text:
The 2009 Princeton Lectures on
Youth, Church, and Culture
Sharing Not Only the Gospel, But Also Our Lives
The Princeton Lectures on Youth, Church, and Culture are designed to foster original scholarship pertaining to youth and the contemporary church. The lectures are delivered as a series at the Princeton Forum on Youth Ministry and are published online annually. Lecturers include scholars who are not directly involved in the practice or study of youth ministry but who can bring the fruits of their respective disciplines to bear on ministry with the young.
The theme for the 2009 lectures is "Sharing Not Only the Gospel, but Also Our Lives," from 1 Thessalonians 2:8. Youth leaders in today's church can easily speak Paul's words to believers in Thessalonica, written two thousand years ago. "So deeply do we care for you that we are determined to share not only the gospel of God, but also our own selves, because you have become very dear to us." The 2009 lectures address this passage through discussion of relational youth ministry, the transcendence of God, and the question of what gospel, "which Jesus" will we share.
2009 Lectures
- From an Incarnational Model of Ministry to Being Ministers of the Incarnate One OR Justin Versus Jan
- Encounter with the Transcendence of God: The Shape of Faithful Place-Sharing for Youth Ministry
- Which Jesus Shall We Teach?
Encounter with the Transcendence of God: The Shape of Faithful
Place-Sharing for
Youth Ministry
It was about 5:30 a.m. I was sleeping deeply and restfully when I was shaken awake by the piped-in pleadings of my son screaming at me through his monitor, "Daddy, Daddy, come and get me, I'm ready to get up!" The problem was that I wasn't ready to get up. It was 5:30 in the morning; his (and therefore our) wake-up time is usually not until 6:30. I stumbled out of bed and walked to his room, my stiff body reminding me that another hour of sleep would be very nice. Opening his door the dawn light of an early summer morning hit me as it engulfed him. I should have been moved by the beauty of my then two-year-old sitting in his bed being washed with the early morning sunrise as he awoke to a new day of life. But seeing him sitting in his bed illuminated by a sunbeam, all I could think was, Great. I guess there's no way to convince him that it's still the middle of the night. Still feeling unable to function, and my body yearning to lie down and rest my eyes, I decided that instead of lying to him (which I wasn't above, it was just obvious it wouldn't work), I decided to bargain with him. So I made my pitch: "Hey Owen, it's still very early in the morning. How about Daddy lies with you in your bed and we listen to a CD, and then get up?" To my surprise, he fell for it. So I walked over to his CD player and put in a nice, quiet children's CD, figuring the one called Sleepy Time Tunes would be perfect, and crawled into his bed. I shut my eyes to doze off as he lay next to me, chatting away to his stuffed animals and then directing questions toward me just as I began to fall deeply into sleep.
About halfway through the CD, a very catchy yet soothing song came on called, "God Is Watching." It went something like...
Where is God?
God is watching, God is watching you tonight
Where is love?
Love is holding, love is holding you tonight
And angels hover over you,
And Jesus loves you as you are...
Being a theologian, my once-sleepy mind—that just minutes earlier sought to lie to or bargain with a two-year-old for an hour more of sleep—snapped awake. Lying on a large teddy bear and surrounded by a stuffed rabbit, three dogs, and a plastic gorilla, my mind started to theologically examine this beautifully soothing song.
I was first struck by the question, Where is God? This question really is the heart of the connection between theology and ministry. Where do we understand God as present? Where is God in the world? How can we help the adolescents we work with encounter this God where this God is? And how can we construct our ministries and times with adolescents to be faithful to where God is? Once God becomes the God of Israel, once God unveils Godself in Jesus Christ, when revelation is central to our theological conceptions, once we claim that God reveals Godself, then we are confronted with this question, "Where is God?" 1page 2
The singer's question, spilling gently from the rhythm of her acoustic guitar, encompassed a central theological question since the arrival of modernity, Where is God? In a world where miracles happen only on TV, death happens in hospitals, and churches sponsor Starbucks kiosks and Pilates classes, where is God concretely? Where can we say we encounter God? The arrival of individualism tends to encourage us to assert that God is where we subjectively feel God. But if we are honest, such assertions can't avoid the white-hot heat of doubt in late modernity. "Can I trust my feelings?" "Is it God or what I had for lunch?"
So, as much as I admired the songwriter's question, I was unconvinced by her answer—that God was watching. I found myself unsatisfied. God is watching doesn't give me any answers to her question, Where is God? (I know, I know, I'm a high-strung theologian, and I should cut her some slack. The song, after all, is not her dissertation, though truth be told it may impact the thinking of the church more than 100 dissertations, so I'll continue). The songwriter's direct question about where God is concretely, where we encounter God, was answered with obscurity and abstraction. God is watching somewhere, it seemed; far enough away that God can see us but we cannot be encountered by God. But the question Where is God? asks for a direct, concrete answer. The question assumes a desire to be encountered by God, and encounter is the heart of relationship.
For instance, if my son came up to me while I was watching a baseball game on the couch and asked me, Where is Momma? and I said, "Momma is watching," he would be very unsatisfied; he'd figure I was either a jerk or deranged. He wants to know concretely where she is, so that he can be with her, so that he can be loved by her and love her. Where is Momma?—just like Where is God?—is a question that seeks the presence of a person, to be in a relationship with another. To answer "God is watching" is to assume that we cannot share in God's presence, that God is too far away to be with us, too abstract to be a person.
But then what really got me going was the second stanza. "Where is love? Love is holding you tonight." What bothered me wasn't that she equated love with holding and rocking her child (this no doubt is one of the purest acts of love that we know). What was disturbing in light of the first stanza was that there was no connection between where God was and where love was. (Again, I know this is a children's song, and not a theological paper, but this divide between God's presence and our experiences of day-to-day love and care is too common, the two are too often unrelated, or the connection unsophisticatedly thought through). The songwriter had somehow made love concrete: "Love is holding you tonight." She had made it an encounter, a relational reality; but she had made God's presence abstract, God is invisibly watching you from somewhere unknown.
When we focus our ministries on the who of Jesus Christ, when we see the incarnation as the encounter with a person as opposed to a theme, we are pointed to either a God who's far away just watching, or a God who can be divided from the love and embrace of a mother to a child. Rather, the incarnate one reveals a God of encounter, a God who desires more than just to watch us, but to share our place in relationship, to love us by being present to us. But if this God is loving us by sharing our place, how should we understand our encounter with God and how should it impact our ministries?
The theological reason for relational youth ministry is not simply the fact that "It's what Jesus did." Rather our reasons for relational ministry should have something to do with where God is. Or to say it another way, relational youth ministry isn't about getting kids to accept a message from long ago, but is rather about participating in the living presence of God together with them, right now.
A youth ministry of place-sharing argues that our relationships—where we truly see other persons and share their place—are the location of God's presence in the world. So...if asked, "Where is God?" we would answer that God is found in our relationships. Because God has become human, gone to the cross suffering our estrangement, and overcome it with resurrection.page 3
Jesus Christ stands with us and for us, beside us. 2 So when we search for God, we don't look outside our world, for God in Jesus has already entered our world. Rather, we search and find God by turning to our brothers and sisters and confessing that God in Jesus Christ stands with/next to them. 3
This is why in Mathew 25:31ff Jesus equates his presence (his "where") with feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, and visiting the prisoner. Since Jesus stands with and for them, that means that what we do "unto" them, as Jesus says, we do unto him. When we enter into relationships of place-sharing, God is concretely present, not just as an idea, not just as a nice thing to say or believe, but as an actuality. Since Jesus Christ is really there, then, quite literally, what we do to another we do to Christ. For through incarnation, crucifixion, and resurrection Jesus stands with and for others.
But what does all this mean? Primarily it means that our relationships with young people are not tools for influence but rather something more beautiful and significant. Our relationships with youth (and our relationships in general) are the location of God's presence in the world. When we open our lives to young people, and they open theirs to us, we're not just doing good ministry. Rather, we are doing good ministry because we're both (kid and adult) communing with God, not in ourselves, but in our communion with each other. As we share each other's place, through the power of God's own action as incarnate, crucified, and resurrected, we're participating in God's own person.
At first glance such a perspective seems to make God into our pet. Asking the question "where is God?" at all seems to run this risk. But this is only so if we fail to explore the profundity of relationship. Relationship (true relationship that is not the road to something else, but the destination of being together, being with and for each other) is the experience of transcendence. 4 In the midst of encounter, in the midst of really seeing and being with others, we discover that they are other than us, that they escape us, they are outside what we can grasp. The more I love my wife and embrace my children and allow them to embrace me, the more I encounter them as a mystery, as others that I cannot possess or totalize but can only encounter in the infinite mystery of their being, of their being with me as other than me. The deeper we encounter others the more they become other than us, the more they transcend us. They become our limit, that which is outside and beyond us, that which transcends us. 5
God is other and beyond us by entering our history, by revealing Godself. God is transcendent as both hidden and revealed by binding Godself with humanity, first through Israel and then through Jesus. Because Jesus is the incarnate, who is crucified and resurrected, Bonhoeffer contends that God's transcendence is historical; it confronts humanity within humanity's experience of time and space. Following this, the place of God's transcendence within human history is found in the person of Jesus Christ. God has chosen to make Godself known as person, for the inner life of the Trinity as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is constituted by persons in relation to one another. Therefore, it is the other person (or human neighbor) who confronts me within my existence, and in so doing demonstrates his or her otherness from me (his or her transcendence). Because Jesus Christ is person (both in the inner life of the Trinity and within human history) we experience the transcendent otherness of God as we encounter the otherness of our human neighbor as person. 6 Therefore, it is within the relationship that we come up against the living God. 7 In standing with and for the other person whom Jesus Christ stands beside, I encounter Christ as I see the mystery of others' humanity, as I recognize that I cannot possess him or her, but must love him or her as I confess the love of Christ for us both. 8 I encounter the presence of God because in encountering the other I meet the one, Jesus Christ, who is for and with us both. But how do we do this? What might this look like?
The Shape of Place-Sharing
I was leaning against his kitchen counter, sipping a freshly poured soda still cracking the ice in my cup. I hadn't known him or been in ministry for long when, in the middle of our awkward small talk, the doorbell rang. It was 6:00 p.m., and I was the invited guest for dinner at his home. He went to the door, then left the house and closed the front door behind him while his wife prepared the dinner and hurried the children to the table, rushing from microwave to oven as she readied our meal and her children's.page 4 I just stood there, drink in my hand, waiting for him to return, too young and stupid to ask if she needed me to do anything.
When we sat down for dinner he still hadn't returned. She finally sat, breathed a deep sigh of exhaustion, and began cutting her youngest child's hot dog as I started with the salad. I felt uncomfortable; I was there for dinner because he and I had just started doing ministry together, and he was nice enough to invite me over. But as I spooned the pasta onto my plate, he was gone, and I was sitting with his wife and kids, feeling more than a little self-conscious. He had answered the door and disappeared. I thought this was odd, but she seemed, though annoyed, to see it as regular behavior. Finally, feeling so embarrassed as the silence grew and my mind raced to find something to say but could think of nothing, I inquired about her husband's absence. She responded that it must be the guys. "The guys?" I asked worried that he had somehow gotten entangled with the mob or something. "You know, the guys from his Bible study. They stop by most nights." This didn't seem right, but I was too new in ministry to understand why.
We had finished dinner and the ice cream was being placed on the table when he finally came in. "Everything alright?" I asked, assuming that one of them must have been suicidal for him to be gone for the last forty-five minutes without so much as a word. "Yeah," he responded with a suspicious look. "Yeah," he continued proudly, "they were just coming back from hanging out." After a pause he continued, I can only assume as if to teach me something, "I guess that's ministry for you; it doesn't just happen nine to five." As he said this, I looked at his family—wife clearly worn out, kids messy from dinner. He'd left his wife, children, and invited guest during dinner to be relational, to be in ministry. And this wasn't abnormal; they stopped by most nights around dinnertime. He'd given his life to being relational with young people, but his relational behavior seemed, from my perspective, to be hurting his family. He was saying that he was being relational, but what does relational mean and what does it look like?
Does it mean always dropping everything to be with young people? I can imagine if our nights are only filled with Family Guy reruns and snack foods, we might answer "yes." But what about when our nights are filled with needed rest, time with friends, stories read to our children, and long talks with our spouse? Then must we be so-called "relational," responding to every phone call and every doorbell ring?
Now you may be wondering, Doesn't all this talk about entering into adolescents' suffering and sharing their place affirm us taking such a stance, becoming people who are always on call, always available? Wasn't that coworker being a place-sharer? If not, what then would faithful place-sharing look like? There are four stances that faithful place-sharing will encompass that connect with the concrete "where" of God in relationship.
1. Open and Closed
A relationship can only be a relationship if the people in it are able to be both open and closed with each other. We rightly assume that being in relationship with another person means being open to that person, letting that person in, sharing things with that person as he or she lets us in and shares things with us. We often hear this in the midst of frustration; for instance, when a parent, spouse, or friend says, "I don't know what it is, but he just won't open up to me." Yet we too often make the mistake of assuming that the major component to any relationship is the ability to be open. While this is important, it's just as important (though this seems counterintuitive to us) that we can be closed with another. Bonhoeffer writes, "Be wary of the person who cannot be with others, but be just as wary of the person that cannot be alone."
My marriage is not only dependent on being open with my wife. It surely is; but just as important is my ability to be closed, my ability to be myself, to have a self. It is just as important not to allow her or myself to be sucked into enmeshment where we can no longer determine where she begins and I end, no longer be two people. The most tragic of marriages are those in which each person seems almost flat, as if neither has had an original thought, dream, or simply a laugh in years. page 5Rather, the health of our marriage is dependent on my wife being herself and me being myself. It's dependent on us not only being connected but being connected as the two distinct people we are. If we cannot be closed, having our own opinions, thoughts, and needs—if we are not free to say, "I need to be alone"—then we cannot be open with each other. If she cannot be closed with me, I'll never be able to share in her distinct life, for it won't be distinct enough from my own life for me to see it as "other" than me, as an experience of transcendence, and something that must be cherished and loved.
Now, what does this have to do with youth ministry? To enter into another's suffering and share another's place demands that I open myself to this other; but just as importantly, it demands that I be closed. If I cannot be closed enough to know myself, and young people as different than me, than I cannot truly see them.
My ministry partner in the previous story believed being relational in ministry was about being radically open, willing to let kids in at any time and moment. But in so doing he was open without being closed. He became not a human being with needs, dreams, and other people (such as his wife and children) who made him who he was, but a dispenser who existed only to meet adolescents' needs. His ministry was no longer broken person to broken person, but a ministry to consuming kids with a commodity-giving youth worker. To be a place-sharer we have to be able to say "no" or "I'm finished" or "Don't stop by at dinnertime" or "I'm on vacation" or "Call me when the sun is up."
If our ministries are only about influence, then we have every reason to fear ever saying any of these things, for any good sales rep is "always open for business." But if we truly believe that God is present (i.e., that the "where" of Jesus Christ is located) in relationships, then it's vital that these relationships be human person to human person, that they be open and closed, where each person sees the distinct and beautiful humanity of the other, and therefore confesses God in the relationship.
Too often we've told volunteers and youth workers that their relational success is judged on how open they are with kids, but it's just as important they be able to be closed. It's important that they be able to identify with adolescents; but just as important is their ability to be different, to differentiate, to be an adult, to be a person.
Jesus encounters humanity in the identification and differentiation of his own humanity. He is the very Logos of God, he is different and distinct from all others. If you have seen him you have seen the Father. But Jesus, at the same time, is open to us; he is fully human, he is bearing death and despair. God has fully allowed Godself to be known and encountered as person in the humanity of Jesus Christ. Where once one could not survive a face-to-face encounter with God, in the humanity of Jesus God is encountered (fully) as person. But this doesn't eliminate God's transcendence, it fortifies it. That which is the most mysterious and other is that which is nearest to hand, that which is other but so near. Like the sad story of your grieving friend, or the warm embrace of your mother's hands, or the deep sleeping breaths of your child. They are near, but in the nearness of their person they transcend us in the love of relationship person to person. The fullness of God's otherness is experienced in open- and closedness. It is experienced as that which is close at hand, it is experienced in our humanity, for God has become human. 9 But in experiencing it here, it escapes us, its nearness reveals its otherness. God has taken on flesh and in so doing shows God's love for us; by being near to us, God shows God's otherness from us. Relationships of open- and closedness, of identification and differentiation, hold within them the possibility of being places to encounter God, because they are places of transcendence, places where persons meet persons, places where the person of God encounters our own persons. But without the open- and closedness of person-to-person structure, transcendence is lost, for there is no otherness without closedness. 10
The place-sharer seeks to always remind adolescents that there is a boundary that separates them. If my ministry partner had gone to the door that night and said, "Hey guys! Great to see you. But I'm having dinner with my family right now. Can I catch up with you tomorrow?" He not only would have communicated love and fidelity to his family, but also would page 6 have communicated to the adolescents at the door that he's a distinct human being with others he loves and who love him, with particular thoughts and dreams, with depth in his person that calls those young people into their own depth. He would have become a person to be in relationship with as opposed to the "super-relational pastor." When he spent dinner after dinner outside, away from his family, the teenagers who monopolized his time witnessed not a unique person who calls out for relationship with his own distinct, unique person, but simply a guy who met their needs. They saw someone who could be summarized, not as a multidimensional, mysterious person, but as a youth worker whose job it is to be relational.
My ministry partner that night was right: Relational ministry is not done from nine to five. Sharing another person's place happens at times and places rarely anticipated, and often it is in the middle of crises that we are called to enter others' lives. But the fact that it's not a nine-to-five job doesn't mean that it's not humanizing, that relational ministry isn't practiced from the core of our beings, which calls us to be with everyone (adolescent or not) as open and closed.
The real art of practicing relational youth ministry, then, is not about dropping everything to be with kids; more profoundly, it's about being open and closed alongside them. It is not your job to be radically open with young people; it's your job to be a healthy and whole person who's able to both identify with them and be different from them.
2. Barrier
In the movie Good Will Hunting, Will is a delinquent young adult from South Boston. After getting in a fight with someone in the neighborhood and hitting a cop who was breaking up the fight, Will's sentenced to see a psychiatrist or go to prison. Chasing away his first two psychiatrists—by questioning one's sexuality and the other's vocational methods—Will is close to accomplishing his strategy of avoiding this court-appointed hurdle by scaring off all willing counselors. That is, until he meets his last option, Sean. Sean is dealing with issues of his own. Once a promising MIT grad, he's found himself working in a community college teaching uninterested students. Yet, his issues are not really career related; he's still dealing with the death of his wife who lost a long, painful battle with cancer.
Will enters Sean's office for their first meeting and puts his strategy into action, looking for a way to push Sean to quit before ever starting with Will. Will begins by insulting the books on Sean's shelf; Sean is not bothered. Trying a new tactic, Will asks Sean how much he can bench. When Sean responds with a weight much higher than Will's max, he looks for another angle. Seeing a painting leaning against Sean's window depicting a man in a boat, Will inquires, "Did you paint this?" "Yeah," Sean responds. Taking a few shots at its quality, Will then tries to interpret it. "You ever hear the saying, 'any port in a storm?'—Well, maybe that means you. Maybe you were in the middle of a storm, a big...storm—the waves were crashing over the bow, the...mast was about to snap, and you were crying for the harbor. So you did what you had to do to get out. Maybe you became a psychologist." Sean's not bothered. "Bingo," Sean says. "Now let me do my job." But Will takes one more jab at finding Sean's weak spot through the painting, "Maybe you married the wrong woman." Sean turns quickly and shoots back, "Watch your mouth." Will smiles; he's found Sean's vulnerability, so he goes for the kill, "That's it, isn't it? You married the wrong woman. She leave you? Was she [seeing] someone else?"
Like he's fired out of a cannon Sean crosses the room, grabs Will's neck, and pushes him up forcefully against the wall. Sean says through the intensity of clenched teeth, "If you ever disrespect my wife again I will end you." And the scene is over.
This scene reveals a deeply theologically significant moment—a moment that we can build our ministries around. Of course, I'm not advocating that you strangle kids (though you may know a few that make you wish that was exactly what I was saying). Rather, what this scene shows is the power of another person becoming our barrier or limit.
Sean's act communicates closedness to Will; it communicates boldly that Sean is a human being who knows suffering and pain—and this suffering and pain will have to be respected. It is closed to Will; he has no right to use it for his own purposes. In the forceful act Sean asserts, "No further! This is me, a human being. You will respect my broken humanity, or there page 7 can be no relationship." In shooting across the room and asserting his closedness, something beautiful happens, as you'll remember if you've seen the movie. Through this act of closedness, in which Sean becomes Will's barrier, a relationship is formed—and such a rich relationship that Will (and Sean for that matter) discovers who he is and what he offers the world. The power of faithful place-sharing that's both open and closed is that the other person becomes our barrier or our limit. When we come up against their person, we discover who we are. Whenever we're forced to see the other person (and are not allowed to use them, but to really see them), we discover ourselves. It's in interaction with others that we discover our gifts, abilities, and overall uniqueness. We form our very identities as we come up against the barrier of other people. It's only after witnessing Sean's closedness and seeing Sean as his barrier and limit that Will begins, through their relationship, to discover his own person.
It is when Sean acts upon him as a barrier and limit that Will is actually invited into a relationship. The other therapists were willing to see Will as a patient, someone that needed knowledge to avoid his dysfunction. But Will's own (inappropriate) actions forced the therapists to quit, for his actions subverted their role and they wished to only deal with Will outside of action and in the realm of technical knowledge. When Sean "chokes" Will he is acting, he is revealing his very self through his action. His action is not avoidance but becomes a direct barrier to Will's own action, reflecting back on him not only who Sean is (a hurting widower) but who Will is as well (a self-protective and hurting kid).
It is through action one to another that we discover our very selves, but also discover that our selves are bound in relationship to others. We need others to be our limit.
A theology of God's otherness encountered in revelation is the assertion that we know God through God's own action. There is no knowledge of God outside of God's own action, outside of encounter. And now that God has made Godself known through the action of taking on humanity, it is in encountering humanity, it is in acting with and for our fellow human being, in coming up against our limit, that we encounter God. But only if we see that God has encountered the world, that God has acted in revealing Godself by being found on the cross, by being found in suffering and brokenness, acting for the world by suffering the world, restoring relationship by suffering broken relationship. Sean acts from the core of his brokenness, inviting Will to share in it, calling Will to open his own broken suffering to Sean. In the mutual action of shared suffering we witness the other person as a barrier, as that which cannot be crossed, and in encountering that barrier we find ourselves with our neighbor in the presence of God.
The power of relationships in ministry is not that they're ideal tools to get kids to do things or intimacy zones that makes kids feel things. Their power is that they offer young people barriers; they offer our humanity as the adolescents' limit, as the adolescent's becomes ours. And as such, the relationship becomes the place where adolescents discover their own person, as they encounter the otherness of God in the nearness but strangeness of our humanity.
But in order to be barriers we need to be ourselves. We need to be open and closed with adolescents; we need to be able to say, "No further; this is me and that is you," just as Sean did with Will (minus the strangling part!). This is the ultimate danger with my ministry partner's actions. When he became so open to young people that he would skip out of his parenting responsibilities (not to mention his relationship to his wife or obligation to his dinner guest) to be with adolescents, he was forgetting his ability to be a barrier to kids. Instead he became a jungle gym; his relationship with them gave them something to do, but he couldn't claim his otherness enough to become their barrier, to communicate to them who he witnessed them to be.
3. Corresponding to Reality
This third disposition is corresponding to reality, it is seeking to see the world from the young person's locations. We can't be in relationship with young people if we refuse to allow young people to inform us, whether through conversation or observation, about their world.page 8
In the British movie About a Boy, Marcus is an eccentric kid who lives with a hippie-ish, depressed single mother. Soon Marcus meets Will, a bachelor who thinks only of himself, on a picnic with Marcus's mother's friend, Susie. Marcus was along on Will and Susie's date because his mother was feeling "blue." Upon dropping Marcus off at home, they stumble across his mother passed out on the floor, having attempted suicide.
For the next several weeks Marcus shows up at Will's flat after school. At first Will is reluctant to allow Marcus in; after all, Will is self-centered, and Marcus is a weird kid. But it soon becomes something Will expects: Marcus arrives, they watch Count Down, and Marcus leaves. There's no agenda. Marcus likes being with Will, and after a while Will looks forward to being with Marcus. After several weeks together, Will uncharacteristically breaks the normal rhythm of their time by asking Marcus, "So how is it going at home, then?"
"You mean with my mom?" returns Marcus, trying hard to show that it is not obvious what Will is referring to. "She's alright, thanks." Marcus continues, looking away quickly.
"I mean she's..." Will adds tentatively, unwilling to finish his thought. But Marcus knows exactly what he is referring to, finishing Will's sentence, "I know, no, nothing like that."
Sensing Marcus' anxiety about his mother Will responds, "So, that still bothering you then?"
"Does it bother me?" Marcus adds, trying to appear stoic.
We are then taken into Marcus' thoughts: Every single day, that's why I come here instead of going home. Looking away he answers Will's question, "A bit, when I think about it."
Will can only respond by looking away, shaking his head. Then in deep compassion and understanding he says, "F-king hell." Marcus and Will share a meaningful look and the scene ends.
We next see Marcus walking home saying again to himself, "I don't know why Will swore like that but it made me feel better; it made me feel like I wasn't being so pathetic for getting so scared."
In this scene Will's "f-king hell" is corresponding to reality; he has taken the time to see Marcus' suffering and can only respond from the core of his own being. He has seen the world from Marcus' place. As the scene ends, Marcus responds that he feels understood, and that Will has entered into this difficult situation with him. Marcus's place of Godforsaken loneliness has become the location of new community, new possibility; it has become the place where God is present. With Will's "f-king hell" he has spoken what is, he has called a thing what it is. He has placed his person in Marcus's hell. He has seen his reality and by seeing and acting to call it what it is, he has joined Marcus in his hell. But Will has joined him as himself, he has really experienced Marcus's pain, but he has not confused whose pain it is. He is able to really join Marcus in suffering because Will is closed enough to distinguish Marcus's issue from his own. If somehow he imagined that Marcus's suffering was his own he could not say "f-king hell" but would instead seek to solve the problem.
Marcus is still in his hell, but no longer alone; he has been joined, his suffering has been shared. And as shared suffering, it witnesses beyond itself to the God who joins God's very being with the suffering of humanity in the person of Jesus Christ. Will's "calling a thing what it is" is the call to join God where God can be found in hell, bringing life from death. Will's "f-king hell" becomes the joining of his person with Marcus as Jesus joins his with ours by suffering the fullness of our reality. Will's "f-king hell" is at the same time both the assertion of "reality" (it's hell to worry about your mama's depression), and hope. Will's "f-king hell" reveals that Marcus is no longer alone, that his frail, worried humanity is bound page 9 to another, to Will. And if it can be bound to Will it just as well can be bound to the one that promises to bring life from death, to bring hallelujah from f-king hell. But there can be no hallelujah without f-king hell, just as there can be no resurrection without the cross, no ultimate through the avoidance of the penultimate.
Much like Will in About a Boy, corresponding to reality with young people often happens as we simply spend time with them. Will didn't do anything magical or professional; he simply weekly (or daily) watched the game show Count Down with Marcus, and as he did, Marcus revealed windows into his reality. If we can simply spend time with adolescents with the simple but profound desire to be with them in their realities, we have become their place-sharers.
4. Freedom in Mutuality
There is no "ought" in place-sharing; there is no need to feel guilty that you should be doing this or that with adolescents. There's only the invitation to be human alongside them, to be yourself as you act with and for them, to experience their lives as they experience yours. In your relationship with young people, you are free—free to share adolescents' place as it works for you and for them. As long as it's mutually humanizing, it need not conform to some master plan (theme). Helping a kid change his oil, making French flash cards, decorating your daughter's birthday cake, or simply sitting together in silence can all be the needed free space for place-sharing to occur. You're free—free to be yourself with and alongside them.
However, the real power of place-sharing is not in filling these free spaces with tactics to get kids to talk to us, sharing their deepest and darkest fears and worries. Too often we imagine that a good youth worker is able to get adolescents to open up and talk, so we carpet-bomb them with questions: "How is school? Who are you dating? How is volleyball? How is your prayer life? How are things at home?" and on and on. As any parent or youth worker knows, getting a fifteen-year-old guy to answer any of these questions with more than two words is a miracle. Rather, in the freedom of this free space, the goal isn't to get them to talk as much is it to allow them to join in our lives, to come close to us and watch as we seek to live faithfully as authentic human beings. The goal isn't to get them to open up to us as much as it is, in silent assertion through our relationships with them, to invite them to come close to us, to see us, to be with us, and to watch as we seek to live out this thing called discipleship in fear, hope, doubt, and joy.
This is what Ray Anderson calls "closing the circle of transcendence." If God is found next to our humanity through the humanity of Godself, then we are calling young people not away from their own and our humanity, but toward it, to encounter it as we together seek God. As open/closed, a barrier, and corresponding with reality, we call young people to come and live near us, to watch and participate in our lives. Not because we are perfect, not because we possess something, not because it is about us, but because we believe that God is a God who encounters us not outside but within relationships of broken people, bringing new life out of our broken places. Therefore we call young people to come near to us, not to share in our perfection but in our brokenness, not in our completion, but in our emptiness, not in our fulfillment, but in our yearning. To be with us in these places is to witness the beautiful fragility of our humanity that seeks a God found in just such places. It is the invitation to young people to themselves seek God together with us in the fragility of their own humanity, in relationships where we share each others' places as the proclamation and experience of God sharing ours.page 10


text:
With my Invisalign journey now over I thought it was time to update you all on the removal process.
I wasn't exactly sure how the attachments would be removed as I had never had braces as a child, but my initial thoughts were that there would be some kind of solvent that would dissolve the glue holding them in place. Instead the attachments had to be filed down with a drill. I am not someone who is afraid of the dentist, though I am sure that everyone agrees having a buzzing sander in your mouth is never a pleasant experience. Luckily, it was over pretty quickly and was completely painless!
With the attachments gone the areas they had adhered to felt a little rough as my dentist was careful not to sand away my enamel (especially as my teeth are super sensitive anyway). The rough feeling persisted for a few weeks, but is slowly getting better as the remaining grit of the attachments gets worn away. This is not something that was at all noticeable, so nothing to worry about, even if you have attachments on your incisors.
After the Invisalign removal I had a lovely clean and polish of my teeth. I always love having my teeth polished (never whitened as they are too sensitive) so I was happy with the results. Any residual staining from the trays was removed and my teeth looked clean and bright, ready to be shown off to the World!
I was given my last tray to keep along with a new set of trays made from a different plastic. I was told I should wear these for 15 mins every day to ensure my teeth didn't start moving back into position. I have to confess I haven't been as diligent in this as the new trays are very brittle and a little uncomfortable. I have tried to wear them a few times a week when I can remember. Mostly I use them in the mornings when I'm getting ready for work so I don't have to speak as it's pretty impossible while wearing them!
It is amazing how quickly I have got out of the habit of wearing the trays. When I first had all the attachments removed I expected people to notice, but in fact no one did! Even though very few had commented on the trays while I was wearing them, I thought that some may have been hesitant so as not to embarrass me, but once they were gone they would comment. Evidently this was not the case and I really was over thinking the whole thing. I guess this really does give testimony to the fact that Invisalign is barely noticeable!

subset: commoncrawl


text:
|New product news
|SMC meets the need for speed with latest AC Servo Motor launch
SMC, the world's leading provider of pneumatics, has upped a gear with its latest AC servo motor drivers that meet market demand for fast protocols and improved safety. The LECYM and LECYU have been specifically designed for use in applications that require high speed and precision positioning. Both models feature a Safe Torque Off (STO) function and fast protocols, suitable for interpolation. The addition of the STO prevents the torque energy from interfering with the motor and causing the drive to start unexpectedly. As there are no electromechanical components, switching times are also shorter. The other stand-out feature of the LECYM and LECYU is their compatibility with the super-fast protocol, MECHATROLINK, which is designed for accurate motion control and interpolation. This facility delivers greater productivity, managing speeds up to 100Mbps and reduced cycle times of just 125µs. Further efficiencies are driven through wiring and labour saving features that includes the integration of the lock cable within the motor cable and the opportunity to connect up to 62 drivers in line. In addition, they also feature an absolute 20-bit control encoder and a mechanical end stop offers easy positioning without the need for auto switches. Truly flexible, with the ability to work with a wide range of electric actuators across many applications, the LECYM and LECYU are particularly suitable for machinery and systems with axis motion. From its original pneumatics roots 53 years ago, SMC now has a team of 1,400 R&D engineers and is recognised as the worldwide leading expert in the pneumatics industry. The company offers more than 12,000 basic products with over 700,000 variations and has a diverse customer base covering all automation industries. For more information about SMC and its quality products visit www.smc.eu.
|December 2014


text:
- Follow goantolondon on WordPress.com
Follow goantolondon on TwitterMy Tweets
Like goantolondon on Facebook
Competition related links – check them out*Competition has now closed.* COMPETITION closes 10.06.2019 at midnight London GMT (BST) Win a @bakerdays Father's Day Cake for Sunday 16th June, 2019 a Rafflecopter giveaway... what are you waiting for, enter now!!! http://www.rafflecopter.com/rafl/display/93e4eb104/? (... if link is not working, head over to our blog post and follow active link to our Rafflecopter competition)
Disclaimer – Editorial ControlThe goantolondon team retains full editorial control over all our posts.
We are part of The Blogger Programme – working with Brands and PR's
Tabl – We are a Community Founder
Zomato reviews
Zomato listing
We are listed on Leaderboarded Top 1000+ Travel Blogs!
We are part of Travel Massive
We are part of Travel Link Up
Recent Posts
- Chick 'n' Sours, near London Liverpool Street
- Homage2Fromage – say yes please to all you can eat cheese!!!
- Win a @bakerdays Father's Day cake for Sunday 16th June, 2019
- Comté cookery class with Chef Laura Pope at Central Street Cookery School
- Celebration cakes by bakerdays – order your delicious surprise cakes !
Tag Archives: @marieslittlejar
The Tabl, a feast for all the senses!
Posted on April 19, 2016 by goantolondon
View this post on Instagram A thought provoking quote on side of @155_bar_kitchen #the155club @clerkenwellldn #clerkenwellldn @theTabl @the_tabl #atthetabl #communityfounder #event #eatdrinkrepeat A post shared by @ goantolondon on Apr 3, 2016 at 12:08pm PDT When we got to the … Continue reading →
Posted in Clerkenwell, Clerkenwell London, England, fusion cuisine, Global inspirations, london, London, Meat, menus and prices, Style of cooking, supperclub, The Tabl, The Tabl - Social Media, Venues for special occasions | Tagged #atthetabl, #cocktailhour, #communityfounder, #communityfounderevent, #food #bloggers, #foodbloggers, #RSD16, #SaturdaySessions, #VinylLounge, 155 Bar and Kitchen, @155_Bar_Kitchen, @alajode, @andreaspassions, @BrightonGin, @CharAimeeClarke, @ChefConsultant, @chintalkakaya, @ClerkenwellLDN, @CocoaHernando, @connieconsumes, @Dalton_Banks, @Fabulous698B, @FreshnFearless, @guan_chua, @HerenciaTequila, @JessEatingeast, @KashaCapeTown, @kekelovescake, @Kimberlybhurd, @LBCatG, @LuxTravelFoodie, @marieslittlejar, @MasterChefUK, @miammiamyum, @MrTimChow, @nixandkix, @OpiumChinatown, @OppoIceCream, @OttouCarine, @OzoneCoffeeUK, @PalomaKara, @passandbrush, @PlaylisterFM, @raastawala, @TazzGault, @teastudio, @theboywhoatetheworld, @theTabl, @the_cheeksterx, @vosswater, Aftab, Brighton Gin, Brighton rock, Brighton rocktail, Chef Damian Wawrzyniak, Clerkenwell, Clerkenwell London, cocktail, community founder, Damian Wawrzyniak, drink, event, food, G&T, Guan Chua, London, producers, razor clams, sensory playground, supperclubs, tartare, The Cheekster, The Tabl, TheCheeksterX, venison, venison tartare | Leave a comment


text:
Utilities, Sustainability and the LawSLN #: 12692
Course Prefix: LAW-791
Course Section: 002
Credit Hours: 3
Instructor(s): Mayes
Course Description:
Students will examine utility law in Arizona and the United States, with a particular focus on how traditional ratemaking is accomplished in an era of renewable energy portfolio standards, energy efficiency mandates and greenhouse gas emissions reductions regimes for electric and natural gas utilities. Since energy sustainability laws and regulatory policies are largely imposed on and carried out by utilities, the course will begin with an examination of the fundamentals of utility regulation. Additionally, the course will follow current trends in utility regulation such as adjustor mechanisms designed to pass through natural gas and other commodity costs, renewable energy and energy efficiency surcharge mechanisms and the rate-basing of renewable energy projects, construction work in progress allowances in rate base, and attrition adjustments. Finally, the course will address new and emerging trends in utility law, including a discussion of transmission policies promoting renewable energy development, federal and state efforts on Demand Response and the Smart Grid, and the regulation of greenhouse gasses, including proposed federal climate change legislation.
Additional Information:
Credit Hours: 3
Grading Option: Letter Grade Only
Graduation Writing Requirement: No
Flexible Writing Requirement: Yes
Skills Requirement: No
Experiential Learning: No
Special Withdrawal Course: No
Limited Enrollment Number: 16
Final Exam Given: No
Attendance Policy: Per Statement Of Student Policies
* The law school has a policy that Is used To calculate credit hours. Please see the Statement of Student Policies.


text:
Author: Bill Martin Jr.
Edition: First
Format: Kindle eBook
Number Of Pages: 32
Publisher: Henry Holt and Co. (BYR)
Release Date: 2011-11-14
Details: A big happy frog, a plump purple cat, a handsome blue horse, and a soft yellow duck--all parade across the pages of this delightful book. Children will immediately respond to Eric Carle's flat, boldly colored collages. Combined with Bill Martin's singsong text, they create unforgettable images of these endearing animals.
The Origins of Brown Bear
On a train ride in 1966, the title phrase Brown Bear, Brown Bear, What Do You See? popped into Bill Martin Jr.'s head. Later, he spotted an illustration of a red lobster in a magazine and contacted the creator, Eric Carle, to ask if he would illustrate his poem. So began Eric Carle's career as a children's book illustrator--along with a life-long collaborative friendship with Bill Martin Jr. Since then, Brown Bear and the three companion titles, Polar Bear, Panda Bear, and Baby Bear, have gone on to sell millions of copies worldwide.
The Bear books are a cultural landmark and a key milestone in many children's reading lives. And many adults today remember reading the Bear books themselves as well as the experience of reading them for the first time to their own children. Whether in a picture book or a reader, and now in eBook and audio, the same bold graphics and repetitive, rhythmic text have truly stood the test of time.
Throughout Eric Carle's career, he has shown an unshakeable commitment to artistic integrity and a dedication to making art accessible to children. His skillfully designed and beautifully rendered collage art is admired by fellow artists, colleagues and fans in equal measure. And in 2002, with his wife Barbara, Eric founded The Eric Carle Museum of Picture Book Art in Amherst, Massachusetts, the first museum of its kind in the United States.
--Laura Godwin, Vice President and Publisher, Henry Holt Books for Young Readers
A Question for Eric Carle
Before the Bear books, you worked in advertising but had not yet created a children's book. What went through your mind when you first heard from author Bill Martin Jr. about the Brown Bear manuscript? What made you want to illustrate it?
Eric Carle: At that point I was doing work-for-hire and I was very pleased to have the chance to do something different. I went through the manuscript and could see in my mind images of bright colorful animals, big and bold and simple like in posters. I was actually able to finish the art for this book and deliver it in one weekend. The whole process felt right and I was very excited by the opportunity to work on the book with Bill, which really changed my life and set me on the true course in my career.
Eric Carle at work in his studio, Northampton, MA
Eric Carle, holding a sketch from Baby Bear


text:
Canada made a stuttering start to the defense of its Olympic curling title on Monday, following up a scrappy win over unheralded Germany with a surprise loss to Switzerland on a sobering day for the big gold-medal favorites.
By the end of opening day, Sweden was the only team 2-for-2, with wins in tough matches against the Swiss and Britain at the Ice Cube Curling Center at the Sochi Games.
After becoming the first team in Canada's storied curling history to go through Olympic trials unbeaten, Brad Jacobs' rink was widely seen as the overwhelming favorites for the games.
U.S. & World
But Canada was sloppy in beating Germany - arguably the weakest lineup in the 10-team competition - 11-8 in the morning and then was upset 5-4 by Switzerland in the evening. It has given plenty of hope to their rivals for the gold.
"I'm a little bit surprised," Sweden player Fredrik Lindberg said. "But they have never been abroad to play a championship and that's something to consider. And they are expected to win and obviously it has to be a big pressure on them.
"If they get a tough start, maybe it starts getting to them."
And it doesn't get any easier for the Canadians — their only match on Tuesday is against Sweden in a repeat of the 2013 world championship final. The Swedes won that in Victoria, Canada, in April.
"We're not sharp, not in a rhythm, not making our shots," Canada's Ryan Harnden said. "But we will bounce back. We are the type of team that bounces back. Tomorrow's a new day."
Joining Sweden in making a good start to round-robin play was Norway, the 2010 silver medalists who have become much more popular for their fashion sense than their curling.
The Norwegians were the talk of the Vancouver Olympics in 2010 for wearing a range of funky, diamond-printed pants during their games. They are continuing the trend here, and emerged for their first game - against the United States in the evening - with another snazzy pattern on their pants.
This time, they donned the Ice Blocks range - a mixture of red, white, blue and gray squares and rectangles.
"We have so many things going on in the closet right now," Norway curler Haavard Vad Petersson said. "We just have to try to get through them all."
Curling's kings of cool proved too strong for the U.S., taking a 5-1 lead after three ends and winding up a 7-4 winner to go 1-for-1. They were playing in front of Prince Hakan of Norway.
With Princess Anne of Britain and Prince Albert of Monaco also spectators at the Ice Cube on Monday, there was a royal feel to proceedings.
Sweden leads the way after beating Switzerland - the reigning European champion - 7-5 in the morning and then winning 8-4 against Britain, which had started by easing past Russia 7-4.
"We couldn't be more happy - two solid wins," Lindberg said.
Britain, China and Denmark all finished the day with one win to their name. Russia is 0-for-2, disappointing the horn-blowing, thunderstick-clapping home fans who created a lively atmosphere throughout the day.


text:
|May 19, 1999
|State Directors of Vocational-Technical Education
State Directors of Community, Technical and Junior Colleges
State Tech-Prep Coordinators
|Patricia W. McNeil
At the meeting of the State Directors on April 28, some members inquired whether the enactment of the Education Flexibility Partnership Act of 1999 would affect the requirements of the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act of 1998. The Department is currently developing guidance on the Act, and we will share that guidance with you when it is complete. We will be able to address any issues specific to the Perkins Act at that time. For your information, I am sharing with you the information on Ed-Flex that the Secretary recently sent to your Chief State School Officer.
On April 29, 1999, President Clinton signed into law the Education Flexibility Partnership Act of 1999. (A copy of the Act is enclosed for your convenience.) This legislation allows the Secretary to delegate to states with strong accountability safeguards the authority to waive certain federal education requirements that may impede local efforts to reform and improve education.
To be eligible to apply for Ed-Flex waiver authority, a state must:
have developed and implemented challenging state content standards, student performance standards, and aligned assessments as required under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, and for which districts in the state are producing the individual school performance profiles required by Title I; or
have developed and implemented challenging state content standards and interim assessments, and have made substantial progress toward developing and implementing student performance standards and aligned assessments required under Title I, and toward having districts produce the individual school performance profiles;
hold districts and schools accountable for meeting the educational goals described in their local applications and for engaging in technical assistance and corrective actions consistent with Title I for districts and schools that do not make adequate yearly progress; and
waive state statutory or regulatory requirements relating to education while holding districts and schools that are affected by the waivers accountable for the performance of students that are affected by the waivers.
Under the Education Flexibility Partnership Act, any state, as well as the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the outlying areas, may apply for Ed-Flex waiver authority if it meets these eligibility requirements. To be considered for Ed-Flex, eligible states must submit to the Department an educational flexibility plan that addresses the application requirements in the legislation.
The Department is in the process of preparing Ed-Flex application materials and guidance. This guidance, which we expect to issue next month, will assist states in developing their Ed-Flex plans and describe the process for submission and quality review of those plans. This process will include a review of how states have met or are making substantial progress toward meeting the Title I requirements for an aligned standards and assessment system. My office will distribute this guidance to you as soon as it is available.
States are strongly encouraged to refer to the guidance before submitting their Ed-Flex applications to the Department. In the meantime, districts and schools in states that have not yet been granted Ed-Flex waiver authority may still apply directly to the U.S. Department of Education for waivers of federal education requirements. Guidance on applying for waivers from the Department is available on the Department's web site.
Under the new legislation, the original twelve Ed-Flex states (Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Mexico, Ohio, Oregon, Texas, and Vermont) retain their waiver authority for the five-year period for which it was initially granted. They may then seek an extension of this authority under the provisions in the new legislation.
If you have questions about the relationship between the Perkins Act and Ed-Flex, please contact Cynthia Brown of OVAE at (202) 205-5451 or via email at email@example.com.


text:
O.K. We now need a new title for CNN. For years we have been calling it the communist news network.
I vote for the Crazies News Network. Any better idea.
RE: Comments:Criticize public figures regarding their public work. Don't attack a private citizen by name nor repeatedly/ Need an explanation for today's insanity? Here it is: "woe to you people of the world, for the devil has come down to you in great anger, knowing that he has little time." Rev. 12:12 TLB :
Thursday, April 16, 2009
CNN Reporter Slams FOX at Chicago "Tea-Party"
O.K. We now need a new title for CNN. For years we have been calling it the communist news network.
32 comments:
- Sarkazein said...
This is a CNN reporter. She acts like a political hack.
She is not a commentator, she is a CNN reporter with an agenda. It is no wonder CNN is in the cellar when it comes to ratings.
If she called herself a liberal commentator then it would be fine...but she doesn't.
- April 16, 2009 at 8:18 PM
CNN? How about Clueless Neatly-combed Nitwits. Cowardly Nabobs of Negativity. I still like Communist News Network, and I'm sure they'd be much more accepting of a communist protest. www.shirts4freedom.com
- April 16, 2009 at 9:02 PM
Certainly Not News.
- April 16, 2009 at 10:14 PM
Here's the rest of the story.
- April 16, 2009 at 10:47 PM
- Sarkazein said...
That was sick. Like Rush said- it is really them and us now. There are commenters right here on this blog that could watch both videos and NOT see the difference or more probable and worse, admit the difference.
- April 17, 2009 at 8:35 AM
I couldn't agree more Sark.
- April 17, 2009 at 8:59 AM
I liked your link.
The comment I heard was " You are not talking to regular main stream people"
This is what I was commenting on here with Guy before the Billionaire sponsered Tea Party.
I ask those on this blog what they would say when the newsperson shoved a mic in front of them and ask what their agenda or protest was about?
Most really don't or didn't know. They just knew they were pissed off (by Fox News ).
Listing you would think these folks didn't expect to pay any taxes. None seem to realize they would get tax relief from Obama's plan.
Today's Charlotte Observer has a great cartoon with TEA Party protester holding signs. The signs say "Reduce my parents Social Security" " No Medicare for Mom", "Where's my Pink Silp"," Lay off my kid's teacher", Breadlines not Bailouts" "Crash baby Crash".
This is the logic produced by FoxNews and Rush.
- April 17, 2009 at 9:01 AM
- April 17, 2009 at 9:01 AM
Are you referring to the anger woman talking to the reporter, or Ann Coulter
- April 17, 2009 at 9:06 AM
- Sarkazein said...
This is what I mean by "even worse". One would have to be a complete political moron not to be able to see the liberal agenda the CNN "reporter" displays in her "reporting". In the liberal comments here, he is not a complete political moron, just dishonest...a characteristic of liberalism that will be the demise of either our country or liberalism. Both together cannot survive.
- April 17, 2009 at 9:33 AM
The Conservative agenda has done enough damage our country and it's citizens and you want to continue with the same damaging political nonsense?
The conseravitve damage is real and has aready happened.
- April 17, 2009 at 10:34 AM
My LPOV, aren't we obtuse today.
Oh yes I was was referring to the "commentator" who in the videos I saw portrayed herself as nothing more than a political hack for the left, rather like yourself.
As for Ann Coulter I don't believe the "B" word fits, unless it is for the "B" word "Brilliant".
- April 17, 2009 at 1:14 PM
POV, you are incredible. You contend that a liberal gathering or demonstration is patriotic and a conservative event is contrived. Of course the tea parties represent mainstream America. You blindly refuse to realize that being liberal or conservative has nothing to do with parties. It has to do with issues and how you feel about them. Being a practitioner of the liberal religious faith, you have a hard time believing this and would never acknowledge it if you did. I believe you see the momentum rising in the favor of the conservatives. As this is against your religious beliefs, I can understand why you are afraid, very afraid.
CNN is irrelevant except as a sounding board. One should watch it to see how they spin an event. This gives you low end of the scale with which to compare other sources.
How about Cerebraly Negative Numskulls?
- April 17, 2009 at 2:03 PM
I saw the CNN strumpet confront a man holding a baby at the Illinois tea party. She asked him if he was aware that the Stimulus Bill was giving Illinois millions of dollars. I would have given a brick of 22s if he had replied,"Are you aware that this baby will be one of the people paying for it?" Do these people really believe that nobody has to pay the bill?
- April 17, 2009 at 2:44 PM
- Blogger said...
Bill O'Reilly and Greta VanSusteren are discussing this woman right now. They are saying things like: "She is acts like a novice. She does not understand the first amendment."
As to the falling ratings of the other two networks, Greta points out that you cannot be vulgar and disdainful to listeners and expect to survive.
- April 17, 2009 at 8:43 PM
- Sarkazein said...
She picked the most "sensational" looking person with the "Obama is a fascist" sign while there were thousands less sensational people around, then goes to the man holding his child because in her warped liberal mind this was no place for a child.
Yet, on the Bye-Bye Liberal Media post, a liberal comment states FOX is the "sensationalist" network.
Who is politically ignorant enough to compare a "news reporter" with proudly self-admitted conservative author and commentator and believe they are making a sane analogy ?
Any guesses POV?
- April 17, 2009 at 9:40 PM
The one to five percent of the wealthiest people at the top get hate radio, Fox news and to a little lesser degree main stream media to do their bidding.
All of main stream media shop for hype and sensational stories to get the attention of viewers.
Ever notice when something important is going on we have months of Michael Jackson, OJ Simpson, Nicole Smith or some other nonsense?
Fox News and hate radio go further to shop for issues to anger as many Americans as possible about issues of no importance to the well being of their own families. Health Care, Living Wage, Education for themselves or their children, worker safety, fair lending practices, prison reform, improper use of military ( War in Iraq ). Redistribution of wealth to the top one percent.
If Fox and Hate radio can keep you pissed off about guns or God they can keep you weak and write laws to benefit the wealthiest in our society.
- April 20, 2009 at 9:12 AM
POV, are you saying that the only people concerned enough to try to inform themselves with current events are conservatives? You then contend that this is because of an insidious conspiracy between a news network and many different radio programs to make people mad? You do not even consider that the events themselves are the issues causing concerns? You certainly do not give liberals much credit for trying to stay informed or voicing their opinions if the majority of people that watch news or listen to talk radio are rich conservatives.
Of course trickle down economics work. If not, let everyone shop out of the area for a month and see what happens to the local economy. Maybe you can understand that , if nothing else.
I love to read your posts. I can get these "through the looking glass" ideologies nowhere else. Other people are either to smart or to ashamed to voice them.
- April 20, 2009 at 9:25 AM
I'm sure that LiberalPOV has at some point said something that remotely showed a grasp of reality but I can't remember when. Because of his total lack of credibility it's easier, these days, for me to laugh him off. As Guy suggest it is "Alice in Wonderland" stuff.
Nonny, on another thread, summed it up when he wrote: "I just don't understand how someone can develop such and pleasant and mean-spirited attitude towards their fellow humans based solely on political ideology."
IMHO he is the reason that we don't see many liberals on this blog. Andrew, RV, Pocket and Braveheart don't want to defend his absurdity so they largely stay away. Of course I could be wrong so I'll ask, do any liberals think LiberalPOV has a shred of credibility left after all of his ducking and dodging non-sequitors?
- April 20, 2009 at 10:35 AM
"and pleasant" should read "an unpleasant"
- April 20, 2009 at 10:53 AM
Go back and reread my post.
Ask your self or google to see who owns Fox News or other cable and network outlets?
The media is in the hands of a very few people.
While you are going after CNN now, I was going after CNN during the lead up to the Iraq War. All the media failed during the lead up to the war in Iraq. Only four interviews were done with those opposing the war and they were hostile interviews. Hundreds were done with pro war most Bush Admin people. During the same time lots of coverage was given to Michael Jackson or Anna Nicole Smith.
Rupert Murdock is not the friend of working people or small business.
Right now the deal makers and special interest are divided over the stimulus money and moved to green industries and Universal health Care.
Big Coal, Petroleum, Insurance, Pharmaceuticals and chemical companies need the flock of Hate radio and Fox News listeners to protect their interest. Guns, gays and God are just their tools to keep you pissed off. Why would Fox News have you believing you will pay more taxes under the Obama tax plan? Check out the truth on your own taxes? How many of those blogging here make more than $250,000.00 per year?
- April 20, 2009 at 10:57 AM
POV, your attention span needs some work. I have said many times that I watch CNN as a counterpoint to Fox news. I decide from many sources what constitutes the truth on an issue. I do not blindly follow just those things that agree with my opinions. This is apparently past your ability to comprehend even if you have taken your mood altering medication for ADD.
On the other hand, I am starting to believe what others on this blog have indicated. The problem is not that you do not understand differences of opinion. It is that you are being deliberately obtuse because you cannot make a logical argument. The prior condition would have gained you pity. The latter only earns you contempt.
- April 20, 2009 at 11:22 AM
Lib has said many times he likes to tick off the right. The one thing he doesn't realize, it doesn't tick me off. Lib, you like to harp on things as we say in our family. It wastes time and as a friend told me, he doesn't feel he has a lot of time left on this earth and picks and chooses who he spends it with.
I don't have a problem with God, guns and gays and don't think anyone on here does either.
Conservatives know our taxes will go up. It's common sense. Lib, mark our words, taxes will rise. As much as I'd like to believe Obamas promises, it ain't gonna happen. You can't throw money around, without a way to pay for it.
My mother always told me that you don't tell people your business too. My opinion, if you don't share your personal business, you won't give people a reason to judge you. So Lib, it's none of your beeswax how much we make in our personal lives.
- April 20, 2009 at 11:39 AM
I find absolutely HILARIOUS the notion that CNN would be expected to oppose so many Democrats that so enthusiastically supported the war in Iraq!
"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998
"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998
"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998
"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998
"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998
"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others
"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002
"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002
"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002
"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002
"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002
"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." -- John Kerry, October 9, 2002
"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002
"Saddam's existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq's enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002
"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration's policy towards Iraq, I don't think there can be any question about Saddam's conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002
"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002
"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002
"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002
"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002
"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002
"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003
"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003
For good measure I'll throw in France:"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002
- April 20, 2009 at 11:40 AM
- Sarkazein said...
I had not read some of those quotes. Very informative.
With Obama officially giving aid and comfort to our enemy with the release of the interrogation documents as thou our enemy had won the war and demanded them as part of a conditional surrender, do you think the Democrats that officially signed on to these interrogation methods will have similar quotes available and released to the public?
- April 20, 2009 at 12:12 PM
Obama has said that the CIA agents are safe but he wouldn't rule out charging Bush/Cheney with war crimes. If the left is intellectually honest then they will demand that the Democrats that officially signed on to these interrogation methods be prosecuted. Of course we know that they are not intellectually honest.
Which reaction do you think LiberalPOV will have: 1)ignore the post, or 2)blame it on Foxnews, Rush and flagpins? I'd give the third option as him saying "Wow, I didn't know that, good point" but I know hell will freeze over first.
- April 20, 2009 at 2:14 PM
Would you give me a link to the Democrats present in those White house briefings on torture? I do know many in the military were opposing the torture tactics.
- April 20, 2009 at 3:24 PM
- Sarkazein said...
- April 20, 2009 at 5:39 PM
Be careful what you ask for Lib.
- April 20, 2009 at 6:28 PM
Couldn't make it work. Who was at the white house tortire breifing besides Bush Admin?
- April 20, 2009 at 7:47 PM
- Sarkazein said...
Congress oversees the actions of the CIA. Congress was briefed on the interrogation methods. Some asked if the CIA was being tough enough.
Just like the Iraq War Congress signed off on... the Democrats and Republicans alike. Main difference, is the Democrats cowerer in the face of discomfort.
Just like your comments that nothing matters what Obama does wrong, as long as his perceived poll numbers are up.
- April 20, 2009 at 8:01 PM
It worked for me and evidently for blogger because he posted it. You even commented and true to form you changed your tune as soon as you found out how many Democrats were complicit.
- April 20, 2009 at 9:30 PM


text:
Welcome to the Unterrainer group
The terahertz region of the electromagnetic spectrum is a frontier area for photonics research.
This part of the electromagnetic spectrum has been less well explored and has been called the "terahertz gap" because of the lack of high-power, room-temperature sources and efficient detectors. The generation and detection of radiation in this frequency range is difficult. Scaling and extrapolating known concepts of the microwave or infrared ranges is, in general, not possible. However, solid state quantum devices, which allow the realization of quantum optical concepts, e.g. for lasers and photon emitters, are very promising radiation sources in the THz range.
Our research interests are
|Semiconductor quantum structures for novel photonic devices
|Ultrafast lasers and terahertz time domain spectroscopy
|Two-dimensional materials and their interaction with light


text:
Transfer news: Four Premier League clubs in for Matej Vydra
Four Premier League clubs have expressed an interest in taking Udinese striker Matej Vydra on loan, claims his agent.
By Vasek Kadlec
Last Updated: 25/06/13 1:33pm
The Czech forward was brought to the attention of an English audience in 2012/13 while taking in a productive loan spell at Watford - which saw him named Championship Player of the Year and take the Hornets to within 90 minutes of promotion to the Premier League.
Unsurprisingly, he has drawn plenty of admiring glances ahead of the summer transfer window - with West Bromwich Albion, West Ham United, Swansea City and Sunderland said to be keen on bringing him back to England.
Vydra's representative claims a move to the Premier League is now the main focus for his client, with an offer from Bundesliga outfit Werder Bremen having been knocked back.
After holding talks with Udinese and Watford owner Giampaolo Pozzo on Monday, Ondrej Chovanec told isport.blesk.cz: "We agreed that none of the offers (for a permanent transfer) are in the region that would interest Udinese.
"They don't want to sell him for £8million, so they have given us freedom to discuss loan spells with the Premier League clubs that are interested.
"At the moment we have offers from four Premier League clubs - West Brom, West Ham, Swansea and Sunderland."
On the decision to reject a move to Germany, Chovanec added: "At Udinese they don't want Matej to have to get used to life in a different country, so now it seems likely that he will be playing on in England."