As if ethics were the only means with which to determine eligibility for taxpayer-funded government contracts. See: All religious organizations.

9/21/2009 11:40:51 AM

Quote :

"You're comparing ACORN workers to sex predators? Wow, just wow..."

Well, they advised someone on how to set up an underage prostitution business, and the guy in San Diego offered to traffic the underage girls.... So yea... If that doesn't qualify someone as a predator... not sure what your definition is

9/21/2009 11:44:48 AM

I'm not sure that you're sure on what the definition of a "sex predator" is.

9/21/2009 11:48:47 AM

pretty sure that trafficking in underage girls qualifies someone as a predator

9/21/2009 1:06:41 PM

Obama must be in on the "right-wing conspiracy" against ACORN.

Obama favors investigation into ACORN scandal (AP)

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g5I6tDiLF17oQUvXCSsqWXxeLNoAD9ARFH9O0

9/21/2009 1:09:21 PM

^ you posted that at around 1:30 this morning.

Aren't you a bit young to be going senile? It could be dementia... you should have that checked out.

Come to think of it, you exhibit a couple of the symptoms of dementia... hmm...

9/21/2009 1:42:28 PM

^ Yeah, yeah--hooksaw's a big poopyheaded old guy. Got anything else? You know, like an actual reply, dumbshit?

9/21/2009 1:45:29 PM

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/22/whoops-anti-acorn-bill-ro_n_294949.html

HuffPo is billing this as a failure, but it looks like congress agrees with bigun20 that tax payer money shouldn’t go to fund fraudulent enterprises:

Quote :

" The congressional legislation intended to defund ACORN, passed with broad bipartisan support … it applies to "any organization" that has been charged with breaking federal or state election laws, lobbying disclosure laws, campaign finance laws or filing fraudulent paperwork with any federal or state agency. It also applies to any of the employees, contractors or other folks affiliated with a group charged with any of those things. … Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) picked up on the legislative overreach and asked the Project on Government Oversight (POGO) to sift through its database to find which contractors might be caught in the ACORN net. Lockheed Martin and Northrop Gumman both popped up quickly, with 20 fraud cases between them, and the longer list is a Who's Who of weapons manufacturers and defense contractors. "

http://www.thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=577043&page=1#13290735
It looks like too that aaronburro agrees with John Conyers, Jerry Nadler, and Barney Frank that laws singling out individual companies are unconstitutional.

[Edited on September 22, 2009 at 7:27 PM. Reason : ]

9/22/2009 7:23:42 PM

Obama favors investigation into ACORN scandal (AP)

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g5I6tDiLF17oQUvXCSsqWXxeLNoAD9ARFH9O0

9/22/2009 7:32:04 PM

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/22/whoops-anti-acorn-bill-ro_n_294949.html

HuffPo is billing this as a failure, but it looks like congress agrees with bigun20 that tax payer money shouldn’t go to fund fraudulent enterprises:

Quote :

" The congressional legislation intended to defund ACORN, passed with broad bipartisan support … it applies to "any organization" that has been charged with breaking federal or state election laws, lobbying disclosure laws, campaign finance laws or filing fraudulent paperwork with any federal or state agency. It also applies to any of the employees, contractors or other folks affiliated with a group charged with any of those things. … Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) picked up on the legislative overreach and asked the Project on Government Oversight (POGO) to sift through its database to find which contractors might be caught in the ACORN net. Lockheed Martin and Northrop Gumman both popped up quickly, with 20 fraud cases between them, and the longer list is a Who's Who of weapons manufacturers and defense contractors. "

http://www.thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=577043&page=1#13290735
It looks like too that aaronburro agrees with John Conyers, Jerry Nadler, and Barney Frank that laws singling out individual companies are unconstitutional.

[Edited on September 22, 2009 at 7:27 PM. Reason : ]

9/22/2009 7:48:11 PM

Quote :

"Police say a worker with the activist group ACORN who was caught on video giving advice about human smuggling to a couple posing as a pimp and a prostitute had reported the incident to authorities. National City police said Monday that Juan Carlos Vera contacted his cousin, a police detective, to get advice on what to with information on possible human smuggling. Vera was secretly filmed on Aug. 18 as part of a young couple’s high-profile expose. Police say he contacted law enforcement two days later. The detective consulted another police official who served on a federal human smuggling task force, who said he needed more details. The ACORN employee responded several days later and explained that the information he received was not true and he had been duped."

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_ACORN_HIDDEN_CAMERA?SITE=FLSTU&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

wonder when fox news etc. will report this.

9/23/2009 11:44:20 AM

Glenn Beck should pay this guy's unemployment...

Anyway, ACORN isn't exempt from their misgivings, but this guy seemed to do the right things here. Didn't just kick them out and forget about it, but actually got information and went to the authorities...

9/23/2009 12:06:07 PM

Quote :

"It looks like too that aaronburro agrees with John Conyers, Jerry Nadler, and Barney Frank that laws singling out individual companies are unconstitutional."

Funny how Barney Frank didn't feel that way when the AIG bill came around less than a year ago...

9/23/2009 12:31:31 PM

Bank of America (NYSE: BAC) Withdraws Support for ACORN
September 28th, 2009

http://www.americanbankingnews.com/2009/09/28/bank-of-america-nyse-bac-withdraws-support-for-acorn/

9/28/2009 12:20:12 PM

Between the ACORN employee reporting the incident, and the bill possibly ending the military industrial complex, this thing has taken a turn for the hilarious.

9/28/2009 12:25:13 PM

^ That's all you ever do anymore is post about how "hilarious" everything is. Did someone spray you with fucking Joker gas?

9/28/2009 12:30:24 PM

it is hilarious that ACORN is losing all its federal funding

9/28/2009 12:38:52 PM

^ Well, that's true.

9/28/2009 12:49:29 PM

^^^ Is that really all I do?


So what do you say of the fact that the pimp-enabler turned to the authorities?

9/28/2009 1:08:35 PM

^ Keep trying to misdirect--it's hilarious!

ACORN is a corrupt organization. And their chickens are coming home to roost!

9/28/2009 1:11:59 PM

Your evidence of their corruption just turned out to be false.

So what do you have to say about that?

9/28/2009 1:13:57 PM

^ WTF are you and your cohorts babbling about? You realize that evidence of ACORN's corruption is systemic and has involved multiple incidents that have unfolded over several years, right?

In any event, tell it to Congress (pulled funding) and Bank of America (pulled funding) and so on.

9/28/2009 1:20:00 PM

Systemic corruption-- really? The voter registration anomalies were caught and corrected, and no evidence linked it to any of the leadership.

The recent undercover stories were entrapment of bottom-level employees, and even this turned out to be crap.

Where's the evidence for systemic corruption?

9/28/2009 1:23:24 PM

^ Entrapment? Prove it.

9/28/2009 1:33:09 PM

Quote :

"^ Keep trying to misdirect--it's hilarious!"

It seems pretty clear to me. Regardless, it's completely moot to my argument.

Why is it that it always takes multiple attempts to get you to answer simple, straightforward questions?

9/28/2009 1:35:39 PM

oh, it totally was entrapment. that shit would never hold up in a court.

of course it doesn't change the fact that the particular ACORN employees were retards, and their indefensible actions only served to critically damage the organization's reputation at a time they were already under scrutiny.

9/28/2009 1:37:45 PM

^^ and ^ You two are stooges--do you even know what "entrapment" means?

Quote :

"ENTRAPMENT - A person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit; and the law as a matter of policy forbids conviction in such a case."

http://www.lectlaw.com/def/e024.htm

YOU

ARE

DUMB

[Edited on September 28, 2009 at 1:48 PM. Reason : Which branch of government were the fake pimp and prostitute in, schmoe? Sweet Jesus. ]

9/28/2009 1:45:51 PM

whatever, you pedantic old fart.

it's the concept of entrapment, as applied to vigilante news investigators pursuing a political agenda.


EDIT: they were in the fourth branch, duh





[Edited on September 28, 2009 at 1:49 PM. Reason : ]

9/28/2009 1:48:33 PM

^ STFU, you doofus. Ignorance of the law on your part is no excuse, and it's not "pedantic" to recognize fact, engineer.

Are you referring to the Fourth Estate, dummy? If so, you're indicating that the two investigators at issue were, in fact, journalists?



And Mike Wallace begs to differ concerning "vigilante news investigators."

[Edited on September 28, 2009 at 2:01 PM. Reason : OMFG! You really are stupid--just wow. ]

9/28/2009 1:52:09 PM

lol at people sticking their heads in the sand and denying that ACORN is corrupt

i mean...wow

9/28/2009 2:38:22 PM

I'm still waiting for a reply, hooksaw.

I realize this is the internet and all, but does it not shame you to act like this?

9/28/2009 2:45:43 PM

I think I missed where they specifically referenced "underage" girls in the prostitution video.

9/28/2009 3:00:12 PM

doesnt matter. acorn is listing badly to starboard. conservatives are now free to chuck as much shit at them as they wish.

9/28/2009 3:31:12 PM

^i agree, its not so much what ACORN really is, its that its an opportunity for conservatives to attack it and liberals in general
I gotta say liberals are guilty of this tactic also, but like everything else, what goes around comes around

10/1/2009 11:48:04 PM

Quote :

"A non-profit organization filed a lawsuit against the federal government Thursday morning, seeking to overturn a law stopping the flow of federal funds to ACORN. The suit, filed in federal court in New York, claims that bills passed by the House and Senate to defund the group qualify as bills of attainder, legislation that unfairly targets one group. Such bills are unconstitutional. The suit will seek to restore funding and roll-back the ban, which was passed as part of the legislative branch appropriations bill in September. ACORN claims that the legislation was of “malicious and punitive intent.” The suit also claims Congress violated the Fifth Amendment by skirting due process before doling out the punishment of the funding cut. OMB Director Peter Orszag and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner are listed as co-defendants in the suit. "

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29436.html

Because apparently government funding is a right and requires due process to remove.

11/12/2009 3:03:28 PM

liberal entitlement

maybe they should ask for 40 acres and a mule while they are at it

11/12/2009 3:22:01 PM

Meanwhile,

How's the KBR rape case going?

Or the million dollar Blackwater bribe?

11/12/2009 3:58:49 PM

^^^ How about, instead of what you said, we point out that bills of attainder are unconstitutional. ACORN deserves a chance to put it to a court to decide if that legislation was, indeed, a bill of attainder.

11/12/2009 4:06:34 PM

A bill of attainder (also known as an act or writ of attainder) is an act of the legislature declaring a person or group of persons guilty of some crime and punishing them without benefit of a trial.


We need to involve a court to show that stoping voluntary funding != punishmnet?
or maybe you are arguing that there was declaration of guilt?
no?

please sit down then
by your logic removing tax breaks for the wealthy should have the right to be put before the court as a bill of attainder - as they are being punished without the benefit of a trial

11/12/2009 5:12:32 PM

Exactly. They're not being convicted of anything, they're not losing any rights, no-one is going to jail, they're not being fined by congress. Congress is simply not funding them with taxpayer dollars. Not getting money from tax producers =/= criminal prosecution.

Quote :

"How's the KBR rape case going? Or the million dollar Blackwater bribe?"

Are you asininely implying that by opposing ACORN I magically support KBR's rape cover-up or misallocation of funds to Blackwater? Or is your argument based on a narrow pre-conceived diametrically opposed political universe?

11/12/2009 5:26:00 PM

I'm not implying anything about anyone individually.

I'm just entertained by 9 pages of breathlessness over ACORN when there seem to be much bigger fish to fry.

11/12/2009 5:48:51 PM

I don't see how they can selectively enforce this new law against ACORN and not KBR and Blackwater.

11/12/2009 5:50:16 PM

^ there is nothing unconstitutional about it . . . the morality is indeed questionable

^^ I don't disagree with you there, but when I find articles pertinent to an active topic, I'm happy to post them. There are already 3 times as many pages dedicated to a single cable news channel.

11/12/2009 6:00:24 PM

If the enforcement is discriminatory (which it appears to be), then it is a violation of equal protection and therefore unconstitutional. But good luck proving that.

11/12/2009 6:25:14 PM

Quote :

"9 pages of breathlessness over ACORN when there seem to be much bigger fish to fry."

ACORN came very close to doing official census work for the gov't. That makes the group a big enough fish.

Bill of Attainder? Does that mean we will be having a trial before congress allows the Bush tax cuts to expire?

11/12/2009 9:43:59 PM

The size of the fish was referring to the severity of the crime committed.

But regardless, Blackwater was given military authority in an occupied country. It seems incredibly more significant than being asked to walk door-to-door giving surveys. Was ACORN given authority to shoot people in the face if they refused to give census information?

11/12/2009 10:06:07 PM

how about all of them should have their funding removed?

a Bill of Attainder claim is going to hard to support here, as I don't believe the bill specifically names ACORN by name, nor does it name any of its executives. As such, the best the group could do is ask why other groups are not being targeted. ACORN fit the description of companies that should lose gov't funding, and that description does not fit only ACORN. Thus, a Bill of Attainder claim is shown to be false.

11/12/2009 10:18:52 PM

Quote :

"how about all of them should have their funding removed?"

Sounds good to me, but it will never happen. KBR and Blackwater have powerful lobbyists while ACORN is just a poor non-profit organization.

11/12/2009 10:22:05 PM

It's not a bill of attainder because federal funding isn't a right.

It is total crap, though, because having a few bad employees and then firing them is not even in the same ballpark as trying to cover up a gang rape or trying to bribe your way out of a massacre.

11/12/2009 10:25:15 PM

I find it kinda interesting that most of the shit about ACORN seems to get stirred up around the time of elections. I wonder why that is?

11/12/2009 10:26:16 PM