Stop Me Before I Vote Again

Have no fear, the futurists http://therealnews.com/t/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=4188&updaterx=2009-09-09+10%3A11%3A12 will come to the rescue. Maybe they already have.

I'm not going to pretend I understand half of the above. But I do have a question.

Why the long face, General Jackson?

(Bwa! I kill me!)

Well, that was coherent.

God save us from the social innovators. http://www.momentumconference.org/news-events/news-room/single-news-item/article/leading-social-changemakers-and-investors-converge-in-san-francisco-to-drive-social-innovation/index.html

Okay, leaving aside the "Thought-Leader" Orwellianism surrounding the over-hyped "conference," which one of these do-gooders draws your ire, Jay? What's the matter with some earnest speechifying from folks on the righteous side of the ledger?

"In these turbulent times, social innovators in the public and private sectors, from foundations to social venture funds to development agencies to grassroots Web 2.0 activists, are working together to build a new economic foundation for the world. SOCAP09 is the premier event that puts the flow of capital to social good into a context," said SOCAP Founder Kevin Jones.

The density of the hogwash in that is breathtaking. It's got more punch than a ball peen hammer to the diaphragm. I suspect the purpose of it is the destruction of what moral sensibility remains to the great and good attendees.

"SOCAP09 is the premier event that puts the flow of capital to social good into a context"

Yeah, I'll bet it does. They've been invited to a self-congratulatory informercial. In these turbulent times, no less.

It would be funny if that was a threat. "Nice little organizations you've got there, folks. Be a real shame if something was to happen to the revenue streams..."

I'll add some context of my own.

The eleemosynary industry provides stable employment and career opportunities for some very nice people. The senior employees direct portions of those old flows of capital to change facilitators, some of whom are liberal consequentialists and some of whom are progressive deontologists. There is a very good natured debate going on between the facilitators and the senior capital flow directors. This has been playing out for several hundred million years. It may play out for several hundred million more.

Meanwhile...

The eleemosynary industry provides stable employment and career opportunities for some very nice people, who just happen to be vicious wingnuts, vengeful sociobiologists and enraged crackpots. They take issue with liberal consequentialism and progressive deontology, for money. All they want is a level playing field, one that corrects the under-representation of misanthropy and anal rape in the field of do-goodery.

While not every framework is a good framework, as liberals conceive the good, it remains nevertheless a framework, conceived by people who may be seeking their inner liberal. Can they afford to rule out the possibility? Are the misanthropists wholly lost? The great and good believe that they should really do something to address those questions. But not until the debate is concluded -- because the eleemosynary industry provides stable employment and career opportunities for some very nice people, and it ain't easy finding a job in these turbulent times.

"I'm not going to pretend I understand half of the above....Well, that was coherent"

forgive them lord
they know not what i write

Owen, cheer up. Smithee is modest and surely understands the gist of it. Stras is seeking reasons for humility. May his quest be fruitful.

OP's "narrative flow", after all this time off, is rough, his imagery stale, his over-compensating profanity, well, embarassing. . . but, his message is clear. Hail to the chief!

http://www.counterpunch.org/baker09102009.html

the dean chimes tinkle in the hot breeze

"Most people might consider it perfectly reasonable to have Congress’s auditing arm review what the Fed has done with $2 trillion of the taxpayer’s money to ensure that everything is proper. After all, we wouldn’t let other government agencies spend one millionth of this amount ($2 million) without some sort of record that could be verified.
However, the Fed and its chairman Ben Bernanke do not see it this way. Mr. Bernanke warned Congress last month that such an audit could jeopardize the Fed’s independence, which in turn: “could raise fears about future inflation, leading to higher long-term interest rates and reduced economic and financial stability.”

Did Mr. Bernanke forget about the current state of the economy and the financial collapse that he was frantically trying to head off when he warned Congress that if the Fed were less independent, it could lead to “reduced economic and financial stability”? After all, how do you get less economic and financial stability ...
Congress should not forget that it was incredible mismanagement by Bernanke and his predecessor Alan Greenspan that brought about this disaster in the first place...
Congress should not be hesitant to use more oversight than it did in past years. And it certainly should not let the Fed send $2 trillion out the door without a verifiable paper trail. "

this triggered by an audit bill ...?

does the fed want to remain a black box
for ever ??

no of course not
this is a democracy we got cookin here

and inquiring citizens need to know

see
the fed wants to become more transparent
and is becoming more transparent

at its own prudent pace however

not frog marched along by
the demagogue wing
of the people's House of Representatives

again
i won't be happy
till the fed's fomc
is run real time from
from a desk in the house cloak room

"stale"

that stings

the rest is merely what cometh from
the sailing folly
of the site's father ....
the great redactor

recall its sop
for smiff to rework
my raw out put
which often contains...
demotic and commonplace variations
on our iconic swears

but
"stale ..."

fair enough
but
point to these lazy pox sir
or how can there be
correction!!!

My rapier-keen wit is wasted here. What are you? An audience or an oil painting?

{crickets}