About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

MSNBC airs discredited allegation linking White House to ACORN

September 29, 2009 1:16 pm ET — 202 Comments

RedState contributor Brian Faughnan suggested on MSNBC that White House political affairs director Patrick Gaspard was formerly a "senior" official at ACORN -- a charge that was discredited minutes later by the Politico's Ben Smith. During the segment, MSNBC host Dylan Ratigan did not challenge Faughnan's statement and did not point out to the audience that MSNBC had not verified that the charge was true.

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.

EMBED

Faughnan on MSNBC: "[I]f there are senior people from ACORN who hold positions of power in the White House like political director ... we need to know what they are doing"

From the 10 a.m. ET hour of the September 29 edition of MSNBC's Morning Meeting:

FAUGHNAN: Well, I don't think I'd couch this in terms of a conspiracy theory. What we have here, according to reports from the House government reform committee in July, is a criminal organization operating across state lines. ACORN has been involved in voter fraud and tax fraud, in hiding embezzlement in violations of the law prior to these recent sting videos. And I think that if there are senior people from ACORN who hold positions of power in the White House like political director, like chief of staffing, that we need to know what they are doing. [emphasis added]

Faughnan's claim echoes American Spectator report that "[e]vidence shows ... Gaspard was ACORN boss Bertha Lewis's political director in New York"

From Matthew Vadum's September 28 American Spectator post:

Newly discovered evidence shows the radical advocacy group ACORN has a man in the Obama White House.

This power behind the throne is longtime ACORN operative Patrick Gaspard. He holds the title of White House political affairs director, the same title Karl Rove held in President Bush's White House.

Evidence shows that years before he joined the Obama administration, Gaspard was ACORN boss Bertha Lewis's political director in New York.

[...]

Because Gaspard's employment with the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now is acknowledged by no less an authority than ACORN founder Wade Rathke himself. Rathke writes at his blog:

Tell me that 1199's former political director, Patrick Gaspard (who was ACORN New York's political director before that) didn't reach out from the White House and help make that happen, and I'll tell you to take some remedial classes in "politics 101."

Politico's Ben Smith: "American Spectator report ... that White House political director Patrick Gaspard used to work for ACORN in New York just isn't true"

From Smith's September 29 blog post, which was posted at 10:42 a.m. ET:

ACORN attack misses mark

I hate to put a damper on the day's firestorm on the right over a White House staffer, but an American Spectator report making the rounds this morning that White House political director Patrick Gaspard used to work for ACORN in New York just isn't true.

The Spectator (accurately) quotes ACORN founder Wade Rathke claiming that Gaspard was political director at the group's New York chapter at some point before 2003.

I covered New York politics at the time, and that was news to me; the also White House denies it. But just to be sure, I checked checked just now with Gaspard's former boss, whom he ultimately replaced as the political director of the giant New York SEIU local, 1199, Jennifer Cunningham. Cunningham confirmed to me that he'd worked for her starting in 1999; that he'd worked for a City Council member before that; and before that, for the Dinkins Administration.

The fact that Rathke got this wrong does provide more evidence of how totally decentralized and disorganized -- contrary to the claims of both fans and detractors -- the group is, but that's all it says.

The Spectator piece is a model of the sort of guilt-by-association Google work in which partisans of both sides specialize. Gaspard is also allegedly linked -- gasp! -- to Rep. Jerry Nadler. Writes the Spectator:

As the old Washington saying goes, politics is personnel. Who knows how many administration officials were put in place by Gaspard with direct input from ACORN's Bertha Lewis. It boggles the mind.

Transcript

From the 10 a.m. ET hour of the September 29 edition of MSNBC's Morning Meeting:

RATIGAN: Brian Faughnan, contributor to RedState.com; we, of course, have the presence here in studio of Arianna Huffington, co-founder, editor in chief of The Huffington Post.

Brian, I want to begin with you. When you look at all the various conspiracies -- and we'll start with ACORN, which is where your attention is focused. What do you think the priorities should be for all of us, whether it's bloggers, people like myself hosting TV shows, Arianna, or anybody else, when it comes to asking questions of the relationship and conspiracies that are speculated in our government?

FAUGHNAN: Well, I don't think I'd couch this in terms of a conspiracy theory. What we have here, according to reports from the House government reform committee in July, is a criminal organization operating across state lines. ACORN has been involved in voter fraud and tax fraud, in hiding embezzlement in violations of the law prior to these recent sting videos. And I think that if there are senior people from ACORN who hold positions of power in the White House like political director, like chief of staffing, that we need to know what they are doing.

RATIGAN: I have a question for you, and again, I won't get into an ACORN debate one way or another. But I do wonder, when you see the corrupt nature or outdated nature of so many of our government systems, financial systems, obviously that we perpetuate a monopoly right now in health care for reasons I can't comprehend, why do you choose to devote your resources to this?

Not that it's not a valid concern, but it strikes me as maybe number 20 or 30 on the list of priorities in terms of outdated systems and problems in our government when you look at the few trillion that came out of the taxpayer last year, and a health care debate right now that refuses to address the elephant in the room, which is the health care monopoly and the employer-based health care system.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 1:30 pm ET)
      3 14
      Wow, when even MSNBC is getting accused of right-wing bias, you know it's getting bad, and by bad I mean ANY slightly negative comment about anything to do with Obama gets shot down as a lie. I have news for you: He's not perfect. In fact, he's got so many skeletons in his closet it's frightening.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by IRONY 101 (September 29, 2009 1:34 pm ET)
        9 1
        In fact, he's got so many skeletons in his closet it's frightening.

        Reallly...? Name about five of them for starters.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 1:39 pm ET)
          4 15
          Bill Aeryes, Reverend Wright, William Resko and ACORN.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by IRONY 101 (September 29, 2009 1:46 pm ET)
            8 2
            Those are closeted skeletons? All of the names you cite have been PUBLICLY raised and addressed at one time or another...and Barack Obama was never shown to have done anything unethical, illegal or immoral in any instance.

            You just like throwing around baseless talking points....oooh, skeletons in Obama's closet. LOL... You are indeed a fool...and an admitted frightened one at that.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 1:51 pm ET)
              3 14
              Fair enough, they are not in the closet anymore, but they are still skeletons nonetheless. The fact that his connections to them don't seem immoral makes you a fool.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by IRONY 101 (September 29, 2009 1:53 pm ET)
                9 3
                Connections...? Immoral connections...? I'm afraid your talking points were debunked long ago...although you wouldn't know that if you watch FOX nad listen to Limbaugh.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 1:57 pm ET)
                  4 12
                  I guess it's acceptable to be friends with criminals, terrorists and racists now and be president. What a world we live in!
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by IRONY 101 (September 29, 2009 2:03 pm ET)
                    8 1
                    Ask George W. Bush...
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by congero6189599 (September 29, 2009 2:29 pm ET)
                      4 1
                      Don't feed the trool.
                      Report Abuse
                    • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 2:38 pm ET)
                        6
                      What does that have to do with Obama?
                      Report Abuse
                    • Author by tennisstar142571 (September 29, 2009 2:46 pm ET)
                        3
                      IRONY 101, name 5 criminals, terrorists, and racists that G.W.B is friends with ... mmmhhmm
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by snoopy (September 29, 2009 3:17 pm ET)
                        12  
                        Besides Rove?

                        Indicted / Convicted/ Pled Guilty* Eric G. Andell – deputy undersecretary in charge of newly created Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools (previously senior adviser to Secretary of Education Rod Paige) – pleaded guilty to one count of conflict of interest for using government travel for personal causes and was sentenced to one year of probation, 100 hours of community service, and fined $5,000.

                        * Claude Allen – Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy - resigned, pled guilty to shoplifting from Target stores.

                        * Lester Crawford – Commissioner, FDA – resigned in late September 2005 after only two months on the job. On October 17th, he pleaded guilty to two misdemeanor counts, making a false writing and conflict of interest. On February 27, 2007, Crawford was sentenced to to three years of probation and was fined $90,000.

                        * Brian Doyle – Deputy Press Secretary, Department of Homeland Security – Resigned in wake of child sex scandal. Doyle was arrested on April 4th, 2006 and pleaded no contest on September 19, 2006 to seven counts of use of a computer to seduce a child and sixteen counts of transmitting harmful material to a minor. On November 17th, 2006 Brian Doyle was sentenced to five years in state prison and ten years of probation. He will also need to register as a sex offender.

                        * Steven Griles – Deputy Secretary at the Interior Department – is the highest-ranked administration official yet convicted in the Jack Abramoff scandal. In March 2007, Griles pleaded guilty to lying about his role in the Jack Abramoff scandal. Sentenced to 10 months incarceration.

                        * John T. Korsmo – Chairman of the Federal Housing Finance Board from 2002 to 2004 – pleaded guilty in 2005 to lying to the Senate and an inspector general. He swore he had no idea how a list of presidents for FHFB-regulated banks were invited to a fundraiser for his friend’s congressional campaign. On the invites, Korsmo was listed as the "Special Guest." Got 18 months of probation and a $5,000 fine.

                        * Scooter Libby – Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff – resigned after being indicted for lying to a grand jury and investigators in connection with the investigation stemming from the leak of Valerie Wilson's covert CIA operative’s identity. Convicted on four of five counts, making him the highest-ranking White House official to be convicted of a felony since the Iran-contra scandal. Sentenced to thirty months imprisonment and a fine of $250,000. On July 2nd, after a judge decided that Libby would remain in prison during the appeals process, President Bush commuted Libby’s sentence by removing the thirty months in prison.

                        * David Safavian – former head of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy at the Office of Management and Budget – convicted of lying to ethics officials and Senate investigators about his ties to lobbyist Jack Abramoff. On October 27, 2006, he was sentenced to 18 months in prison. He is currently appealing the ruling.

                        * Robert Stein – former comptroller and funding officer for the now disbanded Coalition Provisional Authority, Southern Central Region in Al-Hillah, Iraq – pleaded guilty to conspiracy, bribery, conspiracy to commit money laundering, possession of a machine gun, and being a felon in possession of a fire arm. On January 30, 2007 Stein was sentenced to nine years in prison and ordered to forfeit $3.6 million.

                        * Roger Stillwell - desk officer, Interior Department – pleaded guilty to failing to report Redskins tickets and free dinners from Jack Abramoff.

                        Resigned Due to Investigation, Pending Investigation or Allegations of Impropriety


                        * Philip Cooney – chief of staff, White House Council on Environmental Quality – a former oil industry lawyer with no scientific expertise, Cooney resigned after it was revealed he had watered down reports on global warming.

                        * George Deutsch – press aide, NASA – resigned amid allegations he prevented the agency's top climate scientist from speaking publicly about global warming.

                        * Michael Elston – chief of staff to Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty – announced his resignation on June 15, 2007. Despite allegations that he’d threatened at least four of the eight fired US Attorneys, McNulty said Elston had served the Justice Department "with distinction for nearly eight years."

                        * Kyle Dustin "Dusty" Foggo – appointed executive director of the CIA, the agency's third-highest post, in October 2004 – resigned and was ultimately indicted on bribery charges related to the Duke Cunningham scandal.

                        * Alberto Gonzales – former Attorney General – resigned without explanation amidst investigations of the firings of U.S. Attorneys, the politicization of the Justice Department, warrantless surveillance, and the torture and mistreatment of detainees.

                        * Monica Goodling – former Justice Department liaison to the White House and senior counsel to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales – resigned on April 7, 2007 amidst the investigation of the firings of U.S. Attorneys.

                        * Michelle Larson Korsmo – deputy chief of staff, Department of Labor – Helped her husband (see John Korsmo, above) with his donor scam. Quietly left her Labor plum job in February 2004, about two weeks before news broke that she and her husband were the targets of a criminal probe.

                        * Howard "Cookie" Krongard – former State Department inspector general — accused of not properly investigating State Department contractor fraud in Iraq and Afghanistan; of retaliating against whistleblowers in his own office; and of not telling the truth about his knowledge of his brother's ties with Blackwater, a State Department contractor. Faced with a possible perjury investigation, Howard Krongard resigned on December 7, 2007.

                        * Julie Macdonald – former deputy assistant secretary for fish, wildlife and parks at the Interior Department – resigned in May 2007 after an "inspector general's report found she had improperly leaked information to private organizations, bullied staff scientists and broken federal rules." The Department of the Interior is investigating many of her decisions regarding endangered species; so far seven have been overturned.

                        * Paul McNulty – Deputy Attorney General for the Department of Justice – resigned, after questions about his involvement in the U.S. attorney firings and his testimony to Congress about the firings.

                        * Richard Perle – Chairman, Defense Policy Board – resigned from Pentagon advisory panel amid conflict-of-interest charges.

                        * Susan Ralston – assistant, White House – resigned amidst revelations that she had accepted thousands of dollars in gifts from Abramoff without compensating him, counter to White House ethics rules.

                        * Janet Rehnquist – inspector general, Department of Health and Human Services – resigned on June 1, 2003 in the face of an investigation into her alleged efforts to block a politically dangerous probe on behalf of the Bush family.

                        * James Roche – secretary, U.S. Air Force – resigned in the wake of the Boeing tanker lease scandal, after it was revealed he had rather crudely pushed for Boeing to win a $23 billion contract.

                        * Kyle Sampson -former chief of staff for Attorney General Alberto Gonzales – resigned amidst the investigation of the firings of U.S. Attorneys.

                        * Joseph Schmitz – Inspector General, Defense – Resigned amid charges he personally intervened to protect top political appointees.

                        * Bradley Schlozman – resigned from his third and final post with the Justice Department after accusations of actively politicizing the department. He's currently under investigation by the Department's inspector general.

                        * Thomas Scully – Administrator, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services – shortly after Scully resigned in 2003, an investigation by the Department of Health and Human Services inspector general found that Scully had pressured the agency's actuary to underestimate the full cost of the Medicare reform bill by approximately $100 billion until after Congress passed the bill into law. Scully was also hit with conflict of interest charges by the U.S. attorney's office for billing CMS for expenses incurred during a job search while he still headed the agency. He settled those charges by paying $9,782.

                        * David Smith – deputy assistant secretary for fish, wildlife, and parks, Interior Department – resigned on July 21, 2006 after shooting a buffalo and accepting its skeletal remains and meat as an illegal gratuity. He eventually paid over $3,000 for the dead buffalo, but only after the internal inquiry had commenced. The Department of Interior inspector general also noted in a May 16, 2006 report that Smith's involvement in the designation of Houston as a port of entry for imported wildlife in order to benefit a friend was inappropriate.

                        * John Tanner – Voting Rights Section Chief, Justice Department – resigned in December of 2007 and moved to the Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices. Already under suspicion for aiding efforts to politicize the voting section, the bumbling proponent of voter identification laws angered lawmakers with his comments that such laws actually discriminate against white voters because "minorities die first". Even more impressive was his apology for the comment. The DoJ's Office of Professional Responsibility is currently investigating his travel habits and those of his deputy.

                        * Sara Taylor – Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of Political Affairs at the White House, where she was Karl Rove's top aide – resigned amidst the U.S. attorneys investigation and other probes of Rove's alleged politicization of the government.

                        * Ken Tomlinson – Board Chairman, Corporation for Public Broadcasting; member, Broadcasting Board of Governors – resigned at the release of an inspector general report concluding he had broken laws in spending CPB money to hire politically connected consultants to search for "bias" without consulting the board. At BBG, a separate investigation found he was running a "horse racing operation" out of his office, and continuing to hire politically-wired individuals to do "consulting" work for him. After being nominated and serving another term, he finally stepped down from that spot earlier this year.

                        * Carl Truscott – Director, Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Bureau – resigned. A report by the Justice Department’s inspector general found that Truscott wasted tens of thousands of dollars on luxuries, wasted millions on whimsical management decisions and violated ethics rules by ordering employees to help his nephew with a high school video project.

                        * Paul Wolfowitz – World Bank President – resigned in May 2007 after a committee report found that he broke ethics rules by giving his girlfriend a substantial raise.

                        Nomination Failed Due to Scandal

                        * Linda Chavez – nominated, Secretary of Labor – withdrew her nomination in January 2001 amidst revelations that an illegal immigrant lived in her home and worked for her in the early 1990s. Chavez blamed what she said were the "search-and-destroy" politics of Washington.

                        * Timothy Flanigan – nominated, Deputy Attorney General (also Alberto Gonzales' top deputy at the White House) – withdrew his nomination in October 2005 amidst revelations that he'd worked closely with lobbyist Jack Abramoff when he was General Counsel for Corporate and International Law at Tyco, which was a client of Abramoff's.

                        * Bernard Kerik – nominated, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security – withdrew his nomination amidst a host of corruption allegations. Eventually pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor relating to improper gifts totaling tens of thousands of dollars while he was a New York City official in the late 1990's. Subsequently, on November 8, 2007, Kerik was indicted on sixteen counts for bribery, tax fraud, and false statements with a maximum sentence of 142 years and more than $5 million in fines. Kerik has pleaded not guilty. For a rundown of Kerik's myriad indiscretions, check out TPM's Ultimate Kerik Scandal List!.

                        * William Mercer – the former associate deputy attorney general and US Attorney for Montana – withdrew his nomination to be the permanent number three official at the Department of Justice on June 22, 2007 due to his role in the U.S. attorney firings.

                        * Hans von Spakovsky – Commissioner, FEC – nomination to another term after his recess appointment failed due to allegations that he'd worked at the Justice Department to suppress minority voter turnout.

                        Under Investigation But Still in Office

                        * Stuart Bowen – Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR) – was once admired for his successes while investigating allegations of waste and fraud in Iraq, but now employee allegations have prompted four government investigations into the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR).

                        * Lurita Doan – Administrator of the U.S. General Services Administration – still in office, despite investigations by both the Office of Special Counsel and the House oversight committee that found that Doan had "crossed the line" by suggesting that the GSA use its resources to help Republicans get elected.

                        * Alfonso Jackson – Secretary of Housing and Urban Development – following reports that Jackson told a business group in April 2006 that he once canceled a contract after the contractor criticized President Bush, an investigation by the HUD inspector general found that while Jackson told his deputies to favor Bush supporters, there was "no direct proof that a contract was actually awarded or rescinded because of political affiliation." A second, criminal investigation was triggered in part by Jackson's claim before Congress in May 2007 that "I don’t touch contracts." That probe, now before a federal grand jury, has turned up evidence that Jackson may indeed have touched contracts – and steered them towards friends.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by justjoe628 (September 29, 2009 4:37 pm ET)
                            2
                          Wow, that's quite a list. Where'd you get that. Straight from the DNC. I'm just wondering what that has to do with Obama. I personally would never say GB was a good president. So lets say for arguments sake say that all of those people on that list were folks who GW knew well and even knew what kinds of things they were doing or had done i.e. Bill Ayers being a convicted terrorist and Rev. Wrights bigoted and hate-filled sermons, how does that justify anything. My momma always said two wrongs don't make a right. So what you are doing is justifing Obama being affiliated with shady characters, by providing a list of shady characters associated with GB. That makes perfect sense. It makes everything alright?
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by snoopy (September 29, 2009 4:45 pm ET)
                            4  
                            I answered a question, and everything else you said about wright and ayers was opinionated projection. Someone else asked this - if you're outraged at Obama for ayers, why aren't you also outraged at the several republicans who were on that same board? We have yet to see a single denunciation of them anywhere...
                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by justjoe628 (September 29, 2009 5:00 pm ET)
                                 
                              A convictions is "opinionated projection." You soften that up a little. And while it may be a matter of opinion relating to Rev. Wright, would there be more or less outrage if GB had gone to a church where the pastor was a member of the KKK. Hate is hate, whether coming out of the mouth of a black man or a white man. I would hate to think that I could have gone to a church for 20 years and not picked up anything. Nothing? Sounds like Obama should have gone to a new church for an entirely different reason.
                              Report Abuse
                              • Author by snoopy (September 29, 2009 7:32 pm ET)
                                4  
                                Ah, still sputtering I see. Too bad you don't want to watch the entire sermon Wright gave, because it clearly does not support the beliefs fox gave you. But that's how fox does things, just take a sound bite and then twist it out of proportion. They know their audience will never bother checking it out for themselves to see if what they claim is really true...
                                Report Abuse
                                • Author by justjoe628 (September 30, 2009 1:11 pm ET)
                                     
                                  Well first of all the media is famous for taking a "sound bite". They only have so much time on TV so you can't expect them to show the whole thing. They ALL do it, not just FOX.
                                  Secondly, you can easily go on Youtube or other video websites and see all kinds of Rev. Wright sermons. In nice long cuts. This was not an isolated sermon. He sais stuff like this frequently. And just because Obama did not happen to be at one particular sermon, where Rev. Wright said some particularly viles things, does not mean he wasn't at other sermons. He went there for 20 years. You are gonna try to convince anyone with any common sense at all that Wright never said anything else controversial. That boat don't float.
                                  Report Abuse
                          • Author by MiddleLeft (September 30, 2009 8:44 am ET)
                            1  
                            Bill Ayers being a convicted terrorist .

                            FAIL>
                            Report Abuse
                        • Author by justjoe628 (September 29, 2009 4:43 pm ET)
                            2
                          I'm sure that with enough time (I have a job so I don't), anyone could come up with a similarly impressive list from the Clinton administration or the Obama administration or any administration. It still doesn't make it right. Democrat or republican, conservative or liberal or progressive or whatever you guys have changed you name to sound better.
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by snoopy (September 29, 2009 7:34 pm ET)
                            3  
                            When you get your list, let me know, because "I'm sure somebody could make a list" doesn't pass as a fact.
                            Report Abuse
                      • Author by IRONY 101 (September 29, 2009 3:22 pm ET)
                        6  
                        CRIMINALS: Jack Abrahamoff, Scooter Libby, Ken Lay...(I leave out future convicts such as Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and Tom DeLay.)

                        RACISTS: Rush Limbaugh and half the Republican Party.

                        TERRORISTS: Every member of the Saudi royal family who has contributed to terrorist causes.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by smarshall1432997 (September 29, 2009 3:48 pm ET)
                          6  
                          Snoopy, "Brilliantly" written. One can always find facts here at Media Matters, and you sure stepped up to prove this in a "Brilliant" way - LOL. Thank you.
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by fairliberal (September 29, 2009 4:38 pm ET)
                              4
                            Yeah brilliant, he copies a list of low level Bush figures while he will conveniently ignore the long list of current and prominent democrats under investigation or convicted of crimes. Not to mention the list of failed nominees of Obama. The dems have a long history of embracing criminals into the party, ala Kennedy, Barry, Rangel etc. A conviction is a merit badge to a democrat.
                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by snoopy (September 29, 2009 4:48 pm ET)
                              4  
                              Someone call whine-one-one, failedlib is throwing another one of his poutrages instead of actually posting a fact to back up his soiled diapy stain.
                              Report Abuse
                        • Author by fairliberal (September 29, 2009 4:34 pm ET)
                            5
                          Do you mean the Saudi's that your guy has been bowing to?
                          Report Abuse
                      • Author by snoopy (September 29, 2009 3:31 pm ET)
                        6  
                        More racists:

                        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fZd0mENw3I
                        Report Abuse
                      • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 29, 2009 3:42 pm ET)
                        4  
                        Karl Rove, Trent Lott, Strom Thurmond, the bin Laden family, and Jack Abramoff.
                        Report Abuse
          • Author by rumpleteasermom (September 29, 2009 1:48 pm ET)
            4 4
            That's not five. I'm so sorry the public schools failed you.

            But lets try again, would you like to name five REAL ones - ones that haven't been thoroughly debunked. And I'll spot you one, I'll give you Rev Wright, Obama should have seen through him years earlier.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 2:39 pm ET)
                10
              I guess you don't understand what ABOUT FIVE means. I guess public schools failed you. Also, those examples were very real.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 29, 2009 3:44 pm ET)
                3  
                I guess you don't understand what ABOUT FIVE means.
                Actually, I do. it's the approximate emotional age you display when you post.
                Report Abuse
          • Author by BetsyM (September 29, 2009 1:49 pm ET)
            8 1
            You are truly ridiculous starkcr31. The Ayres gossip was debunct, along with Rev. Wright. He wasn't there when the Rev. had his rant. Then we have Resko, LMAO, you have to be kidding me. ACORN really is a mixed bag. It does more good then bad, and unfortunately all you right wingers only talk about the bad. But that's okay because if anyone wanted to dig up all the skeletons in the Republican party it would be really easy.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by kydem09 (September 29, 2009 2:03 pm ET)
              2 9
              You really believe that out of the hundreds of times Obama was at that church he never once heard Wright say something racist or un-American? He had absolutely no idea that Wright had those kinds of views? Talk about a Kool-Aid drinker!
              Report Abuse
              • Author by snoopy (September 29, 2009 2:10 pm ET)
                5 1
                And you have proof that wright says the things you claim all the time? It's your opinion he does it all the time, one that has yet to be verified.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 2:27 pm ET)
                    9
                  Yeah, I'm sure he only said those things the few times.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by snoopy (September 29, 2009 2:35 pm ET)
                    5 1
                    Based on the few comments y'all highlighted (and we debunked), it's more like none of the time.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 2:40 pm ET)
                      1 7
                      How did you debunk it? Are you honestly saying those comments weren't racist and un-American? Really?
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by snoopy (September 29, 2009 2:46 pm ET)
                        4 1
                        I find your comments much more racist and un-american than all that ginned up phony outrage against Wright.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 2:49 pm ET)
                            7
                          Explain to me how my comments are racist or un-American. Is it because I oppose Obama? Gee, how shocking coming from a liberal.
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 29, 2009 3:47 pm ET)
                            4  
                            Gee, how shocking coming from a liberal.
                            And you don't see how smearing an entire class of people through sheer ignorance could be un-American?

                            It's typical wingnut, but not typical American.

                            And, why don't you get your Underoos in a twist at the several Republicans who were appointed to the same board that Obama and Ayers were? Why aren't those GOP members "palling around with terrorists?" Clear the beam out of your eye before railing against the speck in others'.
                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by justjoe628 (September 29, 2009 5:10 pm ET)
                              1 1
                              Nice quote from the Bible. Problem is, you keep justifing the beam in your eye, by pointing out the beam in others. I'm still waiting on you to name the names of these GOP operatives who served with Ayers. However, there is a disconnect. Those people are not the president. His affiliation with Ayers, which was more than simply serving on some random board, speaks to poor decision making in surrounding himself with questionable character.
                              Report Abuse
                              • Author by Disputed Zone (September 29, 2009 10:36 pm ET)
                                3  
                                Regardless of [Ayers'] background, it was never a problem for anyone - including Republicans and Chicago's most powerful business leaders - to work with Ayers on Chicago's public schools. In fact, Ayers is widely respected in the field of urban education.

                                "It was never a concern by any of us in the Chicago school reform movement that he had led a fugitive life years earlier," said former Illinois state Republican Rep. Diana Nelson, who worked with both Obama and Ayers over the years. "It's ridiculous. There is no reason at all to smear Barack Obama with this association. It's nonsensical, and it just makes me crazy. It's so silly."

                                Nelson says her fellow Republicans "might snort when they hear the name Bill Ayers, because they know he comes from a wealthy family, they know he became a radical activist early in his life ... but beyond just snorting, I don't think anyone gives it another thought."

                                "I don't remember ever hearing anyone raise concerns or questions or concerns about [Ayers'] background," says Anne Hallett, who has worked closely with Ayers on the Annenberg Challenge grant and with Obama on education and other community and legislative matters. "And that included everybody I was engaged with," including prominent Republicans, and corporate and civic leaders in Chicago, Hallett adds.

                                Hallett calls this attack on Obama's association with Ayers and the Annenberg Challenge by further association, "a smear campaign. It's a political diatribe that has no basis in fact. The Chicago Annenberg Challenge was an extremely positive initiative. It was well-vetted, thorough, and the fact that it is now is being used for political purposes is, in my opinion, outrageous."

                                link
                                Report Abuse
                                • Author by justjoe628 (September 30, 2009 1:01 pm ET)
                                    2
                                  So what lefty blog did you get the name Diane Nelson from? Maybe Great Orange Cheeto. They like that quote. Or maybe from the October 6, 2008, NPR article (with the added “Note: This text was revised from an earlier version in an effort to more clearly explain background information about William Ayers and the Weather Underground.”) How convenient. Nelson served in the Illinios house from 1981-1985. A decade before she served on any boards with Ayers and Obama. She is hardly considered by anyone to be a conservative republican if she is even a republican at all anymore. Anne Hallett has never been a republican, she actually contributed $5250 to the Obama campaign. You can look it up on Campaignmoney.com. So one used to be republican, does not "several republicans" make.
                                  Report Abuse
                                  • Author by Disputed Zone (September 30, 2009 1:38 pm ET)
                                    2  
                                    I provided a link to the NPR article. I don't care if you doubt Nelson's Republican credentials, and I never said Hallett was a Republican. But both women have first hand knowledge that you and I and Sean Hannity don't, and both state that Republicans had no problem working with Ayers in the exact same way Obama did, and both call the smear attempts baseless. I have no reason to think they are lying.
                                    Report Abuse
                                    • Author by justjoe628 (September 30, 2009 4:58 pm ET)
                                         
                                      My point is that one person, Nelson, does not several republicans make. How many and who were the other republicans on the board. Even so, that does not change who Ayers was or what he had done. It also does not change the fact that Obama has a history of surrounding himself with people on the far left. That to me speaks of poor decision making and poor judgement. Do you have kids Craig? Are you gonna be concerned with what friends and people they hang out with. Bad water pollutes good water. Since he's our president (mine too), I hope Obama was the good water.
                                      Report Abuse
                                      • Author by Disputed Zone (September 30, 2009 11:08 pm ET)
                                           
                                        There are people in this forum who are pretty far left. So I guess your presence here shows you have poor judgment. Now you are bad water. It's a shame, as you seemed to have so much going for you.
                                        Report Abuse
                                        • Author by justjoe628 (September 30, 2009 11:45 pm ET)
                                             
                                          That is really, really weak Craig. I'm not even gonna justify it with any further response.
                                          Report Abuse
                                          • Author by Disputed Zone (October 01, 2009 9:52 am ET)
                                               
                                            How about this. Good people aren't polluted by exposure to different ideas. I don't have children, but if I did I would hope that they could think for themselves and trust their own judgment and that being with people who had all kinds of different views would be a benefit, not a risk.

                                            The only ones doing any polluting here are the ones saying that there is something wrong with Obama's involvement with groups trying to improve the educational opportunities for city children, because one member of that group, who is widely respected in the field of education, was a radical in the 60's. On that count you are certainly polluted.

                                            And if you don't want my "weak" replies, stop making such stupid arguments.
                                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by John Carter (September 29, 2009 8:50 pm ET)
                                1
                              Don't you routinely smear conservatives?
                              Report Abuse
                            • Author by starkcr31 (September 30, 2009 10:53 am ET)
                                1
                              I guess that makes you un-American as well because you liberals do it every chance you. What's a "typical American", someone that worships Obama and questions nothing?
                              Report Abuse
              • Author by westla (September 29, 2009 2:18 pm ET)
                6  
                Rev. Wright is not the topic for this thread, thankfully.

                Not only has every revelation regarding him been studied and dissected under a microscope for over a year, the public isn't interested anymore. It's old news. The fact that a few of you cling to it in hopes of resuscitating it for the current news cycle is futile, I am sorry to report.

                Find another smearing arrow, Wright just doesn't cut anymore.
                Report Abuse
              • Author by mk3872 (September 29, 2009 2:26 pm ET)
                6 1
                So Obama is guilty of what here? Of listening to a black preacher who says things that you make you feel unconformtable?

                I feel sorry for you.

                But ya know what? Obama won anyway! Get over it ...
                Report Abuse
                • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 2:30 pm ET)
                  2 10
                  Yeah, that's the typical liberal way to look at it. Obama won, get over it, and just go along with whatever he wants. I'm glad you had that attitude during the Bush years.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by westla (September 29, 2009 2:42 pm ET)
                    7 1
                    It's not about "getting over it", these associations have all been vetted and been through the wringer. The people knew about them and Obama was elected. The people have "gotten over it", it's only desperate Obama smearers that keep bringing it up. And for what?

                    To "get over it" sounds like good advice, it's time to move on. There are issues that need discussing.
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by mk3872 (September 29, 2009 2:44 pm ET)
                    7 1
                    Hmm? Are you comparing 2008 to 2000 when the Supreme Court (led by Cheney golfing buddy Renquist) selected Bush as the winner even though the majority of VOTERS selected Gore?

                    So because Bush W had 30% approval ratings, we're supposed to let conservatives lie, mislead and create false staatements just because your poor little feelings were hurt?

                    LOL!
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 2:50 pm ET)
                        8
                      Apparently you need to go back to elementary school political science where you learn that the electoral vote, not the popular vote, decides the election.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by congero6189599 (September 29, 2009 3:08 pm ET)
                        4 1
                        typical juvenile response not taking into account the context of the Supremes vote in determining the outcome of the election. Wow, your stupidity and childishness knows no bounds!!!!!
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 3:19 pm ET)
                            5
                          The fact that you disagree with who became president is irrelevant. The president was decided just as the constitution dictates. I guess that's not enough for you though.
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by congero6189599 (September 29, 2009 3:44 pm ET)
                            5  
                            No I'am not OK with it since over 60,000 of My and Your countrymen were illegally crossed off of voting rolls but that another story. George Bush and his brother stole the election in 2000 a real life American coup, and you have nerve to talk about following the constitution. If you weren't some brain dead con willingly content to digest and regurgitate Republican drivel you'd be concerned that a sizeable portion of your countrymen were disenfranchised...oh thats right they were mostly poor and people of color who mostly vote democractic. The election was not decided how the constitution dictates and the eight years that followed was the worst of any presidency in the history of this country, so much soo that the country couldn't get rid of you cons despite all the lies you repeat soon enough to elect a black man. So in a way I'am grateful for you and George you gave us our 1st black President.
                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by justjoe628 (September 29, 2009 5:17 pm ET)
                              1 1
                              I was fine with you rant until you pulled the race card. How do you know that the supposed 60K votes that were "crossed off" were poor and people of color? You can't make a race baiting statement like that without some proof to back it up.
                              Report Abuse
                          • Author by caucasion jesus (September 29, 2009 3:57 pm ET)
                            2  
                            nope.

                            but I sure love "states' rights" stooges applauding federal interference in a state's election process.

                            hypocrite.
                            Report Abuse
                      • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 29, 2009 3:51 pm ET)
                        2  
                        Starkers, are you so condescending to others because you don't realize just how stupid you are, or is it a mental aberration that causes you to lash out at those who best you constantly?
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by starkcr31 (September 30, 2009 10:55 am ET)
                             
                          I'll answer that question right after you answer it about yourself. Is it a deal?
                          Report Abuse
                  • Author by congero6189599 (September 29, 2009 2:50 pm ET)
                    5 1
                    Yes, he won and he won handily even though YOU cons tried to smear him with Rev. Wright, ACORN, and paint him as a radical black muslim christian communist socialsit fascist sent here to establish FEMA concentration camps to indoctrinate our children and kill Sarah Palins baby. We've herd your trash before saying IT this time does not make it anymore believable or YOU any less absurd and ridiculous.
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 29, 2009 3:49 pm ET)
                    3  
                    Yeah, that's the typical liberal way to look at it. Obama won, get over it, and just go along with whatever he wants.
                    Poor Starkers. He's been given the sage advice to look up what "straw man' means so he won't keep using them, and he keeps right on using them. Gee, how shocking coming from an ass.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by mikehuck1976 (September 29, 2009 4:03 pm ET)
                      5  
                      You guys are alll wasting your time with Stark. He has no evidence and no factual basis for any of his beliefs. It has been proven over and over and over again on this site that he has zero intellectual honesty or has any intention of having a debate of ideas. He regurgitates the talking points he is fed by the entertainers disguised as political leaders. There are several right-wingers who come here to debate their ideas. Stark has no ideas of his own. He has been asked time and again to provide any shred of evidence and has failed miserably. He is an intellectual waste of time.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by slowtyper (September 29, 2009 4:36 pm ET)
                        1  
                        ^^this^^ and i'm a bit surprised that his trolling is constantly fed here..juss sayin'
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by DellDolly (September 30, 2009 1:54 pm ET)
                             
                          I agree. It's stupid how many people allow his methods to succeed.

                          It's ridiculous that people do just want he wants them to do - go off topic to avoid discussing the real issues.
                          Report Abuse
              • Author by bip84124092 (September 30, 2009 4:55 pm ET)
                   
                Many white people sit in churches every Sunday listening to hate speech and actully believe it. They actually go out and commit acts of violence based on perceived threats fostered by their church. The KluKluxKlan was a Christian organization started in the "church". I've never seen so many good white "Christians" filled with so much hate. "Should Obama be killed? Should the military take care of the "Obama" problem? Obama is a racist. Obama is a communist/socialist/Marxist/fascist/Muslim. Don't let Obama speak to school children. Obama want's to kill your grandmother. Beware of Obama's secret agenda. Obama is the anti-Christ. Obama is not "one of us". Be afraid, be very afraid". I can see why so many of you are concerned he might have been influenced by racist sermons you think you know he heard for 20 years. It's called projection. Sunday is still the most segregated day of the week.
                Report Abuse
        • Author by bermensch (September 29, 2009 1:44 pm ET)
          4 1
          I suppose they are skeletons if everyone knows about it IRONY.

          and only four were mentioned.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 1:47 pm ET)
            1 8
            The request was ABOUT FOUR, not exactly five, and the fact that everyone knows about makes it better? Interesting.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by IRONY 101 (September 29, 2009 1:50 pm ET)
              6  
              Uhhhh...a skeleton in a person's closet means it is an incriminating fact that is either a secret or which other people know very little about. What you cite are neither incriminating nor secret.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 1:52 pm ET)
                  10
                They may not be secret but they are certainly incriminating.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by snoopy (September 29, 2009 2:13 pm ET)
                  4 1
                  Really? Last time I checked they were debunked and the only people who keep pushing it anyways are the 30% who hate Obama no matter what. So quick, get your little orphan annie secret reichwing decoder ring out, Herr Limbaugh just sent another important secret message!

                  [http://www.hudekfamily.com/items/orphan_annie_secret_decoder.jpg]
                  b... e... s... u... r... e... t... o... d... r... i... n... k... y... o... u... r... b... i... g... o... t... i... n... e...
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 2:30 pm ET)
                      6
                    How do you figure they were debunked? I'm just curious.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by congero6189599 (September 29, 2009 3:13 pm ET)
                      2 1
                      look up Sarah Palin/Todd Palin and the Alaska Independence Party. Your not curious just stupid!
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 3:22 pm ET)
                          5
                        First of all, it's "you're", and second of all your response has nothing to do with my comment so I won't bother addressing it.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by congero6189599 (September 29, 2009 3:49 pm ET)
                          1  
                          ZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz! Even when you try you miss.
                          Report Abuse
                        • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 29, 2009 3:55 pm ET)
                          3  
                          First of all, it's "you're", and second of all your response has nothing to do with my comment so I won't bother addressing it.
                          In other words, Starkers just lost again, and he's forced into bluster mode to try and make everyone think he's still interesting in the slightest.

                          From now on, Starkers, your name here will be "Puffer Fish," because you think you're much larger than you are, but you have no substance to back up your claims at all.
                          Report Abuse
                        • Author by sambo (September 30, 2009 6:34 am ET)
                          2  
                          stark,man you are off the wall from one silly
                          thing to another. How old are you? Are you really this simple,or do you just like to irritate? Posters have given you proof on everything you've ask (especially Snoopy) so,if
                          you've got some juice on Obama lets hear it,along with some facts
                          Report Abuse
              • Author by tennisstar142571 (September 29, 2009 2:54 pm ET)
                  6
                each one of those names that starkcr31 mentioned were at one point skeleton's in Obama's closet .. of course starkcr31 isn't going to know any Current skeleton's unless he is personal friends with Obama lol come on now!! who knows what other crazy socialists are tied to Obama
                p.s. i think libs just like saying the word 'debunked' without knowing the meaning , it is a cool word to say lol
                Report Abuse
                • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 29, 2009 3:58 pm ET)
                  1  
                  p.s. i think libs just like saying the word 'debunked' without knowing the meaning , it is a cool word to say lol
                  "Debunked" means all your claims were investigated and proven to be without merit. Now, why do idiot wingnuts insist on "lol'ing" at their own posts, most often when there is absolutely nothing funny about them at all.

                  Maybe they're signing their posts, and "LOL" is an abbreviation for "Lying, Obnoxious Loser."
                  Report Abuse
            • Author by bermensch (September 29, 2009 1:51 pm ET)
              6 1
              The request was ABOUT FOUR, not exactly five

              False...IRONY said "Name about five of them for starters." not "ABOUT FOUR"

              and the fact that everyone knows about makes it better? Interesting.

              IRONY already addressed this:
              "Those are closeted skeletons? All of the names you cite have been PUBLICLY raised and addressed at one time or another."

              ya ass
              Report Abuse
              • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 1:53 pm ET)
                  9
                I meant "about five". Give me a break.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by snoopy (September 29, 2009 2:15 pm ET)
                  3 1
                  Give you a break, like the way you give president Obama a break? Fat chance.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 2:31 pm ET)
                    1 8
                    I gave him a chance and he's already failed. People only get so much of a chance.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by snoopy (September 29, 2009 2:34 pm ET)
                      4 1
                      Sure you did. He's following through on his campaign promises, so you knew up front what he was going to do. You're against every single one of his initiatives, so I find it laughable your claim that you gave him a chance.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 2:55 pm ET)
                          6
                        I did know up front, and I knew he was going to be failure. What's your point? I don't like his policies and I never did. That's my choice. It's not personal.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by snoopy (September 29, 2009 3:19 pm ET)
                          2 1
                          So, you admit you never gave him a chance after lying and saying you did. Priceless!
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 3:24 pm ET)
                              6
                            I didn't agree with his policies when he campaigned. However, I gave him the benefit of the doubt because I don't think I'm right all the time and it was possible that his policies could have worked. Unfortunately for us, they are a complete and utter failure. Now do you understand?
                            Report Abuse
                      • Author by justjoe628 (September 29, 2009 6:19 pm ET)
                          2
                        He's following thought on his campaign promises? Which ones?
                        Oh, I know, transparency. 300 pages of amendments on cap and trade at 3am the nigh before the vote. Transparent. I'm sure you'll want me to list all the examples and then you'll still disagress so I'm not gonna bother.
                        Oh, how bout no lobbyists. Ever heard of William J. Lynn? How bout Andrew McLaughlin?

                        Taxes, I'm sure he'll keep that promise. Well during the campaign the number was $250K. The last speech he was talking about $97K. Waffle waffle. Internal white house memos say cap and trade will cost me $1700 a year. I know not, "technically" a tax. You honestly think if healthcare reform passes in it's current form, that taxes aren't gonna have to be raised. Well see, but I'm pretty sure that's promise number three down the tubes.
                        Report Abuse
              • Author by kydem09 (September 29, 2009 2:04 pm ET)
                1 6
                OMG are you guys really going to get hung up on the fact that he listed 4 instead of 5??? You all seriously need to get a life.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by bermensch (September 29, 2009 2:07 pm ET)
                  5 2
                  And the fact you took the time to post this dribble speaks volumes of your character.

                  Good Day Sir!
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by kydem09 (September 29, 2009 2:08 pm ET)
                      7
                    Someone's got to reign in your foolishness.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by bermensch (September 29, 2009 2:09 pm ET)
                      3 1
                      I Said Good Day Sir!
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by kydem09 (September 29, 2009 2:39 pm ET)
                        1 5
                        LOL, not so easy to dismiss me. Especially since you yourself engaged in the very "dribble" I was responding to in the first place.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by bermensch (September 29, 2009 2:52 pm ET)
                          2  
                          I Said Good Day Sir!
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 2:56 pm ET)
                              4
                            Wow, what an intelligent response.
                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by kydem09 (September 29, 2009 3:03 pm ET)
                                4
                              Yeah, especially when he was engaging in what he called "dribble" and then accused me of lacking character for commenting about the ridiculousness of it.
                              Report Abuse
                              • Author by bermensch (September 29, 2009 3:12 pm ET)
                                2 1
                                You both can take it, or leave it.
                                Report Abuse
                                • Author by kydem09 (September 29, 2009 3:16 pm ET)
                                    4
                                  LMAO!!! I think I can speak for my pal stark and say we leave it -- we leave the ridiculousness to you. You can have it all to yourself!
                                  Report Abuse
                                  • Author by bermensch (September 29, 2009 3:27 pm ET)
                                    2 1
                                    Thank you for conceding.
                                    Report Abuse
                                    • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 3:31 pm ET)
                                        4
                                      Conceding to the fact that you're an imbecile? It didn't take much convincing.
                                      Report Abuse
                                      • Author by bermensch (September 29, 2009 3:34 pm ET)
                                        3  
                                        Conceding to the fact that you're an imbecile? It didn't take much convincing.

                                        False.

                                        You have conceding to the fact that what you (and kydem09) post is indeed dribble.
                                        Report Abuse
                                • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 3:25 pm ET)
                                    4
                                  Take what, your idiocy? Nah, that's ok.
                                  Report Abuse
                                  • Author by bermensch (September 29, 2009 3:28 pm ET)
                                    2 1
                                    What is so idiotic with what I said?

                                    Please explain
                                    Report Abuse
                                    • Author by DellDolly (September 29, 2009 3:40 pm ET)
                                      5  
                                      Stop feeding the trolls! Just stop.

                                      Guess what they want? You to give them attention like this. Guess why they want that? So that they don't have us discuss the real topic here.

                                      The MSNBC host should have already known that this talking point had been debunked, and so should have called for proof, and when proof wasn't forthcoming, should have pointed it out. He didn't.

                                      But I'm already 3/4 of the way through this thread, and not a single person has talked about this point!!!!!!
                                      Report Abuse
                                      • Author by bermensch (September 29, 2009 3:42 pm ET)
                                        4  
                                        The feeding has stopped
                                        Report Abuse
                                      • Author by kydem09 (September 29, 2009 4:01 pm ET)
                                          5
                                        If going off topic is trolling, then 90% of the posters here, right and left leaning, are trolls.
                                        Report Abuse
                                        • Author by DellDolly (September 29, 2009 4:15 pm ET)
                                          3  
                                          Going off topic with the intent to derail a thread and prevent/forestall conversations about the topic is troll behavior.

                                          That intent is not present in other's behavior. In yours, it is. In your partner in crime's behavior, it is.

                                          You did your job. Go collect your paycheck for today and be gone.
                                          Report Abuse
                                          • Author by kydem09 (September 29, 2009 4:37 pm ET)
                                              1
                                            Based on your description, I'm not a troll. I did not generate this thread, was only responding to it. It's amazing to me that you can obviously peer into my mind to see what my intent is. And at least I work for a living. Maybe you should try it yourself.
                                            Report Abuse
                                            • Author by DellDolly (September 30, 2009 12:52 am ET)
                                                 
                                              Oh yeah, is this like how Karl Rove didn't leak Valarie Plame's name because he wasnt't the first one to do it?

                                              Except he did leak her name. It doesn't matter if he wasn't the first one to do it.

                                              And it doesn't matter, using my definition, that you didn't begin the thread.

                                              "Going off topic with the intent to derail a thread and prevent/forestall conversations about the topic is troll behavior."

                                              You did this.
                                              Report Abuse
                    • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 29, 2009 4:01 pm ET)
                      3  
                      Someone's got to reign in (sic) your foolishness.
                      The term is "rein in." Before you attempt to "reign in" anyone else's "foolishness," kydumb09, perhaps you should rein in your ignorance, your stupidity, and your delusions of adequacy.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by kydem09 (September 29, 2009 4:38 pm ET)
                          2
                        Oh wow, you sure have put me in my place. I'm shuddering from your awesomeness.
                        Report Abuse
                • Author by IRONY 101 (September 29, 2009 2:08 pm ET)
                  5 1
                  Actually he listed NONE...not one "skeleton" in Obama's closet.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by kydem09 (September 29, 2009 2:41 pm ET)
                      6
                    Actually, I think all the things listed are skeletons because the mainstream media did not do its job and vet Obama during the campaign. I guarantee there's more than meets the eye with more than one of the characters named above. Just a matter of time before it all comes out.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by IRONY 101 (September 29, 2009 2:58 pm ET)
                      4 1
                      I guarantee there's more than meets the eye with more than one of the characters named above. Just a matter of time before it all comes out.

                      Wow...how do you know all these things? You must listen to Rudh Limbaugh and Sean Hannity...
                      Report Abuse
                    • Author by westla (September 29, 2009 2:46 pm ET)
                      3 1
                      So it's the mainstream media's job now to go back and pour over Obama's associations from years gone by to see if he attended some Bill Ayer's meetings, or had lunch with Rev. Wright? Or maybe there is some witness to some blood sharing ceremony that Obama had with these men? Ridiculous. Let Sean Hannity pander to his viewers with stuff like this, while the rest of us get on with what is really important to people's lives in this country.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by kydem09 (September 29, 2009 3:18 pm ET)
                          4
                        BTW, I don't listen to Limbaugh or Hannity. I can actually think for myself, a concept I'm not sure half the Kool-Aid drinkers at this site are familiar with.
                        Report Abuse
                      • Author by kydem09 (September 29, 2009 3:08 pm ET)
                          5
                        Gee, I don't know. Seems like they had no problem tearing into Sarah Palin's past. Would have been nice for them to have been as interested in Obama's past. Plus, you'll never be able to convince me that Obama didn't know about Wright's views. Have lunch with the guy? Are you friggin' kidding me? Obama himself said Wright was his mentor, that he attended Wright's church regularly, yet he wants people to be naive enough to believe he never heard any of the offensive things Wright had to say about this country or white people. Uh, huh.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by congero6189599 (September 29, 2009 4:03 pm ET)
                          3  
                          You keep repeating the drivel you do like the press ripped into Sarah Palin and you deserve the ridicule you get. Charles Gibson ripped into her? Katie Couric ripped into her? You have your own republicans and cons to thank for exposing her for not being vetted or ready for the position she was chosen for, and we saw the debates...wink...wink...it's amazing how Rev. Wright just rolls off your tongue but you don't say anything about Sarah and Todd's association with the Alaska Independence Party...hmmmm a patriot calling for secession...and YOU think Obama wasn't vetted? Your cup of kool-aid has runneth over.
                          Report Abuse
                        • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 29, 2009 4:06 pm ET)
                          1  
                          Gee, I don't know. Seems like they had no problem tearing into Sarah Palin's past. Would have been nice for them to have been as interested in Obama's past.
                          While Puffer Fish refuses to look up "straw man," perhaps you could put your spare time to good use and look up "false equivalence."
                          Report Abuse
                        • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 29, 2009 4:07 pm ET)
                          2  
                          I can actually think for myself
                          Objection, Your Honor! Kydumb09 is asserting facts not in evidence.
                          Report Abuse
                    • Author by congero6189599 (September 29, 2009 3:04 pm ET)
                      4 1
                      predictable con retort. Obama was not vetted. Hahah! he went to a whole democratic primary fighting for his party's nomination but he wasn't vetted. Then he ran against the nastiest Republican noise machine ever along with JohnMcsame/Sarah I see Russia Palin whose husband did pal around with secessionist with ties to right wing militias,which we never heard to much about but Obama wasn't vetted? We've herd your drivel before we just ain't buying it. It's tired play-out conservative lies and misinformation. We saw what you cons had to offer and voted overwhelmingly for Obama. If there is ONE thing I'd like to thank you cons and George Bush for doing is for f@#$%&@# up this country sooooo much it was willing to elect a black man to clean it up! Thank You cons!
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by kydem09 (September 29, 2009 3:09 pm ET)
                          4
                        Well, the way things are looking, I'd be surprised if went beyond one term.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by congero6189599 (September 29, 2009 3:24 pm ET)
                          3 1
                          Well considering you voted WRONG in the last election I'll take my chances. Thank You cons for this summer showing us how crazy and ridiculous you are, and if we get meaningful healthcare reform passed you cons can kiss your butts good-bye. No solutions, no answers,just ramblings and attempts to smear by guilt of association ,reflective of the desperation you feel. Despite all your fuss this summer the public still overwhelmingly supports a public option and are even more committed to reform. It seems the more tantrums you have in support of insurance company profits people still want change. Amazing how that works, you know...the way things are going.
                          Report Abuse
                        • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 29, 2009 4:09 pm ET)
                          3  
                          Well, the way things are looking, I'd be surprised if went beyond one term.
                          I have a feeling you'd be surprised if Wednesday followed Tuesday.
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by starkcr31 (September 30, 2009 11:00 am ET)
                               
                            Wow, you are truly awesome when you insult someone for a simple comment that you disagree with.
                            Report Abuse
                      • Author by kydem09 (September 29, 2009 3:13 pm ET)
                          5
                        No, he wasn't vetted. Mark my words, there will be a major scandal erupt during his presidency that will related to one of the pre-election associations that some of us have been concerned about and the media will be left with egg all over its collective face. The media dismissed all the "guilt by association" stories because they were primarily generated by conservative media. We've seen with Van Jones, ACORN, etc. how that tactic is working for them.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by snoopy (September 29, 2009 3:36 pm ET)
                          4 1
                          And if that scandal you are praying for never materializes you are going to apologize and admit you were wrong, correct?
                          Report Abuse
                        • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 29, 2009 4:11 pm ET)
                          1  
                          No, he wasn't vetted.
                          So say you, someone who hasn't been correct in any post you have made so far. And your string is still intact.
                          Report Abuse
                    • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 29, 2009 4:04 pm ET)
                      3  
                      Actually, I think all the things listed are skeletons
                      That does not magically make them "skeletons." Your posts have shown that you have no idea what the concept of "skeleton in the closet" is, so all you have left is posturing, acting stupid, and showing you have even less substance than your "pal" Puffer Fish.
                      Report Abuse
            • Author by westla (September 29, 2009 1:52 pm ET)
              7  
              Star,

              It's obvious to me that today's Republican party is devoid of ideas and constructive criticisms if all they have are these guilt by association red herrings to throw at Obama.

              I find it sad and pathetic that a once vibrant party with ideas, not all of them I ever agreed with but ideas nonetheless, is now reduced to Limbaugh and Beck style smears at anything they can drum up to attack Obama on. And offer nothing in the way of substance along the way.

              If they are out to destroy their party, fine. I just wish they leave the country alone.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by tennisstar142571 (September 29, 2009 2:57 pm ET)
                  3
                Here's an idea (it relates to what Beck and Limbaugh preach on a daily basis and what the Republican party stands for) STOP SPENDING OUR MONEY!!!
                Report Abuse
                • Author by snoopy (September 29, 2009 3:55 pm ET)
                  3  
                  Used to stand for. Bush grew the government far bigger and spent like a drunk sailor in a whorehouse, and he did it with the complete support of beck, limbaugh and the entire republican party. You no longer have the moral high ground on that subject.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 29, 2009 4:12 pm ET)
                    3  
                    The GOP never had the moral high ground on that argument.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by slowtyper (September 29, 2009 4:56 pm ET)
                         
                      the GOP never had the high ground on any argument..they claimed they did..but they lied..
                      Report Abuse
                • Author by Appleboy (September 29, 2009 4:24 pm ET)
                     
                  Yeah, and government spending has nothing to do with your ability to earn money. Next time you go to work, please don't use MY public roads. Grow up.
                  Report Abuse
        • Author by DellDolly (September 29, 2009 3:33 pm ET)
          3  
          Irony (and many others), why in god's name did you feel the need to feed the troll?

          Don't you know by now that they post at the very tops of threads to disrupt and derail, and when you all feed the trolls, you give them exactly what they want, so that we forget the topic being covered?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by southerngal (September 29, 2009 3:59 pm ET)
              5
            Give it a rest Sue. Even after being banned more times than I can remember, you are still not the moderator here and your admonitions are worthless. If you don't like to read the posts, then don't. Stop your childish whining.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 29, 2009 4:13 pm ET)
              4  
              Give it a rest Sue.
              You first, Tommy.
              Report Abuse
            • Author by DellDolly (September 30, 2009 12:58 am ET)
              1  
              Not sure what you're going on about, and you're the one who is the known sockpuppet who has no credibility here, so I don't think you're one to suggest to anyone how to behave responsibly and honestly.

              I used to fight troll posts on threads when I was first getting into computers back in the mid 90's, and have been here at MMFA since I started posting here after I returned to the states a couple of months ago after a stint with a US company at a call center in India.

              It's always been a pet peeve of mine, and it's undeniable that it was an issue on this particular thread, and what you want to do is attack me for pointing it out? Could you lose any more credibility?
              Report Abuse
      • Author by mjsomme (September 29, 2009 1:45 pm ET)
        5  
        If a "slightly negative comment" is untrue, it IS a lie and should be shot down. And it should be called a lie, not a mistake.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 1:49 pm ET)
          1 9
          So... the fact that ACORN not only helped get Obama elected (in many cases, illegally registering people) and is getting federal funding doesn't make them connected to the White House? I see.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by IRONY 101 (September 29, 2009 1:51 pm ET)
            8  
            Name one person who voted illegally for Barack Obama.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 1:54 pm ET)
              1 9
              I didn't work on the indictments, so I don't have specific names but many people were arrested for voter fraud.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by IRONY 101 (September 29, 2009 1:58 pm ET)
                7 1
                Where...? Voting fraud...or voter registration fraud? There's a difference. Point to anyone who is alleged to have voted fraudulently.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 2:32 pm ET)
                    7
                  Fine, voter registration fraud, but it's still illegal, and again, I don't have specific names.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by ScienceBuff (September 29, 2009 2:39 pm ET)
                    6  
                    And it hasn't been shown to have produce one single illegal vote. Exactly how did illegal registrations help Obama?
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by foghornleghorn (September 29, 2009 3:35 pm ET)
                    5  
                    I've got 2 names: Mickey Mouse and Harry Potter. And guess what? Their registrations were flagged because ACORN was FOLLOWING THE LAW.

                    Furthermore, Mr. Mouse and Mr. Potter didn't vote. But Ann Coulter DID vote twice. Any outrage over that?

                    And...any outrage over voter caging and the purging of eligible voters for partisal political purposes?
                    Report Abuse
              • Author by snoopy (September 29, 2009 2:18 pm ET)
                6  
                That's correct, you have no information. But not one person was arrested for voter fraud, because the only known case of voter fraud was Ann Coulter, who has two counts of voter fraud.
                Report Abuse
              • Author by mk3872 (September 29, 2009 2:25 pm ET)
                5  
                Some of ACORN workers who were poor and not well trained, faked voter registration cards to earn extra bonus $$.

                ACORN themselves turned them in.

                There were no FRAUDULANT votes because these people do not actually EXIST.
                Report Abuse
              • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 29, 2009 4:17 pm ET)
                3  
                I didn't work on the indictments
                Actually, no one did, because there were no indictments for voter fraud, Puffer Fish. Several people were prosecuted for voter registration fraud, and those cases are ongoing.
                I don't have specific names but many people were arrested for voter fraud.
                Another lie. Please present evidence of people arrested for voter fraud.

                I have a feeling all we'll hear from you is crickets, because the most famous case of voter fraud committed in the 2008 election was Ann Coulter, who admitted voting twice in two different precincts.

                So you lose yet again, Puffer Fish. It's time for you to insult me instead of countering the actual facts presented, in other words, your usual M.O.
                Report Abuse
          • Author by The_Cat (September 29, 2009 1:59 pm ET)
            6  
            You mean the $54 million over the last 15 years, starkcr31, or the funding the Congress just cut completely? They no longer get federal money.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Appleboy (September 29, 2009 2:17 pm ET)
              4  
              Hey man, that comes out to just over 1 cent per US citizen per year. I could have gone out and bought a gum ball with that penny. Damn you ACORN!
              Report Abuse
              • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 29, 2009 4:36 pm ET)
                   
                It would have cost you more than that to fill the cavities caused by all the sugar in the gum ball. So ACORN actually saved you money!
                Report Abuse
          • Author by mk3872 (September 29, 2009 2:29 pm ET)
            4  
            So Obama is guilty of something because an organization that had people give bad advice on a video tape helped to get him elected?

            So what is George W. Bush guily of then seeing that Tom DeLay and Jack Abramoff helped secure votes for him as well?
            Report Abuse
      • Author by shaggles (September 29, 2009 1:54 pm ET)
        7  
        And you know it's really, really bad when someone from Politico has to correct them.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by shaggles (September 29, 2009 1:51 pm ET)
      6  
      Why shouldn't someone who once worked for ACORN hold a position in the Obama administration? What has ACORN done that would disqualify any former official, no matter how "senior," from holding such a position?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 1:55 pm ET)
        1 8
        How about committing crimes? Oh wait, that doesn't preclude someone who committed a crime from holding a position in the Obama administration. I mean Geitner got the job, right?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by IRONY 101 (September 29, 2009 2:02 pm ET)
          7  
          Timothy Geitner's tax situation was handled as a civil matter and never rose to the level of a prosecutable criminal offense.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by kydem09 (September 29, 2009 2:07 pm ET)
            1 6
            Someone who failed to pay his taxes because he was confused by the tax preparation software is not qualified (or apparently smart enough) to be running the Treasury Department. Just one example of poor choices made by Obama.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by IRONY 101 (September 29, 2009 2:09 pm ET)
              7  
              Strak said Geitner was a criminal...which he is not.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 2:35 pm ET)
                  5
                But being a bumbling fool who is in charge of our Treasury Department is OK???
                Report Abuse
                • Author by vhw28672478 (September 29, 2009 2:36 pm ET)
                  4  
                  How about Bush
                  Report Abuse
                • Author by John Paradox (September 29, 2009 2:51 pm ET)
                  4  
                  Great job, Brownie.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 2:58 pm ET)
                      3
                    What does that even mean?
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by shaggles (September 29, 2009 3:09 pm ET)
                      1  
                      I think he meant 'Heckuva job, Brownie.'
                      Report Abuse
                    • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 29, 2009 4:41 pm ET)
                         
                      What does that even mean?
                      Here's an idea, Puffer Fish. Put that sentence in a document somewhere convenient so you can easily copy it to the clipboard of your computer. Then, whenever you feel like making some sort of pithy post, instead, just copy and paste "What does that even mean?" instead. It will be more intelligent than anything else you have ever posted, and it will have the added benefit of showing your ignorance to the world with every post you make. Granted, you are already doing that, but the simple copy and paste would make it even better for you, given your limited intellect.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 29, 2009 4:43 pm ET)
                           
                        I put the word "instead" twice in the same sentence because Puffer Fish probably wouldn't remember I had used it and would need to see it again to understand. Maybe his response to that will be, "What does that even mean?"
                        Report Abuse
          • Author by starkcr31 (September 29, 2009 2:34 pm ET)
              6
            If you commit tax fraud, it's a crime. He wasn't charged because he paid it off AFTER he was being vetted for his job and it was discovered. Don't make excuses for this criminal.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Disputed Zone (September 29, 2009 4:39 pm ET)
              3  
              According to the Supreme Court in Sansone v. United States, 380 U.S. 343, 85 S. Ct. 1004, 13 L. Ed. 2d 882 (1965), a conviction under section 7201 [for tax evasion] requires proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt as to each of three elements: the existence of a tax deficiency, willfulness in an attempted evasion of tax, and an affirmative act constituting an evasion or attempted evasion of the tax.

              An affirmative act is anything done to mislead the government or conceal funds to avoid payment of an admitted and accurate deficiency. Affirmative behavior can take two forms: the evasion of assessment and the evasion of payment. Affirmative acts of evasion include evading taxes by placing assets in another's name, dealing in cash, and having receipts or debts paid through and in the name of another person. Merely failing to pay assessed tax, without more, does not constitute tax evasion.


              link

              He didn't commit a crime, and neither did Ms. Palin.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 29, 2009 4:43 pm ET)
                1  
                Don't confuse Puffer Fish with facts, all he'll do is post "What does that even mean?"
                Report Abuse
        • Author by shaggles (September 29, 2009 3:16 pm ET)
          3  
          What crimes has ACORN committed?
          Report Abuse
      • Author by IRONY 101 (September 29, 2009 1:56 pm ET)
        5  
        Basically...because Glennn Beck Sean Hannity say that is a very bad thing.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by tennisstar142571 (September 29, 2009 3:02 pm ET)
            2
          and you don't think it's a very bad thing?? maybe they should check your taxes next year lol
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 29, 2009 4:45 pm ET)
            2  
            Again, laughing at the unfunny. Are you signing your post "Lying, Obnoxious Loser," too?
            Report Abuse
    • Author by Media Mumblings (September 29, 2009 2:52 pm ET)
        3
      How anyone can assign this the status of a witchhunt is beyond me. Calling something a withhunt implies that there is no "witch." Is someone seriously suggesting that there isn't a great deal of smoke in regard to this organization? How many times do they have to get indicted for voter registration fraud, among many other dubious activities, for people to start questioning their legitimacy? Wayne Radke, the founder of Acorn, embezzled a million dollars from this tax-payer subsidized org. for christsakes. Some of you have drunk too much of the good reverend's kool-aid. If this were a conservative or classically liberal(read:libertarian) organizaton, I have no doubt that the corruption would be as obvious to you as it is to the rest of us.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by shaggles (September 29, 2009 3:15 pm ET)
        3  
        ACORN was not indicted for voter fraud. ACORN workers, whom ACORN turned in, were indicted. And if Wayne Radke embezzled money from them doesn't that make ACORN the victim?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Media Mumblings (September 29, 2009 6:24 pm ET)
            1
          Oh, I see. Acorn trained employees were indicted, not Acorn itself. How rich is that! I do love semantic games played by apologists for corrupt institutions. Some of the posters grudgingly admit that Acorn is corrupt by saying that they only took 1 penny per year per citizen. This is a tacit admission of guilt on Acorn's part. If these are the best apologies that you guys have, then you're on weak ground.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by mary59 (September 30, 2009 12:01 pm ET)
            1  
            You do have comprehension problems, don't you. If you owned a company and an employee embezzled money from you, are you the offender? Or if you charged them with a task, and they took short cuts to try to squeeze more money from you, are you the offender?
            Please rent a clue.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by shaggles (September 30, 2009 12:33 pm ET)
            1  
            ACORN turned them in.
            Report Abuse
      • Author by ScienceBuff (September 29, 2009 3:18 pm ET)
        4  
        Voter registration fraud is a thorn in ACORN's side. They hate it. It gives them headaches and they derive no benefit from it. They flag suspected fraudulent registrations for election officials and turn them in as they are required to do by law. Perhaps you can tell us exactly why ACORN would wish to produce fraudulent registrations.

        The embezzlement was discovered by ACORN and they decided to handle it in house. This is how such things have been handled by businesses many times on large and small scales. A theft by employee is discovered and the company will accept the return of the stolen product and fire the employee in return for not prosecuting. This could be to avoid publicity, because of affection for the person, to get the stolen property back faster or just to avoid the hassles of prosecuting. It indicates dishonesty only by the employee and means nothing relative to the organization or business.

        These are the kind of normal problems encountered by many organizations and businesses simply because of human nature. There is no indication of organizational corruption.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by kydem09 (September 29, 2009 4:00 pm ET)
            3
          They didn't even report it to the Board of Directors. How do you respond to that?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by ScienceBuff (September 29, 2009 4:20 pm ET)
               
            They probably should have, just like those examples in business should probably report to higher levels. They thought the situation could be handled quietly, with a minimum of fuss, again like you'll find in the business world.

            Perhaps you could tell me how this indicates organizational corruption. They chose to fix things instead of covering them up. The organization gained nothing from the episode. All of the evidence shows it was the actions of a single individual. It had nothing to do with the way ACORN operates as an organization because there is absolutely no indication of a pattern.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by mary59 (September 29, 2009 4:21 pm ET)
            2  
            What board of directors? Their own???? I do think this sort of stuff is routine in voter registration drives. They're required to turn in all registrations and they flag any that look fraudulent.

            The League of Women Voters do the same thing.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by kydem09 (September 29, 2009 4:34 pm ET)
                2
              I was specifically referring to the embezzlement.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by mary59 (September 29, 2009 5:23 pm ET)
                2  
                Sorry. But see sciencebuff's post above.

                I really don't see how you can miss the hyperventilation that's going on here about this organization. It's ginned up and crazy. You'd think they were running bootleg whiskey or something. Or selling arms for hostages.
                Report Abuse
          • Author by congero6189599 (September 29, 2009 4:36 pm ET)
            2  
            Report what to the board of directors? You have some inside information you'd like to share, by all means provide your link Mr.or MS. never been right.

            Maybe they'll find that President Obama was born in Kenya. Ohhhh...I know the scandal is that he actually had his grandmother silenced just days before the election because she was going to expose him as being born in Kenya, and ACORN provided the hitman and William Ayers and Rev. Wright put up the money. Yea, Yea,thats it...thats the ticket.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by snoopy (September 29, 2009 4:41 pm ET)
            3  
            How did you respond to corrupt CEO's getting paid outrageous bonuses while their departments and companies failed? Were you one of the crowd that said "Oh well, it's their company, they should be allowed to do whatever they want."?
            Report Abuse
      • Author by mary59 (September 29, 2009 5:55 pm ET)
        3  
        Joe Conason had a good column on the ACORN hysteria. Here's two excerpts:
        "Like so many conservative attacks, the crusade against ACORN has been highly exaggerated and even falsified to create a demonic image that bears little resemblance to the real organization.

        Working in the nation's poorest places, and hiring the people who live there, ACORN is not immune to the pathologies that can afflict institutions in those communities. As a large nonprofit handling many millions of dollars, it has suffered from mismanagement at the top as well -- although there is nothing unique in that, either..."

        ..."To claim that the stupid behavior of a half-dozen employees should discredit a national group with offices in more than 75 cities staffed by many thousands of employees and volunteers is like saying that Mark Sanford or John Ensign have discredited every Republican governor or senator.

        Indeed, the indignation of the congressional Republicans screaming about ACORN and the phony streetwalker is diluted by the presence of at least two confirmed prostitution clients -- Rep. Ken Calvert and Sen. David Vitter -- in their midst. Neither of those right-wing johns has been even mildly chastised by their moralistic peers. Nobody is cutting off their federal funding..."
        Report Abuse
    • Author by aaniko (September 29, 2009 4:38 pm ET)
        2
      Why debate the obvious? Acorn and SEIU were promised a "seat at the table" by Obama before his inauguration. Obama and Acorn have worked together for years and Acorn helped to elect Obama as senator. The Irrelevant Media can't or won't read what is all over the internet. You can even se and hear on a video on Youtube where Obama is promising Acorn to be there and have their voices heard when he makes new policy. Wake up and smell the stench of Acorn and SEIU in the White House. No doubt we'll have to fumigate after Obama, Acorn and SEIU leave the White House.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by mary59 (September 30, 2009 12:05 pm ET)
        2  
        Link to Obama promising ACORN a place at the table???
        Frankly, it's just your imagination that something would be seriously wrong with that, even if true (which I doubt)

        SEIU and ACORN are both organizations that work to help lower income people and ordinary working people. Naturally, you'd be against them.
        Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.