Comments on: Good for them

By: larry d.

larry d. — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 13:28:46 +0000

Good call, Tim!

By: alan t.

alan t. — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 19:47:12 +0000

The many millions of deep-pocketed scam "charities" out there really rubs me the wrong way. That dude Chuck Hurley also seems to be paying himself quite handsomely compared to many other CEOs in a similar position. For example, even a slick deep-pocketed organization like PETA takes a semi-grass roots approach to paying their bigwigs. He makes pays himself three to four times what they do. How charitable of Hurley to give to his biggest charity of all. Himself.

I also read with interest about this guy's purported connections to companies that sell those sneaky camera photo pole things that cops and governments are now using.

By: terje

terje — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 18:29:54 +0000

here's m.a.d.d.'s rating from charity navigator:

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=4129

garbage.

now excuse me while i take the proceeds from my world hunger relief non-profit to mcdonalds to buy a double quarter pounder meal.

By: alan t.

alan t. — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 16:58:09 +0000

Just one more note, since I neglected to mention it, MADD receives the very worst rating from charity watchdogs. It's a very sleazy organization.

By: alan t.

alan t. — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 16:51:23 +0000

Notwithstanding the fact you won't go further, Tim (basically because you have no point), MADD exploits these situations every bit as much as PETA does. Actually, it's pretty sleazy the way they exploit any situation to further their own agendas.

For example, the way MADD recently exploited Nick Adenhart's death was just creepy and shameless. This is no different. Problem is, even otherwise intelligent folks, just like Pat, very rarely see through these Penn & Teller facades and only look at the surface. In fact, when guys like Pat print and perpetuate this nonsense, which MADD is conveniently blasting out its bullhorn, it's just one more victory for MADD.

By: alan t.

alan t. — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 16:37:47 +0000

Boy, Tim, that's a deep comment.

By: Tim

Tim — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 16:25:19 +0000

Larry and Alan…that's why you blog. Your comments have no basis.

By: alan t.

alan t. — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 16:13:48 +0000

$2,500? Was Stallworth's lawyer and the prosecuting attorney serious? Granted, a 30-day freebie is pretty darn good, but a whole $2,500 as part of the deal??? Gee, I'm surprised they didn't simply donate to MADD a really nice case of Chardonnay.

But larry has a point. MADD has been known to sometimes be pretty shifty and slick in their public relations conduct. They're very much like PETA in that regard. The problem wasn't the donation, the problem was the amount of the donation.

By: larry d.

larry d. — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:27:29 +0000

You have to wonder what they would have done if MADD got the five million and the family got the $2,500.

By: Elizabeth

Elizabeth — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:20:34 +0000

Amen to those sentiments. Honestly, does this guy have any sense of reality?