Bill Clinton, "Giving"

Yahoo News:

NEW YORK - Former President Bill Clinton will appear on Oprah Winfrey's TV talk show next Tuesday, Sept. 4, his first interview to promote "Giving," a book on philanthropy and civic action coming out the same day.

Pre-order from Amazon. Subtitle is, "How Each of Us Can Change the World." 

Comments

[O Lucky Man]

Willy Jeff came to town and gave me a headache and a pain in the ass. Should we praise someone to whom giving is so effortless?

[Phil]

God works in mysterious ways his wondrous works to perform. I will try to read the book with an open mind. At least it will make "giving" a word that will resonate. These celebrity endorsements do raise the level of attention to the subject. The centralizing powers do have a way of co-opting the margins. Jesus was a pariah. Now the Pope sits on a Throne.

[Susan]

I am astonished that the pope is carried around on a gilded chair; is he really God's representative? Does he not know that in the Bible it says "He who exalts himself shall be humbled, and he who humbles himself shall be exalted"?

[Gerry]

It does seem like an act fit to be satirized.

[boots]

I must commend Bill Clinton on this book. I saw him on Oprah and based on that, I will read the book. I think the concept about what one person can do gets lost in the shuffle of red tape and many people don't trust charities.

I wonder if Kiva.org concept might cut to the chase in helping out the people of New Orleans and the US instead of just third world countries.

Andre Agassi's Charter School in Vegas also is of note. Georgia Schools could learn a lot from his model. Parents should demand it, and get rid of the waste.

[Kristen Maisano]

Why are people judging the book and former preseident Bill Clinton without reading the book? Did you research his work prior to posting the negative comments? If you are TRULY interested in the bettering of America, can you give someone a chance without redicule? Did you actually watch the interview with Clinton or did you just get a second hand account from your conservitive buddy?

If only one person was empowered to "give" to another being as a result of seeing Clinton on Oprah today, every word in the book will be worth it. Lets honestly try, try, to look at this as a glass half full. Take this as a ice breaker into other philanthropic events and causes.

How can it be said that giving is "effortless" for a human being? How do you know how someone else feels? If you actually watched the interview or read the jacket of the book, it is VERY evident that Clinton believes that giving is a selfish act. A selfish act secondary to the fact that he feels GOOD after helping another being.

Keep putting people and things down if you need to in order to feel better about yourself. You are displaying a very obvious and common coping mechanism. It is okay... for a pre teenager.

[Gerry]

I don't read any put down, or pre-judgement, not much anyway. And I can guarantee that tin-hat conservatives would not like much written at this site.

Isn't it an open question whether it is really giving if it is selfish? Or at the very least it is a lower level of giving, a lower quality of gift.

[Phil]

Didn't see Clinton on Oprah, but read an address he gave recently at Middlebury College. He is a great spokesperson for getting past our differences, and thinking of ourselves worldwide as one community. I imagine the book will make giving topical and generate a lot of gifts. Celebrities make a difference that way. This site has been swamped today with hits on this post.

[bUM fREE]

Hey, OLM, how do you like your chide, spicy, or plain?  ;-)

[O Lucky Man]

Eight more years as co-President? His sacrifice is killing me. Enough with the giving already.

(By the way, "Holden" is the neocon on this site. I'm just a shameless opportunist, like Willy Jeff.)

[Phil]

Now if we knew what Bill knows, and had done what he has done, would we have the chops to be so upbeat, so inspiring? I have a feeling we would be in mental institution. He should be admired for turning his life around?

[Phil]

Holden is the neocon? The Habermassian neocon funder of the poor? No way. He is like the rest of us, thinking things through bit by bit, with a long way to go, like the rest of us.

[O Lucky Man]

I have a feeling we would be in mental institution.

For you this is conceptual. For me, a concrete fact.

(I withdraw the remark. Holden's a good dude.)

[Phil]

War Criminals, Common Criminals, aren't the higher ups always living in fear of some Tribunal making explicit all the stuff they signed off on, behind closed doors, marked Top Secret? Yet, on they go inspiring us with giving or freedom, or what not. The words never fail them, nor the self esteem. Millions swaying like a field of wheat in the wind under the force of their eloquence. I guess they do the best they can, like the rest of us.

[O Lucky Man]

Yet, on they go inspiring us with giving or freedom, or what not.

Could it be said any better than this? I think not.

Long may we wave.

[Phil]

The force of law, of religion, of ideals, of eloquence. Those who are visible and audible on a large stage speak to us and for us to the point that we have no other way to articulate as a nation, or a person, who we are, whether the symbols of identity be a flag, a cross, or a bottle of coke.

[Gerry]

There are other celebrity examples, snubbing some grandchildren and leaving a huge sum for a dog.

[A Serious Babe]

Thank you, Ms. Maisano, for making the difficult points. Like many good Americans, you may have had the benefit of an extended network of adults - a "village", if you will - to help instill in you a sense of reasoned optimism about human nature and our ability to adjust to difficult challenges.

It is possible that Mr. Man was not as fortunate as you, I and so many other good Americans, and finds himself troubled by the very people and events from which we draw inspiration and hope. Perhaps as our gift to Mr. Man and others, we can demonstrate tolerance for their intolerance, drawing them the best we can into the diverse American family that we value so much.

We can build trust across the greatest divides if we are bold and hew to our vision. Let us begin today.

[Phil]

That Babe is serious. Dad may abuse us in secret, but that does not mean that he is wrong when he tells us to brush our teeth, go to Church, and love our fellow man.

[O Lucky Man]

It is possible that Mr. Man was not as fortunate as you, I and so many other good Americans... etc etc

Jeez.

I've always thought Willy J would make a good Hamburglar. I mean, who can blame the Hamburglar? He's only responding honestly to something too delicious to resist.

And there's always a Ronald McReagan to get our deliciousness back.

Although he is a thief, he is still considered a friend of Ronald McReagan and the rest of the McDonaldland gang, who appear to tolerate his kleptomania as an eccentricity.

Robble, robble, robble.

[bUM fREE]

How can it be said that giving is "effortless" for a human being? -Kristen

Isn't it an open question whether it is really giving if it is selfish? Or at the very least it is a lower level of giving, a lower quality of gift. -Gerry

What are you willing to lose -- to give UP -- to benefit another?

It seems to me true giving implies a zero-sum. One must genuinely perceive a personal loss that initially overshadows the gain of the other in need.

If I give you something that I don't need or don't want, that which has no visceral value to me, then I give you rabbit droppings, pocket lint and broken car alarms. Thanks a bunch.

Voluntarily give up something you want/need and you risk a revelation of character: the benefit of the other may never overshadow the longing for what you had and lost.

[Gerry]

When I give something away that I don't need or want, I call that recycling, and it is a gift to the planet and the whole community because of the resources saved. It is more of a character of growing ours as it is a cost to me to save and coordinate the process.

Of course, need and want are completely subjective here. Possession, property and all that are not natural phenomena. Artificial in the sense that there are derived from linguistics, human signs and signals.

Without the confusion of property, gifts and giving are more about processes than things. The gift of ourselves, our speech, our songs our dance through life. Nothing to be accumulated, something to be experienced.

[Phil]

Wouldn't it be nice if giving could generally be risk free, painless, and effective? "The joy of giving." Sometimes it may be a zero sum game, but in other cases both giver and receiver are gainers in some way. Don't we teach kids this? "More blessed is it to give than to receive." Who enjoys holiday gifts more, the parents or the kids? Sometimes the parents take more joy in their kids joy than the kids do themselves. Giving is a simple virtue, but like all virtues is embedded in such complex grownup situations that sometimes the virtue part seems swallowed up in what else is going on, like self-promotion.

[Gerry]

I think that is sort-of like wanting life to be painless, or looking for a perpetual motion machine. In some contexts, friction is a loss, but in others it is the purchase you need to move, to make actions and reactions. You can't have one without the other, like the front and back of a hand.

[Phil]

Exactly, like light and shadow. Giving without will to power is pretty rare. Giving like any other expression of love is multi-faceted in its origins, expressions, and ends.

[Til It Hearst]

I fear I shall never evict this bitterness.

(Check the tie colors in the accompanying photo. Perfect.)