Pero ese patetismo les ha dado audiencia, porque los seres humanos somos así de incomprensibles. Nos pierde ver broncas en los lugares más inesperados: en las bodas, en las ceremonias, en los reality... Los comentarios ácidos de Risto- para eso le contrataron- subían puntos de audiencia, aunque no sé si la idea era contagiar absolutamente todo de esa atmósfera tensa y beligerante, como finalmente ha pasado.

Al final, más que un concurso de "talentos", parecía una obra casposa de Jose Luis Moreno. El "que te den" de Jesús Vázquez me pareció la guinda absurda a este anti-programa. ¡Y qué decir de los concursantes! Se les fue subiendo el ego al punto de la prepotencia, alimentada por la actitud de su director/showman (NInaaa, vuelve!!!!), sin que nadie les recordara que en unos años nadie se acordará de ellos. La hostia será fina, vista la falta de inteligencia social que demostraron anoche. ¿Nadie les enseñó un poquito de habilidades sociales? Como concursantes- ya ni digo como compañeros/as- demostraron no tener ni un poquito de educación, cortesía y buenos modales (salvo excepciones). El vacío que le hicieron a la ganadora era realmente impactante, empezando por el presentador. Con lo cual dieron más razón aún a la gente que apoyó a la joven andaluza. Parece mentira que a estas alturas aún no sepan en OT que cuanto más se machaque a un concursante, más apoyo tendrá del público (como demostró Rosa en la primera edición). Por empatía, por joder tanta prepotencia condensada, o porque realmente les guste su propuesta.

Y yo, dejando a un lado el análisis más sociológico, me alegro de que ganara Virginia. Creo que es especial, diferente. Su voz, su personalidad. Sólo por su resistencia psicológica merecía ganar el concurso, porque ha demostrado tener mucha fuerza. Pero además tiene un algo que me gusta. Estoy harta de artistas en serie, me aburre la uniformidad, las voces iguales, los patrones. Esta niña, si cae en buenas manos, puede ser algo distinto. Aunque no lo sé, porque OT, desde hace muchas ediciones, sólo sirve para parir más carnaza televisiva y destrozar carreras musicales. Suerte tuvo la cantante de Nena Daconte de que no se le asocie a OT. Quizás por ello ha podido llegar más lejos...

En fin, que los freaks, los raros/as, ayer disfrutamos un ratito viendo como el sistema no respondía como estaba establecido. Mucha suerte, Virginia, ojalá puedas aportar algo diferente a tanta mediocridad musical en el plano comercial. Porque hoy hasta los 40 principales tienen que tirar de remember. Triste, triste...

The UCDoers will meet at the McKinstry Company located at 5005 Third Avenue South Seattle, WA  98134 (http://www.mckinstry.com/). 

This month Greg Taylor & Per Farney of Microsoft's Certified Master (MCM): Messaging Program also known as the "Exchange Rangers" will join us. Greg and Per will provide an overview of the program including requirements to attend, what the training program consists of and the benefits of the Exchange Ranger program to the Messaging Community.  We will also provide an update on upcoming meetings\plans for the group as we continue to grow the UCDoers User Group! 

Come out and join us; food and drinks will be provided!

RSVP: http://upcoming.yahoo.com/event/923349/?ps=5

Se oyen pájaros de fondo, algún coche que pasa... Supones que hay vida fuera, pero debe estar apiñada frente al mar o en las piscinas de las casetas (pequeña casa que muchos valencianos/as tienen en el campo, lugar que es sinónimo a paella con romero los domingos). El tranvía, acaba de pasar el tranvía.

Hay tanto silencio que nos ha dado hasta apuro pasar la aspiradora esta tarde- ya, a quien se le ocurre limpiar un domingo: a nosotras. Un domingo de julio, en Valencia, marcado por la limpieza, detenida para comer una fideuá familiar al mediodía, y retomada con resignación.

Refresco, teclado nuevo con pantalla nueva (mi vista no podía más), momento de cambio vital. Ilusión, y también mosqueo, porque no me he ido a Marte. ¿Quién carajo cubrió en EFE la noticia de la compañera trans que fue asesinada en Sevilla? Hacía tiempo que no leía una noticia tan profundamente transfóbica y burda. Difundida a los cuatro vientos por todos los medios menos Público (gracias!). Un fuerte abrazo a las compañeras de ATA, por la pérdida de Rosa. Y a los compañeros de los medios que metieron la nota de EFE, suspenso total. A estas alturas hay cosas que deberían doler a la vista. Y faltar la dignidad de las minorías, es una de ellas. Menos mal que el verano no afecta la ética de todos. Felicidades al compañero de Público. Ha demostrado que no cuesta tanto hacer las cosas bien.

Sigue el domingo su curso, acercándose a su ocaso- aunque aún quedan unas cuantas horas de sol. Yo sigo en mi pequeño cuarto, el mirador cubierto donde paso tantas horas todos los días, observando el mundo, dando forma a las ideas, inyectando vida a los proyectos... Con ilusión dedicaré estas horas que quedan de domingo a seguir fraguando mi futuro, tan cerca del faro de 28 años que me llena de vida con su mirada limpia y buena (al otro lado de la pared). Quizás, aunque muy poca gente pueda entenderlo, así es la felicidad para mí. Amar en libertad, salud para quienes quiero, luchar por lo que creo, decidir el camino que quiero tomar en cada momento y no tener miedo a los lunes.

Un poquito de música (he creado esta sección), y a disfrutar...

On the basics

• Use anecdotes
• Start with actions
• Constantly raise questions and answer them as you go on
• Have 'a moment of reflection' - Why are you listening to the story
• A good story needs both action and 'a moment of reflection'

Finding great stories

• The amount of time finding a decent story takes more time than production
• Sometimes the chemistry with interviewee isn't there: be ambitious and kill the story
• "By killing, you will make something else even better live."
• Be a killer, be ruthless with your stories
• Failure is a big part of success - "Be happy about that"
• "You have to get rid of crap to make anything special".

On good taste

• "For the first couple of years you're making stuff, it's not that great."
• Your taste, however, tells you your work is crappy.
• "A lot of people, at this point, they quit."
• We all know our early work falls short - Everyone goes through that phase
• Solution: Do a lot of work
• For audio production: Talk the way people normally talk
• It takes a while to get through the phase.

Two common pitfalls

• When we start, we try to mimick some TV or radio personality
• Don't imitate. Just talk normally.
• "The more you are being yourself, the better off you actually are."
• On radio, don't only talk about yourself, talk about others too
• On a good story you see people interacting with other people.
• No interaction = No drama

In case you missed your copy, find a PDF of each on eResource:

Company Info>Your Country>Company Communications

Taz Arnold of SA-RA, rocking that vintage MCM jacket, and customize "hat" you can say along with a Rolex Submariner watch! ;) Stay posted for more pics!

Internet como medio de comunicación de masas:

"Respecto a las características de internet como medio de comunicación de masas (MCM), estas son todavía controvertidas. En primer lugar, porque realmente no es un MCM sino un conglomerado de ellos, es decir, en internet se puede acceder a radio, televisión o prensa y, por tanto, más que un medio propio es un servidor de todos ellos. A su vez, una de las características básicas de los MCM es la no intervención directa del receptor en el mensaje, algo que con internet se difumina insertando la posibilidad de un feedback mucho más rápido y accesible que no se limita a las “cartas al director” sino que se nutre de foros, comentarios, chats, e-mails, puntuaciones y un largo etcétera en constante evolución.

Ciertamente, pese a que podría parecer que la influencia de los MCM en internet se difumina, esta es una verdad a medias. Es cierto que el usuario gana más protagonismo y que surgen nuevas formas de comunicación desvinculadas de los MCM con cada día más repercusión, blogs por ejemplo, pero los MCM siguen manteniendo su rol director en la red de redes al canalizar la información. En realidad, los MCM en internet son como grandes autopistas por las que se propaga su información mientras que las comunicaciones desvinculadas de los MCM no dejan de ser minoritarias en influencia y, sobre todo, informativo-dependientes, en otras palabras, que su información suele provenir de estos grandes MCM."

Muchas veces he pensado en internet como un medio de aumentar el poder ciudadano, de fijar nosotros mismos la agenda o los issues sobre los que queremos que se desarrolle la política gubernamental. Desafortunadamente, el fenómeno es el contrario. Los blogs suelen seguir y nutrirse de las informaciones vertidas por grupos mediáticos consolidados (PRISA, Planeta, Unidad Editorial, etc...) anulando así su oportunidad de empowerment ciudadano. Creo que tal vez debieramos replantearnos el rol de los blogs como herramienta social. En mi opinión, el blog debiera ser un lugar de expresión y creación, no un amplificador de los grandes grupos mediáticos.

Diese Seite dient dem gegenseitigen Informations- und Meinungsaustausch. Ganz im Sinne des guten alten Kompensationshandels. ;-)

Notez le pseudonyme de l'utilisateur qui a uploadé la vidéo ...

Pour voir l'un des épisodes les plus emblématiques de la série, cliquez en bas ... Faut-il en rire ou avoir pitié ? Le fait que nos enfants peuvent facilement tomber sur ce genre d'émission a de quoi refroidir.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bu9Z2NBPPFM

Cette émission est produite par Kallissa Miller

Vídeo explicativo

It looks like for their Autumn/Winter '08 collection Japans Phenomenon got together with MCM on a small collaboration collection. They take it back to the 80's and used the loud MCM all-over print in several colors on bags, jackets and accessories, such as New Era caps. This is definitely a collection vintage lovers will be all over!

I've talked about capitalism. I've talked about capitalists. But I haven't explicitly talked about capital itself. That's the purpose of this video.

The term "capital" is often overused, allowed to describe any asset regardless of how this economic asset is used. In popular culture and in mainstream economics "Capital" has been used to describe everything from money to factories to cars to ideas to social connections.

I will be using the term "capital" here in a quite specific sense to refer to a flow between money and commodities which produces more value than it begins with.

Of course, in any debate over definitions we run into the claim that all definitions are somewhat arbitrary. A definition is useful if it helps us to explain the things we are looking to explain. The popular use of the word capital deprives it of any real meaning because it is over-used. But this is quite fitting within the aims of bourgeois economics because it is the function of mainstream economics, as the ruling ideology of a capitalist society, to obscure the social relations of value creation in a capitalist society. In my videos I am seeking to explain these social relations and that is why we need a more specific definition of capital than that used by bourgeois economy and popular culture.

My basic definition of capital is that capital is a flow or circuit through which money and commodities move in order to produce value. This circuit is the primary source of value creation in a capitalist society. Studying this circuit allows us to understand how value is produced and distributed throughout our economy.

Capital takes different forms as it moves through this circuit: it can be money in the form of cash, bank balances, credit, etc. It can be commodities in the form of tools, factories, raw materials, consumer goods, etc. But money and commodities are only capital when they area part of this circuit. Money sitting in your pocket or factories sitting unused are not capital because they aren't part of the circuit of capital. But they can become capital if they enter this circuit.

In my video "what is capitalism" I presented this basic formula for capitalist circulation:

M-C-M

This is shorthand for Money-Commodities-Money, the basic circuit which capitalists engage in. A capitalist invests money in the production process in order to make commodities. At the end of the day he sells these commodities for more money than he started with. This extra money is his profit. We can represent this new quantity of money with: M1. So that

M-C-M1

Thus, the total amount of value in society is expanded.

Now what do capitalists buy with their initial investment of money? What do they buy in order to begin production? They buy two different commodities: means of production and labor power.

Means of production can be all sorts of tools, workplaces and raw materials: hammers, workbenches and wood; steam drills, assembly lines and steel; kitchen knives, kitchens and tofu. Means of production just means "stuff you use to make commodities out of". In a capitalist society the means of production are privately owned by capitalists and hence the vast majority of commodities produced in a capitalist society are produced by capitalists. Of course, many of us own drills, hammers, wood, etc. These commodities only become capital when they are being used as part of the circuit of capital, being used to expand the amount of value in society.

But capitalists need someone to work with those means of production in order to produce commodities. Means of production won't turn themselves into commodities by themselves. And capitalists can't do all that labor themselves (excepting for petty bourgeois capitalists.) And so capitalists must also purchase Labor Power in the form of workers.

When a capitalist buys Labor Power he isn't buying the whole worker like a slave-owner would. He is buying the capacity of the worker to work for a given amount of time. That's why we use the term "Labor Power".

So now we can make a more specific circuit:

M- (MP+LP)- C - M1

In the beginning capital has taken the form of money. Once that money has been exchanged for MP and LP, they become the capital. The money itself goes to other capitalists to pay for the MP commodities and to workers in the form of wages. If those other capitalists use the money to reinvest in production it will become capital again. But if that money is used for consumption or saving it ceases to be capital. Similarly with money spent on wages. Once money ends up in the worker's pocket it is no longer capital. So capital has taken a different form: it's moved from money form to commodity form.

There is a reason why we notate LP as separate from MP. Labor power is a unique commodity with distinctive properties. (people are not machines.) This is because LP is the only commodity which can create more value than it costs thus making profit possible. It might be possible in instances of unequal exchange brought about through monopoly or other market anomalies to sell commodities above their value, but this isn't a creation of value, it's merely profiting from an inequality in exchange. When commodities are bought and sold in the marketplace no new value is being created- values are merely being traded for each other. It's always possible to rip people off and thus realize profits, but this is not a source of value creation. And because competition makes it hard to rip people off through arbitrarily high prices (although we definitely see that in the case of oil companies, utilities and other monopolistic industries) we need a strategy which generates profit outside of exchange in the sphere of value creation itself.

This is where the unique properties of LP come into the picture. When a capitalist buys LP from a worker he is buying the ability of the worker to do work. The amount of work that is done, the amount of value produced, is not predetermined. This is where the theory of exploitation enters, something that I have talked about extensively in my Econ101 playlist. The difference between the cost of LP and the amount of value produced by that labor power is profit. And this profit is a result of exploitation- of paying workers less than the value they produce.

So what's really happened is that we have replaced one set of commodities (MP+LP) with a new set of commodities with greater value (C1). This "magic" has happened in the production process (P). We can now present an updated version of the circuit of capital as:

M-(MP+LP)-P... C1-M1

Money capital is used to buy MP and LP. Through production workers turn the MP into commodities which have a greater combined value than MP+LP. These commodities are then sold at their new values. The capitalist ends up with more money (profit.) Capital has passed from money form into commodity form, been expanded in the production process and then passed back into money form. Some of that profit will become spending money for the capitalist class, leaving the circuit of capital. The rest will be used to start the circuit of capital over again.

Capitalists are always competing with each other. Whenever one capitalist takes a breather from chasing profit, there are ten other capitalists out there who are investing their tails off to increase their profit margins. So there is no time to rest. Money capital must constantly be thrown back into production in the search for more profit. Money and commodities have no use to a capitalist unless they are being used to create profit, that is, unless they are capital. So a capitalist must constantly be seeking to perfect the circuit of capital: to turn money into commodities and back again faster and more efficiently than his rivals.

But sometimes there are barriers to this circuit of M-C-M. Let's trace each stage of the circuit and identify the obstacles at each stage.

Sometimes it's hard for a capitalist to turn money into MP or LP. If resources dry up or become too expensive capitalists have to spend time and money looking for new inputs. Sometimes the price of LP is too high and capitalists must search out cheaper more exploitable labor.

Within the production process itself the main barrier is resistance to exploitation. Because the cost of LP is not related to the amount of value produced by workers there is a constant struggle to extract more value from workers. Workers resist this exploitation. This is the basis of class struggle.

Once commodities are produced capitalists must sell them. This is often the hardest part of the circuit to complete. Capitalism produces a huge amount of commodities everyday and it must constantly be finding people to buy them. In times of economic crisis consumers are less willing to spend money and commodities pile up on shelves.

In fact in a full-scale depression we see money and commodities frozen in all of the stages of the circuit of capital: money which can't find any profitable investment; workers who can't find jobs; factories with no workers; and commodities that can't find buyers. The dynamics of what causes this breakdown will be the topic of a future set of videos on economic crisis.

Part 1:

Part 2:

In many videos I've argued that exploitation is central to capitalism.
In my recent video on money I explained how the contradictions within money itself can only be resolved by a process which circulates money solely for the purpose of circulating money while at the same time measuring and representing real value. In this video I will tie both of these themes together by explaining how exploitation allows capitalism to attempt a resolution of the contradictions within money.

Barter is a simple system of commodity exchange in which people trade one commodity or another. We can represent this with the diagram: C-C

As trading grows and there are more and more commodities to be traded societies began to develop money. Money can be any universally desired commodity with a stable value: silver, gold, axes, cattle, etc. What makes money different from other commodities is the fact that it can be exchanged for any commodity. For instance- at one point in history the gold commodity could buy anything, but donkey commodities or potatoes commodities couldn't. Thus money became a way of expressing the value of any commodity- a property unique to one commodity which is singled out from all other commodities and given the name "money".

So now, instead of C-C we have C-M-C. Both types of exchange existed side by side for a long time before C-M-C began to dominate.

The establishment of money as a universal equivalent (a commodity which can buy anything) gives money status as the ultimate form of social power. People then, can be tempted to hoard money, not for the sake of buying commodities, but just for the sake of having more money.

Not only does money create this temptation, but it also requires some process where money is hoarded sometimes and then injected back into circulation at others. This is because we need to have just the right amount of money in circulation to represent the values of all the commodities that are being traded (C-M-C) at a given time. Commodity production is erratic. If we don't have the right amount of money in circulation commodities either can't circulate or circulate at erratic prices. The only way to solve this problem is to take money out of circulation when it's not needed and then to inject it back in when it is.

So with money there is both the possibility and the need for M-C-M.... that is, some process which circulates money just for the sake of circulating money. But why would someone want to trade money for money? This only makes sense if they are making more money from the trade!

In C-M-C people are trading (with money) one commodity for another, because they have a use for the other commodity. In simple commodity production, people are exchanging these "uses" or "use values".

But the purpose of M-C-M isn't to trade use values at all but to get a greater quantity of the same thing- money. Instead of being qualitative it's a quantitative process.

Now how do you get more money? With C-M-C exchange only happens if people agree to trade things for equal value. People measure the value of commodities with money and exchange them for money. If I sell something I've made for $10 and then go spend that $10 on stuff I am essentially trading $10 of my labor for $10 of other people's labor. An equal exchange has taken place with the aid of money as a measuring of value. The value that is being measured corresponds to the amount of labor that has gone into making the commodity.

But if we are going to do M-C-M we need an unequal exchange. We need to end up with more money than we started with. How is this possible?

Well, I could sell a commodity for more than its worth- that is, more than its labor value. What happens when I do that? This can only work if I have a monopoly on selling this commodity, because if I'm selling for more than something's worth other people can just undersell me. If I do have a monopoly I can count on the fact that I won't have a monopoly forever. When one person profits from an unequal exchange it attracts other people into that industry. Soon there are competitors all trying to undersell each other, eating away at the profit margin until the product trades at its value again.

So if there is a tendency for exchange to gravitate toward equal exchange, where do we get the profit we need for M-C-M? Exchange equalizes within a closed economic system where buyers and sellers are aware of what the money price is of all commodities. But what if there are were other people- somewhere else in a different economic community who valued commodities differently than us- maybe it was easier or harder for them to make some commodities and so we could benefit from unequal exchange with them. Or maybe commodity exchanged hadn't even become generalized in their culture yet and so they didn't have a good sense of the value of something.

This is exactly what the early merchant class was all about. Savvy traders traversed the globe looking for "bargains": trying to find cultures willing to part with their pelts, spices, jewels and gold for less so they could return home with commodities and sell them for more. And when they couldn't find unequal exchanges they made them in the form of theft. The early merchant class was rife with pirates who made a living from stealing commodities in order to sell them.

The other class that mastered M-C-M early on was the money lending class. By lending money to people and then charging them interest on the loan, the money lending class could turn a profit. This was called usury and it was frowned upon at many times in history, even outlawed at times.

It should be pointed out that neither merchant capital or usury actually created more value. They merely took commodities from one place and moved them to another. But this moving of commodities was such a source of wealth that it pushed traders and loans to the farthest corners of the universe in search of profit.

And so the world was slowly brought together by merchants exploring the world looking for unequal exchanges to get rich off of. But when ever merchants pushed to the borders of the economic universe they found that the economic integration they had spawned had gone and created their worst nightmare: equal exchange. As cultures were brought into closer contact, as people began to find out how much things exchanged for in different places, as more and more merchants began traveling the same silk roads- it was harder and harder to find people to rip off.

And so those who lived by unequal exchange had to find new ways to make profit. They began to ask, "what if there was a magic commodity?... a commodity which could produce more value than it cost to buy?"

They found such a commodity- it was human labor.

When I sell the products of my own labor on the market I get all the money myself. But what if I am selling my labor to someone else? If I sell my labor to a capitalist for a wage the capitalist can pay less for my wage than he sells the commodity for. Thus he transfers the inequality of profit in exchange into the production process.

Let's take a closer look. When I sell something I've made myself on the open market I am selling a commodity. When I sell my labor to someone else I am selling my labor power- that is, my capacity to do labor. How much I produce is subject to how hard I work, the quality of the tools and materials I use and the organization of the workplace. I'm paid by the hour, so the harder I work the more I can produce per hour. Thus the amount of money I'm paid doesn't necessarily correspond to the amount of value I produce. If it did the capitalist wouldn't be making a profit.

This is what capitalists do. They profit from inequality in the sphere of production instead of exchange. They are modern day pirates.

Why are workers willing to work for less than the value of what they produce? Wages, instead of being related to the value of the commodities workers produce, are related to the amount of money necessary to "reproduce the worker." This is a fancy term for "what it takes to get the worker to show up for work the next day." This usually means paying a worker enough for rent, food, entertainment and whatever else the general standard of living in a society requires. This cost of "reproducing the worker" varies from place to place over time as the standard of living adjusts to the whims of capitalist development. For instance, the standard of living for most Americans has fallen in the last 30 years making labor power cheaper for capitalists to buy.

But still this doesn't explain why workers consent to this. After all, they choose to work for a wage rather than simply produce goods themselves. Well many people do choose to work for themselves if they can. In fact, as real wages have fallen in the American economy the percentage of self-employed people has risen. But in order to produce commodities yourself you have to have access to tools, materials, a work area... We call all of these things "means of production."

In a capitalist society a small amount of people (capitalists) own the vast majority of the means of production. Thus workers have no choice but to sell their labor power for a wage to a capitalist. This has caused some people to refer to wage labor as "wage slavery".

This didn't just happen by accident one day. The process by which simple commodity producers- farmers, craftsmen, etc.- were deprived of their means of production so that they had to work as wage laborers was a long and violent one. It demolished communities, destroyed cultures, eroded feudalism, etc. This process, accomplished by dispossessions, outright theft and usury, is often referred to as "primitive accumulation" to differentiate it from the "capitalist accumulation it made possible.

Along with the profits of merchant capital, primitive accumulation provided the money and capital needed to deprive most of the world of their means to produce and concentrate these means of production, as private property, in the hands of a relatively small class of people: the capitalist class.

Os alunos que assistiram a aula na segunda-feira passada, (09/06) não precisam assistir a aula da segunda-feira (16/06) se não quiserem. Todos que assistirem a aula na segunda-feira (16/06) vão ter suas faltas do dia (09/06) retiradas. Da mesma forma, os que já assistiram a aula do dia 09/06 já terão automaticamente presença no diário de classe no dia 16/06.
Na sexta-feira, dia 13/06, não foi feita chamada.

Outra coisa que ficou acertada é que a prova do terceiro bimestre da disciplina será realizada na primeira semana de aulas após as férias do meio do ano.

Espero que assim eu possa diminuir o prejuízo que foi causado a todos.

Bom final de semana.

1. Never stop praying (‘Devote yourselves to prayer…’ Col. 4:2a)
   • ‘Salvation is not just a logical decision, it is a miracle.’ – The gospel is the power of God…
   • When we pray, we are not changing God, but we are being changed.
   • Also, when we pray we change the spiritual atmosphere.
   • The gospel without spiritual warfare and prayer is just intellectual.
2. Expect the Best/Positive (‘…being watchful and thankful.’ Col. 4:2b)
   • Always expect something.
   • The Holy Spirit wants to lead you to good waters.
3. Open Doors (‘And pray for us, too, that God may open a door for our message, so that we may proclaim the mystery of Christ.’ Col. 4:3a)
   • God is going to open doors for you and you have to expect Him to open up doors.
   • This is the great thing with partnerships.  We can walk through each others’ open doors.
4. Right Language (‘…that I may proclaim it clearly, as I should.’ Col. 4:4)
   • Don’t speak the church language.  If you can help it, don’t even start speaking the church language.
5. Proper Conduct/Behavior (‘Be wise in the way you act toward outsiders…’ Col. 4:5a)
   • Humor is a great key.  If you’re a happy Christian, that will solve a lot for you.
   • Be someone that people love to be around.  That people aren’t avoiding you.
6. Don’t Miss Your Chance (‘…make the most of every opportunity.’ Col. 4:5b)
   • The Holy Spirit plays on the same team as you.
   • When the Holy Spirit passes you the ball, don’t blow it!
   • This isn’t your team or your game.  You’re not in this by yourself.
7. Spice Up Your Speech (‘Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.’ Col. 4:6)
   • If we could quit being so religious all the time and give some answers that people can actually understand, things would be better.
   • We must combine grace with salt.

Qualquer problema com esses arquivos, por favor, entrem em contato.

Lo que sí resulta misterioso es el poder mágico de las palabras. Desde que el Chiki Chiki se ha hecho popular, la vida de Mariano Rajoy ha ido de mal en peor. No sé si el hecho de formar parte del cuerpo de baile de la letra tiene algo que ver, pero resulta inquietante. Lo que sí queda claro es lo que muchos/as sospechábamos: que Rajoy ha sido una marioneta manejada por poderes-con bigote- ocultos (imaginen cuáles). Cuando por fin decide mover sus propios hilos, algo impensable, se convierte en protagonista involuntario de El Ente. ¿Conocen la película? Lean la sinopsis

No puedes verlo, pero está ahí.

"Algo" acecha a Carla Moran. Quiere su alma. Quiere su cuerpo. No hay forma de pararlo. Y no hay lugar donde pueda esconderse. El Ente ha venido a por Carla (Barbara Hershey).

No sabe qué es ni por qué la ha elegido, pero ella es la víctima. La atormenta en su habitación. La ataca en casa de su amiga. Incluso se hace con el control de su coche mientras ella conduce e intenta matarla. Pero su intención no es matarla, tiene otras cosas en mente para ella.

Deslumbrantes efectos especiales, fantásticas interpretaciones, un guión lleno de tensión y una sorprendente dirección se combinan para hacer de EL ENTE una película con fuerza propia que le mantendrá pegado a su asiento.

Vamos, que ni hecho a medida. La duda es cómo acabará esta segunda parte de El Ente, que a diferencia de la película, viene en capítulos. Cada lunes en su kiosko, una nueva entrega de este culebrón surreal. ¡Cómo perdérsela!

Syarat

1. FULLTIME

2. Ada komitmen yang tinggi

3. SANGGUP mengikut semua arahan kelab

4. BOLEH DATANG walaupun dipanggil jam 3pg.

5. boleh TAHAN kena maki

Permohonan dibuka sekarang, pemilihan akan dibuat melalui temuduga nanti, dan jika ingin memohon, sila sms nama pebuh, no ic, alamat pebuh dan no hp. Tarikh tutup permohonan ialah 10/5/2008.

Sms pada Tn Hj Roshidi 019-3134567

Aujourd'hui, focus spécial sur le travail des artistes de l'équipe scéno : Lies One, Premium, Stéréotype, Un plus Un, MCM. Peinture, collage, graff, vidéos tout ce qu'il faut pour égayer les murs du site SLI !

(photos : Patrick Guyennon)