Conservatives are not Christian

Need some room here to separate Christianity from conservatism, since they are actually at odds. The Bible is the ONLY authority in which we can be in obedience to God. If you disagree with that, you're automatically not Christian. If you disagree with the scriptures I present, you must show scriptures counter to what I have presented. In the case of the words of Christ, you must find WORDS OF CHRIST that are counter. Now some may accuse me of "Cherry-picking" verses from the Bible, and that not all Bible verses are relevant to us today.  I call this Evaluated Application. However, the Bible itself requires Consistent Application. For those that doubt that, I give you 2 Timothy 3:16: All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Remember if you disagree with what I'm saying, there must be a SCRIPTURAL basis, including the CONTEXT of said scripture. First a definition:

From Websters:

exhibiting a spirit proper to a follower of Jesus Christ;  Christlike: She displayed true Christian charity.

In the Bible, the Mission of a Christian is CLEARLY stated:

Matthew 28:19-20
¹⁹ Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
²⁰ Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
Jesus speaks these words to the Disciples just after he had risen, and the significance of that shouldn’t be lost on anyone. The Mission of all Christians is to TEACH others about Christ. By teaching others about Christ, you turn them from sin and toward God. Also:
John 13:34 - A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.
Jesus speaks these words at the last supper. This is not only AFTER he predicts Judas will betray him, but AFTER he tells Peter that he will deny him three times before the cock crows. This is VERY important. Christians must treat others as Christ treated them. He says so plainly. Knowing that, let’s look at the two verses that form the basis for Christianity. Without them, there is no Christianity:
John 3:16 - For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Christ is teaching the Pharisee Nicodemus about salvation. (I don’t think there could be a more important topic for Christians!) Note the use of the word “Whosever” by Christ. This is why the members of Westboro Baptist Church are not Christian. They believe that it is predestined that some receive salvation. If you believe that salvation is not available for anyone who asks for it, you are counter to the words of Christ, and therefore not Christian. Now, what made Christ’s sacrifice necessary is below:

Romans 3:23 - For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
Again, notice the word “ALL” here. All have sinned, so all need redemption. The entirety of Romans 3 deals with Salvation. Now notice that John 3 doesn’t require anything but faith to receive salvation. Romans 3 states you don’t deserve salvation. This is more directly stated in Ephesians 2:8: For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 

So Salvation is a gift that cannot be earned and it is not deserved. God provides salvation because of his great love for his children. So the way in which God loves everyone is quite clear. It is also clear that as Christians, you are expected to love others as God loves you. (John 13:34) A tall order, but it’s what you’re commanded to do!

Knowing these things, I will now compare conservative views on issues with Christ’s teachings.

On feeding the poor:

GOP Platform 2012: We must restructure the twentieth century entitlement state so the missions of important programs can succeed in the twenty-first century.

Biblical Teachings:

Proverbs 28:27 - He that giveth unto the poor shall not lack: but he that hideth his eyes shall have many a curse.

1 Corinthians 13:3 -  And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

Isaiah 14:30 - And the firstborn of the poor shall feed, and the needy shall lie down in safety: and I will kill thy root with famine, and he shall slay thy remnant.

Matthew 25:35 - For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:

Again, Christians are expected to love others and God loves everyone.  Your personal evaluation of who is and is not deserving is not relevant. God expects you to help those in need, not only at your only personal expense, but even the risk of ruin. Christians are expected to trust in God when they help others. You are not deserving of God’s grace, it is a gift.

On Healing the sick:

GOP Platform 2012: Three programs-Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security- account for over 40 percent of total spending. While these levels of spending and debt are already harming job creation and growth, projections of future spending growth are nothing short of catastrophic, both economically and socially.

Biblical Teachings:

Matthew 10:8 - Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give.

Matthew 14:14 - And Jesus went forth, and saw a great multitude, and was moved with compassion toward them, and he healed their sick.

Luke 10:9 - And heal the sick that are therein, and say unto them, The kingdom of God is come nigh unto you. 

Luke 9:2  - And he sent them to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick.

Again, a clear mandate. Christ had compassion for the sick, Christians are to have that same compassion. Freely have ye received (From God through his blessings) Freely Give. Again, no evaluation of who is deserving or who has earned it is not valid. Nowhere in the Bible are you told to make that evauation. Instead, you are commanded to give. 

On finances:

GOP platform 2012: Lowering taxes promotes substantial economic growth and reducing regulation encourages business formation and job creation. Knowing that, a Republican President and Congress will jumpstart an economic renewal that creates opportunity, rewards work and saving, and unleashes the productive genius of the American people.

Biblical Teachings:

Mark 10:25 - It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

Luke 18:25 - For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

Matthew 19:24 - And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than                for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

Just to jump in a bit early, this story appears in THREE of the four gospels! Could that be any indication that God believes it’s important? The context of these verses are in the story of the rich man (A Prince!) Asks Jesus what he can do to be perfect. Christ’s response is in Mark 10:21:

Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.

Two significant keys here: One, Jesus beheld him, and loved him. Jesus knew what the man would do, and loved him anyway. Two, This is the ONLY man in the New Testament who Christ said “Follow me,” who declined.

 
Luke 20:25 – And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's.

Matthew 22:21 – They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.

In this case, the Pharisees were trying to get Jesus in legal trouble. Jesus did not fear this trouble, but he showed that he was apolitical. Surprise, surprise, Jesus expects you to trust in him and complete your mission, no matter who is in charge, and no matter how much in taxes you have to pay.

Luke 6:33-35

³³ And if ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have ye? for sinners also do even the same.
³⁴ And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again.
³⁵ But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil.


Exodus 22:25 - If thou lend money to any of my people that is poor by thee, thou shalt not be to him as an usurer, neither shalt thou lay upon him usury.
Here you are commanded to not only lend money, you’re not to charge interest and you’re not to expect anything back! If it’s God’s will you get it back, but you’re still supposed to loan it in the first place. Again, your evaluation of who is and isn’t deserving is not necessary, as you are not deserving of God’s love.
In case you have further questions:
Matthew 6:19-21, 24

19 Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal:
20 But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal:
21 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
24 No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
Luke 14:26-35
26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
27 And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.
28 For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it?
29 Lest haply, after he hath laid the foundation, and is not able to finish it, all that behold it begin to mock him,
30 Saying, This man began to build, and was not able to finish.
31 Or what king, going to make war against another king, sitteth not down first, and consulteth whether he be able with ten thousand to meet him that cometh against him with twenty thousand?
32 Or else, while the other is yet a great way off, he sendeth an ambassage, and desireth conditions of peace.
33 So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.
34 Salt is good: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be seasoned?
35 It is neither fit for the land, nor yet for the dunghill; but men cast it out. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

What do these verses teach? NOTHING in your life is to come before Christ's Mission. That mission is to turn people to God. Everything you do has to be with that purpose in mind. These actions have to be taken in the context of you loving the other person as Christ loves you. God will even send angels to help you if you are doing his work. (Hebrews 1:14) Does conservatism turn people toward God or away from him?

The Crutch

A person I've known for over fifteen years, a conservative who shall remain nameless, posted the following on my facebook:

"Once again you say anything against a person of color, you must be a racist. Typical kneejerk reaction. Black people can always claim racism, it is their never ending crutch, and probably the biggest thing that holds them back in life."

Since this person isn't a conservative whack job like Michelle Malkin or Ann Coulter, I believe it is reasonable to assume that the statement that was made is believed by a fairly large group of Americans. Now, in analyzing the statement, it can be inferred that the person believes that racism is not a pervasive problem in America, since the claim that it's a "crutch" says that if it was simply thrown away, that if Blacks quit believing that American society and institutions were racist, then societal advancement would become more available.

Should Blacks and other "persons of color" simply stop believing in racism? Will societal issues facing non-whites in America be relieved if the belief will simply stop, or is there a pervasive racism to believe in? What is racism? According to Dictionary.com:

rac⋅ism

–noun

1.	a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

2.	a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

3.	hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

---

Origin:
1865–70; < class="ital-inline">racisme. See race ² , -ism

Related forms:

racist, noun, adjective

Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2009.
Cite This Source

|

he belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

I personally reject this definition, only because I reject the word itself. There is only one human race, homo sapiens. The last time another human race existed was Homo neanderthalensis 24,000 years ago. It has beeen postulated that homo sapiens exterminated Homo neanderthalensis, an ultimate act of racism if there ever was one. However, returning to the main point, I find Bigotry to be a more accurate term. Let's give dictionary.com a whirl on that one:

big⋅ot⋅ry

–noun, plural -ries.

1.	stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own.

2.	the actions, beliefs, prejudices, etc., of a bigot.

---

Origin:
1665–75; bigot + -ry, formation parallel to F bigoterie

Synonyms:
1. narrow-mindedness, bias, discrimination.

Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2009.
Cite This Source

|

n. The attitude, state of mind, or behavior characteristic of a bigot; intolerance.

Looking at both of these words, both the accurate and inaccurate, one word comes up in both definitions, discrimination. We're back to Dictionary.com:

dis⋅crim⋅i⋅na⋅tion Show IPA

1.	an act or instance of discriminating.

2.	treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit: racial and religious intolerance and discrimination.

3.	the power of making fine distinctions; discriminating judgment: She chose the colors with great discrimination.

4.	Archaic. something that serves to differentiate.

Obviously only definitions 1 and 2 apply to our discussion here, and it defines the terms on which the existence of racism/bigotry can be argued. First, as in the first definition, it requires an overt act. If everyone were bigoted and no one ever acted on it, it would be impossible to prove that bigotry existed. Further, one overt act by one individual or separate acts by a small group or localized population could not prove a pervasive bigotry in the United States. Secondly, these overt acts must be based on the actor being of one group, class, or category, and the reason(s) for the action(s) are that another person is of another group, class, or category.

I believe that bigotry can be (dis)proved most easily by looking at certain areas of society. Obviously, there are places that everyone wants to be, and places no one wants to be. There are, believe it or not, absolute meritocracies in the United States. One way of looking for a pervasive bigotry is to look at demographic numbers. What percentage of the population is each group, and what percentage of each group is included is these positive and negative areas of society? According to the Department of Defense and the Heritage foundation, this is the population breakdown of the United States:

White - 77.44%
Hispanic - 12.11%
Black - 11.33%
Asian - 3.67%
First Nations - 0.78%

Almost five percent chose not to answer, but I believe that the base proportions of ethnicities would not be greatly affected by the inclusion of that five percent. What we are now looking for is differentiations from the demographics of the overall population versus demographics of different societal groups.

Let's begin with prison populations. This is someplace no one wants to be. Some would argue that prison IS a meritocracy since only those who are deserving go there. Anyone with common sense knows that this is false, since application and severity of legal consequences is based almost as much on the quality of legal representation as it is on evidence of acts committed by the accused. Check with http://www.innocenceproject.org/understand/Bad-Lawyering.php for more information. Now looking at the prison population, where no one wants to go, and it is NOT a meritocracy:

Black - 40%
White - 36%
Hispanic - 19%
First Nations - 1%
Asian - 1%
Mixed - 3%

So Blacks are overrepresented in places no one wants to be by over 350%, and Hispanics are overrepresented by over a third. Whites are underrepresented by more than half. Many would say that Blacks and Hispanics are just a bunch of criminals, while others could say that poverty is a big factor in crime. While the latter has significantly more merit than the former, I would also point to the fact that Lawyers are 89% White, 4% Black and 3% Hispanic. (http://www.abanet.org/marketresearch/Lawyer_Demographics.pdf) Also, Judges are 85% White and 13% non-white (http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2009/08/federal-court-demographics-changing-to.php) So Blacks and Hispanic are overrepresented in those who go to prison, while whites are overrepresented in those who decide who goes to prison. Let's keep going, you never know what we'll find next.

Now lets try another non-meritocracy, that people do want to get into, Politics. Besides the government pay and and good health insurance, politicians have great power and influence in their constituencies, and in some cases on the national scale. Let's get right to it:

House of Representatives - 435 members

White - 363 (83.4%)
Black - 42 (9.6%)
Hispanic - 24 (5.5%)
First Nations - 1 (0.2%)
Asian - 5 (1.1%)

So we have Hispanics and Asians woefully underrepresented, Blacks underrepresented, and Whites Overrepresented. Lets try the Senate, 100 members makes the percentages easy!!

Whites - 96 (96%)
Black - 1 (1%)
Hispanic - 1 (1%)
First Nations - 1 (1%)
Asian - 1(1%)

And just for fun, some quick numbers, 99.8% of presidents were white, 0.2% were not. So again, Whites are overrepresented in an profession where decisions are made about the lives, opportunities and futures of others.

Ok, lets try another one, this time, something that IS a meritocracy, but not a lot of people want to be into, the Army. As of 2003, this is the breakdown of Army Demographics:

White - 78.5%
Black - 16.25%
Hispanic - 10.74%
First Nations - 1.2%
Asian - 1.1%

Isn't that strange? The demographic breakdown is suddenly close to the actual population numbers. How could that be? Could it be that when merit is a bigger factor in a given area, there's a greater representation of minorities?

Finally let's try the ultimate meritocracy, professional sports. Everyone wants to do that, and it's an absolute meritocracy. Winning is the only measure, so decision makers will always select the best player, regardless of ethnicity. Let's start with the NFL:

Black - 67%
White - 31%
Hispanic 1%
Asian - 1%

Hmmm...in an absolute Meritocracy that many want to belong to, Blacks are overrepresented. Let's try the NBA!

Black - 76%
White - 20%
Latino - 3%
Sian - 1%

Wow, another absolute Meritocracy that many want to belong to, and again Blacks are overrepresented. How about the National Pastime?

White - 60%
Black - 19%
Hispanic - 18%
Asian - 1%

Again, when merit is inescapable, Blacks are overrepresented. When not based on merit, Blacks are underrepresented.

I make no conclusions about this data, since they should be obvious. So ask yourself, is it a crutch?

The Heisman - the most overrated, useless irrelevant award ever made.

Here we go again with the start of another college season, and the Heisman hype has already begun. My question, as always is....why? The award is supposed to be for the most outstanding college football player that year, but it almost NEVER is. Heisman voters are supposed to ignore a player's prospects in the NFL when voting, but it is the true measure of any player, and coaches as well. I'll go through the winners in more detail in a moment, but take for example 1966 winner Steve Spurrier.

Spurrier was (surprisingly) the starting quarterback of the national championship winning team. He was selected third overall in the 1967 NFL draft, so some NFL evaluators at least THOUGHT he had potential. HE ended up playing nine years as a backup, with under 7,000 yards passing. Spurrier was drafted two places behind Bubba Smith, the number one overall pick, who as a defensive lineman had NO chance of winning the Heisman. Spurrier was drafted AHEAD of the following players : Bob Griese, George Webster, Floyd Little, Mel Farr, Gene Washington, and hold on to your hats...Hall of famers Alan Page, Gene Upshaw, Lem Barney, and Willie Lanier. Only Griese would have had any shot at the Heisman as a Quarterback, but it's PLAIN that Spurrier was NOT the most outstanding college player in 1966, not even close.

Factoring in a college player's potential in the NFL makes complete sense, especially when looking at the example above. The true test of a player is how he does when the other team has just as many good players. Scoring 60 on Podunk State doesn't really prove anything, except that if college had a playoff system, that game would never be played. What's even worse, this even followed Spurrier as a coach. He was a dismal failure as coach of the Redskins, because he's only a good coach so long as his team is far and away better than his opposition. Look at his record at South Carolina for more evidence.

Enough Spurrier bashing, his isn't the only case, or even the most glaring. I'll list Heisman winners, how they fared, better players at the same position, and other players more deserving below:

1967 - Gary Beban
NFL - Drafted 30th overall, never started, retired after two years.
BASP - Ken Stabler, Greg Landry (Wow, that's gotta hurt!)
OMD - Ron Yary, Larry Csonka, Art Shell
Verdict - Heisman Loses

1968 - O.J. Simpson
NFL - Drafted 1st overall, first 2000 yard rusher, played 12 years, 1st Ballot Hall of Famer.
BASP - None
OMD - Four other HOF players in that draft, but none as good as Simpson.
Verdict - Heisman Wins

1969 - Steve Owens
NFL - Drafted 19th overall, did make All-Pro, career cut short by injury.
BASP - None, and a bad year for running backs overall.
OMD - Ummm...Terry Bradshaw? I'm just sayin'....
Verdict - Heisman Loses

1970 - Jim Plunkett
NFL - Drafted 1st overall, two time Superbowl Winner, (and one time Superbowl MVP) had basically three good seasons.
BASP - Joe Theismann, Archie Manning, Ken Anderson
OMD - Jack Ham, John Riggins, Dan Dierdorf, Jack Youngblood
Verdict - Can't ignore the two championships. Heisman wins.

1971 - Pat Sullivan
NFL - Drafted 40th overall, five year jouneyman
BASP - Brian Sipe (an AWFUL quarterback draft!)
OMD - Franco Harris, Cliff Branch, Conrad Dobler, Willie Buchanon
Verdict - Even in a down draft year, Heisman still loses.

1972 - Johnny Rodgers
NFL - Drafted 25th overall, dominated the CFL, lasted only two seasons in the NFL
BASP - Issac Curtis, Golden Richards
OMD - Ummm...Dan Fouts? John Hannah
Verdict - Heisman Loses

1973 - John Cappelletti
NFL - Drafted 11th overall, solid, but not great nine-year career
BASP - Delvin Williams (two-time pro-bowler)
OMD - Danny White, Too Tall Jones, Dave Casper, Jack Lambert, Mike Webster, Lynn Swann, John Stallworth
Verdict - The Steelers entire draft class was better. Heisman Loses.

1974 - Archie Griffin (special case, he won twice)
NFL - 24th overall in 1976, played 7 seasons, gained 2808 yards (703 more than Eric Dickerson gained in 1984)
BASP - Ummmm....Walter Payton?
OMD - Randy White, Fred Dean, Steve Bartkowski
Verdict - Heisman Loses...lets try again!

1975 - Archie Griffin (special case, he won twice)
NFL - 24th overall in 1976, played 7 seasons, gained 2808 yards (703 more than Eric Dickerson gained in 1984)
BASP - Chuck Muncie, Joe Washington
OMD - Steve Largent, Lee-Roy Selmon, Mike Haynes, Jackie Slater, Harry Carson
Verdict - Heisman goes 0 for 2.

1976 - Tony Dorsett
NFL - Drafted 2nd overall, 1st Ballot HOF, numerous records, Super Bowl winner
BASP - Wilbert Montgomery the closest, but not even close.
OMD - No other HOF players from that class, no one even close.
Verdict - Biggest win for Heisman since 1968.

1977 - Earl Campbell
NFL - Drafted 1st overall, HOF member, 8 year career, 3-time rushing champion
BASP - Not even close
OMD, Great players that year (James Lofton, Ozzie Newsome) but no one even close.
Verdict - Another Big Win for Heisman.

1978 - Billy Sims (Sims played another year before going to the NFL, so he's compared against players that came out that year)
NFL - Drafted 1st overall, three time All-Pro, but blew up his knee and played only four years
BASP - A few decent backs that year, but none as good as Sims.
OMD - Ummmm...Joe Montana? Kellen Winslow, Dan Hampton
Verdict - Career cut short by injury, but Joe Montana. Heisman Loss, but a close one.

1979 - Charles White
NFL - Drafted 27th Overall, Played 7 years, had one all-pro season.
BASP - This is the year Billy Sims came out, but as a past Heisman winner, I can't count him against White, so none.
OMD - Anthony Muñoz, Dwight Stephenson, Art Monk
Verdict - Heisman Loss.

1980 - George Rogers
NFL - Drafted 1st overall, a couple pro-bowls, Superbowl Champion, 7 year career.
BASP - Freeman McNeil, James Brooks, James Wilder, all probably at least equal.
OMD - Ummmm...Lawrence Taylor?, Ronnie Lott? Mike Singletary? Howie Long?
Verdict - Probably the worst Heisman loss ever, even though Rogers had a solid career.

1981 - Marcus Allen
NFL - Drafted 10th overall (how did THAT Happen?) Superbowl MVP, 1st Ballot HOF
BASP - Nope.
OMD - Jim McMahon, Mike Munchak, and Andre Tipett all came out teh smae year, but...not even close.
Verdict - Another Big Win for Heisman!

1982 - Herschel Walker
NFL - Drafted in fifth round in 1985, but played in the USFL for three years, 10-year career, two pro bowls.
BASP - Eric Dickerson
OMD - The famed class of 1983: John Elway, Jim Kelly, Dan Marino...plus Bruce Mathews and Darrell Green. (I bet Chiefs fans were pissed that year!)
Verdict - Heisman snares defeat from the jaws of victory!

1983 - Mike Rozier
NFL - Started in USFL, Supplemental Pick, * year career, two tiem all-pro, but best year was 1002 yards.
BASP - No other running back drafted in 1984 even had ONE pro bowl.
OMD - Wilbur Marshall, Boomer Esiason, Carl Banks, Jeff Hostetler
Verdict, A Heisman loss, but not a particularly shameful one.

1984 - Doug Flutie
NFL - Drafted 285th overall, played in the CFL, one pro bowl.
BASP - Bernie Kosar, Randall Cunningham
OMD - Ummmmm...Jerry Rice? Bruce Smith?
Verdict - Although I find Flutie to be one of the most underrated players of all time, this is still a stinging Heisman loss.

1985 - Bo Jackson
NFL - Drafted 1st overall, five-year career, one pro bowl, (also a baseball All-Star Appearance)
BASP - Keith Byars, Ronnie Harmon, and Neal Anderson were decent, but not close.
OMD - MAYBE Pat Swilling or Charles Haley, but no.
Verdict - A Heisman win, but the weak draft class of '86 definitely a factor.

1986 - Vinny Testaverde
NFL - Drafted 1st overall, TWENTY-year career, two time pro-bowler, but basically a journeyman.
BASP - Rich Gannon, Steve Beuerlein, and Jim Harbaugh all Journeymen as well.
OMD - Cris Carter, Hardy Nickerson, Rod Woodson, Nate Odomes
Verdict - Well, one of the OMD's is on the all time team, so Heisman Loss.

1987 - Tim Brown
NFL - Drafted 6th overall, 16 year career, 9 time All-Pro.
BASP - I'd call Sterling Sharpe and Michael Irvin about even.
OMD - Thurman Thomas, maybe Randall McDaniel
Verdict - Borderline, but the win goes to Heisman.

1988 - Barry Sanders
NFL - Drafted 1st overall, 10 year career, all 10 all-pro. 3rd all-time in rushing
BASP - You're Kidding, right?
OMD - Hard to argue with Troy Aikman, Deion Sanders and Derrick Thomas...but it's still Barry.
Verdict - Even in the face of stiff competition, absolute Heisman win.

1989 - Andre Ware (this is where it starts to get ugly)
NFL - Drafted 7th overall, started six games, went to CFL after 4 years.
BASP - Neil O'Donnell and Jeff George? Wow, that's just wrong.
OMD - Ummmm...Emmitt Smith? Junior Seau.
Verdict - Blowout loss for Heisman.

1990 - Ty Detmer
NFL - Drafted 203rd overall, Had one good year but never an All-Pro
BASP - Maybe Brett Favre?
OMD - Eric Swann, Herman Moore, Ricky Watters
Verdict - Heisman. loses. ugly.

1991 - Desmond Howard
NFL - Drafted 4th overall, SuperBowl MVP, great returner, not a great receiver.
BASP - Jimmy Smith was pretty good.
OMD - Troy Vincent, Leon Searcy, Dale Carter
Verdict - Another Heisman loss in a weak draft class.

1992 - Gino Toretta
NFL - Drafted 192nd overall, played ONCE in an NFL game (and no that wasn't a start)
BASP - Drew Bledsoe, Mark Brunell, Trent Green
OMD - Willie Roaf, Michael Strahan, Jerome Bettis, Lincoln Kennedy
Verdict - Heisman loss on the scale of a Texas - UNLV game.

1993 - Charlie Ward
NFL - NONE. Played in the NBA, but never an All-Star there.
BASP - Trent Dilfer and Gus Ferotte? That's just sad.
OMD - Marshall Faulk maybe? Willie McGinest?
Verdict - Once more, a crushing defeat for Heisman

1994 - Rashaan Salaam
NFL - Drafted 21st overall, 1000 yard rusher as a rookie, but a mostly unremarkable 4-year career.
BASP - Curtis Martin, Terrell Davis
OMD - Tony Boselli, Steve McNair, Warren Sapp, Ty Law, Joey Galloway.
Verdict - There were about five more players I could have put on the OMD list. Crushing defeat for Heisman.

1995 - Eddie George
NFL - Drafted 14th overall, 8 year career, 4 time pro bowler, Rookie of the year, Super Bowl Appearance
BASP - None, and Lawrence Phillips and Tim Biakabutuka were drafted ahead of him. Ouch.
OMD - Ray Lewis, Zach Thomas, Keyshawn Johnson, Jonathan Ogden, John Runyan
Verdict - I actually believe Heisman got this one right at first, but Lewis and Ogden tipped the scales. Heisman Loss, by a long field goal in overtime.

1996 - Danny Wuerffel
NFL - Draftted 99th overall, 7 year career, had some NFL Europe time
BASP - Jake Delhomme, Jake Plummer (Ouch!)
OMD - Orlando Pace, Warrick Dunn, Walter Jones, Tony Gonzalez, about four or five more...
Verdict - Heisman loses in a laugher, 63-0.

1997 - Charles Woodson
NFL - Drafted 4th overall, 8 year career (still active) five time all-pro, led NFL in interceptions
BASP - None.
OMD - Peyton Manning, Randy Moss, Matt Hasselbeck, Hines Ward
Verdict - Without Manning this is a Heisman win, but Manning is here.

1998 - Ricky Williams
NFL - Drafted 5th overall, 6 years in NFL (Still Active) One pro bowl.
BASP - You could argue for Edgerrin James.
OMD - Jevon Kearse, Donovan McNabb, Champ Bailey, Torry Holt, Joey Porter
Verdict - Heisman loss, but Ricky could have helped by not smoking buds.

1999 - Ron Dayne
NFL - Drafted 11th overall, 7-year journeyman career, currently active, but unsigned.
BASP - Jamal Lewis, Thomas Jones, Shaun Alexander
OMD - Chis Samuels, Plaxico Burress, Brian Urlacher, Julian Peterson
Verdict - This one was over by halftime. Heisman Loss.

2000 - Chris Weinke
NFL - Drafted 106th overall, 7 year career (active, but unsigned), 2-18 record as a starter.
BASP - Michael Vick, Drew Brees
OMD - LaDainian Tomlinson, Richard Seymour, Reggie Wayne, Chad Ochocinco
Verdict - Heisman Loss.

2001 - Eric Crouch
NFL - Drafted 95th overall, three year "career" where he never made a team.
BASP - David Carr and Joey Harrington? That's the unkindest cut of all.
OMD - Bryant Westbrook, Albert Haynesworth, Dwight Freeney, Ed Reed
Verdict - Three future Hall-of Famers vs a guy who never played. Worst Heisman loss yet.

2002 - Carson Palmer
NFL - Drafted 1st overall, 5 year career (still active) Two-time pro bowler
BASP - None, no quarterback in the 2003 draft has made a pro bowl besides Palmer.
OMD - The closest would be Antonio Gates, Troy Polamalu, Nnamdi Asomugha
Verdict, Even with some strong competition, Heisman finally wins one.

2003 - Jason White
NFL - Undrafted, signed with the Titans, then quit.
BASP - Ben Roethlisberger, Eli Manning, Phillip Rivers
OMD - Bob Sanders, Larry Fitzgerald, Sean Taylor, Steven Jackson, Chris Cooley
Verdict - Down goes Heisman! Down Goes Heisman! (Heisman Loss)

2004 - Matt Leinart
NFL - Drafted 10th overall, still active, but lost his starting job.
BASP - Aaron Rogers, Jason Campbell, Derek Anderson
OMD - DeMarcus Ware, Shawne Merriman, Roddy White, Frank Gore
Verdict - Leinart looks better this year, but he still won't start. Heisman Loss.

2005 - Reggie Bush
NFL - Drafted 2nd overall, still active, has about 3000 yards and 20 touchdowns.
BASP - DeAngelo Williams
OMD - Mario Williams, Antonio Cromartie, Jay Cutler, Devin Hester
Verdict - Bush is also improving, but still a Heisman Loss.

2006 - Troy Smith
NFL - Drafted 174th overall, slted to start for Ravens until he gets the flu, doesn't get a 2nd chance.
BASP - JaMarcus Russell
OMD - Calvin Johnson, Adrian Peterson, Marshawn Lynch.
Verdict - Smith could possibly start somewhere, but still a devastating Heisman Loss.

2007 - Tim Tebow
NFL - None, not projected as a quarterback
BASP - Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco
OMD - Jake Long, Chris Long, Darren McFadden, Chris Johnson
Verdict - Since Tebow hasn't gotten an opportunity, it's hard to judge, but the bar is pretty high. We'll give Heisman the benefit of the doubt and call a push.

2008 - Sam Bradford
NFL- Unless he gets seriously hurt or stinks up the place, he projects to the 1st round.
BASP - Matthew Stafford, Mark Sanchez, Josh Freeman
OMD - Aaron Curry, Jeremy Maclin
Verdict - Same as Tebow, can't judge until he plays (if he plays) Push.

So the Heisman voters are 9-32-2 in choosing the actual best college athlete since 1966. Of course part of the problem is the selection criteria: An offensive skill position player, preferably on the east coast or midwest, usually a senior, on a conference championship winning team that is contending for the national title. That cuts out most of the great players right there. And star players on great teams have a great supporting cast to hide their flaws, but there is no such cover on an NFL team. So enjoy all the Heisman hype this year ladies and gentlemen, then watch the winner stink it up in the NFL next year.