IN THE TIME OF A PLAGUE HOW THE DEMOCRATS TAKE AS THEY supposedly GIVE

THE RELIEF PACKAGE FOR THE US ECONOMY WAS SEEN BY THE OPPORTUNISTIC PELOSI, THAT FAUX MOTHER THERESA who portrays  he self as ALWAYS PRAYING IN THAT PATHOLOGICAL WAY FOR OTHERS, CREEPY!

sO THE DEMOCRATS SCHEME  how this ‘gift’ to the nation can be deployed, to gain advantage.

bUT THEN IF WE CHOOSE TO GET ALL INTELLECTUAL ABOUT IT,it might be objected that even if it is psychologically difficult to give without also receiving, 25 MILLION BUCKS FOR THE kENNEDY CENTRE, FOR THE 'ARTS' SO THE DEMS ACTION of GIVING WAS tantamount to taking AS THEY DEMONStRATED  A refutation of the logic of genuine giving. OH SO HOLY nANCY FAILED TO transcend HER immature and egocentric conception of giving.

iF nANCY HAD TAKEN THE SAINTLY MANTLE  SHE SO EERILY ADOPTS a genuine gift TO THE PLAGUED NATION WOULD requires an anonymity of the giver, such that there is no accrued benefit in giving, i WILL GIVE YOU THIS 

IF YOU WILL GIVE ME THAT

The giver cannot even recognise that they are giving, for that would be to reabsorb their gift to the other person as some kind of testimony to the worth of the self – ie. the kind of self-congratulatory logic that rhetorically poses the question “how wonderful I am to give tO THE nation  and without even letting them know that I am the giver. 

The truly holy stance is  that a genuine gift must involve neither an apprehension of a good deed done, nor the recognition by the other party that they have received, 

althought Derrida is villified, his view on such seems translucently clear and like some mathemathical beautifully clear equations i.e 

'...this demand for an absolute altruism can never be assuaged, and yet equally clearly it can also never be fulfilled, and this ensures that the condition of the possibility of the gift is inextricably associated with its impossibility.'

the  aporia that surrounds the gift revolves around the paradoxical thought that a genuine gift cannot actually be understood to be a gift.

 The notion of the gift contains an implicit demand that the genuine gift must reside outside of the oppositional demands of giving and taking, and beyond any mere self-interest or calculative reasoning.

 According to Derrida, a gift is also something that cannot appear as such  as it is destroyed by anything that proposes equivalence or recompense, as well as by anything that even proposes to know of, or acknowledge it. 

This may sound counter-intuitive, but even a simple ‘thank-you’ for instance, which both acknowledges the presence of a gift and also proposes some form of equivalence with that gift, can be seen to annul the gift.  

Hard to be really
'Holy# Nancy, you have to first come out from behind that protective cloud of metapshysics.  Unlikely, when you have been pathologised into 'holyness' 
Isn't her Religios spouting an 'age' thing?