It’s hard to come up with a more appealing or contribution-worthy charitable organization than the Wounded Warrior Project. Maybe a charity specifically for abused Labrador puppies or one that feeds malnourished doe-eyed little girls who wear pink ribbons in their hair would generate more good feeling, but it’s hard not to earmark a little disposable income for those who have volunteered to fight for our country and were wounded in the process. As their site describes their raison d’être, “Wounded Warrior Project® (WWP) takes a holistic approach when serving warriors and their families to nurture the mind and body, and encourage economic empowerment and engagement. Through a high-touch and interactive approach, WWP hopes to foster the most successful, well-adjusted generation of wounded service members in our nation’s history.” Who could argue with that? Not us. But . . .
But the Daily Caller’s running a story revealing that WWP doesn’t want to be associated with just anyone. And one of the groups they’d just as soon stay away from is anyone who has anything to do with guns. Well most of the time, anyway.
Tom Gresham’s the sonorous voice behind Gun Talk Radio. And with Veterans Day being last weekend, he apparently figured he’d do a mitzvah and pump up the WWP cause a little. You know, direct some cash their way. But they declined his invitation to go on the air saying,
WWP does not co-brand, create cause marketing campaigns or receive a percentage or a portion of proceeds from companies in which the product or message is sexual, political or religious in nature, or from alcohol or firearms companies.
Gobsmacked by WWP’s thanks-but-no-thanks, Gresham exchanged emails with the org’s spokesnoid, Leslie Coleman. She added this:
This policy is not a judgment on those who own and use firearms – clearly every member of our armed forces has been trained in the use of firearms and then called on to use them in the course of their service to this country.
Our position regarding firearms and alcohol is in response to the struggles that many injured service members face with substance abuse and suicide and the roles those items often play in those issues.
Hey, it’s a free country, right? WWP doesn’t have to take money from anyone with whom they don’t want to associate. Except sometimes they do.
The Daily Caller piece detailed contributions WWP had received from Kahr Arms. Not to mention the Lea County Action Shooters of Hobbs, New Mexico. And the NSSF touted a WWP benefit shoot organized by 18-year-old Ashley Butcher of Lockport, N.Y. to raise some coin. All of which WWP apparently accepted.
So what gives with the Gun Talk snub?
I saw this on Walls of the City late last night, and he had a link to GunTalk’s Facebook page for the conversation. Upon reading the initial “does not co-brand” statement, I thought it had to be a tempest in a teapot. The statement is really not that bad. Then I read the full exchange on Facebook. It left me simply shaking my head at how they could possibly be that obtuse. Since I read the initial post, and returned just now to get the linkback, Linoge has added a link to a YouTube video from 2009 where Playboy did an event at the Mansion to benefit WWP. Maybe their “ideals” have changed since then?
Edit to add: Your link to Gun Talk Radio actually goes to the WWP page, instead of its intended target.
They have a D-rating. If you care about vets, give to a charity that has an A rating.
Look on their Facebook page for an update. They now say it was a poorly worded response and they will send someone to gun talk.
They refused the proceeds from a shooting match my gun club held to raise money for them.
You misspelled raison d’être. Merci.
They also had an event at the Playboy mansion in 2010 as well.
I think The Semper Fi Fund is my new favorite wounded soldier cause.
Not only will I not be donating any further monies to Wounded Warrior Project, but Guns Save Life won’t either.
I suspect one of the local gun clubs, the DeWitt Co. Sportsmen’s Club, who raised $300 for Wounded Warrior Project at last month’s first annual zombie shoot, won’t be sending monies to WWP next year, either.
Link fixed. Thanks.
Having donated to WWP on multiple occasions, I find myself shaking my head at this recent development. Come on guys!!! Seriously? Of all of the places and from all of the disparate places you could foster good will for veterans injured in combat; do ya really think you could do better than firearms enthusiasts? I mean really dig down deep and ask yourselves “who are the Americans most sympathetic to our cause?”. We are the people that shed real, heartfelt tears for our countries’ wounded warriors. I can’t speak for others but I have a nice little budget for charities. I wear your patch with pride and a heavy heart (at least I used to). You don’t need to align yourself with our cause, but for the love of all that’s holy, don’t piss us off and get preachy! Take my damned money and spend every cent possible to improve the lives and lift the spirits of these men and women that we ALL cherish! If you don’t think you can do that, close your doors and turn off the lights; you’re dead to me.
They won’t get anymore of my money ever again.
That is just wrong considering who they are supposed to be helping.
Time to find another charity for our vets!!
I am a retired Navy officer, accountant and have two sons in the Army. I know first hand that the DoD and VA medical systems are poorly managed by uniformed and civilian managers. Our wounded veterans of all wars need help but not from WWP. They have cavalierly adopted the politically correct approach of gun control advocates to defame gun owners but like so many charity rackets they don’t mind d accepting cash and in kind support from whoever wants to give even if it is the sporting arms industry, DoD weapons manufacturers and patriotic gun owners. It obvious that their embrace of Playboy media illustrates that their moral compass is totally adrift as they don’t mind aligning their “brand” with pornographers who have contributed more to the debasement of our culture and the exploitation of women than inanimate guns ever have. But you could expect that from a sleazy charity whose ratings by Charity Navigator http://www.charitynavigator.org are barely into the level 3 category and below almost all other charities with similar veteran service missions. Their artfully worded latest response to the incident is as obtuse as their financial statements which is probably why they earned only 2 out of 4 stars on Charity Navigator for financials. That put them below the midpoint for charities . Needless to WWP won’t be getting any donations or sympathy from me as a result of exposing their true beliefs.
I find this disheartening and surprising. As a Soldier, and friend of several wounded warriors, I have worked with WWP before. They do great work, on scale other similar charities don’t touch, and despite this statement I still believe it is a wonderful organization. I also know several of their top folks, and have met the founder. I know them to be true patriots (almost all vets by the way). To my knowledge none of them are anti 2a. This statement is a bit disheartening to say the least. I am not ready to write them off, but I am certainly concerned and will be watching them more closely.
Please keep us posted on this issue. I was planning on providing a regular monthly donation in 2013 to WWP, but maybe I need to find another group.
Beggers can’t be choosers. You are a charity. Your whole existence revolves around the goal of collecting money for your advertised cause. Beyond the rediculousness of this particular incident, I don’t really see why it matters where the money comes from. If someone is willing to give you money, or publicity that will reach out to an already willing to donate deomgraphic, take it.
This ranks right up there with the school earlier this years tha trefuse da very sizeable donation to fund the sports team, all because it came from an adult entertainment venue. If I was on the board, I’d biatch slap anyone who turned down donations from legitimate and legal business enterprises, regardless of anyone else’s moral standpoint.