Thursday, October 4, 2007
Monday, October 1, 2007
There is a wonderful benefit Auction "Hope Sees A Star" (sponsored by the mixed media artist group ZNE) that began today in honor of two beautiful young woman who lost their lives this last year. Stevie McMoyler (daughter of artist Gina Gabriell) and Brianna Grant (daughter of artist Iva Wilcox) each lost their battle with illness and the artist community has shared in their grief and mourning. This auction will help raise funds for a memorial in their names. Many artists have contributed artwork . One of the pieces I contributed is the necklace *SHOW YOUR FAITH* pictured above.
You can fine more information at the ZNE website.
Posted by pam peters at 10:59 AM
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
Friday, August 31, 2007
Monday, August 6, 2007
The entire month of July was a loss here due to the incredible heat. Now we are fully into FIRE SEASON and the smoke is unreal. The valley is socked in and 85,000 acres are burning....VERY SAD.
I have started a painting (watercolor for now) based on these flowers from a wedding we attended in June.
I am not making any jewelry right now, so I am reading a LOT! Enjoying the people and book suggestions at SHELFARI.
Posted by pam peters at 9:53 AM
Thursday, June 14, 2007
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Thursday, June 7, 2007
Wednesday, June 6, 2007
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Friend and fellow Wetcanvas member Tina Mammoser has tagged me! It's a blog game of tag amongst artists. Thanks for the tag, Tina!
These are the tagging rules:
1. List 7 random facts/habits about yourself.
2. Choose another 7 bloggers to tag and list their names in your blog.
3. Leave your 7 tagged bloggers comments to notify them of their tagging and to direct them to your blog for tag instructions.
My random facts:
1. I have chocolate time every day around 3PM
2. I have lived in 8 states
3. I have been a nurse, social worker, psychotherapist, business owner, Mom,
wife, administrator, and artist-in-waiting
4. I love to gourmet cook
5. If I had the money I would TRAVEL all the time.
6. My favorite color is purple
7. I LOVE the WWW.....it's the first and last thing I do every day.
Elizabeth Leahy Australian Artist
Nana Lau , NY artist
Marvin Chew, Singapore artist
Beverly Fagan Gilbertson, American Artist
Ruth Harris, UK artist
Laura Tasheiko, Maine Studio Artist
Posted by pam peters at 8:49 AM
Friday, April 27, 2007
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Friday, April 20, 2007
Thursday, April 12, 2007
Sunday, April 1, 2007
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Monday, March 12, 2007
Saturday, March 10, 2007
How far you go in life depends on your being tender with the young, compassionate with the aged, sympathetic with the striving, and tolerant of the weak and strong. Because someday in your life you will have been all of these.
George Washington Carver
Posted by pam peters at 4:28 PM
Thursday, March 8, 2007
Tuesday, March 6, 2007
Monday, March 5, 2007
The truth, which almost everyone except them acknowledges, is there is little reasonable doubt left about the threat posed to the earth by climate change. There is an international consensus among scientists, religious leaders, business leaders, and economists that we must act, and act now, to preserve a world for our children. Just a month ago, the leading international network of climate change scientists, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, concluded for the first time that global warming is "unequivocal" and that it is with 90% certainty due to human activity. The New York Times called the report “a bleak and powerful assessment of the future of the planet....” You can read the full report.
But the Religious Right is also now personally targeting the NAE’s vice president for governmental affairs, Rich Cizik. They claim that Cizik is “dividing and demoralizing the NAE” by orchestrating a “relentless campaign” opposing global warming. And they end by suggesting that “he be encouraged to resign his position with the NAE.”
Cizik, far from dividing evangelicals, is part of a broad evangelical consensus on global warming. He is a respected evangelical leader who is bringing Christians together to address the growing danger of climate change, and is literally a hero to a new generation of evangelical students and pastors. That new generation has made “creation care” a mainstream evangelical issue. A statement last year by the Evangelical Climate Initiative, signed by 86 national evangelical leaders, including 39 Christian college presidents, noted that “we are convinced that evangelicals must engage this issue without any further lingering over the basic reality of the problem or humanity's responsibility to address it.” The statement added: “Love of God, love of neighbor, and the demands of stewardship are more than enough reason for evangelical Christians to respond to the climate change problem with moral passion and concrete action.”
Sen. John McCain, in an op-ed with Sen. Joe Lieberman, recently declared: “The debate has ended over whether global warming is a problem caused by human activity. … There is now a broad consensus in this country, and indeed in the world, that global warming is happening, that it is a serious problem, and that humans are causing it.” In a powerful commentary in this morning's Washington Post, "The Climate Change Precipice", David Ignatius wrote, "The scientific debate about whether there is a global warming problem is pretty much over. ... Skeptical researchers will continue to question the data, but this isn't a 'call both sides for comment’ issue anymore. For mainstream science, it's settled."
But the Religious Right is so used to being able to veto debates by their proclamations that when they see they are losing, they go on the attack. So if they think the debate is not over, let’s have a debate. We will respond; stay tuned next week.
Posted by pam peters at 10:39 AM
Sunday, March 4, 2007
Friday, March 2, 2007
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Monday, February 19, 2007
Our trip to South America was marvelous...we saw everything from cathedrals, to glaciers and penguins.
We ate gourmet foods, drank wonderful wines and thoroughly enjoyed the people and the culture:
Since being back, I have been obsessed with making charm bracelets from altered objects and vintage doo-dads
Posted by pam peters at 1:58 PM
Saturday, January 20, 2007
Thursday, January 18, 2007
The way to come to grips with $1.2 trillion is to forget about the number itself and think instead about what you could buy with the money. When you do that, a trillion stops sounding anything like millions or billions.
For starters, $1.2 trillion would pay for an unprecedented public health campaign — a doubling of cancer research funding, treatment for every American whose diabetes or heart disease is now going unmanaged and a global immunization campaign to save millions of children's lives.
Combined, the cost of running those programs for a decade wouldn't use up even half our money pot. So we could then turn to poverty and education, starting with universal preschool for every 3- and 4-year-old child across the country. The city of New Orleans could also receive a huge increase in reconstruction funds.
The final big chunk of the money could go to national security. The recommendations of the 9/11 Commission that have not been put in place — better baggage and cargo screening, stronger measures against nuclear proliferation — could be enacted. Financing for the war in Afghanistan could be increased to beat back the Taliban's recent gains, and a peacekeeping force could put a stop to the genocide in Darfur.
All that would be one way to spend $1.2 trillion. Here would be another:
The war in Iraq.
Leonhardt says his estimate of the eventual cost of the Iraq war is conservative, noting, "I didn't even attempt to put a monetary value on the more than 3,000 American deaths in the war." And, one could add, the value of the more than 20,000 physically wounded.
Another news story in USA Today highlighted a different aspect of the war: "An experienced Navy psychologist warns that the U.S. military does not have enough mental health professionals to meet the growing number of emotionally damaged war veterans." Navy Commander Mark Russell says that "Mental health trauma is on the rise. … Training for mental health professionals is inadequate. … Staffing is down."
The war goes on; the cost in money and lives continues to grow. As I ended my last blog on Iraq, unjust wars cause massive human suffering. When will we ever learn?
Posted by pam peters at 9:05 AM
Friday, January 12, 2007
When the American people make it clear in the election, and in every public opinion poll, that they want an end to the war in Iraq, he ignores them. When the central recommendation of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group is "new and enhanced diplomatic and political efforts…that will enable the United States to begin to move its combat forces out of Iraq responsibly," he ignores them. When Republican Senators across the spectrum – from Susan Collins (ME) and Olympia Snowe (ME) to Sam Brownback (KS) and Gordon Smith (OR), and respected foreign policy expert Chuck Hagel (NE) – oppose his plan, he ignores them. (" … a dangerously wrongheaded strategy that will drive America deeper into an unwinnable swamp," says Hagel.) When the top U.S. military commanders in Iraq question the strategy, he replaces them.
George W. Bush is determined to continue making war in Iraq. I agree with Bush on one point – we need a new strategy in Iraq. But last night, George Bush decided to escalate the war and increase the American occupation – which he still doesn't seem to realize is at the center of the problem. Bush stubbornly believes that military solutions are always the best answer and consistently chooses war over politics. But without a political solution in Iraq, no escalation of the war will succeed. Whether in Iraq, or even in the larger war on terrorism, Bush believes, as he said again last night, that we are in a great "ideological struggle" between us and them, good and evil – and that only military solutions against "them" will suffice. Both wisdom and humility (two religious virtues) suggest that political and diplomatic resolutions to conflict are ultimately required. But last night, Bush again chose the primacy of military solutions.
By sending 20,000 more U.S. troops in support of a Shiite-dominated government, into a conflict that has become a sectarian civil war, he has essentially rejected the idea of a unified Iraqi government. Today, the idea of there even being a government in Iraq is another myth of Bush rhetoric, and for the young servicemen and women who daily die, it is a cruel joke to learn we have no real partners in Iraq. There is no real commitment to "democracy" among Iraq's leaders, a goal that Bush again invoked last night; there is only endless sectarian violence – with the government forces themselves acting simply as part of the tribal warfare. The depraved scene of Saddam Hussein's hanging revealed more a revenge lynching than an act of national justice – and became a brutal metaphor for what Iraq has now become. American lives are now the prime targets of the insurgency, while they are also caught in the cross-fire of a civil war. To send more troops into battle in a senseless "surge," without any new plan for political resolution between Iraq's intransigent and hateful factions – is morally irresponsible. We've tried this before, and failed. A new surge will simply mean more young Americans in body bags and wheel chairs, more families left without dads, moms, sons, or daughters, and more slaughter of innocent Iraqi civilians. "I don't want to die over there; I don't think it's worth it," said one American serviceman who was interviewed this morning about the President's new plan. He and his new wife had a new baby just five days ago, but now he has been ordered back to Iraq. He named several of his friends who have new wives and babies on the way, who will now also be sent back.
By the classic criteria of a "just war," Iraq was not, and is not, one. Not even close. And at the time of the run-up to the war, a majority of church bodies and their leaders around the world said just that. Pope John Paul II was quite agitated about Iraq, and had he been a younger man, might have actually intervened to prevent the unjust war. Even most evangelical Christians around the globe were against the American war in Iraq, and continue to be – a fact that the U.S. media also missed. There were others, like the American Southern Baptists, who supported their president's war, but on an international scale they were clearly the exceptions.
There is absolutely no way that the American invasion of Iraq could be considered a "last resort" – one of the just war criteria. The inspections officers were working to find and contain any weapons of mass destruction Iraq might have had, and the Bush administration both misrepresented and manipulated the alleged threat from the weapons of mass destruction. The administration lied to start a war. Over time, the brutal Saddam Hussein could have been isolated, undermined, and overthrown (a very worthy goal) from pressures internal and external, and serious proposals were on the table to do just that when Bush went to war. Instead we bombed the children of Baghdad and then allowed the country to slide into bloody chaos. There was never adequate "authority" to wage this war (another criterion) – the United Nations, NATO, and the vast majority of the world's people and nations were against it. Only Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair thought this was a good idea, and their political legacies will be forever shaped by the worst foreign policy decision either country has made in decades. Iraq also failed the tests of "proportionality" and "discrimination" with all the societal damage it was likely to cause (and has): the horrible number of innocents that have been lost through the tactics of "shock and awe," the resulting insurgency against American occupation, and now the civil war that has turned into ethnic cleansing. There was never an "imminent threat" from Saddam, there was no connection between Iraq and 9/11 (as we were told), and Bush's war in Iraq was not a central front in the international campaign against terrorism, but rather has turned out to be a serious distraction from it (though the war itself has now transformed Iraq into a haven and school for terrorism).
The war in Iraq was unjust; to continue it now is criminal. There is no winning in Iraq. This was a war that should have never been fought – or won. It can't be won, and the truth is that there are no good solutions now – that's how unjust wars often turn out. The president says that "failure in Iraq would be a disaster for the United States." But we have already failed in Iraq and it has already become a disaster for Americans, Iraqis, the Middle East, and even for the larger campaign against terrorism. The mistaken war in Iraq can only be mercifully ended, in ways that cause the least damage to everyone involved: the Americans and the Iraqis, the volatile surrounding region, and a world longing for security. It will likely take new international leadership to help fix the mess of Iraq, because U.S. leadership has brought one calamity after another. Unjust wars cause massive human suffering. When will we ever learn?
Posted by pam peters at 12:46 PM
Tuesday, January 9, 2007
A new year....resolutions, ideas, new starts.
Many people have different ways of seeing the new year. To me it is just more days to live each day, one day at a time.
Today's art offering:
a puzzle, a meditation shrine, an art play thing
AVAILABLE ON EBAY
Posted by pam peters at 9:41 AM
Friday, January 5, 2007
The goal of this project is to help me overcome a slump in my painting....I was very "off" last year for months and would like to begin again.
I am painting a few pieces for a challenge at WETCANVAS
I am going to South America in a couple weeks and hope that will also help.
Posted by pam peters at 9:59 AM