Aug 25, 2013 at 14:22:17
“What an inspiring and practical article—one that I'll share with all my other author friends and students. Daydreaming is often when we get out very best ideas because the unstructured, non-dogmatic brain makes connections that all of our analysis might miss.”
suzych on Aug 26, 2013 at 03:01:03
“Brenda Peterson ^^^ Daydreaming is a form of mental play; other forms of play, physical ones as well as mental, also help rest and refresh the mind for new perceptions, plans, etc. My most restful, absorbing forms of play include needlepoint, antique window shopping, and reading mystery novels. Others I know of are walking by running water, growing herbs, flying kites, and anything that puts you into a flow-state where action is effortless and pleasing. We don't do enough of these things (I know I don't, and I'm not as busy as plenty of other people). We need to treat others better, but we also need to treat ourselves well and gently.”
“Note that most of the blue states are on fresh or saltwater where we see the effects of climate change clearly. The red states are in drought but don't seem to make a connection to global warming. Just because you deny something or don't believe in it, doesn't mean it isn't happening: Gulf coast still recovering from floods. Watching wildfires here in the West—again —and homeowners poised to flee in Eastern Washington.
Romney's cynical denial of our planet's human-induced climate change is so tragic. What does it matter how many people he "helps" if we have no habitat?
“Thanks for this insightful comment. Yes, we are a schizophrenic species when it comes to animals. If we tame or domesticate an animal so they are under our control we can cherish them, as we do our dogs. But if they are wild and equally important top predators in our ecosystems, we hunt them to extinction as we have the wild wolves. The only wolf control we should be practicing is self-control.”
After last week's much protested loss of the alpha female fromm Lamar Canyon pack, massive negative media coverage seems to have prompted Montana into some temporary sanity. The state has placed a temporary ban on wolf hunting near Yellowstone. Given that many of the wolves killed wore radio collars and are research animals, there is some speculation that hunters simply tuned into the wolves' radio frequencies and targeted them. This is, as my grandaddy used to say, "like shooting fish in a barrel" and shows a cynicism and complete lack of integrity or hunting ethics. Here's an update on the temporary ban. May it become permanent!
“>Wolves are ³often blamed for livestock attacks.
> The Department of Agriculture states that wolves are responsible for less than 1 % of
> depredations. Dogs kill four times as many.
> The second inaccuracy is that wolves are decimating elk.
>.² Montana State Wildlife and Parks(MSWP)
> state that wolves do not account for the
> yearly ups and downs of elk, and that the Montana elk population
>is now at an all time high.
> In repeating these falsehoods, the media is guilty of a false
> equivalence, between official sources and the lunatic fringe.
The area north of Yellowstone has now
> been closed to further hunting and trapping. This should be made permanent. The killing in that area of at least 12 wolves
> from Yellowstone packs has damaged longstanding research by
> scientists, as well as a multimillion-dollar tourist business.
> Eight of the twelve wolves
> killed wore radio collars, yet only 17% of Yellowstone wolves are collared.
>One would have expected about three of the twelve dead wolves
> to be collared. The statistical chances of eight being collared are
> The most likely explanation is that collared wolves are
> being targeted and that the means for this is homing in on their radio frequencies. This is
> against Montana law.
➢ You would be helping the wolves if you contacted MSWP and demanded that they
“At last Nate Silver of the New York Times' astute 538 poll has written a fascinating commentary on the gender gap. If only women voted, President Obama would be a landslide winner, writes Silver. If only men voted, Governor Romney would claim the presidency.
What does this wide gender gap say about our politics, women's future, and men's preferences? To me, it says the patriarchy is in its last days with many men wanting to continue "the way we were" and many women longing for a future that guarantees reproductive rights and equal pay. If women turn out in strong numbers, we will determine the election.
As I predicted, the gender gap is widening again between President Obama and Governor Romney.
At last the news media has figured out that the women's vote is crucial and are giving it more coverage. But I'd like to see more statistical attention. I wish Nate Silver at NYTimes 538 blog would address this gender gap and how it may affect the election. I do believe that women will elect our next president. More than any recent election, this 2012 decision will drastically affect women's lives, our health, our rights, and our hopes for equality. Can anyone really imagine a woman's life without the option of abortion and access to Planned Parenthood to assure our reproductive health?”
“I'm so enjoying all of your insightful comments on my Huff Post piece and thanks for sharing and making so many of your voices heard. I do believe women will decide this election. Reading the Sunday news, I note that the Cleveland Plain Dealer has endorsed Brown for Senate. In their endorsement, the Plain Dealer noted the intensely negative campaign run by his opponent, Josh Mandel, and wrote that they did not choose Mandel because, " It would reward ambition untethered to substance."
What a fabulous description of Romney's campaign, as well. Naked and blind ambition without substance or depth is what we saw on display in Romney's debate. Why reward that with our nation's highest office?”
NobleTry on Oct 7, 2012 at 17:11:01
“Modern American women will be the downfall of the U.S., as well as, generally, Western civilization. Give it another two decades or so. By then we'll all be sitting on couches with the ladies on The View or eunuchs like Dr. Phil, dabbing our eyes so as not to have our mascara run as we're going over our feelings, one more time, about how the big bad meanie men in our lives scare us when they raise their voices at us....while the Chinese are running the show.”
“Amen. AWoman! Why would women raise their sons to be so insensitive, rude, and domineering as Romney in this debate? I do think women hold the key to this presidential election. And while the gender gap is still the under-covered story, it will suddenly be big news the day after the election when women turn out in multitudes and reject this kind of Ugly American behavior.
“Hi, Mark, yes you are correct about the origin of this term and it's usual positive connotations of "bully for you," and having a good platform from which to speak one's mind. I was putting a new 21st century twist on the phrase, "bully pulpit" because October is national anti-bullying awareness month and because our uncivil politics have become not so much a dignified platform for debate, but a bullying contest.
“Thanks so much for this astute comment, Fannie. I, too, wonder what our nation would look like if we had a break from the warrior mentality and dominator model that Romney so employs with all those he seems to believe are beneath him, "victims," the "47 percent. Flexibility and cooperation are excellent models for a man like Romney to learn. Also, a little humility.”
Fannie LeFlore on Oct 7, 2012 at 09:35:04
“Thank you, Brenda. I've been posting on other discussions or sending a link to your article to friends as much as I can. I hope many people pause and reflect on your very convincing analysis.”
Thanks for speaking out for the many men who've contacted me to echo your "It's not just women who are weary of such in-your-face style of discussion." My male friends are equally dismayed by the declaration of a debate winner based solely on aggression and disrespectful fighting style, rather than substance and thoughtfulness. Can you imagine Romney in a delicate diplomatic situation with an equally hot-headed dictator? In those dangerous situations, we need a leader who can remain calm, neutral, and not escalate. Obama has proven himself capable of such dignified yet nuanced negotiations. That's why he is so well respected throughout the world. We need President Obama to navigate us in a volatile and global community.”
ScaredAcademic on Oct 5, 2012 at 04:53:28
“There is far more to it than that. Listening and understanding competing perspectives is perhaps the most crucial part of realizing the possible. Not the perfect, just the better... Politics is neither bloodsport nor is it winner take all. This is about governing a country and setting foundations in place for a tomorrow that can be better than today. Scoring points with silly practiced phrases or naked aggression and seeking shallow retorts to rather notable problems is simply an insult to people that care about the community and country that they belong to. Fights are for times when reason fails; if reason has failed us in the search for the leader of this land then we have defeated the very promise that justifies the entire endeavor.”
SketchesInSand on Oct 5, 2012 at 03:19:01
“Romney has demonstrated (this summer at the London Olympics) that he can't even handle a friendly house call to our oldest ally, let alone master a difficult diplomatic situation with a potential enemy. I can imagine it might have been demoralizing for Obama to be sharing the stage with a pathological liar who just delivered pre-rehearsed smoke and mirror fairy tales about increasing military spending, repealing Obamacare for something better, cutting taxes, creating 12 million jobs, and somehow doing all this while cutting the deficit, knowing that a lot of mathematically challenged people actually bought Romney's schtick. No wonder Obama looked like he didn't want to be there. I'm sending Obama's campaign as big a check as I can spare, just to show him that I am behind him.”
“You can take the woman out of the bed, but never take away the bed from a woman. We need our rest!”
darquelourd on Oct 12, 2011 at 17:04:38
“The women I have known have never been satisfied with any bed. But that may be part of the female make-up which requires wasting alot of money periodically on "new" stuff because having to live with the old stuff would be too depressing.”
“Thanks for the comment, Lindsay. It's always such a shock for extreme candidates to be reminded that they must govern with the needs of all of us, not just their "base."”
mary joyce1980 on Oct 2, 2011 at 01:01:33
“let me open your eyes if you not scared to read.1.depopulation:wiki.pedia.2.codex alimentarius.3.monsanto.4.globalization.5.spp.6.nafta.7.nanobots.8.human chiping.9.fema camps.10.promoting same sex marriage,even putting up posters of 2 men kissing at school.11.taking gun rights.12.passed bill so u can't grow your food.Now this last one is long with lots more info as to when,where,who,why,and what's next.conspiracy or coincidence.I bet you don't read any of this,but if this is what kind of future you wont to live in dictatorship.”
“Thank you for all of these fascinating comments, generous links, and concerns, evoked by my wolf hunt piece. I've read them all, learned a lot, and hope that we can move toward a 21st century ethic that includes top predators in our healthy ecosystems.
In the wildlife study at this link, it's poignant to see the wolves' territories then and now. A fraction of their former range. Surely we can learn what we teach our children: to share.
As Chief Sealth said, "All things are connected."”
Somsai on Sep 9, 2011 at 14:26:20
“Your first link no longer works. Try the link at IUCN, they are the world body that deals with endangered species, woops, maybe don't go there, they are science based and show wolves a species of "least concern" and inhabiting half their original range.
What about Wyoming? Huge blooper of a mistake, no retraction? Not so hard to say, "oh sorry, made one mistake among many".”
“Thanks for this very timely and sane post about the futility of forecasting doomsdays. Apocalypse is so much easier to imagine than practical and visionary ways to face our world's problems. The meaning
of "apocalypse" is "revelation." Is it possible to have revelation without apocalypse?
Can we really learn from the environmental collapses of past civilizations -- and our own
Perhaps we can envision our way into a future in which the earth survives with us -- a natural world
in which extinction (the wrong kind of rapture) is not the only option. When the Bible promises,
"We shall all be changed," why not consider this a form of skillful and soulful adapting to a
changing (and warmer) world, rather than simply dying out? It will take all of our imagination
and humility to imagine a future in which we all survive with a healthy planet. And we need both
scientists and believers of all faiths to do their part. Not giddily anticipate Armageddon.
I want to be left behind.
“Thanks, Brenda, for those good thoughts. Science has helped us to see religions for what they are: cultural interpretations of an ultimate reality that no one fully grasps. (Even hard-bitten atheists can only suppose that out beyond the light horizon is ... more of the same.)
Re-imagining religion in the light of what we have learned from science and history is exactly what we need. Though not religious myself, I heartily endorse your effort.
“As the author of this post, I've thoroughly enjoyed reading every one of these comments
and found them fascinating -- some quite illuminating. This post is all over the internet --
appearing in such diverse websites as End Times News and Earth First. It's deeply gratifying
to see this post being linked on green sites all over the world. It is also being read and
discussed on conservative sites, such as NewsBusters.org. Their article is suspicious of
any "eco-theology" while giving it lots of press.
Kind of like the censors of any burgeoning spiritual movement who, in trying to deny that belief,
actually end up spreading its "gospel." NewsBusters cites eco-theology as a "media craze" and
is a little wary of "earth worship." It fears that Christian environmentalism is "a product of a
left-wing media culture?" and cites The Huffington Post as an example.
“As the author of this book and blog, I'm so deeply gratified that readers are understanding exactly my intent: to defuse fundamentalism with humor, to tell a story that finds common ground and celebrates civic discourse even among those who disagree, to remember all the ways we can find rapture right here on earth. I am particularly delighted that those of us who are environmentalists can also have the courage to look at our own "shadow" when we fall into what I call "apocalyptic green" visions of the future. Fear and judgment constrict the imagination; whereas, hope and humor open us up to adapting and finding new ways to cherish our earth and all that is alive.
Thanks to all of you who have commented and I'm looking forward to hearing from more readers! This is my first Huffington Post and I'm so impressed with the thoughtful dialogue. I"m on book tour now throughout the country and have found a similar courtesy and insight with all of my audiences. People of all faiths and political beliefs seem to be hungry for conversations that are respectful and good-hearted. I was just interviewed on a far Right Christian radio show and we all ended up laughing together. Balm in Gilead.
Brenda Peterson www.IWantToBeLeftBehind.com”
Jan 31, 2010 at 13:54:31
“Thanks for this very timely and insightful post by Cunningham. If we had more revelation and less apocalyptic thinking, we could open up our imaginations to the future. Fear constricts creativity and is an easy abandonment of our earth and our next generations. What might happen if we simply took up full residence in this life and devoted ourselves to enduring rather than escaping this planet we call home?