the only thing to remember when reading about, or writing about love, it that it’s all lies. not the love, but the analysis of it, the memories of it, and it’s a disgrace to stuff it into a box and poke holes in the top and put it on display. emotions are ephemeral, little butterflies who either tickle your nose on a warm summer day or hornets who sting the soles of your feet, and often both at the same time.

the common theme in the love i used to remember is being out of control. in the beginning, the nausea, insomnia, terror, ego, tears, fear, and the relentless barrage of thoughts about... i have been known to describe the giddy, effervescent sensation that precedes love as the worst possible feeling i could ever feel, that it needs to stop and i am out of my head and my body and can’t we just get over it already…

and when it ends, when i have been brought to my knees in sheer, gutted agony, waking at 4 am to run the streets and hearing silent phone calls that never come, shut down, a walking zombie, where no comfort is to be had and pain is constant, scared that my pain is so obvious, shameful that i chose poorly, devastated, angry, obsessed…

when all i knew was anticipation and devastation, life was much simpler. it sparkled more, was more dynamic, and the pain kept me moving, running, breathless, with no time for real sleep or calm or peace. this was once my true love, the icicle through in my heart, gripping me with such intensity that it became my lover. i yearned, longed, lusted for the feeling, the emotion, so the human behind it was inconsequential.

the day came, as it must for everyone, when i left the beast dying in the street. with dirt in its mouth, i abandoned the notion of who i was, the lies i believed, the fantasy i slept with every night and the fear of being caught in the tidal waves i was dancing in. i stepped into something more than these nasty gifts; it became the love people speak of wistfully, the love we scoff at when we are young and want moremoremore of everything/without holding onto it. the kind one feels will last forever and terror grips one’s heart at the thought of losing it.

What a bummer about last night's debate. I wonder how much heat abc is feeling for turning the presidential debate into a cafeteria conversation about someone else's liabilities? slate.com declares Clinton the winner by a hairsbreadth, which is interesting as Slate offers a daily Clinton "Deathwatch," or her odds of actually winning the nomination. This is similar to Rush Limbaugh's meter of Hillary's chance of stealing the election. That is, when he's not penning such delightful prose as Why Liberals Fear Religion. Had Obama been more virile, more awake, less defensive, he may have won. And while I am also on the "Hillary, Please Step Aside" bandwagon, I understand, slightly, why she has not. It simply means she is in this for personal glory, some vindication of her relationship with Bill while she was First Lady (and not, mind you, baking cookies).

my new hobby is research. so rather than mass email and post a hundred bulletins on myspace, i will compile some findings here.

first is the perpetual job search, which is on hold-ish until august, when the decisions will be made to stay in srq and finish the obligatory associate degree, or move on to greener, more stimulating pastures. so if you are interested in some resources for non-profit and/or philanthropy job opportunities, go nuts:

http://www.communitywealth.com/about_job_listings.htm
www.cfsarasota.org
www.idealist.org

next on the google hotbed is social entrepreneurship. this is a really nebulous term, leading to more nebulous definitions and cross-lexiconian dialogs. in short, a social entrepreneur is an idealistic citizen who, in recognizing a social problem such as gross injustices, poverty,illiteracy, or what have you, takes the initiative to solve this problem. in theory, this problem is solved in an enclosed circuit, rendering the affected groups/beneficiaries fully sustainable and continuous.

the term "social entrepreneur" is part of a growing trend toward corporatizing the nonprofit world. in the past, the np's impact on the community it served was enough, and there was really little need or want for detailed reporting. the government was throwing money at these people and agencies in the hopes that problems like drug abuse, poverty, child hunger and homelessness would go away. since that approach didn't work, and now that we are facing a war budget of $3 trillion, np's have turned to foundations for help. these grantors, overseers of huge pots of money, are understandably reluctant to shell out mad cash with to ROI. since no one gets rich working in nonprofts, it is assumed Auntie and Uncle Moneybags made their money the old-fashioned way, meaning they hold to the expectation of concise reporting, prudent investments and a return on investment.

this is a partially good tactic, since it raises the bar for nonprofit administrators. it forced np's to take a long look at their work, and by quantifying one's successes, the case for continued support is all the more clear.

this is also a bum idea for nonprofits. most nonprofits are staffed with people rich with soft skills: kind, big-hearted, generous individuals who would dissolve into a crispy pile of ashes under Donald Trump's crusading ways. however, these are not people strong in the ways of quantifying. they can help, and will continue to help, but they don't know/get/care about the cold, hard numbers. this takes the softies and throws them into the big game of the hardballers, where they are chewed up and spit out. or their funding is pulled. neither of which are what the quiet girl in psych class wanted when she became a social worker.

i digress.

links:
http://www.socialedge.org/resources/edge-wiki/VenturePhilanthropy
http://www.pbs.org/opb/thenewheroes/whatis/resources.html
http://www.socialfranchise.com/
http://www.kauffman.org/
http://www.nationalcne.org/
http://www.svn.org/
http://www.ashoka.org/home/index.cfm
http://www.schwabfound.org/index.htm

open question:

what can the united nations do to be more effective in its enforcement of human rights internationally?