Well, there is the Robin Hood appeal that he only stole from the rich. Robin Hood (in the movies) gets away with that because the rich are also evil and due to the time difference, obviously not 'us'.
In this case, I think the fact that he stole from people like 'us' is causing the problem. I think people would react differently if this card were held by Mexican drug lords.
I guess reactions to this wealth distribution differ according to the measure in which one a) relates to these Starbucks customers, b) finds said Starbucks customers somewhat guilty for being (relatively) rich and not doing enough for helping out the poor, and c) finds the Salvation army a good enough way to help out the poor (what if his charity would be the famine in Africa?)
If I rob a bank and give the money to a family who desperately needs it, I am a very different person from the person who steals it to purchase a ferrari.
Legally , there may be no difference. Ethically and morally there is a huge difference in my opinion.
Oh and to steal to feed your own family is a different case altogether. You are not acting like a pretentious douche.
Also, this behaviour doesn't scale. If everyone was allowed to steal bread because he/she is hungry, the whole trading system would probably collapse and make everyone hungry.