newest ACORN scandal / Those nutty acorn people

[Ziggurat]

So I'm not exactly a fan of the organization, but I'm still rather surprised by what some ACORN employees were caught on tape doing.

http://biggovernment.com/2009/09/10/chaos-for-glory/

It was a sting operation where a couple posing as a pimp and prostitute go to an ACORN office and ask for help so they can get a home loan to buy a house to set up a brothel. And the ACORN employees are fine with that, and even give them advice about how to engage in tax evasion to keep their business straight. But the really horrible stuff comes when the film makers inform the employees that they're going to be bringing in a bunch of El Salvadoran underage girls to work as prostitutes, and the ACORN employees start giving them advice about how to keep from getting caught. I really didn't think ACORN would stoop to assisting in human trafficking and child prostitution, but they tried to do exactly that.

[Dr Adequate]

ACORN has ascended. They elect our politicians and receive billions in tax money. Their world is a revolutionary, socialistic, atheistic world, where all means are justifiable.

Hmm ... not exactly a trustworthy source.

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Ha, they were capitalist all along!

But crazy. Guess they need to add an anti-child prostitute brothel position for their future employees.

[Ziggurat]

Hmm ... not exactly a trustworthy source.

Watch the video, Dr. A. The video is plenty damning.

[Lurker]

Is this ACORN policy is is it just a person who happens to work for them going off the reservation?

[oldhat]

Is this ACORN policy is is it just a person who happens to work for them going off the reservation?

It's an indictment of the entire black inner city organization and black people from the inner city and President Inner City Obama.

[Dr Adequate]

Watch the video, Dr. A. The video is plenty damning. I'm sure it's every bit as damning as that Kenyan birth certificate. But the fact that it was produced by people whom I know to be liars does not encourage me to believe in its authenticity.

Let me know when arrests are made.

[Tricky]

It's about time we got some decent, government-run prostitution.

I wonder if there'll be a public option?

[Upchurch]

hm... (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,548827,00.html)
A spokesman for ACORN, Scott Levenson, when asked to comment on the videotape, said: "The portrayal is false and defamatory and an attempt at gotcha journalism. This film crew tried to pull this sham at other offices and failed. ACORN wants to see the full video before commenting further."

[NoZed Avenger]

Is this ACORN policy is is it just a person who happens to work for them going off the reservation?

I doubt it's policy.

Of course, the fact that last year saw something like serious investigations and/or arrests in, what -- 14 or 15? states for voter fraud of one type or another also raises a few questions about what the organization is doing to keep its people *on* the reservation, if anything.

[oldhat]

Man, an awful lot of editing and jump cuts going on in those videos...

[Upchurch]

Of course, the fact that last year saw something like serious investigations and/or arrests in, what -- 14 or 15? states for voter fraud of one type or another also raises a few questions about what the organization is doing to keep its people *on* the reservation, if anything.
First, it was voter registration fraud. Second, they dealt with it by reporting the fraud.

Unethical bastards.

[NoZed Avenger]

First, it was voter registration fraud. Second, they dealt with it by reporting the fraud.

Unethical bastards.

All? My memory may be off, but didn't think they had reported the majority. If you are fairly sure, then I'll accept your memory over mine. It's been a while.

I will say their system does not appear to have a robust way of making sure that type of stuff doesn't happen -- where the persons making up names don't use obviously fals ones. Maybe there's no better system, but the incentives don't seem to help.

[Upchurch]

All? My memory may be off, but didn't think they had reported the majority. If you are fairly sure, then I'll accept your memory over mine. It's been a while.
I don't remember anything to the contrary, but I'm not sure. It's been, what, at least 7 months since this was an "issue".

[Upchurch]

I will say their system does not appear to have a robust way of making sure that type of stuff doesn't happen -- where the persons making up names don't use obviously fals ones. Maybe there's no better system, but the incentives don't seem to help.
It's not like it's a high paying job. You get what you pay for.

And they did check the incoming cards, but by law, they had to turn all of them in, even the obviously fake ones. Their hands were tied on that account.

[Phrost]

So people on the left take the ACORN spokesman's word as fact, people on the right take the filmmaker/troll's word as fact, and "skeptics" dutifully line up on one side or the other instead of being concerned with the actual facts of the situation above and beyond ideology.

Yep, another JREF Politics forum discussion. Good to see things never change around here.

Edit: oh and criticism of any minority is Racism; except when they're Republican. I missed that one.

[Upchurch]

So people on the left take the ACORN spokesman's word as fact
No, no. Don't get me wrong. I'm not taking it as fact. I'm pointing out that this hasn't fully played out yet.

Right now, we're at the he said/she said phase.

[GreyICE]

So people on the left take the ACORN spokesman's word as fact, people on the right take the filmmaker/troll's word as fact, and "skeptics" dutifully line up on one side or the other instead of being concerned with the actual facts of the situation above and beyond ideology.

Yep, another JREF Politics forum discussion. Good to see things never change around here.

Edit: oh and criticism of any minority is Racism; except when they're Republican. I missed that one.

Um, apparently a group of skeptics are skeptical that known liars are telling the truth.

And that counts as 'lining up on one side or the other.'

Nice soapbox.

[Snide]

So people on the left take the ACORN spokesman's word as fact, people on the right take the filmmaker/troll's word as fact, and "skeptics" dutifully line up on one side or the other instead of being concerned with the actual facts of the situation above and beyond ideology.

Yep, another JREF Politics forum discussion. Good to see things never change around here.

Edit: oh and criticism of any minority is Racism; except when they're Republican. I missed that one.You forgot the part about the smart aleck person who tries mind reading, and in so doing mistates people's intentions, and then mocks them by putting quotes around the word "skeptic." Only when you see that can you really say things haven't changed here! ;)

[Ziggurat]

I'm sure it's every bit as damning as that Kenyan birth certificate.

In other words, you're willing to accuse the video of being dishonest even though you haven't actually watched it. How... enlightened of you.

Watch the video or shut up about it. And if you have watched it, try commenting on the video rather than dismissing it with ad hominems.

[Phrost]

I seem to have struck a nerve, making me the victor!

[gtc]

It's an indictment of the entire black inner city organization and black people from the inner city and President Inner City Obama.

Nice. You want to accuse Ziggurat of being racist but you don't actually have the guts to come out and say it.

[Upchurch]

Watch the video or shut up about it. And if you have watched it, try commenting on the video rather than dismissing it with ad hominems.
There is a lovely ACORN flag positioned behind the tax lady so that no one can doubt that it is, no kidding, ACORN. I kinda wonder where that secret camera was hidden and how he managed to frame everyone so well without a view finder.

-----------

If there really is anything to this, it will be confirmed who those women are and who they work for by more reliable sources.

[applecorped]

There is a lovely ACORN flag positioned behind the tax lady so that no one can doubt that it is, no kidding, ACORN. I kinda wonder where that secret camera was hidden and how he managed to frame everyone so well without a view finder.

-----------

If there really is anything to this, it will be confirmed who those women are and who they work for by more reliable sources.


The video was staged?

[Juniversal]

So I'm not exactly a fan of the organization, but I'm still rather surprised by what some ACORN employees were caught on tape doing.

http://biggovernment.com/2009/09/10/chaos-for-glory/

It was a sting operation where a couple posing as a pimp and prostitute go to an ACORN office and ask for help so they can get a home loan to buy a house to set up a brothel. And the ACORN employees are fine with that, and even give them advice about how to engage in tax evasion to keep their business straight. But the really horrible stuff comes when the film makers inform the employees that they're going to be bringing in a bunch of El Salvadoran underage girls to work as prostitutes, and the ACORN employees start giving them advice about how to keep from getting caught. I really didn't think ACORN would stoop to assisting in human trafficking and child prostitution, but they tried to do exactly that.To ACORN's credit this was restricted to a single office of ACORN. I don't think for a second ACORN the organization would condone it or "let it slide" if they knew about it. It's a shame but considering there's many offices around the country i'd say this was an isolated case.

If this tells you anything it's that ACORN needs better employees/employers and quality control. And from watching the video I think these ladies were simply trying to help people that they felt needed help. Even if it involved fraud.

[Phrost]

Nice. You want to accuse Ziggurat of being racist but you don't actually have the guts to come out and say it.

This is why online communities do so much better when a member's credibility is largely based on the amount of time they spend around the other community members in a real-life social setting (as I've instituted on my own skeptics forum).

The prospect of having to actually look the people who you make implications like this about in the eye, makes internet douchebaggery of this sort much less common.

Remember kids, criticism of the President or his associates is Racism*.






*Except Hillary Clinton

[GreyICE]

I seem to have struck a nerve, making me the victor!

Yes, because none of the 9/11 troofers have ever annoyed anybody.

You're using their logic here.

Also, I'd happily accuse you of douchebaggery in person for this little stunt.

[Phrost]

The video was staged?

Man, the politics forum must be located by the sea, because Occam's Razor sure does get dull and rusty around here.

Yes, because none of the 9/11 troofers have ever annoyed anybody.

You're using their logic here.

You're taking that post way too seriously.

[NoZed Avenger]

To ACORN's credit this was restricted to a single office of ACORN.

It will need to be confirmed as happening by some third party, but agreed that finding this at one ACORN office hardly indicts the organization as a whole.

[gtc]

Yes, because none of the 9/11 troofers have ever annoyed anybody.

You're using their logic here.

Also, I'd happily accuse you of douchebaggery in person for this little stunt.

Or taking the mickey.

[Upchurch]

The video was staged?
Not enough information.

[GreyICE]

You're taking that post way too seriously.

Don't take you seriously. Roger, that, ignore list updated.

[applecorped]

Remember kids, criticism of the President or his associates is Racism*.






*Except Hillary Clinton

If it was Hillary was being criticized would it then be misogyny?

[Phrost]

Yes, because none of the 9/11 troofers have ever annoyed anybody.

You're using their logic here.

Also, I'd happily accuse you of douchebaggery in person for this little stunt.

Lovely, you managed to edit-in some very subtle Internet Toughguyism before the "edited by" timer kicked in.

That takes some mad forum posting skills, dawg.

So is that swords at dawn, pistols at high noon, or knives at the ball park, Señor Machismo?

[applecorped]

Not enough information.

I'll wait then.

[Phrost]

If it was Hillary was being criticized would it then be misogyny?

Of course. That's how you play the game.

Don't take you seriously. Roger, that, ignore list updated.

This, however, is not.

[Praktik]

Edit: oh and criticism of any minority is Racism; except when they're Republican. I missed that one.

You're right you know, I've been consuming a steady diet of Malkin, Beck and O'Reilly and I really think that the treatment of the conservative minority group in American society is appalling. THey have to live with a liberal leviathan that discriminates against them constantly in the media, in the schools and on message boards.

Years from now, when the Republicans finally achieve emancipation, we're gonna ask each other "What did YOU do when the downtrodden Republicans were treated so poorly?"

And many people, I'm sad to say, will have to answer that they did nothing to stop this ongoing oppression.

[Upchurch]

I'll wait then.

That's what I'm sayin'

[oldhat]

Nice. You want to accuse Ziggurat of being racist but you don't actually have the guts to come out and say it.

No, you're misunderstanding. I wasn't quoting Ziggurat's on-the-fence OP for one and for two I was riffing off of Lurker's post and the comments on the YouTube page.

You'd know that any individual ever associated with ACORN being treated as an avatar for the entire black community and President Obama has been one of the silly memes tossed around by the right wing for years if you understood the the joke and/or lived in the United States.

Of course my quip sailed above your head and Phrost's head and you resorted to the Internet Tough Guy shtick. Try harder next time.

[Ziggurat]

If this tells you anything it's that ACORN needs better employees/employers and quality control.

That would be a minimum.

And from watching the video I think these ladies were simply trying to help people that they felt needed help. Even if it involved fraud.

Even if it involved fraud? No, this was more than fraud. They were willing to help these people engage in child prostitution. I'm sorry, but since when was sympathy even the remotest excuse for enabling something so vile?

[Ziggurat]

It's about time we got some decent, government-run prostitution.

I wonder if there'll be a public option?

In the spirit of inappropriately tasteless but completely unserious replies:

Those Ecuadoran children are only doing the Johns that American children won't do!

[Phrost]

But seriously, ACORN is corrupt.

[applecorped]

But seriously, ACORN is corrupt.

All of it, or some of it?

[Dancing David]

So I'm not exactly a fan of the organization, but I'm still rather surprised by what some ACORN employees were caught on tape doing.

http://biggovernment.com/2009/09/10/chaos-for-glory/

It was a sting operation where a couple posing as a pimp and prostitute go to an ACORN office and ask for help so they can get a home loan to buy a house to set up a brothel. And the ACORN employees are fine with that, and even give them advice about how to engage in tax evasion to keep their business straight. But the really horrible stuff comes when the film makers inform the employees that they're going to be bringing in a bunch of El Salvadoran underage girls to work as prostitutes, and the ACORN employees start giving them advice about how to keep from getting caught. I really didn't think ACORN would stoop to assisting in human trafficking and child prostitution, but they tried to do exactly that.

Sorry i only made it to about page twelve (transcript), so they turned this over to the DA and are willing to swear to it right?

I mean we are talking some really questionable stuff, have they passed it on to real law enforcement or is this all just a bunch of actors pretending on both sides?

they like took this to ACORN and the police right?

[Phrost]

All of it, or some of it?

Enough of it.

[Dancing David]

Watch the video, Dr. A. The video is plenty damning.

If it is true and not fake.

[Dancing David]

So the ACORN fired the twp people FOX reports that rightly so charges will be pressed:
http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9j8euy2halK9tkAuSzQtDMD;_ylu=X3oDMTBjMHZkMjZ yBHBvcwMxBHNlYwNzcg--/SIG=123kvt2vo/EXP=1252710198/**http%3a//www.startribune.com/nation/58654397.html

[Ziggurat]

If it is true and not fake.

If it's fake then it's actionable libel, and I would expect ACORN to file suit. But somehow, I suspect that won't happen.

[Phrost]

If it's not fake will those of you on the leftward side of the fence demonstrate some character and own up to it?

Except GrayICE, of course, since I'm apparently on his ignore list after calling him out for his subtle, securely within Membership Agreement, chest thumping.

[Ziggurat]

So the ACORN fired the twp people FOX reports that rightly so charges will be pressed:
http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9j8euy2halK9tkAuSzQtDMD;_ylu=X3oDMTBjMHZkMjZ yBHBvcwMxBHNlYwNzcg--/SIG=123kvt2vo/EXP=1252710198/**http%3a//www.startribune.com/nation/58654397.html

Good find, though I only saw mention of firing in that link, not the pressing of any charges. Was that from a different article, or am I just missing it?

[Praktik]

If it's not fake will those of you on the leftward side of the fence demonstrate some character and own up to it?

Why would people who had nothing to do with the actions of these individuals have to own up to anything?

[applecorped]

If it's not fake will those of you on the leftward side of the fence demonstrate some character and own up to it?

Except GrayICE, of course, since I'm apparently on his ignore list after calling him out for his subtle, securely within Membership Agreement, chest thumping.

I own up to questioning its authenticity. I am not on the leftward side of the fence though.

[Phrost]

Own up to the organization being corrupt. There's a lot of noise from that side of the fence about it being a lilly-white innocent little group of harmless "community organizers" with no political agenda whatsoever, nope, not them.

[applecorped]

Own up to the organization being corrupt. There's a lot of noise from that side of the fence about it being a lilly-white innocent little group of harmless "community organizers" with no political agenda whatsoever, nope, not them.

;) - damn whiteys.

[Upchurch]

So the ACORN fired the twp people FOX reports that rightly so charges will be pressed:
http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9j8euy2halK9tkAuSzQtDMD;_ylu=X3oDMTBjMHZkMjZ yBHBvcwMxBHNlYwNzcg--/SIG=123kvt2vo/EXP=1252710198/**http%3a//www.startribune.com/nation/58654397.html
Looks bad.

[oldhat]

Own up to the organization being corrupt. There's a lot of noise from that side of the fence about it being a lilly-white innocent little group of harmless "community organizers" with no political agenda whatsoever, nope, not them.

Shorter Phrost: Liberals are collectively responsible for anything said by anyone about ACORN anywhere at any time.

There's a lot of noise coming from your side of the fence about Obama being a Muslim Kenyan Socialist Nazi from Indonesia. When are you going to demonstrate some character and own up to it?

[Phrost]

;) - damn whiteys.

I'm sorry, I meant "lilly-gray".

20a-exAW6qc

[Juniversal]

That would be a minimum.



Even if it involved fraud? No, this was more than fraud. They were willing to help these people engage in child prostitution. I'm sorry, but since when was sympathy even the remotest excuse for enabling something so vile?In part ACORNs purpose is helping underprivledged people gain housing. I see nothing that gives me the impression they were departing from there regular routine of helping a seemingly helpless person obtain housing. After listening to the audio (http://biggovernment.breitbart.com/2009/09/10/introducing-james-o%E2%80%99keefe/) it's clear as day they didn't give the ACORN staff the same pretext that they gave at the begining of the video (0:30-0:43). Aiding and abbeting? yes. But I feel the problem is these people's hearts are too big lol. Not that they're any evil underhanded organization.

Quite the opposite of what they (the website) want you to believe.

"Hannah Giles and I took advantage of ACORN’s regard for thug criminality by posing the most ridiculous criminal scenario we could think of and seeing if they would comply–which they did without hesitation." :rolleyes:

[Upchurch]

Own up to the organization being corrupt.

So corrupt it took biggovernment.com four tries to find someone who played into their scam (if what the ACORN rep says is true).

[applecorped]

So corrupt it took biggovernment.com four tries to find someone who played into their scam (if what the ACORN rep says is true).

Sure, believe the Acorn rep. ;)

[Phrost]

Shorter Phrost: Liberals are collectively responsible for anything said by anyone about ACORN anywhere at any time.

There's a lot of noise coming from your side of the fence about Obama being a Muslim Kenyan Socialist Nazi from Indonesia. When are you going to demonstrate some character and own up to it?

I think it's absolutely retarded and say so regularly.

Except for the Socialist bit, because I'm sure Obama isn't exactly thumbing through Atlas Shrugged for ideas on social policy and issues of government's responsibility vs. an individual's responsibility for their own life and success. I don't think he's an outright socialist, but I'm pretty sure he wouldn't kick socialist ideas out of his bed for eating cookies.

[Phrost]

So corrupt it took biggovernment.com four tries to find someone who played into their scam (if what the ACORN rep says is true).

It'd be great if Occam's Razor had replaceable cartridges, wouldn't it?

[oldhat]

Sure, believe the Acorn rep. ;)

Why should anyone believe Andrew Breitbart? He works for Sun Yung Moon and the Moonie Times.

[WildCat]

That video is hilarious!

eta:
LtTnizEnC1U

[Phrost]

Why should anyone believe Andrew Breitbart? He works for Sun Yung Moon and the Moonie Times.

So do thousands of other people whose credibility and integrity you just impugned in one giant, Content deleted, cowboy.

Edited for Civility and breach of Rule 10

[GreyICE]

Why should anyone believe Andrew Breitbart? He works for Sun Yung Moon and the Moonie Times.

I dunno, I'd hold the Drudge Report against him more myself.

[Upchurch]

It'd be great if Occam's Razor had replaceable cartridges, wouldn't it?

So you think this is the first ACORN office they happened to wander into?

[oldhat]

So do thousands of other people whose credibility and integrity you just impugned in one giant, *************************, cowboy.
Moderated content removed



You're a little high strung, aren't you?

Anyway, I see it from your point of view now.

Media pundits and news product paid for and produced by Rev. Moon and the Unification Church cult (such as Andrew Breitbart, bighollywood.com, biggovernment.com, etc.) are beyond reproach now. Because it impugns the credibility to question why a right wing apocalyptic cult leader is bankrolling them. On a skeptic's forum.

[Praktik]

See the issue with this is that the individuals who were about to enable some child prostitution (let's assume that's true for sake of argument) were criminal in ways that cannot be connected to their politics.

It would be like finding out about someone who was dealing meth, or killed someone, or molested a child. These are the kinds of crimes that are very often (if not always) politically neutral - having to do with deep-seated aggression, perversion, greed, etc.

So there is no need for the left-wing, or anybody, to "own up" to anything.

Now, someone who shoots up a church full of "liberals", who loved Bernie Goldber's screeds and paid special attention to his lists of Liberals That Are Destroying America - now that's something that some people (but not nearly all) on the right have to own up to. There's a political layer to the act, and there is a type of political rhetoric that was seized upon to justify it.

But even in that narrow and exceptional case - Goldberg didn't pull the trigger, and he is only tangentially connected to the act itself. All the same a moderating of tone would perhaps be an appropriate response. People engaging in that rhetoric would perhaps have to "own up" to the chain of causality stemming from the language they use, not the act itself.

[Phrost]

You're a little high strung, aren't you?

Anyway, I see it from your point of view now.

Media pundits and news product paid for and produced by Rev. Moon and the Unification Church cult (such as Andrew Breitbart, bighollywood.com, biggovernment.com, etc.) are beyond reproach now. Because it impugns the credibility to question why a right wing apocalyptic cult leader is bankrolling them. On a skeptic's forum.

I figured the addition of "cowboy" would have made it come off a little less hostile. Otherwise, refer to my signature; it's not personal and I generally take very little that's said on the Internet too seriously.

Let's rephrase this:

ACORN has had several issues in which their employees or people working on their behalf have displayed poor character, judgment, and ethics. But it would be wrong for me to state or imply that everyone who works for ACORN is somehow automatically untrustworthy or lacking credibility.

Make sense?

Painting with broad strokes is usually indicative of a small mind.

[Phrost]

So you think this is the first ACORN office they happened to wander into?

Considering it's completely unsubstantiated and precisely what I'd say if I were trying to defuse the **** before it got traction, I think it would pay to be, I dunno...
Edited for rule 10. Do not use foreign languages to avoid the autocensor.

...Skeptical, of that claim.

[Snide]

I seem to have struck a nerve, making me the victor!Yet somehow I don't feel like a loser. Go figure. :)

[Phrost]

Yet somehow I don't feel like a loser. Go figure. :)

I wouldn't either if that's really you in your avatar.

[Snide]

I wouldn't either if that's really you in your avatar.Heh heh. Certainly no loser in his prime, but sadly, he lost big to McMahon, and is now in pretty rough shape (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29534398/).

/OT

[oldhat]

Painting with broad strokes is usually indicative of a small mind.

Sort of like when you huffed and puffed and demanded that liberals collectively apologize for ACORN?

But it would be wrong for me to state or imply that everyone who works for ACORN is somehow automatically untrustworthy or lacking credibility.

You just said ACORN was corrupt.

So which is it? :confused:

[quadraginta]

Even if it involved fraud? No, this was more than fraud. They were willing to help these people engage in child prostitution. I'm sorry, but since when was sympathy even the remotest excuse for enabling something so vile?

It's not, of course.

My problem is that you seem to be using the apparent behavior of these individuals, low level employees, as an indictment of the entire organization nationwide, and all of its efforts. If I've misunderstood I apologize.

If I haven't I'd like to ask if this sort of approach is, in your opinion, valid for use as a credible method to condemn any group, or only the ones you don't like to begin with.

[Juniversal]

See the issue with this is that the individuals who were about to enable some child prostitution (let's assume that's true for sake of argument) were criminal in ways that cannot be connected to their politics.

It would be like finding out about someone who was dealing meth, or killed someone, or molested a child. These are the kinds of crimes that are very often (if not always) politically neutral - having to do with deep-seated aggression, perversion, greed, etc.

So there is no need for the left-wing, or anybody, to "own up" to anything.

Now, someone who shoots up a church full of "liberals", who loved Bernie Goldber's screeds and paid special attention to his lists of Liberals That Are Destroying America - now that's something that some people (but not nearly all) on the right have to own up to. There's a political layer to the act, and there is a type of political rhetoric that was seized upon to justify it.

But even in that narrow and exceptional case - Goldberg didn't pull the trigger, and he is only tangentially connected to the act itself. All the same a moderating of tone would perhaps be an appropriate response. People engaging in that rhetoric would perhaps have to "own up" to the chain of causality stemming from the language they use, not the act itself.Agreed. Not to mention I really feel they were sincerely trying to find this poor girl a house since "they don't judge" lol. The term brothel wasn't used ONCE in the transcript. But the word house was used many times. And initially he told them these 13 girls were being moved in to, "help them get on there feet". Not that he was pimping them lol. I know it's rediculous but I really don't believe it's a matter of big bad evil ACORN. The woman literally says that her job is not to judge people @ 31:57 (in the audio clip).

[Ziggurat]

Agreed. Not to mention I really feel they were sincerely trying to find this poor girl a house since "they don't judge" lol. The term brothel wasn't used ONCE in the transcript. But the word house was used many times. And initially he told them these 13 girls were being moved in to, "help them get on there feet". Not that he was pimping them lol. I know it's rediculous but I really don't believe it's a matter of big bad evil ACORN.

Big and bad may have nothing to do with it, and regardless of how representative of ACORN in general this incident is, evil really is an appropriate word. It was made pretty damned clear that these girls would be prostitutes.

[Dr Adequate]

In other words, you're willing to accuse the video of being dishonest even though you haven't actually watched it. How... enlightened of you.

Watch the video or shut up about it. And if you have watched it, try commenting on the video rather than dismissing it with ad hominems. Ad hominems? My heavens, you're right. I have strayed from the true path of skepticism.

Sir, I am ashamed and chastened. In my partisan zeal, I had fallen into the trap --- you'll laugh when I tell you this --- of supposing that the fact that someone is known to tell lies about a certain subject is a factor that should weigh on the question of whether to invest their further statements on that subject with unqualified belief.

It seems silly when I say it out loud like that. For in forming this erroneous opinion, I had of course forgotten the core principle of critical thinking: blind, unquestioning faith in known charlatans.

[oldhat]

Big and bad may have nothing to do with it, and regardless of how representative of ACORN in general this incident is, evil really is an appropriate word. It was made pretty damned clear that these girls would be prostitutes.

Not really. To you, today, watching an undercover video in the context of a right wing media gotcha moment? Of course, because that's the buildup and money shot. But if you're the ACORN women being "stung"? It's debatable.

And why is this video so heavily edited?

[leftysergeant]

There is a lovely ACORN flag positioned behind the tax lady so that no one can doubt that it is, no kidding, ACORN. I kinda wonder where that secret camera was hidden and how he managed to frame everyone so well without a view finder.

I was thinking the same thing. I also noticed that the sound quality was ratyher odd. The man's voice is not the least bit muffled, the "ACORN" people sounded like they were on the other end of a sewer pipe. Has the rightwad reporter identified the "ACORN" people by name, and has there been any confirmation that they are actually with ACORN?

[Juniversal]

Big and bad may have nothing to do with it, and regardless of how representative of ACORN in general this incident is, evil really is an appropriate word. It was made pretty damned clear that these girls would be prostitutes.The second woman says her job was not to judge (i.e. get in their business). She clearly had her mind set on just getting this girl a house and not pursuing her personal matters as it would intrude on her ability to get the house. Is it wrong? Yes. Was it wrong for them to attempt to get this girl a house? That's up for debate.

But I love how ACORN became the Rights whipping boy since it was associated with the president. I mean they have a section on this website dedicated to them for gods sake! :boggled:

[tyr_13]

I was thinking the same thing. I also noticed that the sound quality was ratyher odd. The man's voice is not the least bit muffled, the "ACORN" people sounded like they were on the other end of a sewer pipe. Has the rightwad reporter identified the "ACORN" people by name, and has there been any confirmation that they are actually with ACORN?

Yes, ACORN fired them.

Was the tax advice given accurate?

[gtc]

But I feel the problem is these people's hearts are too big lol.

You serious?

[Upchurch]

So you think this is the first ACORN office they happened to wander into?

Considering it's completely unsubstantiated and precisely what I'd say if I were trying to defuse the scheißesturm before it got traction, I think it would pay to be, I dunno...

...Skeptical, of that claim.

Given the context, I assume you mean that you are not skeptical of the claim that this was the first ACORN office they happened to wander into.

[gtc]

Yes, ACORN fired them.

Was the tax advice given accurate?

I doubt you can legally claim illegal immigrant child prostitutes as dependants.

[Phrost]

Given the context, I assume you mean that you are not skeptical of the claim that this was the first ACORN office they happened to wander into.

I'm skeptical of the claim that they attempted this at several other offices but would be happy if it were to be proven true since I put my commitment to reason above my commitment to any political ideology.

[tyr_13]

I doubt you can legally claim illegal immigrant child prostitutes as dependants.

Worth a shot though. :p

Did these people at ACORN really believe that these people were doing what they claimed, or did they say to put down 'performance artist' because that's what they thought they were.

Another possibility is that these ACORN workers were really used to dealing with people in the worst of the worst situations and have trained themselves to 'tune out' some things.

At any rate, I don't take this as evidence that ACORN is an especially corrupt organization. Hell, for as large as it is and as hard as some groups have been 'looking' to find fault with it, it seems fairly uncorrupted as organizations go.

[gtc]

Worth a shot though. :p

Just so long as you don't have a personal interest in the

Did these people at ACORN really believe that these people were doing what they claimed, or did they say to put down 'performance artist' because that's what they thought they were.

Another possibility is that these ACORN workers were really used to dealing with people in the worst of the worst situations and have trained themselves to 'tune out' some things.

At any rate, I don't take this as evidence that ACORN is an especially corrupt organization. Hell, for as large as it is and as hard as some groups have been 'looking' to find fault with it, it seems fairly uncorrupted as organizations go.

If they are that jaded you wonder what their other clients are like.

I've said it before that ACORN seems to have problems with some of the people it hires but we've seen the Whitehouse having the same problem this week.

[Upchurch]

I'm skeptical of the claim that they attempted this at several other offices but would be happy if it were to be proven true since I put my commitment to reason above my commitment to any political ideology.
Perhaps, but you certainly allow your commitment to a particular ideology color your assumptions before the facts are known.

[Phrost]

Perhaps, but you certainly allow your commitment to a particular ideology color your assumptions before the facts are known.

To think that an organization that's been caught perpetrating shenanigans in the past is likely to be guilty of it again?

If by "coloring" you mean "not seeing things in black and white" then sure, I'm totally guilty of that.

[Juniversal]

You serious?No I said for comedic purposes. *sarcasm*

Another possibility is that these ACORN workers were really used to dealing with people in the worst of the worst situations and have trained themselves to 'tune out' some things.My thoughts exactly.

[Puppycow]

So people on the left take the ACORN spokesman's word as fact, people on the right take the filmmaker/troll's word as fact, and "skeptics" dutifully line up on one side or the other instead of being concerned with the actual facts of the situation above and beyond ideology.

Yep, another JREF Politics forum discussion. Good to see things never change around here.

Edit: oh and criticism of any minority is Racism; except when they're Republican. I missed that one.

Are you reading the same thread as I am? I'm seeing questions raised and not too many assertions that can't be backed up with evidence.

[Puppycow]

Man, after starting to watch that video, which is highly edited, I had to stop because I'm at work and that girl posing as a hooker sure looks the part. And that outrageous pimp getup? I may try again for the lulz after going home, but so far this is ridiculous. We can't even tell what questions she's answering, we just have take the narrator's word for it.

[Juniversal]

Man, after starting to watch that video, which is highly edited, I had to stop because I'm at work and that girl posing as a hooker sure looks the part. And that outrageous pimp getup? I may try again for the lulz after going home, but so far this is ridiculous. We can't even tell what questions she's answering, we just have take the narrator's word for it.http://biggovernment.breitbart.com/2009/09/10/introducing-james-o%E2%80%99keefe/

Heres the full audio here...^ Much more telling then the highly edited video.

[Puppycow]

http://biggovernment.breitbart.com/2009/09/10/introducing-james-o%E2%80%99keefe/

Heres the full audio here...^ Much more telling then the highly edited video.

I'll take a look when I get home and suspend judgment until then.

[Dr Adequate]

You serious? If I remember rightly, "lol" is a commonly used acronym for "lI'm ototally lserious".

[corplinx]

My judgment is that two people working for McDonalds who put pubes in a cop's burger don't mean the whole company is bad.

This isn't an Acorn scandal until the problem is systemic or points back to the leadership.

[Juniversal]

If I remember rightly, "lol" is a commonly used acronym for "lI'm ototally lserious".Hmm...didn't know "lol" was a synonym for insincere. *shrugs*

[gtc]

If I remember rightly, "lol" is a commonly used acronym for "lI'm ototally lserious".

In most cases LOL seems to signify that the statement that preceded the acronymn was anything but funny. However, in this case I couldn't work out whether he was laughing at the suggestion that they were merely big hearted or laughing because they were so big hearted.

[Skeptic]

Seems like an advanced case of nonjudgementalitis.

Sure, they want to start a brothel, but who am I to judge that prostitution is wrong? Who gave me the right to determine their morals for them? Isn't the evil social stereotype against "sex workers" just a result of the patriarchial fear of women's sexual power? As for the underage prostitutes thing... welllllllllll, for start, they are illegal aliens, but we all know immigration laws are just a racist plan to keep out brown people from the White USA. And if there is nothing wrong with prostitution (or at least, I have no right to tell anybody if it's wrong), then just how bad can underage prostitution be?

This is what happens when people take seriously what Theodore Dalrymple called "the rush from judgement". Recently in the UK, the social services asked in an ad for a social worker to work with underage teenage prostitutions -- distributing condoms, giving lectures on safe sex, helping with drug abuse, etc. A necessary qualification for the job was the the worker's ability to "work nonjudgementally" -- that is, to have no qualms about aiding and abetting child prostitution, let alone "stigmatize" the child prostitutes by, say, calling the police and alerting them to what is still officially a crime.

They say it took them a while to find an ACORN worker who was willing to help them. I don't doubt that: as I said, this is an extreme case of nonjudgementalitis. Most people realize that "oh, there is nothing wrong with prostitution! We shouldn't judge them!" is mere talk, just an entry ticket to the ranks of the social club of the self-important "enlightened" and "caring" folks, not to be taken seriously. But, alas, as such cases show, some people -- like this worker and those who wrote the social service "wanted" ad -- do not.

[Skeptic]

There is a lovely ACORN flag positioned behind the tax lady so that no one can doubt that it is, no kidding, ACORN. I kinda wonder where that secret camera was hidden and how he managed to frame everyone so well without a view finder...

I was thinking the same thing. I also noticed that the sound quality was ratyher odd...

Did you also notice twin towers went straight down after someone was caught on tape saying "pull it!"?

[Dancing David]

If it's fake then it's actionable libel, and I would expect ACORN to file suit. But somehow, I suspect that won't happen.

Apparently ACORN thought itw as real... I was wrong.

[Dancing David]

If it's not fake will those of you on the leftward side of the fence demonstrate some character and own up to it?

Except GrayICE, of course, since I'm apparently on his ignore list after calling him out for his subtle, securely within Membership Agreement, chest thumping.

Wowwy zowey Batman, is this like some Crusade or something? How about everyone owning up, did Bush and Cheny apologise for Armitage outing Plame?

Sheesh, we are not discussing the end of the world here and it is not like there aren't enough antics to go around for everyone.

[Ziggurat]

Has the rightwad reporter identified the "ACORN" people by name

Yes, which you'd know if you watched the video.

and has there been any confirmation that they are actually with ACORN?

Yes.

[Dancing David]

Own up to the organization being corrupt. There's a lot of noise from that side of the fence about it being a lilly-white innocent little group of harmless "community organizers" with no political agenda whatsoever, nope, not them.

Yeah sure, those words came out of my mouth... are you having a bad day. How many references can you find to back up that sentiment? This is the JREF:
Data, evidence, citations?

[Dancing David]

I think it's absolutely retarded and say so regularly.

Except for the Socialist bit, because I'm sure Obama isn't exactly thumbing through Atlas Shrugged for ideas on social policy and issues of government's responsibility vs. an individual's responsibility for their own life and success. I don't think he's an outright socialist, but I'm pretty sure he wouldn't kick socialist ideas out of his bed for eating cookies.

I am pretty sure that Obama is a centrist Dem who is a little left of center, just as I ams ure that Durbin is a centrist dm way right of center, until a bunch of kooks changed the meaning of the word liberal.

O-man is NOT a socialist as the whining from the 'progressives' that theyw ere sold a bill of goods will attest, as a reformed socialist i assure you that the O-man is not a socialist.

There are evry good market reasons to implement health insurance reform.

[Phrost]

Wowwy zowey Batman, is this like some Crusade or something? How about everyone owning up, did Bush and Cheny apologise for Armitage outing Plame?

Sheesh, we are not discussing the end of the world here and it is not like there aren't enough antics to go around for everyone.

I'm not talking about Obama and Pelosi apologizing for ACORN.

I'm talking about people on this forum who make excuses for ACORN, owning up to the fact that there is corruption in the organization. If you're an apologist, then maybe you should apologize.

[Phrost]

There are evry good market reasons to implement health insurance reform.

Reform? Sure. Everyone loves Reform (coming to CBS this fall).

Since when has "reform" meant "nationalizing-style government take-over"? And how is that not a socialist-inspired approach, especially when it would mean the government would be taking over an industry worth a full 15% of the national GDP?

And given how next-to-impossible it is to reform existing government social programs, much less remove the ones that are unnecessary once they're implemented, don't you think it's at the very least reckless to go rushing headlong into another massive government expansion?

Social Security is already a giant mess. It takes an evangelical degree of faith to believe that our federal government is capable of taking on the healthcare of every citizen without bungling it catastrophically.

Which is yet another example of how the left-leaning, self-described Skeptics, replace their irrational faith in the supernatural with an irrational faith in Government.

[Lurker]

I doubt it's policy.

Of course, the fact that last year saw something like serious investigations and/or arrests in, what -- 14 or 15? states for voter fraud of one type or another also raises a few questions about what the organization is doing to keep its people *on* the reservation, if anything.


Um, wouldn't that be voter registration fraud? There is a big difference, no? I'm not aware of any instances of voter fraud except Ann Coulter.

[fuelair]

1)never trust edited video. period.
2)especially if the edits come between where a question is asked and an answer is given (I used to train my students on why that was bad - and the ways it could be used to mislead).

3) so, has anything proven factual come out on this yet?

[Phrost]

Uhh, the full version (at least the audio and transcripts) have been made public. Of course you don't trust edited video. But you don't just leave it at that and then use the fact that there was an edited version of an hour+ long conversation as a reason to outright dismiss the entire thing.

[Praktik]

as a reason to outright dismiss the entire thing.

Hmm... to my eyes it looked like they were using that fact as a reason to express skepticism - and not dismiss it "outright".

Perfectly natural reaction IMHO.

[Phrost]

Well they just released another video of them getting essentially the same reaction from another ACORN office.

So apparently they did "try the thing at other ACORN offices" but they seem not to have "failed".

[Phrost]

Hmm... to my eyes it looked like they were using that fact as a reason to express skepticism - and not dismiss it "outright".

Perfectly natural reaction IMHO.

Not when the full version's been available for a good amount of time. Some people would call that "willful ignorance".

[Praktik]

Not when the full version's been available for a good amount of time. Some people would call that "willful ignorance".

I think you're rushing to judgment in your categorization as "outright dismissal".

If someone hasn't heard the full audio yet then its perfectly reasonable for them to express skepticism regarding the edited video until they get a chance to listen to the whole thing. They could even be aware the full stuff is out there yet not had a chance to view it yet.

But then again, I don't want to insinuate that the pedestal you've placed yourself on here regarding your noble skepticism may have a weak foundation if you're this easy with your language.

But maybe I just did.

[quixotecoyote]

I just finished reading the transcript, and the actions of the workers are indefensible, but there were no ties shown to ACORN policies or general procedures.

I'd be real surprised if ACORN didn't expect it's employees to report child abuse to the police, if just for liability reasons.

[WildCat]

Since when has "reform" meant "nationalizing-style government take-over"? And how is that not a socialist-inspired approach, especially when it would mean the government would be taking over an industry worth a full 15% of the national GDP?
Private health insurance is nowhere near 15% of the nations GDP. Closer to 3%. And Obama didn't even suggest taking that over.

[Neally]

My judgment is that two people working for McDonalds who put pubes in a cop's burger don't mean the whole company is bad.

This isn't an Acorn scandal until the problem is systemic or points back to the leadership.Does a second similar event count as systemic? http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,549241,00.html

[quixotecoyote]

Does a second similar event count as systemic? http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,549241,00.html

I'm still looking for the transcript on that one.

If they ran the same child-prosititute angle, then I'd say that there is at least a lack of training or a problem with what employees think their jobs are. In that case it's something that ACORN needs to correct.

If they just ran a prostitute and pimp trying to get a loan on a house - that I have less problems with. Why shouldn't prostitutes get to live in a house?

[Ziggurat]

Does a second similar event count as systemic?

I'm guessing that this second set of videos isn't going to be the last example either. I bet they've got a string of several more such videos cued up for sequential release, like what the Mona Lisa Project (http://liveaction.org/index.php/projects/monalisa/) did with Planned Parenthood.

[Ziggurat]

If they just ran a prostitute and pimp trying to get a loan on a house - that I have less problems with. Why shouldn't prostitutes get to live in a house?

The ACORN employees are still telling them how to engage in fraud and tax evasion. The child prostitution thing is certainly the worst of it, but it's not clean and it's not OK even without that.

[quixotecoyote]

I'm guessing that this second set of videos isn't going to be the last example either. I bet they've got a string of several more such videos cued up for sequential release, like what the Mona Lisa Project (http://liveaction.org/index.php/projects/monalisa/) did with Planned Parenthood.

I knew I was getting a feeling of "oh crap, not this **** again."

[Dancing David]

I'm not talking about Obama and Pelosi apologizing for ACORN.

I'm talking about people on this forum who make excuses for ACORN, owning up to the fact that there is corruption in the organization. If you're an apologist, then maybe you should apologize.

I note your lack of evidence and data.

[oldhat]

Social Security is already a giant mess.

This is OT but no, it's not. Of course if you have a philosophical problem with paying pensions for old people because Ayn Rand ghost says so, you'll always see it that way.

It takes an evangelical degree of faith to believe that our federal government is capable of taking on the healthcare of every citizen without bungling it catastrophically.

OK, you clearly don't have the foggiest idea what you're talking about. It's like you're stringing a bunch of buzzwords together haphazardly and characterizing that as the Democrats' reform proposal. The public option has nothing to do with a "government takeover." Scare talk about a jackbooted "government takeover" of everyone's health care is chum thrown out only to the most impressionable of Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh listeners.

Besides, you know who already has "socialized" single-payer government healthcare? Everyone over the age of 65, i.e. your grandmother and grandfather. It's called Medicare and it's perhaps the most popular government program today.

You've seen the bitter irony in the ignorant teabaggers screaming about how they don't want the government to take away their Medicare?

To speak nothing of those commie socialist America-hating U.S. military veterans, who receive health care through the Veterans Administration, which runs UK-style government-own hospitals staffed by government-employed doctors. The quality and popularity of VA hospitals and care is high.

If you want to talk about Social Security and how you're wrong about that, too, we can have that debate.

[Ziggurat]

This is OT

Yes, it is. So start a new thread, or find another one.

Edit: you too, Phrost.

[Phrost]

I note your lack of evidence and data.

We're in a thread discussing (now) two separate incidents of ACORN employees recommending tax evasion. I'm pretty sure I don't need to provide much beyond that to most reasonable people who don't have a vested interest in defending ACORN.

[Ziggurat]

We're in a thread discussing (now) two separate incidents of ACORN employees recommending tax evasion.

That's understating the case: they were recommending tax evasion in order to conceal a child prostitution racket.

[tyr_13]

We're in a thread discussing (now) two separate incidents of ACORN employees recommending tax evasion. I'm pretty sure I don't need to provide much beyond that to most reasonable people who don't have a vested interest in defending ACORN.

An organization the size and age of ACORN and you believe that two examples are sufficient for 'most reasonable people'?

No, that is not sufficient. Now, I know you're about to accuse me of being a liberal ACORN apologist, but that's not what I'm saying. ACORN might be a corrupt organization. I don't know. What I do know is that you have not produced enough evidence here to make that claim.

These people did try this at several different offices, so far I saw CNN on tv confirm four. When the video surfaced ACORN did not try to cover it up or deny it. The people in the video were fired. So far this seems like evidence that ACORN is not corrupt.

Again, I'm not claiming that ACORN is not corrupt. I'm saying that the evidence I've seen present so far does not support your claim Phrost.

[Lurker]

Heck, I'll happily admit the Acorn workers were proceeding in error. I'm not sure how that reflects on Acorn though.

I recall a FoxNews employee was recently indicted for child porn. Does that make all of FoxNews guilty? Of course not. If he were doing it on the job? No, not even then. So what is the point if an employee errs unless it can be traced to a policy or a trend within an org?

For all the conservative uproar about Acorn I would have assumed that voter fraud was rife. Turns out the conservatives have not produced ONE SINGLE case of voter fraud. Not one. Voter registration fraud, yes but unless those fake registrants actually vote no harm has been done. And isn't that the part that would produce actual harm yet not a single case of it has been found? So why are conservatives so upset with Acorn? What actual harm have they done?

[Brainster]

I knew I was getting a feeling of "oh crap, not this **** again."

Yeah, I know. So what if some 30-year-old man gets a 13-year-old girl pregnant. What could be more natural and beautiful? It's just that silly Americans are hung up over sex and can't accept it.

Ditto with the teen prostitution part of the ACORN sting. Those young girls were getting an opportunity to come to the USA. How could anybody possibly complain about them having to serve a little indenture as prostitutes?

:p

[quixotecoyote]

Yeah, I know. So what if some 30-year-old man gets a 13-year-old girl pregnant. What could be more natural and beautiful? It's just that silly Americans are hung up over sex and can't accept it.

Ditto with the teen prostitution part of the ACORN sting. Those young girls were getting an opportunity to come to the USA. How could anybody possibly complain about them having to serve a little indenture as prostitutes?

:p


I'm not sure exactly what you intend with this, but I certainly don't support either activity.

[Ziggurat]

When the video surfaced ACORN did not try to cover it up or deny it.

Yes, they did try to deny it. Let me quote (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,548827,00.html) an ACORN spokesman:
"The portrayal is false and defamatory"

Sounds like denial to me.

[Brainster]

I'm not sure exactly what you intend with this, but I certainly don't support either activity.

And you plainly don't support exposing those who would facilitate it, either.

[Ziggurat]

So why are conservatives so upset with Acorn? What actual harm have they done?

Yeah! Why is voter registration fraud even illegal in the first place? Speak truth to power!

[Juniversal]

For all the conservative uproar about Acorn I would have assumed that voter fraud was rife. Turns out the conservatives have not produced ONE SINGLE case of voter fraud. Not one. Voter registration fraud, yes but unless those fake registrants actually vote no harm has been done. And isn't that the part that would produce actual harm yet not a single case of it has been found? So why are conservatives so upset with Acorn? What actual harm have they done?Yea I was also wondering why this was in the Politics section. If anything this belongs in the Social Issues & Current Events forum. This has no relevance to Politics. It seems the Right wants to disparage Acorns name at all cost simply because its connection to the President. Otherwise I doubt they'd ever been in the national news. Community action organization helping low income familys?? Pleeeeeaasse...

[Dancing David]

We're in a thread discussing (now) two separate incidents of ACORN employees recommending tax evasion. I'm pretty sure I don't need to provide much beyond that to most reasonable people who don't have a vested interest in defending ACORN.

So you admit that your claim of people holding people blameless no matter what they do is baseless or did you forget what I called you on already (it happenes to me a lot).

[Dancing David]

Own up to the organization being corrupt. There's a lot of noise from that side of the fence about it being a lilly-white innocent little group of harmless "community organizers" with no political agenda whatsoever, nope, not them.

So where is this "a lot of noise from that side of the fence about it being a lilly-white innocent little group", that is what i called you on, data and evidence?

:)

[quixotecoyote]

And you plainly don't support exposing those who would facilitate it, either.

What on Earth are you taking about?

[Dancing David]

Yes, they did try to deny it. Let me quote (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,548827,00.html) an ACORN spokesman:
"The portrayal is false and defamatory"

Sounds like denial to me.

It's not just for breakfast anymore...

:D

[tyr_13]

Yes, they did try to deny it. Let me quote (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,548827,00.html) an ACORN spokesman:
"The portrayal is false and defamatory"

Sounds like denial to me.

Except that it isn't denial. The portrayal by the organization may well be false and defamatory. The portrayal is that this is common in the corrupt ACORN organization.

The key is that qualifier 'the portrayal'.

[Phrost]

So where is this "a lot of noise from that side of the fence about it being a lilly-white innocent little group", that is what i called you on, data and evidence?

:)

You must not visit DemocraticUnderground.com much.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7686188

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6387970

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x202558

Unless you're under the impression that I was saying that people here are specifically stating that "ACORN is 100% innocent". My accusation is that some people who vote Democrat here are unlikely to use the same skeptical approach on this subject as they would on a thread about the Hollow Earth theory.

[Phrost]

Except that it isn't denial. The portrayal by the organization may well be false and defamatory. The portrayal is that this is common in the corrupt ACORN organization.

The key is that qualifier 'the portrayal'.

As someone who regularly faces down legal threats due to my fraud busting and skeptics activities it seems to me that you don't understand the meaning of the word "defamatory".

In order for something to qualify as defamation it needs to be completely untrue. Considering that they fired two people already, there's no way they can claim defamation.

[tyr_13]

As someone who regularly faces down legal threats due to my fraud busting and skeptics activities it seems to me that you don't understand the meaning of the word "defamatory".

In order for something to qualify as defamation it needs to be completely untrue. Considering that they fired two people already, there's no way they can claim defamation.

The portrayal might well be defaming ACORN. ACORN firing the two employees admits to misconduct or other offense. That doesn't make the portrayal by that website true. That the employees did something very wrong isn't what the ACORN official appeared to be commenting on.

[Ziggurat]

Except that it isn't denial. The portrayal by the organization may well be false and defamatory. The portrayal is that this is common in the corrupt ACORN organization.

No. That statement was made regarding the video itself. The video itself does not make any claims about commonality or organizational corruption. The video itself portrays nothing beyond the interaction of the film makers with those ACORN employees.

[tyr_13]

No. That statement was made regarding the video itself. The video itself does not make any claims about commonality or organizational corruption. The video itself portrays nothing beyond the interaction of the film makers with those ACORN employees.

The edited or non-edited video?

[Ziggurat]

The edited or non-edited video?

The edited video. But it's still a denial. Hell, it would be a denial even if it were correct. Just like if you accuse me of eating kittens, I will deny it, and my denial will be correct (I prefer puppies).

[tyr_13]

The edited video. But it's still a denial. Hell, it would be a denial even if it were correct. Just like if you accuse me of eating kittens, I will deny it, and my denial will be correct (I prefer puppies).

The official denies that the portrayal is accurate (probably with hyperbole on his/her part), not that the workers did something wrong.

If you meant 'sounds like denial to me' about the portrayal, I agree. However, I thought we were talking about denying the incident.

[quixotecoyote]

Yeah! Why is voter registration fraud even illegal in the first place? Speak truth to power!

A little late, but once the workers collected the signatures, ACORN was required by law to submit them. But, since it noted on the registration forms that they were believed to be fraudulent, I don't see what all the panty twisting was about.

[Ziggurat]

The official denies that the portrayal is accurate (probably with hyperbole on his/her part), not that the workers did something wrong.

If you meant 'sounds like denial to me' about the portrayal, I agree. However, I thought we were talking about denying the incident.

The only "portrayal" on that video was a portrayal of events. If you say that the portrayal on the video is false, you're denying that the events which appear to have happened actually happened the way they appear to have happened. In my book, that's denying the incident - maybe not in total, but it's still a denial of the incident.

[tyr_13]

The only "portrayal" on that video was a portrayal of events. If you say that the portrayal on the video is false, you're denying that the events which appear to have happened actually happened the way they appear to have happened. In my book, that's denying the incident - maybe not in total, but it's still a denial of the incident.

So, in your book, one fourth of the points I brought up in the paragraph you quoted are inaccurate.

Would you like to address the rest of the paragraph or post?

[applecorped]

As someone who regularly faces down legal threats due to my fraud busting and skeptics activities it seems to me that you don't understand the meaning of the word "defamatory".



You've faced legal action due to your skeptic activities?

[PixyMisa]

So, in your book, one fourth of the points I brought up in the paragraph you quoted are inaccurate.

Would you like to address the rest of the paragraph or post?
He did.

ACORN said the portrayal was "false and defamatory", i.e. ACORN claimed that the the video was not only untrue, but a deliberate and malicious lie.

If that's not a denial, nothing is.

[Tsukasa Buddha]

I call the biased sample or cherry-picking logical fallacy on the film-makers. While I didn't take their word for it at first, after the second video ACORN fired the next two workers and stated that the stunt had been tried at five other locations, where they were either rejected or had police called on them. So now that they got more specific, and since this is such a simple logical fallacy, I find it to be more boring the more I read about it.

I still don't get the broader application. This privately-run national charity work organization has four bad workers! I am shocked! Unless it comes out that they have a "help people lie on official documents" part of their employee requirements...

Besides, up to a certain point of the hilarious parts of the situation, I would be more inclined to support ACORN if they did help prostitutes stay in business and get their own homes :p .

I think the old voter registration fraud had better legs for being against ACORN running the Census (Which I am guessing is the reason). But either way that has already been cancelled. So now it is the "receiving federal monies" complaint. But that has to do with ACORN opening their books, not about helping pimps and prostitutes.

But still, highly entertaining so far. I just hope people don't confuse this with serious political action. And to be honest, I think we just had a Planned Parenthood string of attacks just like this and this guy copied them.

[Juniversal]

You know what I want to know is what the site that did the "investigation" wants as a result of their investigation. Do they want Acorn shut down? Or do they actually want to improve the organization so it can serve it's purpose free of corruption (yea...right). And i'd also like to know how many different Acorn facilities he visited and how many participated in his scheme. I'd concede immediately that they need an overhaul if this is indeed a common occurence. But that's unknown as of now.

[tyr_13]

He did.

ACORN said the portrayal was "false and defamatory", i.e. ACORN claimed that the the video was not only untrue, but a deliberate and malicious lie.

If that's not a denial, nothing is.

Which is only one fourth of the points from one paragraph of my post he quoted from.

And to be clear, I was talking about denying the event. However, if you want to count that as 'one point addressed' that's fine.

[Juniversal]

I call the biased sample or cherry-picking logical fallacy on the film-makers. While I didn't take their word for it at first, after the second video ACORN fired the next two workers and stated that the stunt had been tried at five other locations, where they were either rejected or had police called on them. So now that they got more specific, and since this is such a simple logical fallacy, I find it to be more boring the more I read about it.Hmm. Suprising they didn't cite this on the big government website (well..not really).

[Upchurch]

Perhaps, but you certainly allow your commitment to a particular ideology color your assumptions before the facts are known.

To think that an organization that's been caught perpetrating shenanigans in the past is likely to be guilty of it again?
See? There you go.

ACORN, as an organization, did what they were supposed to do, by law, by turning in those phony voter registrations. In your mind, that is somehow "perpetrating shenanigans"?

If by "coloring" you mean "not seeing things in black and white" then sure, I'm totally guilty of that.
Actually, I would call that exactly seeing things in black and white: "ACORN = BAD"

[applecorped]

28.5% of Acorn workers are corrupt.:boxedin:

[applecorped]

****offices, not workers.

[leftysergeant]

ACORN, as an organization, did what they were supposed to do, by law, by turning in those phony voter registrations. In your mind, that is somehow "perpetrating shenanigans"?


There you go. They were supposed to do what Republican voter registration drives do and throw away the Republican cards they fill out.:D

[BeAChooser]

Another possibility is that these ACORN workers were really used to dealing with people in the worst of the worst situations and have trained themselves to 'tune out' some things.

Maybe, being democrats, they've just trained themselves to 'tune out' criminal activity ... like helping set up an underage prostitution ring in the US? :D

[BeAChooser]

i am pretty sure that obama is a centrist dem who is a little left of center

:rolleyes:!

[BeAChooser]

I just finished reading the transcript, and the actions of the workers are indefensible, but there were no ties shown to ACORN policies or general procedures.

Then you have to admit that the organization is completely out of control at this point. That alone is reason enough not to give them ANY government funding for ANY purpose until we can be assured they've cleaned people like these employees out of their organization. Until they've established procedures that will insure this doesn't happen again. And we shouldn't just take their word at this point. They've been caught too many times.

[BeAChooser]

Yes, they did try to deny it. Let me quote (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,548827,00.html) an ACORN spokesman:
"The portrayal is false and defamatory"

Sounds like denial to me.

Sure does.

[tyr_13]

Maybe, being democrats, they've just trained themselves to 'tune out' criminal activity ... like helping set up an underage prostitution ring in the US? :D

What partisan drivel. First, you're assuming that they're Democrats. Second, you assume that them being Democrats would somehow make their decision different than if they had been Republicans, or Green, or Communist.

[quixotecoyote]

Then you have to admit that the organization is completely out of control at this point.


No I don't. Why would I?

[tyr_13]

Then you have to admit that the organization is completely out of control at this point. That alone is reason enough not to give them ANY government funding for ANY purpose until we can be assured they've cleaned people like these employees out of their organization. Until they've established procedures that will insure this doesn't happen again. And we shouldn't just take their word at this point. They've been caught too many times.

This is the logical fallacy 'the excluded middle'. It's a middle that has been pointed out by many posters.

Perhaps ACORN needs to tighten protocols, but that doesn't make them 'out of control'.

List the other times they've been 'caught'. Once? Twice? They've been around from about the 70's right? Surely they have a lot of problems from decades ago.

I'm assuming that you hold this conservative website to the same standard as well.

And yes, I know I'm wasting my words.

[BeAChooser]

What partisan drivel. First, you're assuming that they're Democrats.

:rolleyes: I'd say there's a VERY strong likelihood that they voted for Obama. Now if you want to claim they are socialists or communists and voted for Obama because they liked his agenda, you go right ahead. That's what I think, too. And you are certainly free to try and prove that ANY members of ACORN are republicans. I'd like to see that evidence. :D

[gtc]

I'd say that there is at least a lack of training

I don't like ACORN but I think they had every right to assume that their employees wouldn't be stupid enough to tell people how to use a houseful of underage illegal immigrant prostititutes to minimise their tax bill.

[Upchurch]

I invite Phrost, BAC, and Zig to join me join condemning the GOP for its systemic homosexual escapes.

[Juniversal]

:rolleyes: I'd say there's a VERY strong likelihood that they voted for Obama. Now if you want to claim they are socialists or communists and voted for Obama because they liked his agenda, you go right ahead. That's what I think, too. And you are certainly free to try and prove that ANY members of ACORN are republicans. I'd like to see that evidence. :DRelevance??

I don't like ACORN but I think they had every right to assume that their employees wouldn't be stupid enough to tell people how to use a houseful of underage illegal immigrant prostititutes to minimise their tax bill.I still don't understand the "I don't like Acorn" people. Is it that you don't like their mission or simply the few instances of wrong doing (where "I don't trust Acorn" might be more oppropriate)?

[tyr_13]

:rolleyes: I'd say there's a VERY strong likelihood that they voted for Obama. Now if you want to claim they are socialists or communists and voted for Obama because they liked his agenda, you go right ahead. That's what I think, too. And you are certainly free to try and prove that ANY members of ACORN are republicans. I'd like to see that evidence. :D

You have no grounds to ask for evidence after you've made a positive claim. Then you go about saying other unfounded assumptions you're making, and you think this makes it less partisan?

But I'm glad to see you admit that, in your view, 'voted for Obama' equals 'democrat'.

I know, I know, don't feed the troll.

[tyr_13]

I still don't understand the "I don't like Acorn" people. Is it that you don't like their mission or simply the few instances of wrong doing (where "I don't trust Acorn" might be more oppropriate)?

I tend to assume that they mean 'I don't trust ACORN', which I find a valid view. I don't agree with it, but at least I could see a rational argument behind it.

Take that back. I don't trust ACORN. Neither do I distrust them. I find the focus on them odd however.

[gtc]

See? There you go.

ACORN, as an organization, did what they were supposed to do, by law, by turning in those phony voter registrations. In your mind, that is somehow "perpetrating shenanigans"?


Actually, I would call that exactly seeing things in black and white: "ACORN = BAD"

The point is the way they set up their voter registration scheme practically ensured that they would recieve fraudalent registrations.

In this case it seems they have hired amoral drongos.

[Juniversal]

I tend to assume that they mean 'I don't trust ACORN', which I find a valid view. I don't agree with it, but at least I could see a rational argument behind it.

Take that back. I don't trust ACORN. Neither do I distrust them. I find the focus on them odd however.Agreed. Acorn is only in the news because they're associated with liberal politics (Obama to be specific) even though they're not a Political organization per say. So the Right attempts to slander them at all cost even though for the most part they do good work.

The point is the way they set up their voter registration scheme practically ensured that they would recieve fraudalent registrations.

In this case it seems they have hired amoral drongos.A kid I knew worked for our local Acorn in 2004 and he was either paid per registration or had a quota. Couldn't say for sure. Mind you at the time he was 16. I imagine many doing the registrations were also of high school age and prone to cutting corners for sake of easy money or simply laziness. Cutting corners=registering non existent voters for the cash involved or to meet quota. Wouldn't fault Acorn for the actions of these individuals..

[Upchurch]

The point is the way they set up their voter registration scheme practically ensured that they would recieve fraudalent registrations.
Which they caught, fired those responsible, and reported the fraudulent registrations to the proper authorities. No organization that large is ever going to be 100% pristine, but they had a self-reporting mechanism in place.

In this case it seems they have hired amoral drongos.
No question.

[corplinx]

I invite Phrost, BAC, and Zig to join me join condemning the GOP for its systemic homosexual escapes.

I thought you were above this sort of bigotry Upchurch. SHAME ON YOU. SHAME ON YOU. Hell man, you play in their marching band-

OOHhhhhhhh, for a second I thought you said escapades.

[Upchurch]

OOHhhhhhhh, for a second I thought you said escapades.
DAMN MY PHONE AND ITS LACK OF SPELL CHECK!!!!

DAMN IT TO THE SYSTEMICALLY GAY REPUBLICAN PARTY!!!


:mad:


eta: or, rather, its word suggestion that's just a little too easy to use. Whatever, I meant "escapades".

[quadraginta]

Then you have to admit that the organization is completely out of control at this point. That alone is reason enough not to give them ANY government funding for ANY purpose until we can be assured they've cleaned people like these employees out of their organization. Until they've established procedures that will insure this doesn't happen again. And we shouldn't just take their word at this point. They've been caught too many times.


I think you're right. You're just aiming too low. Why waste all your energy on some two-bit advocate group for the helpless.

Let's apply your logic to the big guys. We could start with Homeland Security and the INS. Then the FBI. State and local law enforcement. And these are just some of the ones supposedly enforcing the law.

Think we can ferret out a few bad eggs in the military? What's that you say? We have??!! Let's shut them down too. Root and branch. Root and branch.

Good plan.

[gtc]

A kid I knew worked for our local Acorn in 2004 and he was either paid per registration or had a quota. Couldn't say for sure. Mind you at the time he was 16. I imagine many doing the registrations were also of high school age and prone to cutting corners for sake of easy money or simply laziness. Cutting corners=registering non existent voters for the cash involved or to meet quota. Wouldn't fault Acorn for the actions of these individuals..

Which they caught, fired those responsible, and reported the fraudulent registrations to the proper authorities. No organization that large is ever going to be 100% pristine, but they had a self-reporting mechanism in place.

Juniversal's statement accords with the other things I have read about the way they set up their registration drive. I fault them for setting up the scheme in a way that pretty much ensured they would get a large number of dodgy registrations.

[Praktik]

I think you're right. You're just aiming too low. Why waste all your energy on some two-bit advocate group for the helpless.

Let's apply your logic to the big guys. We could start with Homeland Security and the INS. Then the FBI. State and local law enforcement. And these are just some of the ones supposedly enforcing the law.

Think we can ferret out a few bad eggs in the military? What's that you say? We have??!! Let's shut them down too. Root and branch. Root and branch.

Good plan.

winnar

[Dr Adequate]

Are they, in fact, getting any government funding for any purpose? When did this start?

[quixotecoyote]

I don't like ACORN but I think they had every right to assume that their employees wouldn't be stupid enough to tell people how to use a houseful of underage illegal immigrant prostititutes to minimise their tax bill.


Yes, but that doesn't mean there couldn't also be a training issue. I could see them going through many training sessions where it's drilled in not to question or criticize clients and just to give the tax advice. If that's combined with a culture of empathy for the lower income classes which include prostitutes and drug users and so forth, I can see a situation where multiple employees could turn off their normal social judgment to deal with the clients. And when that happens, you can get stuff like this.

[BeAChooser]

You have no grounds to ask for evidence after you've made a positive claim.

There is no way to prove that every ACORN member is a democrat. Although there is reason to believe that.

But there is a way to prove that at least one ACORN member is a republican. Just link us to a source talking about one.

So go ahead. The ball is in your court. Or have you lost your racket? :D

[gtc]

Yes, but that doesn't mean there couldn't also be a training issue. I could see them going through many training sessions where it's drilled in not to question or criticize clients and just to give the tax advice. If that's combined with a culture of empathy for the lower income classes which include prostitutes and drug users and so forth, I can see a situation where multiple employees could turn off their normal social judgment to deal with the clients. And when that happens, you can get stuff like this.

I see what you are saying but I would have assumed people would be able to use their own judgment about where empathy or not wanting to criticise clients ends.

[quixotecoyote]

I see what you are saying but I would have assumed people would be able to use their own judgment about where empathy or not wanting to criticise clients ends.

I have bolded your overestimation of people as a group. :D

More seriously, some people have difficulty switching gears. I first saw it with juvenile offenders I worked with. If they're doing something (anything) they don't like to stop on their own and if you make them stop they get stressed. So I don't think it's a stretch that some people would get in the mode of helping clients without thinking about the morality of how they're living their life and not changing gears when appropriate.

Could be completely unrelated, we don't know what ACORN training and culture is like. It does seem like reasonable speculation, though.

[Brainster]

What on Earth are you taking about?

Perhaps we could get to the heart of the matter if you would just explain what you meant when you said:

I knew I was getting a feeling of "oh crap, not this **** again."

My interpretation of that was "Oh crap, not another right-wing sting operation exposing a liberal institution as corrupt and unprincipled." But perhaps what you meant was, "Oh crap, not another liberal institution turning out to be corrupt and unprincipled?"

[The Painter]

I invite Phrost, BAC, and Zig to join me join condemning the GOP for its systemic homosexual escapes.

Why would you condemn someone for being gay??

[The Painter]

Are they, in fact, getting any government funding for any purpose?

Yes they are;

ACORN knows how to secure CDBG funds. Audit reports filed by ACORN’s headquarters with the Office of Management and Budget show that ACORN spent $1,588,599 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program funds from FY 2003 through FY 2007. It is not clear from these records when or from what source the funds were awarded to ACORN. It is also not clear whether ACORN chapters or affiliates have received CDBG grants on their own.

House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) repeatedly urged President George W. Bush and other federal officials to withhold taxpayer funds from ACORN, including $17.2 million in federal grants awarded in December 2008 after numerous allegations of wrongdoing in connection with ACORN’s election activities were reported by the news media.

Leader Boehner also released a study of federal records in October 2008 listing tens of millions in federal grants received by ACORN. A new updated and more expansive study reveals that ACORN has actually received millions more than first thought. A review of the Federal Register and news releases issued by federal agencies showed that ACORN was awarded more than $53 million in taxpayer dollars. This amount does not reflect the millions more ACORN has received in federal block grant funds awarded to state and local agencies which passed them on to ACORN.
http://nicedeb.wordpress.com/2009/01/26/850-billion-stimulus-package-will-funnel-money-to-acorn/

They also are eligible for 4+ billion from the stimulus bill.

When did this start?

Years ago.

Program funds from FY 2003

urged President George W. Bush and other federal officials to withhold taxpayer funds from ACORN,

All the way back in Bush years. Apparently, Republicans didn't like it then either.

[Upchurch]

Why would you condemn someone for being gay?? Are you homophobic?
Not in the slightest.

I do not, however, approve of an organization that systemically encourages men to cheat on their wives, proposition cops in airport restrooms, and flirt with young pages via instant messenger.

Are you honest enough to condemn this sexually corrupt organization?



eta: Oh, and you may hear a wooshing noise. That would be the point you just missed.

[The Painter]

What organization?

[Upchurch]

What organization?
Do you often have a problem with memory loss?

I invite Phrost, BAC, and Zig to join me join condemning the GOP for its systemic homosexual escapades*.
*fixed

[The Painter]

an organization that systemically encourages men to cheat on their wives, proposition cops in airport restrooms, and flirt with young pages via instant messenger.

And you're saying the GOP is that organization? Are you insane? You can't honestly believe that. I really don't need to post the plethora of Democrats that have acted exactly the same way, ie. John Edwards, who coincidentally was involved with ACORN

[Dancing David]

You must not visit DemocraticUnderground.com much.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7686188

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6387970

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x202558

Unless you're under the impression that I was saying that people here are specifically stating that "ACORN is 100% innocent". My accusation is that some people who vote Democrat here are unlikely to use the same skeptical approach on this subject as they would on a thread about the Hollow Earth theory.

You are the one who makes these vague statements that are uncritical.

Now see that is a better phrased statement now isn't it. You first statement was broad and over general and had little bearing on the vast majority of people who might have leftist views, then you shifted the goal posts to whining about the JREF, now you have more clearly stated that it is a small segment of the general 'liberal' population.

Now you are speaking more carefully, I would not smear all 'conservatives' with Schafley or Beck.

See here is the deal , while Politics is sort of one of the fuzzy minded areas of the JREF where people of all sorts make outrageous claims with little basis or merit it is still the JREF, so the call

Data, evidence?

is still the most powerful.

Had you stated "There is a population of liberals who will rise to defend ACORN no matter what they do." I would not have questioned it at all, instead you made a spin statement out of it, so yeah there is some small group that will do as you say.

But that is not 'a lot of noise' now is it, I can do sample counts of the idiotic posts on Yahoo Buzz as well, it is largely dominated by uncritical thinkers who currently express conservative viewpoints, Sarah Palin's facebook is even worse, but neither represent 'conservatives' as a population but rather restricted fringes of the population.

[Dancing David]

Maybe, being democrats, they've just trained themselves to 'tune out' criminal activity ... like helping set up an underage prostitution ring in the US? :D

Or like the SEC pretending that the largest ponzi scheme in history is good for the economy, or Raygun subverting the COTUS is okay, or Bush II that the habeus corpus clause does not say "no person" in the case of illegal seiazure of people.

[WildCat]

So let me get this staright: we shouldn't worry about ACORN's hireing unethical workers with federal tax dollars who won't work within the law because some GOP pols like to have gay sex? Is that the argument here?

[Dancing David]

:rolleyes:!

I am pretty sure you are just a shill for the party, want to debate physics again? Your statements in Politics are about as valid as your imaginary physics in SMT. You use imagination in most of your disucssions and have a hard time with citations and evidence. Like all the misrepresentations you made about the New Hampshire home schooling case. There you thought that the fringe religous beleifs of the mother should trump the co-equal rights of the father to have a relationship with his daughter. then you ran away, because you had never even read the court order.

Why not play Karl JR and then take the 'poor little martyr' role when you are called on your inaccuracies and misrepresentations.

Obama is a centrist Dem, just because the Pubs took a large step to the right on their public face does not mean that Durbin or Obama are uber-liberals.

So Obama wants a universal health care plan, he will leave the progressives very unhappy, as he already has. Just as Clinton did as well, another centrist Dem.


Remember to attack the argument and not the arguer.

[Dancing David]

No I don't. Why would I?

Because you have fallen pray to the mind control of Karl JR?

[Dancing David]

I don't like ACORN but I think they had every right to assume that their employees wouldn't be stupid enough to tell people how to use a houseful of underage illegal immigrant prostititutes to minimise their tax bill.

Have you met 'the aveage empolyee', they are avergae.

50% will do any stupid old thing on average.

You also think that mortage brokers wouldn't lie about ineterest rates either, now would you?

[Dancing David]

The point is the way they set up their voter registration scheme practically ensured that they would recieve fraudalent registrations.

In this case it seems they have hired amoral drongos.

Yeah, well , when you hire people who would otherwise be standing there advertising sandwiches, that is going to happen. And I am sure that the people 'registered' were not accepted as valid voters, this is a shiboleth for some people. The same ones who think it is okay to fire US AGs because they won't play partisan politics about ? Voter registrations fraud.

Some amoral drongos wear suits and whispered in the ear of BushII.

[Praktik]

And you're saying the GOP is that organization? Are you insane? You can't honestly believe that. I really don't need to post the plethora of Democrats that have acted exactly the same way, ie. John Edwards, who coincidentally was involved with ACORN

hook, line and sinker!!

beautifully done upchurch

[The Painter]

hook, line and sinker!!

beautifully done upchurch

I got his point;

Which they caught, fired those responsible, and reported the fraudulent registrations to the proper authorities. No organization that large is ever going to be 100% pristine, but they had a self-reporting mechanism in place.

His comparison is what I disagree with. Also his unbridled defense of ACORN and then a shift to "everyone else does it" defense. Pathetic.

[tyr_13]

There is no way to prove that every ACORN member is a democrat. Although there is reason to believe that.

So you've made an unprovable claim. Great.



But there is a way to prove that at least one ACORN member is a republican. Just link us to a source talking about one.

So go ahead. The ball is in your court. Or have you lost your racket? :D

Except my claim isn't that they were Republicans. You love you your straw don't you? My claim was that you can't assume that they were Democrats and that your attributing their actions to their political affiliation is ******** of the lowest order.

[Brainster]

Census director drops ACORN from its vendors (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/11/census-bureau-severs-ties-acorn/) for 2010:

The Census Director has sent a letter to the National Headquarters of ACORN notifying the group that the Census Bureau is severing all ties with the community organizing group for all work having to do with the 2010 census.

"Over the last several months, through ongoing communication with our regional offices, it is clear that ACORN's affiliation with the 2010 Census promotion has caused sufficient concern in the general public, has indeed become a distraction from our mission, and may even become a discouragement to public cooperation, negatively impacting 2010 Census efforts," read a letter from Census Director Robert M. Groves to the president of ACORN.

Also the two Washington staffers have been fired (following the firings of the two Baltimore staffers):

Two more ACORN workers were fired Friday after a second video surfaced, this time showing staff members in the community organizers' Washington office offering to help the undercover man and woman acquire illegal home loans that would help them set up a brothel.

[quixotecoyote]

Makes sense.

Sucks to be ACORN, but the Census Bureau's job isn't to stand up to waves of propaganda on behalf of third-party vendors. It probably was distracting to their main purpose, which justifies cutting them loose.

ACORN will survive and keep doing a net good.

[Dr Adequate]

Yes they are; Thanks.

* tips hat *

They also are eligible for 4+ billion from the stimulus bill. "Eligible for"?

Is that the same as "getting"?

All the way back in Bush years. Presumably Bush was paying them to rig elections for him ...

[leftysergeant]

I got his point;



His comparison is what I disagree with. Also his unbridled defense of ACORN and then a shift to "everyone else does it" defense. Pathetic.

I agree with you that "everybody else does it" is not a good defense.

Republicans, however do not do what ACORN does. They do not fire dirtbags for being dsirtbags. sometimes they appoint them to higher office.

BTW, the State's Attorney in Baltimore will probably be filing charges. He can, at this point, find only one clear criminal offense at all supported by evidence.
His opinion at this time is that the filming of the YouTube video probably violates the state's wire tap laws, so that idioit reporter had probably best get rid of any of the evidence now before he is legally restrained from doing so.

[Dancing David]

Also his unbridled defense of ACORN .


Yeah right, the fact that you stretch the truth and pretend that Upchurch does things and then make straw attacks really helps your already low credibity score. Your history of exagerated statements is well known, and just furthered by your assumption that this is not the JREF.

[leftysergeant]

I really don't need to post the plethora of Democrats that have acted exactly the same way, ie. John Edwards, who coincidentally was involved with ACORN

Uh....yeah. You DO have to post the list. Few, if any, of us know who the hell you coulbe talking about

Doubt you can come up with many names.

[Moochie]

Breitbart has all the credibility of Fox News.


M.

[Dr Adequate]

Breitbart has all the credibility of Fox News. But only half the calories!

[Upchurch]

I got his point;
With all due respect, you really didn't. Neither did Wildcat or Lefty.

His comparison is what I disagree with.
I'm not making a comparison between two organizations. I'm applying the bad argument used in this thread to another organization that those judging ACORN so harshly have a little more empathy for.

Nor am I making a tu quoque argument. I'm not saying that what these (former) ACORN people are justified because Republicans act bad too.

Of course it is insane to conclude that the Republican party systemically encourages homosexual trysts based on the behavior of a few members. Likewise, it is wrong to conclude that ACORN systemically encourages its employees to be accessories to criminal acts based on the behavior of a few employees.

Its called, I believe, a hasty generalization and it is a logical fallacy.

Also his unbridled defense of ACORN and then a shift to "everyone else does it" defense. Pathetic.
I have not had an unbridaled defense of ACORN. These specific people were wrong and I have said so.

What I am doing is not immediately assuming organizational guilt nor "backing it up" with logical fallacies.

There is plenty of real things to not like about ACORN. Do we really need to invent reasons using bad logic and uncritical thinking.

[WildCat]

With all due respect, you really didn't. Neither did Wildcat or Lefty.
My point was simply that if we're giving tax dollars to private groups they should at least demonstrate that they are using that money wisely and within the law.

No different from the US embassy guards in Kabul who were videotaped in various acts of asshattery and were then fired. I think the company they worked for should maybe lose their federal contracts, even if a hundred married Republican family-value pols get caught propositioning men in public toilets. One has nothing to do with the other.

[BeAChooser]

So you've made an unprovable claim.

I've offered you a simple way to prove I'm wrong. Just post a link that names someone other than someone who voted for Obama (a democrat) belonging to ACORN. Like I said, the ball is in your court. If you can't do that, I suggest that's strong evidence that I'm right ... that all four of the people who gave this illegal and unethical "advice" are democrats. :D

By the way ...

In the House Republican's July report, the ranking Republican on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform charged that:

1. ACORN has evaded taxes, obstructed justice, engaged in self dealing, and aided and abetted a cover-up of embezzlement by Dale Rathke, the brother of ACORN founder Wade Rathke. 


2. ACORN has committed investment fraud, deprived the public of its right to honest services, and engaged in racketeering affecting interstate commerce. 


3. ACORN has committed a conspiracy to defraud the United States by using taxpayer funds for partisan political activities. 


4. ACORN has submitted false filings to the Internal Revenue Service and the Department of Labor, in addition to violating the Fair Labor Standards Act. 


5. ACORN falsified and concealed facts concerning an illegal transaction between related parties in violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.

Now we can add something new to the list.

6. ACORN employees have aided and abetted child prostitution in the course of their *duties*. :)

[Upchurch]

My point was simply that if we're giving tax dollars to private groups they should at least demonstrate that they are using that money wisely and within the law.
I couldn't agree more, but that has nothing to do with what you were responding to.

This incident, while awful, doesn't prove that ACORN is a corrupt organization. If ACORN memos come out that is criticizing branch offices for not meeting their Child Prostitution Brothel quotas, then you have evidence of ACORN being a corrupt organization.

[Dr Adequate]

I've offered you a simple way to prove I'm wrong. Just post a link that names someone other than someone who voted for Obama (a democrat) belonging to ACORN. Like I said, the ball is in your court. If you can't do that, I suggest that's strong evidence that I'm right ... that all four of the people who gave this illegal and unethical "advice" are democrats. :D

By the way ...

In the House Republican's July report, the ranking Republican on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform charged that:

1. ACORN has evaded taxes, obstructed justice, engaged in self dealing, and aided and abetted a cover-up of embezzlement by Dale Rathke, the brother of ACORN founder Wade Rathke. 


2. ACORN has committed investment fraud, deprived the public of its right to honest services, and engaged in racketeering affecting interstate commerce. 


3. ACORN has committed a conspiracy to defraud the United States by using taxpayer funds for partisan political activities. 


4. ACORN has submitted false filings to the Internal Revenue Service and the Department of Labor, in addition to violating the Fair Labor Standards Act. 


5. ACORN falsified and concealed facts concerning an illegal transaction between related parties in violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.

Now we can add something new to the list.

6. ACORN employees have aided and abetted child prostitution in the course of their *duties*. :) And this is the organization to which the Bush administration gave tens of millions of dollars in taxpayers' money?

Golly, Republicans really are a shady bunch, aren't they? They've been using our money to subsidize tax evasion, embezzlement, fraud, racketeering ... and now it turns out that Bush was in effect financing a child prostitution ring.

On the other hand, the Democrats' hands aren't entirely clean. President Obama once worked for a law firm which once did some legal work for ACORN. So I'm not going to cast the first stone.

[WildCat]

This incident, while awful, doesn't prove that ACORN is a corrupt organization. If ACORN memos come out that is criticizing branch offices for not meeting their Child Prostitution Brothel quotas, then you have evidence of ACORN being a corrupt organization.
I'm not saying they're corrupt, I am saying they're incompetent. There doesn't appear to be a lot of oversight of the field offices. Many chain stores send people posing as customers to the stores see how they're performing, maybe ACORN should do the same. Especially since they know they're a target, and apparently an easy one.

[BeAChooser]

BTW, the State's Attorney in Baltimore will probably be filing charges. He can, at this point, find only one clear criminal offense at all supported by evidence.
His opinion at this time is that the filming of the YouTube video probably violates the state's wire tap laws, so that idioit reporter had probably best get rid of any of the evidence now before he is legally restrained from doing so.

Yeah ... isn't that amazing folks? I guess the Maryland State Attorney, Patricia Jessamy, didn't hear the part on the tapes where the ACORN employees offered advice on how to evade taxes (under report income), disguise a criminal activity (prostitution and a brothel), aid/abet criminal activities (import illegal underage aliens and turning them into child prostitutes), and defraud the US government (reporting the girls as dependents on tax forms as a tax credit)? :rolleyes:

Of course, this is the same State Attorney's office that prosecuted Linda Tripp for an illegal wiretap that exposed the nefarious activities of Bill Clinton and his administration. Of course, Baltimore is the home of Nancy Pelosi. And Patricia Jessamy is black and gave Obama $1000 last year (http://hotairpundit.blogspot.com/2009/09/states-attorney-in-baltimore-who-would.html ). In fact, here she is praising Obama at a DNC party last August. So it's hard to be surprised by this decision of hers. :D

[Upchurch]

I'm not saying they're corrupt
But Phrost is. That's the argument I was countering.

[Dr Adequate]

Yeah ... isn't that amazing folks? I guess the Maryland State Attorney, Patricia Jessamy, didn't hear the part on the tapes where the ACORN employees offered advice on how to evade taxes (under report income), disguise a criminal activity (prostitution and a brothel), aid/abet criminal activities (import illegal underage aliens and turning them into child prostitutes), and defraud the US government (reporting the girls as dependents on tax forms as a tax credit)? But if, as lefty claims, this sort of wiretapping is illegal, then where is the legally admissable evidence?

And Patricia Jessamy is black ... Ah well, if she bears the mark of Cain, then that explains everything.

[applecorped]

I'm not saying they're corrupt, I am saying they're incompetent.

How about corruptly incompetent?

[Peephole]

All? My memory may be off, but didn't think they had reported the majority. If you are fairly sure, then I'll accept your memory over mine. It's been a while.

I will say their system does not appear to have a robust way of making sure that type of stuff doesn't happen -- where the persons making up names don't use obviously fals ones. Maybe there's no better system, but the incentives don't seem to help.
The problem is, that ACORN is forced by law to turn in all registration forms, even when they're false. So they can detect all they want, they still have to send in fraudulant forms.
Since when has "reform" meant "nationalizing-style government take-over"? And how is that not a socialist-inspired approach, especially when it would mean the government would be taking over an industry worth a full 15% of the national GDP?
1. These kinds of systems work in other countries.
2. This isn't what the Democrats are pushing for.
And given how next-to-impossible it is to reform existing government social programs, much less remove the ones that are unnecessary once they're implemented, don't you think it's at the very least reckless to go rushing headlong into another massive government expansion?
The issue has been around for decades in the U.S., how is this rushing into something? It's not rockets science or anything either, this stuff has all been invented already.
Social Security is already a giant mess. It takes an evangelical degree of faith to believe that our federal government is capable of taking on the healthcare of every citizen without bungling it catastrophically.
Why do you think the government of the U.S. is so incompetent? Other countries are able to run their public health care systems just fine.

[Phrost]

I invite Phrost, BAC, and Zig to join me join condemning the GOP for its systemic homosexual escapes.

I wholeheartedly condemn the Republican Party's hypocrisy when it comes to matters of sexual preference, treatment of the homosexual community, their liberal use of the neglected side-door in the wall that's supposed to separate Church and State called "Marriage".

Every Republican who does not support equal rights for all lawful citizens should be thrown from office, literally, by the scruff of their necks, and hopefully those offices will be on the second floor or higher.

Will that work for you?

(I'm a libertarian; you can keep your false dichotomy.)

[Phrost]

I couldn't agree more, but that has nothing to do with what you were responding to.

This incident, while awful, doesn't prove that ACORN is a corrupt organization. If ACORN memos come out that is criticizing branch offices for not meeting their Child Prostitution Brothel quotas, then you have evidence of ACORN being a corrupt organization.

At least if this is your sincere viewpoint, as long as you apply your ridiculous threshold for what constitutes corruption equally across the board, I definitely couldn't call you a hypocrite.

[Phrost]

1. These kinds of systems work in other countries.
2. This isn't what the Democrats are pushing for.

1. We're not other countries. What works for Penn and Teller doesn't work for James Randi (although I'm sure many people would appreciate it if he included more hot chicks doing full frontal in his presentations.)

2. Them'r weasel words there, partner. Plenty of Democrats would love a full-on Universal Healthcare system, and many people who vote for the jackass party* support the concept and are indeed "pushing for it".




The issue has been around for decades in the U.S., how is this rushing into something? It's not rockets science or anything either, this stuff has all been invented already.

Because the President himself stated that he wanted it passed before the congressional recess, which was a ridiculously short amount of time to work up a bill, as evidenced by the fact that it's still not done.


Why do you think the government of the U.S. is so incompetent? Other countries are able to run their public health care systems just fine.
Because unlike a lot of people who have a religious level of faith in it, I've actually worked for it and know better.



Edited out comments about moderation - if you wish to discuss a moderation issue please do so in Forum Management.

[LostAngeles]

I think it's absolutely retarded and say so regularly.

Except for the Socialist bit, because I'm sure Obama isn't exactly thumbing through Atlas Shrugged for ideas on social policy and issues of government's responsibility vs. an individual's responsibility for their own life and success. I don't think he's an outright socialist, but I'm pretty sure he wouldn't kick socialist ideas out of his bed for eating cookies.

So what do you think of the previous administration handing out government money to keep afloat the organizations whose employees played around with the credit market in the interest of making short-term profits? Why should they have not had to assume the responsibility for their actions and the government continued to allow them to stay afloat and now succeed?

Big and bad may have nothing to do with it, and regardless of how representative of ACORN in general this incident is, evil really is an appropriate word. It was made pretty damned clear that these girls would be prostitutes.

Because more than five women living in a residence constitutes a brothel?

Yeah, I know. So what if some 30-year-old man gets a 13-year-old girl pregnant. What could be more natural and beautiful? It's just that silly Americans are hung up over sex and can't accept it.

:p

There might have been a simpler explanation of that. The PP workers knew the girl needed help. If they scare her off by telling her they have to report it, who knows what could happen. They need to get her in there and get her to a social worker.

But no, PP is all about old men knocking up younger chicks like it used to be back in the day.

28.5% of Acorn workers are corrupt.:boxedin:

****offices, not workers.

Cite for these please?

There is no way to prove that every ACORN member is a democrat. Although there is reason to believe that.

But there is a way to prove that at least one ACORN member is a republican. Just link us to a source talking about one.

So go ahead. The ball is in your court. Or have you lost your racket? :D

Actually, while that would do it, not being able to does not mean they they are all Democratic. Not everyone drops their political affiliation every time they open their mouth.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


Ah well, if she bears the mark of Cain, then that explains everything.

You mean the Curse of Ham (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_Ham)

[BeAChooser]

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


Does that apply to WMD too? :D

[Phrost]

So what do you think of the previous administration handing out government money to keep afloat the organizations whose employees played around with the credit market in the interest of making short-term profits? Why should they have not had to assume the responsibility for their actions and the government continued to allow them to stay afloat and now succeed?

Why are you making the assumption that I support corporate bailouts?

I think the concept that a company is "too big to fail" is morally reprehensible. I also think that people on the JREF's Politics forums prefer to argue with the people they wish they were quoting instead of the people they actually do.

Both Big Business and Big Government are threats to individual liberty, and need to be regulated in a way that maximizes liberty for the individual; not collective entities.

[Dr Adequate]

You mean the Curse of Ham (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_Ham) I know what I mean (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_of_Cain).

[Peephole]

I wholeheartedly condemn the Republican Party's hypocrisy when it comes to matters of sexual preference, treatment of the homosexual community, their liberal use of the neglected side-door in the wall that's supposed to separate Church and State called "Marriage".

Every Republican who does not support equal rights for all lawful citizens should be thrown from office, literally, by the scruff of their necks, and hopefully those offices will be on the second floor or higher.

Will that work for you?

(I'm a libertarian; you can keep your false dichotomy.)
You seem to have missed this post (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5099545&postcount=213) by Upchurch in which he explains the point that keeps going over your head.
1. We're not other countries.
I really don't see why the United States is so different from all other democracies. Do you have any evidence for this claim?
2. Them'r weasel words there, partner. Plenty of Democrats would love a full-on Universal Healthcare system, and many people who vote for the jackass party* support the concept and are indeed "pushing for it".
Not every universal health care system is a government takeover of health care, you should read this article by Nate Silver:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/08/not-all-socialist-countries-are-alike.html

And the point remains, none of the current bills in congress are pushing for a single-payer system like Canada or "socialised medicine" like the U.K.
Because the President himself stated that he wanted it passed before the congressional recess, which was a ridiculously short amount of time to work up a bill, as evidenced by the fact that it's still not done.
The passing of a health care bill has little to do with the details of how health care should be organised and everything with politics (making compromises to get conservative Democrats aboard).

[Phrost]

I really don't see why the United States is so different from all other democracies. Do you have any evidence for this claim?

You don't see the difference between a Parliamentary Democracy and a Presidential one?

You're serious?

Of all the Presidential Democracies, I think that only two of them have decent, working, UHC. And both of those countries (South Korea, Panama) are smaller than many individual US States.

Which begs another question: why isn't this being done at the state level? (Hint: has something to do with how it's only resulted in utter failure each time it's been tried).


Not every universal health care system is a government takeover of health care, you should read this article by Nate Silver:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/08/not-all-socialist-countries-are-alike.html

Will do when I get a chance.



And the point remains, none of the current bills in congress are pushing for a single-payer system like Canada or "socialised medicine" like the U.K.

The passing of a health care bill has little to do with the details of how health care should be organised and everything with politics (making compromises to get conservative Democrats aboard).

There are entirely reasonable concerns that a "Public (Government) Option" will effectively gut the private insurance market to the point where we're left with nothing but fringe services and a lot less competition.

I fully realize there are business interests in keeping the government as much out of the industry as possible. I'll even acknowledge many of them are acting in the interests of profit over the interest in the individual (It's Capitalism, Stupid*).

But Reagan was right about one thing: once you create a government program (especially an entitlement), it's nigh impossible to dismantle, even if it's a demonstrably gigantic mess. Whether it's Bush's expansion of Government (the Department of Homeland Security), or FDR's (Social Security), it doesn't matter how much the programs are poorly run or subject to politics. If Social Security's looming bankruptcy and the DHS's (FEMA) historic failure during Hurricane Katrina aren't cause enough for complete overhaul if not dismantling of those components of the Federal Government, then how little change would come from a subtle, "frog in a pot", progressive increase in taxes to support bloated Government-run care?

And also, I'll be frank. The prospect of the Federal Government having not only access to but control over the health care records of every individual in the country scares the crap out of me. And I'm not remotely the tinfoil hat type.



Moderation issue removed.

[LostAngeles]

Does that apply to WMD too? :D

Was there any actual evidence of WMD to begin with?

Why are you making the assumption that I support corporate bailouts?

I think the concept that a company is "too big to fail" is morally reprehensible. I also think that people on the JREF's Politics forums prefer to argue with the people they wish they were quoting instead of the people they actually do.

Both Big Business and Big Government are threats to individual liberty, and need to be regulated in a way that maximizes liberty for the individual; not collective entities.

I just wanted to clarify on your concept of socialism is all, thank you.

I know what I mean (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_of_Cain).

Mormons don't count. You need to talk to REAL Christians. (http://baptistsforbrown2008.wordpress.com/2007/07/19/the-curse-of-ham-why-barack-hussein-oboma-will-never-be-president/)

[Skeptic Ginger]

ACORN has ascended. They elect our politicians and receive billions in tax money. Their world is a revolutionary, socialistic, atheistic world, where all means are justifiable.

Hmm ... not exactly a trustworthy source.Billions in tax dollars? Oh good grief.

[Upchurch]

(I'm a libertarian; you can keep your false dichotomy.)
A false dichotomy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma) is an argument where two options are presented as the only possible options. (For example, "if you're not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem.") What you, and I in comparison, presented was a hasty generalization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasty_generalization), an inductive conclusion based on an extremely small sample size.

I choose a political example to show the absurdity of it, but I could have just as easily chosen Smurfs:
Given Greedy Smurf and Vanity Smurf, it is apparent that the Smurfs systematically encourage the Seven Deadly Sins within their population.

What makes this even more dubious is the small sampling has been cherry-picked (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_picking), too. In other words, the producers of the videos presented only those ACORN workers who "helped" in their illicit plans. They did not also show workers who refused to.

(I realize you consider this an unsupported claim and, at this point, you are correct. However, it is still a possibility. If you aren't already assuming that ACORN is a purely evil and corrupt organization, it is even a likely possibility that some individuals are decent people as much as the ones who were shown in the videos are scumbags.)

At least if this is your sincere viewpoint, as long as you apply your ridiculous threshold for what constitutes corruption equally across the board, I definitely couldn't call you a hypocrite.
If by "ridiculous threshold" you mean "not relying on logical fallacies to support my ideological beliefs", then yes, I do.

[Phrost]

Uhh, Ground Control calling Major Upchurch: the False Dichotomy is "left/right", "conservative, liberal", "Democrat, Republican".

You get that, right?

[Upchurch]

Uhh, Ground Control calling Major Upchurch: the False Dichotomy is "left/right", "conservative, liberal", "Democrat, Republican".

You get that, right?
You need to read more than just the first sentence of a post, Phrost.


...if you're still reading, I didn't say "If you're not a Democrat, then you must be a Republican". Now, go back and actually read my last post before you jump to conclusions.

[GreyICE]

You need to read more than just the first sentence of a post, Phrost.


...if you're still reading, I didn't say "If you're not a Democrat, then you must be a Republican". Now, go back and actually read my last post before you jump to conclusions.

So, 6 pages later, just reading that quote assures me that my decision was well-founded.

[tyr_13]

I've offered you a simple way to prove I'm wrong. Just post a link that names someone other than someone who voted for Obama (a democrat) belonging to ACORN. Like I said, the ball is in your court. If you can't do that, I suggest that's strong evidence that I'm right ... that all four of the people who gave this illegal and unethical "advice" are democrats. :D



Except my claim isn't that they were Republicans. You love you your straw don't you? My claim was that you can't assume that they were Democrats and that your attributing their actions to their political affiliation is ******** of the lowest order.

Boy it seems like I've said that before. Maybe this time he'll read it. Probably not, but I, unlike some other people, try not to make such assumptions.

[Upchurch]

Incidentally, Phrost, this is the false dichotomy you were looking for:
There is no way to prove that every ACORN member is a democrat. Although there is reason to believe that.

But there is a way to prove that at least one ACORN member is a republican. Just link us to a source talking about one.

[leftysergeant]

By the way ...

In the House Republican's July report, the ranking Republican on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform charged that:
[snip] Wild-eyed rant removed to save space[snip]6. ACORN employees have aided and abetted child prostitution in the course of their *duties*.

So an asshat from a red state said it. Got proof?

[Dancing David]

My point was simply that if we're giving tax dollars to private groups they should at least demonstrate that they are using that money wisely and within the law.

No different from the US embassy guards in Kabul who were videotaped in various acts of asshattery and were then fired. I think the company they worked for should maybe lose their federal contracts, even if a hundred married Republican family-value pols get caught propositioning men in public toilets. One has nothing to do with the other.


Hear here!

To my mind it really depends on the oversight and knowledge of such behaviors by employees, if they knew this was happening and it was not addressed then that is a problem.

[Dancing David]

I'm not saying they're corrupt, I am saying they're incompetent. There doesn't appear to be a lot of oversight of the field offices. Many chain stores send people posing as customers to the stores see how they're performing, maybe ACORN should do the same. Especially since they know they're a target, and apparently an easy one.

Well, social service agency budgets aren't quite as exciting as retail budgets.

You usually don't have enough money for anything, and in this case it looks like the training and oversightw as minimal.

[Darat]

Posts discussing or raising issues of moderation either moved or edited - if you wish to discuss a moderation issue please do so in the correct section of the Forum i.e. Forum Management.

[Dancing David]

You don't see the difference between a Parliamentary Democracy and a Presidential one?




I am not sure that I agree with this characterization of the US government.

The power and role of the President have varied widely in US history. And so while I think that we as USers think there is a difference, the issue usually is more about things like our lack of parliamentary style parties and consensus based politics. There are times when there is more of a consensus based model and times when there is direct non-cooperation between the parties.

The power of the POTUS varies and changes, currently we have had a very strong executive side in BushII and now people are getting used to more the 'deal maker' presidency in Obama.

This I think is part of the issue, Eisenhower had much less influence on his Congresses than did GWB, even though he was a very strong president, same for Regan and most 'strong' presidents. GWB had a co-occurance of a new mentality (fostered by Regan) where he had majorities in Congress and a party that was acting unified. This was very unprecedented in many ways, heck I remember times when George Schultz (Sec. of State) openly disagreed with Regan policy and the wonder of a circus that has the House under Tip O'Neil.

[Peephole]

You don't see the difference between a Parliamentary Democracy and a Presidential one?
Huh? How does the system of government have any relevance at all in this issue?
There are entirely reasonable concerns that a "Public (Government) Option" will effectively gut the private insurance market to the point where we're left with nothing but fringe services and a lot less competition.
That's something completely different from a takeover of health care.

Anyways, who cares about the private insurers? They're doing a terrible job in the U.S.
If Social Security's looming bankruptcy and the DHS's (FEMA) historic failure during Hurricane Katrina aren't cause enough for complete overhaul if not dismantling of those components of the Federal Government, then how little change would come from a subtle, "frog in a pot", progressive increase in taxes to support bloated Government-run care?
Bloated? A public health care system would be a lot cheaper because it eliminates the profit motive and the huge overhead costs.

[fuelair]

Uhh, the full version (at least the audio and transcripts) have been made public. Of course you don't trust edited video. But you don't just leave it at that and then use the fact that there was an edited version of an hour+ long conversation as a reason to outright dismiss the entire thing.

IFF you are referring to me, I have not noticably stated a belief on either side yet - and have not seen the full tape or read the transcript - having, frankly, a lot of stuff that needed doing this weekend that precluded putting that kind of time into it.

[quadraginta]

IFF you are referring to me, I have not noticably stated a belief on either side yet - and have not seen the full tape or read the transcript - having, frankly, a lot of stuff that needed doing this weekend that precluded putting that kind of time into it.


(Psst. fuelair. Didn't you know? You're either with 'em or agin' 'em. Ain't no room for wussy, middle-of-the-road wafflin'. The center is the left in right-wing drag.)

[The Painter]

There is plenty of real things to not like about ACORN.

Well now you've piqued my curiosity. What are they?

[Dancing David]

Well for me it is the same blind playing of the same old hash, which I resent on both sides. Poverty is an issue and it tears people apart, eliminating poverty is a great goal, but given the local nature of ACORN stupid stuff happens, I remember when Jesse Jackson (not part of ACORN) came to protest the suspension of gang bangers who got in a high school fight, it pissed me off, they were not suspended for racism they were suspended for gang activity.

That sort of stuff is so ignorant.

ETA:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EPF/is_13_99/ai_58168925/

Now despite the fact that the article says JJ did not mention race and was fighting the zero tolerance policy, he did mention race in the speeches he gave at the time. And he constantly pointed out that race was a factor in expulsions and other discipline. And this is very prevalent in central Illinois, low socio-economic status seems to be associated with more disruptive behavior, and when you have schools that have a high proportion of 'AA' students they are often the focus of discipline. But it is NOT about race, it is about appropriate school behavior.

At the middle schools I worked at 80% of the suspensions went to 20 students (out of 560) one year and all except for one were racially identified as "AA", but the issue was not their race it was their behavior.

Now if ACORN wants to talk about the actual effects of race (whens statistically demonstrated) that is fine, if they want to talk about lack of resources and the impact of poverty that is fine. But I am personally tired of the false race card, there is still very real racism in central Illinois, there are factories that only employee white people, sundowner communities and the like, but the false racism accusations are not helpful.