Big Problems With Biden’s Border and Immigration Policies

—

Big Problems With Biden’s Border and Immigration Policies

Rachel del Guidice / @LRacheldG / March 09, 2021

Illegal immigration likely will increase as summer approaches, Rep. Paul Gosar says. Pictured: Migrants wearing T-shirts with a message for President Biden kneel and pray March 2 at the southern border in San Ysidro, California. (Photo: Stringer/Picture Alliance/Getty Images)

Unchecked illegal immigration leads to the loss of property, life, and resources, Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., says.

Gosar joins “The Daily Signal Podcast” to discuss the Biden administration’s troubling border and immigration policies. Gosar also talks about the dangers of cancel culture and his opposition to the agenda of the progressive left.

We also cover these stories:

Twelve state attorneys general sue the Biden administration over the president’s executive order on climate change.
President Joe Biden remains opposed to ending the Senate filibuster, White House press secretary Jen Psaki says.
The Supreme Court announces an important decision for religious liberty.

The Daily Signal Podcast” is available on Ricochet, Apple Podcasts, Pippa, Google Play, and Stitcher. All of our podcasts can be found at DailySignal.com/podcasts. If you like what you hear, please leave a review. You also can write to us at letters@dailysignal.com.

Want to keep up with the 24/7 news cycle? Want to know the most important stories of the day for conservatives? Need news you can trust? Subscribe to The Daily Signal’s email newsletter. Learn more >>

Rachel del Guidice: I’m joined today on “The Daily Signal Podcast” by Congressman Paul Gosar of Arizona. Congressman Gosar, it’s great to have you on “The Daily Signal Podcast.”

Rep. Paul Gosar: Great having me.

Del Guidice: All right. Well, you recently sent a letter to the Department of Homeland Security, raising some concerns over the Biden administration’s actions to limit enforcement and weaken border security. Can you tell us about the letter and why you sent it?

Gosar: Yeah. Being a border state in Arizona, and being one of the biggest … states [impacted] by illegal immigration, the lack of enforcement from our border security perspective, tearing down the Trump program, keeping folks in Mexico while their case is processed, now re-instituting catch and release—where now 99%-plus of the people that are cited, then turned loose, do not show up for our court date. So, now we’re seeing it overwhelming our district.

In Yuma County they’re releasing over 50 individuals a day, and so that puts a strain on the resources, both at the county and the state level, which they are really trying to do their due diligence. But it also puts a restraint on the health and human services aspect because you’re still in a pandemic and you don’t know what these people come with and the resources are tight.

Del Guidice: As you mentioned on the day of President [Joe] Biden’s inauguration, he ended construction of the border wall. I’m curious, have you seen a change in people coming in, how that’s [been] affected since President Biden ended that construction? Have you seen even a difference? It’s been a short amount of time, but since that, have you seen any difference there?

Gosar: Oh, we’ve seen a whole different attitude in those coming into the country illegally. There’s big caravans on the move already. We’ve seen an uptick in the number of people coming across the border.

So, the signal was given and now we’re seeing that advance problem again, and as the weather starts to warm up, we will see more and more coming across the border illegally.

Then the humanitarian crisis that we’ve exacerbated—the rape, the human trafficking, the smuggling of drugs. I mean, during this COVID pandemic, we’ve seen increases in drug overdoses and domestic violence.

Del Guidice: Speaking of the drugs, I want to talk a little bit about that some more. How will the drug cartels, [specifically], be effected by this ending of construction? How will things look for them? How will their tracking, how will it look for them coming into the country, and what will that change? Will it make it easier? What will happen with these cartels?

Gosar: Well, the fact that you didn’t complete a mission—and even back in the day, I’m sure that President Biden actually voted for border security. Very few people voted against it.

So, when you’re incomplete, what you’re sending is a subliminal message to people from the other side, from the cartels, from those that want to come into this country for the wrong reasons, that it’s OK to violate the law, to violate a contract.

That starts the whole negative precipitation. If you’re not going to honor the rules of law coming into the country, how apt are you to follow them? It builds a culture of problems.

Del Guidice: Another agenda for the Biden administration that you’ve talked about being concerned over is their plan to give amnesty to 11 million illegal immigrants, as mainstream media reports. Why is this a problem, Congressman Gosar?

Gosar: Well, first thing, it’s a problem in regards to the number is inaccurate. I’m tired of people lying to the general public, and the American public understands that as well. That number is more like 33 million, or even more because you have these overstays.

You have so many people here and it’s an insult to the people that came here legally. And I hear about it all the time, saying, “Listen, how is it that we’re going to allow people to facilitate, to go on a path to citizenship when I stood in line and did it the right way? They chose to ignore the rule of law and did it on their free will.”

It really causes a problem, particularly in a country of laws. It just continues that cancer of anti-law activity.

Del Guidice: Living in Arizona, and I’m sure talking to constituents a lot, are there any personal stories or situations you’ve heard of of how illegal immigration affects your constituents?

I think, at The Daily Signal, we really try to tell personal stories that illustrate to the general public why policy issues are important. So, are there any stories you can share, things you’ve heard of with your constituents, why and how illegal immigration affects them?

Gosar: Well, you can go back to my first days in Congress, with the … family where their father was actually murdered by cartel members, seeing desecration of their ranches, the theft and looting of their personal properties, threats that they have.

Then also, when they take advantage of innocent people that are stranded, these individuals are compelled to comply and help out people that have been stranded with no water, who have been maybe raped, who have been desecrated, and basically lifesaving issues.

So, it hits over and over and over again, the loss of a property, the loss of life, the loss of resources that could go to other aspects. We’re stretched thin with our law enforcement, so it hits over and over and over again.

Del Guidice: Speaking of walls and, ironically enough, when it comes to Democrats and their perspective of walls, we’ve seen a wall go up around the Capitol, which is keeping taxpayers out right now, [keeping them from] visiting the members that they sent to Congress. But the wall at the southern border that was being built to keep out drug cartels and [illegal immigrants], construction has been stopped, as we talked about. Do you see any sort of double standard here at all?

Gosar: Absolutely. So, we know we can ask [House Speaker] Nancy Pelosi how that really works, and she’s in charge of security on the Capitol grounds.

We’re now being made aware that during the [Jan. 6] uprising, from some folks, that it was mainly a peaceful exhibition. But she, in her oversight, failed to put the proper resources that had been asked by Capitol Police. And now they’re relying on a 12-foot-wall.

It wasn’t good enough for a regular [wall]. Now we’ve gone to a 12-foot-wall with some razor wire. So, really, it looks more like the Soviet Union than it does a Capitol that we the people could actually just walk in. That was one of the best charges.

So it’s funny that the walls work when they want them to work, but they’re not adequate or they’re racist when they don’t condone it.

Del Guidice: I think you were among about 41 House Republicans that went to Speaker Pelosi to ask her to take down this wall. Has there been any movement on that? What’s the update there? Have you heard anything from her?

Gosar: No, and she’s one of those people that she’ll do it on her time and her time only, and so I don’t expect that we’ll actually hear something from her for quite some time.

Del Guidice: Well, we’ve talked a lot about immigration and the different pieces of the Biden agenda there. What other items of the Biden administration and agenda are most concerning to you?

Gosar: Well, … cancel culture, the embracing of wiping away, intimidation, threatening when we don’t agree with somebody in that public sphere, in that public workplace, that public square of the First Amendment.

We’re not seeing that attack. More than anything we’ve seen now that a group of people, a group of platforms, have been given special immunity, where they are deciding, as associates from the Democratic Party, what is good speech, what is bad speech, what is tolerable, what is censored?

If they’re really a principled lot to the Constitution, then it’s high time that we rein these folks in and make sure that what we do is we have that public sphere where we have the freedom of speech, the freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, and the freedom to petition our government.

I find that you can’t solve anything unless you have that debate, and this crimps that debate. That puts a heavy air, force against that aspect of free speech.

Del Guidice: Recently, House Democrats passed the Equality Act, and there’s a bunch of different pieces to this legislation. But one of the things that it will do is allow biological men into women’s restrooms, and it will allow biological boys who are identifying as girls into locker rooms to disrobe in the same room with biological girls.

So, first of all, what all will this piece of legislation do, and is it concerning to you?

Gosar: It’s very concerning to me because I thought there was a move afoot that allowed women to excel with women. When you talk about sports, there’s no comparison for the average woman versus the average man, and so that’s shameful when you see that.

I’m appalled that I don’t see more of the women, first, coming forward and acknowledging that there’s a problem here. That gets to the quality of the discussion, not the color of my skin that was so poignant during the civil rights aspect.

When you start looking at the gender-changing for young kids, this is problematic.

I think [Sen.] Rand Paul hit it very head-on in regards to children are still maturing, they’re trying to figure out life. So you’re allowing them to take an irreversible process and make that decision there, particularly when the facts and the protocols show that it’s mitigated in a natural way as they grow older.

I’m very sad, very, very sad. That’s not what the intent was of the equal rights in 1964. It wasn’t the intent there. I find that instead of being inclusionary, we’re dictating everything to a small group, and that’s really sad.

Del Guidice: Is there any way that conservatives can combat this? … The Democrats are running everything right now, but what would you tell your colleagues when it comes to how a type of this legislation could be combated in some way?

Gosar: I think that we should have had a strategy in place. … Because of the cant of where the Democrats have gone to the real socialistic side, there’s a number of the more moderate and more centralist Democrats that don’t like the direction.

I mean, we heard [Rep. Abigail] Spanberger from Virginia sound off after the election. And, with their narrow majority, and soon-to-be shorter majority, particularly when you have the five members that are going into the administration, there’s an opportunity here to actually put a lot of force. I mean, last night, two Democrats voted against the COVID-19 package.

So, making sure that they’re put on notice. And I think that goes with the same fact as, … every week that we’re in session, why isn’t the minority leader going to the floor and asking for a motion to vacate the chair?

That’s using all the tools in the toolbox in regards to making sure that we save this republic and getting back to business that should be usual, where we actually have regular order, where committees are actually being heard, there’s debate, and that we’re getting bills that actually solve problems instead of creating more.

Del Guidice: Well, more big picture, how do you think your conservative colleagues in Congress can combat Biden’s agenda, despite the fact that the Democrats are running everything else, [as] we talked about?

Gosar: Once again, it’s holding people accountable. We should be spending money in these folks’ backyard, make sure that they’re held accountable. When I won my election in 2010, we won it on the face of Nancy Pelosi, and so why not do that again? She’s toxic.

The other thing is that we should be out there for what we’re for in the agenda items. I spend a lot of time in natural resources, so why aren’t we engaging with the new secretary and California with wildfires? These are the most polluting events, period. Period. And we’re not going to intercede on that? There’s a great way to be empowered, not become victims.

There’s that. There’s water. There’s critical minerals—that is so vital to our technology sector. I mean, to give you an example of one, we’ve got a rare earth discovery in Arizona, that the mineral, when you add it to aluminum, gives you twice the strength for half the weight.

That’s going to revolutionize aviation, it’s going to revolutionize cars because of the less weight, with a better strength, it’s going to get more efficiency. So, that pursuit of excellence is going to continue.

So, we ought to be dictating that to the American people, making a push so that the American people engage and help us push that agenda forward.

Del Guidice: Congressman Gosar, you touched on the problem of cancel culture a little bit ago in our conversation. We’ve seen how big of a problem this has become on social media, just in general society, of people losing jobs for beliefs that they hold, that they have spoken out on.

So, how would you encourage your colleagues, as well as everyday Americans, to fight against cancel culture?

Gosar: Well, we have to lead by example. So, to give you an example, I’m from a big family. I’ve got seven siblings that do not like me. They worked to cancel me in my representation of the people I serve back in Arizona. It’s backfired. I mean, we’ve run 70% of the vote now, year, after year, after year. But we have to set an example for everybody else, and we got to make sure that we’re pursuing this in good form.

I brought up the platforms. Why do they get away with things that you couldn’t get away with or I couldn’t get away with? You got to be under that same law. And so we need to be putting solutions and then integrating with individuals out there, engaging with the public at large, saying, “Listen, there is a solution here. Here’s why it works. This is why we need it.”

Because if we stop the framing and openness of talking about ideas—that’s how we got to being the greatest country ever, was the sharing and debate of ideas, but in the civil sphere.

When you cancel culture, history books always tell you that you are doomed to fail and repeat history if you don’t acknowledge what your history is all about. That history is about a learning people that wanted to get things right, that it’s an imperfect world, and it’s a striving to make sure that we get it better.

And there’s not one right way. There’s not one right culture. It should be all available so that we understand the good, the bad, the ugly. So, when we do it in that fashion, we’re less apt to repeat the failures of the past.

Del Guidice: Well, Congressman Gosar, thank you so much for joining us on “The Daily Signal Podcast.” It’s always great having you with us.

Gosar: Thanks, Rachel. Appreciate it, always appreciate it.

Milton Friedman in 2004

Power of the Market – Immigration

MILTON FRIEDMAN ON IMMIGRATION

MILTON FRIEDMAN ON IMMIGRATION PART 2

February 9, 2021

Office of Barack and Michelle Obama
P.O. Box 91000
Washington, DC 20066

Dear President Obama,

I wrote you over 700 letters while you were President and I mailed them to the White House and also published them on my blog http://www.thedailyhatch.org .I received several letters back from your staff and I wanted to thank you for those letters.

There are several issues raised in your book that I would like to discuss with you such as the minimum wage law, the liberal press, the cause of 2007 financial meltdown, and especially your pro-choice (what I call pro-abortion) view which I strongly object to on both religious and scientific grounds, Two of the most impressive things in your book were your dedication to both the National Prayer Breakfast (which spoke at 8 times and your many visits to the sides of wounded warriors!!

I have been reading your autobiography A PROMISED LAND and I have been enjoying it.

Let me make a few comments on it, and here is the first quote of yours I want to comment on:

WHEN IT CAME to immigration, everyone agreed that the system was broken. The process of immigrating legally to the United States could take a decade or longer, often depending on what country you were coming from and how much money you had.Meanwhile, the economic gulf between us and our southern neighbors drove hundreds of thousands of people to illegally cross the 1,933-mile U.S.-Mexico border each year, searching for work and a better life. Congress had spent billions to harden the border, with fencing, cameras, drones, and an expanded and increasingly militarized border patrol. But rather than stop the flow of immigrants, these steps had spurred an industry of smugglers—coyotes—who made big money transporting human cargo in barbaric and sometimes deadly fashion. And although border crossings by poor Mexican and Central American migrants received most of the attention from politicians and the press, about 40 percent of America’s unauthorized immigrants arrived through airports or other legal ports of entry and then overstayed their visas.
By 2010, an estimated eleven million undocumented persons were living in the United States, in large part thoroughly woven into the fabric of American life.Many were longtime residents, with children who either were U.S. citizens by virtue of having been born on American soil or had been brought to the United States at such an early age that they were American in every respect except for a piece of paper. Entire sectors of the U.S. economy relied on their labor, as undocumented immigrants were often willing to do the toughest, dirtiest work for meager pay—picking the fruits and vegetables that stocked our grocery stores, mopping the floors of offices, washing dishes at restaurants, and providing care to the elderly. But although American consumers benefited from this invisible workforce, many feared that immigrants were taking jobs from citizens, burdening social services programs, and changing the nation’s racial and cultural makeup, which led to demands for the government to crack down on illegal immigration. This sentiment was strongest among Republican constituencies, egged on by an increasingly nativist right-wing press. However, the politics didn’t fall neatly along partisan lines: The traditionally Democratic trade union rank and file, for example, saw the growing presence of undocumented workers on co
nstruction sites as threatening their livelihoods, while Republican-leaning business groups interested in maintaining a steady supply of cheap labor (or, in the case of Silicon Valley, foreign-born computer programmers and engineers) often took pro-immigration positions.
Back in 2007, the maverick version of John McCain, along with his sidekick Lindsey Graham, had actually joined Ted Kennedy to put together a comprehensive reform bill that offered citizenship to millions of undocumented immigrants while more tightly securing our borders. Despite strong support from President Bush, it had failed to clear the Senate. The bill did, however, receive twelve Republican votes, indicating the real possibility of a future bipartisan accord. I’d pledged during the campaign to resurrect similar legislation once elected, and I’d appointed former Arizona governor Janet Napolitano as head of the Department of Homeland Security—the agency that oversaw U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection—partly because of her knowledge of border issues and her reputation for having previously managed immigration in a way that was both compassionate and tough.
My hopes for a bill had thus far been dashed. With the economy in crisis and Americans losing jobs,few in Congress had any appetite to take on a hot-button issue like immigration. Kennedy was gone. McCain, having been criticized by the right flank for his relatively moderate immigration stance, showed little interest in taking up the banner again. Worse yet, my administration was deporting undocumented workers at an accelerating rate. This wasn’t a result of any directive from me, but rather it stemmed from a 2008 congressional mandate that both expanded ICE’s budget and increased collaboration between ICE and local law enforcement departments in an effort to deport more undocumented immigrants with criminal records. My team and I had made a strategic choice not to immediately try to reverse the policies we’d inherited in large part because we didn’t want to provide ammunition to critics who claimed that Democrats weren’t willing to enforce existing immigration laws—a perception that we thought could torpedo our chances of passing a future reform bill. But by 2010, immigrant-rights and Latino advocacy groups were criticizing our lack of progress..And although I continued to urge Congress to pass immigration reform, I had no realistic path for delivering a new comprehensive law before the midterms.

—-

Milton Friedman wisely noted, “It’s just obvious you can’t have free immigration and a welfare state,”
Is it prudent to allow illegal immigrants (60 percent of whom are high-school dropouts) access to Social Security, Medicare, and, over time, to 60 federal means-tested welfare programs? I don’t think so either!

Heritage Responds to Senator Rubio on Immigration Study

Amy Payne

May 8, 2013 at 8:41 am

The Heritage Foundation has issued the following statement in response to Senator Marco Rubio’s (R-FL) comments about our new study on the cost of amnesty.

Senator Rubio’s family story is a testament to the American Dream. His parents’ ability to scrimp and save and sacrifice for their children is something in which we all take pride. The story of the Rubios, in fact, makes the point we make with our study. They represent the immigration model that worked for America for centuries and one we need to get back to.

Senator Rubio’s parents came here in 1956, almost a decade before the introduction of the Great Society programs that laid the foundation of the modern welfare state. Over the following four and a half decades, our government has added layer upon layer of government involvement in our lives, creating a dependency that undermines self-respect and self-reliance.

That dependency has been devastating to our society; it has shattered communities, families, and individuals. It is now threatening the American Dream. This is true for all—native and immigrant alike, lawful or unlawful. We do not blame immigrants for being entrapped by that system; we blame the people who created that system. We especially blame people who now seek to expand it.

This is why Heritage has been leading the fight on the need to recreate upward mobility for low-income and middle-income Americans. The current welfare and entitlement systems lower opportunity and make it all but impossible for people to climb the ladder of success.

Heritage has worked with Senator Rubio on numerous issues, and we admire him. He is right: Our study is “an argument for welfare reform and entitlement reform.” He cannot pretend, however, that this already herculean task will be made easier after we have added millions of new people to a failing entitlement system. The time to fix it is now. We are ready to work with him and any man and woman of either party who realizes the urgency of our plight.

As Milton Friedman, the Nobel Prize-winning economist, once said:

It is one thing to have free immigration to jobs. It is another thing to have free immigration to welfare. You cannot have both. If you have a welfare state, if you have a state in which a resident is promised certain minimum level of income or a minimum subsistence regardless of whether he works or not produces it or not. Well then it really is an impossibility.

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733 everettehatcher@gmail.com

Open letter to President Obama (Part 293) (Founding Fathers’ view on Christianity, Elbridge Gerry of MA)

April 10, 2013 – 7:02 am

President Obama c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500 Dear Mr. President, I know that you receive 20,000 letters a day and that you actually read 10 of them every day. I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here. There have […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in David Barton, Founding Fathers, President Obama | Edit |Comments (0)

The Founding Fathers views concerning Jesus, Christianity and the Bible (Part 5, John Hancock)

May 8, 2012 – 1:48 am

There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at war with religion in our public life. Lillian Kwon quoted somebody […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in David Barton, Founding Fathers | Edit | Comments (0)

The Founding Fathers views concerning Jesus, Christianity and the Bible (Part 4, Elbridge Gerry)

May 7, 2012 – 1:46 am

The Founding Fathers views concerning Jesus, Christianity and the Bible (Part 3, Samuel Adams)

May 4, 2012 – 1:45 am

The Founding Fathers views concerning Jesus, Christianity and the Bible (Part 2, John Quincy Adams)

May 3, 2012 – 1:42 am

The Founding Fathers views concerning Jesus, Christianity and the Bible (Part 1, John Adams)

May 2, 2012 – 1:13 am

President Obama and the Founding Fathers

May 8, 2013 – 9:20 am

President Obama Speaks at The Ohio State University Commencement Ceremony Published on May 5, 2013 President Obama delivers the commencement address at The Ohio State University. May 5, 2013. You can learn a lot about what President Obama thinks the founding fathers were all about from his recent speech at Ohio State. May 7, 2013, […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Founding Fathers, President Obama | Edit | Comments (0)

Francis Schaeffer’s own words concerning the founding fathers and their belief in inalienable rights

December 5, 2012 – 12:38 am

Dr. C. Everett Koop with Bill Graham. Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 4) THE BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY Published on Oct 7, 2012 by AdamMetropolis The 45 minute video above is from the film series created from Francis Schaeffer’s book “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” with Dr. C. Everett Koop. This […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Founding Fathers, Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit |Comments (1)

David Barton: In their words, did the Founding Fathers put their faith in Christ? (Part 4)

May 30, 2012 – 1:35 am

America’s Founding Fathers Deist or Christian? – David Barton 4/6 There have been many articles written by evangelicals like me who fear that our founding fathers would not recognize our country today because secular humanism has rid our nation of spiritual roots. I am deeply troubled by the secular agenda of those who are at […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in David Barton, Founding Fathers | Tagged governor of connecticut, john witherspoon, jonathan trumbull | Edit | Comments (1)

Were the founding fathers christian?

May 23, 2012 – 7:04 am

3 Of 5 / The Bible’s Influence In America / American Heritage Series / David Barton There were 55 gentlemen who put together the constitution and their church affliation is of public record. Greg Koukl notes: Members of the Constitutional Convention, the most influential group of men shaping the political foundations of our nation, were […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Founding Fathers | Edit | Comments (0)

John Quincy Adams a founding father?

June 29, 2011 – 3:58 pm

I do not think that John Quincy Adams was a founding father in the same sense that his father was. However, I do think he was involved in the early days of our government working with many of the founding fathers. Michele Bachmann got into another history-related tussle on ABC’s “Good Morning America” today, standing […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in David Barton, Founding Fathers | Edit | Comments (0)

“Sanctity of Life Saturday” Taking on Ark Times Bloggers on various issues Part E “Moral absolutes and abortion” Francis Schaeffer Quotes part 5(includes the film SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS) (editorial cartoon)

July 6, 2013 – 1:26 am

I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Arkansas Times, Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit |Comments (0)

Article from Adrian Rogers, “Bring back the glory”

June 11, 2013 – 12:34 am

I truly believe that many of the problems we have today in the USA are due to the advancement of humanism in the last few decades in our society. Ronald Reagan appointed the evangelical Dr. C. Everett Koop to the position of Surgeon General in his administration. He partnered with Dr. Francis Schaeffer in making the […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

“Schaeffer Sundays” Francis Schaeffer’s own words concerning the possibility that minorities may be mistreated under 51% rule

June 9, 2013 – 1:21 am

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 4) THE BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY Published on Oct 7, 2012 by AdamMetropolis ____________ The 45 minute video above is from the film series created from Francis Schaeffer’s book “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” with Dr. C. Everett Koop. This book really helped develop my political […]By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

—-

—

March 9, 2021 – 6:59 am Categories: Uncategorized | Post a comment

Georgia Senate Passes Bill to Stop No-Excuse Absentee Voting

—-

Georgia Senate Passes Bill to Stop No-Excuse Absentee Voting

(Dreamstime)

Monday, 08 Mar 2021 5:36 PM

Georgia’s state Senate narrowly passed a Republican-backed bill that would end no-excuse absentee voting Monday, the deadline that bills must generally pass out of one chamber to remain alive for the session.

Senate Bill 241 would limit absentee voting to people 65 and older, those with a physical disability and people who will be out of town on Election Day — ending broad no-excuse absentee voting introduced by the Republican-led legislature in 2005. It would also require an ID for those who are able to vote absentee, among many other changes.

The bill passed by a vote of 29-20 and now goes to the House for more debate. Bills must get at least 29 votes for a majority in the 56-member Senate.

Several Republicans who could face tough reelection battles in quickly changing metro Atlanta districts were excused from the vote, including Sens. John Albers, Kay Kirkpatrick and Brian Strickland. Lt. Gov. Geoff Duncan, who has denounced efforts to limit who can vote absentee, refused to preside over the debate.

Democrats in the chamber said the bill is a direct reaction to Trump’s claims about fraud and would disproportionately affect voters of color.

“The purpose of 241 and all of the vote-limiting bills that we have before us is to validate a lie,” Democratic Sen. Nikki Merritt said. “It is to prevent massive voter turnout from happening again, especially in minority communities, our new voters who are turning 18 and hard-working Georgians.”

Democratic Sen. Lester Jackson said the bill harks back to Georgia’s dark history of racist voting policies.

“It smells like Jim Crow laws of the past. This smells like poll taxing. This smells like voter suppression,” Jackson said.

The chamber is also set to vote on a separate bill that would end automatic voter registration when a person gets a driver’s license, as well as several other voting measures.

The votes come as a task force convened by Georgia’s secretary of state issued a statement expressing concern that the legislation is being rushed.

The state House has already passed a wide-ranging election bill backed by Republicans. The House bill would require a photo ID for absentee voting, limit the amount of time voters have to request an absentee ballot, restrict where ballot drop boxes could be located and when they could be accessed, and limit early voting hours on weekends.

The latter provision has raised concerns among voting rights groups who say the proposal seems targeted at hampering Sunday voting — a popular day for Black churchgoers to vote in “souls to the polls” events.

Republican Gov. Brian Kemp has endorsed the idea of requiring a photo ID for absentee voting but has yet to back any specific proposals. GOP Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger says he favors ending no-excuse absentee voting as well as requiring an ID for mail voting.

Monday is crossover day in the Georgia legislature. Bills must generally be passed out of one chamber or the other to remain in play for the session, though there are procedural ways to resurrect a bill even if it doesn’t receive passage.

Also Monday, members of an elections task force formed by Raffensperger released a statement expressing concern that “the legislative process is proceeding at a pace that does not allow full examination of all factors that must be considered.”

“There is a need for responsible elections policymaking to be deliberate and evidence-based, not rushed,” the statement continues. “When we see proposals that properly balance voter access with integrity, we will voice support.”

Twelve members of the task force signed off on the statement, which specifically noted that three other members were not included.

Read Newsmax: Newsmax – Breaking News | News Videos | Politics, Health, Finance
Urgent: Do you approve of Pres. Trump’s job performance? Vote Here Now!

——

Continue reading →

March 9, 2021 – 4:54 am Categories: Current Events | Post a comment

Some Liberals Are Getting Sick of Cancel Culture

__________

–

Television host Bill Maher attends the 2020 Vanity Fair Oscar Party hosted by Radhika Jones at Wallis Annenberg Center for the Performing Arts Feb. 9, 2020, in Beverly Hills, California. (Photo: Matt Winkelmeyer/VF20/WireImage/Getty Images)

A mounting discontent with “cancel culture” is emerging, even in some liberal circles.

On a recent episode of “Real Time,” host Bill Maher dedicated a monologue to the cancel culture phenomenon. Maher is very much a man of the left, and of course used some of his time to attack Republicans.

But he also noted that cancel culture from the left is real, undeniable, and out of control.

“Liberals need a Stand Your Ground law … for cancel culture,” Maher said. “So that when the woke mob comes after you for some ridiculous offense, you’ll stand your ground, stop apologizing.”

He then criticized those who deny cancel culture’s existence.

“Cancel culture is real, it’s insane, it’s growing exponentially, coming to a neighborhood near you,” Maher said.

Just days before, Disney+ and Lucasfilm decided to cancel actress Gina Carano from their series “The Mandalorian,” ostensibly for her social media posts that they didn’t agree with, and more likely than not for simply being a conservative in Hollywood.

Maher finished his monologue by saying that some of the woke crusades sound like they come from The Onion, a parody website.

“Memo to social justice warriors: When what you’re doing sounds like an Onion headline, stop,” Maher concluded.

Just days later, they canceled Dr. Seuss.

Not only did the Dr. Seuss estate remove six books from publication, but the books were scrubbed from Amazon and eBay. Even President Joe Biden’s Read Across America Day message scrubbed any reference of the once-beloved children’s book author.

The activists demand, the institutions obey.

It’s one thing to see the problem for what it is. The first step to defeating the absurdity of the woke left is to draw it out in the light and expose its absurdities.

The next step is to take action to reform the institutions that have been captured by this ideology, or build new ones that won’t back down in the face of the woke moral panic.

This is what former New York Times opinion editor Bari Weiss called for in a recent New York Post editorial.

The New York Times brought in Weiss to deepen the readership’s perspective after the 2016 election of President Donald Trump. Weiss is a centrist who on many issues leans left, but she was treated like a pariah from the moment she began working for the Times, not only by angry mobs on social media, but by members of The New York Times staff. It got so bad that she eventually resigned.

Her resignation letter is well worth reading.

Now she and others are starting the challenging work of building new institutions to replace the old ones.

It’s clear, for instance, that the Americans Civil Liberties Union is morphing into a more openly progressive organization, willing to uphold and enforce the dogmas of the left.

As a conservative, I’m not surprised.

Just look at the transformation of college campuses. They were once home to the “free speech movement,” when the left didn’t have nearly as much cultural and institutional power. Now that they are in charge, you will find few places in America where speech is more under threat than a modern college campus.

Just as worryingly, there is a growing movement to redefine racism that has been more normalized by our most elite institutions. Critical race theory posits that racism is structural and endemic. Equality under the law is portrayed as an excuse to perpetuate this systemic racism.

The only way to not be racist, according to these theories, is to be “anti-racist” and embrace laws and practices that may be racially discriminatory to promote “equity.”

Nevermind if the laws are outright tyrannical.

Question the new wokeness and you will often be called a racist and quickly canceled. So who will actually stand up for the principle of free speech, rational debate, and pursuit of the truth?

Is Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream for a world in which we judge people based on merit rather than skin color—an idea that came to be embraced by Americans across the political spectrum—a thing of the past rather than the future?

Despite this rising tide of wokeness, there are some on the left who still take free speech seriously and are aghast at the new racial essentialism.

It’s these dissidents who are often first in the cancel culture crosshairs, after all. They are often closer to the institutions that have been poisoned by the woke ideology and are the first ones to be targeted by its inquisitors.

Dissent is no longer the highest form of patriotism; it’s racism, it’s transphobia, it’s insurrection.

It would be foolish at this point to rely on the ACLU to come to your defense when the mobs are looking to destroy you.

Weiss and a long list of others formed an organization that could fill this gap.

The Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism, which includes many prominent dissident liberals, is “dedicated to advancing civil rights and liberties for all Americans, and promoting a common culture based on fairness, understanding and humanity.”

Here is what the organizations says it stands for:

-We defend civil liberties and rights guaranteed to each individual, including freedom of speech and expression, equal protection under the law, and the right to personal privacy.

-We advocate for individuals who are threatened or persecuted for speech, or who are held to a different set of rules for language or conduct based on their skin color, ancestry, or other immutable characteristics.

-We support respectful disagreement. We believe bad ideas are best confronted with good ideas—and never with dehumanization, deplatforming, or blacklisting.

-We believe that objective truth exists, that it is discoverable, and that scientific research must be untainted by any political agenda.

-We are pro-human, and promote compassionate anti-racism rooted in dignity and our common humanity.

All pretty basic stuff that is now controversial in the current political and cultural climate.

This is a good start, but it must be followed up by other efforts to save our civil society from devolving into a woke, repressive nightmare.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we will consider publishing your remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature.

——-

Real Time with Bill Maher: Ben Affleck, Sam Harris and Bill Maher Debate Radical Islam (HBO)

Sam Harris rightly noted earlier this month on Bill Maher’s show that liberals are still getting “agitated over the abortion clinic bombings that happened in 1984” but they are not upset at what is happening in the Muslim world right now!!!! There is really no comparison at all between Christianity and Islam concerning the areas of freedom of religion, freedom of press and political freedom.

Bill Maher, Ben Affleck and Islam

Dennis Prager | Oct 07, 2014

Last Friday night a rare dialogue/debate took place on American television. It was rare because it involved criticism of Islam, one of the many taboo subjects that are labeled “politically incorrect.” And it took place on the program “Real Time with Bill Maher,” a show not generally known for taking politically incorrect positions.

But on this night the host, Bill Maher, along with atheism-advocate Sam Harris, had a vigorous debate with Actor Ben Affleck, New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof, and former Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele.

Bill Maher, a man of the left on virtually every issue, began by defending liberalism’s honor against liberal hypocrisy on the subject of Islam:

“Liberals need to stand up for liberal principles. … Liberal principles like freedom of speech, freedom to practice any religion you want without fear of violence, freedom to leave a religion, equality for women, equality for minorities including homosexuals — these are liberal principles that liberals applaud for [pointing to his audience], but then when you say in the Muslim world this is what’s lacking, then they get upset.”

Sam Harris then added:

“Liberals have really failed on the topic of theocracy. They’ll criticize … Christians; they’ll still get agitated over the abortion clinic bombing that happened in 1984, but when you talk about the treatment of women and homosexuals and free thinkers and public intellectuals in the Muslim world, I would argue that liberals have failed us. And the crucial point of confusion is that we have been sold this meme of ‘Islamophobia,’ where every criticism of the doctrine of Islam gets conflated with bigotry toward Muslims as people. That’s intellectually ridiculous.”

Ben Affleck and Nicholas Kristof — along with, sad to say, a former chairman of the Republican National Committee — would have none of that.

Affleck’s first response to the indictment of the liberal double standard was to ask Sam Harris: “Are you the person that understands the officially codified doctrine of Islam?”

To which Harris responded: “I’m actually well-educated on this topic.”

Affleck, presumably not desirous of comparing his knowledge of Islam with that of Harris, moved on: “You’re saying that Islamophobia is not a real thing?”

“It’s gross! It’s racist!” Affleck continued, in answer to his own question.

“It’s like saying, ‘I’m not your shifty Jew,'” comparing an antisemitic epithet to what Maher and Harris were saying.

To which Harris pointed out that there is no comparison between attacks on all members of a group and attacks on ideas: “We have to be able to criticize bad ideas. And Islam is the mother lode of bad ideas.”

That really set Affleck off.

“Jesus! It’s an ugly thing to say.”

This was classic leftist thinking. The question of whether an assertion is true is of little or no interest to the left. The question of concern to the left is whether something is politically incorrect.

Then the New York Times columnist, Kristof, offered his take:

“The picture you’re painting is to some extent true, but it is hugely incomplete. It is certain that plenty of fanatics and jihadis are Muslim, but [so are] the people who are standing up to them — Malala [the Pakistani 12-year-old shot and critically wounded by Islamists for attending school and advocating that other girls do so], Muhammad Ali Dadkhah in Iran, in prison for nine years for speaking up for Christians, [and] a friend that I had in Pakistan [who] was shot this year, Rashid Rahman, for defending people accused of apostasy.”

Kristof’s response is a frequent one. So it is worth responding to.

It is quite true that there are heroic Muslims who are fighting the Islamists throughout the Muslim world — and that some of them have been murdered for doing so. These people are moral giants. But their existence has nothing to do with the criticisms leveled by Maher and Harris, since they never said or implied that all Muslims are bad. There were heroic Germans who fought Hitler and the Nazis. Therefore what? If Kristof had been present when people criticized Germany’s values, would he have labeled them “Germanophobes?”

But it was later in the dialogue that Kristof expressed the most dishonest of the left’s arguments on this issue: “The great divide is not between Islam and the rest. It’s rather between the fundamentalists and the moderates in each faith.”

“In each faith,” Kristof?

Where, sir, are the Christian and Jewish jihadists? The only Jewish state in the world is one of the freest countries on earth, with protections for minority religions and women and homosexuals unknown anywhere in the Muslim world. And virtually every free country in the world is in the Christian world.

Presumably, these are just “ugly” facts.

This debate was valuable. Even more valuable would be if Maher and Harris came to realize that the death of Judeo-Christian values and their being supplanted by leftism is producing hundreds of millions of people who think like Ben Affleck and Nicholas Kristof.

Open letter to President Obama (Part 670) The Obama administration should take up for free speech instead of pandering to Muslim extremists

September 15, 2014 – 1:19 am

Open letter to President Obama (Part 670) (Emailed to White House on 6-25-13.) President Obama c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500 Dear Mr. President, I know that you receive 20,000 letters a day and that you actually read 10 of them every day. I really do respect you for trying to get […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Cato Institute, President Obama | Edit | Comments (0)

The Obama administration should take up for free speech instead of pandering to Muslim extremists

May 30, 2013 – 1:09 am

Great video on free speech and religion. The Obama administration should take up for free speech instead of pandering to Muslim extremists. May 28, 2013 9:10AM Does Freedom of Speech Conflict with Freedom of Religion? By Ilya Shapiro Share This is a provocative question, of course, or at least it is seemingly everywhere in the […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events, President Obama | Edit | Comments (0)

Chuck Colson: True Christians renounce violence and promote human freedom

July 23, 2011 – 10:17 am

Smoke rises from the central area of Oslo Friday, July 22, 2011 after an explosion. … Today there is a big debate caused by the tragic events in Norway where an extremist associated with a Christian group that opposed multiculturalism has killed over 90 people. In the article below Chuck Colson noted, “True Christians renounce […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Truth Tuesday:Secular Liberals are Religious by Eric Adams

September 16, 2014 – 12:52 am

_______________ Secular Liberals are Religious by Eric Adams Episode VII – The Age of Non Reason ____________________ Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode 8 – The Age of Fragmentation NoMirrorHDDHrorriMoN Francis Schaeffer- How Should We Then Live? -8- The Age of Fragmentation Joseph Rozak·https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEmwy_dI2j0 _______________________ I love the works of Francis Schaeffer and […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 2 “A look at how modern art was born by discussing Monet, Renoir, Pissaro, Sisley, Degas,Cezanne, Van Gogh, Gauguin, Seurat, and Picasso” (Feature on artist Peter Howson)

January 1, 2014 – 4:27 am

__________________________ Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode 8 – The Age of Fragmentation NoMirrorHDDHrorriMoN Today I am posting my second post in this series that includes over 50 modern artists that have made a splash. Last time it was Tracey Emin of England and today it is Peter Howson of Scotland. Howson has overcome alcoholism in […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Tagged Cezanne, Degas, Frank Mcfadden,James McCullough, Lorna Grady, Monet, Pablo Picasso, Paul Gauguin, Peter Howson, Pissaro,Renoir, Seurat, Sisley, The Rt Revd Lord Harries of Pentregarth, Vincent Van Gogh | Edit |Comments (0)

Open letter to President Obama (Part 461) (Secular Liberals are Religious by Eric Adams)

November 26, 2013 – 1:43 am

Open letter to President Obama (Part 461) (Emailed to White House on 5-3-13.) President Obama c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500 Dear Mr. President, I know that you receive 20,000 letters a day and that you actually read 10 of them every day. I really do respect you for trying to get […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer, President Obama, Prolife | Edit | Comments (0)

Secular Liberals are Religious by Eric Adams

July 10, 2013 – 12:10 am

Secular Liberals are Religious by Eric Adams Episode VII – The Age of Non Reason ____________________ Episode 8: The Age Of Fragmentation Published on Jul 24, 2012 Dr. Schaeffer’s sweeping epic on the rise and decline of Western thought and Culture _______________________ I love the works of Francis Schaeffer and I have been on the […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

Former skeptic David Limbaugh comments on Ravi Zacharias and on the Book of Ecclesiastes

July 1, 2013 – 12:00 am

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

Francis Schaeffer’s wife Edith passes away on Easter weekend 2013 Part 28 (includes pro-life editorial cartoon)

May 29, 2013 – 12:48 am

The Francis and Edith Schaeffer Story Pt.1 – Today’s Christian Videos The Francis and Edith Schaeffer Story – Part 3 of 3 Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 1) ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis ________________ Mrs. Schaeffer became a missionary in Switzerland. Associated Press / April 4, […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit | Comments (0)

March 9, 2021 – 4:33 am Categories: Current Events | Post a comment

OPEN LETTER TO BARACK OBAMA ON HIS AUTOBIOGRAPHY “A PROMISED LAND” Part 108 OBAMA’S VIEW ON MINIMUM WAGE “I promised to raise taxes on high-income Americans to pay for vital investments in education, research, and infrastructure. I promised to strengthen unions and raise the minimum wage”

—

Milton Friedman – A Conversation On Minimum Wage FREE TO CHOOSE

March 9, 2021

Office of Barack and Michelle Obama
P.O. Box 91000
Washington, DC 20066

Dear President Obama,

I have been reading your autobiography A PROMISED LAND and I have been enjoying it.

Let me make a few comments on it, and here is the first quote of yours I want to comment on:

The financial system was in a meltdown and taking the American economy with it.
As I saw it, the combination of globalization and revolutionary new technologies had been fundamentally altering the American economy for at least two decades…. By 2007, the American economy was not only producing greater inequality than almost every other wealthy nation but also delivering less upward mobility.
     I believed that these outcomes weren’t inevitable, but rather were the result of political choices dating back to Ronald Reagan. Under the banner of economic freedom—an “ownership society” was the phrase President Bush used—Americans had been fed a steady diet of tax cuts for the wealthy and seen collective bargaining laws go unenforced. There had been efforts to privatize or cut the social safety net, and federal budgets had consistently underinvested in everything from early childhood education to infrastructure. All this further accelerated inequality, leaving families ill-equipped to navigate even minor economic turbulence.
     I was campaigning to push the country in the opposite direction. I didn’t think America could roll back automation or sever the global supply chain (though I did think we could negotiate stronger labor and environmental provisions in our trade agreements). But I was certain we could adapt our laws and institutions, just as we’d done in the past, to make sure that folks willing to work could get a fair shake. At every stop I made, in every city and small town, my message was the same. I promised to raise taxes on high-income Americans to pay for vital investments in education, research, and infrastructure. I promised to strengthen unions and raise the minimum wage as well as to deliver universal healthcare and make college more affordable.
    I wanted people to understand that there was a precedent for bold government action. FDR had saved capitalism from itself, laying the foundation for a post–World War II boom.

—-

Clinton and not Reagan was responsible for the 2008 housing bubble crisis because of home buying subsidies! Take a look at this quote from the article below:

The sordid tale begins in 1994, with President Bill Clinton and his National Partners in Homeownership. U.S. politicians long have sought to win votes with homebuying subsidies, but Mr. Clinton took the strategy to new levels. “It was unheard‐of for regulators to team up this closely with those they were charged with policing,” observe the authors.

Trump vs. Biden on the Minimum Wage

In another display of selfless masochism, I watched the Trump–Biden debate last night.

The candidates behaved better, for whatever that’s worth, but I was disappointed that there so little time (and even less substance) devoted to economic issues.

One of the few exceptions was the brief tussle regarding the minimum wage. Trump waffled on the issue, so I don’t give him any points, but Biden fully embraced the Bernie Sanders policyof basically doubling the minimum wage to $15 per hour.

This is very bad news for low-skilled workers and very bad news to low-margin businesses.

The economic of this issue are very simple. If a worker generates, say, $9 of revenue per hour, and politicians say that worker can’t be employed for less than $15 per hour, that’s a recipe for unemployment.

Earlier this month, Professor Steven Landsburg on the University of Rochester opined for the Wall Street Journal on Biden’s minimum-wage policy.

It isn’t only that I think Mr. Biden is frequently wrong. It’s that he tends to be wrong in ways that suggest he never cared about being right. He makes no attempt to defend many of his policies with logic or evidence, and he deals with objections by ignoring or misrepresenting them. …Take Mr. Biden’s stance on the federal minimum wage, which he wants to increase to $15 an hour from $7.25. …So why does Mr. Biden want to raise the minimum wage…?He hasn’t said, so I have two guesses, neither of which reflects well on him. Guess No. 1: He’s dissembling about the cost. …The minimum wage…comes directly from employers but indirectly (after firms shrink and prices rise) from consumers. A minimum wage is a stealth tax on eating at McDonald’s or shopping at Walmart. …Mr. Biden should acknowledge the cost of wage hikes and argue for accepting it. Instead he’s silent about the cost, hoping he can foist it on people who won’t realize they’re footing this bill. Guess No. 2: He’s rewarding his friends and punishing his enemies. New York is going to vote for Mr. Biden. The state also has a high cost of living and high wages—so New Yorkers would be largely unaffected by the minimum-wage hike. Alabama is going to vote against Mr. Biden. Alabama has a low cost of living and relatively low wages—so under the Biden plan Alabama firms would shrink, to the benefit of competitors in New York. Alabama workers and consumers would pay a greater price than New Yorkers.

And Mark Perry of the American Enterprise Institute recently highlighted some of the adverse effects for unskilled workers.

It’s an economic reality that workers compete against other workers, not against employers, for jobs, and higher wages in the labor market. And it’s also true that lower-skilled, limited-experience, less-educated workers compete against higher-skilled, more experienced, more educated workers for jobs. …If the minimum wage is increased…, that will…take away from unskilled workers the one advantage they currently have to compete against skilled workers – the ability to offer to work for a significantly lower wage than what skilled workers can command. …Result of a minimum wage hike to $15 an hour? Demand for skilled workers goes up, demand for unskilled workers goes down, and employment opportunities for unskilled workers are reduced.

Since I recently shared videos with Milton Friedman’s wisdom on both taxes and spending, here’s what he said about the minimum wage.

Let’s share one last bit of evidence. Mark Perry’s article referenced some new research by Jeffrey Clemens, Lisa Kahn, and Jonathan Meer.

Here’s what those scholars found in a study published by the National Bureau of Economic Research.

We investigate whether changes in firms’ skill requirements are channels through which labor markets respond to minimum wage increases. …Data from the American Community Survey show that recent minimum wage changes resulted in increases in the average age and education of the individuals employed in low-wage jobs. Data on job vacancy postings show that the prevalence of a high school diploma requirement increases at the same time. The shift in skill requirements begins within the first quarter of a minimum wage hike. Further, it results from both within-firm shifts in postings and across-firms shifts towards firms that sought more-skilled workers at baseline. Given the poor labor market outcomes of individuals without high school diplomas, these findings have substantial policy relevance. This possibility was recognized well over a century ago by Smith (1907), who noted that the “enactment of a minimum wage involves the possibility of creating a class prevented by the State from obtaining employment.” Further, negative effects may be exacerbated for minority groups in the presence of labor market discrimination.

So why do politicians push for higher minimum wages, when all the evidence suggests that vulnerable workers bear the heaviest cost?

Part of the answer is that they don’t understand economics and don’t care about evidence.

But there’s also a more reprehensible answer, which is that they do understand, but they want to curry favor with union bosses, and those union bosses push for higher minimum wages as a way of reducing competition from lower-skilled workers.

P.S. Here’s my CNBC debate with Joe Biden’s top economic advisor on this issue.

P.P.S. Here’s a rather frustrating discussion I had on the minimum wage with Yahoo Finance.

P.P.P.S. But if you’re pressed for time, don’t listen to me pontificate. Instead, watch this video.

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733 everettehatcher@gmail.com

Open letter to President Obama (Part 293) (Founding Fathers’ view on Christianity, Elbridge Gerry of MA)

April 10, 2013 – 7:02 am

The Founding Fathers views concerning Jesus, Christianity and the Bible (Part 5, John Hancock)

May 8, 2012 – 1:48 am

The Founding Fathers views concerning Jesus, Christianity and the Bible (Part 4, Elbridge Gerry)

May 7, 2012 – 1:46 am

The Founding Fathers views concerning Jesus, Christianity and the Bible (Part 3, Samuel Adams)

May 4, 2012 – 1:45 am

The Founding Fathers views concerning Jesus, Christianity and the Bible (Part 2, John Quincy Adams)

May 3, 2012 – 1:42 am

The Founding Fathers views concerning Jesus, Christianity and the Bible (Part 1, John Adams)

May 2, 2012 – 1:13 am

President Obama and the Founding Fathers

May 8, 2013 – 9:20 am

Francis Schaeffer’s own words concerning the founding fathers and their belief in inalienable rights

December 5, 2012 – 12:38 am

David Barton: In their words, did the Founding Fathers put their faith in Christ? (Part 4)

May 30, 2012 – 1:35 am

Were the founding fathers christian?

May 23, 2012 – 7:04 am

John Quincy Adams a founding father?

June 29, 2011 – 3:58 pm

“Sanctity of Life Saturday” Taking on Ark Times Bloggers on various issues Part E “Moral absolutes and abortion” Francis Schaeffer Quotes part 5(includes the film SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS) (editorial cartoon)

July 6, 2013 – 1:26 am

Article from Adrian Rogers, “Bring back the glory”

June 11, 2013 – 12:34 am

“Schaeffer Sundays” Francis Schaeffer’s own words concerning the possibility that minorities may be mistreated under 51% rule

June 9, 2013 – 1:21 am

—-

—

March 9, 2021 – 3:05 am Categories: Uncategorized | Post a comment

My March 9, 2021 letter to President Joe Biden, MILTON FRIEDMAN: The higher wage rate decreed by Congress for low-paid workers will raise the cost of the goods that these workers produce—and must discourage sales. It will also induce employers to replace such workers with other workers—either to do the same work or to produce machinery to do the same work or to produce machinery to do the work!

Ep. 4 – From Cradle to Grave [6/7]. Milton Friedman’s Free to Choose (1980)

March 9, 2021

President Biden c/o The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

Thank you for taking time to have your office try and get a pulse on what is going on out here in the country. I wanted to let you know what I think about the minimum wage increase you have proposed for the whole country and I wanted to quote Milton Friedman who you are familiar with and you made it clear in July that you didn’t care for his views! Let me challenge you to take a closer look at what he had to say!

“Minimum-Wage Rates”
by Milton Friedman
Newsweek, 26 September 1966
©The Newsweek/Daily Beast Company LLC

Congress has just acted to increase unemployment. It did so by raising the legal minimum-wage rate from $1.25 to $1.60 an hour, effective in 1968, and extending its coverage. The result will be and must be to add to the ranks of the unemployed.

Does a merchant increase his sales by raising prices? Does higher pay of domestic servants induce more housewives to hire help? The situation is no different for other employers. The higher wage rate decreed by Congress for low-paid workers will raise the cost of the goods that these workers produce—and must discourage sales. It will also induce employers to replace such workers with other workers—either to do the same work or to produce machinery to do the same work or to produce machinery to do the work.
Some workers who already receive wages well above the legal minimum will benefit—because they will face less competition from the unskilled. That is why many unions are strong supporters of higher minimum-wage rates. Some employers and employees in places where wages are already high will benefit because they will face less competition from businessmen who might otherwise invest capital in areas that have large pools of unskilled labor. That is why Northern manufactures and unions, particularly in new England, are the principal sources of political pressure for higher legal minimum-wage rates.

The groups that will be hurt the most are the low-paid and the unskilled. The ones who remain employed will receive higher wage rates, but fewer will be employed. As Prof. James Tobin, who was a member of president Kennedy’s Council of Economic Advisers, recently wrote: “People who lack the capacity to earn a decent living need to be helped, but they will not be helped by minimum-wage laws, trade-union wage pressures or other devices which seek to compel employers to pay them more than their work is worth. The more likely outcome of such regulations is that the intended beneficiaries are not employed at all.”
The loss to the unskilled workers will not be offset by gains to others. Smaller total employment will result in a smaller total output. Hence the community as a whole will be worse off.
Women, teen-agers, Negroes and particularly Negro teen-agers, will be especially hard hit. I am convinced that the minimum-wage law is the most anti-Negro law on our statute books—in its effect not its intent. It is a tragic but undoubted legacy of the past—and one we must try to correct—that on the average Negroes have lower skills than whites. Similarly, teen-agers are less skilled than older workers. Both Negroes and teen-agers are only made worse off by discouraging employers from hiring them. On the-job training—the main route whereby the unskilled have become skilled—is thus denied them.
The shockingly high rate of unemployment among teen-age Negro boys is largely a result of the present Federal minimum-wage rate. And unemployment will be boosted still higher by the rise just enacted. Before 1956, unemployment among Negro boys aged 14 to 19 was around 8 to 11

per cent, about the same as among white boys. Within two years after the legal minimum was raised from 75 cents to $1 an hour in 1956, unemployment among Negro boys shot up to 24 per cent and among white boys to 14 per cent. Both figures have remained roughly the same ever since. But I am convinced that, when it becomes effective, the $1.60 minimum will increase unemployment among Negro boys to 30 per cent or more.

Many well-meaning people favor legal minimum-wage rates in the mistaken belief that they help the poor. These people confuse wage rates with wage income. It has always been a mystery to me to understand why a youngster is better off unemployed at $1.60 an hour than employed at $1.25. Moreover, many workers in low wage brackets are supplementary earners—that is, youngsters who are just getting started or elderly folk who are adding to the main source of family income. I favor governmental measures that are designed to set a floor under family income. Legal minimum-wage rates only make this task more difficult.

The rise in the legal minimum-wage rate is a monument to the power of superficial thinking.

_____________

Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband.

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733

Williams with Sowell – Minimum Wage

Thomas Sowell

Thomas Sowell – Reducing Black Unemployment

By WALTER WILLIAMS

—-

” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” /> Image result for milton friedman ronald reagan

Ronald Reagan with Milton Friedman

Milton Friedman The Power of the Market 2-5

March 9, 2021 – 1:09 am Categories: Milton Friedman, President Obama, spending out of control | Post a comment

IT IS TRULY RARE TO HAVE The American Civil Liberties Union, the American Humanist Association, and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops all filed friend-of-the-court briefs in support of an Evangelical wanting to share his faith!

—

IT IS TRULY RARE TO HAVE The American Civil Liberties Union, the American Humanist Association, and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops all filed friend-of-the-court briefs in support of an Evangelical wanting to share his faith!

Supreme Court Sides With Christian Student in College Free Speech Case

Thomas Catenacci / @ThomasCatenacci / March 08, 2021

Justice Clarence Thomas issued an opinion of the Supreme Court Monday that sided with Chike Uzuegbunam, a former student at Georgia Gwinnett College, affirming his right to share his Christian faith on campus. (Photo: Walter Bibikow/Getty Images)

The Supreme Court ruled in an 8-1 decision Monday that a Georgia college’s speech code policy violated the First Amendment and that a student who was harmed by the policy can seek damages.

Justice Clarence Thomas issued the opinion of the high court, siding with Chike Uzuegbunam, a former student at Georgia Gwinnett College, and affirming his right to share his Christian faith on campus.

The opinion reversed an 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision, which said Uzuegbunam didn’t have standing to sue the college over a policy that severely restricted his speech.

“The Supreme Court has rightly affirmed that government officials should be held accountable for the injuries they cause,” Kristen Waggoner, general counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, said in a statement Monday. “When public officials violate constitutional rights, it causes serious harm to the victims.”

In 2016, Uzuegbunam was told that he needed to use one of two “speech zones,” which made up less than 1% of the entire campus, if he wanted to continue sharing his Christian faith on campus, according to Alliance Defending Freedom. Uzuegbunam complied, but minutes after speaking in a reserved zone, campus police threatened him with discipline if he continued.

“School officials violated [Uzuegbunam’s] constitutional rights when they stopped him twice from speaking in an open area of campus,” Tyson Langhofer, the director of Alliance Defending Freedom’s Center for Academic Freedom, told The Daily Caller News Foundation in January. “The only permit students need to speak on campus is the First Amendment.”

School officials ultimately accused Uzuegbunam of violating a campus speech code, which prohibited offensive speech, Langhofer said. Georgia Gwinnett College initially defended its speech code in court after Alliance Defending Freedom sued on behalf of Uzuegbunam in 2016, but then reversed its speech policy and argued the case was moot as a result.

Thomas was joined in his opinion by seven justices from across the ideological spectrum. The justices agreed that because Uzuegbunam’s rights were violated, he can sue the school and receive nominal damages.

“It is undisputed that Uzuegbunam experienced a completed violation of his constitutional rights when respondents enforced their speech policies against him,” Thomas wrote.

Chief Justice John Roberts issued the lone dissent. Roberts agreed with the appeals court, which argued that because Georgia Gwinnett College changed its policy after Uzuegbunam sued, the case was moot.

“Today’s decision risks a major expansion of the judicial role,” Roberts wrote. “Until now, we have said that federal courts can review the legality of policies and actions only as a necessary incident to resolving real disputes.”

The American Civil Liberties Union, the American Humanist Association, the Frederick Douglass Foundation, and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops all filed friend-of-the-court briefs in support of Uzuegbunam.

—-

December 5, 2020

Office of Barack and Michelle Obama
P.O. Box 91000
Washington, DC 20066

Dear President Obama,

I have been reading your autobiography A PROMISED LAND and I have been enjoying it.

Let me make a few comments on it, and here is the first quote of yours I want to comment on:

“If we won, it would mean that I wasn’t alone in believing that the world didn’t have to be a cold, unforgiving place, where the STRONG PREYED ON THE WEAK and we inevitably fell back into clans and tribes, lashing out against the unknown and huddling against the darkness”

It seems obvious to me that you need to read the BOOK OF ECCLESIASTES.

Below are Francis Schaeffer’s comments on ECCLESIASTES and they deal with the fact that life UNDER THE SUN power reigns and the books will not be balanced!

The Christian Scholar Ravi Zacharias noted, “The key to understanding the Book of Ecclesiastes is the term UNDER THE SUN — What that literally means is you lock God out of a closed system and you are left with only this world of Time plus Chance plus matter.”

Oppressed have no comforter

Ecclesiastes 4:1

Then I looked again at all the acts of oppression which were being done under the sun. And behold I saw the tears of the oppressed and that they had no one to comfort them; and on the side of their oppressors was power, but they had no one to comfort them.

Francis Schaeffer: Between birth and death power rules. Solomon looked over his kingdom and also around the world and proclaimed that right does not rule but power rules.

Ecclesiastes 7:14-15

¹⁴In the day of prosperity be happy, but in the day of adversity consider—God has made the one as well as the other so that man will not discover anything that will be after him.

¹⁵I have seen everything during my lifetime of futility; there is a righteous man who perishes in his righteousness and there is a wicked man who prolongs his life in his wickedness.

Ecclesiastes 8:14

¹⁴There is futility which is done on the earth, that is, there are righteous men to whom it happens according to the deeds of the wicked. On the other hand, there are evil men to whom it happens according to the deeds of the righteous. I say that this too is futility.

Francis Schaeffer: We could say it in 20th century language, “The books are not balanced in this life.”

Woody Allen’s 1989 movie, CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS , was on this very subject of the Nazis that Lester Mondale and I discussed on that day in 1996 at Mondale’s cabin in Missouri. In this film, Allen attacks his own atheistic view of morality.Martin Landau plays a Jewish eye doctor named Judah Rosenthal raised by a religious father who always told him, “The eyes of God are always upon you.” However, Judah later concludes that God doesn’t exist. He has his mistress (played in the film by Anjelica Huston) murdered because she continually threatened to blow the whistle on his past questionable, probably illegal, business activities. She also attempted to break up Judah’s respectable marriage by going public with their two-year affair. Judah struggles with his conscience throughout the remainder of the movie and continues to be haunted by his father’s words: “The eyes of God are always upon you.” This is a very scary phrase to a young boy, Judah observes. He often wondered how penetrating God’s eyes are.

Later in the film, Judah reflects on the conversation his religious father had with Judah ‘s unbelieving Aunt May at the dinner table many years ago:

“Come on Sol, open your eyes. Six million Jews burned to death by the Nazis, and they got away with it because might makes right,” says aunt May

Sol replies, “May, how did they get away with it?”

Judah asks, “If a man kills, then what?”

Sol responds to his son, “Then in one way or another he will be punished.”

Aunt May comments, “I say if he can do it and get away with it and he chooses not to be bothered by the ethics, then he is home free.”

Judah ‘s final conclusion was that might did make right. He observed that one day, because of this conclusion, he woke up and the cloud of guilt was gone. He was, as his aunt said, “home free.”

Woody Allen has exposed a weakness in his own humanistic view that God is not necessary as a basis for good ethics. There must be an enforcement factor in order to convince Judah not to resort to murder. Otherwise, it is fully to Judah ‘s advantage to remove this troublesome woman from his life. CAN A MATERIALIST OR A HUMANIST THAT DOES NOT BELIEVE IN AN AFTERLIFE GIVE JUDAH ONE REASON WHY HE SHOULDN’T HAVE HIS MISTRESS KILLED?

The Bible tells us, “{God} has also set eternity in the hearts of men…” (Ecclesiastes 3:11 NIV). The secularist calls this an illusion, but the Bible tells us that the idea that we will survive the grave was planted in everyone’s heart by God Himself. Romans 1:19-21 tells us that God has instilled a conscience in everyone that points each of them to Him and tells them what is right and wrong (also Romans 2:14 -15).

It’s no wonder, then, that one of Allen’s fellow humanists would comment, “Certain moral truths — such as do not kill, do not steal, and do not lie — do have a special status of being not just ‘mere opinion’ but bulwarks of humanitarian action. I have no intention of saying, ‘I think Hitler was wrong.’ Hitler WAS wrong.” (Gloria Leitner, “A Perspective on Belief,” THE HUMANIST, May/June 1997, pp. 38-39)

Here Leitner is reasoning from her God-given conscience and not from humanist philosophy. It wasn’t long before she received criticism. Humanist Abigail Ann Martin responded, “Neither am I an advocate of Hitler; however, by whose criteria is he evil?” (THE HUMANIST, September/October 1997, p. 2)

On the April 13, 2014 episode of THE GOOD WIFE called “The Materialist,” Alicia in a custody case asks the father Professor Mercer some questions about his own academic publications. She reads from his book that he is a “materialist and he believes that “free-will is just an illusion,” and we are all just products of the physical world and that includes our thoughts and emotions and there is no basis for calling anything right or wrong. Sounds like to me the good professor would agree wholeheartedly with the humanist Abigail Ann Martin’s assertion concerning Hitler’s morality too! Jean-Paul Sartre noted, “No finite point has meaning without an infinite reference point.”

Christians agree with Judah ‘s father that “The eyes of God are always upon us.” Proverbs 5:21 asserts, “For the ways of man are before the eyes of the Lord, and He ponders all his paths.” Revelation 20:12 states, “…And the dead were judged (sentenced) by what they had done (their whole way of feeling and acting, their aims and endeavors) in accordance with what was recorded in the books” (Amplified Version). The Bible is revealed truth from God. It is the basis for our morality. Judah inherited the Jewish ethical values of the Ten Commandments from his father, but, through years of life as a skeptic, his standards had been lowered. Finally, we discover that Judah ‘s secular version of morality does not resemble his father’s biblically-based morality.

Woody Allen’s CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS forces unbelievers to grapple with the logical conclusions of a purely secular morality, and the secularist has no basis for asserting that Judah is wrong.

Larry King actually mentioned on his show, LARRY KING LIVE, that Chuck Colson had discussed the movie CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS with him. Colson asked King if life was just a Darwinian struggle where the ruthless come out on top. Colson continued, “When we do wrong, is that our only choice? Either live tormented by guilt, or else kill our conscience and live like beasts?” (BREAKPOINT COMMENTARY, “Finding Common Ground,” September 14, 1993)

Josef Mengele tortured and murdered many Jews and then lived the rest of his long life out in South America in peace. Will he ever face judgment for his actions?

The ironic thing is that at the end of our visit I that pointed out to Mr. Mondale that Paul Kurtz had said in light of the horrible events in World War II that Kurtz witnessed himself in the death camps (Kurtz entered a death camp as an U.S. Soldier to liberate it) that it was obvious that Humanist Manifesto I was way too optimistic and it was necessary to come up with another one. I thought that might encourage Mr. Mondale to comment further on our earlier conversion concerning evil deeds, but he just said, “That doesn’t surprise me that Kurtz would say something like that.”

I noticed in Wikipedia:

The second Humanist Manifesto was written in 1973 by Paul Kurtz and Edwin H. Wilson, and was intended to update the previous one. It begins with a statement that the excesses of Nazism and world war had made the first seem “far too optimistic”, and indicated a more hardheaded and realistic approach in its seventeen-point statement, which was much longer and more elaborate than the previous version. Nevertheless, much of the unbridled optimism of the first remained, with hopes stated that war would become obsolete and poverty would be eliminated.

Let me show you some inescapable conclusions if you choose to live without God in the picture. Solomon came to these same conclusions when he looked at life “under the sun.”

Death is the great equalizer (Eccl 3:20, “All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return.”)
Chance and time have determined the past, and they will determine the future. (Ecclesiastes 9:11-13)
Power reigns in this life, and the scales are not balanced(Eccl 4:1)
Nothing in life gives true satisfaction without God including knowledge (1:16-18), ladies and liquor (2:1-3, 8, 10, 11), and great building projects (2:4-6, 18-20).

You can only find a lasting meaning to your life by looking above the sun and bring God back into the picture.

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733 everettehatcher@gmail.com

Open letter to President Obama (Part 293) (Founding Fathers’ view on Christianity, Elbridge Gerry of MA)

April 10, 2013 – 7:02 am

The Founding Fathers views concerning Jesus, Christianity and the Bible (Part 5, John Hancock)

May 8, 2012 – 1:48 am

The Founding Fathers views concerning Jesus, Christianity and the Bible (Part 4, Elbridge Gerry)

May 7, 2012 – 1:46 am

The Founding Fathers views concerning Jesus, Christianity and the Bible (Part 3, Samuel Adams)

May 4, 2012 – 1:45 am

The Founding Fathers views concerning Jesus, Christianity and the Bible (Part 2, John Quincy Adams)

May 3, 2012 – 1:42 am

The Founding Fathers views concerning Jesus, Christianity and the Bible (Part 1, John Adams)

May 2, 2012 – 1:13 am

President Obama and the Founding Fathers

May 8, 2013 – 9:20 am

Francis Schaeffer’s own words concerning the founding fathers and their belief in inalienable rights

December 5, 2012 – 12:38 am

David Barton: In their words, did the Founding Fathers put their faith in Christ? (Part 4)

May 30, 2012 – 1:35 am

Were the founding fathers christian?

May 23, 2012 – 7:04 am

John Quincy Adams a founding father?

June 29, 2011 – 3:58 pm

“Sanctity of Life Saturday” Taking on Ark Times Bloggers on various issues Part E “Moral absolutes and abortion” Francis Schaeffer Quotes part 5(includes the film SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS) (editorial cartoon)

July 6, 2013 – 1:26 am

Article from Adrian Rogers, “Bring back the glory”

June 11, 2013 – 12:34 am

“Schaeffer Sundays” Francis Schaeffer’s own words concerning the possibility that minorities may be mistreated under 51% rule

June 9, 2013 – 1:21 am

—-

—

March 8, 2021 – 10:52 pm Categories: Uncategorized | Post a comment

2 Major Reports Conclude Excessive Government Spending Threatens American Prosperity

—

The United States received its lowest ranking ever in the newly released 2021 Index of Economic Freedom, placing just 20th in the world in overall economic freedom. Pictured: Midtown Manhattan, the Empire State Building, and the towers of Hudson Yards in New York City as seen from Weehawken, New Jersey, on March 6. (Photo: Gary Hershorn/Getty Images)

Last week, two important reports were released, shining a light on one of the major challenges facing America—excessive government spending that is causing the poor and declining fiscal health of the federal government. This reduces economic freedom and threatens prosperity, making it more difficult for families to live the American dream.

In The Heritage Foundation’s 2021 Index of Economic Freedom, which was released March 5, the results weren’t pretty for the United States. The U.S. received its lowest ranking ever, just 20th in the world in overall economic freedom.

The reason? A dramatic drop in fiscal health, scored at only 34.9 out of 100. This is worse than 150 other countries and is a failing grade on anybody’s report card.

Later that same afternoon, the Congressional Budget Office released “The 2021 Long-Term Budget Outlook.” This report provides a snapshot of the nation’s fiscal health over the next 30 years.

The diagnosis is not good.

While tax revenues are projected to rise above their historical average as a share of the economy, the growth of spending will outpace that growth in revenue. Federal government spending as a percentage of gross domestic product was already above its historical average even before the pandemic, and is projected to continue growing.

Because of overspending, the national debt held by the public has already eclipsed the size of the economy, and is projected to continue rising much higher than it ever has before, reaching 202% of GDP by 2051.

The net interest costs for the taxpayers of financing this debt will skyrocket from 1.4% of GDP (about $300 billion) this year to 8.6% of GDP in 2051. For the sake of comparison, that would be more than 250% higher than what we currently spend on national defense as a percentage of GDP.

The primary drivers of the increases in spending are unsustainable entitlement programs, which require significant reform not only for the sake of the taxpayers, but also to allow better results for Americans in need.

Unless substantial reforms are implemented, Medicare’s Hospital Insurance Trust Fund will be exhausted in 2026. The Social Security Trust Fund is projected to be depleted by 2032, which could cause across-the-board benefit reductions for all retirees just 11 years from now.

Over the long term, government spending simply cannot continue growing faster than the economy.

The Congressional Budget Office has been warning for years about the significant negative consequences of the high and rising federal debt. As the recent “Long-Term Budget Outlook” report indicates, the current fiscal trajectory would “reduce business investment, and slow the growth of economic output,” and would “increase the risk of a fiscal crisis.”

The Congressional Budget Office also warns that high levels of debt would pose a threat to America’s national interests because it would cause “increase[d] interest payments to foreign holders of U.S. debt,” and “an erosion of confidence in the U.S. dollar as an international reserve currency.”

This current path is not acceptable.

The United States needs to get its fiscal health in order, not just to improve its ranking in the Index of Economic Freedom, but because of what that improved ranking would mean for the American people.

The index results demonstrate year after year that people living in countries with higher levels of economic freedom enjoy higher levels of per capita income, better health care and education, and cleaner environments than those living where economic freedom is significantly constrained. Even modest improvements in economic freedom can boost growth rates as well.

These two important reports should be a wake-up call for policymakers that they need to start slowing the growth of spending. Thankfully, there are solutions that could be implemented, such as those included in The Heritage Foundation’s “Blueprint for a Responsible Post-COVID-19 Budget.”

Some recommendations found in the blueprint include reforming benefit programs, preventing out-of-control spending, and maintaining a pro-growth economic policy, among many others.

Unfortunately, the longer we wait, the more difficult will be the climb out of the fiscal hole that politicians have been digging for years. The time for action is now.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we will consider publishing your remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature.

—

National Debt Set to Skyrocket

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.

In the past, wars and the Great Depression contributed to rapid but temporary increases in the national debt. Over the next few decades, runaway spending on Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will drive the debt to unsustainable levels.

PERCENTAGE OF GDP

National Debt Set to Skyrocket

Source: Heritage Foundation calculations based on data from the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Institute for the Measurement of Worth, Congressional Budget Office, and White House Office of Management and Budget.

Chart 20 of 42

In Depth

Policy Papers for Researchers
- SPECIAL REPORT ON SEPTEMBER 29, 2010Slay the Beast: How You Can Save Us from the Massive Debt
- BACKGROUNDER ON APRIL 21, 2011Don’t Raise the Debt Limit Without Getting Spending Under Control
Technical Notes

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

March 8, 2021 – 10:37 pm Categories: spending out of control | Post a comment

Who Was the First Woman to Receive an Electoral Vote? (Plus links to my correspondence with John Hospers)

John Hospers pictured below:

Image result for john hospers

—

Image result for john hospers ayn rand

In 1980 I read Milton Friedman’s book FREE TO CHOOSE over and over again! I also had the opportunity to correspond with Milton Friedman and with several other libertarians including John Hospers. Here are the links to my correspondence with Hospers here, and here, and here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.

By David Boaz

Depending on your age, you may think the answer to that question is Kamala Harris, Hillary Clinton, Sarah Palin, or Geraldine Ferraro. But in fact the first woman to receive an electoral vote, 12 years before the historic nomination of Ferraro in 1984, was Theodora (Tonie) Nathan, the 1972 Libertarian Party vice presidential nominee.

Tonie Nathan was a radio‐television producer in Eugene, Ore., when she attended the first presidential nominating convention of the Libertarian Party in 1972. She was selected to run for vice president with presidential candidate and philosophy professor John Hospers. Although the ticket received only 3,671 official votes, Virginia elector Roger L. MacBride chose to vote for Hospers and Nathan rather than Nixon and Agnew, thus making Nathan the first woman in American history to receive an electoral vote. MacBride, an author and former legislator, had been elected on the Republican slate. As I wrote in Liberty magazine when he died in 1995, “MacBride became a ‘faithless elector’—faithless to Nixon and Agnew, anyway, but faithful to the constitutional principles Rose [Wilder] Lane had instilled in him.”

Brian Doherty, author of Radicals for Capitalism: A Freewheeling History of the Modern American Libertarian Movement, writes:

It is a shame that her historical status for the advancement of woman’s role in what had been entirely a man’s world has been little noted or long remembered, mostly I suspect because the Libertarian Party is not much respected by institutional feminism (though it should be).

Nathan was also the first Jewish person to receive an electoral vote.

After her vice‐presidential run, she ran for office as a Libertarian candidate during the 1970s through the 1990s for numerous offices, vigorously though never successfully. In the 1980 U.S. Senate election in Oregon, Nathan participated in three statewide television debates with incumbent Bob Packwood (R) and then–state senator Ted Kulongoski (D). She served as national vice‐chair of the Libertarian Party, and at the 2012 Libertarian National Convention she announced former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson as the presidential nominee. She founded the Association of Libertarian Feminists in 1973 and served as its chair. Tonie Nathan died in 2014 at the age of 91.

—

Adrian Rogers: How to Answer a Skeptic [#1534] (Audio)

How To Answer A Skeptic
Sermon Summary by Bro. Adrian Rogers
We live in a day of accelerating skepticism, humanism and scientism. We as Christians
are going to be ridiculed and made to look ignorant and uneducated because we believe
in God. Do we have sound reason for believing what we believe? Are we not worthy of
real, honest thought? How do you respond to this skepticism in this day and age in
which we live?
The Bible tells us how to respond to skeptics in 1 Peter 3:10-17, especially verse 15
which states, “But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and be ready always to give an
answer to every man who ask you to give a reason of the hope that is in you, with
meekness and fear.” (As a believer, you must understand what you believe and why we
are Christians, and then be able to explain your beliefs humbly, thoughtfully,
reasonably, and biblically.)
Often we are told to keep the faith, but not only should we keep it but we need to give
it away. If you have no desire to give it away, you ought to give it up, because what you
have is not the real thing. Any man that has been born of the spirit of God, has an innate
desire to share his faith with others.
There are two things that must be true of you before you are ready to share your faith
with anybody. First, you must be Real. You are to have a full-hearted, burning,
compassionate, overflowing love for God. You are to be a zealot for the Lord Jesus.
Yours is to be a full faith, a fearless faith. Don’t let anybody intimidate you because you
are a Christian. They can hurt you but they cannot harm you, therefore don’t be afraid.
Second you must be Ready. When you live a Christian lifestyle, people will start asking
questions about you when they see something in you that cannot be explained. They
are going to want to know why you believe what you believe and why you act the way
you act. Do you know how to respond to a skeptic? There are four basic ideas to
remember as you respond to this skeptical age:
1) Forego the Folly of Fools – Some skeptics are fools, not all but some. In the Bible,
fool means someone who is morally depraved, not mentally deficient. Don’t
argue with someone who shows himself to be a fool. Give him the mind of God;
tell him what God says then go your way. In Proverbs 26:4 it says, “answer not a
fool according to his folly, less you be like unto him.” Don’t answer him; don’t get
in a debate with a fool. You won’t be able to do much with these type of people.
Also see what Jesus says about this in Mark 6:11.
2) Learn the Limits of Logic – Logic is a valuable tool but it can only carry you so far.
When you get to a chasm that logic can’t leap, then faith will have to fly. The logic
for God is found in creation and design and universal moral beliefs. It is logical to
reason that if we have a creation, we must have a Creator since nothing comes
out of nothing. Also logic tells us that if there is design in nature, there must be a
Designer; and the more complex the design, the greater the designer. The
creation found throughout the earth and universe is immensely complex and
organized. The logic of there being universally held beliefs in a moral law shared
throughout mankind also says there is a god. If anyone ever comes up to you and
says, “Prove there is a god.” Be Bold and say, “I can’t, but can you prove there is
no god?” He’ll say he can’t either. Then if he says “You just think there is a god
because it is just what you believe.” You can say, “I believe there is a god and you
believe there is no god. I have faith that there is, and you have faith that there
isn’t.” What we as Christians believe is reasonable, but it goes beyond reason.
3) Remember the Resource of Revelation –If we are to know a god, he is going to
have to reveal himself to us. The finite can never understand the infinite, unless
the infinite explains himself and reveals himself to the finite. 2 Peter 1:19-21
shows us three things about the word of God: 1) The Inspiration of the word of
God. The Bible is like no other book – it was inspired by the Holy Spirit. 2) The
Illumination of the word of God. It shines into our hearts – it enlightens us. It
reveals to us what we could not know without it. 3) The Confirmation of the
word of God. We believe not only because of what any other person has said, but
also because of what the Bible has said. The Bible is power whether you believe it
or not. It does not matter what we believe; what matters is what is true. Use the
Bible because you know it is true.
4) Fortify the Force of Faith – A Christian with a glowing testimony is worth a library
of arguments. Share what Jesus means to you and what God has done for you
and how He has changed your life. Let Jesus be real to you. Sanctify God in your
heart. Strengthen your faith by staying in contact with God through prayer,
reading and listening to His word, and sharing your faith with other believers as
well as non-believers. Your faith will be as much caught as it will be taught.
Remember 1 Peter 3:15, “But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and be ready
always to give an answer to everyone who ask you to give a reason of the hope
that is in you, with meekness and fear.”

Adrian Rogers, “IF A MAN HAS COMMITTED A CAPITAL CRIME AND HE KNOWS THAT HE IS GOING TO DIE FOR THAT CRIME, IT MAY BRING HIM TO REPENTANCE” Exhibit #1 Kenneth D. WIlliams of Grady Arkansas

April 28, 2017 – 10:39 am

Adrian Rogers: Does a Loving God Believe in Capital Punishment? [#2183] (Audio) Kenneth D. Williams was executed at 11:05 pm in Grady, Arkansas on April 27, 2017. In this post I want to take a short look at Adrian Rogers’ sermon THE BIBLE AND CAPITAL PUNISHMENT and then look at the life of Kenneth […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Atheists Confronted, Biblical Archaeology, Capital Punishment | Edit | Comments (0)

10 YEARS AGO ADRIAN ROGERS WENT TO GLORY BUT HIS SERMONS ARE STILL SHARING CHRIST LOVE TODAY!!!

November 16, 2015 – 9:33 am

On 11-15-05 Adrian Rogers passed over to glory and since it is the 10th anniversary of that day I wanted to celebrate his life in two ways. First, I wanted to pass on some of the material from Adrian Rogers’ sermons I have sent to prominent atheists over the last 20 years. Second, I wanted […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers | Tagged (Paul Kurtz (1925-2012), Albert Ellis (1913-2007), Archie J. Bahm (1907-1996), Aron S “Gil” Martin ( 1910-1997), Barbara Marie Tabler (1915-1996), Bette Chambers (1930-), Brian Charlesworth (1945-), Carl Sagan (1934-1996), Ernest Mayr (1904-2005), Francisco J. Ayala (1934-) Elliott Sober (1948-), George Wald (1906-1997), Gordon Stein (1941-1996), H. J. Eysenck (1916-1997), John Hospers (1918-2011), John J. Shea (1969-), Kevin Padian (1951-), Lloyd Morain (1917-2010), Mary Morain (1911-1999), Matt Cartmill (1943-), Matthew I. Spetter (1921-2012), Michael A. Crawford (1938-), Michael Martin (1932-)., Milton Fingerman (1928-), Milton Friedman (1912-2006), Nicolaas Bloembergen (1920-), Renate Vambery (1916-2005), Robert L. Erdmann (1929-2006), Robert Shapiro (1935-2011), Sol Gordon (1923-2008), Warren Allen Smith (1921-) | Edit | Comments (0)

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER AND ADRIAN ROGERS ARE MY TWO SPIRITUAL HEROES BECAUSE THEY DEFENDED THE ACCURACY OF THE BIBLE!

July 24, 2015 – 8:18 am

Francis Schaeffer I remember like yesterday hearing my pastor Adrian Rogers in 1979 going through the amazing fulfilled prophecy of Ezekiel 26-28 and the story of the city of Tyre. In 1980 in my senior year (taught by Mark Brink) at Evangelical Christian High School, I watched the film series by Francis Schaeffer called WHATEVER HAPPENED […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Francis Schaeffer | Tagged 11. Puru “The lot of Yahali” 9th Century B.C.E., 12. The Uzziah Tablet Inscription, 13. The Pilate Inscription, 14 B Pontius Pilate Part 2, 14. Caiaphas Ossuary, 14c. Three greatest American Archaeologists moved to accept Bible’s accuracy through archaeology., 2. Hezekiah’s Siloam Tunnel Inscription. 3. Taylor Prism (Sennacherib Hexagonal Prism), 4. Biblical Cities Attested Archaeologically. 5. The Discovery of the Hittites, 6.Shishak Smiting His Captives, 7. Moabite Stone, 8. Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III, 9A Verification of places in Gospel of John and Book of Acts., 9B Discovery of Ebla Tablets. 10. Cyrus Cylinder, Evangelical Christian High School, Mark Brink, of Nebuchadnezzars Siege of Jerusalem, The Babylonian Chronicle | Edit | Comments (0)

THE SERMON ON EVOLUTION BY ADRIAN ROGERS THAT I SENT TO OVER 250 ATHEIST SCIENTISTS FROM 1992 TO 2015!

July 17, 2015 – 8:05 am

My good friend Rev. Sherwood Haisty Jr. and I used to discuss which men were the ones who really influenced our lives and Adrian Rogers had influenced us both more than anybody else. During the 1990′s I actually made it a practice to write famous atheists and scientists that were mentioned by Adrian Rogers and […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers | Tagged Isaac Newton, Johannes Kepler, Joseph Lister, Lord Francis Bacon, Lord Kelvin, Louis Pasteur, Michael Faraday, Samuel Morris, Sir William Ramsey | Edit | Comments (0)

SANCTITY OF LIFE SATURDAY Clips of Adrian Rogers and Francis Schaeffer from the film “With God on our side”

May 9, 2015 – 1:32 am

Clips of Adrian Rogers and Francis Schaeffer from the film “With God on our side” ______________________ I grew up in Memphis going to Bellevue Baptist Church and Adrian Rogers was our pastor and he had a great impact on me. He had a lot to say on the issues of the day and that included […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit | Comments (0)

On 3-16-15 I found the first link between my spiritual heroes: Adrian Rogers and Francis Schaeffer!!!!!

March 17, 2015 – 8:36 am

______________ Francis and Edith Schaeffer pictured below: _____________ Milton and Rose Friedman pictured with Ronald Reagan: My heroes in 1980 were the economist Milton Friedman, the doctor C. Everett Koop, the politician Ronald Reagan, the Christian philosopher Francis Schaeffer, the evangelist Billy Graham, and my pastor Adrian Rogers. I have been amazed at how many […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers, Francis Schaeffer, Milton Friedman, Ronald Reagan | Tagged Audrey W. Johnson (1907-84), C Everett Koop, evangelist billy graham | Edit |Comments (0)

How can I know the Bible is the Word of God? by Adrian Rogers

December 15, 2014 – 6:47 am

How can I know the Bible is the Word of God? by Adrian Rogers ________________________ _______________________________________ How can I know the Bible is the Word of God? How Can I Know the Bible is the Word of God? By Dr. Adrian Rogers Overview The historical, scientific, and prophetic accuracy of Scripture, along with its life-changing […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers | Edit | Comments (0)

What evidence is there that the Bible is in fact God’s Word? Adrian Rogers

October 29, 2014 – 5:09 am

Adrian Rogers: How You Can Be Certain the Bible Is the Word of God [#1725] (Audio) What evidence is there that the Bible is in fact God’s Word? Adrian Rogers ___________ I want to give you five reasons to affirm the Bible is the Word of God. First, I believe the Bible is the Word […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers | Edit | Comments (0)

Jesus Christ in the Old Testament by Adrian Rogers

October 28, 2014 – 8:09 am

Adrian Rogers: An Old Testament Portrait of Christ Published on Jan 27, 2014 I own nothing, all the rights belong to Adrian Rogers (R.I.P.) & his website http://www.lwf.org. Story of Abraham is told. ______________________________________ Adrian Rogers: Why I Believe in Jesus Christ Adrian Rogers: The Biography of the King Published on Dec 19, 2012 Series: […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers | Edit | Comments (0)

Adrian Rogers, ‘rising star of Memphis,’ elected 35 years ago by David Roach, posted Wednesday, May 21, 2014 (5 months ago)

October 27, 2014 – 8:01 am

Adrian Rogers: 3 Truths to pass on to the next generation Published on Feb 7, 2013 Just a few weeks before Glory ___________________ Adrian Rogers pictured below: ________________________________ Adrian Rogers, ‘rising star of Memphis,’ elected 35 years ago by David Roach, posted Wednesday, May 21, 2014 (5 months ago) NASHVILLE (BP) — Thousands of […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Adrian Rogers | Edit | Comments (0)

I am still on my way to church

March 8, 2021 – 5:01 pm Categories: Adrian Rogers | Post a comment

Rand Paul questions if US borrowing puts country on path to become Venezuela

—

Rand Paul questions if US borrowing puts country on path to become Venezuela

Paul’s comments came just a day after the Senate passed President Biden’s $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief bill

Sen. Rand Paul, one of the most outspoken Republicans about government spending, took to Twitter Sunday to ask if Congress’ borrowing is putting the U.S. economy on the same path as Venezuela’s.

“New 1,000,000 bolivar note in Venezuela worth 53 cents,” Paul tweeted, while linking to a Bloomberg report on hyperinflation in Caracas. “Will US be the next Venezuela with Congress borrowing over $6 trillion in one year?”

Paul’s comments came just a day after the Senate passed President Biden’s $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief bill in a 50-49 vote. Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, also expressed dismay over some of what he identified as wasteful spending in the bill, including providing billions in financial assistance to states that do not need it.

—

March 31, 2021

President Biden c/o The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

Please explain to me if you ever do plan to balance the budget while you are President? I have written these things below about you and I really do think that you don’t want to cut spending in order to balance the budget. It seems you ever are daring the Congress to stop you from spending more.

President Barack Obama speaks about the debt limit in the East Room of the White House in Washington. | AP Photo

“The credit of the United States ‘is not a bargaining chip,’ Obama said on 1-14-13. However, President Obama keeps getting our country’s credit rating downgraded as he raises the debt ceiling higher and higher!!!!

Washington Could Learn a Lot from a Drug Addict

Just spend more, don’t know how to cut!!! Really!!! That is not living in the real world is it?

Making more dependent on government is not the way to go!!

Why is our government in over 16 trillion dollars in debt? There are many reasons for this but the biggest reason is people say “Let’s spend someone else’s money to solve our problems.” Liberals like Max Brantley have talked this way for years. Brantley will say that conservatives are being harsh when they don’t want the government out encouraging people to be dependent on the government. The Obama adminstration has even promoted a plan for young people to follow like Julia the Moocher.

David Ramsey demonstrates in his Arkansas Times Blog post of 1-14-13 that very point:

Arkansas Politics / Health Care Arkansas’s share of Medicaid expansion and the national debt

Posted by David Ramsey on Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 1:02 PM

Baby carrot Arkansas Medicaid expansion image

Mark Herreid
Baby carrot image via Shutterstock

Imagine standing a baby carrot up next to the 25-story Stephens building in Little Rock. That gives you a picture of the impact on the national debt that federal spending in Arkansas on Medicaid expansion would have, while here at home expansion would give coverage to more than 200,000 of our neediest citizens, create jobs, and save money for the state.

Here’s the thing: while more than a billion dollars a year in federal spending would represent a big-time stimulus for Arkansas, it’s not even a drop in the bucket when it comes to the national debt.

Currently, the national debt is around $16.4 trillion. In fiscal year 2015, the federal government would spend somewhere in the neighborhood of $1.2 billion to fund Medicaid expansion in Arkansas if we say yes. That’s about 1/13,700th of the debt.

It’s hard to get a handle on numbers that big, so to put that in perspective, let’s get back to the baby carrot. Imagine that the height of the Stephens building (365 feet) is the $16 trillion national debt. That $1.2 billion would be the length of a ladybug. Of course, we’re not just talking about one year if we expand. Between now and 2021, the federal government projects to contribute around $10 billion. The federal debt is projected to be around $25 trillion by then, so we’re talking about 1/2,500th of the debt. Compared to the Stephens building? That’s a baby carrot.

______________

Here is how it will all end if everyone feels they should be allowed to have their “baby carrot.”

How sad it is that liberals just don’t get this reality.

Here is what the Founding Fathers had to say about welfare. David Weinberger noted:

While living in Europe in the 1760s, Franklin observed: “in different countries … the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”

Alexander Fraser Tytler, Lord Woodhouselee (15 October 1747 – 5 January 1813) was a Scottish lawyer, writer, and professor. Tytler was also a historian, and he noted, “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy.”

Thomas Jefferson to Joseph Milligan

April 6, 1816

[Jefferson affirms that the main purpose of society is to enable human beings to keep the fruits of their labor. — TGW]

To take from one, because it is thought that his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, “the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry, and the fruits acquired by it.” If the overgrown wealth of an individual be deemed dangerous to the State, the best corrective is the law of equal inheritance to all in equal degree; and the better, as this enforces a law of nature, while extra taxation violates it.

[From Writings of Thomas Jefferson, ed. Albert E. Bergh (Washington: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1904), 14:466.]

_______

Jefferson pointed out that to take from the rich and give to the poor through government is just wrong. Franklin knew the poor would have a better path upward without government welfare coming their way. Milton Friedman’s negative income tax is the best method for doing that and by taking away all welfare programs and letting them go to the churches for charity.

_____________

_________

Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband.

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733

Williams with Sowell – Minimum Wage

Thomas Sowell

Thomas Sowell – Reducing Black Unemployment

By WALTER WILLIAMS

—-

” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” /> Image result for milton friedman ronald reagan

Ronald Reagan with Milton Friedman

Milton Friedman The Power of the Market 2-5

Welfare Spending Shattering All-Time Highs

October 29, 2012 – 11:59 am

We got to act fast and get off this path of socialism. Morning Bell: Welfare Spending Shattering All-Time Highs Robert Rector and Amy Payne October 18, 2012 at 9:03 am It’s been a pretty big year for welfare—and a new report shows welfare is bigger than ever. The Obama Administration turned a giant spotlight […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (0)

We need more brave souls that will vote against Washington welfare programs

September 27, 2012 – 5:51 am

We need to cut Food Stamp program and not extend it. However, it seems that people tell the taxpayers back home they are going to Washington and cut government spending but once they get up there they just fall in line with everyone else that keeps spending our money. I am glad that at least […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in spending out of control | Edit | Comments (0)

Welfare programs are not the answer for the poor

September 13, 2012 – 2:37 pm

Government Must Cut Spending Uploaded by HeritageFoundation on Dec 2, 2010 The government can cut roughly $343 billion from the federal budget and they can do so immediately. __________ Liberals argue that the poor need more welfare programs, but I have always argued that these programs enslave the poor to the government. Food Stamps Growth […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events, spending out of control | Edit | Comments (0)

Private charities are best solution and not government welfare

September 6, 2012 – 6:38 am

Milton Friedman – The Negative Income Tax Published on May 11, 2012 by LibertyPen In this 1968 interview, Milton Friedman explained the negative income tax, a proposal that at minimum would save taxpayers the 72 percent of our current welfare budget spent on administration. http://www.LibertyPen.com Source: Firing Line with William F Buckley Jr. ________________ Milton […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in spending out of control | Edit | Comments (0)

The book “After the Welfare State”

September 5, 2012 – 6:58 am

Dan Mitchell Commenting on Obama’s Failure to Propose a Fiscal Plan Published on Aug 16, 2012 by danmitchellcato No description available. ___________ After the Welfare State Posted by David Boaz Cato senior fellow Tom G. Palmer, who is lecturing about freedom in Slovenia and Tbilisi this week, asked me to post this announcement of his […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Uncategorized | Edit | Comments (0)

President Obama responds to Heritage Foundation critics on welfare reform waivers

August 8, 2012 – 12:58 pm

Is President Obama gutting the welfare reform that Bill Clinton signed into law? Morning Bell: Obama Denies Gutting Welfare Reform Amy Payne August 8, 2012 at 9:15 am The Obama Administration came out swinging against its critics on welfare reform yesterday, with Press Secretary Jay Carney saying the charge that the Administration gutted the successful […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events, President Obama, spending out of control | Edit | Comments (0)

Welfare reform part 3

August 8, 2012 – 12:49 pm

Thomas Sowell – Welfare Welfare reform was working so good. Why did we have to abandon it? Look at this article from 2003. The Continuing Good News About Welfare Reform By Robert Rector and Patrick Fagan, Ph.D. February 6, 2003 Six years ago, President Bill Clinton signed legislation overhauling part of the nation’s welfare system. […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in spending out of control | Edit | Comments (0)

Welfare reform part 2

August 8, 2012 – 12:46 pm

Uploaded by ForaTv on May 29, 2009 Complete video at: http://fora.tv/2009/05/18/James_Bartholomew_The_Welfare_State_Were_In Author James Bartholomew argues that welfare benefits actually increase government handouts by ‘ruining’ ambition. He compares welfare to a humane mousetrap. —– Welfare reform was working so good. Why did we have to abandon it? Look at this article from 2003. In the controversial […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in spending out of control | Edit | Comments (0)

Why did Obama stop the Welfare Reform that Clinton put in?

August 6, 2012 – 6:54 am

Thomas Sowell If the welfare reform law was successful then why change it? Wasn’t Bill Clinton the president that signed into law? Obama Guts Welfare Reform Robert Rector and Kiki Bradley July 12, 2012 at 4:10 pm Today, the Obama Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) released an official policy directive rewriting the welfare […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Bill Clinton, President Obama, spending out of control | Edit | Comments (0)

“Feedback Friday” Letter to White House generated form letter response July 10,2012 on welfare, etc (part 14)

August 3, 2012 – 7:05 am

I have been writing President Obama letters and have not received a personal response yet. (He reads 10 letters a day personally and responds to each of them.) However, I did receive a form letter in the form of an email on July 10, 2012. I don’t know which letter of mine generated this response so I have […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Cato Institute, President Obama | Tagged Dan Mitchell | Edit | Comments (0)

March 8, 2021 – 5:00 pm Categories: Cato Institute, Current Events, Economist Dan Mitchell, Founding Fathers, Milton Friedman, President Obama, spending out of control, Taxes | Post a comment

The Beatles Anthology 8 LET IT BE

–

The Beatles Anthology 8 [Legendado/Parte 1] HD

—

You may be interested in links to the other posts I have done on the Beatles and you can click on the link below: FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE PART 288, LINKS TO 3 YEARS OF BEATLES POSTS (March of 2015 to Feb of 2018) Featured artist is Mark Dion

Suddenly one day, Neil or somebody said “Ringo’s gone on holiday”
I felt two things. I felt I wasn’t playing great
and the other three were really happy and I was an outsider
So I decided, fuck it, I’m leaving
I went to see John, who was living in my apartment in Montagu Square
I knocked on the door and said “Hi”
“I’m leaving the group because I feel unloved and out of it
“I’m not playing well and you three are really close”
And he said “I thought it was you three”
Then I went over to Paul’s, knocked on his door and said the same thing:
“I’m leaving the band. You three guys are really close and I’m out of it”
And he said “I thought it was you three”
So we had to reassure him that we did think he was great
You know, that’s what it’s like in life
You never stop and say “Hey, I think you’re great”
I don’t think we’d ever done any of that with Ringo
and he felt insecure, so we had to-and he left
So we had to say “You’re great, man, you’re the best”
Then he said “Oh, thank you.” I think he was pleased to hear that
I knew we were just in a messed up stage, all of us
It wasn’t just me, the whole thing was going down
I came back into the studio and George had had it decked out with flowers
Flowers everywhere and John had sent me telegrams saying:
“You’re the best rock drummer, come on home!”
I felt good about myself again and we’d got through that little crisis
It was great, and then the White Album really took off
Like Yer Blues was great
We all left the studio and went to a little room, so there’s no separation
There was lots of group activity going down. I loved the White Album
There was a lot more individual stuff
For the first time I think people were accepting that it was individual
I remember having three studios operating at the same time
Paul was doing some overdubs in one, John was doing something in another
I was doing horns on something else in another studio
because maybe they’d set a release date and time was running out
Hey, I’m getting cramp
If we do that again… are we ready, we’ll sing the song
I wanna hear that… I wanna hear that
OK, Robert? – Take 29
Reach for this one. Were any of them any good?
I’ll just be singing to guide you…
Can you turn it down in my cans a bit?
The last mistake was entirely when I just took my mind off it for a second
A lot of the recordings would have a basic idea, then a jam session to end it
which sometimes didn’t sound too good
But this is a fairly small criticism
When they did the White Album
George Martin Record Producer I thought we should have made a very good single album rather than a double
I agree, we should have put it out as two separate albums
the White and the Whiter album
A lot of information on a double album
What do you do when you’ve got all them songs?
You want to get rid of them so you can do more songs
There was a lot of ego in that band
and a lot of songs should have been elbowed or made into B sides
I think it could have been made a fantastically good album
if it had been condensed a bit
But a lot of people think it’s still the best album they made
It’s not my view but… horses for courses
You can always say that, you know. ‘Perhaps’ I’ll go with, not ‘definitely’
I think it’s fine. The fact that it’s got so much is one of the things that’s cool
It’s varied stuff, Rocky Raccoon, Piggies…
Happiness is a Warm Gun, that kind of stuff
I think it’s a fine album
I’m not a great one for ‘maybe it was too many of that… ‘
It was great, it sold, it’s the bloody Beatles’ White Album, shut up!
There was a little trauma with a song called Revolution
I thought it was ‘au courant’ as they say
It was about what was going on at the time and I wanted it to be a single
I said “Put this out. We should say something and this is what I want to say”
And they said “No, it’s too slow”
Neil Aspinall Head of Apple The Apple boutique closed down
I think we just got to the point where we didn’t want it any more
We ended up selling Marks and Spencer underwear
Not the image we started with of Simon and Marijke, all these colourful clothes
Great sixties hippy gear
Then to make it pay we ended up selling…
St Michael underwear… and it wasn’t the image we wanted
Apple Shop Giveaway London 31st July 1968 We came up with the idea to give it all away
and stop fucking about with psychedelic clothes shops
We just gave it to the people who showed up on the day
You could have one item each, not take two, in the spirit of the thing
Well, they cleaned out the shop
Only one free dress for each customer
But I think personally it was a good way to do it
We weren’t seriously in the rag trade. It was “Look, it didn’t work, so…”
“That’s it!”
We went round the night before we gave everything away
and took what we felt we wanted
I didn’t go
Derek Taylor Apple Press Officer I saw a half-acquaintance outside Apple and said “Where are you going?”
He said “I’m going to join the queue to get some of those clothes”
I thought that was awful
I didn’t want them to close the shop and wrote an impassioned open letter:
“Dear boys, you know, if you do this…” and a lot of other hoo-ha
because I dreaded to see the thing falling apart

The Beatles Anthology 8 [Legendado/Parte 2] HD

Frost On Sunday 8th September 1968
Beautiful… absolute poetry
Welcome back to Part III with the greatest tea-room orchestra in the world
Are you in colour? – No, black and white at the moment
But as you can see, making their first audience appearance for over a year
Ladies and gentlemen, the Beatles!
I was driving out to John’s house after John and Cynthia had got divorced
I was just going out to say hello to Cynthia and Julian
I came up with these words in my mind as if talking to Julian…
Hey Jules, don’t take it bad. Take a sad song and make it better
So I got the first idea on the way out there
with this ‘Hey Jules’ as I thought it was going to be called
It seemed a bit of a mouthful so I changed it to Jude
I liked the song a lot and I played it to John and Yoko when I’d finished it
I actually had finished but I thought there was a little more to go
with the words: The movement you need is on your shoulder
I’m playing it and I say to John “I’ll fix that” – He said “What?”
I said “The movement you need is on your shoulder…
“I’ve used the word ‘shoulder’ once and anyway it’s stupid, I’ll change it”
He said “You won’t, that’s the best line in the song”
He said “I know what it means. It’s great”
The great thing about John. I’d have knocked it out, he’d say it’s great
I’d see it through his eyes and go “Oh, OK”
So that is the line now, when I do that song
That’s the line when I think of John and sometimes get a little emotional
This was the period when everything was going up and up and rosy
Then suddenly it started to go down like everything goes in a cycle
Once it starts going down, as anybody can tell you…
when you get knocked to the ground, they start kicking you
The world was a problem but we weren’t
That was the best thing about the Beatles
Until we started to break up like White Album and stuff
then even the studio got a bit tense
It was evident on the White Album
I think it was evident in India
when George and I stayed there and Paul and Ringo left and it was a slow death
It was like the wind-down to a divorce
A divorce usually doesn’t just happen, there’s months and years of misery
They were going through a very revolutionary period at that time
They were trying to think of something new
They actually had a good idea which I thought was well worth working on
They wanted to write an album completely and rehearse it
then perform it in front of a large audience, a live album of new material
We started rehearsing at Twickenham Film Studio and I went with them
Twickenham Film Studios London I’m not sure whether everybody was behind the idea of going to Twickenham
They decided to film whatever they were doing
and they were going to start making a new album
The original idea was that you’d see the Beatles
rehearsing, jamming, making up stuff
getting their act together and then finally we’d perform somewhere
as the big end of show concert
Michael Lindsay-Hogg was going to direct it
This should be built like a film set
so you can glide all over the place on tracks with your cameras
Go places that TV cameras don’t go
You can come down from that roof on one long shot, down on a thing
Slowly like a chair-lift
Right down into Ringo’s face on the one shot from right back there
Have all sorts of cranes and lifts for your cameras to float around us
Just all that flowing movement and then the songs
Just stay with us and that will create your sets, with cameras hanging all over
I thought, it’s a new year and we’ve got a new approach
but it soon became apparent that it wasn’t anything new
It was just going to be painful again
The days were long and they could get boring
Twickenham wasn’t conducive to a great atmosphere. We were just in a big barn
I’d just spent six months producing a Jackie Lomax album
and hanging out with Bob Dylan and The Band in Woodstock, having a great time
For me to come back into the winter of discontent
with the Beatles in Twickenham
it was very unhealthy and unhappy
It was just a dreadful feeling, and being filmed all the time like that
I just wanted them to go away… and we’d be there at 8.00 in the morning
You couldn’t make music at 8.00 in the morning in a strange place
with people filming you and coloured lights
As everybody knows, we never had much privacy
They were filming us rehearsing
There was a bit of a row going on between Paul and I
You can see it where he’s saying “Well, don’t play this”, or something
I’m saying “You know I’ll play what you want, or I won’t play if you don’t want
“Just make up your mind.” That kind of stuff was going on
They were filming and recording us having a row. It was terrible
But it’s complicated in the bit… – It’s not complicated
I’ll play the chords if you like
I’m trying to help you, but I always hear myself annoying you
OK, look, look, I’m not trying to say that
You’re doing this as though I’m trying to say…
And what we said the other day, you know, I’m not trying to get you
I really am trying to just say… Iook, lads, the band…
Shall we try it like this?
It’s funny how it only occurs…
It’s like, should we play guitar all the way through Hey Jude…
I don’t mind, I’ll play whatever you want me to play
or I won’t play at all if you don’t want me to play
What it is that pleases you, I’ll do it
I thought, I’m quite capable of being relatively happy on my own
I’m not able to be happy in this situation, I’m getting out of here

The Beatles Anthology 8 [Legendado/Parte 3] HD

The whole pressure of it finally got to us
So like people do when they’re together, they start picking on each other
It was “You got the tambourine wrong so my life’s a misery.” It became petty
But the manifestations were on each other as we were the only ones we had
It was wait a minute, George has left and this isn’t good enough
I’m not sure what happened. Maybe Neil or one of the people looking after us
would probably ring George and say “They’re sorry, it was a mistake”
I remember being called to a meeting in Elstead in Surrey
It was Ringo’s house that he’d bought from Peter Sellers
It was decided it would be better
if we got back together and finished the record
Also, Twickenham Studio was very cold and not a nice atmosphere
so we abandoned that and went to the Savile Row recording studio
In the end we recorded in the Apple studios in Savile Row
There was a guy called Magic Alex, who was a great friend of John’s
John thought he was the bee’s knees because he gave John electronic toys
He said EMI was no good and he could build a better studio. Well, he didn’t
Hello. I’m Alexis from Apple Electronics
I would like to say hello to all my brothers around the world
and to all the girls and all the electronic people around the world
And that is Apple Electronics
When we finally got him to do a recording studio…
We had a 16-track studio and we walked in there, it was chaos
We had to rip it all out and start again
He had 16 little speakers all around the room
There wasn’t anything he did-except a toilet with a radio in it or something
So we just took the same portable equipment in there
But the studio itself, the actual room to play in there
was much cosier and much more at home
Apple Recording Studio Savile Row London
I think everyone was getting a little tired of us by then
because we were taking a long time
and there were many heated discussions
Billy Preston was a great help, a very good keyboard guy
His work on Get Back alone justified him being there
He was an amiable fellow, very nice
He was a kind of emollient, if you like
He helped to lubricate the friction that had been there
It’s interesting to see how people behave nicely when you bring a guest in
They don’t want everybody to know they’re so bitchy
This happened back in the White Album
when I brought Eric Clapton in to play on While My Guitar Gently Weeps
Suddenly everybody’s on their best behaviour
So I put a message out to find if Billy was in town
and told him to come into Savile Row, which he did
Straight away there was 100o/o improvement in the vibe in the room
Everybody was happier also to have somebody else playing in the band
Every number’s got a piano part
Normally we overdub it… but this time we want to do it live
We were working on a good track and that always excited us
His part was also part of it
Suddenly, when we were working on something good
the bullshit went out of the window
We got back down to doing what we did really, really well
I think it works OK with just the two verses…
Sweet Loretta Martin, the first verse – Just have two for now
I’ll sing it and shout where I think it should go. If you disagree, I’ll change it
Maybe if we had an intro, a verse and a chorus…
To me the Beatles were always a great little band
Nothing more, nothing less, for all our success
When we sat down to play, we played good from the very beginning
From when we first got Ringo into the band, and before
But when we first got Ringo, the band really gelled. We played good!
We’ve never had too many of those times where it’s just not working
We had them like any other band but for a great little rock’n’roll band –
we could play any little blues or rock’n’roll thing-and it seemed to work
The original idea to rehearse all these new songs
and then make an album in a live show never really happened
because the album became us in the studio
As we rehearsed the songs, they were recorded
They were talking about doing a concert on a boat
or in an amphitheatre in Greece
or maybe at the Roundhouse in London
There were lots of ideas about where they should maybe do a concert
and nothing was ever really agreed
What do we want to do? – I’ll tell you what
We’re still rehearsing and we’ll get it together
So then you must collect…
We’ll all collect our thoughts on what we want
You still expect us to be on the chimney with a lot of people or something like that
Or even a stage at the Saville or anything
We won’t worry about that so don’t give us that one
‘Expecting’ is not a word we use any more… ‘thinking about’
‘Praying’
What about the move tomorrow, do you want to…
No, let’s decide on that a bit later, let’s keep off that
We’re getting into too diverse… we’ll do the numbers, we’re the band
Whatever, I’ll do it… if we’ve got to go on the roof
But I mean… I don’t want to go
I would like to
I’d like to go on the roof – It diverts people
That’s all right. Anyway, we won’t discuss it
I want to record them as tracks and I want to do 14 numbers
Any time is paradise when I’m with you
That was looking for an end to the film
and it was “How are we going to finish, there’s not going to be a big concert”
By then it was looking like… can we do this, finish in two weeks’ time?
Then it was suggested that we go up on the roof
and do a concert there,

The Beatles Anthology 8 [Legendado/Parte 4] HD

then we could all go home
30th January 1969
And in the end it started to filter up from our roadie, Mal
who crept in, trying to keep out of the camera:
“Police are complaining. You’ve got to stop.” We said “We’re not stopping”
He said “The police are going to arrest you”
“Good end to the film. Let ’em do it. Great!”
We thought that’s an end: “Beatles busted on rooftop gig”
The thing on the roof that always I feel let down about were the police
Someone called the police and I was playing away and I thought, oh great!
I wanted the cops to drag me off – “Get off those drums!”
We were being filmed and it would have been really great
Well, they didn’t. They just bumbled in: “You’ve got to turn that sound down”
It could have been fabulous
By the time we got to Let It Be we couldn’t play the game any more
It had come to the point where it was no longer creating magic
and the camera in the room with us made us aware that it was phoney situation
In fact what happened was when we got in there
we showed how the break-up of a group works
We didn’t realise we were actually breaking up as it was happening
Just the same as it was before
The year before when we were last in the studio
There was a lot of… kind of trivia
and games that were being played
I think it shows as an absolute fact that we were going different places
I’ve mentioned it before, the energy for the Beatles was waning
We put in 1000o/o but it was dwindling now
“Oh dear, do we have to turn up?” “Do we have to do that thing again!”
“I want to do this and John wants to do that”
And George was off and people were… you know, we had families
I remember thinking of it like army buddies
One of the songs we used to love in the past was Wedding Bells
Those wedding bells are breaking up that old gang of mine…
and this idea that you’d been army buddies but one day…
you kiss the army goodbye and get married and act like normal people
It was like that for the Beatles, we always knew that day had to come
London, weepy time down south
The last bachelor Beatle was no longer a bachelor
12th March 1969 Paul McCartney married New Yorker Linda Eastman
at Marylebone Registrar’s office
Paul’s new step-daughter Heather
was one of the shrieking, sobbing, devoted fans
who surged round the newly-weds as they made for their car
London bobbies and photographers tangled with tear-stained teenagers
bidding farewell to the bachelordom of the Beatle who resisted marriage so long
At last the new threesome found sanctuary in their car
But clearly Paul’s plan for a quiet wedding had gone drastically wrong
Exit the McCartneys, a very popular group
And they chose Paul’s wedding day to bust me
George was in my office
Pattie rang, saying that Sgt Pilcher, if that was his name…
was swarming all over the house in Esher
George said to me “What should I do? What should I tell Pattie?”
I said just tell them where the stuff is because they’ll find it anyway
Save yourself a lot of hassle
He said he had a bit of grass and maybe some hash in a box on the mantelpiece
So he rang Pattie and told her to tell them where it was
By which time they had found a chunk this big
in a boot in his wardrobe
Sgt Pilcher was gaining great notoriety by busting pop stars
such as George, Mick, Keith and John – always was the same cop
Nobody realised, nobody put two and two together
There was a kind of social pecking order
that was in the pop world
The drug squad decided to go round
and this fellow thought he was Oliver Cromwell
He decided to go round and clean up what was going on
They busted Donovan first
Anybody who was in England at that time will remember
Then they bust the Rolling Stones and they worked their way up
They they busted John and Yoko and me
Sgt Pilcher’s successful career with the drug squad was short-lived
He was later sent to prison for perjury
Sentencing Pilcher to 4 years in prison, Mr Justice Melford Stevenson said:

The Beatles Anthology 8 [Legendado/Parte 5 (Final)] HD

But now my life has changed in oh so many ways
We wanted to get married on the cross-Channel ferry
That was the romantic part – when we went to Southampton
She couldn’t get on because she wasn’t English and couldn’t get a day visa
Anyway you can’t get married. The Captain’s not allowed to do it any more
We called Peter Brown from Paris. “We want to get married, where can we go?”
He said “Gibraltar’s the only place”
So “OK, let’s go” and it was beautiful
When John hooked up with Yoko so intensely
it was obvious there could be no looking back after that
I always felt he had to clear the decks of us in order to give her enough attention
It takes a lot to live with four people for years and years, which is what we did
We’d call each other every name under the sun
We’d got to blows, we’d been through the whole damn show
We knew where we were at, we still do
We’ve been through the mill together for more than ten years
We’ve been through our therapy together many times, you know
On a lot of days, even with all the craziness, it really worked still
Instead of working every day, it worked two days a month
There were still good days
We were still really close friends
then it would split off again into some madness
It was quite obvious that the Beatles became…
The thing that it started out being…
gave us a vehicle to be able to do so much
when we were younger, and we grew right through that
But it got to a point where it was stifling us, there was too much restriction
It had to self-destruct
It’s easy for people to say about Apple and the Beatles “Why didn’t you…?”
You sit there with millions of dollars and try and work it out
It’s so easy afterwards to say “Why didn’t you?”
With Apple we were great creators and we could do all of that
but nobody had half an idea about a budget
So we were spending more than we were earning
There was nobody managing Apple
It was wasting away all this money
Nobody had any ability to be a business manager
So it was a question of who was going to do it
I was doing it but only on the basis
that I’ll do it until you find somebody you want to do it. Because I didn’t
That’s why somebody like Allen Klein
had the opportunity to say he could do it, but so did a lot of other people
Klein had been managing the Rolling Stones…
and I believe Donovan… and John had met him
He came in one day and said:
“I’m going to get Klein to manage me, and that’s what’s happening”
And Allen was… a human being
the same as Brian was a human being
It was the same thing with Brian in the early days, it was assessment
I make a lot of mistakes character-wise but now and then I make a good one
The alternative to Klein was possibly Lee Eastman
but I’m not at all sure
that Paul wanted Lee Eastman to be a manager
in the sense that Brian Epstein had been a manager
or Allen Klein to be a manager like Brian Epstein had been a manager
I put forward Lee Eastman, Linda’s dad
as a possible sort of lawyer and possibly someone to do it
But they said no, he would be too biased for you and against us
Oh yeah, we had great arguments with Paul
We felt the three of us have gone this way, why don’t you?
So there it was, and it was a three-to-one situation
In the Beatles, if any one doesn’t agree with the plan
it was always vetoed, it was very democratic that way
So the three-to-one thing was very awkward
Things would happen like…
at Olympic Studio one evening we were supposed to be doing Abbey Road
and we all showed up at the studio ready to record
and Allen Klein showed up as part of the party with his henchman
They said “You’ve got to sign a contract for Klein to take to his Board”
I said “It’s Friday night, he doesn’t work on a Saturday
“Anyway, Allen Klein’s a law unto himself, he doesn’t have to report
“We can easily do this on Monday. Let’s do our session now
“You’re not going to push me into this.” They said “You’re stalling”
They said “He wants 20o/o”
I said “Tell him he can have 15o/o.” They said “You’re stalling”
I said “No, I’m working for us. We’re a big act”
My exact words: “We’re a big act, the Beatles. He’ll take 15o/o”
I think they were so intoxicated with him that they said:
“He must have 20o/o and he’s got to report to his Board tomorrow
“Sign now or never”
I said “Right, that’s it. I’m not signing now”
There was a big argument and they all went, leaving me at the studio
What changed at Apple after he arrived? Everything!
It was a completely different situation
First and foremost, Paul wasn’t there
Let It Be was such an unhappy record, even though it has some great songs
and I really thought that was the end of the Beatles
I thought, what a shame to go out like this
But Paul rang. “We’re making another record, would you produce it?”
My immediate answer was “Only if you let me produce it the way we used to”
“We want to do that.” “John included?” He said “Yes, honestly”
So I said “If you really want that, let’s get together again”
And it was a very happy record – everybody knew it was to be the last
I think the deal was that through Let It Be
I left and we got back just to finish it, to make it tidy
Then everybody decided we ought to do one better album
I think it shows on the record
that when we were excited the track’s exciting
It really all comes together
It doesn’t matter what we’re going through individually on the bullshit level
When it gets to the music
you can see that it’s really cool, we’d all put in 1000o/o
Nobody was sure it was going to be the last one, but everybody felt it was
The Beatles had gone through so much, and it was a long time
They’d been incarcerated together for nearly a decade
It was a very happy album. Everybody worked frightfully well
And that’s why I’m very fond of it
There was always a possibility that we could have carried on
We weren’t sitting in the studio saying “OK, this is it
“Last record, last track, last take”
But when we’d finished Abbey Road the game was up, we all accepted that
It was magical
There were some really loving, caring moments between four people
A hotel room here and there
A really amazing closeness, just…
four guys who really loved each other. It was pretty sensational
They gave their money and they gave their screams
but the Beatles gave their nervous systems
which is a much more difficult thing to give
I’m really glad that most of the songs
dealt with love, peace, understanding
Hardly any said “Go on kids, tell them to sod off, leave your parents”
It’s all very “all you need is love” or John’s “give peace a chance”
There was a very good spirit behind it all
It’s just natural. It’s not a great disaster
People talk as if it’s the end of the earth. It’s only a rock group that split up
You have all the old records there if you want to reminisce
22nd August 1969
That’s what they ask you. On tours round the world and press conferences:
“Getting the Beatles back together?” You say “What are you talking about?”
They say “How about Julian?” I feel sorry for him in the middle of all that
Or Sean or somebody
Well, let me ask you this way: “Are you getting back together?” No!
And yet with Free as a Bird we somehow did, yeah
Subtitles: Screentext

March 8, 2021 – 5:19 am Categories: Uncategorized | Post a comment

	SLIMJIM on FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART…
	mosckerr on RFK Jr: “If Trump is kep…
	mosckerr on “Now whether the 14th Am…
	Everette Hatcher III on “Now whether the 14th Am…
	Everette Hatcher III on RFK Jr: “If Trump is kep…

Real Time with Bill Maher: Ben Affleck, Sam Harris and Bill Maher Debate Radical Islam (HBO)

Supreme Court Sides With Christian Student in College Free Speech Case

Oppressed have no comforter

—

2 Major Reports Conclude Excessive Government Spending Threatens American Prosperity

National Debt Set to Skyrocket

PERCENTAGE OF GDP

In Depth

Policy Papers for Researchers

Technical Notes

Authors

Who Was the First Woman to Receive an Electoral Vote?

Rand Paul questions if US borrowing puts country on path to become Venezuela

Paul’s comments came just a day after the Senate passed President Biden’s $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief bill

Posted by David Ramsey on Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 1:02 PM

–

The Beatles Anthology 8 [Legendado/Parte 1] HD

The Beatles Anthology 8 [Legendado/Parte 2] HD

The Beatles Anthology 8 [Legendado/Parte 3] HD

The Beatles Anthology 8 [Legendado/Parte 4] HD

The Beatles Anthology 8 [Legendado/Parte 5 (Final)] HD

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Categories

Meta