• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

McCain is done

ACORN is not Obama.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDZiMjkwMDczZWI5ODdjOWYxZTIzZGIyNzEyMjE0ODI=

Inside Obama’s Acorn

While Obama’s Acorn connection has not gone entirely unreported, its depth, extent, and significance have been poorly understood.

... snip ...

Let’s begin with Obama’s pre-law school days as a community organizer in Chicago. ... snip ... Madeleine Talbot, who at the time was a leader at Chicago Acorn ... snip ... was so impressed by Obama’s organizing skills that she invited him to help train her own staff. And what exactly was Talbot’s work with Acorn? Talbot turns out to have been a key leader of that attempt by Acorn to storm the Chicago City Council (during a living-wage debate).

... snip ...

The extent of Obama’s ties to Acorn has not been recognized. We find some important details in an article in the journal Social Policy entitled, “Case Study: Chicago — The Barack Obama Campaign,” by Toni Foulkes, a Chicago Acorn leader and a member of Acorn’s National Association Board. The odd thing about this article is that Foulkes is forced to protect the technically “non-partisan” status of Acorn’s get-out-the-vote campaigns, even as he does everything in his power to give Acorn credit for helping its favorite son win the critical 2004 primary that secured Obama the Democratic nomination to the U.S. Senate.

Before giving us a tour of Acorn’s pro-Obama but somehow “non-partisan” election activities, Foulks treats us to a brief history of Obama’s ties to Acorn. While most press accounts imply that Obama just happened to be at the sort of public-interest law firm that would take Acorn’s “motor voter” case, Foulkes claims that Acorn specifically sought out Obama’s representation in the motor voter case, remembering Obama from the days when he worked with Talbot. And while many reports speak of Obama’s post-law school role organizing “Project VOTE” in 1992, Foulkes makes it clear that this project was undertaken in direct partnership with Acorn. Foulkes then stresses Obama’s yearly service as a key figure in Acorn’s leadership-training seminars.

At least a few news reports have briefly mentioned Obama’s role in training Acorn’s leaders, but none that I know of have said what Foulkes reports next: that Obama’s long service with Acorn led many members to serve as the volunteer shock troops of Obama’s early political campaigns — his initial 1996 State Senate campaign, and his failed bid for Congress in 2000 (Foulkes confuses the dates of these two campaigns.) With Obama having personally helped train a new cadre of Chicago Acorn leaders, by the time of Obama’s 2004 U.S. Senate campaign, Obama and Acorn were “old friends,” says Foulkes.

... snip ...

Although it’s been noted in an important story by John Fund, and in a long Obama background piece in the New York Times, more attention needs to be paid to possible links between Obama and Acorn during the period of Obama’s service on the boards of two charitable foundations, the Woods Fund and the Joyce Foundation.

According to the New York Times, Obama’s memberships on those foundation boards, “allowed him to help direct tens of millions of dollars in grants” to various liberal organizations, including Chicago Acorn, “whose endorsement Obama sought and won in his State Senate race.”

... snip ...

Supposedly, Acorn’s political arm is segregated from its “non-partisan” registration and get-out-the-vote efforts, but after reading Foulkes’ case study, this non-partisanship is exceedingly difficult to discern. As I understand, it would be illegal for Obama to sit on a foundation board and direct money to an organization that openly served as his key get-out-the-vote volunteers on Election Day. I’m not saying Obama crossed a legal line here: Based on Foulkes’ account, Acorn’s get-out-the-vote drive most likely observed the technicalities of “non-partisanship.”

Nevertheless, the possibilities suggested by a combined reading of the New York Times piece and the Foulkes article are disturbing. While keeping within the technicalities of the law, Obama may have been able to direct substantial foundation money to his organized political supporters.

... snip ...

Important as these questions of funding and partisanship are, the larger point is that Obama’s ties to Acorn — arguably the most politically radical large-scale activist group in the country — are wide, deep, and longstanding. If Acorn is adept at creating a non-partisan, inside-game veneer for what is in fact an intensely radical, leftist, and politically partisan reality, so is Obama himself.

:D

And OF COURSE the Repubs will accuse ANY successful registration of the young and minorities of fraud. And no doubt they will go though the 87,000 registrations in Nevada and find a couple hundred that are dicey - I don't think you could have that may people doing registrations of that many thousands and NOT have some badly completed applications or some canvasser or prospective voter lying.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/acorn_obama_and_the_mortgage_m.html

ACORN, Obama, and the Mortgage Mess

The financial markets were teetering on the edge of an abyss last week. The secretary of the Treasury was literally on his knees begging the speaker of the House not to sabotage the bailout bill. The crash of falling banks made the earth tremble. The Republican presidential candidate suspended his campaign to deal with the crisis. And amid all this, the Democrats in Congress managed to find time to slip language into the bailout legislation that would provide a dandy little slush fund for ACORN.

... snip ...

ACORN does many things under the umbrella of "community organizing." They agitate for higher minimum wages, attempt to thwart school reform, try to unionize welfare workers (that is, those welfare recipients who are obliged to work in exchange for benefits) and organize voter registration efforts (always for Democrats, of course). Because they are on the side of righteousness and justice, they aren't especially fastidious about their methods. In 2006, for example, ACORN registered 1,800 new voters in Washington. The only trouble was, with the exception of six, all of the names submitted were fake. The secretary of state called it the "worst case of election fraud in our state's history." As Fox News reported:

"The ACORN workers told state investigators that they went to the Seattle public library, sat at a table and filled out the voter registration forms. They made up names, addresses, and Social Security numbers and in some cases plucked names from the phone book. One worker said it was a lot of hard work making up all those names and another said he would sit at home, smoke marijuana and fill out the forms."

ACORN explained that this was an "isolated" incident, yet similar stories have been reported in Missouri, Michigan, Ohio, and Colorado -- all swing states, by the way. ACORN members have been prosecuted for voter fraud in a number of states. (See www.rottenacorn.com.) Their philosophy seems to be that everyone deserves the right to vote, whether legal or illegal, living or dead.

And regarding the Mortgage crisis, Mona Charen nails it in the above link:

If Obama wins, it means hiring an arsonist to fight a fire
 
In which case, they will indeed be taxed on capital gains earnings ... just at withdrawal ... and (like 401ks) using ordinary income tax rates rather than at capital gains tax rates.

Exactly. Therefore, if capital gains tax rates go up, I lose nothing.

Of course, I would like it if taxes went down on everyone, except that someone has to pay the blasted bills!


And all of the above, of course, assumes the ordinary income tax rates are not increased by Obama. But the reality is that in a socialist system ... which is what Obama is essentially proposing ... ordinary income tax rates go up.

When government spends money, it has to pass taxes to pay for the spending. This is true whether capitalist, socialist, or any variation thereof. The only question is exactly who pays the bills. Republicans have a clear track record on this. The next generation should pay.

If we actually had a President and Congress that actually cut spending, then I would say that low taxes would be awesome. Can you name such a President? No? I didn't think so.

And of course both sides say that surely they would have cut spending except those mean bad people on the other side wouldn't let them. Boo hoo. "Mommy, Barney wouldn't let me cut spending. He says he'll tell the voters on me. That's not fair! I didn't want to vote for huge deficits, but he made me!"
 
Last edited:
Why not visit Sweeden and give a disertation on the evils of socialism to the Sweeds.

Really? Did you see the latest news?

http://www.industryweek.com/ReadArticle.aspx?ArticleID=17335

Sweden Announces Income Tax Cuts to Boost Jobs

Part of overall tax reduction program to stimulate employment

Sept. 17, 2008

... snip ...

Since coming to power in the autumn of 2006, the Swedish government has launched a series of measures aimed at inciting Swedes to return to the job market instead of living off of state subsidies.

Gee ... do you think Obama might learn something from that?

And did the mainstream media in the US mention this story?

:D
 
Does anyone in here wonder if the huge drop in the polls is due to the fact
that McCain said he will safe the economy - while the complete opposite is
happening? :p
 
I'm following the electoral map for quite some time now - and
now it's obvious that McCain drowns himself and Palin down the
Toilet of irrelevance - or as he would call it: "Suspending the
campaign":

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

So what shall we talk about concerning the election now that
Obama is the new President? :)

Back to the OP, McCain is far from done.

"From a small ACORN shall a mighty oak grow…"

Talk about your October Surprise…
 
BenBurch said:
Back to the OP, McCain is far from done.

"From a small ACORN shall a mighty oak grow…"

Talk about your October Surprise…

:dl:

Is that the best evidence you have to offer?

Don't get me wrong. I still prefer Obama as the next POTUS over any candidate offered to date. Yet these allegations need to be addressed promptly and thoroughly.
 
Huh. Disparate incidents. Why am I singularly unimpressed.

(Also: Is exibit 2 an original copy? Were there any other reasons? Sorry, I'm unimpressed by Rotten ACORN. Espically as ACORN has already gone look, we are kinda bound.)

... Rotten ACORN is registered by the Employment Policies Institute which is a front for a....


Wait for it..
Berman & Co. Conserative all the way (against minimum wage increases/living wage)

And he has said:

In a speech to the National Pork Forum in Dallas in May 2003, Berman said referring to activists pushing for changes to the meat industry. "People who are on the offense want to win, while people who are on the defense don't want to lose. There's a difference," he said.
Berman said the way for business to win against activist groups was a wage hard counter campaigns "to de-legitimize them in the eyes of the public." Such a campaign he said, delivering his business pitch, would require resources and strategies that "exceed the capabilities of the other side." [4]


[ http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Berman_&_Co. ]
[ http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/results.jsp?domain=rottenacorn.com ]




Something's rotten in the state of Denmark...
 
Huh. Disparate incidents.
Disparate incidents? Then why do they form a pattern over 30+ years?
Why am I singularly unimpressed.
Dunno; perhaps for lack of perceived evidence.
(Also: Is exibit 2 an original copy? Were there any other reasons? Sorry, I'm unimpressed by Rotten ACORN. Espically as ACORN has already gone look, we are kinda bound.)

... Rotten ACORN is registered by the Employment Policies Institute which is a front for a....


Wait for it..
Berman & Co. Conserative all the way (against minimum wage increases/living wage)

And he has said:

In a speech to the National Pork Forum in Dallas in May 2003, Berman said referring to activists pushing for changes to the meat industry. "People who are on the offense want to win, while people who are on the defense don't want to lose. There's a difference," he said.
Berman said the way for business to win against activist groups was a wage hard counter campaigns "to de-legitimize them in the eyes of the public." Such a campaign he said, delivering his business pitch, would require resources and strategies that "exceed the capabilities of the other side." [4]


[ http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Berman_&_Co. ]
[ http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/results.jsp?domain=rottenacorn.com ]




Something's rotten in the state of Denmark...

Read critically what you have cited, and then come to your own conclusions…

Again, this is not to gainsay the value of the Barack Obama/Joseph Biden candidacy, yet rather to put it into focus.
:D
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom