I first caught wind of this story when I saw some lefty contacts retweeting something curious about the “Southern White House” this weekend. This one in particular caught my attention.
— Condé Nasty (@GeraldFarinas) February 5, 2017
That one tweet (and there are many more) has gotten thousands of retweets. Yes, liberal opponents of the President are whipping up their minions and asking them to call the Mar-a-Lago resort and to contact the many charitable groups which make use of the facilities for events, demanding that they stop doing business there. Why? Obviously because Donald Trump owns it and stays there when away from the West Wing. (Associated Press)
Since President Donald Trump opened the gold-infused ballroom at his Mar-a-Lago resort almost 12 years ago, it has been a popular rental for the American Red Cross, hospitals, medical researchers and other charities for fundraising galas where the wealthiest donors are wined and dined, often netting $1 million or more.
But Trump’s election puts charities in an awkward position over choosing the resort — recently dubbed the president’s Winter White House — for events they may have planned more than a year in advance.
With Trump placing a moratorium on refugees and immigrants from seven Muslim-majority countries and his promises to dismantle the Affordable Care Act, activists are pressuring charities such as the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and the Cleveland Clinic to move or cancel their galas this month.
As the American Red Cross held a gala fundraiser Saturday at Mar-a-Lago, about three thousand demonstrators marched nearby to protest Trump’s now-blocked executive order temporarily limiting immigration. The event ended peacefully, and there were no arrests.
This is apparently the state of righteous protesting in America today. Bitter liberals are now finding it acceptable to protest the American Red Cross. That’s not to say that the Red Cross doesn’t get into some questionable activities at times, but the protesters aren’t angry about that. They simply don’t want anyone – including charities – doing any business with facilities which can in any way be tied to the President.
Both the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and the Cleveland Clinic have upcoming events booked at Mar-a-Lago and petition drives are underway attempting to force them to cancel or move their activities, regardless of the losses they might suffer. One petition organizer released a statement saying that he understands the hardships it would cause, “but they can make a public moral stand that is in line with their stated values.”
Here are a couple things for the special snowflakes to consider. First of all, when you turn a charity event into a divisive battleground and create this type of uncertainty around it, the only losers are the charities and the people they are trying to help. You’re taking money directly out of their pockets by driving up the costs for their event and forcing them to take losses by cancelling.
But that’s not the only hole being punched in the hull of the charity boat. Do these protesters honestly believe that the entire world feels the same way they do? When you politicize a charity in a very public way and drag them into your food fight, do you suppose that donors might notice? And in this case, you’re providing a clear incentive for people more inclined to support Trump to look at the charities who are being strong armed into denouncing the President or his properties and consider sending their money elsewhere. That could be very bad news for the Cleveland Clinic, particularly when you consider this 2014 report from The Chronicle of Philanthropy which shows that conservatives give a larger percentage of their income to charity than liberals by a wide margin.
But I suppose that doesn’t matter to these protest organizers. It’s not about charity or principle. It’s simply a bitter desire to score political points, and if a few cancer patients have to pay the price for it, well… when you’re making omelets, sometimes you have to crack a few eggs, right?