Together we can change the world

Isn’t that just about the dumbest slogan?  I’ve heard it or seen it many times in many phrases, and it isn’t true, of course.  Get three people in a room with a white board and marker and you have a case for an argument even to state which world you’re referring to. This invitation to change the world just happened to come in an alumni pitch from the University of Illinois. They want my money.  If Illinois graduates were going to change the world, we certainly would have done so by now.

I’ve seen similar slogans about education, about poverty, about child abuse, about suicide, about the opioid epidemic, about trash in the ocean, about trafficking in persons, about friendships with Muslims, about political parties right and left, and any societal or religious problem out there. 

Our church is doing a “launch out” campaign.  Our summer home at Lakeside is non-stop fund raising—sometimes we go to a dinner, sometimes we’re invited to a really nice cottage to listen to a pitch, sometimes they just pass the plate. Right now it’s $3 million for the new swimming pool and wellness center.

UALC—our church--is calling members to celebrate “how God has moved through the last 60 years of our church’s history, give our thanks as He continues to bless and use our church today, and praise Him for the vision He has revealed to us for the future.”  I don’t know what that vision is. In the late 20th century the vision was to expand to the west of the river and have multiple campuses plus a school, but then that didn’t look like a good idea, so the extra land was sold to pay the mortgage. I thought Peter and Paul and the church fathers had the church’s vision pretty well outlined. 

And the U. of I. wants alumni to “come together for our signature event to celebrate the launch of our most ambitious philanthropic campaign ever.” Claims it has a storied past and bold future.  Sounds a lot like my church launch and vision.

Soon I’ll be getting appeals in my e-mail to change a child’s life by buying a backpack with school supplies for a kindergarten student.  Oh, that it were so easy!

Help where you can; be compassionate and kind.  You will definitely not change the world or transform a life, but it will make you a better person.  And that glorifies God.

Look who’s bringing change from the top down now

"In the 13 years between Obama's return to Chicago from law school and his Senate campaign, he was deeply involved with the city's constellation of community-organizing groups. He wrote about the subject. He attended organizing seminars. He served on the boards of foundations that support community organizing. He taught Alinsky's concepts and methods in workshops [a Chicago Marxist who advised his followers to go after the middle class because the poor have no power, Saul Alinksy died in 1972] . When he first ran for office in 1996, he pledged to bring the spirit of community organizing to his job in the state Senate. And, after he was elected to the U.S. Senate, his wife, Michelle, told a reporter, "Barack is not a politician first and foremost. He's a community activist exploring the viability of politics to make change." Recalling her remark in 2005, Obama wrote, "I take that observation as a compliment."

And he also said, "Change won't come from the top, . . . Change will come from a mobilized grass roots." From The Agitator

But look who’s at the top now, asking all of us to change for his vision of what’s right socially, economically and politically. He even tries to change history. Yes, this is definitely change from the top down.

The Obamas were terrific

according to the consensus and chatter I heard at the coffee shop from the early-early crowd this morning. The girls were adorable; the speech wasn't too long. Pushed the right buttons. However, others in the crowd and on the platform left some pretty negative impressions on suburban citizens.

Aretha's song styling and hat were real turn offs.

What designer would put a classy woman like Michelle in a pea-green dress? She's got a great sense of style, but that? Oh dear! Aged her 10 years. Someone else said the press reported it as gold--but on TV it didn't look gold. I thought it looked like Queen Elizabeth's designer. Fortunately, I think these dresses immediately go to a museum.

The black preacher's prayer was racist.

Booing the president and vice-president (the crowd) showed we have poor winners, not poor losers. After 8 years of smearing and ridiculing Bush, I guess it's a tough habit to break.

The poem . . . boring and awful. Did anyone know what she was talking about? I must have gone to the restroom--don't remember hearing it.

When did Stevie Wonder get so heavy? Didn't see him.

Will the press investigate the cost of Michelle's clothing?

And not a word about policy. Aren't we a shallow bunch! Oh well, maybe tomorrow everything will change.

Not much has changed in a thousand years

When you have access to a library of a few million books and journals just two miles away and freedom to browse in the stacks, it is easy to come home with topics about which you never gave a thought, such as The reformation of the 12th century by Giles Constable (Cambridge University Press, 1996). So far, I've only made it through the preface and introduction, the extensive bibliography and index, and skimmed a few chapters, but I've seen so much that looks familiar in the religious and secular life of the 11th and 12th centuries that reminds me of the 21st. Other names, titles, and concepts are totally unfamiliar like names of monasteries, phrases in Latin that don't translate well into English, places, and Roman Catholic theology. Even when I get out the dictionary, or check the extensive index, I don't have a frame of reference to understand. A Cluniac is not someone obsessed with movie star George Clooney, nephew of Rosemary, for instance. And black and white monks have nothing to do with race. And then there's the internet problem, always there when I read a book, finding things like The Medieval Sourcebook, which I didn't know I needed until I started browsing.

But before I run off on another tangent about medieval times I'll just note a few phrases that caught my eye, that reminded me that everything we (or at least I) think is contemporary, happened before, because human nature really doesn't change that much.

• . . . reform and revival was seen as a result of the increasing population and approaching end of the world. Whether you're a global warmist fanatic follower of Al Gore, holy Cap and Trade, robed in the vestments of green hype or a Christian dispensationalist scanning the headlines to compare with the Books of Daniel and Revelation--this should sound familier
  
• whether the reformers were from wealthy or humble origins, their followers were often well off [and from my cursory reading, feeling a bit guilty about it], but since it is the writings of the reformers that are available, the diversity and equality that is described may be the exception rather than the rule
  
• charismatic preachers [politicians] recruited actively for converts to their reform movement--transfers from one house or community to another created personal, legal and political problems
  
• rules circulated in written form, such as manuscripts and letters, but were carried out mainly through associations, personal contacts and visits--personal influence and connections were paramount
  
• opponents of reform were not necessarily bad men, but they were set in their ways and opposed to change in principle as well as in practice
  
• when faced with change, they resisted both passively and actively
  
• resistance to change has been recorded by the reformers, not the resisters so is distorted or left out of the record
  
• it was easier to start a new house than reform an old one
  
• reforms of existing institutions and communities almost always involved some pain and difficulty, occasionally with activie resistance and open violence
  
• an involuntary reform or change of order was a blow to the self-esteem of members and resistance was not always selfish or unreasonable
  
• even the poorest monastic community needed land, buildings, books, vestments and other supplies, thus it needed patrons as well as spiritual founders, and these patrons often claimed rights over the community so the interests often clashed
  
• even the most generous patrons hoped to get away as cheaply as possible
  
• some reformers removed existing settlers
  
• recruiting the next generation [of the reformed group] was always a problem when the first generation died out--newcomers didn't share the memories and ideals of the early years. The second generation was often the most dangerous period of institutional development
  
• almost every new, reformed house that survived and flourished later went through a painful period, even a crisis as it grew in wealth and numbers
  
• the new orders and reforms created diversity in the 12th century, with unforeseen consequences of competition and eventually greater uniformity and traditional solutions, so that as the age of experiment drew to a close, the traditional ideals and institutional patterns reasserted themselves within the monastic order and brought the period of change to an end.

Ah, change. It's an interesting concept, isn't it?

Change we can count on

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm feeling much better about Obama's change these days. All those Clinton retreads. It's like a family reunion, although they never really left the beltway, just opened "think tanks." Not that the Bush people will be any different. It's what keeps that place going. Also nice to see that they'll probably opt for private school for their daughters. God forbid a wealthy politician who owes the NEA big time should ever support private education for the poor or middle class with vouchers. Nope. The only change I see is the value of my 403-b and my stock portfolio. Just a dab of change left. And he's promising to take even what little's there by taxing more businesses to give me itsy-bitsy perksies. Thank you Democrats for all you've done for us to make our investments worthless while you sat on your fannies.

Change round up

This doesn't look like a good idea to me. Keep your change, dig it out of the bottom of your purse, wallet or pocket and put it in a dish, box or piggy bank at home. Periodically take it to the market (this little piggy, get it?), buy canned food, and donate it to your local food pantry. I have a bunch of reservations about food pantries, but right now many people are stopping by for help who perhaps in the past were donors. The price increases in the stores are shocking--higher fuel costs, less investment in local companies due to punitive environmental regulations, and it's only going to get worse as the coal industry is shut down through the global warming, cap and trade hoaxers. Government do-good, feel-good programs hurt the poor first. The trillions we spend on poverty programs are disturbingly inefficient and wasteful of tax money, propping up inefficent industries, farmers and community organizers. Better to step in and do your part personally than to turn more over to the government.

Yesterday I spent about an extra $10 at Meijer's--some things that are easy to store and will provide a bit more variety than what might be on the shelves. I've heard things are lean and the shelves empty. Instead of a big blow out of grocery bags at Thanksgiving and Christmas, our church has the food bin in the lobby on Sundays during November and is asking that people donate smaller amounts the entire month. Sometimes businesses collect food; sometimes radio or TV stations. Which ever, this week when you're shopping pick up a few extra cans and donate. Keep your change, and then recycle it. Know where it is going.

4916 The Hope and Change theme

Barack Obama certainly isn't the first politician to take a biblical theme and run on/with it, and he won't be the last. The Bible is full of great truths, ideas, stories, parables, miracles and romances which have been used by capitalists and kings, socialists and school teachers, writers, artists, poets, and musicians, slaves and slavers, and even Marxists and fascists over the centuries. But there is one basic truth from Genesis to the Revelation, and it's all about the HOPE.

Christianity is an Easter religion. Easter celebrates HOPE, and in order to participate in this HOPE, the individual needs to change. In the New Testament, the word HOPE refers to the future, not only the HOPE of everlasting life, but the HOPE of resurrection from the dead, the HOPE of a new body like the body of Jesus, the HOPE of being in heaven forever with the Lord. Lots of religions have references to an afterlife, but in the Christian faith, the human body is so important to God because of his intentions at the Creation, He continues to use it even after death on this planet and realm. After all political boundaries and even the earth itself have passed away, we still have this HOPE. This HOPE written about in the New Testament doesn't depend on a nebulous, vague speech of a Chicago pol scrolling across a teleprompter, but a real solid foundation of fact. Our HOPE of a heaven where we dwell with God in a physical body rests upon what happened here on earth in the person of the Lord Jesus. His resurrection is the assurance of our resurrection. Obama can't take that away from us and refashion it into a social justice, namby-pamby temporary band-aid, the hope of a different job, or a housing project that will be torn down in 25 years. It's not the change in a McCain or Gore carbon cap or exchange running after green votes which is going to diminish your life style. No, this is real change--the change that the Holy Spirit will make in the believer, grounded in the HOPE.

Change: coins of a low denomination

Democratic Debate. Austin, Feb. 21, 2008

unified to bring about changes in this country.

we now have an opportunity to potentially change the relationship between the United States and Cuba after over half a century.

solid agenda for moving change forward in the next presidency.

And it is my strong belief that the changes are only going to come about if we're able to form a working coalition for change

And that's a policy that I'm going to change when I'm president of the United States. [outreach to Mexico]

I do think there is a fundamental difference between us [Clinton and Obama] in terms of how change comes about

I've been talking about making sure that we change our tax code so that working families actually get relief.

and so my plan was pretty good. It's not as good now, but my plan hasn't changed. The politics have changed a little bit.

the American people have to be involved and educated about how this change is going to be brought about.

but if we don't change how the politics is working in Washington,

and that's what I intend to change when I am president of the United States of America.

Change as a campaign theme

USAToday (Jan. 15) reports "demand for change," "change directions," "new course," "major shake-up," and "call for change"--whimpers from the electorate it anecdotally interviewed. Why? How old are these people? Ten? It's got to be the silliest one word mantra I've heard. We've had either a Bush or a Clinton in the White House since 1988, and Hillary is preaching change!

Barry Obama's cute and a good orator. So what is change-worthy about that? A politician's song and dance. What's new? Just because George W. Bush wasn't fluent, doesn't mean you fall all over yourself for mellifluous tones and call and response rhythm.

And why would we elect a trial lawyer who's Johnny-one-note on universal health care when trial lawyers are one of the reasons our medical cost are so high and people are leaving the medical profession. "Change" he says, so everyone can have Medicaid level health care instead of just the poor.

And why would we elect a man whose idea of "change" is to trade in wife #1 for a trophy wife--someone younger, richer and more svelte or blond than the first (or second, in Rudy's case).

Why should we elect from a group of senators who now claim "change" for the social security system they haven't looked at seriously in 8 years, who have failed to stop the AMT, a very punitive tax originally set up to catch 155 rich folk and now affects millions, and haven't stopped the earmarks going to their colleagues in their "scratch my back" but don't change now schemes.

Why would we expect change from senators or governors who don't think it is important to secure our borders, or to have an ID to vote, and who see no reason not to continue luring Mexican citizens here with promises of social benefits like education, health care, housing, etc.

None of these candidates, Republican or Democrat, fit my definition of "change," so I haven't even considered that as a requirement.

Poetry Thursday #6

CHANGE is this week's theme in honor of PT's new website. What changes more than women's fashion? Truthfully, my style doesn't change that much, especially with no job to go to. So when I say good-bye to a favorite style or fabric, it is a sad day. Some go to my "vintage closet"--not to wear, but to look at, like a formal my mother made when I was in high school, or my mother-of-the-bride dress from 1993.

This poem is about the last pair of shoulder pads in my closet. Shoulder pads (for women) returned to fashion in the early 1980s after a hiatus of about 30 years. They started small and then became enormous, and gradually disappeared. Now we all have narrow, dainty, child-like shoulders again instead of looking like we suited up for the middle school football team or the soap opera Dynasty.


On removing shoulder pads from a favorite blouse
by Norma Bruce
Feb. 7, 2007

Others told me
(helpful friends)
someday on my own
strength
would I go
to meet the world
tall, strong, confident.

I’d waver; you were silent.

Mirrors told me
(how they lied)
only with your
help
could I climb
the ladder of
greed, success, power.

I’d arrange; you were silent.

Today told me
(glaring lights)
it was now past
time
should I cling
another minute to
padded, shaped, contoured?

Snip and toss; you were silent.


Technorati: Poetry Thursday

Poetry Thursday has moved!

Here's the new site; I'll have to change my template link. So here's this week's challenge: "Given all the changes here at Poetry Thursday, we thought change would be a good topic for this week’s (completely and totally optional) idea." That's something to think about. This might be the time to post my shoulder pads poem.

All I did was attend a different church service today (we have eleven) and was amazed at the changes I saw. Not sure there's anything in that to write about, but change is always with us, isn't it? I've mentioned it before, but "change" is one of the reasons I retired at 60 instead of 65. I was so tired of the constant changes--the reporting line, the staff, the consortia, the committees, the technology. I thought there must be more to life than learning a new software gimmicks that would be gone in 6 months, or the names of student staff who would only stay a quarter. When you're young--like 18-25 or so--the changes dribble like a soft rain and you hardly notice them. Also, you tend to gloss over them thinking it (the changes) are temporary and eventually things will settle down. Doesn't happen. As you age your mind accumulates and stores all these changes and their warranties and instruction manuals are still on your shelves; they become burdensome.