Charitable Giving

  • Law

  • Who gets to decide when a golf course can close and be redeveloped? [Las Vegas Sun]
  • The Eighth District Court has formed a technology improvement committee. Check the link for a list of committee members and the email to which you can send suggestions. [eighthjdcourt blog]
  • Hurricane Harvey hit Texas hard this weekend. What do you do to help in times like this? Do you give money? If so, what organizations do you trust?
16 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 28, 2017 3:30 pm

Voldemort was a logistics clerk??

https://www.facebook.com/CCFCWarmongers/

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 28, 2017 3:39 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Who's running that page? Hilarious!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 28, 2017 5:03 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Not true. He is an American Hero who carried 100 men off of that hill.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 28, 2017 5:43 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

We humans sure can be horrible to one another.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 28, 2017 7:14 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Kinda like Stevie smearing oppositional candidates, while taking money from taxpayers under false pretenses? Yep.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 28, 2017 8:52 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

That page is a complete hit piece. And you know what? Could not happen to a nicer guy. I am all for advocates trying to to clean up the court system (it needs it). However he is the wrong step in the wrong direction that undermines legitimate reforms. He is a self-aggrandizing blight and he is a liar.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 28, 2017 11:03 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Hy 10:43…. I am not sure Voldemort qualifies. Has anyone examined his DNA?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 29, 2017 3:00 am
Reply to  Anonymous

I can certainly understand why such page was started, and also the concept that they wish to hit back hard and fight fire with fire.

But rather than keeping their wrath focused on VIP, they then turn on anyone who has ever sought an endorsement from, or donated to VIP, and they essentially threaten their career by announcing they will do whatever they can to deprive such person of their position and career.

But by doing so, they essentially become their own enemy by engaging in precisely the same tactics that they condemn. Rather than keeping the focus on VIP and strongly urging people to avoid the organization, they go much further and pretty much promise to annihilate anyone who does not let themselves be bullied into complete submission as to what they are permitted to do and say. They condemn this type of McCarthyism(and rightfully so) in VIP and then engage in the same tactics to obliterate those who don't immediately toe the line precisely the way they insist it be. It also demonstrates that instead of primarily coming across as confident and strong, that they are somewhat desperate, weak, panicky, impulsive, and fearful.

If you want to persuade people not to support VIP, much of the content included on the page makes a compelling case. Have enough confidence in your position, and enough confidence in the public officials and candidates who hear your message, that many of them will make the right decision. Otherwise, many of them may support VIP largely because they don't like being bullied, and then this new group will have to work 1,0000 times harder–not just against VIP but against anyone who ever sits for an endorsement interview, etc.(which will still be many, many candidates). And many of these people may be very prominent. This new group should try to persuade, not pick a bunch of fights with dozens of public officials and candidates in the future. That will guarantee that many of these people will aggressively align with VIP. These public officials, for the most part, have huge egos and will bitterly resent any threat and defy it(admittedly, sometimes to their own peril).

At the very least, if this ultimatum is not going to be softened, I suggest you at least have it apply only to people who donate and/or seek the endorsement in the future, not the past. A lot of these developments are very recent, and people who have had some past fleeting association with the group(such as sitting for an endorsement interview or making a past donation)should not be condemned for what they did prior to the dramatic developments of the last few months.

If you change your approach to one based on respect and persuasion, rather than threats(which demonstrate only fear and desperation) you will be amazed at how much support you receive.
On a daily basis, sitting public officials are distancing themselves from VIP. Help that process along. Don't impede it by threatening those who, in all probability, are already distancing themselves, or who will do so in the near future.

Also, start being practical. If there is some politician you don't like, don't threaten him/her as to what happens if they seek the VIP endorsement. Instead, they should not be dissuaded from such approach as an endorsement from VIP is increasingly seen as a liability which makes re-election problematic.

That said, everything else on the page seems right on target, and a lot of the aggressive content is made more palatable by the effective use of biting humor. My only gripe(but it is a major one)is show respect for these(often very prominent and influential) people you are attempting to persuade. If you threaten them your task will be unimaginable, and near impossible. Instead, show respect for those you are attempting to persuade, and I believe you will be delighted with the results.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 29, 2017 9:56 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

8:00 pm– I understand your comments and agree to a degree. Where I disagree is with candidates who solicited, kowtowed and trumpeted VIPI endorsements are absolutely fair game. You advertised that you are VIPI-endorsed, well now you know that that endorsement needs to be disclaimed. Candidates and officerholders can claim that they did not know at the time from whom they accepted an endorsement; well you know now and need to take the necessary steps to distance yourself from it.

What I have a problem with is that the page has turned into flaming people who are litigants in the Family Court system. That is a bridge too far for me. Those are people who did not necessarily agree to be made the fodder for a blog. That is a Stevie technique for which "fighting fire with fire" seems out of bounds and should be reined in.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 28, 2017 5:15 pm

Check out https://www.charitynavigator.org/ and probably avoid Red Cross.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 28, 2017 6:33 pm

Seriously, who is a good charity to give for Harvey? Red Cross admin cost is too high. So many scams, you have to be careful.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 28, 2017 6:44 pm

I will not donate to Red Cross. Google charities in Houston –
http://houston.cityvoter.com/best/local-charity/local-flavor/houston

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 28, 2017 8:44 pm

During Katrina, I gave to a random local church, even though I'm not religious. My logic was they probably gave it all to the needy. I know, there's always the risk of a scammer, but honestly, a small local church or secular shelter is probably your best bet for trustworthiness and high percentage going to the beneficiaries. The larger the charity, the larger the overhead and smaller percentage going to the beneficiaries. It's just the nature of the beast.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 28, 2017 8:53 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

I have friends in Texas and am going through their local charities that are directly charities without any administrative blight and bloat.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 28, 2017 9:22 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

I like Feed America. Make a donation for Tx.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
August 28, 2017 10:41 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

State and federal governments are the largest charities with the largest administrative blight. And they can compel us to "donate".