Tuesday, September 15, 2009

You Can Tell a Lot About People By Who They Choose to Demonize

The current conservative-generated hysteria over ACORN is a perfect example of everything that is wrong with both of our major political parties and the general state of our political discourse. Let's put aside for a moment the Glenn Beck-hyped "sting" videos of ACORN employees supposedly engaged in nefarious behavior (I'll get back to that in minute).  

First, let's take a step back and consider just what ACORN is.  It is a non-profit organization whose mission is to empower and improve the lives of poor people.  As with many other organizations, ACORN has a number of legally distinct parts, each of which has different sources of funding and engages in different kinds of activities (ACORN's conservative enemies routinely conflate these various parts to imply that ACORN is using federal money for improper political purposes). Since its founding the 70s, ACORN and its employees and volunteers have fought successfully to, among other things, increase minimum wages across the country, increase the quality of public education in poor areas, and protect people from predatory lending practices. In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, ACORN helped rebuild thousands of homes and assisted victims in relocating and finding housing outside of New Orleans. The ACORN activity that has drawn the most conservative ire is its voter registration efforts which, consistent with ACORN's mission, are primarily aimed at low-income voters (who tend to vote Democratic).

Republicans have made a lot of breathless claims about ACORN-related voter fraud, most of which do not hold up to investigation or scrutiny. Now Glenn Beck and his minions are hyping a series of "sting" videos taped by conservative activists posing as pimps and prostitutes. As an initial matter, it is worth noting that these videos were shot and edited by people with a clear political agenda. We'll see how this plays out, but having watched the videos, it would not surprise me if they have been edited so as to severely distort and misrepresent what actually happened. The videos do not show a dialogue; the film-makers intersperse their own representations as to what they said with the supposed responses of the ACORN workers. I suspect that they are edited in this way to remove necessary context and make these conversations look worse than they actually were. The ACORN office in California is claiming exactly that, that the employee captured on film was playing along with what she assumed was a joke (and having watched the video, that seems perfectly plausible). I suspect the unedited footage looks very different. Moreover, I virtually guarantee that for every one of these videos aired, there were numerous attempted "stings" in which employees acted appropriately and therefore didn't provide any good footage.

But even if you take these film-makers at face value and assume the worst, the reality is that ACORN has thousands of employees and the vast majority of them spend their days trying to help poor people through perfectly legal means (and receive very little compensation for doing so). Even before yesterday's Senate vote, the amount of federal money that went to ACORN was very small. This is a relatively insignificant organization in the grand scheme of things, but it's an organization that has unquestionably fought over the years to improve the lives of the less fortunate in this country.

That the GOP and its conservative supporters would single out this particular organization for such intense demonization is telling. In September of last year, the entire world came perilously close to complete financial catastrophe. We're still not out of the woods and we're deep within one of the worst recessions in U.S. history. This situation was brought about by the recklessness and greed of our banks and financial institutions, most of which had to be bailed out at enormous cost to the American taxpayer (exponentially more than all of the tax dollars given to ACORN over the years). The people who brought about this near catastrophe, for the most, profited immensely from it. These very same institutions, propped up by the American taxpayer, are once again raking in large profits.

But rather than focus their anger on these folks, conservatives choose to go after an organization composed almost entirely of low-paid community organizers, an organization that could never hope to have even a small fraction of the clout or the ability to affect the overall direction of the country that Wall Street bankers have. ACORN's relative lack of political influence was on full display yesterday, when the U.S. Senate (in which Democrats have a supermajority) not only entertained a vote to defund ACORN, but approved it by a huge margin (with only seven Democrats opposing).

Meanwhile, with a Democratic President elected on a mandate to reform health care and large Democratic majorities in both chambers of Congress, the prospect of meaningful health care reform passing remains doubtful. Why? Because such reform is opposed by very influential lobbies, groups that--unlike ACORN--have the money and the clout to actually affect the lives of average Americans in significant ways.

But thanks to the Glenn Becks of the world, ACORN has now been so demonized that its future as an organization is in doubt. Never fear, though, I'm sure Beck will find some other obscure powerless group to demonize soon.
Digg!

80 Comments:

Blogger dualdiagnosis said...

The whole unedited video is up at Hot Air- http://hotair.com/archives/2009/09/15/fox-news-posts-full-unedited-video-of-sting-on-acorn-san-bernardino/

It's about an hour long. The complete audio and transcripts of previous "encounters" is at BigGovernment.com

The out of context defense doesn't hold up, there are more cringe inducing behaviors on the unedited stuff.

Underage girls (12-15 yrs old)trafficked into sex slavery, their money (they can make extra if they let the johns punch them around)to be used to get a property and the rest to run for office as a Democrat congressperson- All that and more, ACORN employees don't even flinch.

You can tell a lot about people by what activities they choose to defend.

3:41 AM  
Blogger jfrancis said...

The obsession with ACORN is part of an orchestrated attempt by Conservatives to accentuate any example of "blacks behaving badly" to justify their own race-based mistrust of Obama.

ACORN... Kanye West... some kid on a bus... for them, Obama and blackness are one and the same, so whatever any of them does automatically represents the other. ACORN fits this wildly racist meme to a T.

By this token, I'd at least hope Obama would get credit for our gold medal in basketball.

5:03 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

i usually agree with you, al, but the fact is that acorn employees have been caught time and again behaving terribly. while this is unfortunate and should not be conflated with the whole of community organising, it is still bad.
is it as bad as right wing shills like beck and boot lickers like hannity make out? of course not, but defending the indefensible is a an art the right has mastered, lets not try it ourselves.

6:12 AM  
Blogger mls said...

So, as you see it, health care reform is being blocked due to the influence of powerful special interests? As I understand it, most of the powerful institutional players (the drug industry, the hospitals, the AMA, AARP) are supporting healthcare reform, while only the health insurance industry is opposing. Even the insurers are basically in favor of reform, assuming the public option is dropped, because it will mean millions of new government mandated or subsidized customers.

The fact is that Obama worked hard to cut deals with the powerful special interests, thinking that this would smooth the way for passage. For example, he agreed not to permit negotiation of drug prices to get the drug manufacturers on board. As a pure matter of political strategy, he might have been better served by leaving the special interests on the outside, so that he could present this as a fight between the people (represented by him, naturally) versus the powerful, an image the media would have been happy to present if it had a scintilla of plausibility. As it is, the power balance is so lopsided that even the most hardcore Obama supporters are only presenting this scenario half-heartedly.

Accordingly, the preferred theme is that opposition to Obamacare is fed by a kind of mob mentality. Here “the mob” is composed of ignorant, Palin-loving, Fox News- watching, town hall-attending white people who cling to their guns, religion and, for reasons that the media and elite can’t quite put their finger on, healthcare. These unruly yokels are not to be confused with the hardworking and honest silent majority, who are too busy attending SEIU meetings or volunteering at the local ACORN office to be protesting in the streets. Of course, the “silent majority” may not actually be a majority, if numerous public opinion polls are to be believed, but, hey, close enough for government work.

However, I pleased to report that there is an example you can cite of a powerful special interest group that is blocking a popular health care reform measure. According to Howard Dean, the reason that there is no tort reform in the healthcare reform bill is that the people who wrote the bill did not want to take on the trial lawyers. Dean diplomatically presented this as if those people were helpless victims of the trial lawyers, rather than greedy politicians who were taking millions of dollars in contributions from those same lawyers, but I am sure that you will have no difficulty constructing a more sinister portrait. Just match the major legislative players with the campaign contributions they have received from the trial lawyers.

Don’t mention it, I am happy to help.

7:10 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't know about that ... a complete stranger comes into your office, introduces his prostitute girlfriend and asks your help to fund his congressional career by trafficking in underage girls from Central America ... dear reader, what would you say?

7:18 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Here “the mob” is composed of ignorant, Palin-loving, Fox News- watching, town hall-attending white people who cling to their guns, religion and, for reasons that the media and elite can’t quite put their finger on, healthcare."

That's a fairly accurate summary, except for the "media and elite" bit. That wouldn't be Glenn Beck, Rush Lumbaugh, Bill O'Reilly et al, would it?

And don't get your panties in a twist about tort reform. Obama threw it in there just to look good for the independents. No one takes it seriously except for you .. it's just an old sacred cow from the grand old Reagan years. It wasn'ta runner then, and it will never be.

I'd saw Obamacare is looking good right now, and thats what you can't stand.

7:34 AM  
Anonymous SteveAR said...

As with many other organizations, ACORN has a number of legally distinct parts, each of which has different sources of funding and engages in different kinds of activities...

In other words, fronts. Kind of like the Unione Siciliane back in the 1920s and the Italian-American Civil Rights League of the early 1970s. Along with the Teamsters and other unions for several decades.

Republicans have made a lot of breathless claims about ACORN-related voter fraud, most of which do not hold up to investigation or scrutiny.

30 members being convicted of various crimes (usually fraud, typically voter registration fraud) should indicate to anyone with a sense towards the rule of law that ACORN the group has issues. Maybe not with voter fraud itself, but racketeering and corruption issues. It doesn't help that the brother of the founder was allowed to stay on ACORN's payroll for years after he had embezzled a million bucks of the group's money.

We'll see how this plays out, but having watched the videos, it would not surprise me if they have been edited so as to severely distort and misrepresent what actually happened...I suspect the unedited footage looks very different.

dualdiagnosis points to the whole video.

But even if you take these film-makers at face value and assume the worst, the reality is that ACORN has thousands of employees and the vast majority of them spend their days trying to help poor people through perfectly legal means (and receive very little compensation for doing so).

During voter registration drives, the vast majority of ACORN employees are hired temporarily, and, like waiters and waitresses, are not paid minimum wages, encouraged to register Mickey Mouse and cemetary residents to earn a bonus. Not only that, ACORN will not allow these employees to join a union, even the in-the-ACORN-tank SEIU.

But rather than focus their anger on these folks, conservatives choose to go after an organization composed almost entirely of low-paid community organizers, an organization that could never hope to have even a small fraction of the clout or the ability to affect the overall direction of the country that Wall Street bankers have.

In case you missed it, thousands upon thousands of Americans have been protesting those helped create the financial mess the United States is in, the federal government. You know, the jerks that approved the bonuses for bailed out Wall Street bankers and have allowed for these banks to garner this year's profits at the expense of the taxpayer. They are protesting the same jerks who intend to spend the federal government, and America (especially the reason for America's creation), into oblivion.

8:25 AM  
Anonymous SteveAR said...

ACORN's relative lack of political influence was on full display yesterday,...

That's very disingenuous since they have nearly three decades of great political influence, especially at the local level.

Meanwhile, with a Democratic President elected on a mandate to reform health care and large Democratic majorities in both chambers of Congress, the prospect of meaningful health care reform passing remains doubtful. Why? Because such reform is opposed by very influential lobbies, groups that--unlike ACORN--have the money and the clout to actually affect the lives of average Americans in significant ways.

Which lobbies oppose reform? The AMA supports Obamacare, the Federation of American Hospitals supports Obamacare, the American Health Insurance Plan (the health insurance lobby group) supports Obamacare, and Big PhRMA supports Obamacare (after a deal with Obama). Even the AARP has all but said they endorse Obamacare. So, which lobbies oppose Obamacare (which isn't reform, by the way)? Maybe it's the face of evil and spawn of Satan, the everyday American taxpayer.

But thanks to the Glenn Becks of the world, ACORN has now been so demonized that its future as an organization is in doubt.

Good.

8:26 AM  
Anonymous SteveAR said...

mls beat me to it as he indicates that another group (lobbyists?) that supports the health "reform" known as Obamacare: trial lawyers. In fact, I would say the trial lawyers (lobby) really, really likes Obamacare because it invents new avenues with which to enrich themselves. Considering trial lawyers hugely support Democrats, it's no wonder that Democrats will avoid anything that threatens their campaign coffers.

8:59 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

SteveAR said... 30 members being convicted of various crimes....
Numerous Republican politicians have been convicted of crimes which should make the GOP subject to RICO prosecution.
SteveAR said... Considering trial lawyers hugely support Democrats...
Considering that corporate lawyers hugely support the GOP as do their employers, Americans know the the GOP is completely in the pockets of K-Street. It's a given, therefore, that the GOP will prevent any action in which America's 'representatives' will act for voters instead of its financial supporters.
Mike

12:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You can tell a lot about people by what activities they choose to defend.

So when I see posters at a tea bag rally of Obama as Hitler or a witch doctor with a bone through his nose, I can infer that these are not reasoned folks but rather “unruly yokels””… composed of ignorant, Palin-loving, Fox News- watching, town hall-attending white people who cling to their guns”?

12:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Having watched Democratic leadership squander the opportunity they were given in November, I now understand why we aren't working on passing stronger handgun control laws....Democrats need to have something with which to keep shooting ourselves in the feet.

1:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous Two said...

So when I see posters at a tea bag rally of Obama as Hitler or a witch doctor with a bone through his nose, I can infer that these are not reasoned folks but rather “unruly yokels””… composed of ignorant, Palin-loving, Fox News- watching, town hall-attending white people who cling to their guns”?


You betcha! *wink*

3:31 PM  
Blogger C2H50H said...

I'm curious as to what those here who think ACORN is, as a whole, in the wrong here, think as to the pervasiveness of illegality in ACORN is.

After all, in a local city we just had the anti-gang task force disbanded because it was riddled with graft. Yet all the police in it went back to their local departments, and I don't hear people calling for eliminating the police, or even for the police to do a major clean-up. This task force involved perhaps 5 percent of the entire area police force.

And several of the GOP congressional contingent in the last congress have done time or are under investigation. Should the entire GOP contingent cease operations? Oh, wait. They already have, pretty much, as far as positive suggestions go.

I've worked in more than a dozen companies and academic institutions, and I could have exposed people in every single one of them who were involved in activities that were, if not illegal, at least ethically questionable.

So, considering that ACORN has, according to them, about 100,000 in its organization, and fewer than a dozen have been caught in this sting, I just wonder what the big fuss is all about.

The real shocker would have been if this "sting" had been unable to find anybody to expose -- and does anybody here imagine that we would have heard about it if that had been the case?

Let's see what ACORN's response is and judge them on that.

4:06 PM  
Anonymous SteveAR said...

C2H50H:

After all, in a local city we just had the anti-gang task force disbanded because it was riddled with graft. Yet all the police in it went back to their local departments, and I don't hear people calling for eliminating the police, or even for the police to do a major clean-up. This task force involved perhaps 5 percent of the entire area police force.

First off, your comparison is invalid. I equate ACORN with the Mafia, although maybe not as violent. As far as calling for eliminating the police force, come on. But, why wouldn't the city you're talking about get rid of those officers that were involved with graft instead of moving them back to their departments? This sounds like a major political problem. It sounds like a crummy way to run a city, regardless of where it is or the party affiliation of the elected officials.

And several of the GOP congressional contingent in the last congress have done time or are under investigation. Should the entire GOP contingent cease operations?

You mean GOP members of Congress like Chris Dodd, Charles Rangel, Kent Conrad, Harry Reid, John Murtha, Nancy Pelosi, and Dianne Feinstein? Or those GOPers Kwame Kilpatrick, Monica Conyers, Richie Daley, and Rod Blagojevich? Oh wait...those are all Democrats. Kind of like the Democratic President who makes deals with PhRMA. I can't wait to find out how much Obama's campaign coffers received from them.

...I just wonder what the big fuss is all about.

Even Jon Stewart gets it. Stop wondering.

The real shocker would have been if this "sting" had been unable to find anybody to expose -- and does anybody here imagine that we would have heard about it if that had been the case?

I don't know. Andrew Sullivan has been on the case like a religious fanatic for nearly a year to show how Trig Palin is actually Sarah Palin's grandson. While he's gotten absolutely zero evidence proving it, he breathlessly continues to tell everyone how he's still on the job. At least when he isn't smoking weed on federal ground (and getting off thanks to Obama's politicized DoJ), which kind of explains a lot.

Let's see what ACORN's response is and judge them on that.

They have responded. Disgustingly. In typical Democratic fashion, they played the race card.

5:23 PM  
Blogger C2H50H said...

SteveAR,

How is the comparison of ACORN and the police force invalid? Both have been exposed, by sting operations, to contain people who have acted, if not illegally, then certainly in a questionable manner.

Your assertion that ACORN is like the mafia, while the police, apparently, are not, is an example of selective perception. Which organizations have a "code of silence"? (Here's a hint: when ACORN managers discovered wrongdoing by their employees, they notified prosecutors. Policemen and mafia members do not inform on their fellows.) Which are authoritarian in organization?

Oddly, in your list of congressmen, there's no mention of those caught in the Abramoff scandal. I wonder why.

You never make much sense, but this time you seem to be even emptier of rationality.

And you never answered the question: what percentage of ACORN personnel do you think are not law-abiding? Do you think that this percentage is any larger than that of any other large political organization?

5:40 PM  
Anonymous SteveAR said...

C2H50H:

How is the comparison of ACORN and the police force invalid? Both have been exposed, by sting operations, to contain people who have acted, if not illegally, then certainly in a questionable manner.

Think about it logically. Even if the every member of the NYPD were thrown in prison on RICO charges, there would still be an NYPD that would have to be staffed by hopefully honest cops. Either that, or New York City reverts to vigilantism.

Your assertion that ACORN is like the mafia, while the police, apparently, are not, is an example of selective perception.

Actually, it isn't. The police force is a public agency that performs a government function, not a private institution, which is what ACORN and the Mafia are. ACORN cares about the law? They throw a few low-level schmucks to the law to make it look like they care about the law, then don't bother to change their crooked operation. That's very much like the Mafia. The real Mafia, not the one in the movies.

Oddly, in your list of congressmen, there's no mention of those caught in the Abramoff scandal. I wonder why.

Oddly, you didn't bother mentioning any Democratic lawbreakers. So I guess you could say both parties should be RICO'd. What are the odds of that happening? If you guess nil, you're right.

And you never answered the question: what percentage of ACORN personnel do you think are not law-abiding?

I didn't answer because it's irrelevant, like your comment about the GOP (and mine about Democrats) and comparison of ACORN to some police unit made up of many corrupt officers. The whole ACORN organization is corrupt; they aren't just a little bit pregnant. Any law-abiding personnel working for it should leave if they have any scruples.

6:27 PM  
Blogger C2H50H said...

SteveAR,

And there, by your answer to the question, we have "The whole ACORN organization is corrupt; they aren't just a little bit pregnant."

Someone less of a bigot would admit that they do not know how much of ACORN is corrupt.

Based on a few sting successes, you are perfectly happy to damn an organization with 100,000 or so people.

By that standard, you are then forced to condemn the police (and isn't corruption by an official body worse than by an NGO?), the military, Congress, the GOP, as well as most corporations. Even you must admit this.

Unless you want to admit your hypocrisy. I'll be waiting, but I won't be expecting anything.

7:11 PM  
Anonymous Frankie said...

So, which lobbies oppose Obamacare (which isn't reform, by the way)? Maybe it's the face of evil and spawn of Satan, the everyday American taxpayer.

You sure about that Stevie?

7:14 PM  
Blogger Andrew said...

Unless you want to admit your hypocrisy. I'll be waiting, but I won't be expecting anything.

SteveAR has never once shown a shred of intellectual honesty even once in his many, many comments on this website. I know. I've subjected myself to each once of them, and each of his partisan, reason-free screeds are more painful than the last.

7:55 PM  
Blogger Robert said...

The costumes worn by James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles were outrageously over-the-top parodies; they didn't even look like they were trying to look their parts. It's almost as though they're lazy privileged white folk who've never done a real day's work in their lives and wouldn't recognize a sex worker after exchanging money and getting a blow job.

The scenario they spun was equally absurd and over-the-top. Never in the history of the universe have a pimp and prostitute walked into an office filled with strangers and confessed a plan to bring numerous underaged girls into the country for sex work, to steal their belongings, and use the profits to run for office.

Their acting was awful, and most certainly gave away to any sentient being watching them that they were not who they claimed to be.

I can't conceive of anybody believing that James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles were for real. I can't conceive of anyone even believing that they fancied themselves part of a serious sting operation, because they weren't even trying, not even the least little bit, to play a believable part. The level of stupid needed for the ACORN workers to take those two for real simply does not exist, not even in James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles. People who believe that ACORN workers were taken in by these two are crediting those workers with being dumber than mud. After having seen the picture of those two in their "costumes" and having watched one of the videos I can say with 100% confidence that the people calling for ACORN's scalp over this "story" are flaming racists who so hate black people that they can't conceive of a black person being able to see though a perfectly transparent ruse.

8:08 PM  
Blogger Hume's Ghost said...

AL,

I've been writing a series of posts about this topic and have drawn much the same conclusion as you.

I think it worth noting that these "sting" attacks on ACORN are being used to legitimize (in their minds, just listen to AM radio or watch Fox) conservative accusations of voter fraud that have long been demonstrated to bogus accusations politically motivated by the likes of Karl Rove.

It's ultimately an effort to delegitimize the notion of a Democratic administration; it has the same epistemic function as birtherism.

It's also interesting to note the power dynamic in Washington: ACORN can have a handful of employees take the bait of a Borat like entrapment scheme that will never actually happen in the real world (a pimp is never, ever going to walk into an ACORN office and ask for assistance setting up his underage illegal immigrant prostitution ring!) and its time to sever federal financial ties, yet Blackwater employees can kill civilians in Iraq it keeps its contract. Ditto Halliburton and its war profiteering.

12:07 AM  
Blogger Hume's Ghost said...

A KBR employee gets gang-raped, the company tries to cover it up and yet I don't see Beck and the rest talking about that. Imagine what they'd be saying (and the racial subtext) if it happened at ACORN.

About two weeks ago the 19th person working for either a contractor of the US military was killed by faulty electrical wiring. The young man worked for Triple Canopy (Obama's choice of mercenaries) and was hoping to save up enough money to put a downpayment on a home. Not a peep I've heard about that.

And while even the likes of Jon Stewart manages to marvel that no one is covering this amazing "scoop" manufactured by the two young conservative supremacists*, the New York Times quitely broke a real and substantial piece of investigative journalism documenting widespread water contamination across the United States (half a million reported violations in the last 5 years), with the EPA failing to act and the entities responsible for the pollution going unpunished. Yet that doesn't manage to make the news circles.

Hell, a few years ago, KPMG was quietly in the news for helping to defraud the government of billions of dollars of taxpayer money, but I dont' recall Glenn Beck dreaming up conspiracy theories about how KPMG wants to destroy America, or how it used its magical powers to flood New Orleans (like he said ACORN did!) No one was calling KPMG a bunch of thugs. But then again, ACORN helps minorities and poor people register to vote and find affordable housing; the evil nature is so obvious.

Tom DeLay and Ralph Reed were top level power-brokers in the Republican Party while they were lobbying on behalf of the Saipan gov't which was creating wage/sex slaves. That wasn't some stupid Borat scheme involving a fictional bogeyman crime that didn't happen. It was real people. Yet that doesnt' get the same reaction as the ACORN "sting."

Real people are less important when their condition can't serve the purposes of ideological propaganda.

*O'Keefe describes ACORN in rhetoric similar to how anti-Semites describe the supposed nefarious machinations of Jews.

These tactics allow the viewer to see ACORN’s soul; their playing field and their morality, out in the open. Their system is based on conflict and change for its own sake. This system is based on totalitarian principles and class war techniques. These people understand pressure, power and self-interest. When the Baltimore employees saw we were shady dealers, their instincts clicked in, as we were prime recruits.

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. And they create chaos, again, for it’s own sake. It is time for us to be studying and applying their tactics, many of which are ideologically neutral. It is time, as Hannah said as we walked out of the ACORN facility, for conservative activists to “create chaos for glory.


Substitute in "the Jew" for ACORN and you'd have a screed that would fit in well at the Nazi propaganda archive.

12:07 AM  
Blogger Hume's Ghost said...

Something else worth pointing out:

I keep hearing the AM radio crowd and the rest going on and on about "ACORN" promoting underage prostitution.

I've watched all 4 videos and its only the first video which has that it in it. The second video they only mention that have girls from El Salvador (but not their ages) and in the 3rd video Giles tries to trick the woman into a gotcha moment but basically gets her to agree that there are people who prey on young girls.

The 4th video hardly has credibility. One way or another, the employee can't be taken seriously.

12:31 AM  
OpenID eclecticradical said...

While I am sure we disagree on a great many details of the better way to handle health care policy, mls is correct that the manner in which this attempt to reform the health care system has been handled is deeply flawed. Instead of working to pass universal health care, Democrats have been focused on 'universal coverage.' Thus the fact that one of the biggest weaknesses in the current system, the worthlessness of much of the coverage people have when the rubber hits the road, is being addressed in a manner that slaps the insurance companies on the wrist and tells them to play nice. While poll numbers claim to support the personal mandate, I don't think most people trust insurance companies to administer reform.

The lack of conviction on the Democratic side has been met with obvious conviction from the GOP side. Far too many Americans think like Steve and assume a lot of incoherent anger must ultimately have a coherent source. Unfortunately, it's simply the propaganda of the privileged class and the rage of the incoherent combined for the best possible aroma.

This ACORN vote is just another example of the assumption of coherent motivations for incoherent anger among the American public. Someone like Glenn Beck gets cranky on tv and lots of Republicans badmouth the organization and everyone thinks it must mean something that all these people are pissed.

The fact that they are just stupid and/or corrupt rarely comes into play. Sadly, the Bush Administration's conduct in office (and their Congressional cronies') has created such an atmosphere of scandal that people believe everyone in both parties is like that. There is a continued myth of equivalency in the non-political section of the American public. The fact that right wing 'community' groups are corrupt therefore means ACORN must be corrupt too. It's another political group, right?

5:15 AM  
Blogger dualdiagnosis said...

Good News!

More tape coming out today.

ACORN- San Diego.

Acorn official offers to help traffic the child sex slaves through his connections in Tijuana. (!)

And more to come...?

"Chaos For Glory"

Go get 'em James and Hannah- Modern Day Heroes.

5:35 AM  
Anonymous SteveAR said...

C2H50H:

Someone less of a bigot would admit that they do not know how much of ACORN is corrupt.

Based on a few sting successes, you are perfectly happy to damn an organization with 100,000 or so people.


I'm a bigot, eh? Nice try playing the phony-baloney race card. I don't think so. I'm not one who would support throwing billions of taxpayer dollars down the ACORN rathole. I also didn't and don't support throwing tens of billions of dollars down the ratholes of failing Wall Street banks, AIG, GM, Chrysler, or any other mismanaged company, whether it was done by the Bush or Obama administrations.

How corrupt is ACORN? I linked to it earlier, but I'll link to it again. From July 9, 2008:

A whistle-blower forced Acorn to disclose the embezzlement, which involved the brother of the organization’s founder, Wade Rathke.

The brother, Dale Rathke, embezzled nearly $1 million from Acorn and affiliated charitable organizations in 1999 and 2000, Acorn officials said, but a small group of executives decided to keep the information from almost all of the group’s board members and not to alert law enforcement.

Dale Rathke remained on Acorn’s payroll until a month ago, when disclosure of his theft by foundations and other donors forced the organization to dismiss him.

...

But the fact that most of the handful of people who did not disclose the fraud when they learned of it eight years ago still work for Acorn or its affiliates concerns many of the group’s financial supporters.


In a nutshell, an ACORN exec embezzles a million bucks, and is caught by a couple of other execs, including the thief's brother. Instead of notifying law enforcement, the embezzlement is covered up by these execs. Most of ACORN's board and the general public doesn't know anything about it; in fact, the thief remained in his job. For nearly a decade. And most of the people who knew about the theft were allowed to still retained their positions after the thief was fired (and his brother resigned). Plus, ACORN is still set to get over $8 billion in Porkulus money. If ACORN weren't a corrupt organization, all those people would have been fired and turned over to law enforcement for obstruction of justice. That's on top of the recent revelations. So spare me how this has anything to do with me being some kind of bigot because it doesn't wash.

5:45 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

as a an avowed liberal i am appalled that my fellow lefties are using the "its just a few bad apples" defense. we rejected that same defense when right wingers got caught with their hands in the cookie jar, so we must now or have no credibility.

acorn has created a system that helps to foment the kind of bad behavior that keeps getting them busted.

6:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This obsession on ACORN is just a distraction for the conservative rank and file. It's absurd the amount of time Fox News and other "conservative" media have spent on this group.

The American "conservative movement" is an anemic corporate controlled joke- easily distracted by obvious race card ploys like going after a group staffed by poorly paid ghetto dwellers without much sophistication.

Meanwhile they get robbed by a DC insider corporate oligarchy. And if this "Conservative movement" begins to stir to this massive crime before their eyes- Fox News will find some other equally absurd distraction.

The fact of the matter is that all these bailouts are ripe for a real conservative populist critique- but we won't get one. The "Right" in this country is corporate owned.

6:45 AM  
Blogger dualdiagnosis said...

Here we go San Diego videos-

http://biggovernment.com/2009/09/17/acorn-video-prostitution-scandal-in-san-diego-ca/

6:47 AM  
Anonymous SteveAR said...

C2H50H:

By that standard, you are then forced to condemn the police (and isn't corruption by an official body worse than by an NGO?), the military, Congress, the GOP, as well as most corporations. Even you must admit this.

You really play fast and loose with the logic. By your standard, you would disband the police, disband the military, and disband Congress, right? That is what you're saying. I'm not even attempting to say a clean version of ACORN could never exist; it's just that ACORN in its current form is corrupt and needs to go away. You like what ACORN was originally chartered to do, then start a new organization that doesn't engage in corruption. Nothing is stopping you. Then you can hire all those law-abiding ACORN workers.

For the record, corruption by public officials should constitute different criminal statutes than similar acts by individuals in the private sector. For the simple reason that public officials convicted of such crimes are also guilty of violating the public trust. To curb such crimes, I would make those convicted subject to the death penalty, applying it equally to anyone regardless of political persuasion or political affiliation.

Unless you want to admit your hypocrisy. I'll be waiting, but I won't be expecting anything.

Drop the pretense that you're a fair-minded person or someone who applies things equally. It's obvious that you would apply Animal Farm rules for those you favor as being more equal than others. You would RICO the GOP because of the conviction of some members, but you wouldn't RICO the Democratic Party even though an equal number of their members have been convicted of crimes. Admit your hypocrisy. I'm waiting. And before you throw out Jack Abramoff, remember that Bernie Madoff was a Democratic donor. As was Tony Rezko. And Norman Hsu. Admit you're a hypocrite.

7:02 AM  
Blogger C2H50H said...

SteveAR,

No, it's your standard that I was describing. I never condemned any organization as a criminal enterprise because some of the group were caught with their pants down. As I said above, let's see how ACORN deals with this and then judge.

You are just projecting again.

I'll be busy today, so I won't be commenting, but rest assured, I'll be laughing at your drivel.

Oh, and for the concerned guy above, I, too, am concerned. ACORN, overall, has been a positive force in American society. It would be a shame if it can't clean itself up.

I'm with Hume's Ghost and A.L. on this. The selective denigration of ACORN speaks volumes about the critics.

7:21 AM  
Anonymous SteveAR said...

C2H50H:

No, it's your standard that I was describing. I never condemned any organization as a criminal enterprise because some of the group were caught with their pants down.

You're kidding, right? All I have to do is read this thread to see it isn't true. You're saying you don't doesn't wash. It's your standard, not mine.

As I said above, let's see how ACORN deals with this and then judge.

And as I said above, ACORN is dealing with this like they did with the embezzlement; covering it up, covering their butts, and throwing a few sheep to the wolves. In other words, nothing.

I'm with Hume's Ghost and A.L. on this. The selective denigration of ACORN speaks volumes about the critics.

The selective defense speaks volumes as well. Like I said, ACORN isn't just a little bit pregnant. Someone defending ACORN and claiming to be for the rule of law would seem to believe in things that are mutually exclusive, because doing both is absurd. But I'm understanding why someone would defend ACORN and claim to be for the rule of law despite the obvious and sick absurdity of doing so.

8:38 AM  
Blogger nerpzillicus said...

Steve-

I kinda agree with you on this. These are disturbing revelations. However, I agree with the others that this may be a case of "a few bad apples." So how about an investigation? Of course, I'm sure you would agree to an investigation into torture also, to see if the administration there wasn't "just a little bit pregnant," with corruption and lawlessness in that case, or if that was a case of a few bad apples also, right? Certainly your desire for law and order for Acorn is equal to your desire for law and order on the Bush administration, right? Or as Hume mentioned, contractors?

8:56 AM  
Anonymous SteveAR said...

nerpzillicus:

However, I agree with the others that this may be a case of "a few bad apples."

"A few bad apples" that includes the entire ACORN board and executive staff, the people who run ACORN, who, based on the New York Times piece I linked to, condone leaving in place most of the people who helped cover up the Rathke embezzlement. Do you include them as well?

Here's where I stand. No federal taxpayer dollars should go to this group. Period. No public dollars at any level of government should go to this group. Period. All contracts the various levels of government have with ACORN should be terminated immediately, including for voter registration. Period. Any private firms that continue to donate to ACORN will not get my business. I don't care if Congress investigates ACORN, but I don't see it as a good use of the taxpayer's money; dropping financial support via tax dollars and canceling any contracts the various levels of government have with them, including for voter registration, will suffice. If they go out of business, I say call the waaahmbulance. An organization that doesn't seek to let justice be served through the rule of law to punish those at the top who steal the organization's money is, by definition, a corrupt organization, covering up a crime. But it isn't worth the money for the federal government to investigate them if ACORN itself didn't do anything about it; just don't use tax dollars to subsidize them or contract with them. That should be true with governmental dealings with any private organization. Just so you get it, that's any private organization.

Of course, I'm sure you would agree to an investigation into torture also, to see if the administration there wasn't "just a little bit pregnant," with corruption and lawlessness in that case, or if that was a case of a few bad apples also, right?

I've said it's fine to investigate, but a waste of taxpayer money, because it doesn't solve anything. Just make sure everyone involved, including Democratic and Republican members of Congress, part of the co-equal branch of the federal government, are investigated and indicted, if any indictments are brought forth, or it will seen as a politicization of justice.

9:56 AM  
Blogger nrn312 said...

I equate ACORN with the Mafia, although maybe not as violent.

Genius at work.

11:12 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The plain fact of this matter is that the democratic party was asleep at the wheel on this one. The news that ACORN founder Wade Rathke's brother embezzled close to a million dollars from the organizatiom without suffering significant penalties has been out-there for over a year, and yet the Democratic party apparently didn't think this information was significant enough to terminate its relationship with Acorn. This is chickens coming home to roost.

11:19 AM  
Blogger A.L. said...

Please. There have been similar embezzlement scandals at all kinds of organizations, both in the business and non-profit world. There was a major United Way embezzlement scandall just a few years ago. Just because some people within an organization act badly, does't mean the whole things is some kind of sinister conspiracy.

11:25 AM  
Blogger nerpzillicus said...

Steve-

So you are ready to cut all funding to Halliburton, right?
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/19/business/19halliburton.html

Also, any faith-based assistance to the Catholic Church?
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/05/us/05church.html

What's good for the gander, right?

1:05 PM  
Anonymous SteveAR said...

A.L.:

Just because some people within an organization act badly, does't mean the whole things is some kind of sinister conspiracy.

Assuming your hypothesis is correct, does it justify giving taxpayer dollars to such an organization or having the government contract with them?

Look at what you said in your post:

But rather than focus their anger on these folks, conservatives choose to go after an organization composed almost entirely of low-paid community organizers, an organization that could never hope to have even a small fraction of the clout or the ability to affect the overall direction of the country that Wall Street bankers have.

Are you deliberately ignoring why the protests have been occurring, or is it that you truly don't know? You rail against the banks, yet say nothing about the massive bailouts of those same banks and other companies by the federal government, all without any meaningful recovery of those funds. This isn't just about Obama, but what was done under Bush as well. But Obama is the President now. The economy would be well on the way to a real recovery if the government hadn't made those bailouts of the banks, AIG, GM, Chrysler, etc.; and the execs of those banks you complain about would be out of the way. It's the government that has allowed many of those individuals to stay where they are.

These protests, and much of Beck's show (if you ever watch it), is about the insane spending by the federal government, and who is getting the money, whether it's corrupt Wall Street bankers or those who are corrupt in ACORN. The common thread are those in government who are giving our tax dollars to these organizations. And the American people are sick of it, as well they should be.

Why didn't it happen when Bush was President? Easy. Even in the worst of his fiscal irresponsibility, he didn't quadruple deficit spending in one fell swoop, with a vast increase in deficit spending being planned in ridiculous bills that will cost way more and do way less than advertised. That is what happened with Porkulus; Obamacare and cap-and-tax will be no different. That is what Obama has and is doing.

1:07 PM  
Anonymous SteveAR said...

nerpzillicus:

What's good for the gander, right?

You're hopeless. Thanks for continuing to confirm it. When I said earlier "Just so you get it,...", you obviously don't.

1:12 PM  
Blogger nerpzillicus said...

Steve -

Two things:
First, I guess I am hopeless, as I'm not sure if you are saying you agree that we should cut off any federal funds or contracts for Halliburton and the Catholic Church. Since you said any private organization, I assume you agree, until I hear otherwise.

Second, I read with great interest the article you linked to. In light of the recent town halls and DC protests, I found this passage, explaining the thought process of "Modern Liberals" most illuminating:

So what you're left with is not really adults, but citizens of voting age who cannot judge their own positions but are virulently antagonistic to any posi­tion other than their own. Why? Because when you've been brought up to believe that indiscrimi­nateness is a moral imperative, any position other than their own must have been arrived at through the employment of discrimination. This is why Bush is Hitler; this is why Reagan is Hitler; this is why Giuliani is Hitler.

Yes, yes. So true. And relevant.

1:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, yes. So true. And relevant.

But that only applies to LIBERALS.

Those protesters with the Obama as a bone-through-his-nose witch doctor placards are merely fighting "the insane spending by the federal government, and who is getting the money, whether it's corrupt Wall Street bankers or those who are corrupt in ACORN".

It's a matter of priorities. After all, how many bone-through-the-nose folks work on Wall St.?

2:33 PM  
Blogger A.L. said...

The economy would be well on the way to a real recovery if the government hadn't made those bailouts of the banks, AIG, GM, Chrysler, etc.

Thank, SteveAR, master economist. Nothing makes me madder than the fact that we had to bailout all these reckless idiots, but it really takes an astounding level of obliviousness to assert--confidently--that the economy would be in better shape right now if we had let the financial system implode. I'm glad you'll likely never know how wrong you are.

2:37 PM  
Blogger D Hammontree said...

You're kidding, right? All I have to do is read this thread to see it isn't true. You're saying you don't doesn't wash. It's your standard, not mine.

Wow. Say what you want about SteveAR's poor reasoning skills - he apparently doesn't even know how to read.

Steve: "ACORN should be disbanded because of a few bad apples."

C2: "Would you apply the same standard to the NYPD and disband IT because of a few bad apples?"

Steve: "How dare you advocate disbanding the NYPD!"

Good lord, what a moron.

3:18 PM  
Anonymous SteveAR said...

A.L.:

Nothing makes me madder than the fact that we had to bailout all these reckless idiots, but it really takes an astounding level of obliviousness to assert--confidently--that the economy would be in better shape right now if we had let the financial system implode.

I forgot. Being a lawyer is exactly the same as being a master economist.

Besides, how do you actually know the financial system was going to implode? Did you get that from Bush and Paulson? Because I don't believe them. I'm not sure why you would. But hey, you're a lawyer. Which is the same as being a master economist.

3:19 PM  
Anonymous barkleyg said...

"If the prosecutor is obliged to choose his cases, it follows that he can choose his defendants. Therein is the most dangerous power of the prosecutor: that he will pick people that he thinks he should get, rather than pick cases that need to be prosecuted"

This quote is from Robert H. Jackson in his speech to the country's USA's in 1941.

Obviously, Beck aint any where near a prosecutor, or even a human being, but this essay by Jackson , to me, represents common sense and integrity in the prosecution of the law.

People should read this essay, titled "The Federal Prosecutor" by a future Supreme Court Justice. Compare the theories that the essay discusses with the Bush Monarchy's use of the DOJ during the last 8 years.

http://www.roberthjackson.org/Man/theman2-7-6-1/

3:40 PM  
Blogger C2H50H said...

SteveAR,

If you imagine anyone here would entertain, for even a millisecond, the idea that your understanding of anything can be compared with A.L.'s, your delusions are becoming dangerous.

Seek help.

3:48 PM  
Anonymous SteveAR said...

nerpzillicus:

First, I guess I am hopeless, as I'm not sure if you are saying you agree that we should cut off any federal funds or contracts for Halliburton and the Catholic Church. Since you said any private organization, I assume you agree, until I hear otherwise.

I'm sorry, was the understanding of the English language removed from law school or something? Hell, I even wrote it twice, to be completely unambiguous. You can assume what you want, but I wrote it in such a way so you wouldn't have to assume anything.

4:21 PM  
OpenID eclecticradical said...

Bank bailouts are frequently vile and disgusting things, but sometimes they are necessary. Herbert Hoover bailed out the banks during the Great Depression and, while the bank bailout by itself wasn't enough to really help the economy in the short term, it's highly doubtful the New Deal would have been as successful as it was if the country's financial system had still been insolvent. Saving Wall Street doesn't directly and immediately help Main Street, but it prevents Wall Steet from being a drag on economic recovery efforts for Main Street.

This doesn't require a master economist to understand... just someone who took both Microeconomics and Macroeconomics for a semester each in college.

The sad thing is how many purported master economists remember their 101 but not their 102.

4:24 PM  
Blogger nerpzillicus said...

Steve -

Yet somehow I am still not sure. "Unambiguous" means "clear". You said I was hopeless, and then cited to a ludicrous and hysterically incoherent thesis on how liberals think. I gotta be honest, I am still not sure how to take that, or what you mean.

On the lighter side, here is another highlight from the speech:


But to the folks at The New York Times, there is no objective difference between the terrorist and the freedom fighter. So why do we teach our children that George Washington is a hero? The only possible explanation is that he is a white Christian of Euro­pean descent. If there is no difference between the behaviors of the freedom fighters and the terrorists, then why do we teach that Yasser Arafat and Sadd­am Hussein are villains? There can be no other rea­son than they are darker-skinned Muslims of Middle Eastern birth.

Under this logic, wouldn't "Modern Liberals" expect that we teach our children that Hitler was a hero? ("white Christian of European descent"?) Or if Hitler was evil, that he was actually a "darker-skinned Muslim of Middle Eastern birth?" (making his opinions on the superiority of certain races really, really interesting!). If so, by comparing Bush to Hitler as the erudite speaker described above, wouldn't "Modern Liberals" be comparing him to a hero? Oh, my undiscriminating liberal mind is so confused! Thankfully, the speaker clears up why I'm so confounded-


here's a brilliant book out there called The Clos­ing of the American Mind by Professor Allan Bloom. Professor Bloom was trying to figure out in the 1980s why his students were suddenly so stupid, and what he came to was the realization, the recog­nition, that they'd been raised to believe that indis­criminateness is a moral imperative because its opposite is the evil of having discriminated. I para­phrase this in my own works: "In order to eliminate discrimination, the Modern Liberal has opted to become utterly indiscriminate."

I'll give you an example. At the airports, in order not to discriminate, we have to intentionally make ourselves stupid. We have to pretend we don't know things we do know, and we have to pretend that the next person who is likely to blow up an airplane is as much the 87-year-old Swedish great-great-grand­mother as those four 27-year-old imams newly arrived from Syria screaming "Allahu Akbar!" just before they board the plane. In order to eliminate discrimination, the Modern Liberal has opted to become utterly indiscriminate.

The problem is, of course, that the ability to dis­criminate, to thoughtfully choose the better of the available options--as in "she's a discriminating shopper"--is the essence of rational thought; thus, the whole of Western Europe and today's Democrat­ic Party, dominated as it is by this philosophy, rejects rational thought as a hate crime.


See disliking "discrimination" against, say, a black person necessarily means I refuse to "discriminate" in my reasoning as a "discriminating shopper" would. It's the same word - there can't be a different meaning based on context! Zang! This guy is good. Please read the whole thing - he definitively proves the "Modern Liberal" can't think rationally because the songs "Goodbye Stranger" by Supertramp and "Imagine" by John Lennon has made those of the liberal persuasion mindless five-year-old zombies. I would be impressed, but I apparently lack the mental faculties to be so.

4:54 PM  
Anonymous SteveAR said...

nerpzillicus:

Yet somehow I am still not sure. "Unambiguous" means "clear".

I would be impressed, but I apparently lack the mental faculties to be so.

I'm sure you'll figure it out some day, including everything in that piece.

5:22 PM  
Blogger C2H50H said...

SteveAR,

I've already figured out everything in that piece. It was written by a person who couldn't compete, who failed as profoundly as the utterly ridiculous "Ben Stein's Money" that he wrote for, and so decided to get some of Ann Coulter's money instead of Ben Stein's.

It is one long stream of idiocy. Much like your comments here.

5:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So Steve, admittedly a dilettante on the field of economics, is absolutely certain that the bank bailout has curtailed the economic recovery.

Wow.

6:34 PM  
Anonymous SteveAR said...

C2H50H,

Oh really? If you read A.L.'s whole post, one would realize he has spent no time (at least at the time of the post's writing) watching the full, unedited videos that are available (dualdiagnosis helpfully provides a link). A.L. goes out of his way to say the ACORN workers are victims of entrapment, paying lip service to the idea that what was caught on video was true. A.L. wants readers to believe that conservatives are only going after "a relatively insignificant organization in the grand scheme of things" that has almost no political clout and has never done anything wrong (he never mentions the ACORN embezzlement scandal, nor that they are set to receive over $8 billion in Porkulus money). A.L. makes it a point to say conservatives are only going after the "poor" and "powerless" ACORN. Yet there is no mention, none, of the protests by thousands upon thousands of Americans, Americans who were protesting not only the insane government spending over the last several months, but also the recipients of all that largesse, especially the banks and the vast array of special interests. At least A.L., in this case, didn't add the inflammatory and false charge so many others are willing to wield. But then again, he doesn't have to since he provides only an extremely narrow portrait of the events of the past couple of months, a portrait that ignores significant events showing the opposite of the point of his post.

I think the piece I linked to is quite à propos to the discussion.

7:17 AM  
Blogger A.L. said...

Steve,

If you want to know why I don't engage with you, it's because you are immune to facts. Just to take an obvious example, you keep asserting that ACORN was "set to receive $8 billion" from the stimulus bill. That's just not remotely true. ACORN is not mentioned in the stimulus bill and was set to receive ZERO dollars from it. There is a pot of money in the bill earmarked for neighborhood revitalization in certain areas, but it is a) much smaller that $8 billion and b) ACORN had not applied for and does not appear to have been eligible to apply for any of those funds. Moreover, even if it were, there is way in the world it would have received all or even most of that money.

There is no point arguing with people who invent their own facts.

8:50 AM  
Blogger C2H50H said...

SteveAR,

So you apparently believe that "thousands upon thousands" of people protested ... something (I've never heard a coherent explanation of what, exactly, these people are against, except "Obama", which fits in with your own opposition, composed of mindless, free-floating fear of anything and everything that is associated with the Democratic Party).

Perhaps you hadn't heard that, according to the Washington Post, the number of 9/12 protesters was closer to 20-30 thousand than any of the numbers imagined by the idiots over at hotair?

You do know that there are 300 million people in this country. Even 100k is an insignificant fraction, 3 hundredths of one percent. 30k is 1 in 10000. Even allowing for a 10 passive for 1 active protester, that's a tenth of one percent.

Perhaps you were there and can give us a definitive head count? Never mind. If your math skills are on a par with your reading and comprehension -- which we have reason to believe is the case -- your answer will be meaningless.

8:58 AM  
Blogger nerpzillicus said...

Steve-

A.L. goes out of his way to say the ACORN workers are victims of entrapment, paying lip service to the idea that what was caught on video was true. A.L. wants readers to believe that conservatives are only going after "a relatively insignificant organization in the grand scheme of things" that has almost no political clout and has never done anything wrong (he never mentions the ACORN embezzlement scandal, nor that they are set to receive over $8 billion in Porkulus money).

And that was my point with Halliburton and the Catholic Church. Halliburton has certainly received more than $8 billion (which is, of course, another lie – ACORN may have been eligible for up to$8 billion in stimulus money, meaning they could have applied for grants, etc. that totaled that much. Of course, a whole host of other organizations would also be applying for that money, so the odds of ACORN getting even a large percentage of that is slim to none. But facts are not important to conservative talking points – don't you realize you undermine your entire argument when you treat easily refuted falsehoods as sacrosanct truth? Again, must be the undiscriminating - “eligible” vs. “set to receive” - liberal in me talking. Also, not bad for an organization which has only gotten about $53 million total since 1993. It's only an 1,212 times annual increase! Sounds plausible to me!) and has had tons of embezzlement scandals, like the one I linked to.

p.s. Your unwillingness to simply state whether you approve or disapprove of cutting off funds implies your opinion to me.

A.L. makes it a point to say conservatives are only going after the "poor" and "powerless" ACORN. Yet there is no mention, none, of the protests by thousands upon thousands of Americans...

So with all the protests, you think the best use of time and resources is to go after a small potatoes organization. How about Blackwater, which gets way more money, and actually has been implicated in crimes involving real, as opposed to hypothetical, child prostitutes? What about more attacks on the wall street bailouts, etc? That's AL's point – not that the video didn't show something questionable, but that there are way bigger fish to fry.


I think the piece I linked to is quite à propos to the discussion.

I thought it was a pretty funny diversion. I see why the guy is a comedy writer. That stuff's golden! Here's another classic:


There was a book that came out at just about the same time as Professor Bloom's that in some ways even better describes and explains the mindset of the Modern Liberal. It was Robert Fulghum's All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten, and it reads like the bible of Modern Liberalism and the playbook of Democratic Party policy.

The sentence fragment "Don't hit," which is one of the lessons that Fulghum refers to, has morphed into an entire sentence now that they're adults: "War is not the answer." But they don't really need to know anything, because even though they know about Neville Chamberlain and what happens if you appease evil, they don't really need to know it because knowing it or not knowing it would not have changed the position they have now and have held unquestioned since they were five.


See, liberals are undiscriminating and thoughtless because they couldn't see that Neville Chamberlain's appeasement of an expansionist Hitler is exactly the same as opposing a war against an isolated and weaponless Saddam Hussain. Inability to discriminate is truly the liberals Achilles' heel! Brilliant!

I mean, Steve, that whole diatribe is so hysterically un-self-aware, internally contradictory, and laughably poorly thought out, that I wonder if Colbert wrote it himself. When its impossible to distinguish satire from “argument”, it is not looking good for conservative thought, IMHO.

9:09 AM  
Blogger C2H50H said...

Nerp,

There's a delicious irony in SteveAR's approving link to a guy who is obviously fellating, for wing-nut welfare, a bunch of folks at the Heritage, the mother of all prostitutes, while excoriating ACORN for accepting prostitutes and pimps.

The utter lack of intellectual honesty and self-awareness amuses this cynical old guy, for one.

10:12 AM  
Blogger nerpzillicus said...

C2-

Indeed. And I find nothing funnier than a man who accuses others of the ability to not think rationally, by arguing:
1) strawmen ("Modern Liberals" do not think Saddam Hussein was evil)
2) false dilemma - ("Modern Liberals" opposed the Iraq war, we must go to war with evil, "Modern Liberals" don't think Saddam Hussein was evil)
3) false equivalency - Appeasing Hitler is the same as not going to war against Saddam
4) equivocation - "discrimination" in the legal sense is the same as "discrimination" in the perceptive sense.

As I said, you can't write satire better.

10:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The truth is lobbyist or no lobbyist, id the dems all were behind HR 3200-they could pass it. We didn't want it when Clinton was in office and we do not want it now. Quit playing the race card, it is getting old and Obama hasn't done it, why should anyone who follows him?

11:43 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Quit playing the race card, it is getting old and Obama hasn't done it, why should anyone who follows him?

What race card are you referring to?

Is it the teabag posters of Obama as a bone-through-his-nose witch doctor that I've mentioned before?

Or perhaps the teabag depictions of him with fat lips, big ears and a monkey-like pose?

Maybe you're thinking of the teabag sentiment that Obama should go back to Africa?

I'd love to point to any one of the bastions of right wing punditry who have steadfastly decried this racist crap. Sadly, I can't find any.

You should direct your concerns about the race card their way.

1:40 PM  
Anonymous SteveAR said...

A.L.:

If you want to know why I don't engage with you, it's because you are immune to facts.

Let me just say that what you call facts are, to put it generously, highly subjective statements. Your post is proof of that. So is this statement:

There is a pot of money in the bill earmarked for neighborhood revitalization in certain areas, but it is a) much smaller that $8 billion and b) ACORN had not applied for and does not appear to have been eligible to apply for any of those funds.

C2, nice cherry-picking of one WaPo piece to determine the numbers of people at the protest. I'm waiting for some honesty, any honesty, intellectual or otherwise, out of you.

nerpzillicus:

p.s. Your unwillingness to simply state whether you approve or disapprove of cutting off funds implies your opinion to me.

Your unwillingness to understand a direct statement, written twice, in English, confirms what I said earlier about law schools. And what Mr. Sayet wrote.

2:13 PM  
Blogger C2H50H said...

SteveAR,

The WaPo reporters were there, and they estimated the crowd. Where do your numbers come from? I'm guessing the rear end of Michele Malkin, who wasn't there -- and can't be trusted anyway.

2:27 PM  
Anonymous SteveAR said...

C2,

Are you kidding me? I'm not going to play that game.

Here's the relevant statement from the WaPo piece you linked to earlier, some question and answer session with White House reporter Michael Fletcher:

9/12 crowds: Hello, Michael. Thanks for taking questions. What is the best and most educated guess about the size of the crowds in DC on Sept. 12? There is quite a discrepancy between 60,000 and 2 million. Why is it so hard to get a good estimate?

Michael A. Fletcher: Both of those sound high, and clearly the second number is way, way high. My colleagues say it was in the tens of thousands, probably around 20,00 or 30,000 although it is hard to tell and police did not release an estimate.


That sounds like Fletcher wasn't at the protest. He says he got the numbers from others. My guess is he didn't get it from the people who actually reported on the event, the ones who said "Tens of thousands of conservative protesters...massed outside the U.S. Capitol on Saturday..." I would say that is a bit larger than Fletcher's 20-30,000. And if you look at who did the reporting, Fletcher's name isn't there, either as a writer or contributor. But I have no doubt that you consider Fletcher's number gospel after pulling it out of his rear end.

Like I said, I'm waiting for some honesty, any honesty, intellectual or otherwise, out of you.

4:28 PM  
Blogger C2H50H said...

SteveAR,

Which behavior is "playing a game"?

A) giving citations to statements by reporters who were in a position to know, or

B) refusing to give any supporting information, and trying to pretend that "tens of thousands" must mean more than 20-30k (which, if my arithmetic is calibrated, would seem to be "tens of thousands")?

You seem to get an awful lot of your "facts" by reading the minds of other people, and especially people you don't even know.

5:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Putting aside whether the employees thought they were part of a Punk'd/Colbert/Daily Show/etc. prank (how could you fall for that guy pretending to be a pimp? He makes Jaime Kennedy look "thug"), people talking about "context" should be as clear as the lady that heads ACORN was when she was on CNN yesterday [paraphrased]:

"What you didn't see is how many times they got thrown out or the times when other ACORN employees didn't fall for the act".

Which is a good point. I'd also like to see how indignant people leaving the "OMG underage hookers" comments get about the billions we send to contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan being used for underage prostitutes. How about the regular raping of girls and women - both underage and "legal" - committed by U.S. soldiers everywhere from Colombia to Japan?

You can't get pompous and self righteous only when Glenn Beck tells you to, kids.

5:17 PM  
Anonymous SteveAR said...

C2:

A) giving citations to statements by reporters who were in a position to know...

Was Mitchell there? It sure didn't seem that way. Did you seem him at the protest? Or were you not there either?

B) refusing to give any supporting information...

That is the game I'm talking about. I could link to one report or a thousand reports giving higher numbers and you would dismiss them. Because that is what you do. You don't do it out of some kind of rational thought. You just dismiss them. So, I'm not playing your game.

You seem to get an awful lot of your "facts" by reading the minds of other people, and especially people you don't even know.

Really? I'm not the one putting numbers out from someone who was likely not even at the protest. That would be you.

5:39 PM  
Blogger C2H50H said...

SteveAR,

No, you can't link to anything like a discussion, with a reporter in DC, who reported, based on what his colleagues said, the actual numbers.

That's obvious.

As is your dishonesty and childishness.

How do you feel about the fact that, under George W. Bush, the Interior Department appears to have become a corporate-sponsored criminal organization, yet you and a lot of the right are obsessing about ACORN.

5:52 PM  
OpenID eclecticradical said...

"How do you feel about the fact that, under George W. Bush, the Interior Department appears to have become a corporate-sponsored criminal organization, yet you and a lot of the right are obsessing about ACORN."

Clearly, Steve believes ACORN is Obama's SS. For all his pretensions of conservatism, when one listens to him actually get on his soapbox he sounds an awful lot like some of the Larouche crowd. Which explains the rest of his 'opinions' and 'facts' quite well.

I suppose it's ad hominem, but I think in this case it's very much germane to the debate: Steve believes that everything Glenn Beck speaks is truth and everything that we speak is untruth.

One cannot argue with that kind of mentality, one can only subject it to the scorn or pity it deserves as one is moved by one's own conscience.

7:04 PM  
Anonymous SteveAR said...

C2:

As is your dishonesty and childishness.

Right. That's rich coming from those who can't accurately describe what the past weekend's protests were about, what the anger at the town hall meetings was about, what the tea party protests were all about. It is as if those who dismiss these actions can't conceive of why anyone would protest the government being led by the left's one true god and his high priest and high priestess, childishly and immaturely naming the protesters with some obscure sexual reference, "teabaggers".

These are the same people who describe ACORN as a pure-as-the-driven-snow organization with just a few "bad apples". Except that the top ranks of this pure-as-the-driven-snow organization covered up embezzlement by one of its top executives (and kept the thief on the job for nearly 10 years after the theft was discovered), 30 of its members are in jail for fraud, and members of the organization are under indictment for crimes in about a dozen or so states. That's on top of the very recent revelations. The current CEO was supposedly put in to clean up ACORN's act; if she is doing anything, it doesn't seem to be working, and I doubt she's doing anything other than continuing the cover-up (her "independent" review is being done by two Democrats, one of whom was guilty of lying to the FBI, the ethically-challenged SEIU head who has ties to Wade Rathke, one of ACORN's cover-up artists, and a Soros lackey; I'm sure this group will get to the bottom of things; NOT!!!). That's a bit more than just a few "bad apples". If ACORN is "pure as the driven snow", then I suspect the "snow" must be a reference to cocaine.

I'll say it again, I'm waiting for some honesty, any honesty, intellectual or otherwise, out of you.

eclecticradical:

For all his pretensions of conservatism, when one listens to him actually get on his soapbox he sounds an awful lot like some of the Larouche crowd.

Let me know when you understand what an actual conservative is (which I am), as opposed to your Godwin-like theory of one.

8:45 AM  
Blogger C2H50H said...

SteveAR,

Amuse us. Explain, briefly, what the teabagger protests were about. Give us the ideological underpinnings that drove all those people to take time out from collecting Social Security and unemployment to carry pictures of Obama as Hitler, Obama as the joker, etc.

While you're at it, perhaps you could elucidate what an actual "conservative" believes -- because your support for torture, warrantless government eavesdropping, and the like, doesn't seem to fit.

What we see from your comments here is nothing more than a caricature of a "conservative", with no facts, no coherent ideology, and in fact barely enough humanity to pass a Turing test.

Apparently, being a "conservative" involves outrageous strawman arguments: These are the same people who describe ACORN as a pure-as-the-driven-snow organization with just a few "bad apples". Nobody here claimed that.

You still have never answered why you aren't as outraged over any of a dozen other organizations with far more power, but fewer people of color, such as KBR, Blackwater, the Bush Department of the Interior, not to mention the GOP, all of which have more than a few "bad apples".

Until you can explain your strangely selective outrage, you should expect to be treated as nothing but an unintentional comedian. And I'll continue to point that out.

9:04 AM  
Anonymous SteveAR said...

C2:

Amuse us. Explain, briefly, what the teabagger protests were about.

I already did, in my first comment on this thread.

Just keep talking. You're giving this some serious mileage.

Apparently, being a "conservative" involves outrageous strawman arguments: These are the same people who describe ACORN as a pure-as-the-driven-snow organization with just a few "bad apples". Nobody here claimed that.

A.L. did. In the post.

You still have never answered why you aren't as outraged over any of a dozen other organizations with far more power, but fewer people of color, such as KBR, Blackwater, the Bush Department of the Interior...all of which have more than a few "bad apples".

It's called staying on topic. As far as KBR, Blackwater, and the Bush Department of the Interior are concerned, they aren't topics pertaining to A.L.'s post. Take it up with A.L. if you think he should do so.

...not to mention the GOP,...

And this is why I still await any honesty from you. I have chastised, and will continue to chastise, those members of the GOP who do wrong. Again, that isn't the topic of this post from A.L. However, I never hear the same from you about Democrats. Any Democrats. Ever. Because that is what you do. You don't do it out of some kind of rational thought. You don't even complain of Democrats' support of warrantless government eavesdropping or their support of so-called "torture" (and don't say they don't; the IG report shows they did).

Like I said earlier in this comment, just keep talking. You're giving this some serious mileage.

10:02 AM  
Blogger C2H50H said...

SteveAR,

You obviously can't recall the criticism of Obama's FISA reform bill gamesmanship last year, or any of the other times Democrats have been criticized here.

No surprise there. Selective perception is one of your lesser intellectual failings.

Please point out where anybody here said that, except for a few "bad apples", ACORN was "as pure as the driven snow".

Since the topic of the post was the odd way that ACORN is being demonized by the right, I don't think you are fooling anyone by pretending that it's not "on topic" to discuss why you aren't outraged by KBR, etc. That's even more dishonest than your usual half-truths.

You've already said what "conservatives" believe? You mean that incoherent ramble, about government spending, above? I took that for the effects of a minor stroke, but you apparently are saying you still would say the same thing?

As per above comments, I feel a certain pity for anyone as cognitively deficient as you, mixed with a fair amount of disgust that, in spite of how many times and by how many people you've been shown that you know next to nothing about anything, and cannot coherently defend what little you do understand, you continue to come here and regurgitate your wretched right-wing blather.

It's been fun, and thanks for playing the village fool.

I've extracted what amusement I want for now, and you've flushed any credibility you might have had on this thread down the toilet. You really should ponder that before you set out again on one of these odysseys of idiocy in another thread.

11:02 AM  
Anonymous Mike Lamb said...

Steve--

Let me get this straight...~100 people (heck let's call it 300) out of an organization of 100,000 (conservatively speaking) that have committed illegal or unethical acts makes an entire organization corrupt? And you are really going to argue that you'd apply this same standard to organizations you support or that at least share a conservative bent? For example, what is your position on the Catholic Church, which has more evidence of "bad apples", and FAR MORE evidence of a "cover up" coming from up on high. The same argument can be made about the military and torture. So please, spell it out. I am asking directly--why is ACORN deserving of different treatment either in terms of social stigma or receiving funding than the Catholic Church? Why can you so casually throw around mafia comparisons to ACORN but not the Catholic Church?

12:26 PM  
OpenID eclecticradical said...

'Let me get this straight...~100 people (heck let's call it 300) out of an organization of 100,000 (conservatively speaking) that have committed illegal or unethical acts makes an entire organization corrupt?'

CONSERVATIVE blogger Jenn Q Public claims that ACORN has 350 employees and claims 9 were nailed in the sting. She gives the figure this represents as 3.6 %. Proportionally, this is a bit larger than 100 out of 100,000... but it also casts light on what a tiny organization is being cast as the villain of the Obama administration and how ill-equipped they really are to defend themselves against right-wing bully tactics.

Of course, being a conservative blogger, Jenn Q Public argues that 3.6% of an organization being 'corrupt' is proof the entire organization is evil.

While the right wing has attacked BIG 'liberal' groups like the ACLU MoveOn.Org, and others they have not shown the power to hurt these organizations because they can defend themselves. They have been able to do so much damage to ACORN precisely because it is so small and powerless. That says as much about the people we're talking about as does the fact that they are choosing to demonize an organization devoted to integrating the poor into American society.

3:42 PM  
Blogger C2H50H said...

EclecticRadical,

According to the ACORN web site, ACORN has four hundred thousand families.

It would appear that there is a larger divergence between the low estimate and the high estimate (a factor of 1000) than the divergent estimates for the teabagger 9/12 demonstrations (only 100).

My guess is that ACORN is a fairly soft target because none of the "families" that make it up have names like Rockefeller, Scaife, Koch, or Kennedy, who can pull on the levers of power.

4:03 PM  
Blogger Bongo Bob said...

One thing that the trolls here fail to mention is that the ignorant ACORN employees didn't set out to do anything wrong. They were bullied by the undercover film crew into helping with their "special circumstance."
How many employees of other organizations would fall for this type of entrapment? Probably a small percentage, just as with ACORN.
Bertha Lewis should have been more on top of the fact that the GOP would do ANYTHING to destroy them... why? Because they are really good at registering minority voters, who tend to vote Democratic. She should have had ALL volunteers & employees realize that EVERY single transaction must be done as if you're being watched.
If ACORN does go down because of this stupidity, another community organization will take its place, advocating for the poor & registering poor voters: because the need has never been greater.

6:03 AM  
Blogger Bradley said...

C2h50h.. You confuse me. You profess intelligence and integrity--insofar as you claim to represent it in your comments--and then turn around using an ad hominem fallacy against Steve. The erudite world would appreciate you not misrepresenting logic by engaging in fallacious arguments and proposing that others' logic is somehow faulty.

As for A.L... You denigrate Steve in a concealed way by mocking his inability to discuss economics because he is no "master economist," when you, a lawyer, have no better qualifications on the matter.

This entire thread is replete with a mob mentality against conservatives, willful ignorance, and invalid arguments. It is unnecessary, I suppose, to make points that have a factual basis when the majority of your fellows agree with you.

I will patiently await a reply wherein bad logic and a convoluted perception will somehow prove me ignorant.

2:02 AM  
Anonymous Eclectic Radical said...

'CONSERVATIVE blogger Jenn Q Public claims that ACORN has 350 employees and claims 9 were nailed in the sting. She gives the figure this represents as 3.6 %. Proportionally, this is a bit larger than 100 out of 100,000... right-wing bully tactics.'

These figures are a misquote. ACORN /Housing/ has /250/ employees, according to its own statements as quoted by Jenn Q Public. The '350' is a typo and the word 'Housing' was dropped during transcription. It should read '250.' The figure of 3.6% is correct.

ACORN itself employs 750 people on staff, including part time employees. This would reduce nine employees to 1.2% of ACORN's staff. Still more than '100 out of 100,000' but an even less significant percentage than the higher figure for ACORN Housing.

Jenn Q Public informed me of the error in the course of an argument on another topic, so I immediately posted this correction.

1:22 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home