tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post312613124672060109..comments2023-11-27T02:17:22.859-06:00Comments on The LawDog Files: What the hell?LawDoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05232684877582591461noreply@blogger.comBlogger42125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-46237461558037224592012-11-25T19:39:24.424-06:002012-11-25T19:39:24.424-06:00(The name is supposed to be Ms. Red.)
Another char...<i>(The name is supposed to be Ms. Red.)</i><br />Another charity group, though more personal than simply giving money, is Operation Gratitude. <br />Mostly, soldiers act as liasons for their units, posting wishes & receiving packages. <br />Citizens who wish to donate 'pick up' someone's list & send the things. <br />http://www.operationgratitude.com/Ms.https://www.blogger.com/profile/17393270900141592722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-90023057761425936202012-11-19T10:33:51.080-06:002012-11-19T10:33:51.080-06:00When lawyers infiltrate organizations to the exten...When lawyers infiltrate organizations to the extent that this kind of legalese hedging happens, they tend to have outlived their useful purpose.<br /><br />I'll add my support for Soldiers' Angels. They seem to be a good outfit that hasn't gotten too big for its britches. <br /><br />There are plenty of other small organizations doing great work in this area. There's a group out of Paducah (Texas) called Hunting With Soldiers. They exist to secure donated hunting lease time and resources (lodging, feeders, stands/blinds, corn, ammo, rifles, etc) to provide vets (especially wounded vets) with a free-of-charge hunt. That's a cause I can believe in.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.facebook.com/groups/huntingwithsoldiers/" rel="nofollow">http://www.facebook.com/groups/huntingwithsoldiers/</a>John the Texanerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05387509912509138934noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-32203441069024640832012-11-16T18:10:25.533-06:002012-11-16T18:10:25.533-06:00"WWP has a long history of...fundraising acti..."WWP has a long history of...fundraising activities that involve firearms."<br /><br />Yeah, we knew that. It's the online published policy to eliminate any FUTURE such activities that are the point at issue. That wasn't a "misunderstood communication", but rather an exact understanding of the depth of their support for the Second Amendment (lip service at this point) that was made with laser-like precision.<br /><br />They still aren't walking this back, they're just noticing the pressure of a bear trap on their tender bits. When they chew, swallow, and entirely consume this turd sandwich of a policy it will be the first sign they are truly appreciative of what they did wrong, and only afterwards can they begin to make amends.<br /><br />And Gresham's reply to this blustery dissembling is that he ain't buying it either. He's offered them carte blanche to "clarify" their policy on his program ("Come to Jesus!"), which they've cleverly not made any move to do, at last look.<br /><br />They're still in denial on this intervention, leaving on "Make counter-accusations" as the only remaining option on the G. Gordon Liddy Manual Of Watergate Strategy When Caught In A Wringer.<br /><br />It would be *so* much simpler to say <br />"We Were Monumental Idiots.<br />We Didn't Think This Through.<br />We Fired The Head Idiots, And Put The Rest On Half Rations.<br />We're Very Sorry For What We Did.<br />Please Forgive Us."<br /><br />They could've ended this in 4 seconds with that. Instead it'll linger and cost them million$, because the 2x4 still hasn't gained the mule's attention.<br /><br />-AesopAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-24496718814718208312012-11-16T10:16:00.882-06:002012-11-16T10:16:00.882-06:00Dear Scott,
We appreciate your concern regarding ...Dear Scott,<br /><br />We appreciate your concern regarding this matter. First, these questions arose as a result of a miscommunicated message when declining an opportunity for WWP to appear on Gun Talk Radio. This mistake has unfortunately led some people to question our support of the 2nd Amendment. <br /><br />Please know WWP wholeheartedly supports the Constitution of the United States of America, which includes the Second Amendment. We recognize these are the freedoms our Alumni fought and sacrificed to protect! <br /> <br />WWP has a long history of facilitating therapeutic hunting and outdoor opportunities for Wounded Warriors as well as fundraising activities that involve firearms.<br /><br />Thank you for your support of Wounded Warrior Project as we continue to honor and empower wounded warriors. <br /><br />Thank you,<br />MELISSA MCARTHUR<br /> <br />O: 904.405.1350<br />M: 904.625.6491<br />F: 904.296.7347<br /> <br />Wounded Warrior Project<br />4899 Belfort Road, Suite 300<br />Jacksonville, Florida 32256<br />Scott_Shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14646683071614664257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-78380657547703789742012-11-16T10:05:29.591-06:002012-11-16T10:05:29.591-06:00Wounded Warrior issues a statement:
http://gunnut...Wounded Warrior issues a statement:<br /><br />http://gunnuts.net/2012/11/16/wounded-warrior-project-clarifies-their-position-on-the-2nd-amendment/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-14205038156721599492012-11-16T09:10:35.828-06:002012-11-16T09:10:35.828-06:00I hear Fisher House does great things for wounded ...I hear Fisher House does great things for wounded vets and families...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-51030778865762382962012-11-16T08:54:42.316-06:002012-11-16T08:54:42.316-06:00in other news you have some spilled spam on your S...in other news you have some spilled spam on your SOPA posting back in januaryrobert martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10925027454221767119noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-41439468957954864192012-11-16T00:09:45.198-06:002012-11-16T00:09:45.198-06:00Armedandsafe:
And the counter-argument:
http://ww...Armedandsafe:<br /><br />And the counter-argument:<br />http://www.blackfive.net/main/2012/07/soldierss-angels-responds-to-mike-surplus-yon.html<br /><br />From a different perspective:<br />http://thelibertyzone.wordpress.com/2012/08/01/soldiers-angels-vs-michael-yon/<br /><br />And:<br />http://www.mudvillegazette.com/033746.html<br /><br />Huh.<br /><br />LawDogLawDoghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05232684877582591461noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-461683542095528692012-11-15T22:22:38.625-06:002012-11-15T22:22:38.625-06:00Here's a link concerning SA:
http://www.micha...Here's a link concerning SA:<br /><br />http://www.michaelyon-online.com/soldiers-ducks.htmarmedandsafenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-13025830842793576222012-11-15T19:08:44.189-06:002012-11-15T19:08:44.189-06:00Thanks for the link, LL.
Here's the money quo...Thanks for the link, LL.<br /><br />Here's the money quote, best as I recollect:<br />"Likewise, we gratefully accept donations from companies and individuals connected with the gun industry."<br /><br />Well, yeah. Except for their webpage which says they don't. So were they lying then, or now, or are they just habitual liars?<br /><br />I don't think they're backing the truck up so much as taking shellfire below the waterline, and shipping water over the bow.<br /><br />Honesty would be owning up to what their policy really was, firing whoever dreamt it up, apologizing, and then trying v2.0.<br /><br />Trying to claim everyone misunderstood that they meant exactly what their website said, and when caught at it, things didn't work out well for them from there is damage control, not an acceptance of fault.<br /><br />The cover-up is always worse than the crime.<br />The latter says "I'm bad." The former says "And you're stupid enough to believe I'm not."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-63141456285648042822012-11-15T17:40:25.194-06:002012-11-15T17:40:25.194-06:00WWP is backing the truck up.
http://professionalo...WWP is backing the truck up.<br /><br />http://professionaloutdoormedia.org/node/7384<br /><br />And anonymous who checked Charity Navigator, I would urge you to look over WWP's 990s. For 2010-2011, their overall compensation and benefits for upper management totaled close to $2mil.LLhttp://chromedcurses.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-11656971886109304842012-11-15T16:44:51.694-06:002012-11-15T16:44:51.694-06:00Interesting...
I was just looking into WWP the o...Interesting... <br />I was just looking into WWP the other day using charitynavigator.org to get an outside opinion of them and had pause. <br /><br />While they have received a decent 3 out of 4 star eval, what raised a red flag to me was the amount listed for "compensation of leaders:" <br />~$320 for the exec director.<br /><br />Additionally, peoples' submitted Reviews on another tab given them 1.7/5 (take with a large grain of salt as with most online reviews...)<br /><br />See: http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=12842<br /><br /><br /><br />As for Soldiers' Angels, the eval isn't quite as good (2/4), but the submitted reviews rock at 4.8/5 and their leader compensation appears more favorable. <br />I haven't really dug in to see what in the financials caused their lower than expected rating, but their Accountability and Transparency score were the highest available.<br /><br />Some other similar ones with good inital scores, but I have not dug into yet:<br />- Operation Homefront<br />- Special Operations Warrior Foundation<br />- Hope For The Warriors<br />- Fisher House Foundation<br />- The Navy SEAL Foundation<br /><br /><br />Now granted, I'm not sure how accurate that eval site is overall, but from what I've seen and heard they seem to make an honest effort.<br /><br />Of course, YMMV...<br />Happy Donating!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-47885333439540496302012-11-15T15:58:22.331-06:002012-11-15T15:58:22.331-06:00Hey Spear! I'm a WWP Alumni, and here's wh...Hey Spear! I'm a WWP Alumni, and here's what I think. <br /><br />First, I've worked with the WWP and found them to be seriously concerned and dedicated to wounded and injured vets. Period. They have better outreach, and genuinely work to get wounded warriors help that they need to return, recover and adjust. That has required significant expansion over a short period of time.<br /><br />I heard their rep on the radio yesterday, and I think the problem here comes from ham-handed PR and poorly phrased corporate polices about legitimately reasonable fundraising and branding issues.<br /><br />The key seems to be the whole "co-branding" thing, in which manufacturers put the WWP logo on their products in return for either a licensing fee or a slice of the profits going back to WWP. The whole process is intended to raise funds for WWP, using their logo and "brand". We've all seen lots of products like this in the stores and gun shops, not all of them guns or knives.<br /><br />According to the WWP statement, they have determined that the financial returns from co-branding with firearms and weapons manufacturers has been less than desired, the WWP has decided to focus their efforts elsewhere. <br /><br />Now we return to the problems of a rapidly expanding organization, and having new people who really haven't grown into the organization yet. A business-oriented marketing exec says "we're not going to do that anymore". This is repeated and communicated to the new PR guy who then puts out a press release that "we're not going to do that anymore", phrasing it inartfully and just the facts. <br /><br />Arises the hue and cry from the largely gun-owning veterans community, and the largely conservative community that funds the WWP. All because no one along the line took two minutes to consider how that new policy will be understood and interpreted by the folks who PAY THEIR BILLS. <br /><br />For the record, I think such a policy and it's accompanying announcement is un-needed. Why announce it? Just change your focus and leave the possibility of co-branding under certain circumstances. But I don't think that WWP hates guns or gun owners, I just think that there are some folks in the WWP organization that need to apologize and possibly clean out their desks. However, I'm happy to walk away from WWP if they give even another slight hint that they are not staunchly pro-2nd Amendment.<br /><br />ChuckDesertRathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03410153018009079675noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-51885553940623562972012-11-15T08:12:58.290-06:002012-11-15T08:12:58.290-06:00I guess they aren't as picky when it comes to ...I guess they aren't as picky when it comes to alcohol company prohibition...<br /><br />https://www.racesonline.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=public.race_detail&race_id=13831Delayed Discrepancyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18363459048919339669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-84749769523417141742012-11-15T08:10:03.663-06:002012-11-15T08:10:03.663-06:00This comment has been removed by the author.Delayed Discrepancyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18363459048919339669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-87574912531334953592012-11-15T06:58:17.707-06:002012-11-15T06:58:17.707-06:00Patrick, even a dog knows the difference between b...Patrick, even a dog knows the difference between being accidentally stepped on, and being kicked.<br /><br />WWP made the decision that publicly associating with gun companies would be disreputable. That's entirely their decision. It's reprehensible douchebaggery, but it's certainly legal for them to kick that dog.<br /><br />It also lets everyone know where their deepest sympathies lie, and that helping wounded vets comes in a distant second to those sympathies, none of which have anything to do with avoiding controversy, but rather with very publicly taking a side in one. That fact is inarguable, and indefensible. Spin is what you do when your tires are going nowhere.<br /><br />At this point, if Chuck Schumer started a veteran's charity, its policies would be indistinguishable from WWP's.<br /><br />To me, and a not inconsiderable number of gun owners - let alone vets, any number of whom were wounded - supporting those who group up with Chuck Schumer et al on almost anything is indefensible, and more so given a growing list of similar charities without any such reprehensible proclivities.<br /><br />Despite that, and knowing how WWP thinks, if one still wants to send WWP money, either they too think that guns companies are disreputable, or else I can see where any mention of Stockholm Syndrome might have shaved a little too close to someone's roots. <br /><br />It's a free country (so far), so please, do as you like. But don't be so surprised or dismayed when people or charities are known for the company they keep. And whose dog they kick.<br /><br />-AesopAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-10052047595109706692012-11-14T23:29:50.665-06:002012-11-14T23:29:50.665-06:00LD - I stand corrected, and it's absolutely yo...LD - I stand corrected, and it's absolutely your right to do anything legal you can possibly imagine with your money. I'd argue that it's also your right to do some not-currently-legal things with your money, but that conversation gets sticky fast. Regardless, the question I still haven't seen answered is how a charity not wanting to affiliate themselves with ANY corporate sponsor could evoke a personal insult to anyone other than perhaps that corporation's employees. I have a Verizon phone, but if someone were to curse their inept service or publicly declare a boycott you wouldn't find me stepping up to defend their honor. What happened to "A gun is just a tool"? I do thank you for your time - I'm not trying to troll, just surprised by the outburst. Please feel free to drop me an email if you'd rather I not continue posting...<br /><br />Tango - they're not politicizing their charity, they're trying to keep from politicizing it. Corporate sponsorship is never, ever "no strings attached". WWP hasn't said a word against gun owners and I think what I don't understand is how "we don't want corporate sponsorship from this list of corporations" has provoked such rabid rage from people who patronize some of those corporations. Please help me understand - I presume some of you guys also drink alcohol. What's got you so betrayed about gun manufacturers, and where are all the people boycotting on behalf of Jim Beam?<br /><br />Aesop - For starters, any gun manufacturer in the world would fall on their knees and weep for the chance to sell products to "2/3rds of Americans", and any post that manages to combine the KKK, Al Queda, Wonderland and Stockholm Syndrome is staring Godwin's law squarely in the face. No-one's head is being urinated on, and any cause that openly stated "we have no principles at all, just give us money to accomplish our ONE TRUE GOAL" would arise from a Fleming novel not reality. Even the Westboro Baptists and the Earth First folks have some standards. It seems pretty obvious from their list that WWP included the categories of companies that have offered them sponsorship in the past - not a whole lot of marijuana cartels looking to shell out for prosthetic limbs or PTSD therapy (and no wonder, their product sells itself!), where Jack Daniels has been a master of nontraditional marketing since before the term existed. Patrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09015310389786063118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-84745440874633359422012-11-14T22:57:50.832-06:002012-11-14T22:57:50.832-06:00Where I come from, if you take money from said ent...Where I come from, if you take money from said entity, and then speak out openly against said entity, you are, as they say, "lower than a snake's belly in a wagon rut." In an effort to appease those who's little hearts get all atwitter at the mention of a gun, they have alienated a majority of their contributions I would bet. Too bad for the soldiers who ultimately suffer. Good thing there are other good, respectable charities out there.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-60521227672334954722012-11-14T20:51:34.686-06:002012-11-14T20:51:34.686-06:00http://www.examiner.com/node/55389381?CID=examiner...http://www.examiner.com/node/55389381?CID=examiner_alerts_article<br /><br />An article about WWP deciding to go on the program, after all. Just FYI<br />armedandsafenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-86699176763866592142012-11-14T19:43:00.965-06:002012-11-14T19:43:00.965-06:00Dawg - it's lawyerese-double-speak. Read it a...Dawg - it's lawyerese-double-speak. Read it again, think like a Court-Critter (<i>sideways and HUA</i>) and you'll get another meaning from it. <br /><br />Ol' Willie was right... Suisanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02303788991830837779noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-40387118282182468242012-11-14T18:37:55.973-06:002012-11-14T18:37:55.973-06:00I'm disappointed you didn't dig further. Y...I'm disappointed you didn't dig further. You just took one person's WWP didn't go onto Gun Talk Radio due to it's association with firearms and the hosts gets butt hurt over. To quote WWP, “Our position regarding firearms and alcohol is in response to the struggles that many injured service members face with substance abuse and suicide and the roles those items often play in those issues.”<br /><br />Not that they won't accept money from the gun manufacturers, they just don't want to go on a national radio show about guns. Jennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-79626631930443865102012-11-14T18:27:45.996-06:002012-11-14T18:27:45.996-06:00Normally I consider a reasonable fellow. However I...Normally I consider a reasonable fellow. However I think you are jumping the gun on this one quite a bit. They were trying to say that they would not be on Gun Talk radio program for Veterans Day. The website response is broad however Gun Talk Radio blew the decline way out of proportion. I appreciate what WWP does, know many people who have been helped by them, and I will continue to support them. I don't need to buy another gun or listen to a radio show to my support. I just need to write that check.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-27793701461187147642012-11-14T14:33:09.164-06:002012-11-14T14:33:09.164-06:00I had been considering donating to WWP. Thanks for...I had been considering donating to WWP. Thanks for the info, Lawdog. Now I will certainly not donate to such an organization and will look for other ways of giving what support I can to wounded vets.<br />I used to work with a vet who was nearly blown up in Iraq. He valued his firearms (probably still does) and I shudder to think what he would have to say about that policy (sergeants have such a turn of phrase).Wombatnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-3933737263637904612012-11-14T14:24:12.782-06:002012-11-14T14:24:12.782-06:00Right. 'Cause it's hunky dory to attack th...Right. 'Cause it's hunky dory to attack the manufacture of guns, while still cashing checks from them.<br /><br />That way they're double hypocrites: first about claiming guns are controversial, then by claiming to be untainted by those who engage in their trade.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22957834.post-36877183731646197362012-11-14T13:15:41.411-06:002012-11-14T13:15:41.411-06:00Lawdog:
The have posted on their web-site (quoted...Lawdog:<br /><br /><i>The have posted on their web-site (quoted in the post above, by the way) that they will NOT -- and I quote again: "receive a percentage or a portion of proceeds from ... firearms companies."<br /><br />That is their right, as a private corporation to do so.<br /><br />It is also my right to decide that my firearms-related money is better donated somewhere else.</i><br /><br />You are clear that "receive a percentage or a portion of proceeds from ... firearms companies." does NOT mean that they won't accept donations from firearms companies, right?<br /><br />It means that they won't accept donations that are tied to the <b>purchase</b> of a weapon, e.g. '10% percent of our profits from this sale go to the WWP' or 'we will donate $10 to the WWP for every purchase'.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com