My Jackie Stallone Prediction For This Week:

Ore : 11:01 AM

That the Corner's John J. Miller will not answer the e-mail I'm about to send him in response to this benighted nugget:

The Left has a whole organization devoted to studying conservative philanthropy [ed.'s note: a two-word phrase that dares one not to succumb to paroxysms of horrified laughter]. It's called the
National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy, also known by its acronym NCRP (pronounced "N-crap") [kuh-lassy!]. Actually, I've found a lot of their publications to be professional and worthwhile -- all from a certain perspective, of course, but also honest attempts to understand and evaluate the Right. I spoke at a Hudson Institute forum last year and one of my co-panelists was from NCRP. He sincerely believes that the Left has a lot to learn from the Right in terms of infrastructure and organization. A simple observation: Conservative philanthropies are much more likely to stick by their grantees over long stretches of time -- in other words, they keep going back to the tried and true (which is not surprising for conservatives). On the Left, however, donors often pursue fads and trends -- they may help get a group up and running, but rather than trying to sustain it over time, they abandon it for something else. This winds up having an impact on which ideas are developed and which messages are heard. Mike Joyce was definitley [sic] a member of the "stand by me" school of thought -- if he believed you were talented and hardworking and worth supporting, then his support of you (through the Olin Foundation and later the Bradley Foundation) was likely to last quite a while.

...Proving he knows less about absolutely everything than even his fellow Cornernik Jonah. Now, this was up yesterday, and is therefore old -- doubtless many new squirts of idiocy have since been sprayed up in the local HTML 2.0 -- but I'm going to respond anyway:

RE: "Philanthropy Left and Right"

John: Your anonymous source at the NCRP notwithstanding, ideas aren't developed and messages aren't heard not because the dreaded Left is too busy pursuing trends and fads, but because when the liberals think of philanthropy, typically they think of aiding their fellow man in very concrete, immediate ways: using their private monies (as well as funds raised from other individuals and organizations) primarily for the purposes of, say, providing hospice care for AIDS sufferers, vocational training for the homeless, daycare for low-income families -- that sort of thing. The most politicized you'll see them get is when they engage in public advocacy for such niches. The last thing they're thinking of, when they envision philanthropy, is creating left-leaning think-tanks and media juggernauts. Perhaps wrongly, perhaps rightly, but there it is. As a former social services employee, I understand that it is in part because they are deathly afraid that if they take that plunge, they risk alienating otherwise right-leaning charitable sources that could have helped what "lefties" consider to be "real" philanthropy -- for the sake of actually helping people in the here and now, they're willing to forego taking any stand that could be perceived as too "political". It may be myopic, but to do otherwise is generally regarded as being too great a risk.

Whaddaya bet this pointedly does not get addressed?

posted by teh l4m3 at 11:01 AM | Permalink |

[ back home ]

Comments for My Jackie Stallone Prediction For This Week:
he's ignoring the fact that the reason right-leaning foundations "stick by" their recipients is that said groups make their money solely from right-leaning foundations - nobody makes an out-of-pocket donation to places like these.

Who's Jackie Stallone? Is she related to Sylvester?

conservative philanthropy

That's one doozy of an oxymoron! Since when do wingnuts exhibit effort or inclination to increase the well-being of humankind?

Dex: Not only that (good point, btw), I'm simply agog (though why, I know not) that they take for granted that philanthropy can be defined as funnelling corporate slush funds through non-profits solely for the purpose of forwarding a political agenda.

Chuckles: Only among the top five (with headbands) bestest psychics EVAH!!1!!1!

Question her prognosticatory abilities, and expect to get a F.I.S.T. in yo grill.

elmo: Since never. But there's always lip-service for the sake of political expediency: "Compassionate Conservatism," "Thousand Points o' Light," and all that...

Stay the course.

Wouldn't be prudent.

nah gah da it

Not at this junk-chur.

© 2006 Freedom Camp | Blogger Templates by and Gecko & Fly.
No part of the content or the blog may be reproduced without prior written permission.
Learn how to Make Money Online at GeckoandFly

Web This Blog
My Photo
Location: Camp X-Ray, Gitmo, Cuba

I know why the caged bird gets beaten.

Bulls, Bitches & Screws