Althouse: "Garth Brooks Sues A Hospital."

December 17, 2009

"Garth Brooks Sues A Hospital."

Charity vanity and the ensuing litigiousness.

WARNING: Male camel toe at the link.

37 comments:

chuck b. said...: Ugh! You tricked me into going to Perez Hilton with the promise of male camel toe.

I will get you back for this, Ann Althouse.

Make that Anne Althouse!; 12/17/09, 10:26 AM
Scott said...: I'm afraid to click the link, because I don't know if my company's firewall will allow me to look at it.

I'm fortunate they let me look at Althouse!

"Male cameltoe." Feh.; 12/17/09, 10:34 AM
traditionalguy said...: Donations are seldom honored for a purpose given for, and a few gutsy donor's do sue and win. Think of the promises for the use of our tax monies. It is such a joke that the complainers are accused of upsetting the system. E.g.,I have been taxed for Medicare on my salary for 30 years, and now people in DC say with a straight face that any medicare benefit for me will be a welfare payment that the government cannot afford. So give me back the taxes you stole to buy votes.; 12/17/09, 10:38 AM
vbspurs said...: MALE CAMEL TOE! Eww. I didn't realise this existed! (I only just discovered the female version)...hehehe.; 12/17/09, 10:44 AM
vbspurs said...: "Male cameltoe." Feh.

Oh, you're not gay Scott? I must've confused him with you, since he comments every once in a while here.

(Nice chap, I liked his post about Malaysia).; 12/17/09, 10:46 AM
JohnAnnArbor said...: Ignoring donor intent is very common. The donors are getting wise to it and may end up tying up their gifts in legal strings so tight half the money is spend on compliance documentation.; 12/17/09, 10:49 AM
Pastafarian said...: I thought that the proper term for "male cameltoe" is "moose knuckle".; 12/17/09, 10:56 AM
Big Mike said...: Wrong tag. This is a lawsuit I hope will win -- consdiering that Garth Brooks specified how the donation was to be used it seems to me that the hospital has an obligation to spend it just that way. If for whatever reason they couldn't (e.g., if the amount donated was too small to build a new wing) then it seems to me that they should have met with him to discuss options.; 12/17/09, 10:57 AM
Big Mike said...: Sum day I wil half to lern hou to spel.; 12/17/09, 10:58 AM
ricpic said...: Garth Brooks is reprise of that peculiar phenomenon first epitomized by Tex Ritter -- the drugstore cowboy.; 12/17/09, 11:00 AM
Scott said...: @Victoria, you bitch. :)

A camel's foot is a bifrucated, symmetrical affair.

A man's equipment is not.

So, without being able to click on the link in the original post to view the image, I have no idea what a "male camel toe" could possibly look like. Could you describe it for me?; 12/17/09, 11:05 AM
knox said...: chuck b,

that was my reaction!

"Anne" LOL; 12/17/09, 11:13 AM
bagoh20 said...: I don't get why people think he should be just fine with being lied to. It's his money and if they told him they were going to use it in certain way and then didn't, it's just a rip off. If you are ok with that you are ethically challenged, but I bet it's only cool when it's other people's money.; 12/17/09, 11:23 AM
Pete said...: Tax exempt organizations have restrictions placed all the time on donations they receive. Failure to use the funds as directed is not only a violation of the donor's intent but could get them in trouble with the IRS with their tax-exempt status.; 12/17/09, 11:30 AM
SteveR said...: Not only am I mad at being tricked into clicking to look at a "male camel toe", like Chuck B and knoxgirl, didn't like contributing one measily hit to that scumbag.; 12/17/09, 11:34 AM
traditionalguy said...: Do you remember the American Red Cross (a semi-political Charity with million dollar sararies for insiders) pushed for donations for 9/11 families and relief efforts, but kept the lion's share of the money for future budgets and salaries. The public opprobrium is so bad for any complainers that the Good Charities have that old absolute power that leads to something or other.; 12/17/09, 11:40 AM
Pat said...: Very loud guffaw at the male camel toe at the link warning.; 12/17/09, 11:45 AM
knox said...: SteveR, yes Perez Hilton is infinitely more repulsive than male camel toe. The worst.; 12/17/09, 12:23 PM
jag said...: In his defense, Brooks gave the hospital a great deal of money b/c they promised to name a building after his mother. The hospital failed to carry through. I would be upset as well. I'm not sure this qualifies as celebrity vanity...more like corporate greed.; 12/17/09, 12:41 PM
traditionalguy said...: When a middle age man gives a huge financial gift for a "naming right " for a building in the community that will last longer than he will, it is a donation given to honor his mother's memory. That is a common fund raiser technique and is a lure used by trained fund raising campaigners who presents it to the rich son as a great opportunity that he could lose to someone else. To then skin him by never honoring his mother at all is abominable. He should sue and he should win. The PR defense that "we nobly refurbished some inside areas on another building" will not cover up this scam from all other potential donor marks.; 12/17/09, 2:11 PM
vbspurs said...: So, without being able to click on the link in the original post to view the image, I have no idea what a "male camel toe" could possibly look like. Could you describe it for me?

You see Garth on a stool wearing him some very tight pale-coloured blue jeans (I hate that colour), which reveals the camel toe partition around the testicular area. Brooks' arms are spread eagle, in a questioning way, allowing Mr. Perez Hilton to helpfully write "What Gives?" in PAINT.

I think it's the fold of the very tight jeans that makes the camel toe possible, not the actual male equipment, but what do I know, Scott. :); 12/17/09, 2:18 PM
Roger J. said...: Didnt Princeton University get slugged with a huge lawsuit over their failure to comply with the donor's wishes? In the case of the hospital, the directors look pretty vulnerable.; 12/17/09, 2:18 PM
vbspurs said...: wv: spandi. The only thing worse than male camel toe in jeans, is male camel toe in spandex!

Brain bleach located at the right.; 12/17/09, 2:19 PM
traditionalguy said...: vbspurs...We have our own padded jockey shorts to lure in you Hot babes. President Clinton is our role model. And please remember to look us in the face when chatting.; 12/17/09, 2:41 PM
traditionalguy said...: Best naminig rights technique is to buy the land first and declare a deed restriction when you sell it requiring that name or Plaque to be put on the front of every building to be built there. But modern Covenants can expire in 20 years. So instead you can do a 99 year lease for a dollar a year pre paid as the conveyancing method with that same provision in it. This does work. A great, great grandfather of mine did the 99 year lease method when he sold a hotel in Atlanta in 1888 and his plaques were installed into a prominent place at the Peachtree Plaza MARTA Station entrance in 1978 when the ground began its latest use.; 12/17/09, 2:54 PM
vbspurs said...: And please remember to look us in the face when chatting.

Hey! If you didn't want women staring at your rolled-up gym socks package, stop putting it out there for all to admire!! Call me.; 12/17/09, 3:12 PM
Scott said...: @Victoria

I still think that "male camel toe" is a nonsequitur.

It's just a bulge. Other bulge resources:

I went to Bing and did an image search for "spandex bulge". It produced a great number of NSFW images even on moderate safe search.

There is also the legendary www.hispandex.com

There's also another site I want to check out when I get home
www.bulgereport.com

wv: becutt; 12/17/09, 3:51 PM
Wince said...: So, without being able to click on the link in the original post to view the image, I have no idea what a "male camel toe" could possibly look like.

For example, it's the look when your penis goes from "six to midnight" and the fly seam of your scrunched-up jeans parts your testes like Moses parted the Red Sea.; 12/17/09, 3:59 PM
Michael Haz said...: Men don't have a camel toe. They have a scrotum split.; 12/17/09, 4:17 PM
Ralph L said...: It's caused by his fat ass pulling on the center seam.

He sure has got the middle-age face bloat. Soon Tim McGraw will sport a pot belly and sagging pecs.

The Bass family demanded the return of a multi-million $ gift from Yale because it wasn't being used for Western Civ programs. I can't remember if they sued, but they got the money back.

This hospital's perfidy is going to dry up future donations--very stupid. Big donors to other charities will now bring in the lawyers beforehand, so why is a law prof complaining?; 12/17/09, 4:52 PM
Republican said...: That's ca-male toe, Ann.; 12/17/09, 5:10 PM
Ann Althouse said...: I think the hospital should follow through on its deal, but if you want to give to a good cause, turning around and making it spend its money in litigation is counterproductive.

And $500,000 is a pretty small amount of money for a hospital building. I don't know why (or if) the promise was made or why it wasn't kept, but it's just sad that an organization that Brooks felt kindly toward is now going to be drained of money.

And why doesn't a guy with that much money (and fame) just give money so that it can be used for the good, not to massage his vanity.

Also, I don't need to see his balls.; 12/17/09, 5:30 PM
Scott said...: But I do, Ann.; 12/17/09, 6:13 PM
Scott said...: Now I'm home and I can see the picture.

Oh man, that's not very impressive.; 12/17/09, 6:15 PM
traditionalguy said...: The Professor has a point. Right after the Hospital returns Garth's money spent to buy the naming rights for his mother on the new wing/building they never built, then Garth should become generous and give them a free gift to prove once and for all his good character which the wrongdoers here are placing into disrepute in hopes of covering up their treacherous ways.; 12/17/09, 8:54 PM
jag said...: Yukon, the suburb of OKC in which this small hospital is located, has threatened to take Garth Brook's name off its water tower. Trust me, $500,000 was a major gift for this project.; 12/17/09, 9:01 PM
vbspurs said...: Ann Althouse wrote:

And why doesn't a guy with that much money (and fame) just give money so that it can be used for the good, not to massage his vanity.

This is the age old question about charitable donations. You know, Ann, that there are many reasons for that which are NOT tied to vanity, so come on. You know better than to state it that way.

One which immediately pops to mind is that people are motivated to give too, to a specific charity, when a wealthy or especially famous person donates first. It's about advertising. The second, in line with Danny Thomas' St. Judes' Children Hospital endeavours, is this alliance to a specific charity creates a legacy for the entertainment industry through that individual to say that it has a history of being philanthropic, not just superficial.

In Yahoo Sports' profiles of each professional US athlete, there is also a "charitable efforts" (or similar phrase) to denote what each athlete does for his community or specific charity. Seeing that has an immediate salubrious effect on just folks like me. It makes you feel like these are not just arrogant schlubbs with money. THEY CARE.

Cheers,
Victoria; 12/18/09, 2:13 AM