Am I now the target of your insults? Cuz this thread is not about me either.

geckomon on December 26, 2006 at 8:10 AM

First off, I’ve noticed that you love to play the victim game by claiming to be “insulted” or by accusing anyone who says you are clueless of using “personal attacks.” The bottom line is that your arguments make no sense. You seem to be arguing simply to argue and your arguments are about as accurate as those made by Senor Juan Hernandez on the Michelle Factor.

Secondly, you have indeed MADE yourself the target as you are one of only two people in the entire thread – and possibly the entire nation – who believe that this woman was justified in being angry over the quality of her FREE gifts. You’ve also made yourself the target by responding and arguing with every single comment made, which has in effect … made this thread about you.

Congrats!

geckomon, when asking for something more substantial than anecdotal information, providing that for your side might be considered appropriate.

gekkobear on December 26, 2006 at 5:18 PM

True, but I wasn’t really asking for it, I was pointing out that his story was not a fact in this situation. I said my ancedotal sentence to show how easy it was to conuterpoint with something opposite. I did not take the time to point that out, I assumed it was obvious. Sorry. ;)

The points that Laura layed out and her “bottom line” make a perfect conclusion (for me at least); I don’t think anymore can be said. We could have gone back and forth all day sharing what we all have done or seen or experienced.

Bottom line: she’s not asking for more than Toys for Tots originally promised. Her reaction was bad, but her expectations were not out of line.

Laura on December 26, 2006 at 2:24 PM

The emotional aspect will always be present, but when the facts are stated and understood, the debate should have been less aggressive. I was uncomfortable with how easy it was for some commenters to start insulting and degrading the woman (and dissenters as well).

If people only donated things they needed, you’d see a lot less donations everywhere. People donate items that they don’t need, but that they know could be useful to someone else. It’s true I’m not doing it out of the goodness of my heart. Deal with it. When I drop off old designer clothes at the Goodwill, I’m not doing it thinking “Now some poor woman can get an outfit to wear to a job interview.” I’m thinking “My ass got too big for this skirt, but it’s expensive, and it’s in great shape, and it would be a shame to throw it away. Maybe someone with a smaller ass will want it.”

The woman who went on TV to bitch about the quality of donated gifts from Toys for Tots has even less class than uncharitable little old me. TFT offered to take the toys back and give her something that was appropriate – she declined the offer and went on TV to say that since the free stuff she was getting wasn’t good enough, she’d just go buy gifts on her own. So in one stroke, she turned her nose up at the help that was offered, and made it clear on TV that she hadn’t really needed the help in the first place. People like her and One Angry Christian are why I don’t feel bad when I don’t donate. If I just leave it at the curb, I don’t have to listen to self-righteous speeches about how the quality of my charity leaves much to be desired. If someone wants my stuff, they’ll take it before the trash man comes. I don’t need their thanks, and I’m not interested in hearing them bitch.

I just feel bad for that woman’s kids. I’m sure being teased in school for being not just poor, but in-grateful poor, is going to really do a lot for their popularity.

Your example of the “few kids” who give is sweet but ancedotal. … Give me real evidence. I speak from years of volunteer work and have seen the best and worst of the “givers.”

geckomon, when asking for something more substantial than anecdotal information, providing that for your side might be considered appropriate.

an·ec·dote – a short account of a particular incident or event of an interesting or amusing nature, often biographical.

Example, “I used to work at Salvation Army (ARC, etc.) and people dropped off bags of trash as ‘donations’” would be an anecdote; and not statistical or real evidence.

And One Angry Christian, demanding one “give of their best” when giving to charity is a good way to get misunderstood. Fortunately (for my peace of mind) I deleted the other two paragraphs I had, but if you want charity, making demands of exceptional quality seems questionable at best.

I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt here, and guess you didn’t mean that the way I read it.

Oh, and Laura, that last post (26th, 2:24PM) covers your argument much better than you have before. First post here that made me think any better of this lady. Still tacky, but she did (based on having an agreement of sorts with TfT) have a reason for expectations of gifts other than what her kids received.

1. Toys for Tots is a wonderful organization whose normal standard is a gift valued at ten dollars, and is age and sex appropriate. This is not in dispute. The source of the dollar store toys is unknown and irrelevant.
2. This woman received dollar store toys of the sort she could have probably purchased on her own. This is not in dispute.
3. She should not have called the news; it was, at best, tacky. This is not in dispute.
4. She’s not pampering herself with manicures, haircuts, nice clothes and jewelry. This is my opinion, based on how she looks, but I doubt anyone disputes it.
5. She’s used the program once before, years ago. So she’s struggled with poverty for a while and this is a bad year. But she hasn’t been hitting the system regularly. From this I conclude that she doesn’t like asking for charity.

Here’s where I speculate: She is criticized for saying she’d buy the toys herself – I suggest that we don’t know *where* that money is coming from, whether it is the grocery budget as my mother did, high interest payday loan, loan shark, winning scratch off ticket, or she’s an liar who has had money all along – we have no idea whatsoever. So why assume the worst?

Here’s where I opine: Asking for charity is hard. I’ve done it. And to ask, and not receive what you’ve been given to expect *by the standards of the program* you’ve asked for help (a gift valued at ten dollars, age and sex appropriate) is frustrating, and hurtful. Anger is an understandable reaction. (Going on the news is not, but the feeling of anger is.)

Bottom line: she’s not asking for more than Toys for Tots originally promised. Her reaction was bad, but her expectations were not out of line.

I’ve BEEN one of those under priveleged kids, and I was poor enough to take someone’s garbage and … eat it, litterally. Those who need appreciate when they really need. Those who give should give their best, or quit dumping their trash on people who are as deserving of the very best as those who happen to already have it.

themz my guns. I’m sticking to them.

I do have pity for her children tho, as this woman appears to be shallow and condescending to those who provide charity and to those who require it. I would not want my children to grow up under the guidance of such a person as I want my children to understand the concept of charity and what it can and can not provide.

Charity should not be expected nor demanded and one should never complain about any level of charity shown to them,one should be grateful for any charity provided for without such charity you would have nothing. After all, charity is not a right, but a blessing. It is the greatest gift of all.

You speak of this woman sacrificing her pride, but how much pride does she display by appearing on the news and complaining about the gifts she received, gifts that were donated to her so she may have something to give to her children whom would otherwise not receive anything at all? Isn’t that the idea behind charity, to provide to those whom would otherwise be without?

This woman shows very little pride at all. If she were a truly a proud person, she would have thanked people for their charity and not complain about what she believes is their failure to provide her with the adequate quality of charity she apparently demands.

What was this woman thinking anyways? She,or the news, missed the greatest gift of all, and that is the fact that there are originations like Toys for Tots who are willing to spend the time and effort to collect and distribute DONATED gifts to those whom would otherwise be unable to give something to their children. That is the true gift, and not the quality or quantity of the DONATED gifts. In other words, be thankful for that which you have, and not for that which you wish. After all the true gift is in the giving.

TENUOUS, but one I am certain was readily made worse by an ungrateful hag who got scratched from Jerry Springer at the last minute, but was dressed and wanted her TV time, by damn.

Say hi to Constantine and Grebrook for me.

Gregor on December 26, 2006 at 1:48 AM

How presumptuous of you to think I keep company with those two! Lol.

Really, I’m not sure of what your latest comment has to do with the conversation. Am I now the target of your insults? Cuz this thread is not about me either.

Screams of prejudicial presumptuous speech.

geckomon on December 25, 2006 at 8:08 PM

Wow! I’m impressed. I’d almost think you for a socialist with that remark. Are you hoping to compete for next year’s “Word of the Year” award? Should we pass legislation outlawing “prejudicial presumptuous speech?”

After that … I’m intimidated to argue with such an obviously superior human being, so I’ll just run away and hide. Say hi to Constantine and Grebrook for me.

Gregor on December 26, 2006 at 1:48 AM

Once again, you display a lack of class. This debate is not about you. Go stroke your ego over at DU.

Screams of prejudicial presumptuous speech.

geckomon on December 25, 2006 at 8:08 PM

Wow! I’m impressed. I’d almost think you for a socialist with that remark. Are you hoping to compete for next year’s “Word of the Year” award? Should we pass legislation outlawing “prejudicial presumptuous speech?”

After that … I’m intimidated to argue with such an obviously superior human being, so I’ll just run away and hide. Say hi to Constantine and Grebrook for me.

. . .in spirit, not person. And it’s geckomon, . . .man. Merry Christmas to you as well, Tex!

geckomon on December 25, 2006 at 9:42 PM

—————————————————

That’s a 10-4 geckomon. I’m not blaming my mouse either.

That’s a joke Laura. A Great Evening to all on the
board. Good nite ! : )

Wade on December 25, 2006 at 9:27 PM

Eloquent. Your credibility diminshes when you continually insult people. I feel like I’m at the DU board. Let’s not drop to the level that is sadly there, please.

Neither my comments nor anyone else’s “screw up” this board, accidental duplicates notwithstanding. Your personal attack was uncalled for, especially because there are probably many other topics where we are in perfect agreement. I said repeatedly that Toys for Tots was a worthwhile organization and that this is not the norm, and I also said I disapproved of the fact that this woman went on the news with her complaints. That doesn’t, however, make her the devil, and the people who attacked her assumed a great deal that they have no way of knowing.

All these “merry Christmas”’s from between gritted teeth are starting to make MY jaws hurt. Say what you MEAN to say and let the sarcasm rest tonight… geez.

tickleddragon on December 25, 2006 at 9:56 PM

… sigh. The funny quirk about this forum is the lack of demeanor indicators. All greetings and well wishes from me are well intended and said with open arms and not gritted teeth. I have the upmost confidence in the integrity of all the posters here on hotair.com and hope they have confidence in mine as well.

Ihope that puts to rest your . . . er unrest?

This is the part where I wish you the best as well. Cherish the greeting, its the season!

Both sides have points…but either way it was tacky as hell to complain, and complain publicly about stuff that was given to you for free. Toys for Tots is there to do a good thing, and their record stands behind that fact.

Allahpundit, would you be so kind as to verify that geckomon and I are not one and the same?

Laura on December 25, 2006 at 9:32 PM

I was so upset by the sockpuppetry accusation – even if you were kidding, Texyank – that I forgot to say “please” both here, and in my email to Allah. Sorry about that, and AP, if you have a moment to spare, could you please verify our identities?