BUCKNACKT'S SORDID TAWDRY BLOG
We should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive & well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chocolate, bier or wein in hand, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming "WHOO-HOO, WHAT A RIDE!!!!!!"
Я виделодин ответ, который спрашивал,"Будут ли онименьше питьза Путина?" ЧерезAssociated Press:
Заместитель премьер-министраРоссииИгорьШувалов, выступая на Всемирном экономическомфоруме вДавосе, в пятницу предостерег Западот попытоксвергнуть президентаВладимира Путинаи заявил, чтороссияне готовыпожертвоватьсвоим богатствомв поддержку Путина. РоссияимеетдляПрошедший годбылсползания врецессиюна фонеспада вэкспортныхцен на энергоносители, а такжезападных санкцийпротивроли Москвыв конфликтев Украине, которая унесла более5000жизней.Были подняты вопросыв Россиии за рубежомлицена, которуюпростые россияневынуждены платитьза присоединениеКрымаявляется слишком высокой.
Шувалов, который, как полагают, является одним из самых богатых людейв правительстве, заявил, что он считаетпопыткиЗападасвергнутьПутинабудеттолькосплотить нациюдальше."Когдарусскийчувствует себялюбую иностраннуюдавление, он никогда не будетотказаться от своеголидера," сказалШувалов. ."Никогдамыневыживемлюбые трудностив стране-есть меньше пищи, потребляют меньше электроэнергиикомментарииШуваловавызвалисодержательныезамечания поРоссиисоциальных медиав том числеактивист оппозиции, который разместилфотографииШуваловаМоскве, Лондоне иАвстриидомов, чтобы проиллюстрировать, где вице-премьер. министрбудет испытыватьтрудностион описал.
Изображение вышеприходитчерезCopyranter, который отмечает, чтошрифтназывается "Голодные игры". Хитего связьв течение еще двухпредложенныхрекламных щитов.
Russian Deputy Prime Minister Igor
Shuvalov, speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, on Friday
warned the West against trying to topple President Vladimir Putin and
said that Russians are ready to sacrifice their wealth in Putin's
support. Russia has for the past year been sliding into recession amid a
slump in its energy export prices as well as Western sanctions against
Moscow's role in the conflict in Ukraine that has claimed more than
5,000 lives. Questions have been raised in Russia and abroad whether the
price that ordinary Russians are having to pay for the annexation of
Crimea is too high. Shuvalov, who is believed to
be one of the richest men in the government, said that what he considers
the West's attempts to oust Putin will only unite the nation further.
"When a Russian feels any foreign pressure, he will never give up his
leader," Shuvalov said. "Never. We will survive any hardship in the
country — eat less food, use less electricity. Shuvalov's comments
triggered pithy remarks on Russia social media including an opposition
activist who posted photos of Shuvalov's Moscow, London and Austria
homes to illustrate where the deputy prime minister would experience the
hardships he described.
The image above comes via Copyranter, who notes that the font is called "Hunger Games."Hit his link for two more suggested billboards.
isis has been murdering members of the opposition and those who refuse to convert to their perversion of Islam for months. Children, women, men, the elderly, Christians, all religious leaders ethnic minorities, other Muslims who actually follow the teaching of their faith, Kurds, academics, politicians, foriegn reporters and aid workers, anyone who is not an apostate, anyone who is not a follower of the corrupted, bastardized form of Islam they have created is subject to death at their hands. People do have to remember, isis is a product of the saudi arabian government concrolled religious institutions and the American and Western governments tolerance of and support and defense of saudi state sponsored religious intolerance and terrorism, all for oil. Western Europe, recently Canada, France and Belgium, have suffered the results of their governments policies. When will it come to the U.S.?
Pictures
emerge of ISIL (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) fighters
apparently throwing a man from a building because he was gay
Photographs
have emerged that appear to show members of the Islamic State group in
Iraq throwing a man from a building in punishment for being gay.
The
graphic images, seemingly taken in the northern Isil controlled city of
Mosul, show a man being pushed to his death before a large crowd that
had gathered in the main square below.
One photograph, taken from
the top of the building, shows the man from behind, blindfolded and
with his hands tied across his back, being pushed to the ledge by his
executioner.
In another photo, a jihadist, his face covered with a
balaclava, is shown reading out the apparent sentence that was ruled in
the extremists' "Sharia court".
A caption for another photo says the man had been convicted of the practices of the "people of Lot", a euphemism for sodomy.
In punishment, the caption says, he must be "thrown from a high place".
The date of the execution is not clear. Photographs of a man being
thrown from a roof by Isil members, apparently in the same place first
emerged in December.
As the jihadists consolidate their control of parts of Iraq and
Syria they have implemented increasingly strict, medieval forms of law.
rep joe barton r tb TX is an idiot, but it not right for his opponents to spread falsehoods about him in an attempt to gain support for their position, in this case wind energy and addressing climate change. There is no need to make things up to prove how ignorant rep barton is, he does that well enough on his own. From +PolitiFact .....
Says. Rep. Joe Barton,
R-Texas, once said, "Wind is a finite resource and harnessing it would
slow the winds down, which would cause the temperature to go up."
— Facebook posts on Tuesday, January 13th, 2015 in a meme on social media
Widely shared meme oversimplifies Joe Barton's 2009 comment on wind energy, climate change
By Louis Jacobson on Thursday, January 15th, 2015 at 11:15 a.m.
Wind turbines at the Harvest Wind Farm in Oliver Township, Mich. (Associated Press)
A reader asked us to check this meme circulating on social media, featuring Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas.
Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, is not popular among
environmentalists. A former chairman of the powerful House Energy and
Commerce Committee, Barton is a staunch advocate for fossil fuels and expressed skepticism about the role of manmade carbon emissions in climate change.
Barton’s critics like to paint him as blindly supportive of Big Oil
and as anti-science. Exhibit A is a series of social media memes that
mock him for suggesting that wind power can actually intensify global
warming.
The most extreme version
we found said Barton had claimed that "wind power would stop the Earth
from rotating." That’s clearly not true, but it’s also not clear that
this claim was meant to be taken seriously. Instead, we decided to check
a less outrageous -- and more common -- meme mocking Barton.
A reader recently sent us a meme
featuring a picture of Barton alongside the quotation, "Wind is a
finite resource and harnessing it would slow the winds down which would
cause the temperature to go up." The meme’s creator went on to comment,
"The only thing more stupid than this idiot heading the House-Senate
energy conf(erence) is Michelle Bachmann's stint on the House
'Intelligence' Committee!" (Michele Bachmann's name is misspelled.)
Ultimately, we concluded that Barton’s words were significantly altered. What did Barton actually say?
As it turns out, the comments from the meme we’re checking stem from a
congressional hearing held almost six years ago, on Feb. 26, 2009.
As part of a lengthy question-and-answer session, Barton pressed
witnesses on some of the risks of shifting the nation’s energy portfolio
from fossil fuels to renewable sources. In one exchange, Barton referred to a paper by Jay Apt,
director of the Carnegie Mellon Electricity Industry Center and a
professor of technology at the Tepper School of Business. In turn, Apt’s
paper relied on research in an earlier paper by David W. Keith, currently a professor of applied physics and public policy at Harvard University.
Barton’s off-the-cuff comments are somewhat meandering, but the
general gist of what he said was to raise questions about some of the
downsides of using wind to generate electricity. "I am going to read a paragraph which is, if true, very ironic.
And this is from Dr. Apt’s paper, and I quote: ‘Wind energy is a finite
resource. At large scale, slowing down the wind by using its energy to
turn turbines has environmental consequences. A group of researchers at
Princeton University … found that wind farms may change the mixing of
air near the surface, drying the soil near the site. At planetary
scales, David Keith, who was then at Carnegie Mellon, and coworkers
found that if wind supplied 10 percent of expected global electricity
demand in 2100 … the resulting change in the earth’s atmospheric energy
might cause some regions of the world to experience temperature change
of approximately 1 degree Centigrade.’ … "Now, wind is God’s way of balancing heat. Wind is the way you
shift heat from areas where it is hotter to areas where it is cooler.
That is what wind is. Wouldn’t it be ironic if in the interest of global
warming we mandated massive switches to energy, which is a finite
resource, which slows the winds down, which causes the temperature to go
up? Now, I am not saying that is going to happen, Mr. Chairman, but
that is definitely something on the massive scale. I mean, it does make
some sense. You stop something. You can’t transfer that heat and the
heat goes up. It is just something to think about."
Reading the full text shows that the meme glossed over some important nuances, perhaps by relying on a brief summation published by Time magazine in 2010.
First, even though the meme used quotation marks to frame the comment
as a single, unified quote, it’s actually a stitched-together mix of
several snippets from Barton’s remarks.
Second, the meme ignores that when Barton said that "wind is a finite resource," he was explicitly quoting Apt’s paper, rather than saying that was his personal belief.
Third, the meme overlooks that when Barton supposedly said that
harnessing the wind "would slow the winds down, which would cause the
temperature to go up," he was actually asking the witness a question
rather than stating his view.
And fourth, the meme ignores that Barton said in the same exchange,
"Now, I am not saying that is going to happen, Mr. Chairman." In other
words, what he was doing was posing a scenario to be discussed further.
So, while Barton’s comments clearly show an openness to the ideas he
addressed, the meme is off-base in suggesting that Barton was stating
his own opinion.
For the record, Barton’s spokesman, Sean Brown, told PolitiFact that
the congressman "believes in an all-of-the-above energy plan that
includes wind and solar power but also doesn’t ignore traditional
sources of energy like coal or natural gas." Is there any credibility to the idea that wind energy might contribute to global warming?
So Barton didn’t say what the meme said he did. But what about the
substance of the claim -- that wind turbines can exacerbate global
warming?
The idea isn’t entirely out of left field, but it’s a lot more complicated than it seems on the surface.
Let’s start with what was known at the time Barton made his comment six years ago. The paper ultimately referenced by Barton -- the one that Keith coauthored
-- found some intriguing interactions between wind turbines and
climate, namely that "very large amounts of wind power" can produce
changes to climate "at continental scales."
However, the authors leavened this assessment with a more optimistic
note -- that such changes in climate disappear at the global level, and
that, on balance, using wind power rather than fossil fuels reduces
climate change, rather than exacerbating it.
Keith, who didn’t respond to an inquiry from PolitiFact, and his
coauthors also emphasized that what negative impacts emerged from
wind-turbine use could be eased, fairly economically, by better turbine
design and placement.
Subsequent research has bolstered this conclusion.
A 2012 study that used satellite data for west-central Texas, published in Nature Climate Change and
co-authored by Liming Zhou of the State University of New York at
Albany, found a "significant warming trend" of up to 1.3 degrees
Fahrenheit per decade over wind farms, compared to nearby regions that
didn’t have wind farms. However, Zhou told the Daily Telegraph that the climatic changes from wind farms paled when compared to the impact of manmade global warming.
And Mark Z. Jacobson, a Stanford University professor of civil and environmental engineering, told PolitiFact that a 2012 paper
he coauthored found that the impact of large arrays of wind turbines
would be to cool climate -- not warm it. "That paper is the most
detailed to date," Jacobson said.
Jacobson agreed that even installing enough wind-power capacity to
power "half the world" would have "small" global impacts on climate,
even though the impacts locally could be more significant. If you weigh
the negatives of wind power against the negatives of fossil-fuel use, he
added, "there is only a net benefit of switching to wind." Our ruling
A social media meme says Barton once said, "Wind is a finite resource
and harnessing it would slow the winds down which would cause the
temperature to go up."
Barton raised that possibility while questioning a witness during a
2009 congressional hearing, but contrary to the meme’s implication, he
did not say that it was his personal belief. Rather, the meme makes fun
of Barton by stitching together parts of his comments in a way that is
misleading.
The statement contains some element of truth but ignores critical
facts that would give a different impression, so we rate it Mostly
False.
sen marco rubio r tb FL is going to run for president in 2016. He has started his campaign of deception, manipulation, fear and hate, showing just what kind of presidency his would be. A Christian, yet he can't seem to run on the principles of his faith, I wounder why? Here he is attacking the poor and the social safety net they so desperately need, while saying nothing about federal corporate welfare that allows executives to keep their obscene pay packages while their companies receive tax breaks and government subsidies paid for by the 99%. This from +PolitiFact .....
"If people work and make more money, they lose more in benefits than they would earn in salary."
— Marco Rubio on Tuesday, January 13th, 2015 in his book, "American Dreams"
Marco Rubio in new book: People on welfare 'lose more in benefits than they would earn in salary'
By Steve Contorno on Wednesday, January 14th, 2015 at 11:56 a.m.
Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., released a new book, "American Dreams," on Tuesday, Jan. 13.
At the center of Sen. Marco Rubio’s new book, American Dreams, is the conservative idea that government stands in the way of lower- and middle-class Americans getting ahead.
Why don’t more Americans start small businesses? Government
regulation, Rubio says. Why do Americans pay so much for higher
education? Government subsidies for students drive up prices. Why don’t
low-income workers try to work more hours or strive for a promotion?
Government assistance disincentivizes it.
"If (low-income) people work and make more money, they lose more in
benefits than they would earn in salary," Rubio wrote in the book,
released Jan. 13.
This idea is at the heart of Rubio’s plan to tackle poverty, so it’s one we wanted to look at in depth. Welfare vs. work
Government benefits for low-income individuals and families come in
many forms: housing assistance, health care and money to purchase food,
among others. Additionally, some states provide further assistance with
local programs.
These programs, reserved for poor people, tend toramp down as income goes up, meaning the more money you make, the fewer benefits you receive. Makes sense.
That phasedown, though, creates cliffs that sometime lessen the value
of the increase in earnings. A similar effect occurs when people move
into a higher tax bracket as their income goes up.
Economists look at these changes in benefits and tax rates in terms
of their impact on every additional dollar earned. When the impact is
high, and a large chunk of the amount of every additional dollar earned
goes to taxes or to offset a decrease in benefits, it can affect
people’s desire to work more, said the Congressional Budget Office, the
chief fiscal scorekeeper for lawmakers. This situation becomes an
incentive for people "already in the workforce to put in fewer hours or
be less productive," the CBO said.
Is it possible that the benefits lost could be so great, that a
person would lose more in benefits than they would gain by an increase
in wages?
Sure. The Cato Institute, a libertarian policy shop, released a study
in 2013 that made this exact point. By analyzing the total benefits an
individual can receive in each state and from the federal government,
they determined that in nine states assistance payouts exceeded $35,000 a
year. Welfare paid better than a minimum wage job in 34 states, plus
the District of Columbia, they reported. We asked Rubio’s office for
more evidence, and we didn’t hear back.
Under such a scenario, an individual could lose more by working than staying in their current situation. ‘Typical’ low-income family
But what is that situation? To reach its headline-grabbing
conclusions, Cato claims it focused on a typical welfare family. But the
study focused on what a single mother with two children might qualify
for.
That’s an important distinction, and one that significantly alters
the playing field. Single mothers with multiple children are eligible
for considerably more benefits than poor individuals or married couples
with no children.
The report goes on to assume that the "typical" family receives seven
different forms of public assistance, but that assumption is a pretty
big leap. Here’s why:
There are four main federal programs: Supplemental Nutrition
Assistance Program (food stamps); Medicaid or Child Health Insurance
Program (health care); Section 8 (housing assistance); and Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families (welfare). According to the Congressional
Budget Office in 2012, most families do not receive assistance from more
than one of these programs.
In fact, just a quarter of single parents with children earning up to
250 percent of the federal poverty line are enrolled in two of those
programs. About 11 percent are enrolled in three or four.
If we look at all low-income households of every size and makeup,
then 17 percent of low-income households are enrolled in multiple
federal programs and only 1 percent receive benefits from all four of
them.
So choosing to look at a single mother receiving benefits from seven programs, as Cato does, is an extreme example.
Also, there are two widely used programs, the Earned Income Tax
Credit and the Child Tax Credit, that actually increase benefits for
very low-income individuals the more money that they make for their
first $10,000 in wages. The benefits then ramp down after someone earns
about $17,000 annually. This incentivizes and rewards poor parents who
work more, and therefore it actually decreases the marginal tax rate for
many low-income workers.
In part because of these two tax credits, it is quite uncommon that
someone would go from not working to working and lose more in benefits
than they would gain in income. ‘Possible but rare’
Let’s go back to looking at this issue in terms of income lost on
additional earnings. According to the Congressional Budget Office, there
are very few instances when all 100 cents of an additional dollar
earned would go to taxes and replacing lost benefits. In fact, among
low- and moderate-income taxpayers, less than one percent lose 80 cents or more of every additional dollar earned.
Those most affected would likely be individuals who earn near or just
above the poverty level (about $20,000 in a three-person household),
who are also enrolled in multiple benefit programs that are set to phase
out with any additional income. This is not the norm.
Most people earning at or near the poverty level lose about 30 percent in taxes and offset benefits on their additional income.
Losing 100 percent of every dollar earned to taxes or replacing lost
benefits is "possible but rare," said Eugene Steuerle at the Urban
Institute. "High 40 to 60 percent rates are more common, and, if one
adds in cost of transportation and clothing (not a tax but a loss from
working), higher still."
It’s difficult to know when or how people factor lost benefits in
their employment decisions, the Congressional Budget Office said.
Benefits from government assistance programs are complex and determined
by a multitude of factors, both financial (like salary, enrollment in
other assistance programs) and nonfinancial (marital status, number of
children). It would be hard for an individual to decide if working an
extra few hours a week or taking that promotion is going to impact their
benefits. Our ruling
In his book, Rubio wrote, "If people work and make more money, they lose more in benefits than they would earn in salary."
There is evidence that when a large chunk of the amount of every
additional dollar earned goes to taxes or to offset a decrease in
benefits, people work less. Further, there are scenarios where a
low-income individual with children receiving assistance from the
government through multiple programs could potentially lose more in
benefits than he or shewould gain by a slight or modest increase in income.
But these examples are a small minority. The vast majority of people
face some higher taxes and lost benefits when they make more money, but
they would still take home more in pay than they would under a lower
salary.
The statement contains some element of truth but ignores critical
facts that would leave a different impression. We rate the statement
Mostly False.
Marco Rubio, American Dreams, Jan. 13, 2014
Cato Institute, "The Work Versus Welfare Tradeoff: 2013," 2013
Cato Institute, "Welfare: A Better Deal than Work," Aug. 21, 2013
Congressional Budget Office, "Effective Marginal Tax Rates for Low- and Moderate-Income Workers," November 2012
Congressional Budget Office, "Snapshot of Marginal Tax Rates for Low- and Moderate-Income Workers," Oct. 23, 2013
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, "Policymakers Often Overstate
Marginal Tax Rates for Lower-Income Workers and Gloss Over Tough
Trade-Offs in Reducing Them," Dec. 3, 2014
Email interview with LaDonna Pavetti, vice president, Family Income
Support at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Jan. 8, 2015
Eugene Steuerle, Institute Fellow and Richard B. Fisher Chair at the Urban Institute, Jan. 12, 2015
THE 114th U.S. Congress is in session and already the gop / tea-baggers and third way democrats are maneuvering legislation and regulations in favor of the 1% and corporate America while manipulating public opinion to believe Progressives and moderate republicans are the enemies of the state. Sen Elizabeth Warren D MA reminds us what the role of Congress should be. How long will it be before the nation realizes the truth about the the majority of the gop, the tea-baggers and third way democrats? Will it take another recession? God help us all!!!!
I am a sinner and a saint, all people of faith are. And so some judge me as a real sinner and hypocrite and I confess they are right and I am. But I also ask why they are judging me, is it out of love, or self-righteousness or an attempt to justify their decision not to believe? And I also have to ask, do you only see my faults and failings? Don't you ever see my attempts to be good, to practice my faith as God, as Jesus commands? I will try to do better. This from +Sojourners .....
As you may
know by now, I’m starting a new project in which I try for a year to
really, seriously understand what it means to follow Jesus in western,
post-industrial 21st century society. What does that look like? Do any
of us actually do it? And to what degree, seriously, are we supposed to
actually be like Jesus, as opposed to finding our own way to walk a more
Christ-like path on our current context?
My biggest concern at the
moment is that though a lot of us claim to “be Christians,” or even to
follow Jesus, a lot of us don’t spend much intentional time trying to
figure out what that means and what it looks like in daily life. We try
not to be too crappy to other people, try not to kill, steal, adulterate
(is that even a word?) or worship graven images. We try to love, and to
accept love — though we still hurt each other. A lot. The world is
messed up and so far from realizing the fully kingdom-inspired image of
wholeness and reconciliation to which God invites us.
And
at least in my theological world, that’s on us, not God. I believe,
with all of my being, that the audacious vision of God’s kingdom, here
and now, isn’t something we sit around and pray for God to make real for
us. Like Jesus said, we can (and should) collectively do greater things
than even he did. When people experienced healing in his presence, he
never said, “Hey, I did that!” Rather, he always told them that it was
their own faith that made them well.
That’s pretty amazing to consider. And inspiring. And terrifying.
So here I am, not so much trying to be Jesus,
but trying to at least follow his life, teaching, and example better.
And in taking my own personal inventory, I can see that I pretty much
suck at it. That doesn’t mean I’m giving up, but it’s clear I have
plenty of work to do. Here are five examples:
I like stuff. I
was raised in culture in which the very economy depended on my affinity
for stuff. I mean, what did George W. Bush tell us to do to help us
heal from 9/11? Go shopping, of course! I try to break the habit, but
dammit if stuff isn’t awesome, shiny, fun, and freaking everywhere.
Maybe I need to work the twelve steps for my stuff addiction. Maybe we
all do.
I want people to like me. Especially
in the public sphere, my career more or less depends on it. I post a
new article and watch with either a sense of self-satisfaction or dread
as the page-views roll in or stall out at a trickle. I get the sales
reports form my publishers and see my own self worth in the midst of the
numbers. My ego is so wrapped up in my identity — more specifically,
what I do — that it’s hard for me to talk about who I am without jumping
to my work.
I’m critical of others. I’m
a real pro at finding fault in other people. Some psychologists
suggests (and yes, I dropped out of my PhD in psych, thank you) that
such a critical view of the outside world is simply an obfuscation to
keep us from dealing with our own lingering sense of a lack of worth.
But the thing is, I’m onto the fact that, lots of days, I can be a real
asshole. Maybe for me, it’s more about assuring myself that everyone
else is nearly the same degree of asshole as I am. The thing is, when I
lean on this kind of justification, nothing changes. If our sense of
worth hinges on comparisons, we’re all screwed.
I let fear dictate my actions. It’s
funny to me when people write to me about my writing being vulnerable,
brave, or the like, because to me, it’s proof positive that so much of
my life is simply about trying to reconcile fear and keep it in some
sort of healthy context. By naming it, my hope is that it loses some of
its power. But it keeps coming back, and more often than not, it weaves
its way into my consciousness like some kind of virus, infecting my
judgment and my perspective. If, as Paul notes, we availed ourself to a
more perfect love, there would be no room for fear. Clearly got to keep
that one on my to-do list.
I’m willful. One
of Jesus’ most powerful phrases ever uttered, at least for me, was,
“Not my will, but yours, God, be done.” It’s one thing to submit your
own will to something bigger than yourself under normal circumstances —
it’s entirely another to do it when you’re facing death. It’s not that I
think that we’re all called to be martyrs for our faith. Hardly. But if
we can’t let go of control and place our own agenda and idea of how
things should be in the back seat on the basic, day-to-day stuff, how
can we possibly do it when things get really serious? It’s a little
trickier for me, since I’m not sure I’m on the “God has a consciousness
and will like human beings” train, but I do know, when I take time to
contemplate, what is for the Greater Good. And more often than not, I
want to get there, but only if I can filter it through my own personal
agenda first.
If I achieve nothing more
than working intently on these five things in the coming year, I’m
pretty sure I’ll be a great deal closer to the Jesus path I’m talking
about than I am now. Of course, considering this all is being documented
here on a public blog, on our podcast, and ultimately in a book, it may
be a bit of a set-up.
Dammit, there I go, putting things through my own personal agenda-filter again. Starting again, again…
Christian Piatt is
the creator and editor of BANNED QUESTIONS ABOUT THE BIBLE and BANNED
QUESTIONS ABOUT JESUS. He co-created and co-edits the “WTF: Where’s the
Faith?” young adult series with Chalice Press, and he has a memoir on
faith, family and parenting called PREGMANCY: A Dad, a Little Dude and a
Due Date.
HERE's Jim Wallis' 10 New Year's resolutions for 2015. There are life lessons in these for people of all faiths and good people everywhere. We can do better, I must do better this year. From +Sojourners .....
Some
people don’t like the idea of New Year’s resolutions, but I do. We often
only use the word in the context of this season, but “resolution” is a
nuanced noun. Some of its definitions include:
A new day. Image courtesy eelnosiva/shutterstock.com
A firm decision to do or not to do something — see: intention, resolve, plan, commitment, pledge.
The quality of being determined or resolute —
see: determination, purpose, steadfastness, perseverance,tenacity,
tenaciousness, staying power, dedication, commitment, stubbornness,
boldness, spiritedness, bravery, courage, pluck, grit.
The action of solving a problem, dispute, or contentious matter — solution to, settlement of, conclusion to, “the peaceful resolution of all disputes.”
In
a world of seemingly endless conflicts, I sure like the sound of that.
We need more of all of these qualities just now. All three meanings of
resolution are wonderfully attractive to me — and timely for this brand
new year. So here are my 10 resolutions for this 2015:
1. Love God. We
can’t really love anyone if we don’t spend time with them. Take the
time this year to be quiet and listen to God in prayer. My dad’s old
Bible, which I got to keep when he died, is full of multi-colored notes
underlining the text, from his reading of it literally every day — every
day for me too this year.
2. Extend who our neighbors are; whom we are also called to love. When
Jesus was asked, “Who is my neighbor,?” he told people to reach beyond
themselves, their natural groups, and their regular boundaries to the
neighbors who were further away from them, especially to those who are
in most trouble. My mother’s two instructions to us were always clear:
If there is a kid on the playground that nobody else is playing with,
you play with them. And if there is a bully picking on other kids, you
stand up to him. Okay, Mom.
3. Love hardest those who are the closest. The
relationships that will bring us most joy and sorrow are inside our
inner circle that we are most responsible for. Our wives, husbands,
partners; dearest friends; and, especially, our children must be the
first priority, the first claim on our lives and time. Whoever or
whatever else we are or will ever be — to them we are really only dad or
mom.
4. Build racial bridges. We
are at a crisis point — and a point of great opportunity to heal wounds
and move racial justice forward. It’s time to help lead America into
its diverse and changing-demographic future.
5. Always Ask, “What does this mean for the poor and vulnerable?” What
happens to these members of society is a chief criterion for God’s
judgment on a nation’s righteousness and our own integrity. So that must
be the first question of every public policy debate this year, and we
must be the ones to raise it.
6. Support and empower women and girls. This
half of God’s children not only bears the brunt of the world’s
injustice and conflicts, but is absolutely essential to their
resolutions. The most repressive hierarchies fear the education of girls
above all else.
7. Stand up for the reality of climate change. If
we say we love God and care for God’s creation, it is time to raise our
voices over the crisis of climate change. It’s time to start turning
around, and we must begin to do that.
8. Question every act of war. Peacemaking
is not finding another war to win, but getting underneath the conflicts
to their causes. We must question each escalation of war and continue
to ask our leaders why this keeps happening.
9. Practice presence. Spend
less time with screens and more with books, less time with complaining
and more with solving, less time with arguing and more with listening,
less time with shopping and more time with being thankful, less time
with worrying and more with exercising, less time obsessing about food
and more time eating well, less time planning and more time doing, less
time scheduling and more time living one day at a time.
10. Embrace hope and joy. Try
to replace disappointment and despair with hope — not as a feeling but
as a decision. Try to replace anxiety with joy — which means to be open
to all the surprises, blessings, and gifts that we can’t control but are
offered by God and the people God surrounds us with, if we are paying
attention.
My 11th resolution is for all those who have read this or anything else Sojourners has offered in 2014.
I humbly but sincerely ask you to remember Sojourners’ work and to support our mission in 2015. Pleasepledge the cost of a cup of coffee, or a meal, or a shopping trip or a tithe each month; or make a 2015 year’s gift promise of your resources or legacy to Sojourners; or make another decision of support whose aim, is to help Sojourners to plan its purposeful mission with bravery, boldness, and courage for another year and for years to come. For 2015, we ask for your commitment to help us to fulfill our calling.
May God bless us every one.
Make your commitment to Sojourners’ work in 2015 by clicking here.
Jim Wallisis
president of Sojourners. His book,The (Un)Common Good: How the Gospel
Brings Hope to a World Divided, the updated and revised paperback
version of On God’s Side, is available now. Follow Jim on
Twitter @JimWallis. Sandi Villarreal is Web Editor & Chief Digital Officer for Sojourners. You can follow her on Twitter @Sandi.
