Following Beck's instructions, Fox News attempts to change story from health care to ACORN
On September 9, Glenn Beck said that while the media "says they're going to be talking about health care" the next day, he didn't "think so," later suggesting that a video of Baltimore ACORN employees would instead be the top story. Apparently taking their cues from Beck, through 7 p.m. the following day, Fox News devoted at least 17 segments on six programs to airing and discussing portions of the video.
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
Beck: "[T]hings change" tomorrow due to video on ACORN
From the September 9 edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck:
BECK: America, I have to tell you, I'm going to be real honest with you. I am -- I'm afraid for the future of our country, because I think they're taking us in a direction that most people are just -- they refuse to look at. But I'm optimistic because more and more people are waking up. And these people are so arrogant in Washington. They'll -- I mean, they'll just end up tripping up and exposing themselves and destroying themselves.
I am honestly concerned for myself and for my family because I'd sure like to have some more friends here in the mainstream media -- you know, on NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN -- spread the news here on doing some actual investigating and telling people the truth. But until they do, we'll continue to tell you the truth as we know it.
Tomorrow -- tomorrow, things change. I think things change a lot for those in power. The tides are about to turn, and that will be on tomorrow's broadcast.
Trust me. Everybody now says they're going to be talking about health care. I don't think so. Tomorrow you will see an exclusive -- stuff on tomorrow's program. Don't miss it.
ACORN video the "exclusive stuff." Later in his September 9 program, Beck aired snippets of a video compiled by conservative activist and filmmaker James O'Keefe and TownHall.com columnist Hannah Giles going to ACORN's Baltimore office and, in O'Keefe's words, "posing the most ridiculous criminal scenario we could think of and seeing if they would comply-which they did without hesitation." Beck suggested the video was the "exclusive stuff" that the media would be "talking about" instead of health care.
Fox News follows Beck's lead in "talking about" ACORN video
Fox covers ACORN video in at least 17 segments on six programs. On September 10 through 7 p.m., Fox News aired at least 17 segments on the ACORN video, portions of which it often aired. Fox News programs covering the video included: Fox & Friends; America's Newsroom; Happening Now; Live Desk; Glenn Beck; and Special Report.
On September 10, Beck "trying to figure out how journalists don't report this today"
From the September 10 edition of Glenn Beck:
BECK: I'm trying to figure out how journalists don't report this today. I'm trying to -- OK. NBC I get. They're in bed with the Obama administration, and they're going to go down all the way to the end. They'll go down. That network will go all the way down, sink with the ship. CNN, where are you? ABC? CBS? Well, no. Hang on. They still have time. It might be on the evening news.
Conservatives frequently use ACORN to distract from real issues
Conservative media figures have frequently used ACORN as a bogeyman. In coverage of major news stories, many conservative media figures have frequently blamed ACORN for national crises and accused ACORN of receiving undeserved benefits from the government. Topics conservatives have used to scapegoat ACORN include: the 2008 financial crisis, voter fraud, the stimulus bill, the Minnesota Senate recount, Obama's nomination of David Hamilton to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and the 2010 Census.
Beck obsessed with linking groups to ACORN. Illustrating the conservative penchant for using ACORN as a bogeyman, Beck himself has devoted segments to tenuous or tangential "connections" between ACORN and the following people and groups: AmeriCorps, AARP, Judge Sonia Sotomayor, PRLDEF, and SEIU. Beck has also fearmongered about ACORN while attacking President Obama and his policies.
When in Doubt, "Blame It On The Black Man"
"It's minorities that are causing this health care debate"
"Our only hope is Secession before it's too Late"
Speak truth to power.
Mr. News
Many Republicans simply refer to illegal immigrants as "my nanny", "my gardener", "my maid", "my handyman", etc.
They're certainly not really arguing against any policies of his, and proposing what he should do. Mostly it is smear, lies, distortions, fear mongering, and name calling. They have no logical opposition for anything Obama is doing, and the sad thing is, if they "thought" about it, they do have logical opposition, but alas, that doesn't make for exciting TV now does it?
Instead, they like to call him fascist, commie, socialist, Nazi, racist, and so on.
True enough, any democratic president elected in November of 2008 would be getting jumped on by these guys, because that's how they roll, but the vitriol and rhetoric is a lot more heated and violent than even during the Clinton times, and I dind't think it could get worse.
Have you ever read an actual definition of the word "Socialist"? By definition, Bush was closer to Fascist than Obama is to Socialist. Do your homework.
Maybe you should do your homework.
But I didn't see you argue that Bush was NOT a fascist, so maybe there's hope for you yet...
Look at their rhetoric. Who from say foxNews has offered anything remotely opposing Obama's proposed policies in the form of actual ideas? NOBODY!
What they do, is, as I said, call him names, make things up about him (as you have above calling him a socialist), and basically attack the person, NOT his policies.
By you calling him a socialist doesn't even make it close to true. By others, calling him a socialist doesn't make it anymore true. Obama is right in the middle, and if you think otherwise, you don't know what you're talking about.
Unfortunately, we have an entire mainstream political party encouraging the most infantile of thinkers out there. They have given up on actually using ideas or facts to argue actual policy discussions or sway serious adults. (As you suggest there are actual policu discussions that should be going on and are going on within the Democratic party.)
But instead, the right would whether play to their base, shrink their party even more, and listen to the fallacies being promoted by entertainers. These TV and radio entertainers are now their "statesmen" and represent their "policies". Everything you hear from a Republican or a Republican defender today is merely a talking point I hear when I listen to Limbaugh, Dobbs, Beck, Hannity, etc. etc.
Yeah, you are right - it's personal.
The attacks against Bush weren't personal. Talking about his capabilities is not personal. Attacking Obama for the color of his skin, attacking anyone for the color of his skin, is personal. Attacking someone's behavior, something they can control, is not a personal attack. Attacking someone for something they can't control is a personal attack.
OK - here's your chance. Prove to us that Obama's a socialist.
You are a hopeless reactionary. We have never had a purely capitalist system, nor is there anything in the US Constitution that says we must.
obama seeks to regulate, not take over, the means of production - and that is not socialism. he has not nationalised, nor has he attempted to nationalise, the energy industries. he has not nationalised, nor has he attempted to nationalixe, the steel industry, construction, coal mining, the railway system, utilities, the Great Lakes waterways, or any other parts of the backbone of industry.
Your claims are spurious and vacuaous. You are truly a zombie - you believe what you are told to believe, no matter what the facts are.
He hasn't tried to take over a single industry, and he has stated multiple times that he doesn't want to take over any industry. You couldn't be more wrong, and more deceitful, than you are already.
Epic fail.
Here's an answer for the future you can use, free of charge: just say Obama is a socialist because of all the socialist policies he's socializing on our now-socialist country.
any of various arboreal chiefly nocturnal prosimian primates (superfamily Lemuroidea) that were formerly widespread but are now largely confined to Madagascar and that usually have a longish muzzle, large eyes, very soft woolly fur, and a long furry tail.
QED. Man, proving things is easy now that I know I just need to copy & paste a dictionary definition to do it.
There is an argument that should have been had about nationalizing some of these industries (at least temporarily) since they were too big too fail. That's the conversation an adult, rational country would have had. Unfortunately, we cannot have that dialogue because we are STUCK explaining the elementary basics of socialism to 7th graders like YOU.
Cap and trade has NOTHING to do with socialism. It is government regulation. The government does not need to regulate anything in socialism - they OWN it. Does your simple mind grasp the difference? We cannot move onto the real conversations we need to have until you, the ignorant amongst us, understand the simple government concepts that we are talking about.
I hope you, and Stark and the others have learned something today. Now, do NOT tune into Fox News or Am radio for a few days, then come back here and we can began a lesson on fascism.
You prove your claim. I'll bet you can't. Then we won't have to worry about disproving your claim, because it will be unable to stand without evidence or proof.
And just how am I supposed to prove that Beck and FNC didn't have a racist motive? If it's true then it should be easy to prove they DID have a racist motive. That's why I asked somebody to point it out.
English enough, you ignorant and foolish person?
By your tone, I can tell that not being able to prove a negative is frustrating to you. Welcome to the world of the liberal. You and your heroes have no facts, so it's ALL speculation. All we've been hearing for the past eight months is how the fact that Obama can't prove that something ISN'T true proves that it IS - so you choose: do you want to stick with your statement, and thereby ruin whatever integrity you think your heroes' arguments had, or do you want to apologize on behalf of your heroes for making us hear this crap since Jan 20?
You have been proven worthless as a debating adversary. You come without any ammunition. You suffer from right wing Tourette's syndrome. You shout things out, but have NOTHING behind ANY of it for proof. I can only assume you lack the healthcare coverage that you need, which we will continue to fight for. We have moved on to the other adults that come here for actual dialogue.
Beck: "i think this president hates white people" "i think he's a racist"
fox says this even though obama has done not one thing to show that he "hates white people"
so i guess your right, it's not about race is it?
Are you really incapable of retaining info this basic? If you can't, you really should get yourself immediately to a physician to uncover whatever medical malady you have.
I suspect that you are capable of retaining basic info, and it's just that you are unwilling to have a fair debate. That makes you a troll.
By that reasoning, i am sure we could say the same of the entire Republican party, couldn't we?
Get a grip.
Are you really incapable of retaining info this basic? If you can't, you really should get yourself immediately to a physician to uncover whatever medical malady you have.
I suspect that you are capable of retaining basic info, and it's just that you are unwilling to have a fair debate. That makes you a troll.
This is why Stark will defend Beck till the ends of the Earth even though he is a member of a church that was openly racist for generations. But will attack Obama and an entire congregation (that Stark mistakenly believes is all black) as racist because one pastor may or may not have said some racist statements a few times over a 20 year period. It truly is a modern phenomenon and almost a last grasp at whites to maintain some sense of power over the minorities they fear.
Do not lose you moral way just because it may taint the side you support! Aren't your values worth more than that?
It reminds me of the Planned Parenthood sting operation when the girl went under cover posing as a 14yr old impregnated buy a 30yr old & the employee told her she didn't want to know about him.
Just sickening...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124182750646102435.html
It's pretty clear why stark and a few other right wing suckers can never isolate a quote or a fact to support themselves. They work on the cumulative effect of blaring headlines from right wing sources like the WSJ, a lot of innuendo and subjective statements that add up to convincing them that they've really seen somehthing.
Indicted does not mean guilty. And can you please be more specific and show who was indicted when?
It may be that he intentionally keeps things vague for more wiggle room, but I don't think it's deliberate. I used to work with a guy that would constantly walk in on me out of the blue, first thing in the morning, with questions like "Did you ever talk to him about that?"
Jeez, Col, don't leave us hanging. Did you? And what was the other guy's reaction to what he had said that day?
And, even if they did, can you be sure they voted for Obama?
Harry Potter is the good guy and hates Voldemort, who, as we know, is really Obama reincarnated. So he didn't. It's anyone's guess how Mickey voted--since he is a cartoon character, maybe he voted for the party that choose as a vice president a cartoon character, aw-shucks I can see Alaska from my house. Just my guess.
And even if they did, can you be sure that Mickey Mouse and Harry Potter aren't their real, legal names?
They were indicted for registration fraud. I pointed out the fact that not one single fraudulent vote has ever been shown to be a result of ACORN activities. You presented your website (you really should learn how to post a link) to refute me. It failed to do so.
Can you refute me? You said "There's plenty more." Do they all fail as badly as your first?
In the cases of registration fraud, ACORN is a victim.
Okay, Bill, who? Seriously. I am aware of only one conviction in Las Vegas, in which the prosecuters admitted that the guilty person was not trying to do their job, but just trying to shirk their duty.
We are all puzzled by starkcr's pronouns. It seems you have the secret decoder ring, so let us in!
By the way, my post is trying to be funny, not sarcastic.
He completely disregards the fact that once the registration forms have been submitted to ACORN it's illegal for them NOT to be submitted to the state. Puts ACORN in a damned if you do, damned if you don't position when dealing with vindictive right-wingers.
Thanks. But only one person got convicted, right? Do you know what happened in the 15 other states the right winger keeps bringing up? I have found only one conviction with a google search.
I've made this statement many times over the last couple of years in different forums:
ACORN has been operating for decades all across the country. In all of that time, in all of those places, it's never been shown that one single fraudulent vote has ever been cast as a result of ACORN activities.
No one has ever found evidence to refute that statement, though many have tried. They've been told that ACORN generates fraudulent votes so often that they think it MUST be true and don't realize that there's no support for the claim.
Registration fraud is not the same as voter fraud. In the cases of registration fraud, ACORN is a victim. They hire people to register voters and a few of those they hire choose to collect their pay without doing the work. They are screwing over ACORN. ACORN derives no benefit from those people. In fact, they are a pain in the rear for ACORN and the organization would love it if it never happened again.
From what I have been reading here, none of the liberal posters seem to have a problem with the content of the video. If it didnt make you sick to see the way this group conducted themselves and their disregard for the law (Forget that Obama promised to let them SHAPE his administration) then you need to realize how morally bankrupt you are.
No.
It's the fisher girl rule: whenever she says something, it almost always is not true. (The *Times* didn't publish a review on Levin's book;" "Nancy Pelosi has a luxury plane;" "Kerry bought up all copies of *New Soldier;" "Kerry refused to have the book reprinted.")
And what makes that so terrible, is that she is an ex-Marine who should know better.
At least I would not sacrifice my children to Islamic fundamentalists as you would. If you asked any parent what they would do to save one of there children what do you think they would say? But not you Mr. Righteous, you would let them jump or burn to death. Go watch the video of Nick Berg getting his head hacked off and tell me again how you would let that happen to one of your own family members.
Did you and starker go to the same School of Facts, Links and English Composition?
Why didn't you answer my question?
I don't have a college degree, I've told you that, but I would have been embarrassed to turn in a paper in Middle School written at the level of your average post here. Your imaginary Masters Degree can't make that go away.
And I've been unemployed for a few weeks out of the past thirty years. Do you have any other fiction-based insults you'd like to scribble, or would you like to answer my question?
So you are a Marine that believes in torture. How nice. Calling people names doesn't further your argument. It is pretty laughable that you cite Glenn Beck as a source. Really?
I wouldn't sacrifice my children to Islamic fundamentalist. I also don't support torture. It is really simple. Even our founding fathers, many of them slave owners, recognized torture was wrong. (If you think we should torture people, should we torture mafia and gang members to get more information to potentially save other lives?)
Let me just repeat: you hardly ever fail enforcing the fisher girl rule: whatever you state (Levin's lack of a book review, Kerry's actions, Pelosi's plane, the relationship between Obama and ACORN), always turns out not to be true.
What would YOU do to save your children if you caught one of these monsters?????
And so you know, I would use the same techniques on an Islamist to save YOUR pitiful life! Just remember while you are sleeping peacefully at night, it was people like me protecting you. I hope you can find it in your heart to send a package to one of our brave warriors from the TREATS FOR THE TROOPS website.
You gave me no link. Give it tome now. And your excuse that I should do my own search is outright dishonest. You can use that excuse to justify any claim. Again, you are simply wrong and can post no support.
>>I believe in enhanced interrogation techniques unlike you who would allow your own family to DIE at the hands of these savages.
You believe in torture. That's what human rights call the Orwellian term. You failed to answer my question: if you believe in torture for Islamist, then why don't you support them for Americans? The fact you avoid this shows how illogical your argument is.
>>ust remember while you are sleeping peacefully at night, it was people like me protecting you.
You were never, ever protecting my life, so don't flatter yourself. It is an absolute insult to even hear this.
abcnews.go.com/politics/story?10=2857672&page by jake tapper.
Now answer my question, if two radicals had your kid and you had one of them and they were about to behead YOUR child like they did to Nick Berg, what would you do to save your child? You may want to view the video of Berg getting his head cut off as well as the oriental man whose screams were sickening and imagine this is your child before you post a self righteous answer. And yes I was protecting EVERY citizen incliding YOU.
Oh good God! Then you are against the constitution, then! You are against the clause that forbids cruel and inhuman punishment. You are essentially against America. On the one hand you tell me you are protecting America, but then you don't even know the constitution you are supposed to be protecting!
Your link has been refuted at leas three times by me. (The link actually doesn't work, but I know the story. The fact check organization deem it to be wrong.)
Your scenario is completely hypothetical and has never happened. (It also presents an either-or fallacy.) What we know in the real world is that torture does not work. We also know that many prisoners in Guantanamo were tortured and then found out to be completely innocent. That's what happens in the real world.
You apparently have no respect for human rights or the constitution.
Let me repeat emphatically: nothing you have ever done has made safer. Don't flatter yourself.
You are lying right through your teeth. So not only do you post things that aren't true, you lie about what a source says.
If the Berg episode is not hypothetical, please tell me a real life situation where it occurred. (It hasn't.) You apparently don't understand what an either-or fallacy is. Here's an example:
Would you destroy the whole planet or let Obama pass every single bill? When you dispute that you should not have to support Obama, I come with "So you want to destroy the planet?"
Keep up the lying and hate, fisher girl.
Here is the actual link.
link
And as the fact checking organizations show, the story (or the implications you want to draw from it) are false.
Snopes rules the claim that Pelosi demanded the use of a luxury plane and uses it regularly "mostly false," as I have already shown.
And so does factcheck.
"Reports like this one, saying Pelosi routinely flies about in her own 757-size jet, have been floating around for almost two years. The claims were revived when Democrats complained that CEOs of the Big Three U.S. automakers had used their corporate jets to come to Washington to seek billions in federal aid. But the rumors are incorrect. "
Your contention is rated a pants-on-fire lie by polifact. Keep up the high batting average, fisher girl.
link
"She is wildly wrong with her chraracterization of the Census Bureau's partnership program. Yes, the bureau does partner with organizations to help recruit workers. To date, it has 30,000 such partners.
ACORN is one.
Partners agree "to promote the 2010 Census among their constituents."
Keep up the trash talking. (O'pompous? Way to really further the debate!) And here is the funny thing: you will find no such link. You will be wrong once again. Does it embarrass you to be wrong so much? Does it ever occur to you that you should maybe stoop getting your news from right-wing sites?
You will not find it, and then I will really laugh at you.
Here, I did your work for you:
"'Obama: "We don't need ACORN's help'
"Barack Obama, seeking to nip a growing storyline, told reporters today that his campaign already had the best voter registration and turnout game in politics."
Oh yes. Obama _*rebuffs* ACORN, and yet you claim that during the campaign he actually made the wild statement that Obama would actually request help from ACORN to write policy.
Let me help you out. You can stop searching. What happened to you is you have again become the unwitting victim of the right-wing propaganda you listen to. It started when ACORN was one of 300 groups that would help get the census out. Right wing groups like Judicial Watch hype the connection, claiming Obama is using ACORN to help with the census. Other right wing sites pick up the claim and hype it more. By the time you hear it, you are convinced that Obama actually promised ACORN that it would help write the policy. Your own hatred of Obama probably caused your mind to further exaggerate the claim.
Then you come on some posting boards and post what you believe it absolute fact--falling prey to your own hate and propaganda. But really, if you want to waste more time, just keep looking for that Unicorn.
Here's a fuller quote and a link:
"'There is an ACORN organization in Chicago,' Obama continued. 'They have been active. As an elected official, I've had interactions with them. But they are not advising our campaign. We've got the best voter registration and turnout and volunteer operation in politics right now and we don’t need ACORN’s help.'"
link
And somehow you think that Obama did the opposite, actually promised to let ACORN write his policy? Do you even realize how stupid that sounds on the surface? (ACORN was a lightening rod for Obama, and he tried to distance himself from it all through the campaign.)
And while it's been a load of laughs, you're becoming pathetic. GIVE IT UP!!
Still looking for that link, huh? Consider my laughing at you to have commenced. Maybe if you didn't spend so much time full of hate you might find time to actually listen to real news and understand the world better.
Still searching, huh? It's been over 50 minutes. That damn google! It must be biased against the right wing.
I know: why not just put your own quote into the search engine! Since it is a correct quote, you'll find your source immediately. I do this type of reverse search all the time. Have you tried that? I'm just trying to help you out.
Ha ha ha.
And you called me stupid?
Unless, you're Jeremiah Wright, then you are a racist who hates America.
Also, now you think we should construct our defense policy according to how I would react if my children were being held hostage by murderers? That is so simple-minded and bizarre it is baffling.
Lou Dobbs (Kitty Pilgrim) ran this story, but ran BOTH sides. They noted that some of the video is blacked out and they can't confirm that ACORN'S statemtent on the matter is inaccurate. THAT is real reporting. Not playing a video with no context and calling it fact.
In all the instances of voter registration fraud, ACORN have turned their empoloyees in to the proper authorities. They aren't hiding some secret scheme to rig an election. And taxpayer money isn't going to fund such a scheme either. Think, people, think. Use your brain. Don't just believe Fox News, Glenn Beck, Rush or Hannity. Look at both sides.
It was also noted that it is illegal in MD to record someone without their consent, so while the actions by a(n) (former) employee of ACORN were wrong and, yes, stupid, this pair broke state law and could be prosecuted for recording someone without consent. Which may be why they won't appear on t.v.
But a total distraction from health care.
This doesn't mean I condone the woman's information, or her ignoring of the potential of 13 underage sex workers living in the alleged madam's home.
I watched the video and I was absolutely disgusted. That these two ACORN employees could sit there and say what they did made me think they must have some mental deficiency.
But yes, this has nothing to do with Obama - it's a total distraction.
Seems he has made lots of promises to ACORN
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vJcVgJhNaU
But I know what you gonna say, this is just one rogue group within ACORN and there is no way that the National group knew about this. If that is the case then they should be investigating more than just Baltimore to save their "good name". I can tell right now they wont do that because even if they arent teaching how to fraud the government they arent doing much to prevent it. They will just pull the "WE DIDNT KNOW" card.
Now that's rich coming from a guy who was obviously a Bush/Cheney supporter and sounds like a guy that was a-okay with America losing its moral high ground during this lovely episode...
Just sickening...
Couldn't have said it better myself!
Yes I did and still do support Bush for keeping us safe after 9-11. I support our troops who risk their lives just so some in this country can disregard them or their families wishes & use them to further the sause as they se fit. I miss calling it a "WAR" rather than on "OVERSEES CONTINGENCY PLAN" W
Yes I did and still do support Bush for keeping us safe after 9-11. I support our troops who risk their lives just so some in this country can disregard them or their families wishes & use them to further the sause as they se fit. I miss calling it a "WAR" rather than on "OVERSEES CONTINGENCY PLAN" W
As I was saying I completely supported the Republican party in 2004 & even campaigned locally for them. Look what I got for my time! what a waste of time. I thought I was voting in people who shared the same values who were going to stand up the conservative values. Boy do I feel screwed. I learned at that time not to put your loyalty with a party-they don't care about you or their values. They only care about power.
I hold conservative values and I feel my values are far more important than any political party & I'm not willing to sacrifice them on their behalf. When I find a candidate who is more person then a title, & hold to the same beliefs, they will get my vote.
I was heard a very wise man ask, "What's your highest affiliation?" That put in perspective for me.
Do you mind that the war was based on lies, did not keep us safe, and resulted in at least 100,000 unnecessary deaths?
Yes I did and still do support Bush for keeping us safe after 9-11.
I never supported Bush from day one. On 9/11 I, like most if not all other Americans looked to Bush to lead us in the right direction and exact revenge...
After about 1 week, I was back to feeling as I did about him on 9/10 as I realized that he was inept at his job... by the time he illegally invaded Iraq...
I knew that any possible steps that the Bush people may have taken to keep us 'safe' (as you call it... I wouldn't, but I digress) were swept under the rug and dealt a serious blow to our safety here and to those overseas following orders.
I support our troops who risk their lives just so some in this country can disregard them or their families wishes & use them to further the sauce as they see fit.
How dare you even say this line the way you say it! Your self-righteous wording assumes that only people of your political stripe have some kind of corner on the market of supporting and caring about our troops and everyone else can go to hell!
If you actually gave a damn about the troops, you would come to realize that they are not fighting over there to protect our freedoms... nor are they fighting over there so that we don't have to fight them here!
They are fighting over there to protect the interests of multi-national corporations which only has loyalty to one thing and one thing only.... MONEY! Not America, her people, and certainly not her troops.... MONEY! That's it.
I wish I could entertain your fantasy that our brave boys and girls are fighting for our freedoms... but if I did that, I'd be allowing you to believe a lie! Let that soak into your feeble mind!
I miss calling it a "WAR"
WWI, WWII, and Vietnam were wars... even Gulf War I was a war! The invasion and illegal occupation of Iraq... is not nor ever has been and never will be a war!
Yes, our troops are there. Yes, they are all doing a commendable job. Yes, they are fighting terrorists over there. But one thing for sure is... is that they are not fighting a war.
This was an invasion of choice, not necessity! Afghanistan was a necessity (since that was where those that attacked us on 9/11 lived).
Perhaps if you took the time to actually read the facts and allow yourself to look beyond right-wing TV and radio... you might learn that you have been lied to.
Of course I don't expect you to believe me... but I would ask that you look up this stuff without the prompting of Fox or Rush or whatever right-wing drivel you get your information from!
rather than on "OVERSEES CONTINGENCY PLAN" W
What in the hell are you talking about??
Whatever. Fox could run grainy black-and-white footage of Harold Koh all day for all I care.
Nope didn't think so.
Do you support indictments against these filmmakers? After all, they BROKE THE LAW.
They probably won't arrest anybody for two reasons. First, that type of video is not permitted in court. Second, this strikes as clear a case as entrapment as you can get.
Whether the primary intent is racial or not, Beck's intention is to take the employees in the video, and by their actions indict the entire Acorn organization. The fact that they are members of Acorn is a bonus to Beck. So, I believe, is the fact that they are black. And therefore the underlying message to his sheep audience is twofold: Acorn is corrupt. Black people are corrupt. And maybe, even more subliminally, this: hey - did you notice that Obama's black?
Yet we are supposed to believe that the single most vocal leader of the single most talked about issue (from which Beck is using the Acorn story to distract his viewers) is an upstanding, concerned citizen and not one of the biggest healthcare crooks in American history.
What if they are a different height? weight? eye color? gender? religion? Where do we draw the line?
Sometimes I think the true racists are the ones who can't see anything without it. (Either that of they have nothing worth substance to say so they use their "wild card".)
What's really sad is folks who can't identify racism UNLESS they hear the word n****r first.
The GOP has a problem with race and it's reflected in the party makeup, 89% White.
Fox Noise, like the GOP, has a problem with race.
FOX News is Blind to GOP Racism...
if we believe that the actions of two people in a company, party, or organisation make the entire organisation corrupt, then that pretty much makes the entire country corrupt, doesn't it?
And now back to our regular programming.
Yawn.
I feel sorry for you if you think you're not a hypocrite.
"I'm just the voice of the sheep following, tin foil hat wearing, believe ANYTHING Fox Noise tells me".
There, I fixed that for you.
The ACORN 'expose' video currently a headline on foxnews.com is sad and laughable. Although the headline is slowly being withdrawn from attention.
The entire video is predicated on the assumption that the two ACORN workers are talking about and are aware they are talking about and giving advise to a pimp and his prostitute. The video is highly edited.
EVIDENCE/CLUES this is a HOAX
1) No evidence that the workers are giving advise on prostitution. You have to view the whole video as the interview with the workers is highly edited, with numerous cuts and snips. Just as you would do to create a false perception. In one part when the tax adviser talking and says the word 'prostitute' there is an obvious cut and edit.(2:32 Part 2 on the youtube video).
2) Whenever a highly suspicious statement or answer is given by an ACORN worker, the person making the statement or posing the question is off camera. No idea if that was what was actually said.
3) "What are we going to do about this pimp that is bothering us?" is asked by the male voice off camera. The rest of the discussion is on how to be safe from the 'pimp'. No evidence this second worker (non-tax) has a clue she is talking about assisting with setting up an international child brothel.
4) Look at how calm and courteous the workers are. And we are supposed to believe they are in cahoots with two strangers who just walked in to get advise to start an international child prostitution ring?
5) WHILE IN THE BACKGROUND THROUGHOUT YOU CAN HEAR CHILDREN PLAYING. THIS IS SPOKEN ABOUT IN A PUBLIC AREA OPENLY AND AT TIMES LOUDLY DISCUSSED!
6) The highly edited video is at times set to rock music. At the end there is a rock song with the lyrics (while showing a self made rock video) 'this girl is so ridiculous' showing the ACORN tax worker.
HA, HA, HA, LOL, it is a HOAX or really bad attempt at a SMEAR.
What the workers did was stupid but the video simply capitalizes on that stupidity to create a clever work of fiction
Glen Beck has staked the entire remainder of his credibility on this. He will soon be the laughing stock of the left and the right.
Good work.
Why is our Government supporting ACORN? Does anyone know or is this not true?
I would love to hear a normal reply.
Once again lets hear it in his own words:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vJcVgJhNaU
I did, and Obama never said what you claimed. He said he would be calling "community leaders"--not ACORN. You people are really deranged.
You'd love to hear a normal reply.
I'd love to hear a normal question.
ACORN fires 2 employees in video..
From the link above, you can see ACORN took the right measures in releasing the employees seen in the video. They were fired, as they should have been, for giving such blatantly bad advice. Yes, they were trying to help, but people don't need that "kind" of help in my opinion, skirting the laws and all.
Quote from above link:
"Stuart Katzenberg, lead organizer for ACORN's Maryland chapter, said ACORN is questioning the validity of the video but had fired the employees who appeared in it because their handling of the situation "did not meet ACORN's standards of professionalism."
"Our work historically speaks for itself - fighting for working-class families across the country and in Baltimore," Katzenberg said."
"Katzenberg said ACORN offices in New York, Philadelphia and Los Angeles had received visits under similar scenarios, but those people were turned away."
=1&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=22503&tx_ttnews[backPid]=12386&cHash=d350248fb2]Statement about not receiving or applying for funds in the stimulus bill..
Can read more about ACORN here if you are interested.
They're not some nefarious group out to take over America, they're a community group aimed at helping lower income, and poor people across the country realize that just because they're poor, they still have rights, and a voice.
Show me where I'm wrong.
=161&tx_irfaq_pi1[back]=P2lkPTE3ODU3&cHash=3b5f677fec]ACORN does not receive federal funding...
=162&tx_irfaq_pi1[back]=P2lkPTE3ODU3&cHash=9a11cedf52]More information if you care to read...
It is not I who is ignorant of the facts, it would be, you my friend.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/may/21/michele-bachmann/bachmann-claims-acorn-has-access-85-billion-federa/
Therefore, your claim is a lie, Ms./Mr. I'm-too-stupid-to-read-articles-I-present-as-evidence-for-claims-I-can't-comprehend.
Amazing, and with such alacrity to call me an Ignoramus, without apparently even reading the article before posting.
The whole "FALSE" indicator at the top of the page should have been the first sign that Kydem shouldn't have used that one. Man, this is easy.
Let's take a look at Politifacts Bachman file shall we:
Bachman file
Everything they have on her is either consdired false, or PANTS ON FIRE in the lying category.
Why should I believe ANYTHING she says? Especially without proving it.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/special-editorial-reports/ACORN-got-53-million-in-federal-funds-since-94-now-eligible-for-up-to-8-billion-more-44406217.html
Also, the Washington Examiner asked an ACORN spokesman about the $53 Million and the guy never denied it. In fact, he deflected with the stimulus controversy.
You do realize the spreadsheet they posted is one that they made. Right? And then the rest of the article props up the falsehoods against them.
And let's just say, for instance, that they did get $53 million since 1994, so, over 15 years, they received $53 million in federal money, which is what per year? $3.5 million per year? Which, according to your spreadsheet, went to mostly housing initiatives.
Why do you have a problem with that? If, those things are true?
The 'voter' division of ACORN is not eligible for federal funds, and has not received any. This is the area of ACORN that Republicans are referencing in most if not all of their remarks about the organization.
I have no idea if the $53 million is accurate or not. Our government supports many organizations that help lower income Americans with things like housing and infrastructure, apparently including ACORN.
The most far-right, gullible conservatives are terrified that ACORN's housing division is one of thousands of groups in the country eligible for, or receiving, federal money.
The question these conservatives need to answer is this; Do you think every organization or agency that has an employee busted on any improper action, no matter how minor, should be prohibited from receiving federal grants, not only to itself, but to any affiliated groups?
And if any of you want to answer that, I'd suggest you be very careful, and put some real thought into it before answering.
The question these conservatives need to answer is this; Do you think every organization or agency that has an employee busted on any improper action, no matter how minor, should be prohibited from receiving federal grants, not only to itself, but to any affiliated groups?
Because, you just made my argument. Thank you.
Politifact rated it, "FALSE" as in, not true.
Who are you calling ignorant again?
Tell us what you think ACORN has done that is so wrong?
Give us any evidence that the arm of ACORN associated with voter registration has ever been indicted for voter fraud that actually was voter fraud.
Anything?
Given your history here, we have to assume that even your questions are lies until you demonstrate otherwise. Until then, they're just trollbait, and do not deserve a reply.
ACORN And Federal Funding
Does ACORN Recieve Federal Funding?
The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now does not apply for nor does it receive any federal grants.
ACORN has had contracts with other nonprofit organizations to perform work on projects which received federal grant support. For example, ACORN has received contracts to:
Identify families eligible to receive food stamps and assist them to apply.
Identify homeowners facing foreclosure and deliver them for housing counseling and loss mitigation services.
Provide lead paint remediation services to households with children living in older neighborhoods.
The contracts that ACORN receives on these projects are for delivering specific activities, all of which are tax-exempt qualified in accordance with federal grant guidelines. No payments are received until work product has been delivered.
None of ACORN's contracts to perform work on projects receiving federal grant money has provided funding for voter registration.
You posted a story with no back up as to where they obtained their facts that ACORN has received $53 million dollars. They provide a spreadsheet (which the website made themselves), and don't cite where they got their research and numbers from.
I'd be willing to look at their research, but they provide nothing to go and review and or look at.
http://frwebgate5.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/TEXTgate.cgi?WAISdocID=681054469480+0+1+0&WAISaction=retrieve
And again, what has ACORN done that you deem wrong? Is it because they help poor people?
It's because the people they help are usually BLACK.
ACORN is the boogeyman of the right because when a nutjob hears ACORN he sees black people. And since the nutjobs hate black people, they hate ACORN.
And this video of a pimp and a prostitute just reinforces their racist views that many blacks are too lazy to work so they become pimps and ho's.
the pimp and the ho were whiter than white.
You'll have to do a search for ACORN to find what I linked before. I think I was looking at just the 2008 report. But it does show that ACORN subsidiaries, affiliates, whatever you want to call them, receive federal funds.
God you are dishonest! You linked to the main page of the Federal Register. There is no information on that page. That would be like me claiming moon is round, and then linking to NASA home page and telling you to do a search.
I typed in ACORN twice and got no results. If you really had a hit, you would have posted the hit, rather than giving the generic page.
Which don't add up to 52 million, by the way.
Both counts are laughably wrong, as has been pointed out again and again. Please show us any convictions of where ACORN is found guilty of either thing.
Yes, I'm sure it is, unless you have proof otherwise.
Nice try. Go get some real evidence.
Three entries at this one link totaling more than $400K. And your stupidity with regard to the PolitiFact link is incredible. I've said repeatedly, but you choose to ignore, that the $53 Million amount listed at the link DOES NOT come from a Michelle Bachman quote. It is a quote from an article at the Washington Examiner, which I have posted a link to as well. You are being disingenuous.
He didn't do it, because he'd end up looking stupid.
Why don't you tell us? Seems sort of strange to bring up some hazy group of boogeymen, then ask other people to explain to you who your phantoms are.
A former top Department of Justice voting rights official has added his name to the growing chorus that is denouncing the department's investigation of ACORN as a shameful and inappropriate politicization of Justice along the lines of the US attorney firings.
Manual on Federal Prosecution of Election Offenses.
Under a section headlined "Investigative Considerations in Election Fraud Cases", the manual reads:
When investigating election fraud, three considerations that are absent from most criminal investigations must be kept in mind:
(1) respect for the primary role of the states in administering the voting process, (2) an awareness of the role of the election in the governmental process, and (3) sensitivity to the exercise of First Amendment rights in the election context.
As a result there are limitations on various investigative steps in an election fraud case.
In most cases, election-related documents should not be taken from the custody of local election administrators until the election to which they pertain has been certified, and the time for contesting the election results has expired. This avoids interfering with the governmental processes affected by the election
Another limitation affects voter interviews. Election fraud cases often depend on the testimony of individual voters whose votes were co-opted in one way or another. But in most cases voters should not be interviewed, or other voter-related investigation done, until after the election is over. Such overt investigative steps may chill legitimate voting activities. They are also likely to be perceived by voters and candidates as an intrusion into the election. Indeed, the fact of a federal criminal investigation may itself become an issue in the election.
Hebert argued that the new ACORN investigation clearly violates the manual's guidelines, both in terms of its timing -- initiated so close to election day -- and in terms of the off-the-record leak by which it was publicized.
Hebert served 21 years at DOJ's civil-rights division, including a stint as acting head of the voting rights section.
Ex DOJ Voting Rights Chief: "It's Going to Take a Long Time to Cleanse" Department...
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/special-editorial-reports/ACORN-got-53-million-in-federal-funds-since-94-now-eligible-for-up-to-8-billion-more-44406217.html
They may not get federal money directly but they are tied to almost 300 front groups, some of whom, do get taxpayer dollars.
They are a far-left radical activist group. Ok another link:
http://msplaceddemocrat.com/http:/msplaceddemocrat.com/acorns-brown-shirt-manhandle-ny-republican-senator/
They're a community group....yeah right.
Yeah, why does Beck pick on ACORN? Your tax dollars at work folks
Posted by: Amanda Carpenter at 4:33 PM
House Minority Leader John Boehner (R.-Ohio) released information showing ACORN has received at least $31 million in federal funding since 1998 hours after the FBI announced they were launching a nationwide investigation against the non-profit.
“ACORN’s free ride on the backs of taxpayers must end immediately," a statement from Boehner's office said. "An initial review of federal records shows ACORN affiliates have received at least $31 million in direct federal funding from American taxpayers over the past 10 years, and millions more indirectly through state and local agencies that receive federal block grants. House Republicans worked together to stop the Majority from using taxpayer dollars to fill a slush fund created just for ACORN, but now we must go further to turn off the spigot of federal grants on which ACORN depends"
YOU conveniently for got to add the date and the website for this piece of trash:
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Townhall.com The Blogspot for Political, Conservative and Republican Blogs and Bloggers
When in Doubt, "Blame It On The Black Man"
"It's minorities that are causing this health care debate"
"Our only hope is Secession before it's too Late"
Speak truth to power.' Unquote
So what color where the workers in the Acorn exposed by Glenn Beck?
So are those two Acorn workers going to file lawsuit against Acorn for being fired for ........maybe discrimination?
Why is it that the race card is always brought up? Right is right and wrong is wrong.
They must have paid plenty to get John Stossel. Hope he's worth it. If a reporter is classically supposed to be unbiased, what would you call Glen Beck and O'Reilly and their ilk. Wanna be Goebbels? They must have studied the master.
Finally, yesterday some ditsy commenter on another site compared Obama and said he was the worst since Hitler, not including, perhaps, Pol Pot or Saddam. Well, pal, did you forget that Stalin lived into the 50's? What about Mao? Another couple of true citizens of the world and real humanitarians.
I'am at a lost for words. Ugh! He wonders why the MSM hasn't picked up on this trash story yet!?!? He is really delusional and people come here and defend him, I mean i like watching Pro Wrestling but I know their acting, Glenn Beck is worst theatre, but i guess cons like "B" movie actors...
I spent a year in Iraq, saw the Waste, Fraud and Abuse due to KBR.
Beck mentioned the story was only being reported by 3 news agencies, including Fox News and The Wall Street Journal, both owned by News Corp.
The story was mentioned by Beck on September 9th, and debuted on his September 10th show. The story originated from the website BigGovernment.com, which happened to debut on September 10th as well. How can another news agency cover a story that did not exist until that day?
BigGovernment.com was created by Andrew Breitbart, who also founded BigHollywood.com.
Author from BigHollywood.com, Patrick Courrielche, had made accusations on Becks program on September 2nd that the National Endowment for the Arts tried to get him to create political propaganda.
Is Beck creating his own media circle to attack his so-called liberal counterparts and attempt to legitimize his own program?
Sort of like creating his own news to fit his plots...ummmm! Exactly!
>>Either you can't read or you're lying. The quote I listed is from the Washington Examiner, not Bachman,
He's referring to a polifact article. Heres' the exact quote from the article:
"In a May 6 news release, Bachmann sounded the alarm:
"'At least $53 million in federal funds have gone to ACORN activists since 1994, and the controversial group could get up to $8.5 billion more tax dollars...'"
polifact in no way corroborated the 53 million; it merely quoted Bachman.
I'm not fooled by your name calling. Here's exactly what you said: "You folks here seem to love PolitiFact. Here's a link to an article at their site. Now, go inform yourself Ms./Mr. Ignoramus." You linked to polifact originally and only linked *afterwards* to the Examiner, which is just an opinion piece by Bachman again, supporting my contention.
Sorry, it's not an opinion piece written by Bachman. It is simply commentary from a tabloid:
"On February 1, a free daily tabloid arrived on newsstands and in mailboxes in the Washington, DC area: the Washington Examiner. The new paper is owned by Denver billionaire Philip F. Anschutz, an Evangelical Presbyterian who has bankrolled numerous ultra-conservative causes and has donated at least half a million dollars to Republican committees and political candidates. The Examiner's first three editorials all took hardline conservative positions."
As I wrote above, this is very dishonest. The link to this page is just a generic search page. If you actually had a hit, then you would have posted the hit, rather than the generic page.
As Col point out, you might be better off figuring out how links work rather than getting indignant. And as I already stated, I did do the search and did not come up with anything close to the 52 million you claimed.
BTW, the pedophile thing was a joke, intended to make a point. Nobody took it seriously, and you weren't defamed, get off the fainting couch, crybaby.
Your comparison to a racist joke about Obama is one of the weakest analogies I've ever seen. If you want to make jokes about the taxpayer getting raped, or health care being a secret plan to murder old people, you can do so without checking if anybody has been close to a rape or a murder in their lives.
If you think anybody was making light of child molestation, you're not very bright. If you're faking being offended, you're a phony.
Why do you think anyone would believe that nonsense?You make a claim and then expect *us* to somehow find it? So if I claim that Bush admitted he lied about the Iraq war, and then posted to cnn.com, and called you lazy because you could not find my proof, I would have a good argument?
By the way, I did do the search several times for 2009, and got 0 hits. I did a search for 2008 and saw that the federal government awarded ACORN around 300,000 dollars--not 52 million as you claimed.
perhaps if obama had said something new in his last address that advances the health care story fox would give it more play... but he blathered on, much like he has for the last 5 or 6 months on this topic... so taking fox to task for not staying in lockstep with the rest of the state run media is pretty weak, and criticizing coverage of acorn's latest transgression is downright pathetic...
fox didn't pull this story out of their ***... and now that the dc acorn shoe has dropped, it's obvious something is really wrong with the way acorn operates and the baltimore episode is no isolated incident... acorn can fire these nitwits busted on camera all day long, but at some point they'll have to admit it's no coincidence that two separate offices gave out the same amazingly offensive and felonious advice...
It seems to me that far more Republicans have been caught doing illegal or immoral things in the past ten years than have ACORN employees.
Why should we believe that it is not indicative of an endemic moral lassitude on the part of the Republican Party? Certainly, if we are to think that of ACORN we MUST believe that of the GOP.
The question these conservatives need to answer is this; Do you think every organization or agency that has an employee busted on any improper action, no matter how minor, should be prohibited from receiving federal grants, not only to itself, but to any affiliated groups?
I think it makes it pretty clear they're just blowing smoke if they're scared to take a stand on this.
Yes, it is. And by that logic, the Duvall minor scandal (he is a Repub who got caught bragging about sex with two women) should be a national scandal and should prove how corrupt the Repub party is. Of course, no one is paying attention to it, as they should not.
Nah. Especially since the public is badly misinformed about health care. We need more good news about that, not hype. If we want interesting hype, why not talk about Duvall, the Republican who supports family values, and how he slept with two women, one a prostitute.
"blah blah blah... rhetoric rhetoric... oh, and platitudes..."
with 3 or 4 bills floating thru the house and senate and a president who can't sell any of them, whose fault is it the public is so misinformed about health care reform, fox's or the president's?... i guess fox, since if they had only done their job and made health care the lead story for the last two days the public would finally have been properly informed, after 6 months...
Oh yes, the state run media. I didn't realize government had taken over the media.
>>fox didn't pull this story out of their ***... and now that the dc acorn shoe has dropped, it's obvious something is really wrong with the way acorn operates and the baltimore episode is no isolated incident..
And you know what is also wrong? That the film makers canceled their appearances on CNN at the last minute. What are they hiding?
oh, and it's a euphemism, too...
as for o'keefe, i'll let him answer your question as to why he didn't appear, and may not anytime soon, on cnn:
on why i don't return phone calls from an intrepid cnn producer
No I didn't, and it is still an utterly stupid phrase.
What a wingnut response! It smells exactly of guilt, a lot of bluster and no answers. For example, CNN makes the claim that the film makers tried to do this in several other offices and got thrown out. Here is O'Keefe's response:
"To set that record straight please check the Washington D.C. tape we dropped today at BigGovernment.com, which is also being aired on your cable news competitor with curiously higher ratings."
What an evasive response! This hardly disproves CNN's contention. Apparently, O'Keefe is telling the whole story, and he thinks a bunch of lame insults ("You brought in the damage control crowd to FRAME the story) will cover this up.
And, the film is heavily edited and goes black in places. Why won't the activists release the full version? Does ACORN (and the rest of us) at least have the right to see the whole story before we pass judgment?
If the American people wanted a country that supported the safety of children, women, individual responsibility or mathematically and rationally sound ideas, we would not have voted for CHANGE.
Welcome to the new America. Don't let your children play outside and hold onto your gun as long as you can. In a few years, it should be over.
Yes.
1) Employees of an an organization which has taken on a steadily higher profile over the last two years were videotaped apparently eagerly offering advice on how to break the law.
2) These actions have been significant enough for the U.S. Census Bureau to sever its contract with the group for work during the coming 2010 census.
3) For whatever reason, mainstream media outlets have been burned on this story by FOX. Whether a media outlet likes a story or not shouldn't matter. The main media outlets let themselves be scooped. The best path forward for ACORN right now would to be to set its own house in order rather than complain about the coverage. Imagine if the headline had been: Conservative Activists Solicit Criminal Activity after the ACORN employees had called the police and turned them in?
FOX, are you a news network, or an on air Redneck Tabloid??