ACORN - Should they matter?

The forum for general posting. Come join the madness. :)
Message
Author
User avatar
Sir_Galahad
Posts: 1516
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 7:47 pm
Location: In The Heartland

Re: ACORN - Should they matter?

#26 Post by Sir_Galahad » Thu Oct 09, 2008 4:32 pm

Bob78164 wrote:Sirge -- You're the one who made the assertion. If you want someone to lend it credence, it's up to you to support it.

<** sigh ** > Very well. I hope you have the time to read these.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ND ... EyMjE0ODI=

And, if you don't mind reading a blog:

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/06/25/th ... ama-knows/

There are others but these will get you started.

Perhaps this article will help to explain my (b) assertion.

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/26/t ... n-bailout/
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing" - Edmund Burke

Perhaps the Hokey Pokey IS what it's all about...

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 22147
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: ACORN - Should they matter?

#27 Post by Bob78164 » Thu Oct 09, 2008 4:50 pm

Sir_Galahad wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:Sirge -- You're the one who made the assertion. If you want someone to lend it credence, it's up to you to support it.

<** sigh ** > Very well. I hope you have the time to read these.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ND ... EyMjE0ODI=

And, if you don't mind reading a blog:

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/06/25/th ... ama-knows/

There are others but these will get you started.

Perhaps this article will help to explain my (b) assertion.

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/26/t ... n-bailout/
Thanks. This is why I made the request. In my view, your sources do not substantiate the factual claims at the top of the thread. I'll provide my thoughts in somewhat more detail later -- I do have some work to do today. (And there's one other potential fly in the ointment -- our Internet connection at home was down when I left this morning, so I'm not sure I'll be able to post from home.) --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
ToLiveIsToFly
Posts: 2364
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 11:34 am
Location: Kalamazoo
Contact:

Re: ACORN - Should they matter?

#28 Post by ToLiveIsToFly » Thu Oct 09, 2008 8:22 pm

I've only known two people who've worked for ACORN in my life. I couldn't stand one, and I barely knew the other. But my impression of the organization is that, for a job like voter registerers/registrars/whatever the word is, they pay crap and would tend to have a lot of people working for them who REALLY need jobs. That seems to be an organizational culture thing. (They get organizers who are willing to work for absolute crap pay (and I mean pay that, compared to OTHER progressive nonprofit organizing groups who pay crap, is still crap by comparison) - sometimes they get organizers who are quite talented despite this because they have other sources of income (i.e. parents) and some who see that extra-low pay as some kind of badge of honor. But most of the actual voter registration is done by somewhat lower-level employees, and I can see that not being true of a lot more people)

I'm sure if you don't average a certain number of people registered per shift, you get fired. That's how every paid VR drive I've ever heard of has worked, including ours.

That tends to lead to some of the worst register-ers resorting to desperate, unethical measures to not get fired, like faking names, copying names off other people's forms, etc. And I assume (and the news accounts about ACORN's problems seem to confirm it) that when they catch people doing that, they fire them. Hopefully they call the police on them, too - that's what we do.

I don't see this as an excuse, mind you - at our VR training this summer we spent a LOT of time talking about how important it was to catch people who commit fraud, get rid of them and make an example of them, and how many different bad things would happen to us if we f@#ked this up - but the descriptions of the types of fraud I read about from ACORN sounds a lot more like an organization that hires low-level people who are willing to do horrible things to keep their job, and has poor enough management that they don't catch it, than a group that is deliberately trying to subvert the election process by having people vote multiple times.

And as for duplicate registrations, maybe they mean something different than I think they do, but if I understand it correctly, I don't see what the problem is. If I were doing voter registration, and I asked someone if they were registered to vote, and they said they weren't sure, I'd register them again just to make sure. I have to think the state has some kind of mechanism to keep someone who has registered N times with the exact same name and address from voting more than once under that name and address. (Though now that I think of it, when I was a voting-age college student and my legal address was my parents' address, my Dad and I still somehow managed to both vote even though we had the exact same name and address. Maybe it helped that we went to the polls together so it was obvious we were two different people. Or maybe that we lived in the suburbs and knew some of the pollwatchers). I'd have to think a lot of duplicate registrations are things like this - people who don't know the rules, who worry that maybe since they didn't vote in the last couple elections they were dropped from the rolls, people who've moved a lot and aren't sure what address they're registered at, things like that, who register multiple times to be absolutely sure they can vote once. And I'm sure there's some of those register-ers trying to keep their jobs copying other people's forms so it looks like they registered more people than they did.

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 16549
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: ACORN - Should they matter?

#29 Post by Beebs52 » Thu Oct 09, 2008 8:52 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
Sir_Galahad wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:Sirge -- You're the one who made the assertion. If you want someone to lend it credence, it's up to you to support it.

<** sigh ** > Very well. I hope you have the time to read these.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ND ... EyMjE0ODI=

And, if you don't mind reading a blog:

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/06/25/th ... ama-knows/

There are others but these will get you started.

Perhaps this article will help to explain my (b) assertion.

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/26/t ... n-bailout/
Thanks. This is why I made the request. In my view, your sources do not substantiate the factual claims at the top of the thread. I'll provide my thoughts in somewhat more detail later -- I do have some work to do today. (And there's one other potential fly in the ointment -- our Internet connection at home was down when I left this morning, so I'm not sure I'll be able to post from home.) --Bob

Bob, I posted an entry from wikipedia earlier. I'm crushed that no one even looked at it...

As I said in my post, I don't know if all of the insertions are correct, just that they enumerated a bunch of allegations.
Well, then

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 22147
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: ACORN - Should they matter?

#30 Post by Bob78164 » Fri Oct 10, 2008 1:11 am

Beebs52 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
Sir_Galahad wrote:
<** sigh ** > Very well. I hope you have the time to read these.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ND ... EyMjE0ODI=

And, if you don't mind reading a blog:

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/06/25/th ... ama-knows/

There are others but these will get you started.

Perhaps this article will help to explain my (b) assertion.

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/26/t ... n-bailout/
Thanks. This is why I made the request. In my view, your sources do not substantiate the factual claims at the top of the thread. I'll provide my thoughts in somewhat more detail later -- I do have some work to do today. (And there's one other potential fly in the ointment -- our Internet connection at home was down when I left this morning, so I'm not sure I'll be able to post from home.) --Bob

Bob, I posted an entry from wikipedia earlier. I'm crushed that no one even looked at it...

As I said in my post, I don't know if all of the insertions are correct, just that they enumerated a bunch of allegations.
I read it, Beebs, but it didn't address the issues I raised -- the nature of Obama's current connection, if any, to ACORN and Sirge's claim that ACORN stood to receive billions from an earlier proposed version of the bailout. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
ToLiveIsToFly
Posts: 2364
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 11:34 am
Location: Kalamazoo
Contact:

Re: ACORN - Should they matter?

#31 Post by ToLiveIsToFly » Fri Oct 10, 2008 3:27 pm

ACORN's response to all of this, if you remove the "we're so oppressed" language, boils down to:
- This is not a matter of us trying to defraud the system. This is a matter of a very small percentage of our registration workers defrauding us so they can either get paid for work they didn't do or keep their jobs when they're not very good at it.
- We work really hard to catch people doing this, and when we do, we fire them, we turn them into election officials and law enforcement
- In almost every state in which we do voter registration, we are legally required to turn in every completed voter registration application, even the ones we believe to be problematic
- When we turn in registration forms we believe to be problematic, we flag them in writing. We often get accused later of deliberately turning in phony registrations, and we often can prove these are the same registrations that WE flagged.
- There's extremely little possibility for this type of stuff to actually influence an election. Someone who has registered to vote N times is still only going to be allowed to vote once. A voter registration under Mickey Mouse is not going to result in a vote being cast under that name.
- Somehow this was all caught up in the Alberto Gonzalez U.S. Attorneygate scandal; a New Mexico US Atty who was fired resisted pressure from Gonzalez to prosecute ACORN because he knew the charges were false, and another US Attorney who did prosecute ACORN voter reg staff admitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee that ACORN was the victim of fraud by its employees and that we caught the employees and turned them in.

I am not by any means saying this is the full story. I don't know the full story. (I don't believe any of you do, either, of course). But I recognize that I'm inclined to want the most charitable interpretation to be the true one. I'm curious what people with the opposite inclination will have to say.

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 22147
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: ACORN - Should they matter?

#32 Post by Bob78164 » Fri Oct 10, 2008 5:10 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
Sir_Galahad wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:Sirge -- You're the one who made the assertion. If you want someone to lend it credence, it's up to you to support it.

<** sigh ** > Very well. I hope you have the time to read these.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ND ... EyMjE0ODI=

And, if you don't mind reading a blog:

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/06/25/th ... ama-knows/

There are others but these will get you started.

Perhaps this article will help to explain my (b) assertion.

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/26/t ... n-bailout/
Thanks. This is why I made the request. In my view, your sources do not substantiate the factual claims at the top of the thread. I'll provide my thoughts in somewhat more detail later -- I do have some work to do today. (And there's one other potential fly in the ointment -- our Internet connection at home was down when I left this morning, so I'm not sure I'll be able to post from home.) --Bob
To be a little more specific, on the first claim, all that's said is that some of Obama's early community organizing work (which occurred before he went to law school) occurred on behalf of ACORN. There's no suggestion that he had any sort of leadership position with ACORN, nor any evidence to suggest that he has any particular contact with them now.

On the second claim, apparently the issue is $20 billion that would have gone to some sort of housing trust, some portion of which could (according to critics) have been spent through (not on) ACORN.

Facts matter. It's important to look behind the partisan claims and get to the primary sources. In the Internet Age, that's now easier than ever before, and you're far too intelligent not to understand that. I hope that the next time you're tempted to regurgitate political talking points, you take the time to do your fact-checking first. It will lead to improved dialogue all around. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
silvercamaro
Dog's Best Friend
Posts: 9608
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:45 am

Re: ACORN - Should they matter?

#33 Post by silvercamaro » Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:43 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
To be a little more specific, on the first claim, all that's said is that some of Obama's early community organizing work which occurred before he went to law school occurred on behalf of ACORN. There's no suggestion that he had any sort of leadership position with ACORN, nor any evidence to suggest that he has any particular contact with them now.

On the second claim, apparently the issue is $20 billion that would have gone to some sort of housing trust, some portion of which could (according to critics) have been spent through (not on) ACORN.

Facts matter. It's important to look behind the partisan claims and get to the primary sources. In the Internet Age, that's now easier than ever before, and you're far too intelligent not to understand that. I hope that the next time you're tempted to regurgitate political talking points, you take the time to do your fact-checking first. It will lead to improved dialogue all around. --Bob
I prefer primary sources, too. The original article in Social Policy (Vol. 34, 2-3, Winter 2003-Spring 2004) by Toni Foulkes, described in that journal as "a Chicago ACORN leader and a member of ACORN’s National Association Board," includes this passage about events that led up to Obama's gaining the Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate in March 2004.

"Obama started building the base years before. For instance, ACORN noticed him when he was organizing on the far south side of the city with the Developing Communities Project. He was a very good organizer. When he returned from law school, we asked him to help us with a lawsuit to challenge the state of Illinois’ refusal to abide by the National Voting Rights Act, also known as motor voter. Allied only with the state of Mississippi, Illinois had been refusing to allow mass-based voter registration according to the new law. Obama took the case, known as ACORN vs. Edgar (the name of the Republican governor at the time) and we won. Obama then went on to run a voter registration project with Project VOTE in 1992 that made it possible for Carol Moseley Braun to win the Senate that year. Project VOTE delivered 50,000 newly registered voters in that campaign (ACORN delivered about 5000 of them).

"Since then, we have invited Obama to our leadership training sessions to run the session on power every year, and, as a result, many of our newly developing leaders got to know him before he ever ran for office. Thus, it was natural for many of us to be active volunteers in his first campaign for State Senate and then his failed bid for U.S. Congress in 1996. By the time he ran for U.S. Senate, we were old friends."

In this case, of course, the primary source is more difficult to access, since the Foulkes article apparently is the only portion of that issue removed from the quarterly's site and internet archives. You may wish to argue that 2004 is such ancient history that it can’t possibly be considered “current.” It most definitely was long after “he went to law school.” To some people, 2004 is not long ago at all. Facts matter, Bob.
Now generating the White Hot Glare of Righteousness on behalf of BBs everywhere.

User avatar
silvercamaro
Dog's Best Friend
Posts: 9608
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:45 am

Re: ACORN - Should they matter?

#34 Post by silvercamaro » Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:44 pm

Addendum to my previous post:
As of yesterday, the article was not available on the site. Tonight, it may be available through a username and password system that has been instituted within the last 24 hours. I didn’t use or test that route, although I have the entire article. I will not speculate about why it was temporarily inaccessible.

The Social Policy masthead states: “Now published by The American Institute for Social Justice (AISJ) and The ACORN Institute, in cooperation with the Organizers’ Forum, Social Policy reports on and analyzes contemporary movements for social change in the workplace, the community, and the world.”
Now generating the White Hot Glare of Righteousness on behalf of BBs everywhere.

User avatar
Bixby17
Posts: 519
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 9:10 pm

Re: ACORN - Should they matter?

#35 Post by Bixby17 » Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:37 pm

Sir_Galahad wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
Sir_Galahad wrote:First, off, I hate upgrades.

Now, I know that most of you are reasonably intelligent people (uh, oh, here it comes).

So, I put the question to you. Should it matter that Obama has very close ties to ACORN which is under investigation for voter fraud? In case you are unaware, they are under investigation for registering voter using multiples registrations, names, etc. That is, one person will register using 10 different names or other information. Much more information is available on the net if you choose to investigate. And, coincidentally (wink, wink), ACORN was scheduled to received some $20 BILLION of that initial $700 BILLION buyout. Does this not bother you?
Other than ACORN being under investigation, I'm not aware of any of the other factual assertions in this post. Please provide support for (a) the claim that "Obama has very close ties to ACORN" and (b) the claim that "ACORN was scheduled to received [sic] some $20 BILLION of that initial $700 BILLION buyout." Suffice it to say that my BS-meter is redlining. --Bob
Bob, you're savvy enough to do you're own research. It's out there if you want to find it. Most Obama supporter don't so I take that as it is.

I wasn't aware that you had a meter with your initials attached to it. ;)
This is what the Obama campaign says about the ACORN stuff: http://fightthesmears.com/articles/20/acornrumor

Personally, at least as far as what I've seen in this campaign, the biggest socialist radical stuff has been coming from McCain (?!) . His morgage relief plan he introduced during the debate seems to reward those who aren't paying their mortgages versus those who have stayed within their means or have cut expenses to continue to pay their mortgages. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/10/ ... mortgages/

User avatar
Estonut
Evil Genius
Posts: 10495
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 1:16 am
Location: Garden Grove, CA

Re: ACORN - Should they matter?

#36 Post by Estonut » Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:53 pm

ToLiveIsToFly wrote:- We work really hard to catch people doing this, and when we do, we fire them, we turn them into election officials and law enforcement
Now that's comforting! :)

User avatar
ToLiveIsToFly
Posts: 2364
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 11:34 am
Location: Kalamazoo
Contact:

Re: ACORN - Should they matter?

#37 Post by ToLiveIsToFly » Sat Oct 11, 2008 4:05 pm

Estonut wrote:
ToLiveIsToFly wrote:- We work really hard to catch people doing this, and when we do, we fire them, we turn them into election officials and law enforcement
Now that's comforting! :)
Touche'

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 22147
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: ACORN - Should they matter?

#38 Post by Bob78164 » Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:28 pm

silvercamaro wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
To be a little more specific, on the first claim, all that's said is that some of Obama's early community organizing work which occurred before he went to law school occurred on behalf of ACORN. There's no suggestion that he had any sort of leadership position with ACORN, nor any evidence to suggest that he has any particular contact with them now.

On the second claim, apparently the issue is $20 billion that would have gone to some sort of housing trust, some portion of which could (according to critics) have been spent through (not on) ACORN.

Facts matter. It's important to look behind the partisan claims and get to the primary sources. In the Internet Age, that's now easier than ever before, and you're far too intelligent not to understand that. I hope that the next time you're tempted to regurgitate political talking points, you take the time to do your fact-checking first. It will lead to improved dialogue all around. --Bob
I prefer primary sources, too. The original article in Social Policy (Vol. 34, 2-3, Winter 2003-Spring 2004) by Toni Foulkes, described in that journal as "a Chicago ACORN leader and a member of ACORN’s National Association Board," includes this passage about events that led up to Obama's gaining the Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate in March 2004.

"Obama started building the base years before. For instance, ACORN noticed him when he was organizing on the far south side of the city with the Developing Communities Project. He was a very good organizer. When he returned from law school, we asked him to help us with a lawsuit to challenge the state of Illinois’ refusal to abide by the National Voting Rights Act, also known as motor voter. Allied only with the state of Mississippi, Illinois had been refusing to allow mass-based voter registration according to the new law. Obama took the case, known as ACORN vs. Edgar (the name of the Republican governor at the time) and we won. Obama then went on to run a voter registration project with Project VOTE in 1992 that made it possible for Carol Moseley Braun to win the Senate that year. Project VOTE delivered 50,000 newly registered voters in that campaign (ACORN delivered about 5000 of them).

"Since then, we have invited Obama to our leadership training sessions to run the session on power every year, and, as a result, many of our newly developing leaders got to know him before he ever ran for office. Thus, it was natural for many of us to be active volunteers in his first campaign for State Senate and then his failed bid for U.S. Congress in 1996. By the time he ran for U.S. Senate, we were old friends."

In this case, of course, the primary source is more difficult to access, since the Foulkes article apparently is the only portion of that issue removed from the quarterly's site and internet archives. You may wish to argue that 2004 is such ancient history that it can’t possibly be considered “current.” It most definitely was long after “he went to law school.” To some people, 2004 is not long ago at all. Facts matter, Bob.
No, I'd argue that this isn't a particularly surprising level of contact, nor is it inconsistent with what I've already posted. He represented them as an attorney and they have common goals, which they have occasion to work toward in concert. The fundamental point is that even if, contrary to the evidence, ACORN's leadership was attempting to commit voter fraud, there is no reason whatsoever to believe that Obama was complicit, or even had reason to know it. And in fact, the likelihood (I'm relying here on ToLiveIsToFly) is that ACORN's leadership was not attempting to commit voter fraud, but has instead worked diligently to ensure that any fraudulent activities engaged in by its employees are exposed as quickly as possible. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
silvercamaro
Dog's Best Friend
Posts: 9608
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:45 am

Re: ACORN - Should they matter?

#39 Post by silvercamaro » Sat Oct 11, 2008 7:00 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
No, I'd argue that this isn't a particularly surprising level of contact, nor is it inconsistent with what I've already posted. He represented them as an attorney and they have common goals, which they have occasion to work toward in concert. The fundamental point is that even if, contrary to the evidence, ACORN's leadership was attempting to commit voter fraud, there is no reason whatsoever to believe that Obama was complicit, or even had reason to know it. And in fact, the likelihood (I'm relying here on ToLiveIsToFly) is that ACORN's leadership was not attempting to commit voter fraud, but has instead worked diligently to ensure that any fraudulent activities engaged in by its employees are exposed as quickly as possible. --Bob
I would argue that you consistently wish to speak in specifics until some details of the specifics are refuted by "primary sources," and you then wish to redefine the parameters of the argument. I will assume that you learned this in law school and learned it well. Since I did not go to law school, I had to learn to recognize this approach the hard way -- by repeated exposure.

Carry on, Bob. I am amused, but the topic is boring.
Now generating the White Hot Glare of Righteousness on behalf of BBs everywhere.

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 22147
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: ACORN - Should they matter?

#40 Post by Bob78164 » Sat Oct 11, 2008 7:07 pm

silvercamaro wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
No, I'd argue that this isn't a particularly surprising level of contact, nor is it inconsistent with what I've already posted. He represented them as an attorney and they have common goals, which they have occasion to work toward in concert. The fundamental point is that even if, contrary to the evidence, ACORN's leadership was attempting to commit voter fraud, there is no reason whatsoever to believe that Obama was complicit, or even had reason to know it. And in fact, the likelihood (I'm relying here on ToLiveIsToFly) is that ACORN's leadership was not attempting to commit voter fraud, but has instead worked diligently to ensure that any fraudulent activities engaged in by its employees are exposed as quickly as possible. --Bob
I would argue that you consistently wish to speak in specifics until some details of the specifics are refuted by "primary sources," and you then wish to redefine the parameters of the argument. I will assume that you learned this in law school and learned it well. Since I did not go to law school, I had to learn to recognize this approach the hard way -- by repeated exposure.

Carry on, Bob. I am amused, but the topic is boring.
Check the original post in this thread. Sirge attempted to tar Obama with an association with ACORN. Even assuming that ACORN was deliberately attempting to commit voter fraud, which appears to have been convincingly refuted, my point is that Obama's connections with ACORN are insufficient to support guilt by association here. Do you disagree? --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
ToLiveIsToFly
Posts: 2364
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 11:34 am
Location: Kalamazoo
Contact:

Re: ACORN - Should they matter?

#41 Post by ToLiveIsToFly » Sat Oct 11, 2008 8:23 pm

Bob78164 wrote:Even assuming that ACORN was deliberately attempting to commit voter fraud, which appears to have been convincingly refuted
I'm glad you think it's convincing. I'm not SURE I'm convinced, which is why I posted here. I want to be right, but I'm interested to see what people from the less enlightened side of the political spectrum have to say about it.

Post Reply