Democrats are toutinga compilation polling data out from Public Policy Polling that shows Gov. Mike Beebe has the highest approval rating of any governor in the country. Of those Arkansans polled, Beebe is approved of by 59 percent with only 22 percent disapproving. He truly seems to be the teflon man. Most Arkansans have made up their minds that they like him.
Sen. Mark Pryor, on the other hand, is one of the least liked Senators in Washington, according to the polling firm’s chart. Only 29 percent of Arkansans polled approve of Pryor, while 46 percent disapprove. Only two Senators, John McCain (R-AZ) and Bill Nelson (D-NE), come out worse.
It should also be noted that the data from the various states was not conducted at the same time. The polling data used from Arkansas was from January 2010 – which is why Sen. John Boozman is not listed. It would be interesting to see if these numbers have gone down any especially considering what the economy has done over the last year and half – illustrated by this chart from Roby Brock.
Also in April of this year, Talk Business and Hendrix College polled Beebe and Pryor in a statewide survey. At the time, Beebe had a job approval rating of 67%-22%. Pryor only held a 40%-36.5% positive approval rating. Click here to access those results.
______________
That makes my post a while back even more true now:
It is my view that if the economy keeps stinking that Republicans will have a field day in November of 2012. However, the same principle holds true that challengers to Democrats will be very successful in Democratic primaries.
In Arkansas many have longed for another Clinton in the White House. Could it happen? It is my view that it is a foregone conclusion that the Republicans are heavy favorites to take the Senate back and win the presidency in 2012. Nevertheless, it would not surprise me if there are some big surprises in the Democratic primaries. Matthew Dickinson wrote a fine article, “Run Hillary, Run,” Salon, August 4, 2011 and in that article he makes three points:
1. “To begin, her stint as secretary of state has done wonders for her approval rating, as indicated by Gallup poll surveys dating back to her time in the White House.”
2. “Her second advantage relates to the first: She’s not part of the mess at home. She didn’t weigh in on the stimulus bill, or healthcare, or the banking overhaul, and she certainly bears no responsibility for the state of the economy.”
3. “This leads to a third point: buyer’s remorse. It’s not one she can directly bring up (after all, she’s above politics), but others will certainly remind voters that she did warn you. Remember that 3 a.m. phone call?”
Senator Mark Pryor is part of the establishment too and will face the same problems that President Obama faces in 2012, but that could not be said about Mike Beebe. Beebe is very popular and won with overwhelming numbers in Arkansas when many other big names in the Democratic party went down like Broadway and Lincoln.
Dr. Jay Barth with Hendrix College comments on our latest poll results on Arkansas politics (clip from Talkbusiness) Talk Business reported today in the article “Poll Shows Beebe Strength, Pryor Shaky,” the following: A new Talk Business-Hendrix College Poll shows Gov. Mike Beebe (D) maintaining his high job approval rating, while Sen. Mark Pryor (D) […]
U.S. Sen. Mark Pryor at the 2009 Democratic Party Jefferson Jackson Dinner, Arkansas’s largest annual political event. Mark Pryor is up for re-election to the Senate in 2014. It is my opinion that the only reason he did not have an opponent in 2008 was because the Republicans in Arkansas did not want to go […]
The Sixty Six who resisted “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal (Part 20)
This post today is a part of a series I am doing on the 66 Republican Tea Party favorites that resisted eating the “Sugar-coated Satan Sandwich” Debt Deal. Actually that name did not originate from a representative who agrees with the Tea Party, but from a liberal.
Rep. Emanuel Clever (D-Mo.) called the newly agreed-upon bipartisan compromise deal to raise the debt limit “a sugar-coated satan sandwich.”
“This deal is a sugar-coated satan sandwich. If you lift the bun, you will not like what you see,” Clever tweeted on August 1, 2011.
“First, thank you to the hundreds of constituents who have called, e-mailed and posted comments on my Facebook and Twitter pages. This was a difficult vote, but because of the comments and calls, I cast it with the confidence that it was the right vote for the eighth district of Georgia. My constituents know, as well as I do, that we should do all that we can to keep from defaulting on our obligations. However, a leader in the White House would have never allowed the discussion of a default to begin with and would have prioritized spending before this crisis came to a head.
“While this bill included some of the main principles of my preferred “Cut, Cap and Balance” bill it did not include enough of them. As families across Georgia have realized – you can only spend as much as you take in. “Cut, Cap and Balance” as well as the “Boehner Plan” required the passage of a Balanced Budget Amendment before allowing the President to raise the debt limit a second time. Unfortunately, this requirement was left out of the compromise. Additionally, this bill includes cuts, insisted upon by the President, which would disproportionately fall in the area of defense, to the exclusion of other areas that are the true drivers of our national debt. The uncertainty surrounding these defense cuts could have a devastating impact on thousands of jobs in Middle Georgia – a risk I’m not willing to take at a time when our unemployment rate continues to hover near double digits.
“Middle Georgians sent me here to fight for the personal freedoms, individual liberties and economic opportunities for our generation and the next. I will never cease in that effort. Unfortunately, this bill falls short of those goals and that is why I voted against it.”
I like the overall approach of Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 tax plan. As I recently wrote, it focuses on lower tax rates, elimination of double taxation, and repeal of corrupt and inefficient loopholes.
After all, Europe’s welfare states began their march to fiscal collapse and economic stagnation after they added a version of a national sales tax on top of their pre-existing income taxes.
But it seems that I was too nice in my analysis of Mr. Cain’s plan. Josh Barro and Bruce Bartlett are both claiming that the business portion of Cain’s 9-9-9 is a value-added tax (VAT) rather than a corporate income tax.
In other words, instead of being a 9 percent flat tax-9 percent sales tax-9 percent corporate tax, Cain’s plan is a 9 percent flat tax-9 percent sales tax-9 percent VAT.
Let’s elaborate. The business portion of Cain’s plan apparently does not allow employers to deduct wages and salaries, which means — for all intents and purposes — that they would levy a 9 percent withholding tax on employee compensation. And that would be in addition to the 9 percent they presumably would withhold for the flat tax portion of Cain’s plan.
Employers use withholding in the current system, of course, but at least taxpayers are given credit for all that withheld tax when filling out their 1040 tax forms. Under Cain’s 9-9-9 plan, however, employees would only get credit for monies withheld for the flat tax.
In other words, there are two income taxes in Cain’s plan — the 9 percent flat tax and the hidden 9 percent income tax that is part of the VAT (this hidden income tax on wages and salaries, by the way, is a defining feature of a VAT).
This doesn’t make Cain’s plan bad from a theoretical perspective. The underlying principles are still sound — low tax rates, no double taxation, and no loopholes.
But if I was uneasy when I thought that the 9-9-9 plan added a sales tax on top of the income tax, then I am super-duper-double-secret-probation uneasy about adding a sales tax and a VAT on top of the income tax.
Here’s my video on the VAT, which will help you realize why this pernicious tax would be a big mistake.
This Center for Freedom and Prosperity Foundation video explains why a value-added tax would be a dangerous money machine for big government. The evidence from Europe also shows that VATs actually lead to higher income taxes. www.freedomandprosperity.org
___________________________
Again, this doesn’t make Cain wrong if we’re grading based on economics or philosophy. My anxiety is a matter of real-world political analysis. I don’t trust politicians with new sources of revenue. Whether we give them big new sources of revenue or small new sources of revenue, they will always figure out ways of pushing up the tax rates so they can waste more money trying to buy votes.
Gene Healy is a vice president at the Cato Institute and the author of The Cult of the Presidency: America’s Dangerous Devotion to Executive Power.
Added to cato.org on October 11, 2011
This article appeared in The DC Examiner on October 11, 2011
Memo to the Rick Perry campaign: If your guy can’t win an exchange with Mitt Flippin’ Romney over who’s stuck to principle more consistently, his debating skills need serious work.
That’s what happened at Sept. 22’s Republican debate in Orlando. After deflating Perry with a “nice try,” Romney brazenly proclaimed, “One reason to elect me is that I know what I stand for, I’ve written it down. Words have meaning.”
“I’ve written it down” — I love that. I’m put in mind of the great New Yorker cartoon, featuring a Washington bigwig behind an enormous desk, the Capitol looming through his office window. “I keep my core beliefs written on the palm of my hand for easy reference,” he tells his visitor.
[I]f there’s any case to be made for Romney, it’s that he’s a full-spectrum panderer.
With New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie out and Perry floundering, it’s looking ever more likely that the alternative to President Obama will be a candidate who needs a cheat sheet to remember his core beliefs.
Taking to heart the Stoic principle that we shouldn’t lament what we can’t control, I’m going to try to convince you — and myself — that things could be worse.
In their 2007 editorial endorsing Romney, National Review argued — hilariously — that the former Massachusetts governor was a “full-spectrum conservative.”
But if there’s any case to be made for Romney, it’s that he’s a full-spectrum panderer. Paradoxically, Romney’s faults — his incessant flip-flopping and desperate quest for approval — might make him a less-dangerous-than-average president.
True, from a limited-government perspective, Romney’s stated platform is pretty awful. You can judge a candidate’s budget-cutting bona fides by the specificity of his proposed cuts.
Romney’s only gotten specific on what he’ll spend. He wants 100,000 new troops and a minimum of 4 percent of GDP lavished on our already outsized military.
On the campaign trail, Romney has savaged Obama’s proposed Medicare cuts — the sign “keep your hands off our Medicare” is “absolutely right,” he insists — and he has attacked Perry for questioning the constitutionality of Social Security.
The good news, I suppose, is that there is no better reason to take Romney at his word here than there is anywhere else.
Romney’s strategically timed ideological conversions are well-known. On the road to the presidency, he’s had convenient epiphanies about stem-cells, gay rights and immigration, and gone from being a staunch gun-controller to, in 2007, buying a lifetime NRA membership and awkwardly bragging about blasting rabbits with a single-shot .22 rifle (do those come with laser sights?).
But, having suffered through two ideologically charged presidencies in a row, to many Americans the poll-tested pandering of the Clinton era doesn’t look so bad by comparison.
Our 42nd president wanted national health care, but the country wanted welfare reform and prosperous normalcy — and the country got what it wanted.
Before this year, no one would have mistaken House Speaker John Boehner for a Tea Partier. Yet the political facts on the ground have forced him into a more confrontational posture than he’d otherwise favor.
Given how far the Republican Party and the electorate as a whole have shifted toward distrust of big government and crony capitalism, a pliable president, desperate for approval, might be restrained from doing too much harm, and even forced to do some good.
If Romney becomes president, the governor who pioneered the individual mandate will be pressured to push its repeal.
As David Brooks recently argued, “The strongest case for Romney is that he’s nobody’s idea of a savior.” He’s right: no one could possibly build a cult of personality around a candidate who’s so transparently insincere.
These aren’t inspiring reasons for a Romney candidacy, but, over the last decade, Americans may have gotten their fill of presidential inspiration.
I really like Rick Perry because he was right when he called Social Security a “Ponzi Scheme” which it is. How did he do in the last debate? You be the judge by watching his response above. Rick Perry’s Moment Posted by Roger Pilon Last night POLITICO Arena asked: Who won the Reagan debate? My […]
I am not too pleased with Mitt Romney and the article below shows one good reason to oppose him. Can Mitt Romney Escape His Romneycare Albatross? by Doug Bandow Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. A former special assistant to Ronald Reagan, he is the author of Foreign Follies: America’s New […]
Dodd and Frank are the real villians of the mortgage mess and I knew that 3 years ago after reading this article below. Who did the Democrats get to clean up this mess? You guessed it. What a joke. Who Are the Villains of the Mortgage Mess? by Daniel J. Mitchell Daniel J. Mitchell is […]
Reagan’s statement concerning 1982 tax increase is responded to by Republican Candidates in this clip below: Washington Could Learn a Lot from a Drug Addict Concerning spending cuts Reagan believed, that members of Congress “wouldn’t lie to him when he should have known better.” However, can you believe a drug addict when he tells you […]
I really like Ron Paul a lot and the reasons I like him are in this article below and in the clip above. Ron Paul’s Success Posted by David Boaz The Washington Post reports that Ron Paul “is enjoying a surge in support and the most high-profile campaign of his life. ” Paul’s unwavering ideals […]
Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 plan did steal the show at the Republican debate of October 11, 2011. Take a look at this article below: The Republican presidential debate in Hanover, N.H. (AP) There was one clear winner from Tuesday’s Republican presidential debate, based on the simple metrics of name recognition: businessman Herman Cain’s “9-9-9 Plan.” Virtually […]
Mitt Romney is not a true conservative. Exhibit #1 Romney wants to start trade wars. Romney for Panderer-in-Chief? by Gene Healy Gene Healy is a vice president at the Cato Institute and the author of The Cult of the Presidency: America’s Dangerous Devotion to Executive Power. Added to cato.org on October 11, 2011 This article […]
Ron Paul speaking at Values Voter Summit In this speech above Ron Paul repeats his view that we should not have a Dept of Education and the article below does the same thing. Beating Back Big (Ed.) Brother? Posted by Neal McCluskey It certainly seems quixotic to try to reverse the federal invasion of American […]
This issue concerning Mitt Romney’s religion is heating up. Baptist pastor taken to task Russ Jones and Chad Groening – OneNewsNow – 10/10/2011 11:05:00 am Popular radio and television commentator Glenn Beck wrapped up the Values Voter Summit in Washington, DC, Sunday in a wave of anti-Mormonism comments lodged towards GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney. […]
Steve Brawner made the comment: For now, the Occupy movement doesn’t seem to be offering a lot of concrete solutions for the nation’s problems, and until it does, it won’t accomplish much.
Captain America is a loyal reader of Brawner and he pointed to a great article on the subject and here it is:
A couple years back, liberal bomb-thrower Michael Moore produced a film called “Capitalism: A Love Story.” The funny thing: many of my free-market-loving friends kind of liked the film.
Moore, you see, spent the documentary attacking the tendency of big businesses (especially big banks) to beg for government protection and taxpayer handouts. The libertarian & conservative objection to Moore’s film, of course, was the title. Moore pinned “capitalism,” (which most people interpret as involving the free market) with all the sins of everyone who seeks a profit.
This is the standard conflation committed by the likes of Thomas Frank and Frank Rich. Whether it’s sleight-of-hand or downright confusion, I can’t know.
When I was down at Occupy Wall Street last week, I felt like much of the angry talk aimed at “capitalism” was really about corporatism and crony capitalism. Bailouts were a frequent target. “They don’t play by the same rules,” was the gyst of many objections. Yes, plenty of communists occupied the park, along with some straight-up regulate-`em! liberal wonks, but the complaints about Big Business often involved not just “profits” but gaming the political system as well.
Fred Smith at the Competitive Enterprise Institute (where I served as the Warren Brookes Journalism Fellow in 2005-2006) writes in U.S.A. Today that the Occupiers ought to train their sights more broadly on government-business collusion against the consumer, taxpayer, and small businessman.
Smith also dings the Occupiers for naivete:
Tea Partiers distinguish capitalism from crony-capitalism. Occupiers confuse them. In fact, some Occupiers seek their own form of cronyism — an expanded government that will help the “right” beneficiaries, such as students and homeowners, instead of bankers and automakers.
This sentiment is nothing new. Ralph Nader always notes that government helps big business but then argues for more government to fix the problem. How can this be wise, when government favoritism encouraged crony-capitalism in the first case?
I have written a lot about Steve Jobs recently and I wanted to link those posts below. Here is an interesting article for those who think that government officials are smart as those like Steve Jobs who are able to survive in the private market place and thrive. Indian Bureaucrats Are No Steve Jobs by […]
Here is some video and pictures of the Occupy Arkansas March of October 15, 2011 followed by an excellent article by Jason Tolbert. Steve Brawner has rightly said: For now, the Occupy movement doesn’t seem to be offering a lot of concrete solutions for the nation’s problems, and until it does, it won’t accomplish much. […]
Steve Jobs was raised as a conservative Lutheran but he chose to leave those beliefs behind. Below is a very good article on his life. COVER STORY ARTICLE | Issue: “Steve Jobs 1955-2011″ October 22, 2011 A god of our age Who was Steve Jobs? A revered technology pioneer and a relentless innovator, the Apple […]
Demonstrators march through the streets of Little Rock on Saturday in a protest organized by Occupy Little Rock. (John Lyon photo) Occupy Arkansas got cranked up today in Little Rock with their first march and several hundred showed up. It was unlike the pro-life marches that I have been a part of that have had […]
COUNTER-DEMONSTRATION: At Kappa Sigma house in Fayetteville. The Drew Wilson photo above went viral last night — at least in Arkansas e-mail and social media users — after the Fayetteville Flyer posted it in coverage of an Occupy Northwest Arkansas demonstration in Fayetteville. The 1 percent banner was unfurled briefly on the Kappa Sigma frat […]
I found this article interesting from the Wall Street Journal: OCTOBER 10, 2011 The Corporate Exec: Hollywood Demon Nazis are getting old, moviemakers don’t want to offend foreign audiences, so corporate types top the list of evil stereotypes By EDWARD JAY EPSTEIN It is not surprising that pop-culture protesters are now intent on occupying Wall […]
The Arkansas Times Blog reported today: Around 100 were on hand for tonight’s Occupy Little Rock planning meeting, the second since the group formed in Little Rock earlier this month. Organizers and attendees struggled with a somewhat complicated voting-by-hand-signals process, but the assembly did get some key points ironed out, including the start time and […]
Left leaning blogs like Blue Arkansas have praised the “Occupy Arkansas” but I wonder if they know about some of the crazy things the leaders of this movement have said. Jason Tolbert noted on October 7, 2011: Max Brantley with the Arkansas Times reports on the efforts currently under way to organize an “Occupy Arkansas” […]
I am currently going through his film series “Free to Choose” which is one the most powerful film series I have ever seen.
TEMIN: We don’t think the big capital arose before the government did?
VON HOFFMAN: Listen, what are we doing here? I mean __ defending big government is like defending death and taxes. When was the last time you met anybody that was in favor of big government?
FRIEDMAN: Today, today I met Bob Lekachman, I met __
LEKACHMAN: But that’s not to say __ with discrimination __not per se.
VON HOFFMAN: You’re in favor of certain functions __
FRIEDMAN: I make a living by making distinctions, after all. Certainly not without qualification.
MCKENZIE: Von Hoffman, you have the floor.
VON HOFFMAN: What I was going to say is, I think most of us are not in favor of big government as a theory. The question that keeps haunting me here is, how do you, going back to your question of just the monetary regulation, how do you make __ and let’s assume that you can really, we’ll go a step further and we’ll say __ we’ll go all the way with you. We will install that mechanism. What makes you think that when the storms arise that, that the people running that mechanism are not going to misread, just as they did in the past?
FRIEDMAN: Because I’m gonna have __ if I had my way I would have a mechanism which didn’t require them to read anything.
VON HOFFMAN: In other words, simply a money formula.
FRIEDMAN: Absolutely.
VON HOFFMAN: Is cranked out in relation to the GNP regardless.
FRIEDMAN: Right.
TEMIN: The question is: How are you going to keep from tampering with this black box? Would you have a thing __
FRIEDMAN: I’m not gonna have a black box; I’m gonna have a very visible system. I have written out, as you know __
TEMIN: No, I know. Yeah, but the question is, no, you have the rule __
FRIEDMAN: __ at relative great length and precise details on what I would do.
TEMIN: __ it will calculate this, but then there’s going to be someone who’ll come in, the people that you dislike, they’ll say, “But we could do it a little bit better by doing it this way or that way.”
FRIEDMAN: Of course. Of course.
TEMIN: How will you keep them from doing it?
FRIEDMAN: Well, in the only way in which you can do it in a democratic society, by establishing both a written and an unwritten __ and the unwritten is just as important as the written __ an unwritten constitution on the part of the public at large, an acceptance of the view, that this is not what people in government ought to be doing. That it’s their problem
VON HOFFMAN: A highly sacred measure of __
FRIEDMAN: Well, if you want, but not necessarily sacred in the theological sense.
JAY: It’s unfair of people to say, Professor Friedman, he’s a bad doctor because people won’t actually take his medicine. I mean that is, that is not fair. But it does seem to me, and I say it again, that to reduce the whole debate to one, are you in favor of big government or small government, as though that is the only interesting or important political-economic choice we had to make, is very foolish.
FRIEDMAN: That is very foolish. I agree.
JAY: But __ and if you put it in that form, in practice in democratic societies, people will go on backing, supporting, and paying for big government. Because unless you __ in addition to pointing out the errors, defects, weaknesses, fallibilities, failures or government, you also describe in some detail, and to some attraction, the other changes that you’re going to make in the nongovernmental sector of the economy, which are going to give people the kind of protection, the kind of opportunities, the kind of fulfillment, the kind of stability, the kind of prosperity that they want. They are not going to buy it because you’re offering them a pig in the poke, and they will see it, whether or not you approve of the phrase, or whether or not I approve of the phrase, there’s going back to something which they’re glad to have got away from.
TEMIN: The question of how you draw the lines, and where you draw the lines is a difficult one, and I can’t see any possible way of somehow making a decision on that will stand like __ like the Rock of Gibraltar against all comers.
LEKACHMAN: I don’t think that the public is going to, nor should it, choose ideologically. I think it’s going to favor and disfavor certain activities of government out of its experience, by its perception of what’s good in its own interests and so on. And my __ I don’t preclude the possibility that there will be a different mixture of perceptions by the public which will lead to a shift in the functions of government. But I think it’s at least as possible that after the shift occurs, government will be perceived to have more functions as that it will have fewer functions.
VON HOFFMAN: It seems to me also that you could have the monetary policy that you are talking about, and have the very big HEW etcetera.
OFF SCREEN: Absolutely. Oh, yes.
VON HOFFMAN: And more easily.
FRIEDMAN: Unfortunately, you’re right.
VON HOFFMAN: Now could you dilate on that?
FRIEDMAN: No, no I __
VON HOFFMAN: No, I mean it, seriously.
FRIEDMAN: I agree with you. I agree with Nick. These are separable issues. And Peter Jay will agree with that, too. In fact he and I are in almost complete agreement on the desirable monetary policy. Where we differ is on these other policies, and there is certainly no doubt that you could have an essentially automatic stabilizing monetary policy of the kind which I’ve suggested, of a fixed rate of monetary growth, no discretionary intervention for cyclical purposes, and at the same time have a very big government on HEW, have all sorts of regulation, have tariffs and all other things. With respect to Peter Jay’s more general statement, it’s impossible not to agree with his statement, because it’s __ it concentrates on objectives and not on means. And the real issue has to do with means. What are the most appropriate and effective means which will give people the greatest assurance __ you can’t give them certainty __ but the greatest assurance that they will have a reasonably stable society with opportunity for themselves and their children, for their needs, for their wants. Of course.
MCKENZIE: We must end the discussion for this week and hope you’ll join us again for the next edition of Free to Choose.
But we also know that it is difficult to convince politicians to do what’s right for the nation. And if they don’t change the course of fiscal policy, and we leave the federal government on autopilot, then America is doomed to become another Greece.
The combination of poorly designed entitlement programs (mostly Medicare and Medicaid) and an aging population will lead to America’s fiscal collapse.
This testimony was delivered on September 20, 2011.
Conclusions
Federal spending is soaring, and government debt is piling up at more than a trillion dollars a year. Official projections show rivers of red ink for years to come unless policymakers enact major budget reforms. Unless spending and deficits are cut, the United States is headed for economic ruin as growth falls and rising debt threatens further financial crises.
Policymakers should turn their full attention to long-run spending reforms. They should begin terminating the many unneeded and damaging federal programs that draw resources out of the private sector and sap the economy’s strength. The essays on Cato’s website http://www.DownsizingGovernment.org describe many federal programs that produce low or negative returns. Programs often create economic distortions, damage the environment, restrict individual freedom, or have high levels of fraud and abuse.
I’ve proposed a plan to cut spending on entitlements, defense, and discretionary spending over 10 years to balance the budget.25 Spending reforms should aim to revive constitutional federalism and reverse the expansion of the federal government into areas better left to state and local governments, businesses, charities, and individuals.
Some analysts worry that spending cuts would hurt the economy, but other high-income nations have cut spending with very positive results. In the mid-1990s, for example, Canada faced a debt crisis caused by runaway spending — similar to our current situation. But the Canadian government changed course and slashed total spending 10 percent in just two years — which would be like us chopping annual spending by $360 billion in two years.26 Total government spending in Canada was cut by more than 10 percentage points of GDP over a decade. The Canadian economy did not sink into a recession as Keynesian economists might fear, but instead was launched on a 15-year economic boom.
A recent Joint Economic Committee report summarizes other international examples of spending cuts coinciding with strong economic growth.27 Thus, spending cuts should not be viewed as bad tasting medicine needed only to cure our debt disease, but as an opportunity to create positive and lasting benefits to the economy and society.
I am thrilled to get the chance to share the following article with you today. I got a call from Tim Keown who is a writer for ESPN Magazine a few days ago. He had read a post from my blog on Tim Tebow and wanted to ask me some questions. One of my answers made into the article below. After the article I have put up links to other posts I have done on Tim Tebow.
This story appears in the Oct. 31 issue of ESPN The Magazine.
WHAT SHALL WE say about the kingdom of Timothy Richard Tebow? And what parable should we choose to describe it?
Consider the day this past summer when Tebow attended the Junior Denver Broncos Cheerleaders brunch. It began with an adult requesting a photograph with the Broncos quarterback. Security stepped in and forbade it, for photographs with Tebow were deemed an opportunity for children only, so the adults were waved off.
But Tebow calmly said to the men in the yellow windbreakers, “It’s okay. As long as everyone stays cool, I will take photographs.” And so Tebow posed for photos with all who wanted them. And the picture-taking lasted for quite some time.
Tim Tebow pumps up his fellow teammates during halftime of the 2008 BCS Championship game against Oklahoma.
____________________________
When all seekers had been satisfied, Tebow picked up a football and began tossing it around with a few of the junior cheerleaders. Soon an adult wanted Tebow to throw the ball to him, and the security men stepped in a second time, shaking their heads and declaring the receiving and throwing of passes off-limits to adults.
Year of the Quarterback
ESPN has dedicated 2011 to examining one of the most crucial positions in all of sports — the quarterback. Year of the QB »
Again Tebow addressed the men, raising his hand and firmly — but without anger — telling them that this too was all right. As long as everyone continued to be cool, he would toss the football to all who wanted to catch it, regardless of age. And so it went that Tebow engaged in much throwing and catching, and it lasted quite some time, with men and women and members of the JDBC alike frolicking across Sports Authority Field at Mile High Stadium as in a scene from Roger Goodell’s vision of eternal life.
And thus when the frolickers had had their fill and the brunch concluded, Jessica Serna, mother to a Junior Denver Broncos Cheerleader, was moved to buy matching Tebow jerseys for herself and her husband. Which is how they came to be wearing said jerseys while making their way into Sports Authority Field at Mile High Stadium for the Broncos’ Week 5 game against the Chargers.
It’s also why, when it came time for Serna to describe her attraction to Tebow, she thought of that experience and said, “He’s an amazing person. I’m more into what he stands for than what he is as a football player. But he deserves a chance to play.”
Ron Chenoy/US PresswireMany Broncos fans have made their QB preference known. Tebow will start Sunday at Miami. The Broncos’ next home game is Oct. 30 against the Lions.
THE BACKUP QUARTERBACK is the perfect vessel. Followers are not allowed to witness what the coaches see during practices and film sessions, hence they are free to endow their hero with whatever qualities they desire. And so the backup quarterback sprouts up whole and flawless on the sideline every Sunday, brimming with potential glory. He is free of sin. He is the embodiment of hope. He is the quintessential sports messiah.
Even secular No. 2’s are worshipped. Backups who’d rather spend time in jail than attend a brunch for junior cheerleaders and their families can still be paragons of the sports-talk set. Backups who go out of their way to thank security guards for protecting them from the unwashed can sometimes find their names being chanted when a starter’s passes are underthrown and intercepted.
But when the man in waiting is one of the most famous and revered athletes of our time, the result is nothing short of a cultural earthquake. In his time as the Broncos’ backup, the young man who appeared with his mother in a “Miracle Baby” Super Bowl commercial, who did missionary work assisting infant circumcisions in the Philippines, has become a messiah within a messiah. Tebow was the immortal college quarterback at Florida — a winning, raging, crying, hard-charging, promise-making, speech-giving and Bible-verse-wearing force of nature who forever changed the image of the homeschooled.
Which is why it came to pass that earlier this fall a Broncos official and an assistant coach found themselves having a discussion about the Tebow phenomenon. They covered the usual topics — the cultlike following, the astounding amount of media attention and the wild backlash to any criticism — before the assistant just shook his head. “I’ve never seen anything like it,” he said. “That’s because there’s never been anything like it,” the official replied.
There is the football angle: Can Tebow’s unique talents translate to NFL success despite his deficiencies? There is the religious angle: Does his outspoken Christianity explain the vitriol of some of his detractors and, on the other side, the holy hell aimed at his coaches for not playing him? And then there is the parochial but most fascinating angle: What in the world will the Broncos do with him?
Let’s make one thing clear up front: John Fox does not appear to be a tool of Satan. He is a gray-haired, intermittently successful NFL coach in his first year as boss of a bad team with a 42-year sellout streak. But the second he declared Kyle Orton his starting quarterback after this summer’s abbreviated training camp, Fox unwittingly walked into a battleground in the culture war.
Al Messerschmidt/Getty Images Kyle Orton (No. 8) completed only 58.7 percent of his passes as a starter this season. Tebow (No. 15) gets his chance Sunday, and Brady Quinn (No. 9) remains a backup.
Like any man whose job depends on his ability to put the best players on the field to win the most games, Fox doesn’t appear to be a big believer in intangibles. It’s great that Tebow has an unquenchable will to win, but when faced with deciding between that and the ability to run the offense, Fox seems willing to take his chances with the latter.
And everything would have proceeded according to plan had Orton not shown an incredible propensity for systematic regression over the first 4 games of this season. He went from bad to worse to unplayable, even for a conventional, change-averse coach like Fox.
That is when the book of Tebow took a remarkable turn. It happened after the first half of the fifth game, against the Chargers at Mile High, following two final, offensively stagnant quarters under the direction of the heavy-lidded and outwardly dispassionate Orton. The sellout crowd took note, loudly and with much passion. Fox took note as well, and as Tebow ran toward the locker room before the half, an assistant told him, “You’re in.” Twenty minutes later, when he entered the huddle, Tebow looked at his teammates and said, “Believe in me, guys.” Of course he did.
The people rejoiced, and their faith was rewarded. In the fourth quarter, down 26-10, Tebow led two touchdown drives in 3 minutes and 38 seconds. He ran for one, he threw for the other. He was typically unconventional, underthrowing and scrambling and occasionally having trouble with snaps from center. In the game’s final 24 seconds, Tebow drove the Broncos to the San Diego 29, where his final pass, coming after a 12-second scramble, fell incomplete in the end zone. He was unconventional, yes, but unconventionally effective. It was one of the coolest losses ever.
“You can look at a lot of guys and say they look unorthodox,” says Broncos tight end Dante Rosario. “Some guys it just doesn’t matter how it looks. They just know how to get it done. That’s him.”
Typically, coaches and organizations hate quarterback controversies even more than they hate poor quarterbacking. Maybe it’s because such debates engender a certain amount of self-perpetuating dread. In the detritus of the postgame locker room, Broncos executive vice president and legend John Elway strode through the Gatorade bottles and athletic tape, apparently believing the place had cleared out. When he saw a couple of local reporters standing in an otherwise empty room, Elway waved them off and said, “I can’t wait to talk to you guys.”
If the backup quarterback is the ultimate vessel of hope, then Tebow must become the Broncos’ ultimate nightmare. What happens when the most important decision on your football team is hijacked, taken out of your control by the force of one man’s personality? What happens when the wake left behind Tebow’s cyclonic swirl reduces your list of choices to precisely one?
“You can look at a lot of guys and say they look unorthodox. Some guys it just doesn’t matter how it looks. They just know how to get it done. That’s him.
” — Broncos tight end Dante Rosario
After two touchdowns in just over three minutes and a near-miracle at the end, how could Fox not name Tebow the starter? Could the coach have declared that Tebow needs experience, or that he’s too unorthodox and can’t throw the deep out? Could he have claimed that Orton, 12-21 as the Broncos starter, won the quarterback competition fair and square? Could Fox have said that the people who see persecution at every turn and those who buy jerseys based on kindness shown at JDBC brunches don’t see what he sees in practice and at film sessions?
No, he couldn’t. Two days after the San Diego game, Fox and Elway made the inevitable official: Tebow would replace Orton as the Broncos quarterback. Still, Fox dismissed the uniqueness of the situation. “There are a lot of outside forces at work in every NFL city,” he said, with all the verve and conviction of a guy making a doctor’s appointment.
But Fox knows this isn’t about a city or a fan base or even about a guy who won a Heisman Trophy and two national championships. This is about a cultural force — a man whose following in the evangelical Christian community has made him the strong, handsome face of a burgeoning brand of “muscular Christianity,” which preaches that there is room inside a man to both provide witness and run over a linebacker for the first down. This is about a guy who garners so much excitement that fans in Green Bay joined visiting Broncos fans in chanting his name in the second half of the Packers’ Week 4 blowout win.
It’s about turning a 26-year-old devout Muslim named Mohammad Suleiman into a devout fan of an evangelical QB. Suleiman’s company, Multiline International Imports, normally uses a billboard near downtown Denver to advertise weekly specials, but after the Broncos’ 17-14 Week 3 loss to the Titans, he felt so strongly about Tebow that he changed it to: “Broncos Fans to John Fox: Play Tebow!” Explains Suleiman, “We didn’t have any specials that week, so we figured why not. We want to see what he’s got. I like Tebow. It takes a lot of guts to put yourself out there like he has.”
As is always the case when religion and sports mix, there’s wild stuff residing in the margins. There, every criticism of Tebow’s playing style — his release, his inexperience under center, his decision-making — is viewed through the prism of his evangelicalism. Among a certain subset of fundamentalists, the question has been asked: Is Tebow a victim of religious persecution?
In response to a critique of the quarterback by Boomer Esiason, influential evangelical blogger Howell Scott wrote, “In this life, we face ridicule and scorn for following Christ, whether on the football field, in the boardroom or, yes, even in the church house. For Tim Tebow and for the rest of us, when we are ridiculed and made fun of because of the name of Jesus, might we hear the master say to us yet again: ‘BLESSED, MAKARIOS, WOOHOOH!!!'”
Jamie Schwaberow for ESPN The MagazineNo matter Tebow’s status on the depth chart, his jersey has ranked among the NFL’s top sellers.
Such measured assessment leads naturally to the words of former Broncos linebacker Bill Romanowski, who went on a national radio show and said, “There’s something about this guy being a Christian and a virgin. Whatever it is, he’s got it.”
Closer to the center, there are those who see Tebow as an inspirational cultural touchstone, not a character whose arrival was foreshadowed in Revelations. “He had to make a decision when he went into the locker room: Do I live two lives?” says conservative Christian blogger and fan Everette Hatcher. “He decided to take his faith with him into the locker room. He has lived one life, and I strongly respect that.”
And of course, there is the secular cult of Tebow, filled with fans who watched him at Florida, where he didn’t so much win football games as charge up hills and occupy them. So why, these equally devout believers ask, shouldn’t he get a chance to do the same in the NFL?
Besides, it was the Broncos themselves, under the housefly tenure of Josh McDaniels, who traded up to draft Tebow in the first round in 2010, thereby making it possible for any and all lofty expectations to be bestowed upon him. As Brandon Hamilton from Cañon City, Colo., said as he leaned on the hood of his car in a parking lot near the stadium, “I like Tebow’s views, but he could not have ’em and I’d still want to see him play. Orton just curls up in the fetal position; no way Tebow does that. At least he’d give me a reason to drive up here every Sunday and justify spending all this money.” Some of that cash was spent on a Tebow jersey, which Hamilton was wearing as he spoke.
In the locker room following the near-miracle at Mile High, as Orton and third-teamer Brady Quinn dressed no more than 10 feet away, Tebow held court with the media. He said all the right things, which means he said very little that would either inspire or ignite. Orton and Quinn talked quietly, and one Bronco heading for the showers yelled, “Tebow Nation, baby!” Not one of the three — Orton, Quinn or Tebow — reacted.
Tebow Nation, indeed. Moments earlier, when his final pass against the Chargers fell incomplete in the end zone and the cheers turned to moans, the collective sag lasted a count of two, maybe three, before something nearly magical happened. A roar rose, 70,000 strong: “Te-bow! Te-bow!”
The chant, equal parts appreciation and plea, rained down onto the emptying field. Tebow’s performance, the aftermath, his new starting position — all of it is enough to make you believe there’s something larger at work here, something otherworldly and ethereal, something you can’t name but still know. Yes, it must be said: Tim Tebow is enough to make anyone, even John Fox, believe in intangibles.
Tim Keown is a senior writer for ESPN The Magazine.
Tim Tebow’s Faith (Part 3) Another look at the faith of Tim Tebow. Q & A: Tim Tebow on Faith, Fame, & Football The NFL athlete reflects on his outspoken faith, whether athletes should attribute their wins to God, and moving from the Focus on the Family ad to Jockey ads. Interview by Sarah Pulliam […]
“The View” Fights over Abortion Uploaded by RandomClips2008 on Jun 14, 2009 Hot-Topics The ladies on “The View”sit down and talk about President Obama’s commencement speech at the University of Notre Dame and talk about how the crowd got a little riled over Abortion protesters. They then continue on the abortion subject which leads to […]
This is a RUSH transcript from “The O’Reilly Factor,” June 3, 2011. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated JUAN WILLIAMS, FOX NEWS GUEST HOST: In the “Back of the Book” segment tonight, Tim Tebow is a quarterback for the Denver Broncos and a man of deep faith. That faith […]
Tim Tebow’s faith (Part 1) I really respect Tim Tebow and I wanted to pass along an article that defends him. Tim Tebow, Faith and Blasphemy Culture, Evangelicals, Featured, Protestant, Religion, Sports — By J.F. Arnold on August 17, 2011 at 5:05 am I won’t pretend to be an expert in the world of sports. I can tell you if a given team […]
I think the world of the character of Tim Tebow. Tim Tebow played well in a reserve role Sunday, but did he play himself into a starting quarterback job? Well, Tebow’s loyal fanbase certainly thinks so after the former Heisman Trophy winner tried to rally the Denver Broncos, even though they ended up losing to […]
I really think that if you took Georgia, Florida and South Carolina, you could not find ANY DIFFERENCE IN TALENT. To put South Carolina in that group in the past would have been silly. However, Steve Spurrier has them at that level now. Bringing in players the level of Marcus Lattimore is the difference. (Harry […]
It is clear to me that Tim Tebow is trusting in the Lord and he does not want to get discouraged by the world’s negativity. However, I do not think that he believes that if you have faith then you will become rich and everything you do will bring success as the world thinks of […]
Marcus Lattimore’s Record-Breaking Game Against Florida Uploaded by GamecocksOnline on Aug 6, 2011 Marcus Lattimore ran all over the Gators in the Swamp on November 13, 2010, for a school-record 40 carries for 212 yards and three touchdowns en route to a dominating 36-14 South Carolina victory and SEC Eastern Division Championship. With his additional 31 receiving yards, […]
President and Nancy Reagan talking to Mother Teresa in the Oval Office. 6/20/85. Superbowl commercial with Tim Tebow and Mom. Jason Tolbert wrote a great article this week about a pro-life meeting. He mentons William Harrison who I have written about before on this blog. I used to write letters to the editor a whole […]
The NFL athlete reflects on his outspoken faith, whether athletes should attribute their wins to God, and moving from the Focus on the Family ad to Jockey ads.
Interview by Sarah Pulliam Bailey | posted 6/10/2011 09:27AM
Nobody knows when the NFL season will start, but that isn’t stopping Tim Tebow from building his brand during the lockout. The Denver Broncos’ second-year quarterback recently released his memoir, Through My Eyes (HarperCollins), which replays the stories behind his mother’s difficult pregnancy with him, the Heisman trophy win, and the first-round NFL selection. During his college football years, Tebow became noticed among Christians for more than his athletic ability after he put Bible verses on his eye black. CT recently spoke with Tebow about why he remains vocal about his faith, fallen Christian athletes, and the absence of his biblical eye black.
Does it surprise you at all that you’ve become kind of a Christian celebrity?
I’m blessed to have a little bit of success in football. My biggest goal with that pedestal is to be a good role model and to take that whatever it is (platform, celebrity, whatever you want to call it) and be a great model and inspire. I’m thankful for the ability to share my faith in a lot of different places. It’s something that I take as a responsibility and an obligation to handle as best as I can.
I imagine you get some criticism for being outspoken about your faith as being over the top or maybe an attempt to build a certain image. Has being so outspoken about your faith hurt you at all?
Well, being outspoken about my faith isn’t just something that I do; it’s who I am because my faith isn’t just a little piece of my life. It is my life. It’s not a question of whether I’m outspoken about it or not. I’m definitely not ashamed of it. And first off, I’m extremely proud of my faith. I try to be as real and honest about everything and very genuine with people and say, “Listen, I’m a Christian and I’m not perfect. I screw up every day, but I think that’s what grace is all about.”
Other Christians in sports, like Butler basketball coach Brad Stevens, have been quieter about their faith. Is it ever more effective for coaches or athletes in certain positions to be more subtle about their faith? Or is it always good to be open about it?
It’s something you have to handle with class and be real about it, not be like overly judgmental or dig into people with other faiths. It’s about accepting everybody for who they are and being real with them. They have to handle, as best they can, how they’re trying to handle their witness and who they’re trying to affect. Every situation is very different.
Even as you’re trying to use your platform for good, do you ever wonder or worry about the idea that you might contribute to a culture of celebrity obsession or idolatry?
I don’t necessarily think about that too much, but when people look at me or look up to me, hopefully they see that it’s not about me. It’s having a relationship with Christ, and it’s a lot bigger than me. And that’s what I’m living for—it’s not the money or the fame. It’s having a relationship with Christ, impacting a lot of people and trying to help, encourage, and inspire people.
Occasionally we’ll see a Christian athlete who has been vocal about their faith fall into alcohol, drugs, or something similar. Do you worry that you might feel the pressures that come with being in professional sports?
People have to realize that just because you’re a Christian, it doesn’t mean that you’re perfect, because every once in a while everyone stumbles. Living by faith is about when you do mess up, getting back up, brushing yourself off, and keep trying to improve where you mess up or where you have temptation. I screw up all the time. I’m not saying you have to be perfect because you can’t, but our goal is just trying to improve.
NFL writer David White, who is leaving sports journalism for full-time ministry, recently wrote, “Thou shalt absolutely not say your team won because it was God’s plan. What does the Lord have against the other team?” Should Christian athletes avoid attributing their wins to God? Does it risk gloating or pride or making the other team seem like they’re not on God’s side?
I don’t think it risks anything to say that that something was God’s plan. At the end of the day, everything is God’s plan and he cares about what we do. He cares about our hearts, how we play the game, and how we treat people. He’s definitely involved with how we handle sports and not just the outcome of it. I’m proud when athletes mention God in any way. When they have an opportunity to mention God, I applaud them for doing it and having the courage to do so. I can understand the writer’s point as well, though.
As the NFL owners and players struggle over contracts, is there a Christian perspective on the lockout?
This lockout is about a lot more than just money. Yes, the biggest thing about this lockout is money, but there’s a lot of other things that are being measured and being negotiated. I will not be heavily involved, because there are other things that I’m going to continue to work on during this time. I learned a long time ago not to worry about things that I can’t control, so I’m not going to spend time worrying about it.
The ad you did for the 2010 Super Bowl created a stir initially but turned out to be more neutral politically. Are broadly pro-family messages more effective than specific stances on abortion?
That message was just about my mother’s love for me and about her giving me a chance and her having the courage to do what she believed was right. That commercial wasn’t knocking anyone. It was just talking about the sanctity of life and how amazing life is.
You have appeared in some Jockey ads recently. Are there any specific products you would decline to advertise because of your personal beliefs?
The main things I look for are whether I believe in it, it fits my character, and it fits what I do. But the products I’m behind are ones that I believe work. I use it and also believe in the people behind it. I believe in their integrity. There are some great products, but if it’s not something I truly believe in because I’m not using it every day then I’m not going to endorse it.
Do you have any regrets or anything looking back on the path you have taken?
I’m a firm believer in everything happening for a reason and that God has a plan. There may be times where I want to take back something in a game, but I learn from it to improve.
During your college career, some reporters asked you whether you were a virgin or not. Is the climate in the NFL better or worse? Do you face similar questions?
I guess you will. But I think most people just know who I am and where I stand, and they respect me for that because I stand up for what I believe in. I don’t think that there’s been too much adversity or anything that’s been hard to deal with.
You shifted from putting Bible verses on your eye black to putting them on your wristband due to NFL rules. Will you continue to do that?
Now I can’t put it on a wristband, so who knows? Maybe I’ll try to find a different way to put it on somewhere.
Federal Spending Is Growing Faster Than Federal Revenue
Everyone wants to know more about the budget and here is some key information with a chart from the Heritage Foundation and a video from the Cato Institute.
Since 1965, spending has risen constantly. Federal revenues have dropped recently due to the economic recession, but spending has reached a record high.
INFLATION-ADJUSTED TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS (2010)
Download
Source: White House Office of Management and Budget.
The charts in this book are based primarily on data available as of March 2011 from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). The charts using OMB data display the historical growth of the federal government to 2010 while the charts using CBO data display both historical and projected growth from as early as 1940 to 2084. Projections based on OMB data are taken from the White House Fiscal Year 2012 budget. The charts provide data on an annual basis except… Read More
Authors
Emily GoffResearch Assistant
Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy StudiesKathryn NixPolicy Analyst
Center for Health Policy StudiesJohn FlemingSenior Data Graphics Editor
Ron Chenoy/US PresswireMany Broncos fans have made their QB preference known. Tebow will start Sunday at Miami. The Broncos’ next home game is Oct. 30 against the Lions.
Federal Spending per Household Is Skyrocketing
Federal Spending Grew More Than Ten Times Faster Than Median Income
