About us Login Get email updates
County Fair
Print

First the verdict, then the proof

September 16, 2009 3:34 pm ET by John V. Santore

It is clear that serious questions have been raised concerning the actions of several of the ACORN employees recently featured in surveillance videos, each of whom apparently attempted to help conservative activists in disguise evade taxes and engage in prostitution. However, also deserving of investigation is the systematic journalistic malpractice embodied in the current right-wing campaign against the organization.

As is always the case with such conservative political activism, the greatest irony is that Fox News and a myriad of right-wing talkers are pretending that they are engaged in the investigative journalism the "mainstream media" refuses to do -- presumably because of its supposed allegiance to the Obama administration.

The truth is that the ACORN "investigation" currently underway violates virtually every principle of serious journalism. Red flags should have been raised as soon as it was clear which website was hosting and promoting the ACORN videos: Andrew Breitbart's BigGovernment.com. Breitbart, a protégé of Matt Drudge, is hardly a trustworthy journalist or commentator. His public record speaks for itself. After the death of Ted Kennedy, Breitbart called the senator a "villain," a "duplicitous bastard," and a "prick." He has both suggested and asserted that President Obama is a racist and believes Obama is hiding a radical past. In June, he wrote that "Democrats would distribute needles, methadone, medical marijuana and biscotti in voter goodie bags if they could get away with it" and has said that the Democratic Party depends "on the ability to keep blacks in fear." He has even denied that the murder of Matthew Shepard was a hate crime. And we could go on.

What of the intrepid young muckrakers behind the supposed exposé? Quality citizen journalism is a friend to our democracy, but irresponsible citizen journalism isn't. On the September 10 edition of his Fox News show, Glenn Beck hosted Hannah Giles, the young woman portraying a prostitute in the surveillance videos. He asked her how she came to be involved in the project. Here are her exact words:

I had a summer internship with the National Journalism Center out in Washington, D.C., and they set me up with a job. But one day I was jogging after work and I saw an ACORN, and I was like, hmm, you know, I've never seen them before, I don't like them. And I came up with the idea: What if a prostitute walked into ACORN, had no legal paperwork at all, and wanted a house to set up her business?

Two elements of that testimony should call Ms. Giles' work into serious question. The first is her attendance at the National Journalism Center in Washington. The NJC is but one of the many right-wing institutions conservatives have established to flood the field with young, motivated, and rabidly partisan "reporters." The NJC was established with hundreds of thousands of dollars in funding from the Bradley and Olin foundations, both prominent conservative donors. Among its distinguished alumni are Ann Coulter and Debbie Schlussel.

But beyond this, consider the candid wording used by Ms. Giles -- who is the daughter of conservative blogger Doug Giles -- when talking to Beck: "But one day I was jogging after work and I saw an ACORN, and I was like, hmm, you know, I've never seen them before, I don't like them." In the same sentence, Giles is admitting that she simultaneously a) knew nothing about ACORN, and b) knew they were guilty of something awful. In no actual journalistic institution -- or any introductory logic class, for that matter -- would such a statement be allowed to go unchallenged. But Beck accepted it without comment.

Let us now turn to the content of the videos themselves. Again, it does appear than in certain cases, ACORN employees engaged in indefensible behavior, and they should be punished accordingly. But all of a sudden, these videos -- four, thus far -- are being promoted as unimpeachable proof that all of ACORN is equally corrupt -- all 1,200 chapters and hundereds of ACORN employees. This is literally the opposite of how a credible investigation is supposed to function. Sweeping conclusions should only be drawn after all the facts are in. By comparison, here, the conservative media has a few isolated facts but is willing to extrapolate an entire thesis from them.

Equally absent from the Right's coverage is any sense of the tapes' broader context. Bertha Lewis, a top ACORN official, has claimed that the surveillance plan was attempted in numerous cities and that it failed many times. That in and of itself would undermine the assertion that ACORN is universally corrupt. But Fox News, Breitbart, and others have made no attempt to assess this crucial reality. Instead, they have been deliberately deceptive, implying that the few shameful episodes available were filmed in the first four offices Giles and videographer James O'Keefe walked into.

Most critically, it is clear that Fox News has made virtually no attempt to verify the authenticity of the tapes before broadcasting them -- something no self-respecting journalistic organization would dare do. Consider the case of the San Bernardino ACORN office, which was featured in the most recent video to be released. The words of ACORN employee Tresa Kaelke appear to be damning. Not only does she offer assistance to Giles and O'Keefe, but she claims that she murdered her former husband following a period of domestic abuse.

On September 15, Beck and Sean Hannity both broadcast Kaelke's assertion. Beck, who had reported breathlessly on the supposed confession during his radio program, added on Fox, "She never spanked her kids, but she did shoot her husband dead." Later that night, Hannity played the same clip before commenting, "Specifically, now, she goes into this scenario about her husband and the killing of him."

The following morning, on September 16, Fox News' Gretchen Carlson repeated the allegation, saying, "She killed somebody? Despite this, some lawmakers want to keep funding the group."

The problem, of course, is that Kaelke was deliberately lying. The San Bernardino Police Department itself has now confirmed that her claim regarding her husband was untrue. A department statement released on September 15 reads: "The San Bernardino Police Department is investigating the claims made regarding the homicide. From the initial investigation conducted, the claims do not appear to be factual. Investigators have been in contact with the involved party's known former husbands, who are alive and well."

Furthermore, Kaelke has claimed that when she made the statement, she was seeking to mislead the undercover videographers, whom she was suspicious of. "They were not believable," Kaelke is quoted as saying in an ACORN press release. "Somewhat entertaining, but they weren't even good actors. I didn't know what to make of them. They were clearly playing with me. I decided to shock them as much as they were shocking me."

But none of these simple facts stopped anyone at Fox from running with the story. Any cub reporter would have thought to actually call the San Bernardino police before effectively alleging that ACORN was staffed by murderers. But such an act never occurred to people like Beck, Hannity, or Carlson. (In her defense, Carlson later added that the husband was still alive, "according to ACORN," but ignored the police report.)

We know Fox has a history of baselessly scapegoating ACORN, linking it to a broad array of issues. The network -- as well as its conservative accomplices -- obviously doesn't practice serious journalism. What other distortions might be lurking in the ACORN "reports" being filed on BigGovernment.com and hyped by the Right?

The conservative media machine picks its targets and then operates on a simple principle: first the verdict, then the proof. It's the opposite of what real journalism is, and it must continue to be exposed.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by dmhack (September 16, 2009 3:46 pm ET)
      12 1
      What I don't understand is how you can allege that a large organization like ACORN is involved in some criminal activity based on the actions of a few people.

      It would be like me saying that the GOP is a party of adulterers based on the actions of a few Republican politicians.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (September 16, 2009 4:01 pm ET)
        1 1
        Considering the sheer numbers involved (thanks Neon!) your statement would at least live in the same town as the truth, possibly on the same block. The Right's position on Acorn isn't even on the same planet.

        ----------------------------------------------------------------------
        That's what I think anyway.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by bilbo_dies (September 16, 2009 4:11 pm ET)
        2 1
        It would be like me saying that the GOP is a party of adulterers based on the actions of a few Republican politicians.

        Based on the evidence I can't deny this fact.

        As far as ACORN, the right has made it obvious that ANYONE with any ties to Obama, at all, will be held to the fire.
        OK, they will tie them to the stake and then set the fire.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by kydem09 (September 17, 2009 8:38 am ET)
            2
          Oh yeah, because the Dems never engage in adultery. Oh wait a minute, does the name Monica Lewinsky ring a bell?

          Personally, I don't care what the motivation was behind these "sting" operations, I'm glad ACORN is being exposed. Whether this somehow ties into the Obama administration is another matter. ACORN is corrupt and I'm glad people are finally waking up to it.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by The_Cat (September 17, 2009 10:24 am ET)
            1  
            Monica Lewinsky was a Democrat, kydem09? You shock me. And she had an affair? Say it isn't so.

            The reason that Republicans deserve to be dinged over their affairs is because they are the 'family values' party. They are the ones who think that marriage is in trouble if you let homosexuals do it. They are the ones who brought impeachment against a sitting President for a stained dress. They are the ones who take 'wide stances' in restroom. They are the ones who fly to South America on Father's Day to be with their mistress. They are the ones who dragged religion into politics, to the detriment and degradation of both.

            Yes, Democrats and Republicans are both liable to have affairs. But it takes a Republican to screech about a President's affair while having one themselves while their wife lies dying in a hospital. Contemptible hypocrisy should always be called out.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by fairliberal (September 17, 2009 11:18 am ET)
                1


              " They are the ones who brought impeachment against a sitting president for a stained dress"

              Wrong again , they brought impeachment against a sitting president for obstruction of justice.

              And perhaps we should discuss Eliot Spitzer when we discuss contemptible hypocrisy. But you are right about one thing, instead of invoking Lewinsky's name , he should have stuck with Clinton. Or any number of a long list of dems. But the left likes to bring up the flaws of the pols on the right while ignoring the very same flaws on the left. MMFA should post a memo on each thread to show which set of rules are in effect on any given day.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by The_Cat (September 17, 2009 12:25 pm ET)
                2  
                So, fairliberal, you missed the whole point about Republicans campaigning on 'family values' while they cheat on their wives?

                It's not really the infidelity that is the main thrust of the argument, but the hypocrisy that covers it. As for rules, the only one that seems constant is: It's okay if you are Republican.
                Report Abuse
      • Author by wookie (September 16, 2009 4:59 pm ET)
        3 1
        Its sort of a new McCarthyism. They are part of the whole community organizing feild that the right was demonizing all during the campaign. Much the way they demonized civil rights activists and labor unions in the 50's. Its about portraying grass roots activists as evil subversives so people will have more allegiance to right wing authority figures.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by funnymanpants (September 16, 2009 5:59 pm ET)
          1 1
          >>Its sort of a new McCarthyism. They are part of the whole community organizing feild that the right was demonizing all during the campaign.

          Absolutely.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by shaggles (September 16, 2009 6:42 pm ET)
          4 1
          Not just demonizing but belittling. They were very fond of saying all Barack Obama's ever been is a community organizer. That's nothing. Now all of a sudden community organizers are this big scary group that are trying to take over the country. Which is it? Nothings? Or big scaries?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by DellDolly (September 17, 2009 12:23 am ET)
            1  
            Great point.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by Midnight Kevin (September 17, 2009 11:28 am ET)
            1  
            They are scary because they get people to vote. The GOP has maintained power because they have had a hold on voters. Those who vote republican always vote republican. The most reliable voters, seniors, vote republican. You start including the poor voters and the middle class voters, and those not in traditionally conservative areas, the electorate will change in favor of other parties.

            The GOP can stop that change by attacking these organization. Glenn Beck has been attacking ACORN with the rest of Fox News, but Glenn Beck seemed to add to his attack supporters of the organization, like the Teachers Union. He is trying to bully these contributors to try and cease funding. He already succeeded to some extent with the federal government severing ties...

            The thing is, how come Fox News does not cover community organizations that promote the GOP, and that are involved in the same alleged fraudulent activities of ACORN?
            Report Abuse
      • Author by carlileb5935 (September 17, 2009 12:21 am ET)
        4  
        Exactly how did these ACORN people break the law?

        They aren't even showing the whole tape of these "incidents." Where are the employees seen setting up businesses and handing over cash? All I've seen is just them being agreeable to the interviewers-- at best. Where's the evidence of anything besides being punked by that woman in San Berdoo?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Midnight Kevin (September 17, 2009 11:42 am ET)
          1  
          I would like these reporters to face legal action for violation of the laws they broke filming these videos... maybe then it would encourage ambitious reporters to follow the law and actually conduct real journalism. Their videos are like a high school project, and I am not surprised, since the girl is only 20 years old...

          You can see her inexperience as a reporter not only through the camera lens, but on the news programs as well. She does not offer in depth analysis of her own story, but just a snippet accompanied by accusations.

          Check out some of her other stories:

          http://townhall.com/columnists/HannahGiles/

          Very juvenile. Is it a surprise that this reporter came from the daughter of townhall.com columnist (who is also a townhall.com columnist), a conservative web-based publication that was first run by The Heritage Foundation and now by a company that specializes in evangelical Christian and conservative political talk radio.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by Midnight Kevin (September 17, 2009 11:24 am ET)
           
        I imagine there would be more false reporting to come. On Glenn Beck's program, he called for people to bring him information, demonstrating that he could silhouette their image, add pixelation, and change their voice...

        Essentially, he can have numerous supposed whistle blowers with disguised identities making outrageous claims, and I am sure Beck would stand by their testimonies, as would all of Fox News, and when some light is shown on their falsehoods, they would move onto the next story, forgetting about the previous one, accept for the occasional mention of corruption.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by goesto11 (September 16, 2009 3:51 pm ET)
      5 1
      Reminds me of a "scientist" I heard talking about Big Foot on a TV documentary.

      "We know these Sasquatches bury their dead, because we've never found a corpse."

      Ah, so let's start with the "fact" that Big Foot is real and then work backwards to explain why we have no proof of it.

      Seems like the same kind of logic going on here.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by aBeck in 10-O-C (September 16, 2009 4:04 pm ET)
        3 1
        Bigfoot! Brilliantly funny! Also depressingly applicable here.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (September 16, 2009 4:08 pm ET)
        1  
        That kind of logic - that LACK of evidence constitutes PROOF - is endemic to conservative thinking in general and religion in particular.

        Funny how it's the same disease that afflcits those who believe in UFO abductions, psychic powers, magical thinking, 9/11 truthers, conspiracy theorists, etc... Pretty much all your tin-foil hat wearers.

        This is the best sight I've ever seen for digging through and thouroughly debunking that kind of illogical nonsense.

        But you'll never, ever see the Right excercise this kind of objective, academic discipline when vetting their stories on Acorn. I'm not even sure they'd know how...

        ----------------------------------------------------------------------
        ...because they just don't know how to THINK!
        Report Abuse
        • Author by DellDolly (September 16, 2009 4:28 pm ET)
          3  
          You think this logic is illogical. You should view the student's work who told Beck how many people attended the 9/12 event in DC.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by NiceguyEddie (September 17, 2009 9:37 am ET)
               
            Give me a link. I'd be curious to take a look. (Whether it's a good laugh or not.) :)

            I seen a couple of these kidns of things, both for lib's and con's, and either's analysis suffers from the same bias as the original estimates do. Each makes assumptions which may (or may not) be reasonable, but which inevitably skew the estimate one way or the other. I wish we had a satelite photo like we did for the inauguraltion. Then we could compare.

            But we don't, so both sides are left to endlessly speculate.

            -----------------------------------------------------------------
            Oh well.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by DellDolly (September 17, 2009 2:48 pm ET)
                 
              It was in another of MMFA's postings, the one about "The Hilarious game of conservative telephone continues"

              http://mediamatters.org/blog/200909160019

              Here's a link to the paper.

              http://www.scribd.com/doc/19743935/The-Real-Number-of-Protesters-Zac-Moilanen
              Report Abuse
        • Author by Ecotopian (September 16, 2009 7:09 pm ET)
             
          Regarding your link to the Skeptics Dictionary, which you identify as "the best sight [sic]" you've seen for "thoroughly debunking that kind of nonsense," I would proceed with caution. I picked a topic I know something about---organic gardening and farming---to test how the site does its debunking. I immediately found links to a book by John Stossel and an article by Dennis T. Avery. These are both people who have amply demonstrated an anti-organic bias rather than an open-minded interest in examining organic claims.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by NiceguyEddie (September 17, 2009 9:14 am ET)
               
            Perhaps, but let's not just claim "bias" and say it's false. (That's what the con's do to us. We can be better than that.)

            Do you deny that "bacterial contamination is a much greater possibility from natural fertilizers?" That statement sure seems reasonable to me, since "organic fertilizer" is mostly $#!t. (And I mean that literally, not figurativly.)

            Are you claiming that "organically produced food is safer or more nutritious than conventionally produced food?" Becuase that has never been proven scientifically. It's only a claim made by those who have a "pro-organic" bias.

            Do you doubt that "The residues from pesticides on food, natural or synthetic, are not likely to cause harm to consumers because they occur in minute quantities?" Again - there are many studies that support this.

            NOW... are there ways in that organic farming is better? SURE. I'll acknowledge that it's more sustainanble. Chemical Fertilizers cause the plants to grow BIGGER, which (once the fertilizer is used up) causes the to leach MORE from the soil, which leads to you needing MORE fertilizer than before to maintain them next time around, which is a viscous cycle.

            But to say that organic food is SAFER or HEALTHIER... That just isn't supported by science. A tomato is a tomato. And that (to me) is the jist of the article. The PRACTICE of organic farming, I'll grant you, migh be better in the big picture. But he's not addressing that. He's only shooting down the bogus claims about the FOOD that are not supported by science.

            And that's HIS bias. Pro-Science.

            I will also say this... While I fully believe every singe word that BOB CARROLL wrote there, I'll have to admit that some of the works he links to are more hit-or-miss, at least in my opinion. But taking one good point out of an otherwise mixed work does not necessarily undermine the argument your making, or even the point itself. (Don't go ad hominen, with 'Stossel is biased' now!) If you can refute any of the specific claims he's made, then fine. Go ahead.

            ...And if you can, WRITE HIM. He takes readers emails, and often publishes the responses. He's brutal if you don't do your homework, or misrepresent his work, but he's also been known to make some revisions or expand some of his sections as a result of reader feedback.
            Report Abuse
    • Author by funnymanpants (September 16, 2009 4:00 pm ET)
      2  
      FROM BLOG:"This is literally the opposite of how a credible investigation is supposed to function. Sweeping conclusions should only be drawn after all the facts are in. By comparison, here, the conservative media has a few isolated facts but is willing to extrapolate an entire thesis from them."

      Hear here! That is exactly right. And that is why the first piece that appeared on CNN called these hit pieces propaganda. The journalists didn't suspect (or know of) malpractice on ACORN's part and then devise a scheme to expose this practice.

      Instead, they *invented* the crime. In a court of law, that is known as entrapment. We have no reason to believe (at this point), that offices all over the US were encouraging tax fraud. It is more likely that, presented with a bizarre situation, certain ACORN workers responded in a very unethical way, admittedly showing a lack of principal, but none-the-less not revealing anything inherently wrong with the organization.

      I keep saying that the film makers need to release all of the videos unedited and appear on a real network to answer questions. They refuse to do either. O'Keefe merely responds to the second requirement with reactionary vitriol.

      When accused of not revealing that he tried the same stunt at other ACORN locations, he evades a direct answer, saying that can't be true because he has caught more than one organization in his trap. But of course, it can be true. For all we know, he might have tried his stunt at 200 offices and only succeeded in 3. For all we know, he coached his targets into their responses. We have a right to know the whole story.

      Last, I think it is really dishonest the way O'Keefe and Giles only release the videos one at a time. It is pretty hard for ACORN to respond to the charges when they don't have all the videos, when they don't have the unedited videos, and when the film makers refuse to answer basic questions. My guess is that O'Keefe and Giles won't to maximize the damage done to ACORN's reputation by releasing one film at a time, trying to continually catch the organization on the wrong foot.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by mustardman (September 16, 2009 4:00 pm ET)
      6  
      Kinda like saying Glenn Beck raped and murdered a girl in 1990 or that he continues to beat his wife because there is no evidence to the contrary.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by dmhack (September 16, 2009 4:26 pm ET)
        3  
        I love the Beck rape and murder site.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by mustardman (September 16, 2009 4:29 pm ET)
          3  
          You mean this one. I don't personally believe that Glenn Beck raped and murdered a girl in 1990 or that he continues to beat his wife. The rumors are quite persistent though so maybe there is something to it.
          http://gb1990.com/
          http://hasglennbeckstoppedbeatinghiswife.com/
          Report Abuse
          • Author by kydem09 (September 17, 2009 8:49 am ET)
            1 1
            Funny thing is, there's evidence on video of more than one ACORN worker counseling a pimp and prostitute how to commit tax, bank and mortgage fraud, whereas there's absolutely no evidence about Beck raping and murdering a girl. Based on what we've seen from ACORN I think it's logical to question further about whether any actual fraud occurred as a result of counseling done by ACORN to other customers. And it is more than appropriate for the Senate to have blocked any additional federal funding to ACORN. Now Schwarznegger has asked for a state investigation; Louisiana is investigating. Time for all other states and the feds to investigate.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Übermensch (September 17, 2009 9:24 am ET)
                 
              http://gb1990.com/
              http://hasglennbeckstoppedbeatinghiswife.com/

              These sites may be over your head kydem09
              So much for republicans having a good sense of humor or seeing how their logic can be used against them.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by kydem09 (September 17, 2009 9:44 am ET)
                   
                I was specifically responding to the posters above me with regard to their analogies. Sorry if that's over your head.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by Übermensch (September 17, 2009 10:02 am ET)
                     
                  Funny thing is, there's evidence on video of more than one ACORN worker counseling a pimp and prostitute how to commit tax, bank and mortgage fraud, whereas there's absolutely no evidence about Beck raping and murdering a girl.

                  Yeah, my post held no relevancy to you interjecting your opinion about Glen Beck.

                  As there is no proof Glenn didn't rape or murder a girl in 1990, there is no proof that ACORN as whole is a corrupt organization.

                  in addition, http://gb1990.com/ and
                  http://hasglennbeckstoppedbeatinghiswife.com/ are meant to point out how republicans/conservatives/right-wing pundits and their ilk can just throw around allegations with no concrete proof.

                  The two ACORN employees have been terminated...what about the republicans/conservatives/right-wing pundits and the rest of their cronies? What sort of reprimand would you suggest for them?

                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by kydem09 (September 17, 2009 11:28 am ET)
                       
                    Actually, at least 4 ACORN employees have been terminated. Another arm of ACORN is under investigation in numerous states for voter registration fraud. The brother of the founder of ACORN embezzled $1M in funds from ACORN and ACORN chose not to even report it to its board of directors, nor did ACORN pursue criminal charges. In 1996 the Inspector General stripped ACORN Housing of a $1M grant because it was using the funds in a way contrary to federal guidelines. There are numerous allegations from former employees about ACORN, among other things, strong-arming banking institutions. I could go on and on. Any one of these things might mean nothing, but put it all together and ACORN stinks to high heaven of corruption.
                    Report Abuse
            • Author by fairliberal (September 17, 2009 11:22 am ET)
                 
              "Funny thing is, there's evidence on video of more than one ACORN worker counseling "

              Yes the count is now up to five. Anf if they are so innocent, why has the census dumped tham, the Senate has cut off funds, they themselves has suspended operations, and now the Obama admin is speaking out against them. It's about time. I guess when he speaks out agaainst a group like acorn he doesn't do so as quickly as he does against the police.
              Report Abuse
          • Author by jflz201884 (September 17, 2009 9:28 am ET)
               
            Maybe it's just me. (Sniff, sniff.) But I love America so much that I have to say Glenn doesn't do such things, as far as I know.

            Jerry Elsea
            Report Abuse
    • Author by pilotshark (September 16, 2009 4:00 pm ET)
      2  
      i am going to have to just start laughing at all the bovine scatology that fox and rushbuttboilbo, cause this is so stupid it`s starting to hurt.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by kydem09 (September 17, 2009 8:51 am ET)
          2
        And what's so stupid about exposing potential fraud within an organization as large and influential as ACORN? An organization that receives millions in taxpayer dollars?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by The_Cat (September 17, 2009 10:31 am ET)
          1  
          You are absolutely right, kydem09. Let's do that. More importantly, let's ignore those corporations that receive hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars, and use it to kill American soldiers. That's obviously a much less important story.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by fairliberal (September 17, 2009 11:23 am ET)
              1
            I hope you include GE on that list of corps.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by kydem09 (September 17, 2009 11:32 am ET)
              1
            I'm not saying that. Let's expose them all and prosecute anyone who has broken the law. Any organization receiving taxpayer money should be held to a very high standard. Corrupt and reckless behavior by any of the listed organizations should be out there. I'm fine with pursing Blackwater, etc. No problem with it at all. But stop pretending like ACORN isn't corrupt.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by The_Cat (September 17, 2009 12:03 pm ET)
              1  
              I'm not pretending ACORN isn't corrupt. I deplore the people who would help further a prostitution ring, or try to cheat the government out of taxes. I have a hard time believing that four people are representative of a nationwide group who employ thousands in all 50 states, however.

              Also, this was the part of ACORN that deals with low income housing and other issues in poor communities. Not the ACORN that registers voters. But because they are both organized under the same name, and the attacks against the voter side of ACORN were an epic fail, the conservatives have now targeted another aspect of ACORN. I suspect it is an affront to most Republicans that a poor person's vote counts equally with a millionaire's vote, but that is only my opinion.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by kydem09 (September 17, 2009 1:10 pm ET)
                  1
                All of ACORN's organizations are interconnected. Granted, the voter registration side of ACORN never directly received federal funds. However, ACORN Housing was already found to have misused a federal grant back in 1996 by diverting some of the funds to the voter registration side of ACORN. I've enumerated many other problems within ACORN elsewhere and won't reiterate those. As for your suspicion about Republican's wanting to discount poor peoples' votes, that is a completely baseless comment and simply untrue.
                Report Abuse
    • Author by DellDolly (September 16, 2009 4:09 pm ET)
      3  
      How many people thought that the football player recently arrested for assaulting his girlfriend was guilty because he had been arrested for assaulting her? Turns out, all charges have been dropped.

      An allegation is not fact of a guilty party, much less a guilty organization, or as Karl Rove said, a "criminal enterprise"!
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (September 16, 2009 4:27 pm ET)
        5  
        There is one positive aspect to come out of the relentless attempts to demonize ACORN as a whole by the right.

        Any time I see ACORN on a protestors sign, or see them mentioned in a website comment, or somebody brings them up in a conversation about real issues, it's like a little helpful alert pops up, telling me;

        "Caution: You are dealing with somebody very emotionally driven and easily distracted by trivia. They may have serious problems with logic and facts. Proceed accordingly".
        Report Abuse
        • Author by foghornleghorn (September 16, 2009 4:44 pm ET)
          3  
          And, Col., I believe racism is involved as well because the nutjobs have such an irrational hatred for anything ACORN. A large part of it has to be because they help poor people (who the nutjobs equate as black people). Plus they helped register black voters that put the black man in the White House.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (September 16, 2009 5:17 pm ET)
            4  
            Yeah, I think the racism is pretty obvious to everybody but the racists.

            I've just been mentioning it less, because anybody who's paying attention already knows it, and every time it comes up, the thread get derailed by wingnuts who just don't understand how anybody can see racism when nobody said "I Hate N*****rs !!!"

            The people who keep asking why any opposition to Obama's policies is called racism ( of course, it's not).

            You know, the ones who can't wait to play the "Race Card" Card.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by foghornleghorn (September 16, 2009 5:40 pm ET)
              3  
              I should have recognized these racists for who they are when the nutjobs were claiming Obama voted to allow abortions for live births.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by bluhawk7398 (September 16, 2009 8:24 pm ET)
                1 3
                We're going to have to start a running tally on how many times you skip the issue and plunk down the "race card" while claiming not to be doing so....getting to be a common theme with you! For the record, any suprises? Racism? Prove it! I'd really like to see the facts on this one, and while you're at it go ahead and hyperbole all the way out to inclusion of Fox, and how Wilson saying "you lie" and anything else the left is claiming is racist...it's getting so tiring hearing this everytime the left disagrees with something or someone...
                Report Abuse
                • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (September 16, 2009 8:30 pm ET)
                  5  
                  ...the thread get derailed by wingnuts who just don't understand how anybody can see racism when nobody said "I Hate N*****rs !!!"
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by bluhawk7398 (September 17, 2009 7:21 pm ET)
                       
                    Superb! Boy did you show me! Come on, there has to be a more enlightening response in the deep dark annals of your brain....please show me just the periphery of the colossal magnificence of the liberal/enlightened (hence correct) way of thinking....pretty please?(don't use race in any way though)
                    Report Abuse
                • Author by eweston8542983 (September 16, 2009 10:25 pm ET)
                  3  
                  Buy one of those sleepnumber beds to ease your sufferring.
                  Prove you have any knowledge of what racism is.
                  Reading your quote would certainly give any racist a warm fuzzy.
                  Another word you might check out is enabler.
                  If you've got any time left see SPLC on the growth of hate groups in the last year.
                  Or the Secret Service's alarm over a massive increase in death threats towards a sitting president since Obama entered the office.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by bluhawk7398 (September 17, 2009 7:29 pm ET)
                       
                    I sincerely hope that post was not meant for me! You do not know me(thank heaven), and I do know a lot about racism and bigotry ,first hand and unfortunately on the receiving end. That is why I absolutely HATE when I see people using the race card and suffering vicariously through the perceived laments and woes of others...I don't need to check with the SLPC(special interest groups also earn my ire) to know what it feels like to worry about a walk to the store without getting jumped on the way.....not everyone fits your convenient cutout of what a conservative is, it would be best if you and others get that through their thick skulls!!!!
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by eweston8542983 (September 17, 2009 8:00 pm ET)
                         
                      All for you, enjoy.
                      Your first hand evidence would be? The later hint about trouble walking to the store? This is not suffering from racism.

                      What other special interests raise your ire? You'd be untroubled being in court opposite the SPLC then?

                      I know that you only use the conservative label for cover. Struassian is what you are. The American form of government, your enemy.

                      As long as the leadership of the republican party remains mute over the racist rhetoric coming from elements of the "party", Then they are enablers. They make the racists feel mainstream and right at home.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by bluhawk7398 (September 18, 2009 6:38 pm ET)
                           
                        Oh my! You really are a jewel of the left aren't you? I'm a conservative, so I could not have possibly been touched by racism personally,Right? How about hearing a euphemism for your race when you're only seven? Does that count? How about hearing it again and again as you get older? How about having to fight too many times to count just because you're the only one who wasn't white? Does that count?
                        You use your favorite "struassian" label for me...pray explain what exactly you mean, because seem to love using that label!
                        BTW I would not fear an organization such as the SLPC in court, no.... lame try...
                        Report Abuse
              • Author by Brabantio (September 17, 2009 1:05 am ET)
                1  
                So if anyone else was in Obama's shoes on that vote, wingnuts would just ignore it? They wouldn't try to spin it to their advantage, for some unfathomable reason?

                Some of the ACORN nonsense is based on race, sure. How much is hard to tell, since it's also a convenient way to attack a Democrat regardless of skin color. But I don't see the connection between abortion and race. It's not like the pro-life forces have ever been particularly discriminating in their protests or anything.
                Report Abuse
          • Author by kydem09 (September 17, 2009 8:57 am ET)
              1
            Keep the racism charges coming. It only emboldens everyone in the middle and to the right. On the downside, it diminishes real racism in this country and you set back race relations 20 years by recklessly throwing around the "R" word. It's also a transparent and blatant attempt to silence people with whom you disagree.

            Plus, let's look at some facts. At the time of Obama's inauguration, 70% of Americans said they supported him. Now his approval ratings are around 50%. So, what's more logical here, that 20% of Americans suddenly turned racist or that they don't like the way the President is leading the country?
            Report Abuse
    • Author by Anthony (September 16, 2009 5:26 pm ET)
         
      So there IS actually a close and direct connection of James O'Keefe to Andrew Breitbart? How very interesting!

      Where are the good old days, where the media was held accountable to clarify false reports or get sued?
      I think we should revive those days!
      Report Abuse
      • Author by kydem09 (September 17, 2009 8:59 am ET)
          2
        You want to discount what you've seen with your own eyes because of a "close and direct connection?" I agree that Fox should have checked out the "murder" story before reporting it as such, but it doesn't change what we have seen in the other videos.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Bad News (September 16, 2009 5:37 pm ET)
         
      Fox News & their Hate machine is running on automatic.


      Mr. News
      Report Abuse
    • Author by shaggles (September 16, 2009 6:30 pm ET)
         
      I like that bit about Matthew Shepard in light of the St Louis school bus beating.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Tj (September 16, 2009 7:50 pm ET)
         
      There is a Church-0-Christ near my lovely and talented home, with the obligatory (for Church-0-Christ) neon sign outside. Last week it read "sometimes believing is seeing." In other words, once you b'lieve in ducks, everything looks like a duck.

      one word of caution: DUCK!!!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by leithanne (September 16, 2009 8:24 pm ET)
      1  
      Raise your hand if you think Ms. Giles would ever jog through a neighborhood in which an ACORN office is located.

      Anyone?

      Anyone?

      I didn't think so.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by OOzinEvil (September 16, 2009 9:40 pm ET)
         
      Guess John Stewart fell into the racist trap also. link
      Report Abuse
      • Author by goesto11 (September 17, 2009 11:18 am ET)
           
        What's racist about Jon Stewart's piece?

        I'm guessing Stewart would have aired an identical segment regardless of the race of the people involved.

        What those handful of ACORN people did is outrageous and worthy of mockery. Mockery is Stewart's business.

        I suppose one could question the use of "hos" in the piece, but he was, after all, talking about prostitutes. That's what a lot of people call them these days.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Robert Lopez (September 17, 2009 3:54 am ET)
         
      Oh Gosh. Is Hillary's little rag in a tail spin? Heavy on the "spin".
      Report Abuse
    • Author by ttariku20046974 (September 17, 2009 5:29 am ET)
         
      I never heard this type of journalism, even third world do better assessments, because of their limited budget, before they broadcast on the air.
      I don't know what to make out of the fox people? Are they really in news business or simply a political party (Republican) media?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Bad News (September 17, 2009 8:23 am ET)
         
      That's called Fox 101


      Mr. News
      Report Abuse
    • Author by aBeck in 10-O-C (September 18, 2009 12:04 am ET)
         
      Seems like the time for a betting pool.
      How long before we see the following scrawled on some right wing site?
      "O'Keefe/Giles 2012"
      They are conservative rock stars.
      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

About the Blog

Feed Icon
  • County Fair is a media blog featuring links to progressive media criticism from around the Web as well as original commentary, breaking news and rapid response updates to major media events from Media Matters senior fellows and other staff.