Tag Archives: Arkansas Times

Petrino upset with Miles over field goal

I remember when USC beat Arkansas 70 to 17 back in 2005. The score was 49 to 7 in the first half and USC could have made it 100 to 7 if they wanted to but they put in their subs in the 3rd quarter. However, Wally Hall said they ran up the score because they threw a pass in the 4th quarter. At the time I said that what Arkansas needed to do was build a championship team and take care of USC on the field. Complaining about the other team scoring does no good. It seemed to me that the same thing happened yesterday between Petrino and Miles.

A little story about that game in LA between USC and Arkansas. My friend Sherwood Haisty had recently moved out there and he got a ticket to the game. After USC scored on the opening drive, Arkansas was able to tie the score 7 to 7 and my friend called me from the stadium. We rejoiced together that Arkansas was rising to the occasion. However, needless the say, that was the last time we visited on the phone that night.

I am disappointed that we lost but we should not be unrealistic. I personally was pleased that in Houston Nutt’s 10 years that we actually were SEC West Champs three times. In November in 1998 and 2006 we were still in the national championship conversation. Last year we were leading #1 Alabama in the 4th quarter and the same could be said about our game with eventual national champ Auburn. This year we played ourselves into position to possibly win the national title by the time we had finished the first 11 games this year. I am very proud of our razorbacks.


Below is from Orlando newspaper:

Bobby Petrino, Les Miles have a testy postgame handshake | Video
SEC, college football— posted by matt murschel on November, 25 2011 7:03 PM

Arkansas coach Bobby Petrino is not a happy camper.

After watching his team jump out to a 14-0 lead over top-ranked LSU, the Razorbacks watched as the Tigers ran away with a 41-17 win.

With a BCS bid clearly on his mind, LSU coach Les Miles continued put the foot on the gas and scored 17 points in the fourth quarter to put away Arkansas.

Petrino didn’t quite see it that way and made his point know several times during the game. So much so, that CBS announcers Gary Danielson and Verne Lundquist both pointed it out during the broadcast.

At one point, Petrino pointed to Miles across the field and voiced his displeasure with what I am sure he thought was running up the score.

The postgame handshake between Miles and Petrino was short and sweet to say the least.

Picture below from Arkansas Times Blog.

The impossible dream

Related posts:

ESPN’s Mark Schlabach at Little Rock Touchdown Club (Part 3)

Earlier I wrote about where I think Arkansas could win a national championship with just two more wins. Below is a portion of an article by Jim Harris of the website Arkansas 360: AND ON BOBBY: Schlabach, on Arkansas’ coach: “I said when he was hired that Bobby Petrino would make Arkansas a contender for […]

The most significant game in Arkansas razorback football history? (Part 2)

A few days ago it looked like we would not have the opportunity to play into the national championship game, but now all that has changed. Life is funny that way sometimes. The Arkansas News Bureau reported: “I think we’ll have the opportunity,” Bequette said. “That’s what I believe.” All we got to do is […]

The most significant game in Arkansas razorback football history?

Wally Hall actually said on his radio program on Nov 22, 2011 that the Arkansas v. LSU game on Nov 25, 2011 is the most significant game in razorback history. I have to respectfully disagree. I will agree that it is in the top 5, but I will start a  list today of other games […]

Arkansas razorback Garrett Uekman found dead this morning

Photo by Stephen B. Thornton I saw him play for Catholic against Bryant and I saw him run out on the field just yesterday, but he was found dead this morning in Fayetteville. The Arkansas News Bureau noted: I am proud of the way he represented our program,” Petrino said. “He did everything right and had […]

Pictures from Arkansas’ 49 to 7 victory over Tennessee (Part 1)

My son Wilson and I enjoyed the game and we had great seats on the 40 yard line.   Photo by Amy Smotherman Burgess, ©KNS/2011 Tennessee wide receiver DeAnthony Arnett fails to catch a pass against Arkansas at Donald W. Reynolds Razorback Stadium in Fayetteville on Nov. 12, 2011. (AMY SMOTHERMAN BURGESS/NEWS SENTINEL) Photo by Amy […]

Majors speaks at Little Rock Touchdown Club (Part 8)jh76

Interview with Johnny Majors after 1982 Kentucky game I got to Johnny Majors at the Little Rock Touchdown Club meeting on Nov 7, 2011. Jim Harris wrote these words about the connection between the Arkansas and Tennessee football programs: Former Arkansas Athletic Director Frank Broyles was all for Tennessee as the Hogs’ regular SEC East […]

17 seniors play their last game in Fayetteville for Hogs jh82

    My son Wilson and I went to the game on Saturday in Fayetteville and saw the Razorback Stadium. Above is a picture of the seniors and Seth Armburst is running out on the field. Below is an article by Wally Hall that mentions the names of all  of the 17 seniors for the […]

Johnny Majors speaks at Little Rock Touchdown Club (Part 5)

I got to hear Johnny Majors speak at the Little Rock Touchdown Club on November 7, 2011. Here is a paragraph from his 2005 talk to the club: Majors became the coach at Iowa State in 1968, where his assistants included Jimmy Johnson, Jackie Sherrill and Larry Lacewell. Lacewell, who went on to coach at […]

Football Preview of UT Vols at Arkansas 11-12-11

I got to see Tennessee play at Alabama on tv and the score was 6-0 at the half. The funny thing is that Arkansas also had success in the first half against Alabama. However, the depth started to show in the 2nd half and Bama went on to win both games easily. I spend a […]

Michael Dyer trash talking before Arkansas game on Oct 8th?

I don’t know what it exactly means, but you can judge for yourself after watching the video above. Football: Auburn Duo Eager For Arkansas Homecoming Posted on 06 October 2011 By Robbie Neiswanger Arkansas News Bureau • rneiswanger@arkansasnews.com FAYETTEVILLE — Kiehl Frazier began attending Arkansas games when he was five years old. Over the years, […]

Arkansas Times Blogger says Communists were not atheistic, but they were and they believed “might made right” jh48

Paul Kurtz pictured above.

Norma Bates noted on the Arkansas Times Blog yesterday
The most common justification throughout history – the elephant in everybody’s living room – is religion. “God is on our side.” “We are the chosen people.” “God gave us this land.” “God said to — .”

Judaism, Christianity, or that relative Johnny-come-lately – Islam – are all exactly alike despite their man-behind-the-curtain smoke-and-mirrors fright shows of Truth and Superiority to the others.

As Richard Dawkins says in “The God Delusion,” “Religion is an evil precisely because it requires no justification and brooks no discussion.”


When I asked Ravi Zacharias about religion causing violence as Dawkins claims, Zacharias unapologetically said, “Dawkins is pathetic at this point. He is either ignoring political fact or is misusing numbers to convey something that he is predisposed to want to convey.”

The biggest point Dawkins is missing, Ravi Zacharias said, is “irreligion and atheism have killed infinitely more than all religious wars of any kind cumulatively put together … Joseph Stalin’s violence and eradication of 15 million of his own people was a result of his stepping away from God and into a rabid kind of atheistic thinking.”

By the same token, in their zeal to enforce an atheistic communism, “Mao Tse-tung and Pol Pot caused the extermination of tens of millions of people,” Zacharias said.

Norma Bates noted on the Arkansas Times Blog yesterday, “Communism was a comprehensive, all-embracing religion and not simply a political party, political system or philosophy. This fact is illustrated by the numerous ways in which Communism embraced and attemped to promulgate peculiar quasi-religious (and often clearly anti-scientific) beliefs which had nothing all to do with politics or government. Although Communism typically touted itself as anti-religious and pro-science, it was, in fact, deeply anti-scientific and clearly a religion. One of Communism’s hallmarks in the Soviet Union and China was its aggressive and violent suppression of other religions. Communism was ‘anti-religious’ only in the sense that it forcibly suppressed all religions other than itself.”

If it walks like a duck . . . .

Francis Schaeffer in the episode “The Revolutionary Age” in his film series “How should we then live?” which is available on youtube, made the point that Communism is atheistic and has NEVER EXISTED WITHOUT BRINGING REPRESSION. A few months ago a young person said to me, “I think that Marx was misunderstood and that true communism has not been really tried yet.” I responded that there are a hand full of Communist countries today and they all have several similar conditions: NO FREEDOM OF PRESS, NO POLITICAL FREEDOM, NO FREEDOM OF RELIGION AND NO ECONOMIC FREEDOM. I noted that Schaeffer has rightly said that Communism is basically based on materialism and a result it must fail. It does not have a Reformation base.

I have corresponded on several occasions with the humanist Paul Kurtz. I must say that he is one of the finest gentlemen on the face of the earth. I have had dinner with several other secular humanist who have signed the Humanist Manifesto II and had very civil discussions with them. None of them ever suggested that the Communists were not atheistic. They just simply thought that these particular men murdered to suit their own purposes but were not following logic which would have led them to treat others with respect. However, this idea that humanists and atheists can come up with a logical moral system that rules out murder is not realistic. Rationally they can not do it.  Without God in the picture then you only have this world of time and chance. If evolution teaches us the survival of the fittest then why would “might makes right” ever be wrong?

The movie maker and atheist Woody Allen knows this best.


I am a big Woody Allen movie fan and no other movie better demonstrates man’s need for God more  than Allen’s 1989 film  Crimes and Misdemeanors. This film also brought up the view that Hitler believed that “might made right.” How can an atheist argue against that?  Basically Woody Allen is attacking the weaknesses in his own agnostic point of view!! Take a look at the video clip below when he says in the absence of God, man has to do the right thing. What chance is there that will happen?

Crimes and Misdemeanors is  about a eye doctor who hires a killer to murder his mistress because she continually threatens to blow the whistle on his past questionable, probably illegal, business activities. Afterward he is haunted by guilt. His Jewish father had taught him that God sees all and will surely punish the evildoer.

But the doctor’s crime is never discovered. Later in the film, Judah reflects on the conversation his father had with Judah’s unbelieving Aunt May during a Jewish Sedar dinner  many years ago:

“Come on Sol, open your eyes. Six million Jews burned to death by the Nazi’s, 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.”

The basic question Woody Allen is presenting to his own agnostic humanistic worldview is: If you really believe there is no God there to punish you in an afterlife, then why not murder if you can get away with it?  The secular humanist worldview that modern man has adopted does not work in the real world that God has created. God “has planted eternity in the human heart…” (Ecclesiastes 3:11). This is a direct result of our God-given conscience. The apostle Paul said it best in Romans 1:19, “For that which is known about God is evident to them and made plain in their inner consciousness, because God  has shown it to them” (Amplified Version).

Crimes and Misdemeanors (Woody Allen – 1989) – Final scenes

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.). Humanists don’t really have an intellectual basis for saying that Hitler was wrong, but their God-given conscience tells them that they are wrong on this issue.

Below is a study by Francis Schaeffer that makes the point that the French Revolution and the Communist Revolution in Russia should be compared.

E P I S O D E 5

How Should We Then Live 5-1

T h e


I. Bible as Absolute Base for Law

A. Paul Robert’s mural in Lausanne.

B. Rutherford’s Lex Rex  (Law Is King): Freedom without chaos; government by law rather than arbitrary government by men.

C. Impact of biblical political principles in America.

1. Rutherford’s influence on U.S. Constitution: directly through Witherspoon; indirectly through Locke’s secularized version of biblical politics.

2. Locke’s ideas inconsistent when divorced from Christianity.

3. One can be personally non-Christian, yet benefit from Christian foundations: e.g. Jefferson and other founders.

II. The Reformation and Checks and Balances

A. Humanist and Reformation views of politics contrasted.

B. Sin is reason for checks and balances in Reformed view: Calvin’s position at Geneva examined.

C. Checks and balances in Protestant lands prevented bloody resolution of tensions.

D. Elsewhere, without this biblically rooted principle, tensions had to be resolved violently.

III. Contrast Between English and French Political Experience

A. Voltaire’s admiration of English conditions.

B. Peaceful nature of the Bloodless Revolution of 1688 in England related to Reformation base.

C. Attempt to achieve political change in France on English lines, but on Enlightenment base, produced a bloodbath and a dictatorship.

1. Constructive change impossible on finite human base.

2. Declaration of Rights of Man, the rush to extremes, and the Goddess of Reason.

3. Anarchy or repression: massacres, Robespierre, the Terror.

4. Idea of perfectibility of Man maintained even during the Terror.


IV. Anglo-American Experience Versus Franco-Russian

A. Reformation experience of freedom without chaos contrasts with that of Marxist-Leninist Russia.

B. Logic of Marxist-Leninism.

1. Marxism not a source of freedom.

2. 1917 Revolution taken over, not begun, by Bolsheviks.

3. Logic of communism: elite dictatorship, suppression of freedoms, coercion of allies.

V. Reformation Christianity and Humanism: Fruits Compared

A. Reformation gave absolutes to counter injustices; where Christians failed they were untrue to their principles.

B. Humanism has no absolute way of determining values consistently.

C. Differences practical, not just theoretical: Christian absolutes give limited government; denial of absolutes gives arbitrary rule.

VI. Weaknesses Which Developed Later in Reformation Countries

A. Slavery and race prejudice.

1. Failure to live up to biblical belief produces cruelty.

2. Hypocritical exploitation of other races.

3. Church’s failure to speak out sufficiently against this hypocrisy.

B. Noncompassionate use of accumulated wealth.

1. Industrialism not evil in itself, but only through greed and lack of compassion.

2. Labor exploitation and gap in living standards.

3. Church’s failure to testify enough against abuses.

C. Positive face of Reformation Christianity toward social evil.

1. Christianity not the only influence on consensus.

a) Church’s silence betrayed; did not reflect what it said it believed.

b) Non-Christian influences also important at that time; and many so-called Christians were “social” Christians only.

2. Contributions of Christians to social reform.

a) Varied efforts in slave trade, prisons, factories.

(1) Wesley, Newton, Clarkson, Wilberforce, and abolition of slavery.

(2) Howard, Elizabeth Fry, and prison reforms.

(3) Lord Shaftesbury and reform in the factories.

b) Impact of Whitefield-Wesley revivals on society.

VII. Reformation Did Not Bring Perfection

But gradually on basis of biblical teaching there was a unique improvement.

A. With Bible the ordinary citizen could say that majority was wrong.

B. Tremendous freedom without chaos because Bible gives a base for law.


1. What has been the role of biblical principles in the legal and political history of the countries studied?

2. Is it true that lands influenced by the Reformation escaped political violence because biblical concepts were acted upon?

3. What are the core distinctions, in terms of ideology and results, between English and American Revolutions on the one hand, and the French and Russian on the other hand?

4. What were the weaknesses which developed at a later date in countries which had a Reformation history?

5. Dr. Schaeffer believes that basic to action is an idea, and that the history of the West in the last two or three centuries has been marked by a humanism pressed to its tragic conclusions and by a Christianity insufficiently applied to the totality of life. How should Christians then approach participation in social and political affairs?

Key Events and Persons

Calvin: 1509-1564

Samuel Rutherford: 1600-1661

Rutherford’s Lex Rex: 1644

John Locke: 1631-1704

John Wesley: 1703-1791

Voltaire: 1694-1778

Letters on the English Nation: 1733

George Whitefield: 1714-1770

John Witherspoon: 1723-1794

John Newton: 1725-1807

John Howard: 1726-1790

Jefferson: 1743-1826

Robespierre: 1758-1794

Wilberforce: 1759-1833

Clarkson: 1760-1846

Napoleon: 1769-1821

Elizabeth Fry: 1780-1845

Declaration of Rights of Man: 1789

National Constituent Assembly: 1789-1791

Second French Revolution and Revolutionary Calendar: 1792

The Reign of Terror: 1792-1794

Lord Shaftesbury: 1801-1855

English slave trade ended: 1807

Slavery ended in Great Britain and Empire: 1833

Karl Marx: 1818-1883

Lenin: 1870-1924

Trotsky: 1879-1940

Stalin: 1879-1953

February and October Russian Revolutions: 1917

Berlin Wall: 1961

Czechoslovakian repression: 1968

Further Study

Charles Breunig, The Age of Revolution and Reaction: 1789-1850 (1970).

R.N. Carew Hunt, The Theory and Practice of Communism (1963).

Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities (1957).

Peter Gay, ed., Deism: An Anthology (1968).

John McManners, The French Revolution and the Church (1970).

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, Manifesto of the Communist Party (1957).

Louis L. Snyder, ed., The Age of Reason (1955).

David B. Davis, The Problem of Slavery in Western Culture (1975).

J. Kuczynski, The Rise of the Working Class (1971).

Edmund S. Morgan, The Puritan Dilemma (1958).

John Newton, Out of the Depths. An Autobiography.

John Wesley, Journal (1 vol. abridge).

C. Woodham-Smith, The Great Hunger, Ireland, 1845-1849 (1964).

Actually if you look closely at history then the case can be made that both the Russian Revolution and the French Revolution are closely related.