Shouldn't it be "innocent until proven guilty" rather than "guilty until proven innocent?"

Thats all I am suggesting.

However you want to look at it is cool with me. I know my personal experiences with ACORN over a period of 2 years. I know who they are and how they operate. They are a very well organized smash and grab operation with good PR. That doesn't jive with your view of them. I'm cool with that. In all honesty I believe I could provide you with video of the legal proceedings and transcripts and it still wouldn't change your view of things. Doesn't bother me a bit, you'll just have to pardon me if I chuckle a bit at your indignation at the "wingnuts" ability to be bite onto the talking points.

Feel free to post the video of the legal proceedings and transcripts and we can discuss it further. ;)

Yeah, I'll get right on that.

BTW, I worked with ACORN as well on national lobbying coalitions over time, particularly on CDBG issues.

I didnt particularly like their lobbying style...a bit too aggressive and confrontational for me and some others in the coalition. But when hardball was needed, they were the first to step to the plate.

In much the same manner as other advocacy organizations play hardball...the NRA comes to mind..or even AARP....those grannies can be bitch to lobby with or against. And both have massive PR campaigns on their issues of interest that dwarf anything ACORN does.

That doesnt make them unethical or crooked or their acts illegal.



I wont hold my breath.

No, but if they contacted people and instructed them to lie in order to squeeze money out of companies then, yes they would also be unethical. Then again, I'm biased as I think all lobby groups should be illegal but I know that'll never change. Lobbyists rank just below child rapists in my book.

Thank you for such an astute and objective observation. :eek:

"To generalize is to be an idiot...."

~William Blake

But then again, I do have general thoughts about wingnuts who can never provide the facts to support their baseless allegations. ;)

Fair enough. Let me be more specific. Individuals who choose to make their living attempting to buy politicians in a legal manner are human fucksticks who I rate just below child rapists on the scale of asshattery.

so take your little winking smilie and choke to death on it.

sincerely,

Lookout

Damn, dude.....All that anger and ignorance is really not good for your health.

But I wish you well.

From a former lobbyist who never spent a dime on a politician, relying solely on the facts on the ground and the goodwill of people with shared interests to make my case...sometimes more successfully than others. :)

Thats probably why you are a "former" lobbyist. :rolleyes:

Yep...after a couple years, I was burned out.

Not ashamed to admit that its demoralizing and it takes it toll when the deck is stacked against you.

Such is the life of a low paid, public interest lobbyist.

Now I have a cushy public interest job! I paid my dues and I earned it.

Damm right. As we have seen right here.

And yet with all this honesty and now Merc's added affirmation of the sincere wishes, still absolutely nothing to support the allegations made about ACORN.

Nice deflection, guys! :D

I trust the experince that lookout related. Combined with reports in the press about their practices during the election, that is good enough for me.

Merc...why am I not surprised that its "good enough for you" to believe hearsay ("the courts and the media hid my testimony and covered up for acorn") and sensationalism in the press stirred up by the right ("acorn's massive election fraud" that never resulted in any charges) if it supports your pre-determined belief, rather than seek out the facts.

Dont you want to at least watch his video and read his transcripts with me?

Maybe if you ask nicely, he will post it for us. :)