I'm not suggesting lookout isn't honest. I'm just suggesting that some of you are being a bit unreasonable in expecting someone with no experience of him to just 'take his word for it'.

Sure lo can express his opinion, and if that's what it is, then there's no need to say any more, but just like everyone else, if he's asked for some kind of cite and refuses, then his statement can only be considered an opinion.

Does that make sense?

Classic, I'm really surprised at your responses. I would have thought you of all people would be a bit more reasonable.

Perhaps a little more perspective is in order.

Lookout is outraged by lobbyists:

"Lobbyists rank just below child rapists in my book....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."

I agree with him about the influence of big money lobbyists (though not to point of characterizing them as lower than child rapists) and the need for lobbying reform.

Consider the expenditures on lobbying by the industry groups in question:
So who should lookout really be bitching about? His own industry or ACORN?

Classic is concerned about ACORN'S impact on elections:

"what politician is going to challenge an organization like ACORN during an election year? They have to be nuts too."

Consider campaign contributions to candidates:
Who do you think might have greater influence on the candidates and members of Congress once they are elected?

And as I noted and Classic acknowledged...I said I was a former lobbyist and never spent a dime on an elected official, nor did the organization I worked for have a PAC...and I have never had any affiliation with ACORN.

Oh I totally disagree with Lookout's assessment of lobbysists. They're just doing their job: some good, some bad, some useful, some damaging.

However, I believe his description of the events he himself witnessed. He was asked to cite, but what exactly is he supposed to cite? He was describing his personal experience of ACORN's methods. I believe that. Whether that can then be extrapolated out to a more general sense of ACORN is debatable.

For the most part in this thread, I agree with Redux. But, whilst I don't agree with Lookout, I absolutely believe his description of events he himself was a part of, or at least his perspective on them. Because he was describing such events, calls to cite aren't questioning his sources, they're questioning his personal honesty and integrity.

If I say I read somewhere that a group have acted in a particular way, then calls for citation are merely that. If I say I witnessed something myself, then calls for citation are an attack on my honesty.

:corn:

What one sees, and more importantly, how one presents that to others, may often be influenced by one's pre-conceived biases.....its only human. I readily admit to such biases.

One's perspective is often colored by one's biases.

You see honesty in his perspective of ACORN's "they are very good....rogue rep ploy" where I see an opinion (of someone who apparently doesnt like ACORN) that may reflect his bias. I dont doubt that he believes it to be honest.

We have an honest difference of opinion, not of what he saw, but how he characterized what he didnt see (they are very good at keeping themselves out of trouble by using the rogue rep ploy).

FWIW, Acorn is being investigated by the FBI.
I'm sure this will just disappear.

Heh. :)

Yep..I believe it did disappear, but I dont know that for a fact.

The last I read was that after a preliminary review of allegations made by a few republican partisans during the campaign, the FBI did not proceed with any investigations of ACORN...or at least ACORN has not been informed of the fact they are under investigation and asked to provide access to their records, which would have been standard procedure for such an investigation.

Might the charges have been politically motivated? I'm not accusing, just suggesting the possibility.

Unless you have more recent information you can cite which might be difficult since its all based on one AP story attributed to "leaks" from within the FBI.

In any case, to reiterate, I'm not "one of them" as you had suggested earlier...

...but I do believe in innocent until proven guilty. How about you?

Oh no, we really like the whole idea of lynch mobs here at teh cellar! ;)

Let me get the rope.

Thanks for clearing that up. Innocent until proven guilty? Hmm, that depends on how you want to squirm out of it.

Were all the individuals found guilty in all the cases - no.

From what I understand many times the individuals involved are charged, not ACORN or one of its subsidiaries or affiliates. By design, this allows them to maintain their innocence. Technically they are innocent by the letter of the law. They also maintain plausible deniability. These 'volunteers' get a wristslap if that, and being that they were probably students or have extremely liberal tendencies, the idea of provoking, or challenging the status-quo makes whatever penalties virtually irrelevant. In fact they may actually wear it as a badge of honor.

Is ACORN guilty? Perhaps, maybe its just a few hundred bad apples who went off on their own. Maybe they were just all overexuberant volunteers. Maybe not.


This is like the mafia, only much worse.

LMAO.....a presumption of innocence is now "squirming out" of something.

ACORN and any organization is required by law to turn all all voter registrations any staff person collects....and indicate the ones that they believe may be questionable. Which, in every case, is what ACORN did and generally fired the questionable staff.

But. of course, you dont mention that.

The fact remains that ACORN has never been charged with criminal activity...either in voter registration or housing finance advocacy.

Perhaps its probably time for you to move on to the next boogeyman......the SOCIALISTS!!!!! :eek:

Those socialists now in control will make the mafia and ACORN look like choir boys.

Hey...socialists are largely misunderstood!

Don't be mean to the socialists. ;)

But they want to redistribute our wealth and control every aspect of our lives...Obama said it during the campaign! (insert youtube vid here as "proof")

Ask Joe the Plumber...or Classic the Mafia Hunter!

It must be true! Watch them "squirm" as they try to explain the facts!

They are "guilty" as charged by those patriotic Americans who dont like any organization that might support those among us who are the most disenfranchised.

and what's wrong with redistributing the wealth I ask you??? :D

Its unamerikan to tax the rich or provide a social safety net or affordable health care to all.

:headshake you're just a soc symp!

Yeah...a pinko commie. that's me. ;)

Thats how it works.

Smear, innuendo, half truths and misrepresentations, name calling....

Repeat and rinse until it gets to the roots and you "believe"

lol...well to be honest, I don't think classic or anyone else here thinks that about me, or you even. Most of it is pretty good natured mud slinging I think. Kind of like a food fight. You know it's not right, but it can be pretty funny at times. ;)

Yep..I agree.

I dont even mind the attempting bullying and belittling.

Its just sooooo repetitive, it gets boring after awhile.

But it is still good for a laugh and I dont expect to change any minds here.

Well, some of us are amenable to a different viewpoint. I know mine has changed about some things since I first started posting here.

Actually, that depends on how you interpret the whole purpose of government, states' rights vs. limitations of federal government control, the success/failure of programs and initiatives brought about by the "War on Poverty" and progressive liberalism, and what the government's role should be in our daily lives: the small, quiet guardian that steps up to protect rights and civil liberties when needed, or the large, heavily involved and controlling patriarch if you will, that maneuvers us and our wealth around in what it thinks is best for the people.

Hmmmm....I wonder if we can get ACORN to register you to vote next time. ;)

I understand and accept the differences of opinion on the role of government.

What I find objectionable is the gross mischaracterizations by either side.

a system of government regulation as opposed to a completely "free market" is not socialism

a progressive tax system is not socialism

affordable and accessible health care for all is not socialism

protecting or representing the rights of the most disenfranchised citizens is not socialism (or mafia-like)

lol...that's doubtful...for a number of reasons.

This. Personally though, I don't think applying labels like that to a particular program and then filling in the gaps with assumed ZOMG BAD THINGS is ever appropriate. I don't care what label something is given, if it's an efficient government program that will do legitimate good and there's no alternative, then I'm all for it. But otherwise, I think people should be left to their own devices, and that some things such as a house or affordable health care are not "rights" at all but privileges of hard work and living in a wealthy nation. I don't want my tax dollars going to a program that can be done better by an NGO, or efforts to support legislating morality. Maybe I'm just jaded from living in a swing state and suffering through all the bullshit (gross misrepresentation) that surrounded this past election from both sides. Very few of them are real winners in my book. I need a drink.

I have no argument with the above, even if I dont agree with it. It is certainly worth discussion in a reasonable and rational manner in another thread.

My point....google "obama socialsm" or "acorn voter fraud" while you have that drink and find anything resembling facts....rather than smears, innuendo, half truths and misrepresentations, name calling....

Unfortunately, it is the nature of political discourse these days.

ACORN has a long history of scandal
. In the state of Missouri
in 1986, 12 ACORN members were convicted of voter fraud.

In December 2004, in St. Louis,
six volunteers pleaded guilty to dozens of election law violations
for filling out registration cards with names of dead people and other bogus information.
The volunteers worked for “Operation Big Vote” — a branch of ACORN

On February 10, 2005,
Nonaresa Montgomery, a paid worker who ran Operation Big Vote
during the run-up to the 2001 mayoral primary,
was found guilty of vote fraud.

In April 2008
eight ACORN employees in St. Louis city and county
pleaded guilty to federal election fraud
for submitting bogus voter registrations.

All members of acorn - all guilty. You asked me to put up and I did. These are facts - irrefutable facts.

They probably already did!:rolleyes:

The fact is that ACORN submitted all registrations as required by law, reported those that they thought were questionable, fully cooperated with authorities, which led to the convictions.

In fact, ACORN had collected over 1 million voter registrations nationwide in 08 and less than 1/10th of 1 percent were questionable and reported as such by ACORN to the appropriate state authorities.

ACORN has never been charged with voter registration fraud.....that is a fact.

You can transfer the guilt of volunteers to the organization or characterize it as you wish. No court has ever made that leap of guilt association.

But in your unsubstantiated and undocumented opinion, its all a cover-up of deceptive practices and a ploy that makes them worse then the murdering, drug running, prostitute pimping, illegal gambling operations Mafia?

Not worse - pretty much on par though.
Substantiation:
Whatever redux - this is EXACTLY what I was talking about - many of acorns members have been found GUILTY. I already said that acorn has plausible deniability. The fact that the employees or volunteers of acorn are the ones getting charged instead of acorn itself means nothing. Keep on squirming if you must.

We'll have to agree to disagree - at best.

A handful of volunteers n a few cities among the tens of thousands across the country is now "many".

And transferring the guilt to the organization w/o any evidence is acceptable to you despite no court anywhere in the country every making that finding. I understand that.

Yep...we'll just have to agree to disagree.

An honest disagreement and the "keep on squirming" nonsense adds nothing to the discussion and makes you look petty.

The workers admitted on camera that they were coached to tell registrants to vote for Democrat Claire McCaskill.

You're unabashed defense of acorn makes you look even more partisan than before - go figure.

BTW - The squirming was referenced to acorn originally not you.

I accept that I am probably still "one of them" in your opinion..whoever "them" are.

Thats cool. :D

That's it mister! You're on report.

My first cellar report card! :eek:

Oh fine. Go ahead and laugh it up while you can. Think its funny? Just you wait till Jim hears about it.

I can't believe you are still defending these scumbags from ACORN.

An ACORN Request

Call on Congress to Investigate Arizona Civil Rights Abuses

Well, thats life. The facts havnt changed.

if I was not convinced by comparisons to child rapists and mafia murderers/drug kingpins, why would I find the additional characterization of "scumbags' a more compelling reason to change my mind?

We still agree to disagree.

What I have come to conclude is that trolling, emotionally charged name calling and personal attacks are a common defense mechanism here.

Then stop doing it and earn some respect.

Fixed that for you.

Welcome to the party.

Merc and Bullitt...you guys crack me up.

Merc..who repeatedly disrespects posters with some odd reference to phantom creatures of "1s and 0s" (I never saw that characterization of posters in any other political forum..I have to say it is very creative way to "justify" ignoring facts) if that phantom cites facts that contradict his posted opinion writers.

Bullitt...."Fixing" another posters quotes? Another first for me. I have never seen such practices in other political forums and I've participate in a few across the spectrum.

But I like a good party. :)

'Fixing' is quite common here. I use it myself to make a point or a joke from time to time. I've seen it used in other forums too.

You crack me up with your failed arguements. Dead pan right from Huffington Post.

It really is not meant to be disrespect. More of a factual observation. You are nothing more than a series of 1's and 0's to me. You lack credibility in my opinion. I am sure that You don't give me any more than I give you. So we are even. ;)

I've never written for the Huffington Post.

I do contribute to another non-partisan political report on occasion, but only to present the facts on subjects with which I have some degree of familiarity.

And no complaints yet about failed arguments....from either the editors or objective readers. :)

Yes it's done here often, not just in the political threads.
But, my personal opinion is the changes should be highlighted, colored or distinguished in some way. The poster quoted will spot the change but other readers won't automatically know. Even if they say, "I fixed that for you".

FWIW - Huffpo is far from non-partisan

and just for the record Redux, you asked about Acorn being charged - as discussed the organization never is - just the zealots who work there.

Cool...and you'll keep on ignoring the fact the ACORN regularly reported questionable practices to state authoritie, fired workers engaged in those practices, and cooperated with investigations.

We have a difference of opinion.

You evidently believe in guilt by association and some mafia-like structure where the organization sets up a criminal enterprise with the intent of having the lowest individuals take the fall for the organization with NO-ZERO-NADA-NILL proof of any centralized or coordinated effort to violate the law on the part of the organization...and I believe the organization is innovent until proven guilty.

You would think more than a handful of the 13,000+ ACORN volunteers nationwide (in the last election) would be taking falls and being charged and convicted of crimes if it was the intent of the organization to commit widespread voter registration fraud in that manner.

Wake me when you have something new to share.

I'm tryin. Just posting the facts as they are reported. What you choose to believe or do with the information is up to you. Its still a free country ... for now.:eyebrow:

Do you have any facts on ACORN's involvement in those trials? Were the people reported to the authorities by ACORN?

just the facts I've already reported, but I'll certainly post any additional ones I come across.

Damm we have a bunch of ACORN apologists on here. Where is my picture of the bird with his head in the sand?