Ok, to hell with the partisanship. Time to stop sniping over who supports what. Of course, you have plenty of charities from which to choose, and I encourage you to support your favorite this year (whether it’s for the soldiers or not.) Just reading the comments to yesterday’s post, it’s looking like a tiny minority of us are getting as bad as some of Malkin’s. Let’s rise above it, let’s take the high road, let’s keep the politics out of it, and let’s kick some ass! It’s a fine charity no matter who supports it.
Yeah, I know many of you are from Blue States, and consistently get money stolen from you by Red States, I know you’re probably all hurtin’ for $$. (Hell, I gave most of my charity dollars to my local NPR affiliate this year, but I’ll give what I can!) ;-)
Yesterday, John signed us up for the Army team, so go donate! And while you’re at it, go vote for Balloon-Juice at the Weblog Awards – almost, but not quite as important. I mean hell. Gateway Pundit and My Pet Jawa are in 2nd & 3rd place. Come on! My Pet Jawa? Puleeezee.
ImJohnGalt
Shorter Michael: “Please stop discussing a thread I started with…”
…By elaborating on and discussing with the representatives of said charity how Malkin’s involvement) and their participation in calling liberals “troop-haters” makes it harder to donate.
For fuck’s sake, Michael – way to endear yourself to the blog:
Let’s recap:
and…
and…
Yeah, I see a lot of equivalence between those posts and our discussion of how Malkin will likely use this as a political bludgeon, a point-of-view that *YOU* advanced in the original post.
David Frum, Mark Steyn, and now Michael D. We’re well rid of you up here in Canada. Every time you guys leave our collective IQ goes up a few points. Now if only we could convince Andrew Coyne to become a snowbird and leave Mcleans Mag.
I’m voting for Balloon-Juice every day, but only for the pre-Michael D. edition.
nightjar
Tiny minority? Rise Above it? As bad as Malkin?
I agree entirely with Imjohngalt’s statement above. I and others didn’t put the politics into this situation and taking the high road is a failed liberal strategy. You’re 180 degree turn from yesterday is the sign of a flaky person, without basic principle. I gave yesterday to a non partisan charity so I know my money is well spent. You can give to whatever charity you want, I could care less.
John Cole
Sheesh. Cut the new guy some slack already. Besides, I am a liberal now, and I worship at the altar of diversity. Michael is foreign, gay, and Republican. It is a threefer. I can’t have you all driving him off.
And JohnGalt, your comment was just nasty. Who do you think you are talking to- me?
:P
Michael D.
Wah Wah Wah. I hate Michael D.
Wah Wah Wah. I’m going to read all his posts and tell him I hate him even if I agree with him.
Wah Wah Wah. He’s a self loathing gay.
Don’t worry about “the new guy,” John. The new guy learned a long time ago that arguing with people like this was, is, and shall remain, senseless. :-)
I think coming to the blog and hijacking a post about a worthy cause pretty much says all you need to know.
Michael D.
Yeah, but a Republican who would vote straight ticket Democrat if I could. :-)
nightjar
John Cole says
Do you really believe this has anything to do with the fact that Michael is gay or foreign or republican? If so John, then I will say to you directly that is total crap and you can keep him and I’ll run myself off.
ImJohnGalt
That’s right, I was just whining. Not a single point worth actually having a discussion about in any of my comments. Please point to where I said anything about your sexuality.
What a twofer! You get to call us as bad as Malkin’s eliminationist commenters, *and* dismiss us as not worth having a conversation with, all in the same comment thread! No wonder we love you!
Firstly, I’ve been coming here since long before John had any doubts about his old party. Secondly, that you consider a discussion that was completely of-a-kind with your original post “hijacking” pretty much says all I need to know about your conversational style.
Get over yourself, Michael. You’re gay, we get it. I have no idea if you’re self-loathing or not. How much longer are you going to pretend that matters to us as opposed to your moronical posts? You have some strange ideas about what the Republican party has historically stood for (none of which, so far as I can tell from reading the comments you’ve ever defended with anything other than “I know it’s crazy!”), but your sexuality means not a whit to me.
Once you start assuming good faith in our comments, perhaps we might have a discussion. I’m more than happy to engage you, but as long as you hide behind what you *think* I’ve said [I *hate* you? Really?], that’s not going to be possible.
John:
Man, other than a couple blow-ups with Darrell, that’s the first time I’ve ever really gone off the reservation. I just don’t agree with Michael’s characterization of the last discussion thread, and his easy dismissal of it even though *he’s* the one who started it grates. I expect more of a fellow Canadian.
However, you’re right, it was unnecessarily nasty to someone still finding their Balloon-Juice editorial voice. Michael, I apologize.
MNPundit
Where did self-loathing gay come from in this thread? If it hasn’t been brought up in the comments why bring it up yourself?
Zifnab
Whatever dude. “Red States” aren’t “stealing” anybody’s money. The handful of rich, connected good-ole-boys who carpetbagged down from Blue States and seized control of the local political infrastructure so they could channel federal and state tax dollars into their country clubs and shitty businesses are stealing my money.
I’m not sure what the hell that has to do with anything, but when it comes to VALOR-IT, I honestly have reservations as to whether a wingnut charity is going to actually spend my donations properly. Are they going to actually get money to soldiers, or are they just going to funnel cash through Tom DeLay charities that “help” “people”? If the charity has Malkin’s blessing, I’m more inclined to believe the latter. That you and John vouch for them means alot, but not enough to overcome my lingering suspicions. So I’ll continue giving my donations to people I know I can trust.
That’s all I’m saying.
Michael D.
Zifnab: My personal opinion is that what you are doing is exactly the way EVERYONE should donate to charity. :-)
ImJohnGalt
For the record, I am not saying anything about the charity. In fact, from what I’ve seen it looks like a worthy one, with an interesting angle. I just take offence to Malkin using her challenge as yet another way to either a) call liberals dirty troop-haters, or b) pat herself on the back for getting liberals (who otherwise couldn’t possibly be donating to other charities that support the troops) to donate to this particular charity.
At any rate, I’ve just looked at their roster and fortunately there is a Fisher House team, so perhaps my donation yesterday to them will trickle down to Valor-It anyway.
Maggie
Team Army?
Team Army!
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!
I thought you people were reasonable. I begged for Navy.
“sobbing quietly”
Seriously, this is awesome. I know that you realize what your reach is, so you already know that you have helped Valor-IT enormously.
If anyone cares, you have made my day! Thank you, Michael. Thank you, John. Thank you everyone. I am terribly grateful you have joined those *$%^&% on the Army team.
Tsulagi
Whoa, now that would be a real loss. LOL
Michael, I gotta go with some John Galt. You started the previous Valour-IT thread with this as part…
Which was not remotely true. Malkin had nothing to do in creating or starting the project nor was or is its benefit to recipients measured in its ability to bash “troop-hatin’ libruls.”
That was all spin, no substance. I know you’re starting with a handicap of being Republican like that, but get a grip. You pissed on a fine project to start a cheap shit squall. And now you’re climbing onto the high road? Very Republican of you.
The Other Steve
Valour-IT had an opportunity to distance itself from the tactics of Malkin and Hewitt. Instead the guy involved in it embraced said tactics.
It’s actually not that complicated, Michael.
Plenty of charities out there which are non-partisan and aren’t embracing America haters like Malkin and Hewitt.
capelza
Ah…it’s like the old days…
Michael, throw in a Cindy Sheehan post, would ya?
MNPundit
Personally I find the whole “Join Army! Join Navy!” kind of well…. dumb. Maybe I’ll join the Fisher House team.
nightjar
Crawl back in your hole tsulagi. You will find courage there.
Dreggas
Since it’s an open thread about donations…tell me you didn’t see this coming
Of course part of me is cynical enough to believe Grassley was petitioned by guys like John Hagee whose only complaint was that they weren’t getting enough of the take themselves.
Tsulagi
Nightjar, the gift that keeps on giving. I was expecting more from you, but that’s just me. An eternal optimist.
The Other Steve
Grassley is actually a decent guy. My mother knew him when they were at Iowa State Teachers College back in the 1950s. Well, she didn’t know him as a friend, but he was like class President or something and actively involved in stuff and back then it was a smaller college. He’s a bit of a self-promoter, but then which congress critter isn’t? Generally speaking though, he’s a moderate.
Being an Iowa native myself… Iowans are not impressed with lavishness. I wonder how well prosperity theology is going over in Iowa. It’s gotten a good foothold here in Minnesota, and it’s quite troubling.
Trinity Foundation mentioned in the article sounds interesting… I may have to look into them.
nightjar
tsulagi says
“Nightjar, the gift that keeps on giving. I was expecting more from you, but that’s just me. An eternal
optimistsmartass”Fixed.
Tom Levenson
Got no patience for Michael’s wimpishness — saying stupid stuff, and then declaring himself uninterested in the responses as his interlocutors are unworthy of his attention. And of course, the others here have it right — the Malkinization of this charity makes it obviously less desirable from the point of view of someone like myself, who donates to charities that do what they say they are doing without such political edginess. If you want to do some good for our veterans, a good place to start would be the charities listed down the left side of Philip Carter’s Intel-dump.com blog. My personal target of opportunity there is the “Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America” group, but take a look at the list and pick one, if so inclined. They do the real work well, and mostly unthanked.
As for Michael D. — I have to say, not an impressive debut. Mostly lazy, from what I see — the “google it if you are not too dumb” approach to dissenting views that the poster himself solicited is, how shall we say, not up to the standards of even a blog that proudly proclaims that it delivers hot air and ill informed banter. It’s not the temperature nor the lack of information that condemns Michael; its the banter-free quality.
cheerio, Tom
Dreggas
Living in this country the past few years it’s no wonder prosperity theology is catching on. When your middle class is disappearing and people are having to stretch their money they’ll gladly “pray” for a miracle. It’s even worse in Africa it seems. It’s just snake oil plain and simple but the same could be said about the past 7 years in general.
Kate Armel
Wow.
This marks a first for me. In over four years of blogging, this is the very first time I’ve been outraged enough to sign my real name to anything. But then I don’t recall ever being quite this disgusted before, and that is rather remarkable. On the Internet the bar is set pretty low.
My husband is an active duty Marine currently stationed in Iraq for a year. He’s been gone for 8 months now. What does it say about you people that you can’t see beyond your petty political differences to the end state?
Give, or don’t give. No one honestly gives a shit.
But don’t get on your high horse and tell yourself Michelle Malkin, or Rethugs, or your precious principles have anything to do with your decision.
For whatever reason, some of you have allowed your personal bitterness over the war to persuade you it’s not a good idea to support a charity that has literally no overhead and gives generously to our guys over there. If any of you yahoos had ever set foot inside Landstuhl, Walter Reed or Bethesda, maybe you wouldn’t be so quick to shoot your mouths off about “wingnut charities”. At least these people are doing something constructive about the problems you people fulminate about day in and day out, which is more than I can say for the lot of you. Did any of you even bother to check out the Valour IT web site to see the good work they do? PBS (that bastion of Rethuglicanism) thought it was worth covering. Bottom line: money talks. Bullshit walks.
Neither FbL or Ziegenfuss make any money themselves from the project, which has zero overhead and is completely volunteer-run — just like Soldier’s Angels, which offers all sorts of services for wounded soldiers. FbL, who prefers to keep her real name out of the spotlight and off her blogs, told me how amazed she was by the power of the blogosphere to organize for a cause and come together virtually.
She said she hadn’t met the other bloggers and collaborators at Soldier’s Angels until months after they had started working together. And when CBS Evening News showed interest in telling the story of Valour-IT, FbL had to tell them there was no charity headquarters or place they could film their story about the project.
Just how important are these laptops with voice-recognition software to the soldiers who get them?
“The psychological benefits of the laptops are just huge,” FbL said. “The medical people who work with the wounded soldiers say it has a big effect on their recovery. It’s motivational and keeps them in touch with the other soldiers who are still deployed, and it keeps them in touch with their families who might not be able to visit them. In Chuck’s case, he could do literally nothing for himself. He was a tank company commander in Iraq in charge of about 100 men. He went from that position to being in a hospital bed. It was just devastating for someone who was the big bad guy [in charge]. Now he could sit in his bed and talk to the laptop and do anything anyone else could do on a computer.”
Ziegenfuss concurs, and told me he was blown away by the capabilities of the software.
“It’s incredible, what [the software] can do,” he said. “The company that makes it gives it to us at a very discounted price. We don’t get a discounted rate on the computers, but we find them on sale or refurbished. As long as it can run the Naturally Speaking software, that’s great.”
Man up and own it: you care more about your party allegiance than trying to do some good, or choke on your own self righteousness. Michael, at least, has the guts to stand for what he believes in and take the abuse for it; abuse, by the way, he doesn’t deserve.
Full marks to him. If that’s what ‘self-loathing’ looks like, America could use more men like him.
Meanwhile, some of you are still pathetic. As you were.
srv
Er, the reds get more than they pay in Federal Taxes than the blues do.
Here in CA, we’re lucky enough to send $25B more to DC than we get back. And I’m pretty sure that isn’t going to MA.
ThymeZone
Great rant, but the entire rest of your post belies the assertion. Obviously you care a great deal, and you think it’s your business to judge why other people do or don’t give to a particular charity. I would say, that is none of your goddam business.
I know how much I have to give every year, and I decide in advance what to do with it. It’s a complex decision.
Most of my donation funds go to The Smile Train
I would not under any circumstances take funds away from my Smile Train gift, unless the perceived need for the alternative were extremely high, and nothing I have seen on the veteran-serviceman side meets that test for me, for a large number of complex and sensitive reasons … NONE OF WHICH ARE ANYONE’S BUSINESS TO CRITICIZE or judge in any way, shape or form.
I take your post to be a bitter political scream and I think it exemplifies the worst of what you are supposedly criticizing. You are politicizing the issue at least as much as anyone else around here, and doing it with what appears to be a holier than thou attitude that is not justified as far as I can tell. I’m sure the subject org is worthy and does good work. Unfortunately, there are a thousand other orgs out there doing good work too, and I have limited resources, and I have to make choices, and I will make them as I see fit.
For the record, I’ve “supported the troops” at least as vociferously as anyone on this board in the last three years and done it from a political position of complete disgust over this stupid war and lying traitorous assholes who have brought it upon us, namely the Bush Administration and its various thugs. I have insisted that troops be accorded the treatment of heroes no matter what we think of the war.
Meanwhile I do what I please with my charitable contributions and if anyone doesn’t like my choices they can kiss my entire ass.
Bubblegum Tate
Where’s the TANG team? ;-)
Yeah, FbL is kind of a dick for embracing Stalkin’ Malkin and the ugliness contained therein, but fortunately, Valour-IT is far from the only game around when it comes to helping the troops. I got some good charity suggestions in the other thread, and I’m looking forward to expanding my horizons as far as organizations I donate to.
Dreggas
give the gov’nor a harrumph!
jenniebee
Does anybody have any info about Valor that isn’t on their website? I went all over the thing looking for some numbers on the breakdown of the money given that actually gets distributed vs. what gets eaten up by administrative fees and the like, and I didn’t see anything. And I also didn’t see anything about who is administering the funds, the names of the board of directors, etc. It may be that the organization is just really small, but I’d like to be able to check out who’s running the thing before I give.
What I did find was a “chaplains’ program” that didn’t list any specifics about the pamphlets and materials it supplies, just an email address for chaplains please to get in touch with them. I don’t want to send money to these people if they’re going to use it to send “purity kits” to guys in the field – if some people want to tell guys & gals on 22 month deployments not to touch their naughty bits while they’re there that’s their business, not mine, but giving $100 for that doesn’t really strike me as “supporting the troops.”
Bubblegum Tate
Spoken like somebody who doesn’t understand that the horrors of, ahem, roughing up the suspect far outweigh the horrors of combat and its aftermath.
[/wingnut]
nightjar
What are you trying to say here Kate. Why do you think we balk at giving to charities when it comes from a place that decrees with their sales pitch that liberals don’t support the troops and in fact hates them, which I think is precisely what your trying to say in so many words. And btw it is fulminating to suggest that “wingnut charities’ are the only ones helping the troops and confirms the hesitation some of us have about this whole situation. That’s why my donations went to “wounded warriors”. I hate to burst you preconceptions about liberals hating the military Kate, but I and many other libs have served proudly and most certainly fully support the troops. You may not approve of how we do it — so be it. I wish you and your husband the best, really.
ImJohnGalt
Jenniebee, I think it isn’t particularly huge, but from what I can tell (and from what both the founders and Kate, above, explained)
Valor-IT, as distinct from Soldier’s Angels, provide laptops with voice recognition software to wounded soldiers. No Chaplains from what I can tell, but perhaps if Maggie comes back she can elaborate.
The Other Andrew
Michael D. said:
“Ok, to hell with the partisanship.”
Followed by:
“Just reading the comments to yesterday’s post, it’s looking like a tiny minority of us are getting as bad as some of Malkin’s.”
And:
“Let’s rise above it, let’s take the high road, let’s keep the politics out of it,”
I think that Michael D. is actually Brooks or someone similar. Talking about taking the high road and being bipartisan while passive-aggressively bashing the left and giving the right what might as well be a free pass. Why, it’s just *some* of us and *some* of Malkin’s; see, both sides have the same amount of crazy!
The Other Steve
Aww, ain’t that sweet. You guys come over here and insult us, and then insult us again when we don’t give you money. First rule of grifting is don’t insult the mark.
Then why’d you bother posting?
Interesting accusation, considering the high horse you rode in on.
Kate Armel
Where, anywhere in my comment, did I spout any “preconceptions” about liberals not supporting the troops? Don’t put your biases in my mouth.
You know absolutely nothing about me, my voting habits, political preferences, or what I think and you never will because none of this is germane to helping some very deserving men and women. And no, I feel no need to condemn La Malkin just as you should not have to reflexively condemn every dimwit who says something regrettable on the Leftie side of the fence. We are each responsible for our own words and deeds, not those of others. Sheesh.
The only thing I stated was that the commenters who let what ONE BLOGGER said get in the way of supporting a great charity have serious issues. Where I come from, people choose what they will or will not do based on what THEY think. They don’t get their Hanes Ultrasheers all in a twist because someone in another party hurt their feelings and they don’t go haring off attacking 3rd parties and demanding they denounce everyone in sight or be presumed ideologically suspect fellow travellers. You guys are really a bit scary sometimes :p My family are split straight down the middle politically, but I don’t let that bother me much. Somehow, I still kind of think we’re all human beings at the end of the day – I don’t feel the need to make them denounce their ideological forebears running all the way back to Chairman Mao and Attila the Hun, for Christ’s sake.
Don’t much care what they think about the war or the President. I make my own decisions and they can make theirs. That’s their lookout.
And I wish my husband the best too. He’s a great guy and the love of my life. I wish all our guys the best, whether or not they support the war. And if you read the Valour IT site carefully the info is all there.
Oh, and this is the kind of guy Valour IT is helping, and could continue to reach with your help:
http://fuzzilicious.blogspot.com/2006/12/another-name-from-past.html
Pretty damned impressive.
I agonized, as a blogger, about reaching out to the liberal blogosphere, not as a challenge but as a cooperative effort. I am the biggest Pollyanna in the world and I really believed y’all would step up. Shame I was wrong about that.
My brother and his wife, whom I love, are liberals. My daughter in law is a liberal. My oldest and dearest friend is a liberal. My oldest son’s Godfather is a liberal. So you see, I have no reason to think liberals hate the troops, do I? Sometimes as a reluctantly pro-choice gay-loving, RINO conservatard I think I really should off the lot of them purely from some sort of hypnotized loyalty to KKKarl Rove but one son is a cop and I’d really hate to end up sharing a cell with Scooter Libby.
It’s funny though. During the Valour IT fundraiser last year I kept thinking, “Man – look at all the good we could do if we could just work together as a team, the Left and Right together – wouldn’t that be awesome?”. But I had just come from trying to debate with two liberal blogs about the war. I have never been treated like that, nor did I ever allow my own readers to treat guests to my site like that. I was absolutely amazed that anyone would feel it necessary to act like that. Ever. I wouldn’t treat a dog the way they treated me, and I wasn’t attacking them. I merely stated an opinion they didn’t agree with. That doesn’t make my husband a child killer and it doesn’t make me any of the unforgiveable things they said about me. When we get to the point where we criminalize political disagreements in this country, we have lost something precious – the ability to engage in respectful discourse about matters of vital import.
So I chickened out and just hit my own savings account up and hoped my husband wouldn’t be pissed when I told him.
Anyway, I am not going to convince anyone. I hope you will read about Bryan Anderson and donate to whatever charity moves you. It doesn’t matter.
And I hope you will stop and think the next time you are so moved to personally insult people who merely disagree with you. Calling people wingnuts is not a persuasive argument for your side and doesn’t speak well for progressive ideas. I didn’t allow my 7 year old boys to talk that way and have a really hard time understanding it when I hear grown people who can’t discuss ideas without namecalling like they were on a schoolyard playground.
It is not only unbecoming but debases the entire process of discussion.
That is sad. And wrong.
Kate Armel
And there is no mark.
You are adults. Give. Or don’t give. But for heaven’s sake, don’t whine.
ImJohnGalt
I’m sorry I missed that – can you show me where that was?
ThymeZone
You might want to check (a) the name of the blog, which is a metaphor for Hot Air, and (b) the theme of the blog, which is all political bitching, all the time.
Just a suggestion.
Kate Armel
One more thing: I believe – I really do – that it doesn’t matter what party people belong to.
I also believe that when we get to the point where we start calling each other names, things start going downhill fast. And everything some of you are decrying about Michelle Malkin, some of you are doing yourselves. You are allowing what you object to in her, to shape your behavior in objectionable ways. I have seen people on the Right do that, too and I don’t like it one bit more when it happens there. And I have deplored that behavior just as much on my own side of the fence.
I think it is sad. How would you act, if Michelle were out of the picture? Think about that for a second and ask yourself if you really want her to be that important?
Zuzu
Michael D. says: … I think coming to the blog and hijacking a post about a worthy cause pretty much says all you need to know.
That’s not fair.
ThymeZone
No, actually, it’s exactly the way it is supposed to be.
Discussion? I guess in your land they start “discussions” by walking in the door and announcing how shitty everyone else is?
A round of drinks for the house …. on you. Then we can have a “discussion.”
Kate Armel
John, I didn’t do it, and I didn’t throw the decision process out for open discussion. I have always regretted it, though.
I am not a representative of Valour IT nor affiliated with them in any way. I just had an idea. That is one reason I was reluctant to throw it out – I worried about repercussions. Anyway – I have stuff I need to do :)
Kate Armel
Pardon me, ThymeZone. I was unaware of the ‘only pleasant topics allowed’/no hurt feelings rule :p
My bad.
Zuzu
To Kate:
I just donated as part of Team Army. I would have anyway, but don’t appreciate being insulted along the way.
And insult you have, whether you think so or not.
ImJohnGalt
Kate, let me try to explain this in a way that you won’t immediately dismiss. I am speaking only for myself, someone who donates a fair percentage of my income to charities, but only a little to veteran-based ones.
As you point out, there are any number of good charities to which we can donate. Michelle Malkin, famous for her army of eliminationists and her many screeds calling half of the country traitors, posts a challenge. She wants liberal bloggers to support a charity that she supports, and then when liberals (many of whom, like me, I assume rarely read her site) fail to come forward in a deluge, puts a second post up. This post essentially reinforces her post that because we didn’t respond we are all troop-haters who want America to lose, a point-of-view echoed up and down her comment section, with nary a peep from Ms. Malkin.
Now, imagine that as you peruse the comments, you see something like this from one of the people working for the charity:
Again, reinforcing the meme that liberals don’t support the group, and isn’t it ironic that a liberal’s money might actually go to a wounded soldier. Won’t he be pissed!
Given that, how eager would you be to help out this particular charity? I chose to use the reminder that there are suffering vets out there to prompt me to donate to Fisher House, which has all sorts of external organizations that have validated their administrative costs. In addition, they don’t publicize their donors, ever, and are (unlike the example above) non-partisan to a fault.
That you find it so easy to read our minds on this and immediately ascribe to us all sorts of awful motives for not rising to Michelle’s challenge makes me wonder just how “conciliatory” any liberal blog outreach was.
Quite frankly, I read a large number of liberal blogs and their comments, and have never come across a mention this particular charity, not even in the comment sections. To whom did Valour-IT reach out to on the left?
ThymeZone
What a load of shit. You come in here with a sanctimonious rant with faux outrage over partisanship in a charity thread … you know, on a loud political blog … and then play this card out of your ass at the first sign of rejection?
You can’t imagine the gales of laughter out there that you are coming at me claiming that I want to promote “niceness” around here. First rule of blogspeech: Learn your surroundings. You have no idea what you wandered into, do you?
Niceness or outrageous speech, I have no use for either if the are fake. If it’s real, bring it on, I don’t care what it looks like. It’s the content that matters, Robert’s Rules of Order doesn’t apply here.
Please, cut the crap. If you think the org deserves contributions, talk it up. If you hate libruls, talk that up. If you Love Jesus, talk that up. Just make sure you can take it as well as dish it out, sweetheart.
ImJohnGalt
Man, I’ve just gotta let that one go.
Still, it’s illuminating to see someone who is (more or less) civil and clearly intelligent decrying liberal name-calling, given the last 6 years. What’s the story here? “Traitor” is only an insult if it isn’t true?
Clearly, you don’t live among Fox News viewers.
Have you been reading his posts? It’s only a matter of time before we start waving flip-flops at him and wearing purple heart bandages.
Not to be pedantic here, but you may recall that Best President Ever commuted his jail term, so go ahead and off the lot of them.
Sorry, to me this reads like you actually *did* reach out to the liberal blogosphere in a conciliatory manner, but we just didn’t step up. Did that not happen?
Dreggas
Yes because the entire liberal blogosphere is made up of the same shit as the “conservative” blogosphere. We stalk people to see what their countertops are made of, we publish home address’ and threaten people’s lives. Right.
I hate those people in the “hood” but I’m not racist, one of my best friends is black, I guess that argument has now moved on to being used by the right to continue being passive aggressive in “polite company”.
I am one who would usually give people the benefit of the doubt, I even enjoy playing devils advocate but reading your posts would be the last thing (Malkin aside) that would make me jump to support this charity.
As for making this partisan, we didn’t, the right did. Oh, and scooty-scoot ain’t in a jail cell, nice try.
srv
This says all we ever needed to know about you.
Maggie
Dear John Galt,
Here I am, lol! I must, must respond to JennieBee’s concerns, as you knew I would!
1st Jennie, if you go here
http://soldiersangels.org/index.php?page=about-project-valour-it
you will see that every penny goes into laptops. All overhead is covered by Soldier’s Angels.
Next – As far as “Purity Kits” & Chaplains, go, I have only a vague idea in general. However, I can tell you without a doubt that they have nothing to do with Valor-IT. The most basic reason is that the recipients are not overseas. They are in Walter Reed, Balboa, etc. Valor-IT is only collecting money to purchase laptops for injured soldiers. And baby, if their Internet connection lets them facilitate masturbation – have at it! Valor-IT has nothing to do with current, active duty service personel.
Now, John Galt, my new friend, here is something on which I will take a very firm stand…..I will not equivocate…..I will brook no arguement.
I, Maggie, vow never to be associated with any charity that attempts to interfere with a person’s right to masturbate. If you see me endorse a charity, you can bank on that fact. I also wholeheartedly endorse this activity in general (if that’s not too risque to say here). “Purity kits” based on the little I have read, sound ridiculous. If someone wishes to debate this, I will go to the mat in support of a person’s right to engage in this activity.
If you agree with my firm stand on this issue, then it is more fitting that you donate to Valor-IT (TEAM NAVY) than ever! What invention in our lifetime has done more to advance masturbation than the Internet?
If you are looking for a fight on this, I’m your girl!
Go Navy!
ImJohnGalt
Well, if you’re a 28 percenter, I’d say “war”.
Tsulagi
I’m sure Malkin would be pleased she’s being talked about so much and getting this level of importance in determining charitable support.
Yes, John Galt, FbL one of Valour-IT’s co-founders wrote this…
The “he” in the “he stepped up to the challenge” in the above comment refers to a “liberal” blogger who was also promoting Valour-IT. Apparently on his site he said he was doing it for the “Subers” and “Eichmans” serving in the US military. A Malkinette took offense to that which prompted FbL’s comment above.
Apparently “Eichmans serving in the US military” was an inside joke for the “liberal” blogger. So not long after that she posted this comment…
And at the end of the day FbL posted this on Malkin’s site…
A point I think FbL, Maggie, and now Kate have repeatedly been trying to make is to judge Valour-IT on its own merits, not whether you like the messenger. Nor even whether you like or dislike some of the words coming from the messenger. Contribute where and how you see fit, but Valour-IT is not a “wingnut charity.”
John Galt, you contributed to Fisher House, good on you. If FbL helped that along in any way, I’m sure it’s good for her. Whatever messenger helped or didn’t help you get to Fisher House isn’t near as important as what they can do with the money.
And now I have spent WAY TOO MUCH time on this…
DAMN YOU MICHAEL D.!
les
Lemme see if I’ve got this Kate person straight-if I choose to target my charitable money to an org that doesn’t repeat the presumption that I’m a troop hatin’ traitor, that makes me a troop-hatin’ whining traitor? Right? Yikes, that Catch-22 is a good catch.
ImJohnGalt
Tsulagi, I have been following the comments closely, so I understand the chronology, and the jump to assume Greg was parroting Ward Churchill was telling, but I’m not asking Valour-IT to fall on their swords. FbL understands the point we were making, even if Kate does not, and I really do appreciate her second comment at Malkin’s.
I’m all for everyone who wishes, righty or lefty, to donate to Valour-IT. It seems like a great cause. I just chose to use it as a reminder to donate to a differnt cause. One that hasn’t *in this instance* been hijacked by someone who has no qualms about challenging liberals to disprove a fallacy that they themselves have created (that we don’t support the troops).
In a few months, when this is but a vague memory of Michael’s first few flip-flops, I’ll very likely donate anonymously to the cause.
And you’re right, that’s enough about that.
Bubblegum Tate
Hey, aren’t you Grifty McGrift?
Pretty much.
The mistake you’re making, Kate, is thinking that the attitude is, “Well, I have this money to donate, but now that I see Malkin’s name attached to this charity, then I’m not donating any money to anybody.” The attitude, as has been explained several times is, “If Malkin wants to use donations to one particular charity as some sort of bullshit partisan statement, then I will give my money to a different organization and therefore not have to put up with her.”
Still donating. Just not to the one organization in question.
The Other Steve
Exactly! It was a self-fulfilling whine on the part of Malkin.
Zuzu
Well no, it wasn’t a joke at all, inside or not.
It was the name of his family. The linear thinkers at MM and elsewhere decided it was an insult and FbL played along.
When Greg was nice enough to explain that it was actually the name of his family and he meant to honor his family, FbL – and now apparently you – decided he must have meant it as a joke.
You see why people tend to be insulted by this stuff?
Michael D.
Tom Levenson:
Does that mean you’re leaving like the others? Good! I’m here at the pleasure of John. When he asks me to leave, I will. JohnGalt, or whatever your name is:
I don’t flip flop. I change my mind based on the facts. You should try it. You might make some friends!
ImJohnGalt
Heh. Nice one.
Great, so bring some.
ImJohnGalt
Jesus Christ, Michael. I expect a commenter like Darrell to completely elide the substantive points in a bunch of posts and then only respond to throwaway comments because it doesn’t make his head hurt like that “thinking” stuff does. You are no longer a lowly commenter. You are a front pager. Act like one.
F15Mech
First of all let me get disclaimers out of the way by saying…
I am a conservative USAF vet.
I am also an infrequent commenter at Michelle Malkins main site.
I tend to comment more regularly at Hotair.
Other then donating money, I have no connection to Project Valour-IT.
Now that the disclaimers are out of the way (and if you are still reading this thanks)…
Project Valour-IT is not about Michelle (or her views), or about Bush, or about the War in Iraq or Afġānistān, or that the government should be doing this already (the simple fact is that they are not).
It is about helping the wounded troops that were ordered into this war, and were injured in the process.
While I disagree with liberals on most things (and you disagree with me), I would love to see liberals and conservatives put our differences aside to support Project Valour-IT.
In the same way that Squids/Zommies/Jarheads/Grunts have fun insulting the “inferior” branch of service, what branch is inferior to the USAF I don’t know, since they all are :)
Also by signing up, this site has taken another $50 from this conservative’s wallet.
How cool is that.
Kate Armel
A few things need to be straightened out here. If people chose to take offense when I clearly was not addressing them, that is their choice. But I am going to go back and confront them with what I *did* say.
1. I guess in your land they start “discussions” by walking in the door and announcing how shitty everyone else is?
That is not what I said. In my first comment, I objected to two things:
– the partisan and insulting characterization of Valour IT as a “wingnut charity” by “SOME OF YOU” (This is hardly “insulting everyone else”, is it, unless “all of you” did that). Did you? Or do you need to read more carefully?
Clear?
Then there was:
– the completely unfounded, nasty, partisan and insulting accusation by ONE PERSON that the money was going to Tom DeLay or some such nonsense, rather than to the troops, for which I provided information in refutation.
Maybe if I seemed a bit…. gosh, I don’t know… riled up, it was because both the comments I was objecting to were extremely partisan and insulting. Which was precisely the point I was trying to make, wasn’t it?
2. Regarding this:
Lemme see if I’ve got this Kate person straight-if I choose to target my charitable money to an org that doesn’t repeat the presumption that I’m a troop hatin’ traitor, that makes me a troop-hatin’ whining traitor?
Not only do you not have it “straight”, apparently you are having trouble with reading comprehension.
My actual words:
Wow. You caught me red handed. Translation from the original French: If you don’t donate to Valour IT, you hate Amurrica and puppies and the troops. Didn’t even give you a choice, did I?
It’s easy to “win” an argument if you just make up the other side as you go along, isn’t it? Or you could listen to one of your fellow readers:
3. JohnGalt and ThymeZone:
First rule of blogspeech: Learn your surroundings. You have no idea what you wandered into, do you?
Oooh….discipline. Suddenly I’m feeling all tingly. Now we have rulez for blogspeech? Should I ever feel the need for more discipline as I type into my little box, I’ll be sure to come to you for a lesson or two.
I’ve read this site once or twice before – often enough to know exactly what it’s like. The comments I read before weighing in were already extremely insulting to anyone who is on the right. And yet I didn’t hesitate to say what I thought, and I didn’t do it anonymously either though I knew it would make people angry. If I was going to say something like that, I was going to say it under my own name, though I have never done that before in 4 years.
And John, no – I am sorry if what I wrote was confusing. I was on the phone while I was typing. As I stated, I am not an official representative of Valour IT. I am not affiliated with them, so they didn’t reach out to liberal blogs.
But it sort of begs the question of why does Valour IT have to reach out to liberal blogs in the first place? Why is there even an ideological divide in charitable giving? Doesn’t that strike you as odd? Because I can guarantee you as a Navy junior and Marine wife, it does me.
I have given money to Greenpeace and Sierra Club. They are hardly conservative charities by any stretch of the imagination and some of their spokesmen have been pretty objectionable over the years, but I don’t let that stop me. I don’t boycott Toys for Tots when some whack job movie star says something idiotic during a fundraiser. I don’t punish the recipients of a charity because I think the spokesperson is a nutcase. If I did I’d have to disqualify any charity that ever used an actor or actress because they’re all looney tunes and by my political lights I should be able to invoke your Malkin rule to say “no deal”. Does that really seem rational?
It doesn’t to me. But then charitable giving, to me, is not about me and how I feel. It’s about helping someone else. Someone said they could give to another charity and avoid having to “deal with Malkin”.
It was all about them. Yeah. That is what I still cannot understand. Sure, you can object to her. But I still don’t get the logic of penalizing an innocent charity to salve your own wounded feelings when she isn’t even their official spokesperson. It just seems wrong to me. And that’s my last word.
ImJohnGalt
Because if you don’t, they might not even know you exist. I would’ve thought that was obvious.
Tsulagi
F15Mech,
Maybe I don’t meet the current definition of “conservative,” but I’ll add another $50 to match you, partly out of sympathy because you’re delusional…
Air Farce? Don’t get me wrong. AF has its place. One where all the frenchy types can get together and admire how well they look in clean uniforms…lol
Given the way the two threads here on Valour-IT have gone, I guess I have to add that I’m just kidding. A little bit.
Kate Armel,
Love your fight.
Going to take a little issue with this…
You’ve read this site “once or twice before” and you know “exactly” what it’s like? Okay, whatever. Good to see you don’t rush to judgment.
This yahoo has set foot inside the first two. Fortunately while vertical. But going to have to call bullshit on the spirit in which you wrote this…
I don’t think it’s a matter of having to drag “liberal” blogs or shaming them and their readers into helping. As John Galt said, far more likely they haven’t given simply because they don’t know Valour-IT exists. I know of a number of organizations that benefit those serving, but I seriously doubt I know of them all. Does that fact beg the question of why I’m a bad guy in some eyes?
I am sorry the discussion of Valour-IT denigrated into what it became. Maybe a little hyper-sensitivity in the air.
Anyway, enjoyed seeing FbL, Maggie, and Kate here, and even the guy from the service branch which shall not be named. Can always use a little extra spice.
Carrie C
Wow…alot of comments on the Valour IT post.
Let me just say, by way of introduction, that I volunteer with Injured Marine Semper Fi Fund. Because of that, I have referred three of my cases to Valour IT for laptops.
I can tell you that these laptops are more than just a gift of technology, they are a gift of some independence.
For some, they are also a gift of peace of mind. One of my cases, a young and very dedicated Navy Corpsman attached to a Marine unit was the beneficiary of a laptop. He did not fit the criteria exactly. He was shot in the face and so the voice activated software was not something that was going to help him. That said, FbL and the Valour IT team recognized that if he could continue to communicate with his guys in Iraq, he would get the peace of mind necessary to recover and rehabilitate.
I mentioned that he is a driven guy. When he was shot, he refused to be carried off on a stretcher in front of his guys. He walked to the med vehicle. Before he got on, he wrote a note to his CO that said,”I’m sorry for getting shot.”
So if you have some change that you were looking to donate towards a good cause, please do consider Valour IT.
And Tsulagi?
I hear ya about there being many, many organizations that support our wounded/injured servicemembers. I, along with Kate and FbL, have wanted for some time to have a user friendly, searchable database and registry of these groups.
Something that anyone who might have time or a skill to volunteer or donate might match up with the appropriate group. We still hope to achieve that goal someday.
Someday….
Kate Armel
Tsulagi, I don’t think you’re a bad guy at all. In fact, I was very encouraged by you, JohnGalt, and and several others on this thread who bent over backwards to be reasonable.
What I don’t understand, honestly, is the need for name calling, which is what I have seen the few times I have come over here. I have commented here before under my normal pseudonym, but I didn’t come back because of the atmosphere. It wasn’t conducive to a reasoned conversation, and just as some of you said you saw no reason to subject yourselves to Malkin, I saw no reason to subject myself to some of the vitriol that I encountered here. The only difference was that I was the only one who lost out by not coming here. That’s why I used my real name when I had something a bit confrontational to say – you may not have liked it, but at least I didn’t hide behind a phony name, and I came back and listened to what you had to say in response.
But the name calling – this is what scares people who want to engage with the other side. I didn’t call anyone a name, but some of you kept trying to put labels in my mouth. I did call out specific behaviors I objected to. That is fair game. How can you object to Michelle Malkin and some of her readers when some of you engage in the very same behaviors toward those you disagree with? Two wrongs don’t make a right.
Calling Valour IT a “wingnut charity” right off the bat (on no proof) is just the kind of knee-jerk partisan behavior some people on this thread were complaining about, and that is what I objected to so strongly. Assuming the money would never get to wounded vets when in fact 100% of it goes directly to them is unfair and insulting. Making snotty remarks about “purity kits” just because some people find comfort in their faith during wartime – when they face horrors it’s hard for many of us here at home to imagine is not exactly tolerant or open minded, is it?
What the heck? I thought this was a free country? Doesn’t the Constitution say we are free to believe or not believe? No one has ever pushed me to worship in 27 years of military life. One commander was a little preachy, but my response to that was to pull out my leather skirt and church lady jokes – what are they going to do – take away my birthday? :) If people push your buttons, you push back a bit and they generally back down :p No one is going to burn you at the stake or force you to convert. Get a grip – no sense getting your pantyhose all in a wad. I don’t like vanilla ice cream either but I don’t come unglued when people keep asking me to try it. It is rarely personal.
re:
Going to take a little issue with this…
I’ve read this site once or twice before – often enough to know exactly what it’s like.
You’ve read this site “once or twice before” and you know “exactly” what it’s like? Okay, whatever. Good to see you don’t rush to judgment.
OK — that was a bit strong :p
But read the comment that prompted it. I was reacting to what seemed a very patronizing “Look here little lady, let me school you on the rules of blogspeech -if you can’t handle us, stay outta the kitchen…” sort of deal. I am not sure you all realize how you can come off to conservatives. Try reading some of the more contentious threads and insert the appropriate liberal labels for “wingnut”. Some of you sound exactly like the Malkin readers who offended you – you insult conservatives and lump them all into the same bin just as you say Malkin readers do with liberals. Yet you use Malkin readers as an excuse not to donate to Valour IT!
You say you almost never read Malkin, yet you judged by what you read there. By your logic I am perfectly justified in using a few name calling readers here as an excuse for believing there is a prevailing climate of intolerance of The Political Other at Balloon Juice. Help! Help! I feel Marginalized!!!! :)
Ummmm…. yeah. Except I actually visited here more times than that and even participated in a few conversations before I formed my judgment. And I didn’t feel the need to call anyone names.
Look — I am sorry if my strong words offended anyone. I truly am.
I did not intend to hurt anyone. I absolutely *did* intend to make people stop and see how their words – not everyone’s, but SOME PEOPLE’S – appear to someone who does not agree with them. Calling people whose only crime is political disagreement “wingnuts” makes you no different from the Malkin readers you so dislike. Accusing a charity you won’t take time to research of malfeasance – ON NO EVIDENCE – or making prejudiced remarks about “purity tests” makes a person look small minded.
This creates distrust and anger. I believe in God, though I don’t attend church. My brother and his wife (the horrible liberal :) are atheists. That’s OK with me. This is America – I don’t waste time trying to convert him and he doesn’t waste time denigrating my belief in God. We are both secure in our own belief systems. My sister in law and I are close, and I’m happy about that. Family is the most important thing in the world to me. Trying to imply I’m some sort of racist, as one commenter did last night, because I used that to refute the idea that I think all liberals hate the troops (my Dad was in the Navy so my liberal brother must hate my Dad and my husband and my liberal mother in law must hate her Navy husband) is just so silly it doesn’t merit a response.
I just wish people would look at what people really say and not re-state it, carried to the illogical extreme, to create a straw man they think they can knock down. Makes it hard to have a serious conversation. Believe it or not, there are people on the right who would reach out in good faith to the other side. My childhood best friend (a liberal Dem who voted for Kerry) and I spent 3 hours talking politics after the 2004 election. I am as passionate in my beliefs as she is in hers.
We are still friends. We always will be. This is a good thing. We don’t get mad. I will never change her mind and she will never change mine, but after I talk to her, I understand how someone intelligent of good faith can come to a diametrically opposed conclusion from the one I hold. And we don’t have to call each other names either.
Kate Armel
And thank you, Carrie.
I am sure every charity has wonderful stories behind it. I think we feel so strongly about this one because we have (in some cases) followed these guys from the moment they arrived at Landstuhl until they are finally sent home. I am very grateful for people like Carrie and Fbl and groups like Semper Fi Fund (which makes it possible for families to travel to be with their injured Marines during their convalescence, among other things) and Valour IT, which is often the first step out of that hospital bed and towards independence and reconnecting with the outside world for a severely injured vet who had lost the use of his hands, an arm, or even his sight. It can make the difference between feeling in charge and connected and feeling helpless and alone. It’s a big deal, and it’s really such a simple idea. It’s a good way of reminding them we haven’t forgotten them.
Anyway, thanks for letting us vent.
Cheers :p