For a charity, how is money ever "tainted"? would some really have said, "Oh, you accepted money from the wife of a disgraced governor that she
won on a reality game show, so your important cancer work must immediately stop"? Uh....no.
0 Kudo
- Survivor Sucks
- Lions, Tigers, Survivors - Oh My!
- Survivor Spoilers
- MESS Hall Tribal Council
- MESS Hall Archive
- Survivor Speculation
- Survivor 20+
- The Amazing Race
- Big Brother
- Big Brother - PAST SEASONS
- The Apprentice
- American Idol
- American Idol PAST SEASONS
- The Mole
- Lost
- Other Shows That Suck
- Off Topic
- Clubs That Suck. No, Really.
- The Dump
- Monster Island
- Purgatory
- FAQ
- In Memory, 9/11/01
I'm A Celebrity Get Me Out Of Here - Finally Out Of Its Misery
| Started By | Comment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Tigernanama |
||||
|
Posts: 845 (06/03/09 10:13 AM) Registered user |
|
|||
|
Katy Carney |
||||
|
Posts: 6307 (06/03/09 10:15 AM) |
Exactly. Who cares? It's children. with. cancer. Turning down money to help those kids because it might make their organization look bad to the press,
which was their reasoning, is a mismanagement of priorities.
Obviously if that's what they choose to do no one can stop them, it's just that it's asinine and backwards. |
|||
|
maxxfisher |
||||
|
Posts: 4529 (06/03/09 10:17 AM) Registered User |
If they look bad in the press people might stop liking them and then they will stop donating money. Sounds like a smart call.
|
|||
|
Katy Carney |
||||
|
Posts: 6308 (06/03/09 10:19 AM) |
That reasoning is weak. Just like Tigernanama said, no charitable person is going to withdraw their support of an organization because someone they didn't
approve of also donated money. That's ridiculous.
|
|||
|
Miles Edgeworth |
||||
|
Posts: 1704 (06/03/09 10:20 AM) |
Because its a charity. Job is to get as much money as possible, not to jusdge the people who are giving them money. If you have enough money to the point that
you can turn down donations, than it shouldnt be a charity
|
|||
|
GrenadeJumper85 |
||||
|
Posts: 10639 (06/03/09 10:22 AM) |
Or maybe, just maybe, there are still people and organizations out there that still try to mantain their principles and morals that they built their charity
upon. ::gasp::
I'm sure the charity or it's recipients won't be losing any sleep over the decision so who cares? Because its a charity. Job is to get as much money as possible Sorry, but a charity is not just about getting as much money as possible. 
|
|||
|
Tigernanama |
||||
|
Posts: 846 (06/03/09 10:22 AM) Registered user |
That's my thinking, is that people are willing to give money to a charity usually until a charity doesn't need it anymore. It's like how I used to
give blood twice a month until I discovered that the Red Cross destroys the blood of gay people immediately as a matter of policy. Well, if you don't need
my blood, then kiss my ass. You don't need the money for cancer? You're more worried about headlines? Fine - get your own damned money.
Still, it's really about the kids, and that's what sucks. |
|||
|
maxxfisher |
||||
|
Posts: 4530 (06/03/09 10:23 AM) Registered User |
It is not ridicules if some of the big check writing people were effected by the former governor, they could easily move their charity dollars somewhere else.
NO ONE except the morons on this show have any sympathy for this douche bag. Not taking the money is not going to hurt this charity in the least, it might even
up the donations. Taking the money COULD HAVE hurt them. They were smart.
|
|||
|
Tigernanama |
||||
|
Posts: 847 (06/03/09 10:25 AM) Registered user |
Sorry, wanted to make sure I got my facts straight -- apparently the Red Cross would like to change the policy, but the FDA won't.
Banned for life: Gay men still can't donate bloodFDA wants to prevent HIV spread; Red Cross, others say it's 'unwarranted' |
|||
|
Katy Carney |
||||
|
Posts: 6309 (06/03/09 10:25 AM) |
I didn't even know which charities the celebrities were "working" for, and still don't with the exception of the ones that have refused their
big meanie money, so that logic escapes me. I don't give two shits about Patti, her husband or the state of Illinois, but if I had a kid with cancer
I'd take a check from fucking Hitler.
|
|||
|
Miles Edgeworth |
||||
|
Posts: 1705 (06/03/09 10:27 AM) |
Or maybe, just maybe, there are still people and organizations out there that still try to mantain their principles and morals that they built their charity upon. ::gasp::Yea Im sure those principles and morals are really working on dem cancer kids.
Taking the money COULD HAVE hurt themHow could taking money that was known to be legitimate have hurt them?
Sorry, but a charity is not just about getting as much money as possible. It sure as hell isnt about rejecting money from people they dont like
Last Edited By: Miles Edgeworth
06/03/09 10:34 AM.
Edited 1 times.
|
|||
|
suckshardcore |
||||
|
Posts: 20073 (06/03/09 10:27 AM) Registered user |
If they don't want to accept money from a sleezebag bag and his delusional wife just on principle who are you or anyone else to judge if it's a right or wrong decision?Sleezebag money still helps children with cancer. Besides, the money is coming from NBC anyway, it's not even coming from the Gov or his wife. |
|||
|
Carezy |
||||
|
Posts: 83 (06/03/09 10:39 AM) |
What I find funny is that any of these big investors who donate to this Cancer charity MOST LIKELY wouldn't watch this stupid show. AND if they did, how many would look up which charities would be benifiting?? AND if you didn't like or respect Patti (or/or Blog), then REALLY, would you watch the show with her on it?? Yes, the idea of maybe torturing her would cause interest, but SHE'S BORING. I would've stopped after episode one after not seeing her at all if that was the case. I don't know... I know it's being politically correct by saying that they won't accept donations from Patti, but if there was no headline about it... I wouldn't have even cared who she was playing for. HECK, I just wanted her to be the first boot, and with that not happening... THE SECOND!! She's not great TV... that's all I care about. |
|||
|
Carezy |
||||
|
Posts: 84 (06/03/09 11:06 AM) |
Speidi Still ON I'm A Celebrity!Filed under: TV News > Reality Television > Spencer Pratt > Heidi Montag
Heidi and Spencer Pratt will remain on NBC's I'm a Celebrity…Get Me Out of Here!, Us Weekly is reporting. "Heidi and Spencer are still in the jungle and part of the show," their rep confirmed to the mag. Spencer's sister Stephanie and his friend Spenser arrived under blankets at LAX airport Tuesday night as a decoy leading to conclusions that Spencer and Heidi had returned to L.A. The pair suggested that they were leaving the show for good and have already quit twice!!! "Super-celebrities don't belong in the jungle. They belong in Hollywood with the paparazzi," said Spencer. OMG! We are constantly amazed by those two!!! |
|||
|
realrealityfan |
"Deep In the Jungle" Huh??? | |||
|
Posts: 1029 (06/03/09 11:07 AM) |
A GREAT show would be that the jerk heads comes back and the rest of the "celebrities" walk off the show...leaving NBC to dole out the money to the
charities.
Someone posted this after the first show and it seems that no way are they "deep in the jungle".... They're not in the jungle, their in the backyard of some resort in Costa Rica. This explains why...... 1. Cell Phone worked 2. Spencer standing in front of a door while talking to the producer 3. Spencer and Heidi looked freshly showered and refreshed after returning back to camp the first morning 4. All those lights at night and no bugs? I turn on my porch light and have bugs flying! And I'm not in the jungle!!! 5. Rain in the background, but not on the campers....covered? ---------- Where is the lake that the one person has been swimming? Why are they all so clean??? How many other clues have been shown??? -------- P.S. TMZ reports the jerkheads are still there....Of course they are...those are the only cameras and publicity going for them now!!!!
Last Edited By: realrealityfan
06/03/09 11:15 AM.
Edited 1 times.
|
|||
|
Carboys Desire |
||||
|
Posts: 6385 (06/03/09 11:29 AM) Registered user |
Katy Carney wrote: I am sorry you don't understand ethics and it amuses me that you are getting so personal about it. Why does this bother you so much? It's their charity and they can decide how to run it, and that includes who they will accept money from. If one of its founders was wronged by the Blagojevich dude and they decide that's enough of a reason not to accept any money that is associated with his wife then that's their business, and their right. Is that really so hard to understand? It must be. |
|||
|
realrealityfan |
Definition of "Charity" | |||
|
Posts: 1030 (06/03/09 11:37 AM) |
There are many but this sort of says it all (IMO).....
char·i·ty (chr-t) n. pl. char·i·ties 1. Provision of help or relief to the poor; almsgiving. 2. Something given to help the needy; alms. 3. An institution, organization, or fund established to help the needy. 4. Benevolence or generosity toward others or toward humanity. 5. Indulgence or forbearance in judging others |
|||
|
Katy Carney |
||||
|
Posts: 6312 (06/03/09 11:40 AM) |
I am sorry you don't understand ethics and it amuses me that you are getting so personal about it. Why does this bother you so much? It's their charity and they can decide how to run it, and that includes who they will accept money from. If one of its founders was wronged by the Blagojevich dude and they decide that's enough of a reason not to accept any money that is associated with his wife then that's their business, and their right. Is that really so hard to understand? It must be.You're clearly confused as I said that they obviously have the right to do whatever, just as I obviously have the right to have an opinion about it. "Ethically" I don't think the POTENTIAL for some bad press outweighs the importance of funding the actual cause. So yes, it is their charity, and they can run their charity in any bullshit fashion they choose, and yet still I will sit here and have an opinion about it. |
|||
|
AttaboyJake |
||||
|
Posts: 164 (06/03/09 11:40 AM) Registered user |
It ain't gonna happen, but I'd love to see New York and Sister Patterson replace Heidi and Spencer.
|
|||
|
Cassidy666 |
||||
|
Posts: 10048 (06/03/09 11:43 AM) Registered User |
I watched the second episode but not the first. What is wrong with most of these people? In particular, what the fuck is WRONG with Spencer and Heidi? He's
got to be the most obnoxious jackass that I've seen. Is he trying to make people hate him? And Heidi's voice is annoying as hell. The picture of her
melting was perfect.
As for Stephen Baldwin, he just does not let up does he? "Baptising" Spencer has got to be the height of scripted bullshit. It's ironic and insane at the same time. Seeing this show, it's hard to see Sanjaya lose this. He's happy, gung ho, and willing to try anything. He has been tried and tested by the idol system so it's hard to beat someone who already has fans who are used to calling up to save him. And everytime I see Lou Diamond Phillips on the screen, I go, "What the hell is HE doing there?!" Did he lose a bet? What the hell? He was in La Bamba, Young Guns 1 and 2, Stand and Deliver. He should not be there. Of course he's done a series of direct to video or tv movies the last few years. He did Bats and Supernova. Maybe he's promoting Stargate Universe... |
|||
- Survivor Sucks
- Lions, Tigers, Survivors - Oh My!
- Survivor Spoilers
- MESS Hall Tribal Council
- MESS Hall Archive
- Survivor Speculation
- Survivor 20+
- The Amazing Race
- Big Brother
- Big Brother - PAST SEASONS
- The Apprentice
- American Idol
- American Idol PAST SEASONS
- The Mole
- Lost
- Other Shows That Suck
- Off Topic
- Clubs That Suck. No, Really.
- The Dump
- Monster Island
- Purgatory
- FAQ
- In Memory, 9/11/01
