I've always cringed at the big parties and stuff charities put on. But as long as they raise money for research and they both have done lots for research. Of course they are no better than we/us, but no one can refute how much good they have done for our cause. There is no way I could have done what either of them have done. Not because of one being better, but because of name recognition, friends, and money. Even taking all that away, they both have dedicated their lives to it. I doubt congress would ask me to speak their. I know lots of us have done volunteer work, etc., but they both have done their fair share. Maybe they even made some money at it, but I say God Bless Them. I would not have the energy to do all the things they have done. Every charity has and need a figurehead / spokesman. Were they elected, no, but I think they worked their butts off for it.
Michael J. Fox has done the same for Parkinsons. He seams to be more liked, but I've heard him criticized before also. Things like "He has it so well, he can still work" or "He fakes the shaking on TV" or the one I laugh at "He is only doing it because he has it, if he didn't he wouldn't care at all".
It's the times we lived in, Criticized if do Criticized if you don't. Of course sometimes it is deserved, no one can do it all perfect. Once it becomes a big organization things move slower and things get political.
Greg
|
- Re: [QUAD-L] Buoniconti's 25 year anniversary bob quinn
- Re: [QUAD-L] Buoniconti's 25 year anniversary Steve Oldaker
- Re: [QUAD-L] Buoniconti's 25 year anniversary greg

