Arnold Schwarzenegger opens this clip of Milton Friedman’s film series “Free to Choose” with a statement that contrast the socialist country he came from to the freer society in the USA where he came to live in 1968. I am going to post several video clips from this film series that will demonstrate that our country allowed free enterprise to flourish without excessive government controls.
Jason Tolbert, Max Brantley and John Brummett all wrote interesting articles on the issue of American Exceptionalism during the fall after Tim Griffin and Joyce Elliott discussed the subject during the campaign.
I don’t think we are exceptional because of our people, land or resources. It must be because of two principles that have existed in this country for many years.
First, our country was founded on a reformation base. Francis Schaeffer pointed out in his film series, “How should we then live?” episode 5 on the Revolutionary Age: “As the reformation emphasis, that the Bible is the only final authority, took root the ordinary citizen was increasingly freed from arbitrary governmental power.”
Sadly our country has allowed humanism to take away many of the freedoms that our founding fathers meant for our country to have including prayer in schools. Did you know that 29 of the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence had seminary degrees? Futhermore, over 90% of the 250 original founding fathers claimed to be Christians according to their own writings.
Second, our country allowed free enterprise to flourish without excessive government controls. That was because the founding fathers saw the government as a necessary evil and not a positive force to be interfering with our lives.
This article today is the beginning of a series that I will be starting on the true secret behind the American Exceptionalism in our past. There is no denying that it existed in the past. Take a look at page 976 of the book A History of the American People by Paul Johnson (1997):
It is appropriate to end this history of the American people on a note of success, because the story of American is essentially one of difficulties being overcome by intelligence and skill, by faith and strength of purpose, by courage and persistence. America today, with its 260 million people, its splendid cities, its vast wealth, and its unrivaled power, is a human achievement without parallel. That achievement–the transformation of a mostly uninhabited wilderness into the supreme national artifact of history–did not come about without heroic sacrifice and great sufferings stoically endured, many costly failures, huge disappointments, defeats, and tragedies. There have indeed been many setbacks in 400 years of American history. As we have seen, many unresolved problems, some of daunting size, remain. But the Americans are, above all, a problem-solving people. They do not believe that anything in this world is beyond human capacity to soar to and dominate. They will not give up. Full of essential goodwill to each other and to all, confident in their human decency and their democratic skills, they will attack again and again the ills in their society, until they are overcome or at least substantially redressed. So the ship of state sails on, and mankind still continues to watch its progress, with wonder and amazement and sometimes apprehension, as it moves into the unknown waters of the 21st century and the third millennium. The great American republican experiment is still the cynosure of the world’s eyes. It is still the first, best hope for the human race. Looking back on its past, and forward to its future, the auguries are that it will not disappoint an expectant humanity.
_____________________________________
_____________________________________
Francis Schaeffer does a great job in three 9 minute clips of showing how the USA was founded on a reformation base. Here is the first clip:
Are we supposed to understand and accept that Mike Huckabee is in hell where he has official duties as a greeter,welcoming Osama bin-Laden?
We all suspect strongly, of course, that bin-Laden will spend eternity in hell, whatever his form and whatever hell’s. But we should not embrace a politician’s seeking electoral gain by dictating and announcing after-life dispositions. Those we should defer to a higher power, whose divine authority no mortal man should dare usurp, even for TV ratings or votes, or both.
I really am uncomfortable with all this kind of lighthearted talk about hell. The traditional Christian view of hell is a very serious doctrine. It is a necessary doctrine and today I want to show why.
Take a look at this portion of the article “Hell:The Horrible Choice,” by Patrick Zukeran of Probe Ministries. Here is the fifth installment:
Why Hell Is Necessary and Just
Is hell necessary? How is this doctrine consistent with a God of love? These are questions I face when I speak on the fate of unbelievers. The necessity and justice of hell can be recognized when we understand the nature of God and the nature of man.
Hell is necessary because God’s justice requires it. Our culture focuses mostly on God’s nature of love, mercy, and grace. However, God is also just and holy, and this must be kept in balance. Justice demands retribution, the distribution of rewards and punishments in a fair way. God’s holiness demands that He separate himself entirely from sin and evil (Habakkuk 1:13).The author of Psalm 73 struggles with the dilemma of the suffering of the righteous and the prosperity of the wicked. Joseph Stalin was responsible for the death of millions in the Soviet Union, but he died peacefully in his sleep without being punished for his deeds. Since evil often goes unpunished in this lifetime, it must be dealt with at a future time to fulfill God’s justice and holiness.
Notes1. Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, Handbook of Christian Apologetics (Downers Grove, IL.: InterVarsity Press, 1994), 282. 2. Bertrand Russell, Why I Am Not a Christian (New York: Touchstone Books, 1957), 17 – 18. 3. Charles Darwin, The Autobiography of Charles Darwin, ed. Nora Darwin Barlow, with original omissions restored (N.Y.: W. W. Norton, 1993), 87. 4. C. S. Lewis, Screwtape Letters (New York: Macmillan), 69.Woody Allen’s movie Crimes and Misdemeanors does a great job of showing that if God does not exist then people like Stalin and Hitler were “home free” in that they were never going to be punished for what they did. “Existential subjects to me are still the only subjects worth dealing with. I don’t think that one can aim more deeply than at the so-called existential themes, the spiritual themes.” WOODY ALLEN
Woody Allen’s 1989 movie, CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS , is an excellent icebreaker concerning the need of God while making decisions in the area of personal morality. 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. He 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.
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)
The secularist can only give incomplete answers to these questions: How could you have convinced Judah not to kill? On what basis could you convince Judah it was wrong for him to murder?
As Christians, we would 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. It opens a door for Christians to find common ground with those whom they attempt to share Christ; we all have to deal with personal morality issues. However, 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)
Later, Colson noted that discussing the movie CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS with King presented the perfect opportunity to tell him about Christ’s atoning work on the cross. Colson believes the Lord is working on Larry King.
(Caution: CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS is rated PG-13. It does include some adult themes.)
Cato Institute scholars address several items in President Obama’s first official State of the Union Address. Scholars include Daniel J. Mitchell, Mark A. Calabria, Neal McCluskey, Michael D. Tanner, John Samples, Jim Harper and Malou Innocent. http://www.cato.org
_________________________________
__
John Brummett suggests that Rick Perry could not beat President Obama in his re-election attempt in 2012. In Brummett’s article “Laboring over holiday arrows,” September 6, 2011, Arkansas News Bureau, he asserted:
President Obama— You cannot get re-elected in an economy like this unless the Republicans nominate someone more unsettling even than the economy, a possibility.
Rick Perry, Mitt Romney, Michele Bachmann — The possibilities mentioned above
I will respond in 6 parts. These 6 parts all deal with fundemental economic disagreements that President Obama and Rick Perry disagree on, and I will you determine if the public agrees with Perry or Obama.
These observations come from an article I read by Bradley Gitz on Sept 4, 2011 in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette:
Much is being made of Texas Gov. (and now GOP frontrunner) Rick Perry’s “Texas Miracle.” Conservatives favorably compare Texas’ economic performance with the rest of the nation under Barack Obama. Liberals claim the “miracle” really isn’t much of a miracle at all and that Perry shouldn’t get the credit even if it is.
Both sides have a point. By any objective standard, Texas has done pretty well in recent years, although upon closer inspection it still has problems (like any state) and it remains unclear how much of the good stuff can be attributed to Perry’s policies.
In clarifying all this, it might help to remember that government is necessary for economic development but, past a certain point, is a potential obstacle to it. The logical corollary is that the marketplace is generally self-correcting, unless presidents (and governors) do dumb things that prevent such corrections. Sound economic policy more often than not means government laying the right foundation for economic growth and then getting out of the way.
So what would such a “right” foundation under present circumstances consist of?
First, limiting the size of the welfare state and government spending in general. Much easier than figuring out the right policies is identifying the wrong ones, foremost among which is government spending more each year than it takes in. At this point we have no choice but to overhaul entitlements, drastically cut discretionary spending and hope we have learned to never go down this road again…
That the Obama administration doesn’t like most of these ideas explains certain things, and also suggests a rather obvious ninth step the voters can take in November of 2012.
—–––––
•–––––—
Freelance columnist Bradley R. Gitz, who lives and teaches in Batesville, received his Ph.D. in political science from the University of Illinois.
In the article “When a state legislator’s brain shorts out…,” July 28, 2011, Arkansas News Bureau, Brummett was critical of recent statements by Representative Nate Bell of Mena. Brummett was critical of these Tea Party types not only because they sometimes mispeak but also because the Tea Party is taking the country in a direction that Brummett detests. He asserted:
For one thing, and in the immediate term, it may be that our government’s credit rating will be downgraded to the point that interest costs will rise for beleaguered Americans’ mortgages and car loans.
Let me make two points here. First, the term Tea Party is being used by Brummett for any right wing person he does not like.
One sign of the tea party movement’s success is that the term “tea party” is becoming an all-purpose smear term for any more-or-less right-wing person or activity that the writer doesn’t like. In fact, I think “Tea Party” is replacing “neocon” as an all-purpose word for “the people I hate.”
Second, Brummett claims it the Republicans who want to default, but is the Democrats who are refusing to cut the budget in a way we can lower this 1.7 trillion deficit for this year!!!!
The huge deficits are the problem. People want the debt ceiling raised, but if the huge deficits continue then what is the use? The article below shows how our government will have their credit rating devalued UNLESS WE STOP RUNNING UP BIG DEFICTIS EVERY YEAR!!
Americans, and global financial markets, are watching Washington nervously for a real plan—one that will put the nation squarely on a path to solving our twin crises of spending and debt. Without strong structural changes in spending, our debt will balloon out of control.
At stake are two issues. The short-term is obvious – will there be an increase in the debt limit before August 3? Despite the President and his team practically begging Wall Street to collapse, the markets and the rating agencies believe that there will be an increase and the federal government can safely avoid the chaos of prioritizing its bills in order to service the debt. Though they warn of the consequences if this doesn’t happen, Standard & Poor’s, has stated that
…the risk of a payment default is small, though increasing…Standard and Poor’s still anticipates that lawmakers will raise the debt ceiling by the end of July to avoid those outcomes.”
The second and even more crucial issue is whether Congress will take necessary action beyond the next year to bring our debt under control over the medium and long-term. This is where the rating agencies really voice their strong concern. Again, Standard & Poor’s:
Congress and the Administration might also settle for a smaller increase in the debt ceiling, or they might agree to a plan that, while avoiding a near-term default, might not, in our view, materially improve our base case expectation for the future path of the net general government debt-to-GDP ratio.”
Moody’s response is similar:
The outlook assigned at that time to the government bond rating would very likely be changed to negative at the conclusion of the review unless substantial and credible agreement is achieved on a budget that includes long-term deficit reduction. To retain a stable outlook, such an agreement should include a deficit trajectory that leads to stabilization and then decline in the ratios of federal government debt to GDP and debt to revenue beginning within the next few years.
What the rating agencies are saying is that Congress and the President must pass legislation that immediately begins to rein in deficits and bring our debt down to more acceptable levels, and either keeps it there or continues to drive it down further.
_____________________________
We need more lawmakers like Nate Bell who want to get our country back to the tax level we were at many years ago. Our founding fathers would be SHOCKED IF THEY CAME BACK TODAY AND SAW THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WAS SPENDING OVER 24% OF GDP.
You almost have to feel bad for Arkansas Democrats…almost. With the last remaining Arkansas Congressional Democrat, Mike Ross, announcing he will not run for re-election, they are facing the realization that the entire Arkansas delagation – save Sen. Mark Pryor who is not up until 2014 – could turn red in the next cycle. They are just coming off a tidal wave 2010 election which saw Republicans in the state capitol close to double in ranks. And with the unpopular President Obama leading their ticket in 2012, it is likely to get even worse for them.
It is so bad that Politico this week had the healine “Arkansas Democrats Face Extinction.” Ouch!
It is almost understandable then that they are doing everything they can to hang on to power – whether it is creative map drawing or trying to seize every opportunity to paint Republicans as crazy extremists. Granted, frequent e-mails circulating the Internet make for easy targets. But the over-the-top reaction to an ill-advised Facebook post from a Republican state representative has been both amusing and a bit annoying at the same time.
_________________________
John Brummett Says: July 28th, 2011 at 10:39 am ill-advised? understatement, you think? for the record, i care much less whether democrats or republicans win arkansas political races than whether the republican party can extricate itself from the cranks and kooks and affronts to advanced civilization represented by this kind of outrageously ignorant comment — a process a couple of republicans could begin right here right now by denouncing this guy’s outrage on specific merit and in unambiguous terms, not dismissing it defensively for purely partisan motivation
____________________
If you look at the unbelievable comments that Democrats have made the last two years when they have crammed Obamacare down our throats then you could really come up with so crazy comments. Obama says the whole Obamacare debate will be on CSpan then he retreats with Nancy and does it in private and she says, “You will find out what is in it when we pass it.”
I still think that Tolbert has it right. It makes me think that the Democrat Party of Arkansas is acting much like Florida Alantic’s announcer did last year in the ASU game.
With Arkansas St. leading 37-16 late in the game, Lamont lost his marbles after FAU quarterback Jeff Van Camp scrambled, slid and then took a hit in the head by an Arkansas St. defender.
It should have been a flag. But, as we are reminded on a weekly basis, sometimes officials miss calls. It happens. Well, Lamont was in no mood for oversights. And his subsequent on-air rant was hilariously intense. Here it is:
Florida Alantic was losing at the time and that is why I have compared them to the Arkansas Democratic Party. Jason Tolbert hit the nail on the head in his comments. Is it any wonder that liberal Democrat Michael Cook revealed the Democrats next play in the playbook: “Remarks like the ones made by Nate Bell and Jon Hubbard, without apologies, should be highlighted by Democrats”
I don’t think this strategy of the Democrats will work since it President Obama and the liberals in Washington that have caused the largest pick up of seats by Republicans in Arkansas’ history. IT STILL COMES DOWN TO THE ISSUES.
Congress’s dance with the debt limit can be confusing and, frankly, the details can be a real snooze fest for many Americans. Sometimes a little humor clarifies the absurdities of Washington antics better than flow charts and talk of trillions.
The 31-second video and accompanying infographic “The Debt Ceiling Explained” by Bankrupting America offers the facts, leavened with a dose of levity. The conclusion is serious, however: The country’s debt threatens economic growth, and spending cuts are the answer.
_________________________
It is obvious to me that if President Obama gets his hands on more money then he will continue to spend away our children’s future. He has already taken the national debt from 11 trillion to 16 trillion in just 4 years. Over, and over, and over, and over, and over and over I have written Speaker Boehner and written every Republican that represents Arkansans in Arkansas before (Griffin, Womack, Crawford, and only Senator Boozman got a chance to respond) concerning this. I am hoping they will stand up against this reckless spending that our federal government has done and will continue to do if given the chance.
What would happen if the debt ceiling was not increased? Yes President Obama would probably cancel White House tours and he would try to stop mail service or something else to get on our nerves but that is what the Republicans need to do.
Reading Jason Tolbert’s take (welcome back, BTW) on the new map from Governor Mike Beebe and note that Mr. Beebe seems to be screwing the people of Beebe out of their hometown elected state Sen. Jonathan Dismang:
Sen. Jonathan Dismang’s district will also see a dramatic shift giving up much of its area of White County and instead moving more in the north Pulaski County and therefore deeper into the metro areas north of Little Rock. This puts Dismang on the far edge of his district and away from his base in Beebe where he formerly served as a state representative.
It would appear that in Mr. Beebe’s lame-duckiness, he wants his legacy to be how he punished his home of White County for having the audacity of electing Republicans.
Governor Schwarzenegger Pumps GERRYMANDERING on Leno Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on Jay Leno promoting GERRYMANDERING, which will hit theaters later this year. “An exceptionally entertaining film!” – New York Magazine “Snappy, engaging…succeeds in holding one’s attention the way a good thriller does. It is cinematic – in the best way – all the way through.” – […]
“Gerrymandering” Film Exposes Truth of Redistricting Bill Plante talks to Jeff Reichert, the writer/director of “Gerrymandering,” a new documentary film that uncovers the way that congressional districts are drawn up. _____________________________________ In my last post about redistricting, the point was made that State House and Senate redistricting could lead to many little Fayetteville Fingers. However, […]
John Brummett in his article, “It’s a ‘little-bitty controversy,” Arkansas News Bureau, May 26, 2011 noted: The Republicans said that “even left-leaning columnist John Brummett” had said on Roby Brock’s Talk Business show Sunday night that, conceivably, the Democratic dominance of this board could result in new state House and Senate districts that would include […]
.Jason Cole reported for Yahoo Sports: NEW YORK – The New England Patriots’ selection of Ryan Mallett in the third round of the 2011 NFL draft on Friday may have made sense in a lot of ways, but it did beg one big question: Is coach Bill Belichick focused on what he has left of the Tom Brady(notes) era or […]
Jason Tolbert points out today that even though it seemed like it took forever to get this process of redistricting done, Arkansas still may be the first state in the country to finish the process. One thing I noticed about the new congressional map is that there are 75 counties and District 3 only has […]
Max Brantley thought the “Fayetteville Finger” was a joke when he first heard about it, but he later embraced it and was disappointed when the Democrats could not get it passed. Likewise other liberals John Brummett and Pat Lynch were surprised that that it did not make it. The http://bluearkansasblog.com/ was the latest to rant and […]
Rob Moritz and John Lyon in their article “Panels, Senate OK redistricting plan to split five counties,” Arkansas News Bureau, April 11, 2011 wrote: (NEW MAP BELOW) ( A new congressional redistricting plan advanced at both ends of the Capitol today, possibly signaling an end to a stalemate that has prolonged the regular legislative session […]
Jason Tolbert reported that Rep. Uvalde Lindsey (D-Fayetteville) prefers the map know as the Luker Amendment and does not mix words regarding his opposition to moving Fayetteville into AR4. Here is a clip of an interview Jason did with Rep. Lindsey below. Pat Lynch suggested today in his article “The political bog,” Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, […]
John Burris on Redistricting (from Tolbert Report): I watched “Arkansas Week” and I saw Rob Moritz of the Arkansas News Bureau suggest that it was very realistic that if the state legislators don’t get together soon that this could end up in court. In his article today “Lawmakers return to work on congressional redistricting,” Arkansas […]
A new Talk Business-Hendrix College Poll shows Gov. Mike Beebe (D) maintaining his high job approval rating, while Sen. Mark Pryor (D) appears to be battling a voting public frustrated at Washington.
In a Talk Business-Hendrix Poll taken during the legislative session, Beebe had a 62% job approval rating with only 19% disapproving of his job performance.
“Beebe’s numbers are amazing,” said Dr. Jay Barth, professor of political science at Hendrix College, who helped craft and analyze the poll.
Sen. Mark Pryor, who is not up for re-election until 2014, may be the next big target for Arkansas Republicans who gained two Democratic House seats in 2010. In our poll, Pryor received a 40% job approval rating, with 36.5% voicing disapproval of his job performance. 23.5% did not have an opinion on Pryor’s job performance.
Could Pryor be suffering from the forces that sunk Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D) in her 2010 re-election campaign?
“I think to some degree he is. Certainly, he has become a polarizing figure because basically all things political – especially now related to Washington – are polarizing,” said Barth. “Assuming he runs for re-election, we’re going to see a tough Republican opponent… I think the national Republican Party is going to see this as a winnable seat mainly due to the poor performance of Democrats in national elections over the last couple of cycles.”
Barth added that Pryor is in better shape than Lincoln since the election is still two cycles away, the popularity of his family’s name, and the fact that he has some better numbers in Republican-rich northwest Arkansas than most Democrats normally pull.
Jay Barth makes the comment that Republicans will be expecting to defeat Pryor “due to the poor performance of Democrats in national elections over the last couple of cycles.” Anybody can open their eyes and see the clear trends in Arkansas.
The makeup of the Arkansas State Legislature has changed dramatically in the last few months. This has been true of the states around Arkansas too. The number of Republican State Representatives in surrounding states outnumbers the Democrats 540 to 319 (MO, TN, TX, OK, MS, LA, and KS) while the Republican State Senators are 178 to 99. Only Mississippi’s State House of Representatives is controlled by the Democrats while the other 13 bodies are controlled by the Republicans.
Does Pryor have a chance to win re-election? He needs to be a standup guy when it comes to getting this national debt down and that doesn’t mean trying to raise taxes on a slow economy. Traditionally the spending our federal government has done in the last 50 years has been less than 20% of GDP, but this year it is 24.7%. We must get our spending down!!!!!!!
The Daily Hatch 