirmative for us about the Christian beginnings of our Republic.

This issue is actually very simple. The phrase “Founding Fathers” is a proper noun. In other words, Founding Fathers refers directly to a very specific group of people (although I think you could be a little bit flexible and include a little wider group of people). Those who intellectually contributed to the Constitutional convention were the Founding Fathers. If we want to know whether our Founding Fathers were Christian or deists, one needs only to look at the individual religious convictions of those 55 delegates of the Constitutional convention.

How would we know that? We look at their church membership primarily, and also at their correspondence. Back then church membership was a big deal. In other words, to be a member of a church back then, it wasn’t just a matter of sitting in the pew or attending once in a while. This was a time when church membership entailed a sworn public confession of biblical faith, adherence, and acknowledgment of the doctrines of that particular church.

Of those 55 Founding Fathers, we know what their sworn public confessions were. Twenty-eight were Episcopalians, eight were Presbyterians, seven were Congregationalists, two were Lutheran, two were Dutch Reformed, two were Methodist, two were Roman Catholic, one is unknown, and only three were deists–Williamson, Wilson, and Franklin.

To heap more fuel on the fire of my point, of the 55, the Episcopalians, the Presbyterians, the Congregationalists, and the Dutch Reformed (which make up 45 of the 55) were Calvinists, for goodness sake! In other words, these weren’t just Christians, these were among the most extreme and doctrinally strict Christians around. Of the 55 delegates, virtually all of them were deeply committed Christians. Only three were deists. Even Franklin is equivocal because, though not an orthodox Christian, Franklin seems to have abandoned his deism early in life and moved back towards his Puritan roots. Indeed, it was 81 year old Franklin’s emotional call to humble prayer on June 28, 1787, that was actually the turning point for a hopelessly stalled Constitutional convention. We have his appeal on record thanks to James Madison who took copious notes of the whole proceeding. His appeal contained no less than four direct quotations from Scripture. This does not sound like a man who was hostile to the Christian religion.

But this assessment doesn’ t answer a more fundamental question: Are we a Christian nation? It seems clear that most of the Founders were Christians, not deists. But what about the question “Are we a Christian nation?” I think the answer depends entirely on what is meant by “Christian nation.”

Are the theological doctrines of the Bible explicitly woven into the fabric of government? The answer is no. The non-establishment clause of the First Amendment absolutely prohibits such a thing. However, was the Biblical view of the world–the existence of God who active in human history, the authority of the Scripture, the inherent sinfulness of man, the existence of absolute objective morality, and God-given transcendent rights–was that the philosophic foundation of the Constitution? The answer is, without question, yes. The American community presumed a common set of values which were principally biblical. Further, the founding principles of the Republic were clearly informed by biblical truth.

A question can be asked at this point. Given the fact that most of the Founding Fathers–either those who are among the 55 delegates to the Constitutional convention or those outside of that number who were significant architects to the Constitution–were in fact biblical Christians and had sworn to that, and those that weren’t were at least deeply moved and informed by a biblical moral view, one could ask the question, “So what? What does that have to do with anything today?”

I think that Christians may be a little out of line on this part of the issue, and I want to bring it into balance. Regarding the question, Is America a Christian nation?, if we mean by that that Christianity is the official, doctrinal religion of this country, the answer is of course not. That’s prohibited by the exclusion clause of the First Amendment. If we mean that we were founded on Biblical principles by Christian men who had a deep commitment to the Scriptures by and large, the answer is certainly yes.

But then the question is, So what? How does what happened 200 years ago influence what is going on now? I actually have two points to make.

This fact doesn’ t give Christians a trump card in the debate on public policy, in my view. Just because Christians were here first doesn’t mean that their views should continue to prevail. Within the limits of the Constitution, the majority rules. That’s the way this government works, ladies and gentlemen.

But let’s not rewrite history to relegate those with religious convictions to the sidelines. That is the other half of this. The privilege of citizenship remains the same for all despite their religious convictions. Everyone gets a voice and everyone gets a vote. Christians don’t have a leg up on everyone else because we were here first. Even the Christians who wrote the rules didn’t give us that liberty. They didn’t give us that leg up. They made the playing ground even for everyone, every ideology, every point of view.

Having said that, though, in writing the First Amendment and the non-establishment clause, they did not have in view this current idea of separation–that the state is thoroughly secular and not informed at all by religious values, especially Christian. This view that is popular now was completely foreign, not just to the Founders, but to the first 150 years of American political thought. It’s absolutely clear that the Fathers did not try to excise every vestige of Christian religion, Christian thought, and Christian values from all facets of public life. In fact, they were friendly to religion in general, and to Christianity in particular, and encouraged its education and expression.

As to the durability of this tradition, I suggest that anyone who has any doubts about this simply read Lincoln’s second inaugural address, which is etched into the marble of the northern wall of the Lincoln Memorial. Go there and read it. Face Lincoln, turn right, and there it is. It contains no less than three or four biblical references.

After that you can reflect on Lincoln’s Thanksgiving Proclamation of October 3, 1863. It begins this way: “It is the duty of nations, as well as of men, to own their dependence upon the overruling power of God, to confess their sins and transgressions [By golly, how did that get in there?] in humble sorrow, yet with assured hope that genuine repentance will lead to mercy and pardon. And to recognize the sublime truth announced in the Holy Scriptures and proven by all history, that those nations are blessed whose God is the Lord.”

I think that pretty much settles it.

 

This is a transcript of a commentary from the radio show“Stand to Reason,” with Gregory Koukl. It is made available to you at no charge through the faithful giving of those who support Stand to Reason. Reproduction permitted for non-commercial use only. ©1995 Gregory Koukl

For more information, contact Stand to Reason at 1438 East 33rd St., Signal Hill, CA 90755
(800) 2-REASON (562) 595-7333 www.str.org

June 11, 2012 – 7:59 am Categories: David Barton, Founding Fathers | Post a comment

The real truth about Che Guevara from Nat Hentoff (Part 2)

Uploaded by on Jun 9, 2011

Nat Hentoff is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute. http://www.cato.org/people/nat-hentoff

In this clip, Hentoff describes the telling encounter he had when he met Ernesto “Che” Guevara in the late 1950s. Video produced by Caleb O. Brown and Austin Bragg.

Nat Hentoff
View hi-res version

Get the latest from Nat Hentoff:

Nat Hentoff is one of the foremost authorities on the First Amendment. While his books and articles regularly defend the rights of Americans to think and speak freely, he also explores our freedoms under the rest of the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment by showing how Supreme Court and local legislative decisions affect the lives of ordinary Americans. Hentoff’s column, Sweet Land of Liberty, has been distributed by the United Feature Syndicate since 1992.

Hentoff has earned numerous awards and is a widely acknowledged defender of civil liberties. In 1980, he was awarded an American Bar Association Silver Gavel Award for his coverage of the law and criminal justice in his columns. In 1983, the American Library Association awarded him the Imroth Award for Intellectual Freedom. In 1995, he received the National Press Foundation Award for Distinguished Contributions to Journalism, and in 1999, he was a Pulitzer finalist for commentary.

Hentoff was a columnist and staff writer with The Village Voice for 51 years, from 1957 until 2008. A jazz expert, Hentoff writes on music for The Wall Street Journal and Jazz Times.

Hentoff has lectured at many colleges, universities, law schools, elementary, middle and high schools, and has taught courses in journalism and the Constitution at Princeton University and New York University. Mr. Hentoff serves on the Board of Advisors of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (F.I.R.E.) and is on the steering committee of the Reporters’ Committee for the Freedom of the Press. A native of Boston, he was awarded a Guggenheim Fellowship in education and was a Fulbright Fellow at the Sorbonne in Paris in 1950. He did graduate work at Harvard University, received his B.A. with highest honors from Northeastern University and was awarded an honorary doctorate of law from Northeastern in 1985.

Related posts:

The real truth about Che Guevara (Part 3)

A few years ago the movie “Che” was released and it praised the communist killer Che Guevara. Here is what Movie Guide had to say about it: “Armed Struggle” is the rallying cry of CHE, Steven Soderbergh’s four-hour tribute to the violent Communist tactics of guerrilla warrior Ernesto “Che” Guevaro. Divided into two parts, the […]

The real truth about Che Guevara from Nat Hentoff (Part 2)

Uploaded by catoinstitutevideo on Jun 9, 2011 Nat Hentoff is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute. http://www.cato.org/people/nat-hentoff In this clip, Hentoff describes the telling encounter he had when he met Ernesto “Che” Guevara in the late 1950s. Video produced by Caleb O. Brown and Austin Bragg. View hi-res version Get the latest from Nat […]

The real truth about Che Guevara (Part 1)

  Humberto Fontova on Che Guevara part 2 Francis Schaeffer said about Communism: Communism, you know, is not basically an economic theory. It’s materialistic communism, which means that at the very heart of the Marx, Engels, Lenin kind of communism (because you have to put all three together to really understand) is the materialistic concept […]

June 11, 2012 – 7:40 am Categories: Cato Institute | Post a comment

Which metropolitan area has more population: Little Rock or Fayetteville?

The fast growing Fayetteville-Rogers- Springdale area may one day have more population than Little Rock but it is a far cry from that now. Fayetteville is ranked at #107 and Little Rock is ranked at 72.

Take a look at Wikipedia:

The 366 Metropolitan Statistical Areas of the United States of America
Rank Metropolitan Statistical Area 2011 Estimate 2010 Census Change Combined Statistical Area
!000001 New York–Northern New Jersey–Long Island, NY–NJ–PA MSA !B9832392139707 19,015,900 !B9832454804946 18,897,109 !D0050693985799 +0.63% New York–Newark–Bridgeport, NY–NJ–CT–PA CSA
!000002 Los Angeles–Long Beach–Santa Ana, CA MSA !B9836237952016 12,944,801 !B9836327939144 12,828,837 !D0047061710084 +0.90% Los Angeles–Long Beach–Riverside, CA CSA
!000003 Chicago–Joliet–Naperville, IL–IN–WI MSA !B9839326974527 9,504,753 !B9839373002581 9,461,105 !D0053787870006 +0.46% Chicago–Naperville–Michigan City, IL–IN–WI CSA
!000004 Dallas–Fort Worth–Arlington, TX MSA !B9843086112755 6,526,548 !B9843326116752 6,371,773 !D0037176605963 +2.43% Dallas–Fort Worth, TX CSA
!000005 Houston–Sugar Land–Baytown, TX MSA !B9843784099948 6,086,538 !B9844016361822 5,946,800 !D0037508392980 +2.35% Houston–Baytown–Huntsville, TX CSA
!000006 Philadelphia–Camden–Wilmington, PA–NJ–DE–MD MSA !B9843939951060 5,992,414 !B9843985228860 5,965,343 !D0053952587907 +0.45% Philadelphia–Camden–Vineland, PA–NJ–DE–MD CSA
!000007 Washington–Arlington–Alexandria, DC–VA–MD–WV MSA !B9844433308753 5,703,948 !B9844649118523 5,582,170 !D0038251331536 +2.18% Washington–Baltimore–Northern Virginia, DC–MD–VA–WV CSA
!000008 Miami–Fort Lauderdale–Pompano Beach, FL MSA !B9844492782786 5,670,125 !B9844680580479 5,564,635 !D0039655705113 +1.90% ~primary census statistical area
!000009 Atlanta–Sandy Springs–Marietta, GA MSA !B9845056737988 5,359,205 !B9845226754216 5,268,860 !D0040659336241 +1.71% Atlanta–Sandy Springs–Gainesville, GA–AL CSA
!000010 Boston–Cambridge–Quincy, MA–NH MSA !B9846603671815 4,591,112 !B9846688344362 4,552,402 !D0047673123201 +0.85% Boston–Worcester–Manchester, MA–RI–NH CSA
!000011 San Francisco–Oakland–Fremont, CA MSA !B9847049240241 4,391,037 !B9847176776397 4,335,391 !D0043555568838 +1.28% San Jose–San Francisco–Oakland, CA CSA
!000012 Riverside–San Bernardino–Ontario, CA MSA !B9847247130010 4,304,997 !B9847435054481 4,224,851 !D0039648893015 +1.90% Los Angeles–Long Beach–Riverside, CA CSA
!000013 Detroit–Warren–Livonia, MI MSA !B9847291747431 4,285,832 !B9847267468928 4,296,250 !H9939780372511 −0.24% Detroit–Warren–Flint, MI CSA
!000014 Phoenix–Mesa–Glendale, AZ MSA !B9847346955368 4,262,236 !B9847510999238 4,192,887 !D0041019930700 +1.65% ~primary census statistical area
!000015 Seattle–Tacoma–Bellevue, WA MSA !B9849317190449 3,500,026 !B9849490734954 3,439,809 !D0040452165210 +1.75% Seattle–Tacoma–Olympia, WA CSA
!000016 Minneapolis–St. Paul–Bloomington, MN–WI MSA !B9849849807872 3,318,486 !B9849966969355 3,279,833 !D0044409233937 +1.18% Minneapolis–St. Paul–St. Cloud, MN–WI CSA
!000017 San Diego–Carlsbad–San Marcos, CA MSA !B9850402446678 3,140,069 !B9850546004101 3,095,313 !D0042364187969 +1.45% ~primary census statistical area
!000018 Tampa–St. Petersburg–Clearwater, FL MSA !B9851460787813 2,824,724 !B9851608726474 2,783,243 !D0042061365824 +1.49% ~primary census statistical area
!000019 St. Louis, MO–IL MSA !B9851486909404 2,817,355 !B9851502748844 2,812,896 !D0064470453109 +0.16% St. Louis–St. Charles–Farmington, MO–IL CSA
!000020 Baltimore–Towson, MD MSA !B9851805138933 2,729,110 !B9851873603806 2,710,489 !D0049805943643 +0.69% Washington–Baltimore–Northern Virginia, DC–MD–VA–WV CSA
!000021 Denver–Aurora–Broomfield, CO MSA !B9852291687844 2,599,504 !B9852509554336 2,543,482 !D0038155448166 +2.20% Denver–Aurora–Boulder, CO CSA
!000022 Pittsburgh, PA MSA !B9853259354559 2,359,746 !B9853274032158 2,356,285 !D0065232839405 +0.15% Pittsburgh–New Castle, PA CSA
!000023 Portland–Vancouver–Hillsboro, OR–WA MSA !B9853679726376 2,262,605 !B9853842791460 2,226,009 !D0041080266301 +1.64% ~primary census statistical area
!000024 San Antonio–New Braunfels, TX MSA !B9853983406534 2,194,927 !B9854225123365 2,142,508 !D0037104632633 +2.45% ~primary census statistical area
!000025 Sacramento–Arden–Arcade–Roseville, CA MSA !B9854068931225 2,176,235 !B9854194277288 2,149,127 !D0043729881048 +1.26% Sacramento–Arden–Arcade–Yuba City, CA–NV CSA
!000026 Orlando–Kissimmee–Sanford, FL MSA !B9854091357426 2,171,360 !B9854262987116 2,134,411 !D0040564074259 +1.73% Orlando–Deltona–Daytona Beach, FL CSA
!000027 Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN MSA !B9854246008559 2,138,038 !B9854282965728 2,130,151 !D0055987323137 +0.37% Cincinnati-Middletown-Wilmington, OH-KY-IN CSA
!000028 Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH MSA !B9854577706475 2,068,283 !B9854534493525 2,077,240 !H9945536399810 −0.43% Cleveland-Akron-Elyria, OH CSA
!000029 Kansas City, MO-KS MSA !B9854653451342 2,052,676 !B9854738295088 2,035,334 !D0047652839072 +0.85% Kansas City-Overland Park-Kansas City, MO-KS CSA
!000030 Las Vegas-Paradise, NV MSA !B9855064685897 1,969,975 !B9855160095118 1,951,269 !D0046473908811 +0.96% Las Vegas-Paradise-Pahrump, NV CSA
!000031 San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA MSA !B9855609871311 1,865,450 !B9855764040855 1,836,911 !D0041645690625 +1.55% San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA CSA
!000032 Columbus, OH MSA !B9855647391019 1,858,464 !B9855766082534 1,836,536 !D0044278721085 +1.19% Columbus-Marion-Chillicothe, OH CSA
!000033 Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC MSA !B9855992215020 1,795,472 !B9856202910275 1,758,038 !D0038493743111 +2.13% Charlotte-Gastonia-Salisbury, NC-SC CSA
!000034 Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos, TX MSA !B9856059010630 1,783,519 !B9856443250402 1,716,289 !D0032398001043 +3.92% Austin-Round Rock-Marble Falls, TX CSA
!000035 Indianapolis-Carmel, IN MSA !B9856086808958 1,778,568 !B9856213137125 1,756,241 !D0043651343000 +1.27% Indianapolis-Anderson-Columbus, IN CSA
!000036 Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC MSA !B9856657587458 1,679,894 !B9856706585386 1,671,683 !D0053161114636 +0.49% ~primary census statistical area
!000037 Nashville-Davidson–Murfreesboro–Franklin, TN MSA !B9857038290483 1,617,142 !B9857207969360 1,589,934 !D0040679367372 +1.71% Nashville-Davidson–Murfreesboro–Columbia, TN CSA
!000038 Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA MSA !B9857143458225 1,600,224 !B9857139534545 1,600,852 !H9921564936209 −0.04% Boston-Worcester-Manchester, MA-RI-NH CSA
!000039 Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI MSA !B9857383841159 1,562,216 !B9857424301439 1,555,908 !D0055079959079 +0.41% Milwaukee-Racine-Waukesha, WI CSA
!000040 Jacksonville, FL MSA !B9858768202004 1,360,251 !B9858876524044 1,345,596 !D0045198107423 +1.09% ~primary census statistical area
!000041 Memphis, TN-MS-AR MSA !B9859026204830 1,325,605 !B9859098166241 1,316,100 !D0049306101208 +0.72% ~primary census statistical area
!000042 Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN MSA !B9859260953559 1,294,849 !B9859348473001 1,283,566 !D0047341002527 +0.88% Louisville/Jefferson County–Elizabethtown–Scottsburg, KY-IN CSA
!000043 Oklahoma City, OK MSA !B9859391516158 1,278,053 !B9859589591412 1,252,987 !D0039117732335 +2.00% Oklahoma City-Shawnee, OK CSA
!000044 Richmond, VA MSA !B9859459608497 1,269,380 !B9859547667806 1,258,251 !D0047279236264 +0.88% ~primary census statistical area
!000045 Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT MSA !B9859911826115 1,213,255 !B9859919032473 1,212,381 !D0072350163769 +0.07% Hartford-West Hartford-Willimantic, CT CSA
!000046 New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA MSA !B9860096214273 1,191,089 !B9860293986328 1,167,764 !D0039133203414 +2.00% New Orleans-Metairie-Bogalusa, LA CSA
!000047 Raleigh-Cary, NC MSA !B9860330438462 1,163,515 !B9860618382749 1,130,490 !D0035331415956 +2.92% Raleigh-Durham-Cary, NC CSA
!000048 Salt Lake City, UT MSA !B9860482947242 1,145,905 !B9860674204390 1,124,197 !D0039471434257 +1.93% Salt Lake City-Ogden-Clearfield, UT CSA
!000049 Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY MSA !B9860587038457 1,134,039 !B9860574084334 1,135,509 !H9933504261132 −0.13% Buffalo-Niagara-Cattaraugus, NY CSA
!000050 Birmingham-Hoover, AL MSA !B9860602702738 1,132,264 !B9860640016231 1,128,047 !D0055891191230 +0.37% Birmingham-Hoover-Cullman, AL CSA
!000051 Rochester, NY MSA !B9861306852027 1,055,278 !B9861315905872 1,054,323 !D0070066980722 +0.09% Rochester-Batavia-Seneca Falls, NY CSA
!000052 Tucson, AZ MSA !B9861949752262 989,569 !B9862044238180 980,263 !D0046571615495 +0.95% ~ primary census statistical area
!000053 Honolulu, HI MSA !B9862215611858 963,607 !B9862324126321 953,207 !D0045180262827 +1.09% ~primary census statistical area
!000054 Tulsa, OK MSA !B9862389857553 946,962 !B9862490514301 937,478 !D0045935871226 +1.01% Tulsa-Bartlesville, OK CSA
!000055 Fresno, CA MSA !B9862432802463 942,904 !B9862565763809 930,450 !D0043136264836 +1.34% Fresno-Madera, CA CSA
!000056 Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, CT MSA !B9862614795635 925,899 !B9862713237437 916,829 !D0046159487130 +0.99% New York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA CSA
!000057 Albuquerque, NM MSA !B9862913599861 898,642 !B9863043129330 887,077 !D0043399484923 +1.30% ~primary census statistical area
!000058 Omaha-Council Bluffs, NE-IA MSA !B9863156123089 877,110 !B9863291106716 865,350 !D0042984301069 +1.36% Omaha-Council Bluffs-Fremont, NE-IA CSA
!000059 Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY MSA !B9863220541002 871,478 !B9863229288593 870,716 !D0070411245849 +0.09% Albany-Schenectady-Amsterdam, NY CSA
!000060 New Haven-Milford, CT MSA !B9863340189824 861,113 !B9863324362391 862,477 !H9935506130775 −0.16% New York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA CSA
!000061 Bakersfield-Delano, CA MSA !B9863449986277 851,710 !B9863592822114 839,631 !D0042414941019 +1.44% ~primary census statistical area
!000062 Dayton, OH MSA !B9863524490274 845,388 !B9863570563306 841,502 !D0053778080393 +0.46% Dayton-Springfield-Greenville, OH CSA
!000063 Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA MSA !B9863686875584 831,771 !B9863789022037 823,318 !D0045788211093 +1.03% Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside, CA CSA
!000064 Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA-NJ MSA !B9863769631580 824,916 !B9863815109151 821,173 !D0053908463769 +0.46% ~primary census statistical area
!000065 El Paso, TX MSA !B9863817581530 820,970 !B9864068245702 800,647 !D0036736669011 +2.54% ~primary census statistical area
!000066 Baton Rouge, LA MSA !B9863973832023 808,242 !B9864045328039 802,484 !D0049371217249 +0.72% Baton Rouge-Pierre Part, LA CSA
!000067 Worcester, MA MSA !B9864061004183 801,227 !B9864094446333 798,552 !D0056988507072 +0.33% Boston-Worcester-Manchester, MA-RI-NH CSA
!000068 McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX MSA !B9864103742471 797,810 !B9864396798006 774,769 !D0035152896827 +2.97% ~primary census statistical area
!000069 Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI MSA !B9864334586225 779,604 !B9864404661504 774,160 !D0049572644857 +0.70% Grand Rapids-Muskegon-Holland, MI CSA
!000070 Columbia, SC MSA !B9864366550896 777,116 !B9864489785624 767,598 !D0043900814159 +1.24% Columbia-Newberry, SC CSA
!000071 Greensboro-High Point, NC MSA !B9864978777739 730,966 !B9865077282282 723,801 !D0046153084314 +0.99% Greensboro–Winston-Salem–High Point, NC CSA
!000072 Little Rock-North Little Rock-Conway, AR MSA !B9865271191973 709,901 !B9865415115890 699,757 !D0042338507342 +1.45% Little Rock-North Little Rock-Pine Bluff, AR CSA
!000073 North Port-Bradenton-Sarasota, FL MSA !B9865278886145 709,355 !B9865379111121 702,281 !D0045979075180 +1.01% Sarasota-Bradenton-Punta Gorda, FL CSA
!000074 Knoxville, TN MSA !B9865347563896 704,500 !B9865439826392 698,030 !D0046810859732 +0.93% Knoxville-Sevierville-La Follette, TN CSA
!000075 Akron, OH MSA !B9865390865461 701,456 !B9865366033746 703,200 !H9940005399791 −0.25% Cleveland-Akron-Elyria, OH CSA
!000076 Stockton, CA MSA !B9865465876366 696,214 !B9865623792671 685,306 !D0041403689888 +1.59% ~primary census statistical area
!000077 Springfield, MA MSA !B9865509203928 693,204 !B9865512984194 692,942 !D0078803570768 +0.04% ~primary census statistical area
!000078 Charleston-North Charleston-Summerville, SC MSA !B9865670376595 682,121 !B9865930488325 664,607 !D0036361953274 +2.64% ~primary census statistical area
!000079 Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown, NY MSA !B9865806910887 672,871 !B9865845178557 670,301 !D0055638209663 +0.38% New York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA CSA
!000080 Syracuse, NY MSA !B9865961441663 662,553 !B9865961079434 662,577 !H9897741617738 0.00% Syracuse-Auburn, NY CSA
!000081 Colorado Springs, CO MSA !B9865995216694 660,319 !B9866220444679 645,613 !D0037819446792 +2.28% ~primary census statistical area
!000082 Toledo, OH MSA !B9866148632110 650,266 !B9866130763096 651,429 !H9936718344621 −0.18% Toledo-Fremont, OH CSA
!000083 Greenville-Mauldin-Easley, SC MSA !B9866192788348 647,401 !B9866354970437 636,986 !D0041135006025 +1.64% Greenville-Spartanburg-Anderson, SC CSA
!000084 Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL MSA !B9866444160157 631,330 !B9866645369425 618,754 !D0038959175428 +2.03% ~primary census statistical area
!000085 Boise City-Nampa, ID MSA !B9866502397295 627,664 !B9866680874576 616,561 !D0040169419212 +1.80% ~primary census statistical area
!000086 Wichita, KS MSA !B9866536518252 625,526 !B9866576002937 623,061 !D0055324526198 +0.40% Wichita-Winfield, KS CSA
!000087 Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL MSA !B9866796188976 609,492 !B9866918294808 602,095 !D0043993407275 +1.23% ~primary census statistical area
!000088 Des Moines-West Des Moines, IA MSA !B9867287770589 580,255 !B9867472524272 569,633 !D0039820649718 +1.86% Des Moines-Newton-Pella, IA CSA
!000089 Madison, WI MSA !B9867353266249 576,467 !B9867490798328 568,593 !D0042795986956 +1.38% Madison-Baraboo, WI CSA
!000090 Scranton–Wilkes-Barre, PA MSA !B9867585690789 563,223 !B9867578449389 563,631 !H9927691121133 −0.07% ~primary census statistical area
!000091 Youngstown-Warren-Boardman, OH-PA MSA !B9867594287882 562,739 !B9867540517833 565,773 !H9947716889432 −0.54% Youngstown-Warren-East Liverpool, OH-PA CSA
!000092 Augusta-Richmond County, GA-SC MSA !B9867609955720 561,858 !B9867699003313 556,877 !D0047167137155 +0.89% ~primary census statistical area
!000093 Ogden-Clearfield, UT MSA !B9867716275173 555,916 !B9867874595949 547,184 !D0041377906874 +1.60% Salt Lake City-Ogden-Clearfield, UT CSA
!000094 Harrisburg-Carlisle, PA MSA !B9867770476727 552,911 !B9867832814441 549,475 !D0050746552727 +0.63% Harrisburg-Carlisle-Lebanon, PA CSA
!000095 Jackson, MS MSA !B9867907362517 545,394 !B9868024234043 539,057 !D0044434158463 +1.18% Jackson-Yazoo City, MS CSA
!000096 Palm Bay-Melbourne-Titusville, FL MSA !B9867940935866 543,566 !B9867944431913 543,376 !D0079585327364 +0.03% ~primary census statistical area
!000097 Provo-Orem, UT MSA !B9867991323284 540,834 !B9868254047687 526,810 !D0036260698046 +2.66% ~primary census statistical area
!000098 Chattanooga, TN-GA MSA !B9868130256040 533,372 !B9868228776406 528,143 !D0046151470251 +0.99% Chattanooga-Cleveland-Athens, TN-GA CSA
!000099 Lancaster, PA MSA !B9868315281461 523,594 !B9868394837871 519,445 !D0048298935925 +0.80% ~primary census statistical area
!000100 Modesto, CA MSA !B9868412622641 518,522 !B9868491405207 514,453 !D0048397069312 +0.79% ~primary census statistical area
!000101 Portland-South Portland-Biddeford, ME MSA !B9868465120565 515,807 !B9868498308122 514,098 !D0057065055046 +0.33% Portland-Lewiston-South Portland, ME CSA
!000102 Durham-Chapel Hill, NC MSA !B9868520098123 512,979 !B9868689603703 504,357 !D0040689672743 +1.71% Raleigh-Durham-Cary, NC CSA
!000103 Deltona-Daytona Beach-Ormond Beach, FL MSA !B9868880829964 494,804 !B9868885095188 494,593 !D0077596323476 +0.04% Orlando-Deltona-Daytona Beach, FL CSA
!000104 Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA MSA !B9869016916384 488,116 !B9869104119121 483,878 !D0047377413489 +0.88% San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA CSA
!000105 Winston-Salem, NC MSA !B9869142487410 482,025 !B9869232262140 477,717 !D0047085447476 +0.90% Greensboro–Winston-Salem–High Point, NC CSA
!000106 Lexington-Fayette, KY MSA !B9869200348587 479,244 !B9869350560116 472,099 !D0041907758979 +1.51% Lexington-Fayette–Frankfort–Richmond, KY CSA
!000107 Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers, AR-MO MSA !B9869313961134 473,830 !B9869540771592 463,204 !D0037748637337 +2.29% ~primary census statistical area
June 11, 2012 – 7:35 am Categories: Current Events | Post a comment

The real truth about Che Guevara (Part 1)

 

Humberto Fontova on Che Guevara part 2

Francis Schaeffer said about Communism:

Communism, you know, is not basically an economic theory. It’s materialistic communism, which means that at the very heart of the Marx, Engels, Lenin kind of communism (because you have to put all three together to really understand) is the materialistic concept of the final reality. That is the base for all that occurs in the communist countries.

But all the oppression you have ever heard of in Mao’s China, Stalin’s day, Poland, Czechoslovakia — any place that you can name it – all the oppression is the automatic, the mechanical certainty, that comes from having this other world view of the final reality only being material or energy shaped by pure chance. That’s where it comes from.

That quote from Schaeffer comes from a 1982 speech. Poland was cracking down on the dissenters in Poland at the time. Young people get attracted to Communism and Socialism because they talk of dignity of the individual. However, what they will get from people like Che Guevara and Cuba will be much different.

Che Guevara is celebrated all of the world as a great liberator. A major film was released about his life recently starring academy award winner Benicio Del Toro. In fact in an interview about the film, Del Toro commented, “His objective was to take care of the people ultimately through communism. We have seen that Communism limps. It does not completely work, but there is something about his dream..” Is that all we are left with? This is a perfect example of what I am trying to say here. It may happen on paper, but it does not work in real life. Communism always has failed and it always is guilty of taking away rights!!!!

Guevara played a major part in the Communist take-over in Cuba. Then why do Cubans do anything they can to travel to the USA?

As luck would have it, this very month GQ magazine modestly crowned itself the crowner of the “25 Most Stylish Men in the World.” Based on their cover, the top contender for the top spot seems like cheeky free-spirit Johnny Depp, who appears shirtless–all the better to display his Che Guevara pendant.
On top of jailing political prisoners at a higher rate than Stalin’s and murdering more people in its first three years than Hitler’s in its first six, here’s an (abbreviated) list of the things prohibited under penalty of jail and/or forced labor by the regime co-founded by the gentleman cheeky free-spirit Johnny Depp flaunts on his t-shirts, kerchiefs and pendants:
1. To say “Down with Fidel!” or “Che Sucks!” Cuba’s constitution” mandates 18 months in prison for anyone overheard cracking a joke against Castro or Che. If the neighborhood CDR (Committee for the Defense of the Revolution, imported to Cuba by the East German STASI, who grandfathered it from Hitler’s Gestapo) overhears any such deviation from “ideological purity” the regime “will want a word with you.”
2. Travel abroad without permission from the government. (which is granted mostly to regime toadies and hacks.
3. Switch jobs without regime permission.
4. Switch homes without regime permission…
5. Publish anything without regime permission.
6. Own a personal computer, a fax machine or a satellite antenna.
7. Access the Internet. Cuba’s Internet is under constant regime “surveillance.” By the secret police. Only 1.7% of the population has access to the web, a lower percentage than in Papua New Guinea. This is a nation that pre-Castro/Che had more telephones and TV’s per-capita than most European countries
8. Send your children to a private or religious school. All schools belong to the Communist party.
9. Tune in to any free radio or television station. In Cuba all media is property of the Stalinist regime.
12. Read books, magazines, or newspapers, not approved by the regime. All books, magazines, and newspapers in Cuba are published by the Stalinist regime.
13. Receive publications from abroad or from visitors. This is punishable by jail pursuant to Law 88.
14. Openly communicate with foreign journalists.
15. Visit or stay in hotels, restaurants, beaches or resorts for tourists. (regime permission is granted to a tiny number of regime hacks and toadies)
16. Accept gifts or donations from foreign visitors.
17. Seek employment with foreign companies allowed to do business in Cuba. (regime permission is required for employment with these accomplices with Stalinism.)
18. Own your own home or business.
19. Earn more than the wages established by the regime for all employees: $7-12 monthly for most jobs, $15-20 monthly for professionals, such as doctors and government officials.
20. Sell any personal belongings, services, homemade foods or crafts without regime permission…
21. Fish along the coastline or board a boat without regime permission.
22. Belong to any independent trade union. The regime controls all unions and no individual or collective bargaining is permitted; neither are strikes or protests.
23. Organize any artistic performance without regime permission. (Don’t look for this announced at the Sundance Film Festival but before Robert Redford released the Motorcycle Diaries he was mandated to travel to Cuba and give a special screening for approval to one of the film’s co/producers: Fidel Castro. So in effect, this Castroite provision can actually extend beyond Cuba’s borders.)
24. Select a doctor or hospital. The regime assigns them all.
25. Seek medical help outside of Cuba.
26. Hire an attorney. All are assigned by the regime.
28. Refuse to participate in an event or mass demonstration organized by the Communist Party. (Turn down such an “offer” and watch your food rations shrink and employment status crumble.)
29. Refuse to participate in “voluntary” work for adults and children. (see above)
30. Refuse to vote in a single party election featuring only Stalinist candidates nominated by the Stalinist regime.
31. Transport any food products for either personal or family consumption between provinces.
32. Slaughter a cow. This “felony” is sanctioned by five years imprisonment.
33. Purchase or sell real estate or land.
34. Select a career. In the selection process for universities (all of which belong to the Stalinist regime), regime apparatchiks select it for you, closely reviewing your record of “ideological purity,” as reported to them by regime snitches.
35. Invite a foreigner to spend the night at your home.
36. Buy milk in a regime outlet for any child older than seven years. Only Cuban children up to seven years of age have the right to pay a quota for milk. After that, parents can only obtain milk in the black market—if caught and their “ideological purity” (as reported by regime snitches) is in question, jail time is usually in the offing for the hapless Castro subject.
Today the world’s largest Che Guevara image adorns Cuba’s headquarters and torture chambers for its KGB and STASI-trained secret police. And cheeky free-spirit Johnny Depp seems delighted to flaunt this emblem from his pendants, shirts and kerchiefs. In a Vibe Magazine interview a few years back, Johnny Depp boasted of “digging” Che Guevara.
On the other hand, Venezuela’s youth see what’s coming with “Mission Che Guevara.” And as we saw in harrowing detail above—want no part of it.
“I bet you were expecting a Hollywood putz,” boasted Depp to his obsequious Vibe magazine interviewer who seemed dazzled by Depp’s penetrating sagacity. “Bet you expected some  commodity without a brain in his head!”
Nothing of the sort, Mr Depp. In such as Hollywood and Cannes, you tower as an exceptional intellectual commodity.
Related posts:

The real truth about Che Guevara (Part 3)

A few years ago the movie “Che” was released and it praised the communist killer Che Guevara. Here is what Movie Guide had to say about it: “Armed Struggle” is the rallying cry of CHE, Steven Soderbergh’s four-hour tribute to the violent Communist tactics of guerrilla warrior Ernesto “Che” Guevaro. Divided into two parts, the […]

The real truth about Che Guevara from Nat Hentoff (Part 2)

Uploaded by catoinstitutevideo on Jun 9, 2011 Nat Hentoff is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute. http://www.cato.org/people/nat-hentoff In this clip, Hentoff describes the telling encounter he had when he met Ernesto “Che” Guevara in the late 1950s. Video produced by Caleb O. Brown and Austin Bragg. View hi-res version Get the latest from Nat […]

The real truth about Che Guevara (Part 1)

  Humberto Fontova on Che Guevara part 2 Francis Schaeffer said about Communism: Communism, you know, is not basically an economic theory. It’s materialistic communism, which means that at the very heart of the Marx, Engels, Lenin kind of communism (because you have to put all three together to really understand) is the materialistic concept […]

June 11, 2012 – 7:35 am Categories: Francis Schaeffer | Post a comment

“The Failure of Socialism” episode of Free to Choose in 1990 by Milton Friedman (Part 3)

Milton Friedman: Free To Choose – The Failure Of Socialism With Ronald Reagan (Full)

Published on Mar 19, 2012 by

Milton Friedman’s writings affected me greatly when I first discovered them and I wanted to share with you.

Ronald Reagan introduces this program, and traces a line from Adam Smith’s “The Wealth of Nations” to Milton Friedman’s work, describing Free to Choose as “a survival kit for you, for our nation and for freedom.” Dr. Friedman travels to Hungary and Czechoslovakia to learn how Eastern Europeans are rebuilding their collapsed economies. His conclusion: they must accept the verdict of history that governments create no wealth. Economic freedom is the only source of prosperity. That means free, private markets. Attempts to find a “third way” between socialism and free markets are doomed from the start. If the people of Eastern Europe are given the chance to make their own choices they will achieve a high level of prosperity. Friedman tells us individual stories about how small businesses struggle to survive against the remains of extensive government control. Friedman says, “Everybody knows what needs to be done. The property that is now in the hands of the state, needs to be gotten into the hands of private people who can use it in accordance with their own interests and values.” Eastern Europe has observed the history of free markets in the United States and wants to copy our success. After the documentary, Dr. Friedman talks further about government and the economy with Gary Becker of the University of Chicago and Samuel Bowles of the University of Massachusetts. In a wide-ranging discussion, they disagree about the results of economic controls in countries around the world, with Friedman defending his thesis that the best government role is the smallest one.
___________
Below is a portion of the transcript of the program and above you will find the complete video of the program:
 
 
 DISCUSSIONHello, I am Linda Chavez and welcome to Free to Choose. Joining Dr. Friedman for a discussion of the failure of socialism are Gary Becker from the University of Chicago and Samuel Bowles of the University of Massachusetts. Dr. Bowles, I think we can all agree that socialism has failed Eastern Europe. Dr. Friedman believes that the path out of that is the free market and I think he thinks there are lessons for the United States. What do you think?Chavez: I would like to bring this discussion back to the United States for a moment. What about socialism in the United States. There has been one area where we have tried to redistribute wealth. We have done that through our welfare policies and social security. Has that worked?

Bowles: Well, there is much to celebrate in Eastern Europe __ not only the elimination of dictatorial rule. I go back on that a long time. I was in the Soviet Union in the late 50’s (1958 and 1959) as a musician and I met many Russian musicians and made friends with a lot of Russian people who found themselves harassed and victimized by the police. In fact, my own musical group was prevented from singing a couple of times by the police. That is all on the way out and I hope it is gone for good. Equally welcome is the end of this myth of a centrally planned society. That is gone too and I hope that basically the lesson is learned. But Milton seems to think that we have to choose between either a centrally planned society or a society in which we have markets which are basically unregulated. So the choice is really between all or nothing.

I don’t think that is the choice. I think what Milton is posing for us is a model which is as unrealistic as a centrally planned model. It is outdated, it won’t work, it is extreme, and I think it is undemocratic. I think that we have choices in between, what Milton called the third way, a way that he said wouldn’t work, has been shown to work around the world. I think that Eastern Europe would be very ill-advised to take Milton’s advise on this. Yet, the last time anybody took Milton’s advise on economic policy was Ronald Reagan and Ronald Reagan has put the U.S. economy into a situation where it can’t pay its bills and is facing mounting economic instability and difficulties.

Chavez: Dr. Friedman, what about this midway path?

Friedman: First of all, I utterly reject what Sam says about the results of Ronald Reagan’s changes. We had a decade of extraordinary growth, increased employment in which inflation was brought down sharply. Ronald Reagan came into office at a period of very high inflation, and so on. But this program is not about the Reagan administration. This program is about Eastern Europe and I want to go to Eastern Europe.

I believe Sam is completely wrong in saying that the model I propose is outdated. I believe that what he calls obsolete is something very different. You have had the third way __ you have had it in the United States; you have had it in Sweden; you have had it in Britain; you’ve had it elsewhere. In every case it has been built on the foundation of a long period of what I call the first way. The United States had 150 years of essentially a free private market before it launched on this period of the welfare state. The same thing was true in Britain, the same thing was true in Sweden. I believe he will find it very difficult to site any example of a country which started from a very low level and immediately adopted that combination of policies.

Becker: Let me add something on that. I think the lesson that we learned from what happened in Eastern Europe goes beyond simply that central planning doesn’t work. I think we all agree that it doesn’t work. But it is more than that __ it is the role of private property in the system and the incentives provided by private property.

I don’t know what socialism means anymore, but I remember when I was in Poland I asked the head of the ideology department is private property consistent with socialism? He said, it may be. Then I asked him, well what is the difference between socialism and capitalism. His answer was, we are still working on that. I think what we have seen is a rejection of the ideas associated with traditional socialism which are suppression of private property, government ownership of property, and so on.

Now, how far should we move in the other direction? I think that is question you are asking Sam, and is there a middle way. I think the middle ways that have been successful have all been largely reliant on private property, private ownership, private incentives. The difficult question is one that Milton raised in the documentary. How far can you redistribute income and make it consistent with effective incentives?

I don’t think we know the boundary point, whether 30% of the income being redistributed is too much, 40%, 50% __ my own feeling is that we have gone much too far in Sweden and some of the other Scandinavian countries, and they are beginning to step back from this. They are lowering maximum tax rates to 50% now __ they were up to 80%. So I think there is a third way, but that third way is going to be a lot closer to unregulated market than toward a socialist organization of resources and a suppression of private property.

Bowles: Let’s get back to the particulars though. You talk about Sweden and you talk about the third way failing, and Milton says nobody has ever really gotten rich on the third way __ they have only benefited from that. Let’s talk about the United States. The period you described included a very long period in which the United States was a highly protectionist country in which our industrial base was developed from Alexander Hamilton on for some time, and then during the late 19th and early 20th century. To call that a free market solution would be against everything you have taught. Or, if one wants to go back into the 19th century, the huge subsidies of the railroads were, of course, an intervention in the market.

In the case of England that you talk about, the same is true. The role of the British Navy and for example the Parliament in actually establishing the private property which is what you favor. This was done by a government intervention. We talk about the other cases. Talk about Sweden or about Korea. These are two countries which I think are justly admired for their economic performance. Both countries have income distributions far more equal than the United States.

In Sweden, over the half the GNP is taxed. Now, people in this country would say that obviously they have gone too far. But let’s look at the test of the market. Sweden and Korea have been defeating the United States in world markets. Exports have grown five percent per year during the Reagan/Bush years in Sweden. In the United States, they have grown one percent per year. In Korea we know they have grown much better. If you want to go on to Norway, where much of the investing is done by the government, they have grown their exports even faster than Sweden. Meanwhile, we can’t compete in world markets.

So the lesson of these countries is if you look at the facts Milton, a combination of government regulation and the market works. I agree with Gary. I think private property is extremely important because the incentives associated with owning the results of your work is essential. But private property does not mean that we have to let the market go unregulated and all the evidence says that the countries that are beating us in the world market today don’t do it. They are not that dumb. Japan doesn’t do it; Korea doesn’t do it; Sweden doesn’t do it.

Friedman: Let’s not throw straw men around. Obviously I am not in favor of no government. Government has some very important roles to play. Those are very limited. You take the case of the United States during the 19th century and of Britain in the 19th century. At the time of Queen Victoria’s jubilee in 1899, total government spending in Britain was 10% of the national income. Up until 1929 in the United States, except for periods of great war, total government spending in the United States was about 10% of national income. Now that is a very far cry from a government which spends over half of the national income . . . . and a little less than half in the United States.

Bowles: You are opposed to capital controls. You are opposed to telling people they can’t move their money internationally. That is what Korea does. You are opposed to . . .

Friedman: I think Korea makes a mistake by doing it.

Bowles: Korea has beaten us by exactly the policies you are posing.

Friedman: So has Hong Kong. Hong Kong has beaten us by the policies I am proposing.

Bowles: . . . if Korea is not a middle way and if Sweden is not a middle way, then I would like to know what you call it.

Becker: Korea is a lot closer to a market-oriented economy than any of the economies we have been talking about.

Bowles: The government approves the heads of the banks in Korea. They have nationalized their steel industry and have one of the most efficient plants in the world at Palhang. If you call that a private economy . . .

Becker: What fraction of resources in Korea goes through the government?

Bowles: A tremendous fraction if you take account of the fact that the banks are centrally run and they control the credit allocations there and they don’t let people take their money out of the . . .

 
June 11, 2012 – 7:13 am Categories: Milton Friedman | Post a comment

“Music Monday” Meaning of the song “The Weight” by the Band

Uploaded by on Jun 7, 2010

From their movie “The Last Waltz” with The Staple Singers –

I pulled into Nazareth, I was feelin’ about half past dead;
I just need some place where I can lay my head.
“Hey, mister, can you tell me where a man might find a bed?”
He just grinned and shook my hand, and “No!”, was all he said.

(Chorus:)
Take a load off Fannie, take a load for free;
Take a load off Fannie, And (and) (and) you can put the load right on me.

I picked up my bag, I went lookin’ for a place to hide;
When I saw Carmen and the Devil walkin’ side by side.
I said, “Hey, Carmen, come on, let’s go downtown.”
She said, “I gotta go, but m’friend can stick around.”

(Chorus)

Go down, Miss Moses, there’s nothin’ you can say
It’s just ol’ Luke, and Luke’s waitin’ on the Judgement Day.
“Well, Luke, my friend, what about young Anna Lee?”
He said, “Do me a favor, son, woncha stay an’ keep Anna Lee company?”

(Chorus)

Crazy Chester followed me, and he caught me in the fog.
He said, “I will fix your rags, if you’ll take Jack, my dog.”
I said, “Wait a minute, Chester, you know I’m a peaceful man.”
He said, “That’s okay, boy, won’t you feed him when you can.”

(Chorus)

Catch a Cannonball, now, t’take me down the line
My bag is sinkin’ low and I do believe it’s time.
To get back to Miss Annie, you know she’s the only one.
Who sent me here with her regards for everyone.

(Chorus)

___________

The Weight

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Jump to: navigation, search

“The Weight”
Single by The Band
from the album Music from Big Pink
B-side “I Shall Be Released“
Released June 24, 1968
Format 45′
Recorded January 1968
A&R Recorders (studio A),
New York City
Genre Folk rock, roots rock
Length 4:34
Label Capitol
Writer(s) Robbie Robertson
Producer John Simon
Music sample
Play sound
 
“The Weight”
Single by Diana Ross & the Supremes and The Temptations
from the album Together
B-side “For Better or Worse”
Released August 21, 1969
Format Vinyl record (7″, 45 RPM)
Recorded Hitsville U.S.A. (Studios A & B); 1969
Genre Funk, pop, soul
Length 3:00
Label Motown
M 1153
Writer(s) Robbie Robertson
Producer Frank Wilson
Diana Ross & the Supremes singles chronology
“No Matter What Sign You Are”
(1969)		 “The Weight”
(1969)		 “I Second That Emotion”
(1969)
Together track listing
 
[show]10 tracks
Side one
  1. “Stubborn Kind of Fellow“
  2. “I’ll Be Doggone“
  3. “The Weight“
  4. “Ain’t Nothing Like the Real Thing“
  5. “Uptight (Everything’s Alright)“
Side two
  1. “Sing a Simple Song“
  2. “My Guy, My Girl” (medley of both songs)
  3. “For Better or Worse”
  4. “Can’t Take My Eyes Off You“
  5. “Why (Must We Fall in Love)“
The Temptations singles chronology
“I Can’t Get Next to You”
(1969)		 “The Weight”
(1969)		 “Psychedelic Shack”
(1969)
Music sample
Play sound
Alternative cover
 

“The Weight” is a song written by Robbie Robertson. It was released by The Band as Capitol Records single 2269 in 1968, and appeared one week later on the group’s debut album Music from Big Pink. The song is listed as #41 on Rolling Stone’s 500 Greatest Songs of All Time published in 2004,[1] and Pitchfork Media named it the thirteenth best song of the Sixties.[2] The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame named it one of the 500 Songs that Shaped Rock and Roll.[3]

Contents

 [hide] 

[edit] Composition

“The Weight” takes the folk music motif of a traveler, who in the first line arrives in Nazareth in the Lehigh Valley region of Pennsylvania. (The band Nazareth took its name from this line.) Once there, he encounters various residents of the town, the song being a story of these encounters. Nazareth is the hometown of the guitar manufacturer C. F. Martin & Company.[4]

The residents include a man who cannot direct the traveler to any lodging, Carmen and the Devil walking side by side, “Crazy Chester”, and Luke “waiting on Judgment Day” while leaving his young bride behind and alone.

Musically, the song shows the blending of folk parlour song (harmonies) in the chorus, where the voices come in: “and, (and, and), you put the load right on me (you put the load right on me)”.

In his autobiography This Wheel’s on Fire, Levon Helm explains that the people mentioned in the song were based on real people The Band knew. The “Miss Anna Lee” mentioned in the lyric is Helm’s longtime friend Anna Lee Amsden.[5][6]

On August 17, 1969, The Band played “The Weight” as the 10th song in their set at Woodstock.

[edit] Robertson on “The Weight”

According to songwriter Robertson, “The Weight” was inspired by the films of Luis Buñuel, about which Robertson once said:

(Buñuel) did so many films on the impossibility of sainthood. People trying to be good in Viridiana and Nazarin, people trying to do their thing. In ‘The Weight’ it’s the same thing. People like Buñuel would make films that had these religious connotations to them but it wasn’t necessarily a religious meaning. In Buñuel there were these people trying to be good and it’s impossible to be good. In “The Weight” it was this very simple thing. Someone says, “Listen, would you do me this favour? When you get there will you say ‘hello’ to somebody or will you give somebody this or will you pick up one of these for me? Oh? You’re going to Nazareth, that’s where the Martin guitar factory is. Do me a favour when you’re there.” This is what it’s all about. So the guy goes and one thing leads to another and it’s like “Holy shit, what’s this turned into? I’ve only come here to say ‘hello’ for somebody and I’ve got myself in this incredible predicament.” It was very Buñuelish to me at the time.[7]

[edit] Reception

“The Weight” is one of the group’s best known songs and among the most popular songs of the late 1960s counterculture. However, the song was not a significant mainstream hit for The Band in the U.S., peaking at only #63, though it fared better on some radio stations (e.g., #3 on KHJ[8]). The Band’s record fared much better in Canada and the UK – in those countries, the single was a top 40 hit, peaking at #35 in Canada and #21 in the UK in 1968. Three cover versions of “The Weight” charted higher on the US pop charts in 1968/69 than The Band’s original recording:

None of these cover versions charted in the UK, where The Band’s version remains the only version to chart. The label credit on The Band’s version mentions the names of the band’s five members but not The Band per se. The lyrics on The Band’s and DeShannon’s versions never mention the title.

[edit] Other cover versions

“The Weight” has become a modern standard, and hence has been covered in concert by many other acts, most prominently Little Feat, Stoney LaRue, Aaron Pritchett, The Staple Singers, Waylon Jennings, Joe Cocker, Travis, Grateful Dead, The New Riders of the Purple Sage, O.A.R., Edwin McCain, The Black Crowes, Spooky Tooth, Hanson, Old Crow Medicine Show, Shannon Curfman, Panic! at the Disco, Aretha Franklin, Joan Osborne, John Denver, Cassandra Wilson, Miranda Lambert, Al Kooper and Mike Bloomfield, Deana Carter, New Madrid, and Dionne Warwick. Ratdog and Bob Weir are also known to cover this song from time to time. Additional notable versions are by Lee Ann Womack, the band Smith, Weezer, The Allman Brothers Band, The Marshall Tucker Band, Jimmy Barnes with The Badloves, Free Wild and Aaron Pritchett.[9] At the end of the documentary It Might Get Loud Jack White, Jimmy Page and The Edge play The Weight acoustically while The Edge and White swap vocals.

On record, folk singer Michelle Shocked covers the song as part of her 2007 gospel album ToHeavenURide. Charly Garcia covered the song in Spanish under the title “El Peso,” and Czech singer Marie Rottrová covered the song with the band Flamingo in 1970. Jeff Healey covered it on his album Mess of Blues in 2008.

[edit] Film and commercial play

“The Weight” has been featured in a number of films and television shows – films featuring the song include Easy Rider; Hope Floats; Igby Goes Down (a cover version by Travis); The Big Chill; Girl, Interrupted; Patch Adams; 1408; and Starsky & Hutch (as a parody of the scene in Easy Rider). Television shows which have featured “The Weight” include Californication, My Name Is Earl, Sports Night, Cold Case, Chuck, and Saturday Night Live. The song has also been used in commercials for Diet Coke and Cingular/AT&T Wireless. “The Weight” was also covered by Sherie Rene Scott in the Broadway musical Everyday Rapture.

Due to contractual problems, The Band’s version was used in the movie, but not the soundtrack for Easy Rider – included instead on the film’s soundtrack was a cover (very closely resembling The Band’s original) by Smith. In The Band’s concert film, The Last Waltz, The Band perform the song with the The Staple Singers. The song is also featured in two other of The Band’s concert videos: The Band Is Back (1984) and The Band Live At The New Orleans Jazz Festival (1998). “The Weight” was one of three songs The Band’s 1990s lineup performed for Let It Rock!, a birthday concert/tribute for Ronnie Hawkins. “The Weight” is one of three songs performed by The Band featured in the 2003 documentary film, Festival Express.

An acoustic rendition of the song appears in the 2009 documentary It Might Get Loud, performed by guitarists Jimmy Page, The Edge and Jack White.

[edit] Personnel

June 11, 2012 – 7:12 am Categories: Current Events | Post a comment

Senator Pryor asks for Spending Cut Suggestions! Here are a few!(Part 151)

Senator Mark Pryor wants our ideas on how to cut federal spending. Take a look at this video clip below:

Senator Pryor has asked us to send our ideas to him at cutspending@pryor.senate.gov and I have done so in the past and will continue to do so in the future.

On May 11, 2011,  I emailed to this above address and I got this email back from Senator Pryor’s office:

Please note, this is not a monitored email account. Due to the sheer volume of correspondence I receive, I ask that constituents please contact me via my website with any responses or additional concerns. If you would like a specific reply to your message, please visit http://pryor.senate.gov/contact. This system ensures that I will continue to keep Arkansas First by allowing me to better organize the thousands of emails I get from Arkansans each week and ensuring that I have all the information I need to respond to your particular communication in timely manner.  I appreciate you writing. I always welcome your input and suggestions. Please do not hesitate to contact me on any issue of concern to you in the future.

Here are a few more I just emailed to Senator Pryor myself:

Government auditors spent the past five years examining all federal programs and found that 22 percent of them—costing taxpayers a total of $123 billion annually—fail to show any positive impact on the populations they serve.

  • The stimulus set aside $350 millionfor a national broadband coverage map—even though one private firm stated it could create one for $3.5 million.
  • Fannie Mae—now backed up by taxpayers—paid $6.3 million in legal defense costs for ousted executives such as Franklin Raines. An additional $16.8 millionwas spent defending Fannie Mae’s regulators in litigation against the former executives.
  • The Census Bureau spent $2.5 millionon Super Bowl ads, and on-air mentions by sportscasters.
  • New documents reveal that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) lost 1,000 computersin 2008. Not to be outdone, Homeland Security officers lost nearly 200 guns in places like restaurant restrooms, convenience stores, and bowling alleys. Several of the guns ended up in the hands of criminals.
June 11, 2012 – 7:05 am Categories: spending out of control | Post a comment

99 weeks of unemployment benefits is too good to be true, why not 200 weeks?

Liberals sometime just lose track of reality. Unemployment benefits were originally set up for a 3 month period, but the Democrats have extended it to almost two years!! What will be the result?

I don’t now why I bothered spending all that time perusing the writings of Paul Krugman and Larry Summers in order to produce my previous blog post when this Michael Ramirez cartoon makes the same point in a much simpler way.

Michael Ramirez

June 11, 2012 – 6:46 am Categories: Cato Institute, Current Events | Post a comment

Why would Planned Parenthood encourage abortions?

The War on Baby Girls: Part 1 – Undercover in Texas

Published on May 29, 2012 by

__________

I was very sad to learn that Planned Parenthood encouraged abortions. It is very sad that gendercide happens and the fact is Planned Parenthood has at times encouraged this event. Here is an article on it below:

Sign the petition NOW to stop the killing of girls, just because they are girls! http://www.ProtectOurGirls.com

Over 100 millions girls are missing today. These girls were victims of gendercide. The war on baby girls begins in the womb.

AUSTIN, May 29 — Today, Live Action released a new undercover video showing a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic in Austin, TX encouraging a woman to obtain a late-term abortion because she was purportedly carrying a girl and wanted to have a boy. The video is first in a new series titled “Gendercide: Sex-Selection in America,” exposing the practice of sex-selective abortion in the United States and how Planned Parenthood and the rest of the abortion industry facilitate the selective elimination of baby girls in the womb.

“I see that you’re saying that you want to terminate if it’s a girl, so are you just wanting to continue the pregnancy in the meantime?” a counselor named “Rebecca” offers the woman, who is purportedly still in her first trimester and cannot be certain about the gender. “The abortion covers you up until 23 weeks,” explains Rebecca, “and usually at 5 months is usually (sic) when they detect, you know, whether or not it’s a boy or a girl.” Doctors agree that the later in term a doctor performs an abortion, the greater the risk of complications.

The Planned Parenthood staffer suggests that the woman get on Medicaid in order to pay for an ultrasound to determine the gender of her baby, even though she plans to use the knowledge for an elective abortion. She also tells the woman to “just continue and try again” for the desired gender after aborting a girl, and adds, “Good luck, and I hope that you do get your boy.”

“The search-and-destroy targeting of baby girls through prenatal testing and abortion is a pandemic that is spreading across the globe,” notes Lila Rose, founder and president of Live Action. “Research proves that sex-selective abortion has now come to America. The abortion industry, led by Planned Parenthood, is a willing participant.”

Six studies in the past four years indicate that there are thousands of “missing girls” in the U.S., many from sex-selective abortion. The U.K., India, Australia, and other countries ban sex-selective abortion, but the U.S., save for three states, does not. On Wednesday, Congress will debate the Prenatal Non-Discrimination Act (PRENDA), which would ban sex-selective abortions nationally.

“Planned Parenthood and their ruthless abortion-first mentality is the real ‘war on women’,” says Rose. “Sex-selective abortion is gender discrimination with lethal consequences for little girls.”

The complete, unedited video and transcript can be viewed at http://www.ProtectOurGirls.com, a hub of research and information on sex-selective abortions.

Live Action is a youth led movement dedicated to building a culture of life and ending the human rights abuse of abortion. They use new media to educate the public about the humanity of the unborn and investigative journalism to expose threats against the vulnerable and defenseless.

For further information, please contact Dan Wilson or Jameson Cunningham with Shirley & Banister Public Affairs at (703) 739-5920 or (800) 536-5920 and email at media@liveaction.org

More information at LiveAction.org.

June 11, 2012 – 1:34 am Categories: Prolife | Post a comment

Should the 10 Commandments be banned from public life?(Part 8, 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

Honor the Sabbath day.

42. Examples of the early implementation of this fourth commandment into civil law are seen in the Virginia laws of 1610, the New Haven laws of 1653, the New Hampshire laws of 1680, the Pennsylvania laws of 1682 and 1705, the South Carolina laws of 1712, the North Carolina laws of 1741, the Connecticut laws of 1751, etc.

43. In 1775, and throughout the American Revolution, Commander-in-Chief George Washington issued military orders directing that the Sabbath be observed. His order of May 2, 1778, at Valley Forge was typical:

The Commander in Chief directs that divine service be performed every Sunday at 11 o’clock in those brigades to which there are chaplains; those which have none to attend the places of worship nearest to them. It is expected that officers of all ranks will by their attendance set an example to their men.

Washington issued numerous similar orders throughout the Revolution.

44. In the Federal Era and well beyond, states continued to enact and reenact Sabbath laws. In fact, the States went to impressive lengths to uphold the Sabbath. For example, in 1787, Vermont enacted a ten-part law to preserve the Sabbath; in 1791, Massachusetts enacted an eleven-part law; in 1786, Virginia enacted a law written by Thomas Jefferson and sponsored by James Madison; in 1798, New Jersey enacted a twenty-one-part law; in 1799, New Hampshire enacted a fourteen-part law; in 1821, Maine enacted a thirteen-part law; etc.

45. These Sabbath laws-and scores of others like them-were nothing less than the enactment of the fourth commandment in the Decalogue. In fact, in 1967, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania provided a thorough historical exegesis of those laws and concluded:

“Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy; six days shalt thou labor and do all thy work; but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God. In it thou shalt not do any work.” This divine pronouncement became part of the Common Law inherited by the thirteen American colonies and by the sovereign States of the American union.

46. In 1950, the Supreme Court of Mississippi had similarly declared:

The Sunday laws have a divine origin. Blackstone (Cooley’s) Par. 42, page 36. After the six days of creation, the Creator Himself rested on the Seventh. Genesis, Chapter 2, verses 2 and 3. Thus, the Sabbath was instituted, as a day of rest. The original example was later confirmed as a commandment when the law was handed down from Mt. Sinai: “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.”

47. Similar declarations may be found in the courts of numerous other States, including New York, Alabama, Florida, Oregon, and Kentucky, Georgia, Minnesota, etc.

48. However, before any of these contemporary courts had acknowledged that the Sabbath laws were derived from the Decalogue, John Jay, the original Chief Justice of the U. S. Supreme Court, had confirmed that the source of civil Sabbath laws were the divine commands. As he explained:

There were several divine, positive ordinances . . . of universal obligation, as the Sabbath.

49. There are numerous other examples demonstrating that the fourth commandment of the Decalogue played an important historical role in American civil law.

50. While contemporary critics argue that the first four commands of the Decalogue were inconsequential in our history or that they should not be publicly displayed today, the facts prove that they exerted a substantial influence on American law and jurisprudence. In fact, the 1922 Iowa Supreme Court rejected the assertion that only one side of the Decalogue was important to American law, declaring:

The observance of Sunday is one of our established customs. It has come down to us from the same Decalogue that prohibited murder, adultery, perjury, and theft. It is more ancient than our common law or our form of government. It is recognized by Constitutions and legislative enactments, both State and federal. On this day Legislatures adjourn, courts cease to function, business is suspended, and nation-wide our citizens cease from labor.

51. Whether individuals today agree with those early laws based on the first four commandments in the Decalogue in no manner lessens their historical impact.
June 11, 2012 – 1:21 am Categories: David Barton, Founding Fathers | Post a comment