In today's Chicago Tribune, there's a front-page article about how the State of Illinois is the only state to not have concealed-carry laws. Now that Wisconsin is on the brink (and I use that phrase deliberately) of passing concealed-carry laws, the pressure for Illinois to follow the herd will increase dramatically.
In full disclosure, I have nothing against guns. I used to own a .357 Magnum. My brother and I would regularly go to target practice and I found that I actually preferred his Browning 9mm - it was easier for me to hold. And I'm a pretty good shot.
But that's not the point. So far, Illinois and Washington, DC are the only places in the US that do not allow concealed-carry. And you know what? I'm ok with that.
Guns are not the problem. People are the problem. I applaud Governor Quinn's veto threat to the bill proposed last month. But it's scary because the legislation only failed to pass by six votes. That's the closest it's come.
I don't want "concealed-carry" laws. Period. There is no up-side to this. I don't care that the law is, according to its Democrat sponsor, "...so watered down that you could only have it on your person walking around or in your own house." It's the walking around part that gives me pause. The bill's "watering down" came down to this:
The bill would have prohibited concealed weapons in bars, restaurants, certain businesses, courtrooms, schools and college campuses. Chicago's ban, overturned by the US Supreme Court, forced the city to rewrite the law to allow weapons to only be kept in the home, not in public. They're banned in garages, front porches, yards, hotels, dorms and group living facilities.
Still... you can carry it. It's not the guns, really. It's truly the people. I can't see that this will help "keep people safe" which is the argument the NRA and other pro-carry people will force down our throats.
Some guy who owns a gun store (go figure) says, "Are 49 states wrong and we're right?"
Well. Yeah, maybe. Ever heard of "groupthink"?? Let's turn this on its head: Just because 49 states have this law, does it mean we have to go along with them? No. Not really.
Guns can only exacerbate an already tense situation. So you've got the gun. (A) do you know how to use it? and (B) do you know WHEN to use it?
And (C) --- are you prepared for the very real consequences? Bullets kill people. Bullets maim people. If your aim is off, "collateral damage" isn't just a video game...it's real.
When I was a criminal justice major, even though my field wasn't law enforcement, we all had to view and participate in the "Shoot, Don't Shoot" program. What an incredible eye-opener.
Of course, we were all in our 20s, studying for what we thought would be our life's work. And we knew ourselves. You can see where this is going, right?? Well, after the experience, our instructor, a former cop from St. Louis, debriefed us. And we knew then: Guns are for real. Bullets are for real. And in 90%+ of the situations presented to us as civilians, we didn't have a clue. We were wrong.
IF concealed-carry passes, then I suggest the following: tighten up the training and requirements. You must recertify every year. You must be licensed. You must have a "waiting period" before the purchase is consummated, so that a complete background check can be done on you. This background check should be nation-wide, not just state-wide -- this prevents someone coming into Illinois with a record as long as my arm, and buying a gun because he or she can waltz into the local gun show or Wal-Mart. And you must carry additional insurance for your home and auto, because if you do do something stupid, the people you harm must have appropriate means of redress.
Of course, I see a whomping new market for insurance companies: "So, you have a gun at home? Are you licensed? Have you been trained? Is your training up to date? If so, your premium is $XX... If NOT, then your premium goes up 50%. Your premium, by the way (on both your home AND auto) will be going up 200% anyway, because you are now a higher risk to us. You will need to pay those premiums or we will drop you. And of course, under state law, your auto at least MUST be insured."
This will, of course, make pro-gun people scream like crazy. "We have a right to carry guns."
And I have a right to not worry about being shot by some idiot channeling John Wayne or Annie Oakley.
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
My New Great Adventure...
Hi Everyone, this is Tippi, Intrepid Dog Reporter. I had (hang on, where are the italics on this thing... oh, here they are!) a NEW GREAT ADVENTURE today. I went on a "therapy dog visit" to the local retirement home.
Here's a picture of me decked out in my "Canine Good Citizen" duds. That's what we'll be wearing till I can get my TDI evaluation, sometime later this summer.
I get to wear this lovely bandana, and we use my bright pink hemp leash from Fun Time Dog Shop (www.ftds.com) when I go to visit the old folks.
So before I went with Mom, Dad took Quinn and me out to get some steam blown off us. Well, I don't know about steam blowing OFF us; it was really hot enough so that WE were steaming when we got home. I love that stuff humans call "air conditioning." We got a home-made frosty treat when we got home, but then mom and I got "suited up" and we got to the car. Boy-o-boy-o-boy was the car WARM. Mom couldn't get the cold air up fast enough; but it was a very short trip, so it wasn't horrible.
We got to the parking lot and mom realized they were re-doing the entrance. We had to go in a side door. It was very warm; I didn't know that old folks here don't like air conditioning.
But all that got wiped out of my head with the new sights, noises and smells I was experiencing. We got a tour of the place, and I had my very first elevator ride. Thanks, but even though it got us there quicker, I think I'd rather take the steps next time! I did get out of that silly moving box rather quickly. So we were on the top floor, and we went to the activity room. I got to sniff and walk a bit, but a few of the older ladies there really wanted to pet me.
They kept calling me a "him"!! Mom told them several times that I was a girl, but I figure they were in those chairs with wheels, so maybe they figured I was a big, strong boy. When in reality, I'm a very nice lady dog... But that's ok. They petted me, and I sniffed them. But then it was time to go to another area. I sat down by someone my mom kept calling "Sister." I don't know if it was my mom's sister, but the lady was very nice and told me I was beautiful and that my ears were lovely and my fur was so soft. She didn't want the other ladies petting me, but Mom said I had to go visit the others.
Oh, then another lady called me over, and I REALLY took a liking to her. Except, I was kind of anxious, and didn't realize that Mom wasn't standing up --- I pulled her a bit. She stopped me, and I let her help herself up by pushing on my butt. This lady had dogs; I could tell. She held my face and told me she loved me. So I touched her nose with mine and she started petting my head. I was really happy to let her pet me.
They all enjoyed trying to straighten out my tail; I was a little annoyed by that, so I just sat down! They thought that meant I wanted more petting, which was ok by me!
After a little while I was getting a little overwhelmed. Particularly when some guy was running this big noisy and smelly machine. It sounded like the sucker-upper Dad uses to capture our fur (little does he know, but our fur usually wins that battle!). But this one smelled like it was scrubbing something. Mom said it was a carpet cleaner. I hugged the wall, because I didn't like it. But I was a good girl and didn't freak out.
By this time, though, the warm air was getting to me, so when we visited this little old lady in her room, I did let her pet me, but only for a moment. I really needed to go home, so Mom told her that it was my first visit; she said that she had rat terriers, and she loved dogs. The lady showing us around said that this lady doesn't participate in any activities; she only gets happy when the therapy dogs are around. I will visit her FIRST the next time.
As we were going out, Mom and I had to walk all the way down one wing. There was an employee there who was pretty loud in saying, "I'm not coming in this door with THAT DOG there." Hmmmmm, not sure I like the "that dog" but the lady helping us said that that poor human didn't like dogs. What??? Oh well, we walked down the hall, just to prove that I wasn't a meanie.
Then, two more of the "sisters" stopped to tell me how pretty I was and how they hoped I would come back. The lady helping said she'd get a list together so that we knew who we could visit and who we couldn't.
There are 3 other therapy dogs, so it looks like Tuesday will be our day to visit. I'm looking forward to it, but I do hope it's not as warm. Maybe I was a little anxious. But I did like having the ladies even in the hall reach out to hug me.
I think I'm gonna like this gig.
I get to wear this lovely bandana, and we use my bright pink hemp leash from Fun Time Dog Shop (www.ftds.com) when I go to visit the old folks.
So before I went with Mom, Dad took Quinn and me out to get some steam blown off us. Well, I don't know about steam blowing OFF us; it was really hot enough so that WE were steaming when we got home. I love that stuff humans call "air conditioning." We got a home-made frosty treat when we got home, but then mom and I got "suited up" and we got to the car. Boy-o-boy-o-boy was the car WARM. Mom couldn't get the cold air up fast enough; but it was a very short trip, so it wasn't horrible.
We got to the parking lot and mom realized they were re-doing the entrance. We had to go in a side door. It was very warm; I didn't know that old folks here don't like air conditioning.
But all that got wiped out of my head with the new sights, noises and smells I was experiencing. We got a tour of the place, and I had my very first elevator ride. Thanks, but even though it got us there quicker, I think I'd rather take the steps next time! I did get out of that silly moving box rather quickly. So we were on the top floor, and we went to the activity room. I got to sniff and walk a bit, but a few of the older ladies there really wanted to pet me.
They kept calling me a "him"!! Mom told them several times that I was a girl, but I figure they were in those chairs with wheels, so maybe they figured I was a big, strong boy. When in reality, I'm a very nice lady dog... But that's ok. They petted me, and I sniffed them. But then it was time to go to another area. I sat down by someone my mom kept calling "Sister." I don't know if it was my mom's sister, but the lady was very nice and told me I was beautiful and that my ears were lovely and my fur was so soft. She didn't want the other ladies petting me, but Mom said I had to go visit the others.
Oh, then another lady called me over, and I REALLY took a liking to her. Except, I was kind of anxious, and didn't realize that Mom wasn't standing up --- I pulled her a bit. She stopped me, and I let her help herself up by pushing on my butt. This lady had dogs; I could tell. She held my face and told me she loved me. So I touched her nose with mine and she started petting my head. I was really happy to let her pet me.
They all enjoyed trying to straighten out my tail; I was a little annoyed by that, so I just sat down! They thought that meant I wanted more petting, which was ok by me!
After a little while I was getting a little overwhelmed. Particularly when some guy was running this big noisy and smelly machine. It sounded like the sucker-upper Dad uses to capture our fur (little does he know, but our fur usually wins that battle!). But this one smelled like it was scrubbing something. Mom said it was a carpet cleaner. I hugged the wall, because I didn't like it. But I was a good girl and didn't freak out.
By this time, though, the warm air was getting to me, so when we visited this little old lady in her room, I did let her pet me, but only for a moment. I really needed to go home, so Mom told her that it was my first visit; she said that she had rat terriers, and she loved dogs. The lady showing us around said that this lady doesn't participate in any activities; she only gets happy when the therapy dogs are around. I will visit her FIRST the next time.
As we were going out, Mom and I had to walk all the way down one wing. There was an employee there who was pretty loud in saying, "I'm not coming in this door with THAT DOG there." Hmmmmm, not sure I like the "that dog" but the lady helping us said that that poor human didn't like dogs. What??? Oh well, we walked down the hall, just to prove that I wasn't a meanie.
Then, two more of the "sisters" stopped to tell me how pretty I was and how they hoped I would come back. The lady helping said she'd get a list together so that we knew who we could visit and who we couldn't.
There are 3 other therapy dogs, so it looks like Tuesday will be our day to visit. I'm looking forward to it, but I do hope it's not as warm. Maybe I was a little anxious. But I did like having the ladies even in the hall reach out to hug me.
I think I'm gonna like this gig.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Prayer Shawl Update...
So I've been working on the garnet prayer shawl. Working very hard, actually, because my friend's son is in Hospice care now.
If you have a mind to, please spare some good thoughts for this young man (he's 42, but that's young). He's dying, and his mother is making sure he has the kind of death he wants.
Her relatives are driving her batty, saying that he "sleeps too much" or "doesn't react when we talk to him" or "isn't eating enough."
Ok, let's get this straight. The man is dying of an inoperable brain tumor. The tumor started in the dura matter at the front of his brain, so the tumor effectively gave him a lobotomy. He's lost all "executive function" and it's a terminal condition. He. Is. Dying.
To those relatives: So, when are you coming out to relieve his parents for a short stint, so they can get away for a bit - maybe go grab an ice cream cone or just take a walk around the block?
Yeah. I thought so. Crickets.
Here's the shawl so far. It's a 5-hank shawl, a little over 1,100 yards of yarn. It's a 100% pima cotton which is just gorgeous. I've alternated - 1 hank of Stockinette Stitch with 1 hank of "Organ Pipes" from my "perpetual knitting pattern calendar."
It's not washed, and not blocked. So you can't see the Stockinette 5-stitch border on either side; that'll keep that part from rolling. Click on the picture to get an up-close view of the Organ Pipes stitch.
We were finally able to sing & play at Mass this past weekend; because of my work schedule, I haven't been able to get there for a 4 p.m. Mass, since I work till 5 p.m... Anyway, my friend stopped to talk to someone after Mass, and then sat down to change her shoes (she wears organ shoes when she plays); I sat down and she just started in mid-conversation. And started crying. It wasn't sobbing. It was tears running down her face; her son was asking her if she was sure he would get into Heaven and "what happens if I don't?"
My heart breaks for her. She did the right thing and told him that of course he'd get there, because Jesus said, "In My Father's house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you." That seemed to calm her son down.
I want you to think about what she's going through. Her son is dying in the prime of his life. Think about that, and then go talk to your kids. Hold her and her family in your thoughts; pray if you're inclined; send light -- please help her find some peace.
If you have a mind to, please spare some good thoughts for this young man (he's 42, but that's young). He's dying, and his mother is making sure he has the kind of death he wants.
Her relatives are driving her batty, saying that he "sleeps too much" or "doesn't react when we talk to him" or "isn't eating enough."
Ok, let's get this straight. The man is dying of an inoperable brain tumor. The tumor started in the dura matter at the front of his brain, so the tumor effectively gave him a lobotomy. He's lost all "executive function" and it's a terminal condition. He. Is. Dying.
To those relatives: So, when are you coming out to relieve his parents for a short stint, so they can get away for a bit - maybe go grab an ice cream cone or just take a walk around the block?
Yeah. I thought so. Crickets.
 |
| Garnet prayer shawl |
It's not washed, and not blocked. So you can't see the Stockinette 5-stitch border on either side; that'll keep that part from rolling. Click on the picture to get an up-close view of the Organ Pipes stitch.
We were finally able to sing & play at Mass this past weekend; because of my work schedule, I haven't been able to get there for a 4 p.m. Mass, since I work till 5 p.m... Anyway, my friend stopped to talk to someone after Mass, and then sat down to change her shoes (she wears organ shoes when she plays); I sat down and she just started in mid-conversation. And started crying. It wasn't sobbing. It was tears running down her face; her son was asking her if she was sure he would get into Heaven and "what happens if I don't?"
My heart breaks for her. She did the right thing and told him that of course he'd get there, because Jesus said, "In My Father's house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you." That seemed to calm her son down.
I want you to think about what she's going through. Her son is dying in the prime of his life. Think about that, and then go talk to your kids. Hold her and her family in your thoughts; pray if you're inclined; send light -- please help her find some peace.
Saturday, June 18, 2011
Your Flag Decal Won't Get You Into Heaven Anymore
With all respects toward the great John Prine, I had to use that title, and the lyrics will follow shortly...
I'm sick and tired of Wiener's wiener... Here's the thing. It's basic PR 101: you shouldn't say (no matter what the media is) anything (or SHOW anything) that you wouldn't want printed on the front page of the New York Times.
That being said, the now-disgraced Anthony Wiener didn't heed that information, and he took pictures of what should remain private and made them public. Which is adolescent to be sure. And which is between him and his wife. And now a million+ of his closest friends. Thanks, Andrew Breitbart, for lowering the bar once again. And thanks, Anthony, for proving that Democrats are idiots.
We have no business knowing about Anthony's privates OR his private business. But after this story took on a life of its own, he humiliated himself into the resignation. Though I sincerely think he should've just done what Republicans have done for years: pulled out the Jesus card. OK, he's Jewish, possibly converted to Muslim (gasp!!) --- but pull out the "religion" card and "poof" - it all magically goes away because you've been "saved." From yourself, mostly, and apparently from any kind of punishment.
Works every time for Republicans. See Diaper-Dave Vitter, James Ensign, Newtie...just to name a few. Heck, on the (D) side, Clinton stood his ground even after impeachment! It's been done, Anthony. You should've sucked it up, zipped it up and hung on to your job.
Anyway, I was listening to the folk channel on the radio, and this little ditty popped up. Due credit: copyright Warner/Chappell Music, Inc., written by John Prine.
Your Flag Decal Won't Get You Into Heaven Anymore
While digesting Reader's Digest in the back of a dirty book store
A plastic flag, with gum on the back fell out on the floor
Well, I picked it up and I ran outside, slapped it on my window shield
And if I could see old Betsy Ross I'd tell her how good I feel.
But your flag decal won't get you into Heaven anymore
They're already overcrowded from your dirty little war
Now Jesus don't like killin', no matter what the reason's for
And your flag decal won't get you into Heaven anymore.
Well I went to the bank this morning and the cashier he said to me
"If you join the Christmas club we'll give you ten of them flags for free."
Well, I didn't mess around a bit, I took him up on what he said
And I stuck them stickers all over my car and one on my wife's forehead.
But your flag decal won't get you into Heaven anymore
They're already overcrowded from your dirty little war
Now Jesus don't like killin', no matter what the reason's for
And your flag decal won't get you into Heaven anymore.
Well, I got my window shield so filled with flags I couldn't see
So, I ran the car upside a curb and right into a tree
By the time they got a doctor down I was already dead
And I'll never understand wy the man standing in the pearly gates said:
"But your flag decal won't get you into Heaven anymore
We're already overcrowded from your dirty little war
Now Jesus don't like killin', no matter what the reason's for
And your flag decal won't get you into Heaven anymore."
So. I get that Democrats want to hold to a higher standard. And normally, I'd say go for it. But there's a problem. Look at the Republicans: when you play with the pigs, you'll get muddy. They scream and holler that they are the "family values" party. And they go out and do exactly the opposite.
But they're in unison on the chorus, folks. The Democrats have to get in unison on the chorus. And our chorus has to reflect that we're fighting for people who can't fight: the poor, what's left of the middle class, those dependent upon "entitlements".... Can we please NOT make "entitlement" a dirty word? Yes, I AM ENTITLED TO IT because I've paid into it!
Democrats need to know that sometimes, you need to be just as obnoxious as your opponents. And also, all politicians should not Tweet. They end up looking like TWITS. Remember, if you don't want your mom to see it, keep it to yourself.
I'm sick and tired of Wiener's wiener... Here's the thing. It's basic PR 101: you shouldn't say (no matter what the media is) anything (or SHOW anything) that you wouldn't want printed on the front page of the New York Times.
That being said, the now-disgraced Anthony Wiener didn't heed that information, and he took pictures of what should remain private and made them public. Which is adolescent to be sure. And which is between him and his wife. And now a million+ of his closest friends. Thanks, Andrew Breitbart, for lowering the bar once again. And thanks, Anthony, for proving that Democrats are idiots.
We have no business knowing about Anthony's privates OR his private business. But after this story took on a life of its own, he humiliated himself into the resignation. Though I sincerely think he should've just done what Republicans have done for years: pulled out the Jesus card. OK, he's Jewish, possibly converted to Muslim (gasp!!) --- but pull out the "religion" card and "poof" - it all magically goes away because you've been "saved." From yourself, mostly, and apparently from any kind of punishment.
Works every time for Republicans. See Diaper-Dave Vitter, James Ensign, Newtie...just to name a few. Heck, on the (D) side, Clinton stood his ground even after impeachment! It's been done, Anthony. You should've sucked it up, zipped it up and hung on to your job.
Anyway, I was listening to the folk channel on the radio, and this little ditty popped up. Due credit: copyright Warner/Chappell Music, Inc., written by John Prine.
Your Flag Decal Won't Get You Into Heaven Anymore
While digesting Reader's Digest in the back of a dirty book store
A plastic flag, with gum on the back fell out on the floor
Well, I picked it up and I ran outside, slapped it on my window shield
And if I could see old Betsy Ross I'd tell her how good I feel.
But your flag decal won't get you into Heaven anymore
They're already overcrowded from your dirty little war
Now Jesus don't like killin', no matter what the reason's for
And your flag decal won't get you into Heaven anymore.
Well I went to the bank this morning and the cashier he said to me
"If you join the Christmas club we'll give you ten of them flags for free."
Well, I didn't mess around a bit, I took him up on what he said
And I stuck them stickers all over my car and one on my wife's forehead.
But your flag decal won't get you into Heaven anymore
They're already overcrowded from your dirty little war
Now Jesus don't like killin', no matter what the reason's for
And your flag decal won't get you into Heaven anymore.
Well, I got my window shield so filled with flags I couldn't see
So, I ran the car upside a curb and right into a tree
By the time they got a doctor down I was already dead
And I'll never understand wy the man standing in the pearly gates said:
"But your flag decal won't get you into Heaven anymore
We're already overcrowded from your dirty little war
Now Jesus don't like killin', no matter what the reason's for
And your flag decal won't get you into Heaven anymore."
So. I get that Democrats want to hold to a higher standard. And normally, I'd say go for it. But there's a problem. Look at the Republicans: when you play with the pigs, you'll get muddy. They scream and holler that they are the "family values" party. And they go out and do exactly the opposite.
But they're in unison on the chorus, folks. The Democrats have to get in unison on the chorus. And our chorus has to reflect that we're fighting for people who can't fight: the poor, what's left of the middle class, those dependent upon "entitlements".... Can we please NOT make "entitlement" a dirty word? Yes, I AM ENTITLED TO IT because I've paid into it!
Democrats need to know that sometimes, you need to be just as obnoxious as your opponents. And also, all politicians should not Tweet. They end up looking like TWITS. Remember, if you don't want your mom to see it, keep it to yourself.
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
New Laptop & New Cake...
No, they're not necessarily connected, but I figured it was easier to do one post. I'm doing my (ta-da) very first post on my lew Lenovo ThinkPad T520.
This replaces my eight year old (yes, EIGHT), and still functioning IBM ThinkPad. Hubby got a great deal, so we got Kid #2 a laptop for his graduation and a second one for me. Hubby is repurposing my IBM ThinkPad for his work, and that's cool. The machine runs well, even after surviving the "Elkhound Puppy Drop Test" and my replacing a keyboard.
The cake? Well, I did a wedding cake this past weekend. It was a small one, for about 120 people, for a garden wedding. This is the sister to someone whose cake I did 5 years ago.
Here's a picture of the cake:
And here's what it is. It's actually 5 layers of cake to serve, with the top layer reserved for the wedding party. The bride wanted different flavors (like her sister had), but she wanted the top to be chocolate.
The entire cake was filled with my home-made chocolate buttercream - guaranteed to melt you at the knees.
The layer in the middle is yellow cake; the bottom layer is fudge marble, and the 3 small satellite cakes are devil's food. That way, everyone gets what they want, within reason. All cakes have the chocolate filling. If you click on the picture, you can see the "basketweave" pattern on several of the cakes. I also added their names to the bottom cake, and their date at the top.
Silk pansies, ivy and baby's breath topped the cake. I used a "floating" cake stand that I had used for an earlier wedding, but as you can see, I put the ivy around the arms of the stand. The cake took me a total of 8 hours to decorate, including the hour we spent on-site putting on the borders.
Here's a close-up of the smaller cakes; you can see the basketweave more clearly here. Hubby had the idea to have the ivy vines touching, kind of "encircling" the satellites. The top of each cake has a rope border, to match the idea of a "basket" in buttercream.
The bride was absolutely thrilled with the cake. In actuality, the cake served 128 people, and by the end of the evening (at least when we left), I had 25 pieces left. We figured those would be "wrapped and go" pieces.
I got lots of good comments, and I set out a bunch of my business cards, directing people to the website. Even the wedding photographer took a picture of ME with my cake! Half the time, nobody bothers. Lots of people commented on the personalization. Hubby thought it was "corny" but I think it was ok.
The bride originally wanted a cake just like her sister's. Here: Now, I liked this cake. It was very plain; the florist did the flowers, and it was simple. It was also bigger by about 50 people!
I think that each bride and groom needs their own cake. I knew that they wouldn't mind if I took a little liberty. So I came up with the design above, got mirrors at the Hobby Lobby for the smaller cakes, and we had a lovely, memorable cake for the couple.
My system is to tell people that wedding cake "has no calories" - it's a celebration! As long as, in this case, everyone had a lovely dinner, enjoyed the cake, danced and didn't fall into the pool, the evening was a success.
With every wedding, you learn something. Here's what I learned from this occasion:
1. Put something on the cutting area; it was kind of a mess when I got done!
2. Bring your own knife! I brought one, but it should always be a slim serrated knife.
3. Always bring gloves. Even if you ARE neat, it looks better.
4. Make sure you have someone there to help you set it up. Without Hubby, I'd have been able to do it, but it's easier with an extra pair of hands!
5. Always bring your turntable. Makes putting on the last-minute borders easy.
And as you know: it should be fun. Delicious, too. But fun, always. This is my hobby, not my job. And yes, I do get paid for it. But if I had to do it for a living, I don't think I could. I do just enough to make a little yarn money, and keep me happy.
This replaces my eight year old (yes, EIGHT), and still functioning IBM ThinkPad. Hubby got a great deal, so we got Kid #2 a laptop for his graduation and a second one for me. Hubby is repurposing my IBM ThinkPad for his work, and that's cool. The machine runs well, even after surviving the "Elkhound Puppy Drop Test" and my replacing a keyboard.
The cake? Well, I did a wedding cake this past weekend. It was a small one, for about 120 people, for a garden wedding. This is the sister to someone whose cake I did 5 years ago.
Here's a picture of the cake:
 |
| Flower basket wedding cake. |
The entire cake was filled with my home-made chocolate buttercream - guaranteed to melt you at the knees.
The layer in the middle is yellow cake; the bottom layer is fudge marble, and the 3 small satellite cakes are devil's food. That way, everyone gets what they want, within reason. All cakes have the chocolate filling. If you click on the picture, you can see the "basketweave" pattern on several of the cakes. I also added their names to the bottom cake, and their date at the top.
Silk pansies, ivy and baby's breath topped the cake. I used a "floating" cake stand that I had used for an earlier wedding, but as you can see, I put the ivy around the arms of the stand. The cake took me a total of 8 hours to decorate, including the hour we spent on-site putting on the borders.
 |
| Satellite cakes |
The bride was absolutely thrilled with the cake. In actuality, the cake served 128 people, and by the end of the evening (at least when we left), I had 25 pieces left. We figured those would be "wrapped and go" pieces.
I got lots of good comments, and I set out a bunch of my business cards, directing people to the website. Even the wedding photographer took a picture of ME with my cake! Half the time, nobody bothers. Lots of people commented on the personalization. Hubby thought it was "corny" but I think it was ok.
 |
| Formal wedding cake |
I think that each bride and groom needs their own cake. I knew that they wouldn't mind if I took a little liberty. So I came up with the design above, got mirrors at the Hobby Lobby for the smaller cakes, and we had a lovely, memorable cake for the couple.
My system is to tell people that wedding cake "has no calories" - it's a celebration! As long as, in this case, everyone had a lovely dinner, enjoyed the cake, danced and didn't fall into the pool, the evening was a success.
With every wedding, you learn something. Here's what I learned from this occasion:
1. Put something on the cutting area; it was kind of a mess when I got done!
2. Bring your own knife! I brought one, but it should always be a slim serrated knife.
3. Always bring gloves. Even if you ARE neat, it looks better.
4. Make sure you have someone there to help you set it up. Without Hubby, I'd have been able to do it, but it's easier with an extra pair of hands!
5. Always bring your turntable. Makes putting on the last-minute borders easy.
And as you know: it should be fun. Delicious, too. But fun, always. This is my hobby, not my job. And yes, I do get paid for it. But if I had to do it for a living, I don't think I could. I do just enough to make a little yarn money, and keep me happy.
Wednesday, June 01, 2011
I Can Fix the Budget Crisis...
...and all it will take is some common sense. The screams you might hear will only echo for a little while, and then you can tune them out.
See, here's the thing. Republicans are refusing to raise the debt ceiling. For better or for worse, it is what it is. But Republicans seem to want to hold this issue to the fire because they want to be "fiscally responsible" and have some pretty good-sized cuts so that the budget will balance. Or come close, at least.
Fiscal responsibility is a good thing. I'm all for it. I have to be fiscally responsible, because my own debt ceiling is nowhere near what the USA's is. ComEd doesn't want to hear about my new luxury purchase (which would be the roof we need to put on the house) if I haven't paid my A/C bill! I like to think I'm in what's left of the middle class, and so I pay attention to things like this: things that'll cause my kids' kids' kids massive headaches, providing we even have a planet to live on by that time.
In any even, the "fiscal responsibility" espoused by the Republicans involves massive cuts. To social service programs. Don't even call these "entitlements" because that's a flaming word. It's gone from a perfectly fine word to nearly a curse word. "Entitled" gives the impression of some welfare recipient sitting on their butt chugging a sweet tea or a beer waiting for the check to arrive.
Well, let's turn that on its head. "Entitled" rich folks' kids -- those kids who never did anything to contribute to the family's wealth, but just got born into the right gene pool. "Entitled" corporations like oil companies, who are all posting record earnings (and even poor little BP posted only a "slight" loss after just about killing off the Gulf of Mexico). "Entitled" bankers and Wall Street execs who feel compelled to give themselves massive bonuses for essentially shuffling paperwork. And denying loans to perfectly good (and struggling) businesses like my friend's: she had contracts in the rail industry, which was hit hard by the recession, and her small company needed funds. But it was told it needed to be in better financial condition. Which, if it was, would negate the necessity for her to be seeking a loan, right?
"Entitled" corporations and the mega-rich are apparently spared from the Republicans' righteous budget-cutting sword. The folks they're going after: seniors; kids; teachers; low-level government workers; women in poverty. You know - the folks who've paid into this society for their entire lives, and the littlest ones.
Good Christians one and all, they've apparently forgotten that Bible passage about tending to "the least of these" in order to reap your heavenly reward. That means, people, the elderly, the kids, the sick, the ones who serve us (teachers, cops, firefighters, nurses...the ones who tend us when we're at our most tender ages, and our most vulnerable).
But it's ok, because I know this'll make you sleep better at night. According to the May 23, 2011 Bloomberg BusinessWeek magazine, "On May 17, the Senate blocked a measure that would have repealed $21 billion in oil and gas subsidies over 10 years." So...... the American Petroleum Institute, the lobbyist, did their job.
While Peter Colavito, the SEIU's director of government relations says, "We think that rich folks and American corporations have gotten off too easily..."
Ya think?
So my very simple budget fix is this: Repeal the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans; tax or penalize (don't care which) all American companies who offshore their jobs because they left our own citizen unemployed while seeking to enrich their own coffers; repeal the oil and gas company subsidies -- they can afford it.
And while we're at it, make the Senate and House members pay for their own health care. We have to pay; they work for us. So they should pay for their own benefits, just like we do. Please don't put forward that nasty canard of "public service" since we know that only rich people actually can run for office. They have their own money, for the most part. And those rare few who don't? Well, they probably know how to operate on a budget already.
I think my plan has merit. Of course, I won't hold my breath. Common sense is truly uncommon lately. The press (and the victory, most times) goes to the screaming hordes. Who rarely make any sense, let alone "common sense."
See, here's the thing. Republicans are refusing to raise the debt ceiling. For better or for worse, it is what it is. But Republicans seem to want to hold this issue to the fire because they want to be "fiscally responsible" and have some pretty good-sized cuts so that the budget will balance. Or come close, at least.
Fiscal responsibility is a good thing. I'm all for it. I have to be fiscally responsible, because my own debt ceiling is nowhere near what the USA's is. ComEd doesn't want to hear about my new luxury purchase (which would be the roof we need to put on the house) if I haven't paid my A/C bill! I like to think I'm in what's left of the middle class, and so I pay attention to things like this: things that'll cause my kids' kids' kids massive headaches, providing we even have a planet to live on by that time.
In any even, the "fiscal responsibility" espoused by the Republicans involves massive cuts. To social service programs. Don't even call these "entitlements" because that's a flaming word. It's gone from a perfectly fine word to nearly a curse word. "Entitled" gives the impression of some welfare recipient sitting on their butt chugging a sweet tea or a beer waiting for the check to arrive.
Well, let's turn that on its head. "Entitled" rich folks' kids -- those kids who never did anything to contribute to the family's wealth, but just got born into the right gene pool. "Entitled" corporations like oil companies, who are all posting record earnings (and even poor little BP posted only a "slight" loss after just about killing off the Gulf of Mexico). "Entitled" bankers and Wall Street execs who feel compelled to give themselves massive bonuses for essentially shuffling paperwork. And denying loans to perfectly good (and struggling) businesses like my friend's: she had contracts in the rail industry, which was hit hard by the recession, and her small company needed funds. But it was told it needed to be in better financial condition. Which, if it was, would negate the necessity for her to be seeking a loan, right?
"Entitled" corporations and the mega-rich are apparently spared from the Republicans' righteous budget-cutting sword. The folks they're going after: seniors; kids; teachers; low-level government workers; women in poverty. You know - the folks who've paid into this society for their entire lives, and the littlest ones.
Good Christians one and all, they've apparently forgotten that Bible passage about tending to "the least of these" in order to reap your heavenly reward. That means, people, the elderly, the kids, the sick, the ones who serve us (teachers, cops, firefighters, nurses...the ones who tend us when we're at our most tender ages, and our most vulnerable).
But it's ok, because I know this'll make you sleep better at night. According to the May 23, 2011 Bloomberg BusinessWeek magazine, "On May 17, the Senate blocked a measure that would have repealed $21 billion in oil and gas subsidies over 10 years." So...... the American Petroleum Institute, the lobbyist, did their job.
While Peter Colavito, the SEIU's director of government relations says, "We think that rich folks and American corporations have gotten off too easily..."
Ya think?
So my very simple budget fix is this: Repeal the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans; tax or penalize (don't care which) all American companies who offshore their jobs because they left our own citizen unemployed while seeking to enrich their own coffers; repeal the oil and gas company subsidies -- they can afford it.
And while we're at it, make the Senate and House members pay for their own health care. We have to pay; they work for us. So they should pay for their own benefits, just like we do. Please don't put forward that nasty canard of "public service" since we know that only rich people actually can run for office. They have their own money, for the most part. And those rare few who don't? Well, they probably know how to operate on a budget already.
I think my plan has merit. Of course, I won't hold my breath. Common sense is truly uncommon lately. The press (and the victory, most times) goes to the screaming hordes. Who rarely make any sense, let alone "common sense."
Monday, May 23, 2011
Graduations, Graduations...
Well, I've been busy. We have been busy. Kid #2 graduated from college, and I'm not sure where the time went. He was just in kindergarten. Really. He's now sending out resumes for a teaching gig, and fingers are crossed, candles lit, etc. -- we're hoping he gets something soon.
Anyhow, here's the tie I knitted for him. It was a merino/alpaca blend. It was a little long, but then, he's 6' 1" so it works. In honor of his request to remain anonymous, here's the tie only. He showed it to some of his fellow grads and he says they liked it. I'll choose to believe that!
It's a lovely red/navy colorway, and while my LYS owner had to buy 10 hanks, all 10 of them are gone! I think she'll buy more of this because it worked up great. It's done in rice stitch. Click on the picture for an up-close view.
I have enough to make some coasters. Yeah, coasters, but that's because there really isn't enough to make another tie! Maybe a small scarf for me? Who knows. Not there yet.
The other big news is that our elkhounds both got their CGC certification. That's the AKC's "Canine Good Citizen" exam. We worked for well over a year with them to get this certification. It's a mark of obedience, good pet ownership and just generally making sure you and your dog are a team.
Tippi, our intrepid elkhound reporter, will have more to say at a later date.
Then, the same day, we went to my nephew's graduation party for high school. Yesterday, he was an infant. Seriously. Now, he's off to IIT to study architecture.
Well, at least the grand-nephew is STILL an infant! No pictures of him here... we want to keep him to ourselves for a while.
 |
| Seed Stitch Tie |
It's a lovely red/navy colorway, and while my LYS owner had to buy 10 hanks, all 10 of them are gone! I think she'll buy more of this because it worked up great. It's done in rice stitch. Click on the picture for an up-close view.
I have enough to make some coasters. Yeah, coasters, but that's because there really isn't enough to make another tie! Maybe a small scarf for me? Who knows. Not there yet.
The other big news is that our elkhounds both got their CGC certification. That's the AKC's "Canine Good Citizen" exam. We worked for well over a year with them to get this certification. It's a mark of obedience, good pet ownership and just generally making sure you and your dog are a team.
Tippi, our intrepid elkhound reporter, will have more to say at a later date.
Then, the same day, we went to my nephew's graduation party for high school. Yesterday, he was an infant. Seriously. Now, he's off to IIT to study architecture.
Well, at least the grand-nephew is STILL an infant! No pictures of him here... we want to keep him to ourselves for a while.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Pfleger is Wrong.
Mind you, 99.99% of the time, I would disagree with Cardinal George on just about anything with regard to the Church. I think he's got blinders on in a great many areas, and he's too theoretical for his diocese. The church has lots of problems, and the administration often fails to address problems until they are forced to do so.
But in this case, Cardinal George is right.
There are 3 vows that most religious take when they are accepted into a vowed community: Poverty, Chastity and Obedience.
The Catholic Church has a requirement that priests be moved every so often. Even with the priest shortage, the various dioceses will try to shake things up. Even in my community - they did that a few months ago by moving two priests - Priest A went to St. Something, and Priest B, formerly the pastor of St. Something, went across town to Priest A's church, Holy Smokes. I obviously made those names up, people, but the point is, our diocese just switched two of 'em around. It was time.
Fr. Pfleger has failed to lead his congregation. He has failed in the most basic task that Jesus taught: servant leadership. Yes, he was instrumental at St. Sabina --- he brought that church back. That's a great testimony to his leadership.
The next best testimony to his leadership is to move on and go lead somewhere else. Can he honestly tell Cardinal George that St. Sabina will fall apart without him? Can he honestly in his heart say that there isn't a troubled parish somewhere that he couldn't help?
Can St. Sabina's congregation say in all truthfulness that they will leave en masse if he's transferred? And if they can, then how strong is their faith in the Church as opposed to their faith in Fr. Pfleger? When you get baptized and agree to join the Catholic Church (if you join as an adult, you agree ... babies are just baptized by their parents), you pledge your faith in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Not the guy in the cassock standing there.
Cardinal George floated the idea of Pfleger being the president of a Catholic high school. What better position for a true leader to be in? Think of the way he can energize and motivate the young students at that school. And for pete's sake: it's in the same neighborhood as St. Sabina. I think that's a mistake, but I'm not in that position, so I can't say what's up, unless Cardinal George thinks this is a "kinder, gentler" move for Pfleger.
Now, according to today's Chicago Tribune, Pfleger is threatening to "go preach at other churches." And he's saying that his lawyers tell him that the Cardinal was not following canon law by suspending him. Really? Is he so delusional as to think that Cardinal George wouldn't have thought all this through? If you agree with nothing else, you can see that George is a pedant. He makes sure every "i" is dotted and every "t" is crossed.
I know that in some denominations, it's not uncommon to see a pastor who's there for decades. In one of our Baptist churches in town, one reverend who is very much respected in our area was there for over 45 years. But that doesn't mean the Catholic Church should do the same. I believe the Church's policy of moving religious is a good thing: you are not your assignment. You are not the center of that universe. You are a disciple of Jesus, and he didn't stay in any one place very long either.
Heck, my favorite priest (so much a favorite that Kid #2 is named after him) got moved after TWO YEARS to Guam!! Of course that was while he was serving in a Naval chapel on a base, and they moved them every 2 to 3 years. That was normal. But that doesn't mean we didn't mourn the loss just as much as any congregation.
And let's talk a little about this concept of servant leadership. Pfleger actually meets many of the criteria for a successful servant leader: listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, growth and building community. It's an old concept, going back to 490 BC, where Lao-Tzu writes: The highest type of ruler is one of whose existence the people are barely aware...The Sage is self-effacing and scanty of words. When his task is accomplished and things have been completed, all the people say, 'We ourselves have achieved it!'
Following the concept of servant leadership tends to give a leader more authority versus power.
The concept was "revivied" in a way when a man named Robert Greenleaf wrote an essay in 1970 called "The Servant as Leader." I remember taking a class for my MA where his subsequent book was the centerpiece. I attended a Catholic university, and part of our "mission" classes (everyone has to take these to graduate) include classes on social justice and social responsibility. We turn out students who are hopefully aware of their place in the world, and that they have to leave the world a better place than when they got there.
Where Pfleger went wrong is that he assumed "power" was the issue. It was a power struggle between him and the various cardinals in the hierarchy. Where the Diocese of Chicago got it wrong was that they left him there lo those many years. He should've been moved out of St. Sabina after a maximum of two "terms" (which would've been anywhere from 12 to 16 years total in one parish) and he should never have been allowed to stay there. He's been there since 1981, and he was ordained in 1975. Being at the parish that long is just not done.
Has he done good things? Obviously. But has he also thumbed his nose at the Church? Yes. Adopting children in direct opposition to his Cardinal's orders is just one of the problems. The kids obviously needed a good home, and that's great. But before those kids, the collar was there.
And it's not a collar that stifles you. It's a collar that reminds you of your vows. Reminds you who your Ultimate Boss is. And why you need to be reminded. And reminds you again that you are living a specific life, with a specific mission. Your mission is to go out and preach The Word. To everyone. Not just your parish.
You really aren't supposed to be the end-goal. You're the rudder, steering your parishioners toward their goals. You're not the ultimate achievement of your flock. A good leader is "invisible" to the process. Again, he's done great things. So now it's time to go do those great things elsewhere.
Well, Fr. Pfleger. Go.
But in this case, Cardinal George is right.
There are 3 vows that most religious take when they are accepted into a vowed community: Poverty, Chastity and Obedience.
The Catholic Church has a requirement that priests be moved every so often. Even with the priest shortage, the various dioceses will try to shake things up. Even in my community - they did that a few months ago by moving two priests - Priest A went to St. Something, and Priest B, formerly the pastor of St. Something, went across town to Priest A's church, Holy Smokes. I obviously made those names up, people, but the point is, our diocese just switched two of 'em around. It was time.
Fr. Pfleger has failed to lead his congregation. He has failed in the most basic task that Jesus taught: servant leadership. Yes, he was instrumental at St. Sabina --- he brought that church back. That's a great testimony to his leadership.
The next best testimony to his leadership is to move on and go lead somewhere else. Can he honestly tell Cardinal George that St. Sabina will fall apart without him? Can he honestly in his heart say that there isn't a troubled parish somewhere that he couldn't help?
Can St. Sabina's congregation say in all truthfulness that they will leave en masse if he's transferred? And if they can, then how strong is their faith in the Church as opposed to their faith in Fr. Pfleger? When you get baptized and agree to join the Catholic Church (if you join as an adult, you agree ... babies are just baptized by their parents), you pledge your faith in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Not the guy in the cassock standing there.
Cardinal George floated the idea of Pfleger being the president of a Catholic high school. What better position for a true leader to be in? Think of the way he can energize and motivate the young students at that school. And for pete's sake: it's in the same neighborhood as St. Sabina. I think that's a mistake, but I'm not in that position, so I can't say what's up, unless Cardinal George thinks this is a "kinder, gentler" move for Pfleger.
Now, according to today's Chicago Tribune, Pfleger is threatening to "go preach at other churches." And he's saying that his lawyers tell him that the Cardinal was not following canon law by suspending him. Really? Is he so delusional as to think that Cardinal George wouldn't have thought all this through? If you agree with nothing else, you can see that George is a pedant. He makes sure every "i" is dotted and every "t" is crossed.
I know that in some denominations, it's not uncommon to see a pastor who's there for decades. In one of our Baptist churches in town, one reverend who is very much respected in our area was there for over 45 years. But that doesn't mean the Catholic Church should do the same. I believe the Church's policy of moving religious is a good thing: you are not your assignment. You are not the center of that universe. You are a disciple of Jesus, and he didn't stay in any one place very long either.
Heck, my favorite priest (so much a favorite that Kid #2 is named after him) got moved after TWO YEARS to Guam!! Of course that was while he was serving in a Naval chapel on a base, and they moved them every 2 to 3 years. That was normal. But that doesn't mean we didn't mourn the loss just as much as any congregation.
And let's talk a little about this concept of servant leadership. Pfleger actually meets many of the criteria for a successful servant leader: listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, growth and building community. It's an old concept, going back to 490 BC, where Lao-Tzu writes: The highest type of ruler is one of whose existence the people are barely aware...The Sage is self-effacing and scanty of words. When his task is accomplished and things have been completed, all the people say, 'We ourselves have achieved it!'
Following the concept of servant leadership tends to give a leader more authority versus power.
The concept was "revivied" in a way when a man named Robert Greenleaf wrote an essay in 1970 called "The Servant as Leader." I remember taking a class for my MA where his subsequent book was the centerpiece. I attended a Catholic university, and part of our "mission" classes (everyone has to take these to graduate) include classes on social justice and social responsibility. We turn out students who are hopefully aware of their place in the world, and that they have to leave the world a better place than when they got there.
Where Pfleger went wrong is that he assumed "power" was the issue. It was a power struggle between him and the various cardinals in the hierarchy. Where the Diocese of Chicago got it wrong was that they left him there lo those many years. He should've been moved out of St. Sabina after a maximum of two "terms" (which would've been anywhere from 12 to 16 years total in one parish) and he should never have been allowed to stay there. He's been there since 1981, and he was ordained in 1975. Being at the parish that long is just not done.
Has he done good things? Obviously. But has he also thumbed his nose at the Church? Yes. Adopting children in direct opposition to his Cardinal's orders is just one of the problems. The kids obviously needed a good home, and that's great. But before those kids, the collar was there.
And it's not a collar that stifles you. It's a collar that reminds you of your vows. Reminds you who your Ultimate Boss is. And why you need to be reminded. And reminds you again that you are living a specific life, with a specific mission. Your mission is to go out and preach The Word. To everyone. Not just your parish.
You really aren't supposed to be the end-goal. You're the rudder, steering your parishioners toward their goals. You're not the ultimate achievement of your flock. A good leader is "invisible" to the process. Again, he's done great things. So now it's time to go do those great things elsewhere.
Well, Fr. Pfleger. Go.
Saturday, May 07, 2011
"Dear 16-Year-Old Me....."
This video deserves to be passed on. To anyone you know who's a teen. To anyone you know who's always outside in the sun.
To anyone you care about.
It's a "hanky-alert" kind of message at one point, but it immediately gets across to you that it's not all "beat you over the head with a stick." It's a very strong message about something so simple - that we take so much for granted.
I had a bad burn at age 13 or so. I didn't realize the implications till a few years ago. Now I get checked. I'm fair-skinned to the point of "blending into the wall." I would never tan the way my peer group did "back in the day" when baby oil tinged with iodine was the best way to get that golden glow everyone was after. And now, I couldn't even think about sticking my 53-year-old self into a tanning bed! Ick.
But you know you know people who do it. All year 'round. Send this to them. And then talk to them.
Thursday, May 05, 2011
It's the Black Guy...
...in the White House.
Seriously, that's the meat to that nut. It's The Black Guy in The White House.
NOTHING will change in the next year or so with regard to the right wing. And when he gets re-elected, NOTHING will change again.
The level of disrespect is out of bounds, even with the fact that we live in a most un-civil time. Personal relationships are all about "my truth" instead of "being connected in a community." It's what matters to "me" that's most important, screw your feelings.
President Barack Obama made a very difficult decision. He made a decision that could've made or broken the remainder of his term in the White House. He called for special forces to kill Osama bin Laden (hereinafter "bin Laden" or "OBL"). There are many clips of Shrub where he's clearly saying, "I honestly don't waste much time thinking about OBL. Really, he's not in the front of my mind." It's a documented fact that GWB eliminated the OBL task force. He redistributed those folks to go get Saddam. Because OBL "wasn't important."
That's because Shrub was determined to "prove his manhood" by finishing Pappy Bush's job. To prove to his family that it wasn't a mistake that Jeb wasn't the one in the White House. It wasn't a fluke; Cowboy George was gonna get Saddam. God told him to. No matter that it wasn't the best idea; no matter that evidence clearly showed that OBL was a growing threat. God told him to take out Saddam, and By God, he was going to do that. He must've gotten that epiphany while he was out on vacation chopping brush. He certainly felt free to receive that message, and apparently not receive the intelligence briefings warning him several months in advance of 9/11 that the attacks were "imminent."
So. We had the "birthers" who demanded in the face of incontrovertible evidence that President Obama produce a "real" birth certificate. And President Obama, after dealing with that craziness, finally did. So, now the birthers still don't believe him! "It was doctored." "It was PhotoShopped." "It doesn't use the right words." I'm telling you, if Jesus Himself came down along with St. Peter, the Virgin Mary and Pope John Paul II (recently beatified) and all of them, along with a choir of the Seraphim and Cherubim told the birthers, "It's cool - he was born in Hawaii," they'd shriek collusion, conspiracy, cover-up because that's all they know.
And now I'm watching the blatant disrespect and disregard for the office of president - much less the MAN who holds the office. Because he's black. And the white crazies are not that far removed from their KKK days and Jim Crow. Harsh? To quote Tea Party Diva Poopsie Palin, "you betcha."
Harsh is as harsh does. Poopsie herself credited Shrub.... Shrub - for the capture of OBL. Really? What planet are you on? The Planet Denial, because it's a Black Guy in the White House.
President Obama hasn't always lived up to my own expectations. No president in history, no matter how sanctified and holy they may seem in retrospect, is perfect. JFK had affairs. Nixon was paranoid. Lincoln was a closet racist, and Jefferson owned slaves. And that's just a small slice of history.
But he's still the president. His office is due the respect, even if you can't manage to speak his name without gagging.
We like to think that in America we have a melting pot. That may have been more true in my parents' and grandparents' ages when immigration was all about people coming to America to be American. It was a proud moment when you became a citizen and learned English. Yes, there was racism. "No Irish Need Apply" is just one of the idiocies. But by and large, there was more respect for the immigrant who came here to make a better life for himself or herself.
Now, the "immigrant" (and by the way, unless you're a direct descendant from Plymouth Rock, you are of "immigrant stock" somewhere in your family tree) is viewed as "the other." And not in a good way. And "the other" is to be suspected. "The Other" is someone who is "Not Like Us" and "Strange" and "To Be Viewed as Different."
And to be fair, sometimes immigrants give themselves a bad rap. They do get all, "We need to keep our heritage pure and we CANNOT ASSIMILATE." Well, yeah, you can because when you assimilate, you add to our collective culture and you enrich it. When you expect us, as your adopted country, to adapt to your ways and you refuse to adapt to ours - well, we wonder why you came here. What's the point when you don't want to be bothered to change or enjoy the delights of the variety of our culture, and you demand that yours be treated as "better" than ours?
Anyway, I digress. The point is, we are still a very long way from being color-blind. This generation coming up (my kids and their friends) are a heck of a lot closer to being color-blind than even my generation. My generation likes to talk a good game, but as you can see by pundits and talking heads in the media, we're not there yet. There's a huge segment of the population my age and older who don't like The Black Guy in The White House. And they'll do everything to stonewall him. To their own detriment and the detriment of everyone around them.
Why are they so afraid? Why does it enrage them that President Obama stated in his campaign that he'd get OBL, and he did? The spin coming from the right is enough to adjust the tilt of the planet's axis even more than the earthquake in Japan did.
Just suck it up and put on your big-boy skivvies. President Obama is the one who can truly fly the Mission Accomplished banner. But he won't. It is what it is - he got OBL, he visited the 9/11 survivors. He invited Shrub, and Shrub declined. The first statement was "he wants to stay out of the limelight" but now the radio is saying that he "feels dissed" because he didn't get "the proper credit."
Really? When GWB was using the bullhorn on the 9/11 site, did he thank President Clinton for leaving all that wonderful intelligence for GWB and his crew to use? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?
And also, the idea of releasing the photos? Keep them hidden. Look what happened with the release of the photos of Saddam's sons, and the Abu Ghraib fiasco. Anyone with a grain of common sense or a few working brain cells can tell you that those pictures are deliberately inflammatory. The Abu Ghraib photos specifically have been used in anti-American propaganda. Those pictures hurt our military. Wave your flag on that fact.
Seriously, that's the meat to that nut. It's The Black Guy in The White House.
NOTHING will change in the next year or so with regard to the right wing. And when he gets re-elected, NOTHING will change again.
The level of disrespect is out of bounds, even with the fact that we live in a most un-civil time. Personal relationships are all about "my truth" instead of "being connected in a community." It's what matters to "me" that's most important, screw your feelings.
President Barack Obama made a very difficult decision. He made a decision that could've made or broken the remainder of his term in the White House. He called for special forces to kill Osama bin Laden (hereinafter "bin Laden" or "OBL"). There are many clips of Shrub where he's clearly saying, "I honestly don't waste much time thinking about OBL. Really, he's not in the front of my mind." It's a documented fact that GWB eliminated the OBL task force. He redistributed those folks to go get Saddam. Because OBL "wasn't important."
That's because Shrub was determined to "prove his manhood" by finishing Pappy Bush's job. To prove to his family that it wasn't a mistake that Jeb wasn't the one in the White House. It wasn't a fluke; Cowboy George was gonna get Saddam. God told him to. No matter that it wasn't the best idea; no matter that evidence clearly showed that OBL was a growing threat. God told him to take out Saddam, and By God, he was going to do that. He must've gotten that epiphany while he was out on vacation chopping brush. He certainly felt free to receive that message, and apparently not receive the intelligence briefings warning him several months in advance of 9/11 that the attacks were "imminent."
So. We had the "birthers" who demanded in the face of incontrovertible evidence that President Obama produce a "real" birth certificate. And President Obama, after dealing with that craziness, finally did. So, now the birthers still don't believe him! "It was doctored." "It was PhotoShopped." "It doesn't use the right words." I'm telling you, if Jesus Himself came down along with St. Peter, the Virgin Mary and Pope John Paul II (recently beatified) and all of them, along with a choir of the Seraphim and Cherubim told the birthers, "It's cool - he was born in Hawaii," they'd shriek collusion, conspiracy, cover-up because that's all they know.
And now I'm watching the blatant disrespect and disregard for the office of president - much less the MAN who holds the office. Because he's black. And the white crazies are not that far removed from their KKK days and Jim Crow. Harsh? To quote Tea Party Diva Poopsie Palin, "you betcha."
Harsh is as harsh does. Poopsie herself credited Shrub.... Shrub - for the capture of OBL. Really? What planet are you on? The Planet Denial, because it's a Black Guy in the White House.
President Obama hasn't always lived up to my own expectations. No president in history, no matter how sanctified and holy they may seem in retrospect, is perfect. JFK had affairs. Nixon was paranoid. Lincoln was a closet racist, and Jefferson owned slaves. And that's just a small slice of history.
But he's still the president. His office is due the respect, even if you can't manage to speak his name without gagging.
We like to think that in America we have a melting pot. That may have been more true in my parents' and grandparents' ages when immigration was all about people coming to America to be American. It was a proud moment when you became a citizen and learned English. Yes, there was racism. "No Irish Need Apply" is just one of the idiocies. But by and large, there was more respect for the immigrant who came here to make a better life for himself or herself.
Now, the "immigrant" (and by the way, unless you're a direct descendant from Plymouth Rock, you are of "immigrant stock" somewhere in your family tree) is viewed as "the other." And not in a good way. And "the other" is to be suspected. "The Other" is someone who is "Not Like Us" and "Strange" and "To Be Viewed as Different."
And to be fair, sometimes immigrants give themselves a bad rap. They do get all, "We need to keep our heritage pure and we CANNOT ASSIMILATE." Well, yeah, you can because when you assimilate, you add to our collective culture and you enrich it. When you expect us, as your adopted country, to adapt to your ways and you refuse to adapt to ours - well, we wonder why you came here. What's the point when you don't want to be bothered to change or enjoy the delights of the variety of our culture, and you demand that yours be treated as "better" than ours?
Anyway, I digress. The point is, we are still a very long way from being color-blind. This generation coming up (my kids and their friends) are a heck of a lot closer to being color-blind than even my generation. My generation likes to talk a good game, but as you can see by pundits and talking heads in the media, we're not there yet. There's a huge segment of the population my age and older who don't like The Black Guy in The White House. And they'll do everything to stonewall him. To their own detriment and the detriment of everyone around them.
Why are they so afraid? Why does it enrage them that President Obama stated in his campaign that he'd get OBL, and he did? The spin coming from the right is enough to adjust the tilt of the planet's axis even more than the earthquake in Japan did.
Just suck it up and put on your big-boy skivvies. President Obama is the one who can truly fly the Mission Accomplished banner. But he won't. It is what it is - he got OBL, he visited the 9/11 survivors. He invited Shrub, and Shrub declined. The first statement was "he wants to stay out of the limelight" but now the radio is saying that he "feels dissed" because he didn't get "the proper credit."
Really? When GWB was using the bullhorn on the 9/11 site, did he thank President Clinton for leaving all that wonderful intelligence for GWB and his crew to use? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?
And also, the idea of releasing the photos? Keep them hidden. Look what happened with the release of the photos of Saddam's sons, and the Abu Ghraib fiasco. Anyone with a grain of common sense or a few working brain cells can tell you that those pictures are deliberately inflammatory. The Abu Ghraib photos specifically have been used in anti-American propaganda. Those pictures hurt our military. Wave your flag on that fact.
Friday, April 15, 2011
Text of the Day...
No, I don't text. But a friend of mine passed this along to me in the form of an e-mail, and I Iam passing it along to you in its original form (for the grammar geeks, no I did not correct anything...) I think it's worth sharing and reflecting upon...
Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR, and PBS crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401K's, took trillions in tarp money, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in bonuses, and paid no taxes? Yea me neither.
Think about that the next time someone crabs about those "wealthy" teachers, and how "useless" public employees are, and how Planned Parenthood is "wrecking the American family."
By providing education to our children, making our government work (for the most part!) and providing care to women who would otherwise go without basic medical screenings. I only have my MBA, but if Planned Parenthood's "abortion business" is only 3% of their total business, that leaves.....let's see: NINETY-SEVEN percent (97%) of their business in testing for STDs, basic screenings and providing birth control. Hmmmmmmmmmm. Interesting what happens when you actually use facts.
Kid #2 ends his student teaching today. So he says, "I go from unpaid teaching to UNDER-paid teaching." If he can find a job. Because somehow, the great unwashed -- who have become a very loud bunch of screechers -- have decided that "we don't need TEACHERS."
And also, did you know that the majority of hospitals would rather deal with Medicare than a private insurance company? Medicare may pay the doctors and hospitals less, but Medicare is NOT FOR PROFIT, so they don't have to satisfy stockholders. The government functionaries making that program work are efficient, they have a process and it goes quite well; according to family members who've dealt with the system, and nurses and doctors I've spoken to. And yes, it IS an "entitlement," but since most of us have been paying for it our entire working lives, then yes, we are "entitled" to it when we need it: when we're retired and living on a fixed income.
Points to ponder during your day.
Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR, and PBS crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401K's, took trillions in tarp money, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in bonuses, and paid no taxes? Yea me neither.
Think about that the next time someone crabs about those "wealthy" teachers, and how "useless" public employees are, and how Planned Parenthood is "wrecking the American family."
By providing education to our children, making our government work (for the most part!) and providing care to women who would otherwise go without basic medical screenings. I only have my MBA, but if Planned Parenthood's "abortion business" is only 3% of their total business, that leaves.....let's see: NINETY-SEVEN percent (97%) of their business in testing for STDs, basic screenings and providing birth control. Hmmmmmmmmmm. Interesting what happens when you actually use facts.
Kid #2 ends his student teaching today. So he says, "I go from unpaid teaching to UNDER-paid teaching." If he can find a job. Because somehow, the great unwashed -- who have become a very loud bunch of screechers -- have decided that "we don't need TEACHERS."
And also, did you know that the majority of hospitals would rather deal with Medicare than a private insurance company? Medicare may pay the doctors and hospitals less, but Medicare is NOT FOR PROFIT, so they don't have to satisfy stockholders. The government functionaries making that program work are efficient, they have a process and it goes quite well; according to family members who've dealt with the system, and nurses and doctors I've spoken to. And yes, it IS an "entitlement," but since most of us have been paying for it our entire working lives, then yes, we are "entitled" to it when we need it: when we're retired and living on a fixed income.
Points to ponder during your day.
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
The Truth about Planned Parenthood...
So John Kyl can get up on the floor of the Senate and lie. He said that the "majority" of services provided by Planned Parenthood, are abortions.
When called on his lie, Kyl said, "Oh, I was just making a point." Well, how about making a point with facts and not lies?
Under Federal law, NO PROVIDER can use Federal funds for abortions. Not Planned Parenthood, not your local county health department, no hospital in the United States. This is all political hysteria.
It has to do with giving women affordable health care. One in 5 women comes to Planned Parenthood for healthcare in their lifetime. The organization helps women prevent pregnancies, and also provides basic screenings: mammograms, screenings for cervical cancer, etc. Services that many of us who have insurance take for granted.
Services that will cost a woman's life if she doesn't have access to them.
Do you really want to be on the side of preventing women from getting basic health care? There are about 3 million women who go to Planned Parenthood clinics. The clinics are often in rural areas or medically under-served areas. The organization is more about preventing unwanted pregnancies, rather than terminating them.
Only 3% of Planned Parenthood services center around abortions. THREE percent. That's not a majority in anyone's math; unless you're a conservative who "wants to make a point."
Why are we going to ration care? Why are the Republicans so eager to decry the Affordable Care Act, claiming "death panels" and "rationing care" and all that garbage...when they're doing that for about 50% of the population: women.
Ohhhhhhhhhh. It's because it's women. Usually poor women. Apparently, poor women are disposable. They don't count. They're not the constituents who really matter to conservatives. And the whole "Christian" thing? Sorry, I'm not buying it.
The argument is this: "All life is sacred. The life of the unborn is sacred." OK, so what about the life of the woman who carries the baby? And what if, if all life is sacred, and the woman chooses to complete the pregnancy, she gives the baby up? Are you standing there waiting for it? Are you applying to be a foster parent or an adoptive parent? Or are you just concerned with the fetus, and after that, it's another one of those persons who don't count in your calculations? And if all life is sacred, what about the woman who goes to Planned Parenthood because she hasn't got insurance, hasn't seen a doctor, and has a medical problem? Is your concern for life only if it's a fetus? What about that woman? Who may have children at home who depend on her, and she's found a lump. She has no other recourse but to go to Planned Parenthood because maybe she's unemployed or under-employed, with no insurance, no doctor who gives her an annual physical.
Isn't her life worth something? It's life. It should be, under your argument, sacred. As sacred as any theoretical fetus.
You're willing to go out on that limb and deny basic health care to a large number of women. And do what? Throw them under the proverbial bus to complete your religious agenda? The religious right is driving this bus, and nobody's calling them on it.
Religion and politics are TWO SEPARATE things. Our Constitution states that there will be no "official" religion in this country. But more and more, it seems as if the loud and illogical conservative right seems to think that we are a Christian nation.
Here's a bombshell, folks: "The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion."
Want to guess who said that? George Washington; Commander-in-Chief of the colonial armies in the American Revolution and subsequently the FIRST United States President (1789-97).
George Washington. One of the Founding Fathers, who are often quoted by the Right when it's convenient for them to do so.
Medicaid covered abortion services until 1977, when the Hyde amendment went into effect. This amendment restricts federal funding for abortion. See the following link for more information.
http://womensissues.about.com/od/reproductiverights/f/HydeAmendment.htm
As always, it's important to do your research. Think. Connect with your local legislative people...you know, the people YOU voted into office. Let them hear from you, but do yourself a favor: educate yourself on the issues using unbiased sources. Think.
If you're a woman, this is important to you. If you're someone who loves a woman, this is important to you.
When called on his lie, Kyl said, "Oh, I was just making a point." Well, how about making a point with facts and not lies?
Under Federal law, NO PROVIDER can use Federal funds for abortions. Not Planned Parenthood, not your local county health department, no hospital in the United States. This is all political hysteria.
It has to do with giving women affordable health care. One in 5 women comes to Planned Parenthood for healthcare in their lifetime. The organization helps women prevent pregnancies, and also provides basic screenings: mammograms, screenings for cervical cancer, etc. Services that many of us who have insurance take for granted.
Services that will cost a woman's life if she doesn't have access to them.
Do you really want to be on the side of preventing women from getting basic health care? There are about 3 million women who go to Planned Parenthood clinics. The clinics are often in rural areas or medically under-served areas. The organization is more about preventing unwanted pregnancies, rather than terminating them.
Only 3% of Planned Parenthood services center around abortions. THREE percent. That's not a majority in anyone's math; unless you're a conservative who "wants to make a point."
Why are we going to ration care? Why are the Republicans so eager to decry the Affordable Care Act, claiming "death panels" and "rationing care" and all that garbage...when they're doing that for about 50% of the population: women.
Ohhhhhhhhhh. It's because it's women. Usually poor women. Apparently, poor women are disposable. They don't count. They're not the constituents who really matter to conservatives. And the whole "Christian" thing? Sorry, I'm not buying it.
The argument is this: "All life is sacred. The life of the unborn is sacred." OK, so what about the life of the woman who carries the baby? And what if, if all life is sacred, and the woman chooses to complete the pregnancy, she gives the baby up? Are you standing there waiting for it? Are you applying to be a foster parent or an adoptive parent? Or are you just concerned with the fetus, and after that, it's another one of those persons who don't count in your calculations? And if all life is sacred, what about the woman who goes to Planned Parenthood because she hasn't got insurance, hasn't seen a doctor, and has a medical problem? Is your concern for life only if it's a fetus? What about that woman? Who may have children at home who depend on her, and she's found a lump. She has no other recourse but to go to Planned Parenthood because maybe she's unemployed or under-employed, with no insurance, no doctor who gives her an annual physical.
Isn't her life worth something? It's life. It should be, under your argument, sacred. As sacred as any theoretical fetus.
You're willing to go out on that limb and deny basic health care to a large number of women. And do what? Throw them under the proverbial bus to complete your religious agenda? The religious right is driving this bus, and nobody's calling them on it.
Religion and politics are TWO SEPARATE things. Our Constitution states that there will be no "official" religion in this country. But more and more, it seems as if the loud and illogical conservative right seems to think that we are a Christian nation.
Here's a bombshell, folks: "The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion."
Want to guess who said that? George Washington; Commander-in-Chief of the colonial armies in the American Revolution and subsequently the FIRST United States President (1789-97).
George Washington. One of the Founding Fathers, who are often quoted by the Right when it's convenient for them to do so.
Medicaid covered abortion services until 1977, when the Hyde amendment went into effect. This amendment restricts federal funding for abortion. See the following link for more information.
http://womensissues.about.com/od/reproductiverights/f/HydeAmendment.htm
As always, it's important to do your research. Think. Connect with your local legislative people...you know, the people YOU voted into office. Let them hear from you, but do yourself a favor: educate yourself on the issues using unbiased sources. Think.
If you're a woman, this is important to you. If you're someone who loves a woman, this is important to you.
Saturday, April 09, 2011
Just 32 Words...
A friend of mine sent me the copy of her pastor's recent sermon. She goes to a Universalist Unitarian Church, and this was the talk the pastor gave.
Much food for thought. I have edited it for some grammatical "oops" that happened. And made the poetry into that format. Any colors, bold or italics in the text are there to point out things I consider significant. Otherwise, this is what she sent me. Think about this. And ask yourself: Where am I when it comes to the 32 words?
It makes me want to try harder.
White Bear Unitarian Universalist Church Sunday 3 April 2011 Larger Love Transcending The Reverend Victoria Safford
vsafford@whitebearunitarian.org
Larger Love Transcending
“I am a conservative Republican and an evangelical Christian.” So writes Mark DeMoss, founder of the Civility Project, which he started in 2008, together with his friend Lanny Davis, who is a liberal Democrat and a Jew. They could not be further apart politically or theologically, but their shared hope, on the eve of President Obama’s election, was to change the tone of political discourse, wherever it happens – in statehouses and Senate chambers, in the press, or in the street – and to encourage “graciousness, kindness, common decency and respect toward all people, and particularly those with whom we may disagree.” Last May, the Civility Project sent a letter to every member of Congress and every sitting governor - 585 letters - inviting them to sign the “Civility Pledge.” “The bar couldn’t have been lower,” says DeMoss. The pledge is very simple, just 32 words:
I will be civil in my public discourse and behavior. I will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them. I will stand against incivility when I see it.
Eight months later, they had received just three pledges from three members of Congress, and from other people, tons of hate mail, laced with obscenities. DeMoss says they were not looking to dismantle partisanship or to limit free speech, nor to encourage unity of opinion, but they concluded, sadly, “Too many people in public life equate civility with unilateral disarmament.” Or with weakness, or with a naïve, nostalgic, impossible ideal. In January they closed the project down, although the tragedy in Tucson, and the hate-filled speech that came before and after it, almost made them reconsider. In a letter of thanks to the three co-signers of the pledge, DeMoss wrote, “I have been encouraged by the words and disposition of our president – a man I did not vote for and disagree with on almost every policy issue. Still, I would defend him as a man who loves his family and his country and wakes up each morning desiring to do what is best or both… If you don’t like Obama’s words,” he says, “try these, taken from…the Bible: But with humility of mind let each of you regard one another as more important than himself. That verse alone, if taken to heart, would make America unrecognizable – and beautiful.”
Politics has always been a blood sport - and religion, too; I don’t think these guys would try to change that. But somewhere in the last - what? Five years? Ten? – we crossed some kind of line as a society, a culture, a mass of mixed cultures, on the radio, TV, the internet, and the result is very dangerous, not only to little girls and elected representatives and others in parking lots in Tucson, but to our character as a people, and our spirits, one by one, our souls.
That pledge they wrote is very basic –
I will be civil in my public discourse and behavior. I will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them. I will stand against incivility when I see it.
- And yet I wonder if I myself could sign it in good faith. I think I’d be okay in terms of public or professional behavior, but what if it included private discourse also, casual conversation, the things I say in jest, or not in jest, about politicians whose opinions I dislike? What about religions we don’t like, or relatives who disagree with us on issues that we care about, or co- workers, or anyone, those others, about whom we may sometimes speak scornfully, derisively, if not on the radio or on a blog blasted out to millions of blood-thirsty readers, then just among ourselves? Within ourselves? Am I respectful of others whether or not I agree with them? The pledge sets a high bar after all. In some liberal communions, “sin” is defined, gently, as “missing the mark.” This might be where it lies for us; this question of respect may be where we sometimes miss the mark. I think of the little parable in Jean Olson’s poem:
I tried so hard to bring him to my level. ... he struggled but could not rise.
I pulled with one hand, and then two... I finally sat down next to him
And he gave me some cool water to drink.
Suddenly we were both there.
In the matter of humility, we may sometimes miss the mark.
Not long ago I was at a gathering of local ministers, a friendly and informal lunch. It’s “interfaith,” but only when I go; otherwise it’s Protestant and Catholic. I find a most warm welcome there. We were talking about Japan, the devastation of the earthquake and the growing nuclear disaster. This was common ground, the shared landscape of grief. Then one colleague said that for him the crisis proves what he’s been saying all along, that the only solution for American energy is to drill for oil, wherever we can, as much as we can, as soon as we can. He didn’t say this with arrogance; in fact he said, “I know some of you will disagree with me,” but right away I felt a veil descend between us, an iron curtain of my own design. I tagged him then (this was all subconscious, involuntary, but still real) as someone I’m just not even going to try talk to (even though I barely know him) - he’s too conservative, politically, religiously, environmentally; he won’t understand me; his mind is made up; I’ll never “bring him to my level;” he’s dangerous, he’s stupid, he’s wrong. I could feel the tectonic plates of my heart shifting and locking into place. I dismissed him easily, though I’m sure I was smiling and superficially polite. And I’ve been thinking on it since, wondering how that happens, why I do that, why I choose shutdown or retreat instead of engagement, which is always difficult, but which I know is the holy work of human beings. This is where justice begins, and peace, everything I say I care about, the worth and dignity of every person, including him, including me. Why, instead of deeply knowing someone, understanding him, hearing where he’s coming from, where he’s truly coming from, and seeing him as worthy, would I write him off? I was not uncivil there, I wasn’t ranting (at least outwardly), but nor was I practicing my faith, my beautiful, open-minded, open-hearted, radically hospitable and brave Universalist Unitarian religion. I was “missing the mark,” even though no one else could see it, and missing most of all the opportunity to grow my own spirit. It’s been said by many linguists and philosophers that we cannot describe the world we see - we can only see the world that our limited language allows us to describe. I think it’s also true that we cannot see or hear or hope to know or love the person whom we label; we just label what and whom we won’t take time to understand, the one whom we’re afraid to understand, or too proud to try to understand.
Yehudi Amichai, poet of Israel, has a poem called “The Place Where We Are Right:”
From the place where we are right
Flowers will never grow
In the spring.
The place where we are right
Is hard and trampled
Like a yard.
But doubts and loves
Dig up the world
Like a mole, a plow.
And a whisper will be heard in the place
Where the ruined
House once stood.
That whisper, made of doubts and love, and risk and courage, is the sound that at our best we strive to hear. That’s the song we’re trying to sing, as Unitarian Universalists, as good people, and it is an old, Universalist hymn tune. Its harmonies are hard, demanding, and it takes a lifetime to learn it. It is the sound of radical inclusion, this love of self and other that insists all are saved; none are lost or worthless; all are worthy. Not all ideas, not all opinions, not all policies and principles, but every single person. “Lower the bridge,” says Mario Benedetti, who wrote from the other side of the world, in Uruguay, “Lower the bridge and keep it down:”
I can stay here in my bulwark in this or that solitude ... enjoying my last clusters of silence...
but I’m aware, I know, I never forget that my fertile voluntary destiny is to become the eyes the mouth and hands for other hands and mouths and eyes
lower the bridge and keep it down
let love and hate and voice and shouting in let sadness in with its arms open wide and hope with its new shoes... let rage and its dark gestures in let in good and evil and that which mediates between them which is to say the truth, this pendulum. let fire in with or without rain . . .
let in the one who knows what we don’t know...
in short to avoid confusion let in my fellow, the insufferable, so strong and fragile one, the necessary one the one with doubts, face, blood and a life that ends the welcome one
lower the bridge and keep it down.
It is the hardest thing. How can you hold to what you hold most dearly, the truths that guide your life, the work that gives it form, everything you love and fight for, and still engage the person whose other truth, whose own truth, threatens to destroy what you most cherish? How can you engage at all, let alone civilly, when everything’s at stake, endangered, vulnerable, quite literally melting down? Think of any issue that you care about - civil liberties, gun violence, immigration reform, women’s rights, workers’ rights, gay rights, human rights, racism, poverty, justice, peace, the fragile, sacred web of life on our endangered planet - how can you engage at all, and why would you engage at all, with someone “on the other side” whose mind and heart you cannot change, why take the time, why take the risk?
I think that we can only do it if we do our first work first, meaning, if we take care to sink deep roots, binding our various ideas, our arguments, our opinions and our thinking about things to what we feel most deeply, to what we know within, to what each of us calls sacred. I know that I don’t know all I need to know about nuclear power, say, or about drilling for oil, but I know that I am guided by a sense of reverence for the earth and all that lives upon it, and I am guided by an intuition of old virtues like prudence and restraint and conservation, living lightly, proportion, moderation, deep respect. There’s a difference between what you believe, which may be any number of things, they change and shift as you learn and grow- there’s a difference between what you believe, and what you believe in, what you know by heart. When we engage from that deep place, it seems to me we’re less likely to be shaken, to be caught off guard, to be defensive or dismissive. If you care, say, about workers in Wisconsin, care passionately, it’s good sometimes to unpack that passion, to get down to what in that issue is so deep for you as to be an ethical principle, not just an opinion but a spiritual touchstone, part of your religion even. “I believe,” you might say, “in the inherent worth and dignity of human beings. That’s the very heart of it. That’s why I care so much.” And on that sacred ground, from which, like a tree that’s standing by the water you will not be moved, a human conversation can begin.
Jane Bacon is a member here who has thought about these things more deeply and courageously than anyone I know. (She commissioned today’s topic at the service auction here in 2009.) In one of our discussions she reminded me that though the issues here are huge and over-arching, overwhelming, they play out day-to-day on the very small, human-scale stages of our ordinary lives. “I don’t have to try to understand Glenn Beck,” she said, “or be his friend, or give him any thought at all or even care about him. What I care about are the people I know and the people I meet who care about him - and they are many. What do they really want? What do they fear? What longing is in them? What do they hope for? What emptiness in them wants to be filled by the things that he says? Is it related at all to the emptiness and fear that I feel every day? They sound desperate to me; is their desperation connected to mine? Shouldn’t I care about that? Shouldn’t we, as religious people, care about that?” Jane shared an article from the UU World where someone wrote:
At one time I worked for an ecumenical church council that discussed the problem of “Christian triumphalism,” the belief that Christianity is the best religion and will in the end win over the others. I think there is also a problem of “UU triumphalism,” the belief that our religion is the best and that collectively we ourselves are the best human beings, the most rational, open- minded, and devoted to the pursuit of objective truth. [It may be] so. But we are desperately needy for deep contact with people whose hearts have learned humility and equality. This is where I personally feel too much alone. I yearn for others who openly acknowledge their deep life experiences of failure, shame, and even “sinfulness.” Such feelings are central to our humanity. Sharing them is essential to community.
I’m thinking way back, through years and years, to a definition of nonviolence given to me by an old, old friend. Wally Nelson was already old when I first met him years ago. He first joined the civil rights movement in the 1940’s. Together with other African American activists and together with Black and white clergy, he was developing this method, this habit of being, this way of engaging political work and the work of being a person; this difficult, beautiful spiritual discipline that in time would compel thousands of people in their work for social justice. Some of that work took Wally and others into segregated restaurants long before the famous Greensboro sit-ins. People spat in their faces, spat in their food, poured ketchup on their heads, dropped burning cigarettes down their shirt collars, and beat them and jailed them. When I met Wally, decades later, and asked him how he could withstand it, how he could talk about loving his enemy and truly mean it, how he could talk about the necessary transformation not of someone else’s twisted heart, but of one’s own, he gave this definition: Nonviolence is the constant awareness of the dignity and humanity of oneself and others; it seeks truth and justice; it renounces violence both in method and attitude; it is a courageous acceptance of active goodwill as the instrument with which to overcome evil and transform both oneself and others. It is the willingness to undergo suffering rather than inflict it. It excludes retaliation and flight. It was from him that I first heard the age-old line, “There is no way to peace; peace is the way” - which is a hard and hopeful teaching.
In our tradition, it shows up as Universalism - the larger love, transcending understanding, in which we are all held, from which we all come, to which we all return, and through which we are called to see, to seek, to honor, to recognize, to bless the worth and dignity of everyone - not the policies and politics, not the principles, opinions and ideas, but the common, living, dying, laughing, weeping humanity of everyone.
lower the bridge and keep it down
let love and hate and voice and shouting in let sadness in with its arms open wide and hope with its new shoes...
let in the one who knows what we don’t know...
in short to avoid confusion let in my fellow, the insufferable, so strong and fragile one, the necessary one the one with doubts, face, blood and a life that ends the welcome one
lower the bridge and keep it down.
MEDITATION
Think of someone with whom it’s hard for you to speak, someone about whom it’s hard for you to speak, someone you can barely talk to, whether you’ve tried to or not.
Maybe it’s a famous person, whom you perceive to hold power, dangerous sway over events and policies and people; maybe it’s not a famous person at all, but someone in your life who clearly holds power over you.
Imagine a conversation between you, how it would go if your intention were not to win, to triumph, but only to be heard, truly heard, deeply seen and finally understood. Imagine if your intention were to see and hear and understand in return.
From John O’Donahue, a Catholic, come these words:
Now that you have entered with an open heart
Into a complex and fragile situation,
Hoping with patience and respect To tread softly over sore ground in order
That somewhere beneath the raw estrangement
Some fresh spring of healing might be coaxed
To release the grace for a new journey
Beyond repetition and judgment,
And have achieved nothing of that,
But emerged helpless, and with added hurt…
Withdraw for a while into your own tranquility, Loosen from your heart the new fester.
Free yourself of the wounded gaze
That is not yet able to see you.
Don’t allow your sense of yourself to wilt.
Draw deep from your own dignity.
Temper your expectation ...
And take your time carefully,
Learning that there is a time for everything
And for healing too...
Draw deep from your own dignity. ________________________________________ FIRST READING
from Jean Olson, Unitarian Universalist
I tried so hard to bring him to my level. I spoke eloquent words of encouragement and he struggled but could not rise. I pulled with one hand, and then two. I tried to lift him, to pick him up and carry him. All to no avail. Hot and exhausted, I finally sat down next to him and he gave me some cool water to drink.
Suddenly we were both there.
SECOND READING Mario Benedetti, poet of Uruguay, from his poem “Against Drawbridges”
I can stay here in my bulwark in this or that solitude without any right enjoying my last clusters of silence – I can look out look on time on the clouds, the river vanish in the far foliage
but I’m aware, I know, I never forget that my fertile voluntary destiny is to become the eyes the mouth and hands for other hands and mouths and eyes
lower the bridge and keep it down
let love and hate and voice and shouting in let sadness in with its arms open wide and hope with its new shoes let in the germinal and honest cold and the summer with its scorched sufferings let resentments with their mists come in and farewells with their bread of tears let the dead come and above all the living and the old smell of melancholy
lower the bridge and keep it down
let rage and its dark gestures in let in good and evil and that which mediates between them which is to say the truth, this pendulum. let fire in with or without rain . . . let work in and above all leisure that right to dream, that rainbow
lower the bridge and keep it down
let in the dogs . . . the midwives and gravediggers the angels if they exist and if not let in the moon
lower the bridge and keep it down
let in the one who knows what we don’t know who kneads the bread or who makes revolutions and the one who can’t make them and the one who shuts his eyes
in short to avoid confusion let in my fellow, the insufferable, so strong and fragile one, the necessary one the one with doubts, a shadow, face, blood and a life that ends the welcome one
keep out no one but the man in charge of raising the bridge
at this point it should be no secret to anyone
I’m against drawbridges.
[Translated by Robert Marquez and Elinor Randall]
Much food for thought. I have edited it for some grammatical "oops" that happened. And made the poetry into that format. Any colors, bold or italics in the text are there to point out things I consider significant. Otherwise, this is what she sent me. Think about this. And ask yourself: Where am I when it comes to the 32 words?
It makes me want to try harder.
White Bear Unitarian Universalist Church Sunday 3 April 2011 Larger Love Transcending The Reverend Victoria Safford
vsafford@whitebearunitarian.org
Larger Love Transcending
“I am a conservative Republican and an evangelical Christian.” So writes Mark DeMoss, founder of the Civility Project, which he started in 2008, together with his friend Lanny Davis, who is a liberal Democrat and a Jew. They could not be further apart politically or theologically, but their shared hope, on the eve of President Obama’s election, was to change the tone of political discourse, wherever it happens – in statehouses and Senate chambers, in the press, or in the street – and to encourage “graciousness, kindness, common decency and respect toward all people, and particularly those with whom we may disagree.” Last May, the Civility Project sent a letter to every member of Congress and every sitting governor - 585 letters - inviting them to sign the “Civility Pledge.” “The bar couldn’t have been lower,” says DeMoss. The pledge is very simple, just 32 words:
I will be civil in my public discourse and behavior. I will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them. I will stand against incivility when I see it.
Eight months later, they had received just three pledges from three members of Congress, and from other people, tons of hate mail, laced with obscenities. DeMoss says they were not looking to dismantle partisanship or to limit free speech, nor to encourage unity of opinion, but they concluded, sadly, “Too many people in public life equate civility with unilateral disarmament.” Or with weakness, or with a naïve, nostalgic, impossible ideal. In January they closed the project down, although the tragedy in Tucson, and the hate-filled speech that came before and after it, almost made them reconsider. In a letter of thanks to the three co-signers of the pledge, DeMoss wrote, “I have been encouraged by the words and disposition of our president – a man I did not vote for and disagree with on almost every policy issue. Still, I would defend him as a man who loves his family and his country and wakes up each morning desiring to do what is best or both… If you don’t like Obama’s words,” he says, “try these, taken from…the Bible: But with humility of mind let each of you regard one another as more important than himself. That verse alone, if taken to heart, would make America unrecognizable – and beautiful.”
Politics has always been a blood sport - and religion, too; I don’t think these guys would try to change that. But somewhere in the last - what? Five years? Ten? – we crossed some kind of line as a society, a culture, a mass of mixed cultures, on the radio, TV, the internet, and the result is very dangerous, not only to little girls and elected representatives and others in parking lots in Tucson, but to our character as a people, and our spirits, one by one, our souls.
That pledge they wrote is very basic –
I will be civil in my public discourse and behavior. I will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them. I will stand against incivility when I see it.
- And yet I wonder if I myself could sign it in good faith. I think I’d be okay in terms of public or professional behavior, but what if it included private discourse also, casual conversation, the things I say in jest, or not in jest, about politicians whose opinions I dislike? What about religions we don’t like, or relatives who disagree with us on issues that we care about, or co- workers, or anyone, those others, about whom we may sometimes speak scornfully, derisively, if not on the radio or on a blog blasted out to millions of blood-thirsty readers, then just among ourselves? Within ourselves? Am I respectful of others whether or not I agree with them? The pledge sets a high bar after all. In some liberal communions, “sin” is defined, gently, as “missing the mark.” This might be where it lies for us; this question of respect may be where we sometimes miss the mark. I think of the little parable in Jean Olson’s poem:
I tried so hard to bring him to my level. ... he struggled but could not rise.
I pulled with one hand, and then two... I finally sat down next to him
And he gave me some cool water to drink.
Suddenly we were both there.
In the matter of humility, we may sometimes miss the mark.
Not long ago I was at a gathering of local ministers, a friendly and informal lunch. It’s “interfaith,” but only when I go; otherwise it’s Protestant and Catholic. I find a most warm welcome there. We were talking about Japan, the devastation of the earthquake and the growing nuclear disaster. This was common ground, the shared landscape of grief. Then one colleague said that for him the crisis proves what he’s been saying all along, that the only solution for American energy is to drill for oil, wherever we can, as much as we can, as soon as we can. He didn’t say this with arrogance; in fact he said, “I know some of you will disagree with me,” but right away I felt a veil descend between us, an iron curtain of my own design. I tagged him then (this was all subconscious, involuntary, but still real) as someone I’m just not even going to try talk to (even though I barely know him) - he’s too conservative, politically, religiously, environmentally; he won’t understand me; his mind is made up; I’ll never “bring him to my level;” he’s dangerous, he’s stupid, he’s wrong. I could feel the tectonic plates of my heart shifting and locking into place. I dismissed him easily, though I’m sure I was smiling and superficially polite. And I’ve been thinking on it since, wondering how that happens, why I do that, why I choose shutdown or retreat instead of engagement, which is always difficult, but which I know is the holy work of human beings. This is where justice begins, and peace, everything I say I care about, the worth and dignity of every person, including him, including me. Why, instead of deeply knowing someone, understanding him, hearing where he’s coming from, where he’s truly coming from, and seeing him as worthy, would I write him off? I was not uncivil there, I wasn’t ranting (at least outwardly), but nor was I practicing my faith, my beautiful, open-minded, open-hearted, radically hospitable and brave Universalist Unitarian religion. I was “missing the mark,” even though no one else could see it, and missing most of all the opportunity to grow my own spirit. It’s been said by many linguists and philosophers that we cannot describe the world we see - we can only see the world that our limited language allows us to describe. I think it’s also true that we cannot see or hear or hope to know or love the person whom we label; we just label what and whom we won’t take time to understand, the one whom we’re afraid to understand, or too proud to try to understand.
Yehudi Amichai, poet of Israel, has a poem called “The Place Where We Are Right:”
From the place where we are right
Flowers will never grow
In the spring.
The place where we are right
Is hard and trampled
Like a yard.
But doubts and loves
Dig up the world
Like a mole, a plow.
And a whisper will be heard in the place
Where the ruined
House once stood.
That whisper, made of doubts and love, and risk and courage, is the sound that at our best we strive to hear. That’s the song we’re trying to sing, as Unitarian Universalists, as good people, and it is an old, Universalist hymn tune. Its harmonies are hard, demanding, and it takes a lifetime to learn it. It is the sound of radical inclusion, this love of self and other that insists all are saved; none are lost or worthless; all are worthy. Not all ideas, not all opinions, not all policies and principles, but every single person. “Lower the bridge,” says Mario Benedetti, who wrote from the other side of the world, in Uruguay, “Lower the bridge and keep it down:”
I can stay here in my bulwark in this or that solitude ... enjoying my last clusters of silence...
but I’m aware, I know, I never forget that my fertile voluntary destiny is to become the eyes the mouth and hands for other hands and mouths and eyes
lower the bridge and keep it down
let love and hate and voice and shouting in let sadness in with its arms open wide and hope with its new shoes... let rage and its dark gestures in let in good and evil and that which mediates between them which is to say the truth, this pendulum. let fire in with or without rain . . .
let in the one who knows what we don’t know...
in short to avoid confusion let in my fellow, the insufferable, so strong and fragile one, the necessary one the one with doubts, face, blood and a life that ends the welcome one
lower the bridge and keep it down.
I think that we can only do it if we do our first work first, meaning, if we take care to sink deep roots, binding our various ideas, our arguments, our opinions and our thinking about things to what we feel most deeply, to what we know within, to what each of us calls sacred. I know that I don’t know all I need to know about nuclear power, say, or about drilling for oil, but I know that I am guided by a sense of reverence for the earth and all that lives upon it, and I am guided by an intuition of old virtues like prudence and restraint and conservation, living lightly, proportion, moderation, deep respect. There’s a difference between what you believe, which may be any number of things, they change and shift as you learn and grow- there’s a difference between what you believe, and what you believe in, what you know by heart. When we engage from that deep place, it seems to me we’re less likely to be shaken, to be caught off guard, to be defensive or dismissive. If you care, say, about workers in Wisconsin, care passionately, it’s good sometimes to unpack that passion, to get down to what in that issue is so deep for you as to be an ethical principle, not just an opinion but a spiritual touchstone, part of your religion even. “I believe,” you might say, “in the inherent worth and dignity of human beings. That’s the very heart of it. That’s why I care so much.” And on that sacred ground, from which, like a tree that’s standing by the water you will not be moved, a human conversation can begin.
Jane Bacon is a member here who has thought about these things more deeply and courageously than anyone I know. (She commissioned today’s topic at the service auction here in 2009.) In one of our discussions she reminded me that though the issues here are huge and over-arching, overwhelming, they play out day-to-day on the very small, human-scale stages of our ordinary lives. “I don’t have to try to understand Glenn Beck,” she said, “or be his friend, or give him any thought at all or even care about him. What I care about are the people I know and the people I meet who care about him - and they are many. What do they really want? What do they fear? What longing is in them? What do they hope for? What emptiness in them wants to be filled by the things that he says? Is it related at all to the emptiness and fear that I feel every day? They sound desperate to me; is their desperation connected to mine? Shouldn’t I care about that? Shouldn’t we, as religious people, care about that?” Jane shared an article from the UU World where someone wrote:
At one time I worked for an ecumenical church council that discussed the problem of “Christian triumphalism,” the belief that Christianity is the best religion and will in the end win over the others. I think there is also a problem of “UU triumphalism,” the belief that our religion is the best and that collectively we ourselves are the best human beings, the most rational, open- minded, and devoted to the pursuit of objective truth. [It may be] so. But we are desperately needy for deep contact with people whose hearts have learned humility and equality. This is where I personally feel too much alone. I yearn for others who openly acknowledge their deep life experiences of failure, shame, and even “sinfulness.” Such feelings are central to our humanity. Sharing them is essential to community.
I’m thinking way back, through years and years, to a definition of nonviolence given to me by an old, old friend. Wally Nelson was already old when I first met him years ago. He first joined the civil rights movement in the 1940’s. Together with other African American activists and together with Black and white clergy, he was developing this method, this habit of being, this way of engaging political work and the work of being a person; this difficult, beautiful spiritual discipline that in time would compel thousands of people in their work for social justice. Some of that work took Wally and others into segregated restaurants long before the famous Greensboro sit-ins. People spat in their faces, spat in their food, poured ketchup on their heads, dropped burning cigarettes down their shirt collars, and beat them and jailed them. When I met Wally, decades later, and asked him how he could withstand it, how he could talk about loving his enemy and truly mean it, how he could talk about the necessary transformation not of someone else’s twisted heart, but of one’s own, he gave this definition: Nonviolence is the constant awareness of the dignity and humanity of oneself and others; it seeks truth and justice; it renounces violence both in method and attitude; it is a courageous acceptance of active goodwill as the instrument with which to overcome evil and transform both oneself and others. It is the willingness to undergo suffering rather than inflict it. It excludes retaliation and flight. It was from him that I first heard the age-old line, “There is no way to peace; peace is the way” - which is a hard and hopeful teaching.
In our tradition, it shows up as Universalism - the larger love, transcending understanding, in which we are all held, from which we all come, to which we all return, and through which we are called to see, to seek, to honor, to recognize, to bless the worth and dignity of everyone - not the policies and politics, not the principles, opinions and ideas, but the common, living, dying, laughing, weeping humanity of everyone.
lower the bridge and keep it down
let love and hate and voice and shouting in let sadness in with its arms open wide and hope with its new shoes...
let in the one who knows what we don’t know...
in short to avoid confusion let in my fellow, the insufferable, so strong and fragile one, the necessary one the one with doubts, face, blood and a life that ends the welcome one
lower the bridge and keep it down.
MEDITATION
Think of someone with whom it’s hard for you to speak, someone about whom it’s hard for you to speak, someone you can barely talk to, whether you’ve tried to or not.
Maybe it’s a famous person, whom you perceive to hold power, dangerous sway over events and policies and people; maybe it’s not a famous person at all, but someone in your life who clearly holds power over you.
Imagine a conversation between you, how it would go if your intention were not to win, to triumph, but only to be heard, truly heard, deeply seen and finally understood. Imagine if your intention were to see and hear and understand in return.
From John O’Donahue, a Catholic, come these words:
Now that you have entered with an open heart
Into a complex and fragile situation,
Hoping with patience and respect To tread softly over sore ground in order
That somewhere beneath the raw estrangement
Some fresh spring of healing might be coaxed
To release the grace for a new journey
Beyond repetition and judgment,
And have achieved nothing of that,
But emerged helpless, and with added hurt…
Withdraw for a while into your own tranquility, Loosen from your heart the new fester.
Free yourself of the wounded gaze
That is not yet able to see you.
Don’t allow your sense of yourself to wilt.
Draw deep from your own dignity.
Temper your expectation ...
And take your time carefully,
Learning that there is a time for everything
And for healing too...
Draw deep from your own dignity. ________________________________________ FIRST READING
from Jean Olson, Unitarian Universalist
I tried so hard to bring him to my level. I spoke eloquent words of encouragement and he struggled but could not rise. I pulled with one hand, and then two. I tried to lift him, to pick him up and carry him. All to no avail. Hot and exhausted, I finally sat down next to him and he gave me some cool water to drink.
Suddenly we were both there.
SECOND READING Mario Benedetti, poet of Uruguay, from his poem “Against Drawbridges”
I can stay here in my bulwark in this or that solitude without any right enjoying my last clusters of silence – I can look out look on time on the clouds, the river vanish in the far foliage
but I’m aware, I know, I never forget that my fertile voluntary destiny is to become the eyes the mouth and hands for other hands and mouths and eyes
lower the bridge and keep it down
let love and hate and voice and shouting in let sadness in with its arms open wide and hope with its new shoes let in the germinal and honest cold and the summer with its scorched sufferings let resentments with their mists come in and farewells with their bread of tears let the dead come and above all the living and the old smell of melancholy
lower the bridge and keep it down
let rage and its dark gestures in let in good and evil and that which mediates between them which is to say the truth, this pendulum. let fire in with or without rain . . . let work in and above all leisure that right to dream, that rainbow
lower the bridge and keep it down
let in the dogs . . . the midwives and gravediggers the angels if they exist and if not let in the moon
lower the bridge and keep it down
let in the one who knows what we don’t know who kneads the bread or who makes revolutions and the one who can’t make them and the one who shuts his eyes
in short to avoid confusion let in my fellow, the insufferable, so strong and fragile one, the necessary one the one with doubts, a shadow, face, blood and a life that ends the welcome one
keep out no one but the man in charge of raising the bridge
at this point it should be no secret to anyone
I’m against drawbridges.
[Translated by Robert Marquez and Elinor Randall]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)