Well you posted that 5 minutes after I posted 4 videos all longer than 5 minutes.

Support of underage illegal immigrant sex slavery? Enh! A pittance, must be staged.

And again we see how partisan thinking is not critical thinking.

"Spread the facts on the floor like a fan
throw away the ones that make you feel bad"
- Ben Folds, "Bastard"

Who exactly would you expect to investigate this? What nonpartisan journalists are there? Just because they are from "the other side" doesn't precipitate your denial. At least admit it LOOKS REALLY BAD!

I admit to not reading or watching everything posted from partisan sources.

Without viewing it, I said if ACORN committed a crime, it should be investigated..and it if was staged, it should be investigated.

Well this one was not posted by any partisan source, this one was posted by me, and you know me.

This is why, IMO, its a waste of time to discuss ACORN here.

I am labeled a partisan for waiting for the facts..and yet, no such labels are applied to those rushing to judgment.

I get it.

Did you create the youtube vid...were you there when it took place?

You dont think FOX news has an agenda when it comes to ACORN?

WTF. The facts are on the videos. It's 99% raw video. Watch them and tell me how it could possibly be a setup. If you can watch them and explain one possible way it could be a setup, knowing that they're in ACORN offices talking to ACORN employees, two of which have now been fired by ACORN. The videos are raw news, the 1% spin in them is brief but accurate. Everything you need to know about this is right there. Nobody's extra spin or take on this is going to change anything.

And we all know there are no doctored youtube vids or photoshopped pics out there. How do you know for certain that they are in an ACORN office as opposed to a vacate office with an easlly created copy of an ACORN sign?

That has never happened before by politically motivated partisans on either side. :eek:

Assuming it was in ACORN offices, how do you know it goes beyond the two fired employees and represents ACORN's policies and procedures and not the acts of two fucked-up renegade individuals?

IF the local authorities believe there is even a possibility that a crime was committed by ACORN....they should investigate. What more do you want me to say?

And based upon those video's, the authorities should already be there... are they?

For the record, I dont watch youtube videos at work

I have no idea, which is why I said I was waiting for the facts and not getting all emotional and presuming guilt.

Dude - you are REALLY stretching it - All you got is the "more rogue employees" defense? Thats weak. How many times? Is it always gonna be the employees and the management NEVER knows whats going on? Puhlease!

And, on your side, it is always guilt by association and no such thing as rogue employees, even before the facts have been determined...whether its the Nevada case, the recent NY allegations of contracting abuses, or this latest incident.

What is wrong with waiting for the facts? Are you so afraid that state/local investigating bodies and court systems across the country are all pro-ACORN?

Whatever happened to presumption of innocence until proven guilty...you know, that core value of our legal system?

The women from the first event have been fired, so ACORN agrees that was their employees in their office.

In the second event, the camera points to the ACORN logo on the outside-facing office window.

Was it a crime? I don't think it's a crime to advise people how to cover up the criminal activity they are planning or that they allege. Is criminality the most important aspect, where people are ready to explain in detail how to hide a brothel of underage illegal immigrant sex slaves?

It was a headline on CNN and MSNBC today. Just because you don't like the source does not mean the info is false, staged, or incorrect.

SO why do you automatically assign culpability to the organization rather than consider that they were rogue employees?

I assume the crime would potentially be aiding and abetting or conspiring to participate in a criminal activity.

ACORN finds questionable voter registrations, they turn them over to the authorities.....ACORN discovers that employees are engaged in questionable or potentially criminal activity, they fire the employees and cooperate with the investigations.

Yet, it is all a massive cover-up.

Go home and watch the videos man. You don't want to defend this kind of shit.

I am not defending it or the acts of the individuals involved....I am waiting for the facts to come out before automatically casting a sweeping net and assigning blame or culpability beyond the individuals.

- ACORN fired the DC workers
- The census bureau, citing "recent events", drops ACORN for the 2010 census
- State of Maryland may prosecute the tapers

ACORN fired the DC workers -- what any reasonable employer would do with rogue employees.

The census bureau, citing "recent events", drops ACORN for the 2010 census - probably a wise political decision or it would just give extremists another excuse to bash the census as some new tool of the Obama administration to use the census for nefarious purposes.....ACORN never had grants or contracts from Census; they were one of more than a thousand census "partners" to promote the census.

State of Maryland may prosecute the tapers - if a potential crime was committed by the tapers, it should be investigated.

UT....you're a reasonable guy.....let me try this out on you to help you understand my perspective.

ACORN has been under the microscope and subject of investigations for the last 5-6 years. Most, not all, has been partisan (including the firing of US Attorneys) because ACORN's voter registration work results in bringing low income minority voters into the election process, where they are more likely to vote Democrat.

During that time, ACORN has probably hired tens of thousands of part-time workers across the country to register voters and, with all those workers, at most, a couple hundred have acted in ways that are questionable and might be illegal.

Every time that happens, ACORN fires or reprimands the worker. And every questionable registration form is turned over to state election authorities in accordance with the law.

Yet, somehow, ACORN has an institutional policy to commit voter registration fraud despite the fact that NO investigation to date has resulted in a finding of guilt on the part of the organization?

In this latest incident, according to ACORN:
So, in two out of ten cases by the partisan with a camera, the employees offered some pretty nasty advice. The video didnt show those cases where he was turned away.

ACORN has a practice of hiring many of their part-time employees from within the community they serve - low income minorities, with little previous work experience. I applaud them for that.

Is it unreasonable to expect that the work force may not be the most highly educated or the most experienced in a professional work environment.

They also hire college students, with little previous experience in the workplace, for their voter registration drives.

And in both cases, a very small number of these workers have acted in ways they may believe is what the company wants, but in fact is contrary to policy?

Where is any shred of evidence that ACORN has policies with the intent to defraud the voter registration/election process or commit other illegal or unethical acts like those in the videos?

When that evidence is out there....I will condemn ACORN as much as anyone here. I dont condone anyone breaking the law.

Until such time, how is it constructive to a discussion to compare ACORN to the mafia or characterize them as the "scum of the earth" ...or to question my character or attack me personally?

ACORN is under partisan attack... which means it must have partisan defense, I know; the game must be played and must be played to the best of each "side's" abilities, according to what the public marketplace of ideas will bear.

You're playing harder than me, because as a general non-partisan I don't have to play very hard; I just look at WTF happened and say, well that's gonna leave a mark. I don't have to consider the bigger picture of whether ACORN is an organization to be attacked or to be defended.

You're trying to figure out a narrative for why it would be OK, in a macro sense, for two offices of a national organization to have their employees carefully detail how a dozen underage illegal immigrant sex slaves can be hidden from the federal government.

Why do you think it's OK? Because it only happened twice. If Jimmy only shot two out of ten toes off, does he get to keep playing with the gun?

Because ghetto does as ghetto is. Better known in some circles as the Michael Vick defense. "Yes it's terrible that he strangled those dogs by hand, but you know, that's just what those people do. You have to expect it."

Because it wasn't policy. But that's kind of lame in an Abu Ghraib sort of sense, right? If it's just a few bad apples, then it's not evidence of a system-wide problem, so it's irrelevant? I don't think it matters.

Because it wasn't illegal. That's OK; we can judge them anyway. Just like it's not illegal for Sanford to fly down to Argentina to meet with his girlfriend and have his staff lie about it. It's not illegal for Pat Robertson to pray for the death of politicians. The not-illegal part is for society's needs, not for ours.

I hadn't earlier, but if I'm now to extrapolate what these events should mean for ACORN as a whole? Well! If ACORN were to hire ghetto and excuse their actions, if ACORN were to only consider organizational policy in what is acceptable behavior, if ACORN were to say anything is fair game as long as it's not illegal...

...I'd say that organization should not be trusted to run a canned food drive, much less a voter registration drive.

But if they admitted none of that was relevant, say by firing the employees, and not offering a defense of their behavior...

...I'd say they can register voters, but they still don't get to be involved with the Census.

When did I say the action of the employees was ok? I said there was no evidence to suggest a broader conspiracy. And, I said I thought ACORN took the appropriate action to fire the employees.

I have said repeatedly that ACORN needs better internal management and oversight of its workers. And, again, no facts have come out to suggest that there is a broader conspiracy.

I dont recall any incident where ACORN excused the questionable actions of employees. Such employees were terminated....whether it was voter registration or the video incident.

Nor has ACORN every offered as a defense the fact that many of their workers are from the low income areas they serve and have little professional work experience; that was my characterization.


The census issue is another political issue where ACORN's role has been dramatically overblown by the right.

ACORN was one of a thousand or more "Census Partners", including such organizations as the Boys and Girls Clubs of America and the National Association of Evangelicals, to promote the census. ACORN had no special relationship beyond that, despite the reports from conservative media and bloggers.

The positive side of removing ACORN as a partner is that it will provide one less excuse for extremists on the right to make wild claims about how the Obama administration is attempting to manipulate the census for political purposes.


ps....thank you for your own reasonable interpretation....free of demagoguery or emotional rants.

pss....I am a Census Partner (not me personally, but the public interest organization where I work)....those conspiratorial types better keep an eye on me ;)

BS. They are a criminal organization that deserves not a single dime of taxpayer money, which the Demoncrats are more than happy enough to give to them.

Glady, post your link. Wait, I think I found it.

http://www.democrats.org/

Hahaha.......most of ACORN's federal funding came from the Bush Dept of HUD.

While, at the same time, the Bush White House and DoJ, were "allegedly" conspiring to politicize the DoJ around voter fraud cases, and at least in one case, the firing of the US Attorney (David Iglesias), after a Republican Senator and Republican Congresswoman from NM and the Republican Party of NM complained that Iglesias was not being aggressive enough in pursuing election fraud charges against ACORN, despite an FBI investigation not finding sufficient evidence to pursue further investigation or criminal charges.

I say "allegedly" because the White House officials (Rove, Miers) and the Republican Senator and Congresswoman from NM refused to cooperate with the DoJ internal investigation. At the very least, the politically motivated character assassination of Iglesias by the White House and DoJ was unconscionable.

Excellent post Toad.

I think, even if there's little or nothing to it, once an organisation has gathered enough dirt (fairly or unfairly) it is discredited in the public eye and cannot really be expected to participate in something like the Census. Once trust is lost, it's lost. Again, I say, fairly or unfairly. This is just the nature of life in the public eye.

I agree that it was wise to remove ACORN as a Census Partner....public perception matters.

But it is purely public relations since ACORN had no significant role in the census beyond promoting it to its constituents.

Oh I realise that Redux. From time to time when the gallery gets rowdy, one has to throw someone to the beasts.

Yep...ACORN is red meat.

The silliness of removing ACORN as a partner is that it really changes nothing. Early next year, the government will be hiring thousands of part-time workers to conduct the door-to-door census for those who dont return the mail-in form and there is nothing to prevent ACORN workers (past and present) from applying for those jobs and simply leaving their ACORN affiliation off their application form...not that I would condone that. :)

So what changes. They still have defrauded the government and the American people.

Provide an un-biased link and I would be glad to read it. Although I note you state "allegedly" so that may make your comments nothing more than hearsay.

You are right about one thing and that is that most people now look at ACORN as a corrupt organization and mouth piece for the Left disguised as a civics organization. They are completely partisan.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124623459227366517.html

Read the source document, the Bush administration's DoJ IG report on the firing of the US Attorneys....the juice on Iglesias starts at page 182. It is hard to be more definitive since the key parties involved (Rove, NM members of Congress) refused to cooperate with the investigation, which in itself did not serve the public interest.

The character assassination of Iglesias...The White House stating publicly that he was fired for poor performance, despite having the highest internal review ratings, and for being absent too often, which was the result of his being in the National Guard and called to duty. As noted in the DoJ IG report, the pressure to fire Iglesias was political.

You will not hear me defend the Bush Admin and anything to do with the DOJ.

Tell me again what this has to do with ACORN?

Start at page 182 of the report:
Next thing you know, pressure from New Mexico Republicans and complaints to the White House and Iglesias is fired with baseless charges (poor performance and frequent absence from the job)

Yehbut, most people now look on FOX as a corrupt organisation and mouth piece for the Right disguised as a news outlet. They are completely partisan. Doesn't stop people who share their outlook adhering to their reports as the truth. Most organisations which have anything to do with the political landscape are partisan. From the news media to the third party organisations who try to outreach communities with messages of engagement.

I have seen a great deal to make one wonder at the organisation, but most of it doesn't seem to point to an organisational attempt to act against the spirit of democracy. It seems to point to individual instanvces of malpractice. The difference between Acorn and other, equally partisan groups involved in similar roles is that they are being subject to much more media and legal scrutiny. Unlike the evangelical organisations, Acorn barely has to sneeze and the spotlight instantly swings to it.

That is really a strawman deflection of the practices of what ACORN has been accused of in this election process and hence then. Bush and that admin is no longer in charge. Maybe there was insufficient evidence at that time. An interesting note of history. Obviously that is no longer the case.

Really? "corrupt organization"? Disguised as a news outlet? Last time I checked they were a news outlet. Shall we look at the studies which unbiasedly looked at what side of the issues most major news outlets in the US support?

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla...UCLA-6664.aspx

There is a fine line between reporting and propaganda, you have to read between the lines and examine whether or not how the report is phrased changes the bottom line of the information.

True. And ACORN did more than "outreach' of unbiased political engagement.

I would suspect that for Igleasias it was more than "an interesting note of history" - not that character assassination of a public servant by the highest elected officials in the manner it was done to Iglesias comes close to putting an innocent man to death...but still unconscionable, IMO

Another strawman deflection of the subject. We are not talking about Capital Punishment, that is another thread.

I would suspect that for Iglesias it was more than "an interesting note of history" - character assassination of a public servant by the highest elected and appointed officials in the country in the manner it was done to Iglesias is still unconscionable.

Better?

Not important:

Tell me again what this has to do with the accusations against ACORN today?

That lack of empathy rears its head again.


Tell me why a discussion of ACORN should occur in a vacuum and not include compelling evidence of the political nature of the attacks against ACORN.

Deflection again. You still have not told me why any of what happened under Bush and the failure of them to find any wrong doing by ACORN at that time important. We investigated various criminal organizations for years before they ever found that stuck. The Mafia is a good example. This is no different with this organization. Someone founds some threads and started to pull on them, now they are being exposed. Why are you so concerned, do you know or have you ever worked for ACORN yourself? Is that why you are such a staunch defender of them?

Nope...never worked for ACORN.

My interest is "truth, justice and the American way!" :D

That includes "innocent until proven guilty" before characterizing an organization as "criminal" or comparing it to the Mafia.

You do love the strawman argument. So you get to assign feelings of empathy on to what others think on the internet. Fantastic powers you have.

:lol2: As long as it is the "America" as you get to define it.

Super!

I didnt know I created the concept of innocent until proven guilty before calling an organization criminal, but I'll take credit for it.

We're done here.

Straw man. (just following your logic)

What does a study in 2005 have to do with the way FOX News has covered politics since the last election.

Now I'm done.

You really are a mouth piece for ACORN. You are done. And you look like an ass defending ACORN.

One of the cities they claimed turned away the pimp/prostitute was New York.

The operatives dropped part three this morning. New York...

What do the New York videos show? (Can't watch them at work.) Are they as bad as the other two locations?

Basically the same, except they seem to have heard the criticism. So they take a shot of the outside of the office, a long shot of the inside lobby to establsih location, and get the full names of people assisting them, which they correlate to now-removed names on the ACORN website.

It's more entertaining because a woman with a Jamaican accent explains how to bury the cash from the operation in the back yard. (This is at the beginning of part 2.)

/sar/It's a rogue former employee UT. Stop trying to create something out of nothing. /casm/

http://cellar.org/2009/hannah_giles--300x300.jpg

The "pimp" and "prostitute" responsible, in the actual outfits they wore during these visits, at the NY Post story (via Memeorandum)

OOOOOOH... that big boogey man Fox News... another strawman.

You loose.;)

You know... if I were a 'real' journalist I would be hanging my head in shame over this.

Why is that Jinx? Because you were having tea and yuckin' it up while these two apparently LAME excuses for journalists did what you refused to do?

The Senate voted to de-fund ACORN's federal housing money.

Most media outlets have ignored the story. The AP wrote a very confusing story on it on the first day. My Cellar summaries have been clearer and more on point.

I really only follow the Washington Post as a major news source, because it's my local paper. They had a half page article in the A section (Page two IIRC) that covered this. But I didn't see an article on the NYC video.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...091003644.html

That is really big news. The mainstream media has ignored it. Imagine that. :rolleyes:

Then why did you fire them?