About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Conservative media figures demanding ACORN investigation opposed, downplayed investigations of Bush scandals

October 01, 2009 6:14 pm ET — 29 Comments

Conservative media figures including Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, and Newt Gingrich have called for an investigation of ACORN's activities and its supposed link to President Obama and Democrats, often while spreading misinformation about ACORN. However, these same media figures opposed or downplayed investigations into scandals involving the Bush administration, including the controversial firing of nine U.S. attorneys in 2006, the outing of the identity of Valerie Plame, and alleged torture and prisoner abuse by U.S. officials.

Beck, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Gingrich opposed, downplayed investigations into Bush administration scandals

Plame investigation: Perjury and obstruction convictions, prosecutor said Libby's obstruction made it impossible to determine whether underlying crime had been committed. During an October 2005 press conference announcing the indictment of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, then-chief of staff for Vice President Dick Cheney, special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald said that obstruction by Libby had prevented his office from determining whether an underlying crime had been committed in the disclosure of the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame. Fitzgerald reiterated this point in his 2007 sentencing memorandum, writing that "the reasons why Mr. Libby was not charged with an offense directly relating to his unauthorized disclosures of classified information regarding Ms. Wilson included, but were not limited to, the fact that Mr. Libby's false testimony obscured a confident determination of what in fact occurred." In response to the scandal regarding the outing of Plame:

  • Beck: Outing of Plame's identity was "nothing." In 2007, on his former CNN Headline News show, Beck said of the leaking of Plame's identity as a CIA operative: "[E]ven I said that Scooter Libby should go to jail and he should pay the price for lying to prosecutors, but it was over a CIA name thing, which was nothing. Nobody was held responsible. He did nothing wrong on that. He lied to prosecutors. The guy went to jail." Beck pooh-poohed the Plame scandal on the day that Libby was found guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice in connection with the Plame case, saying: "[E]very other talk show tonight probably leading with the verdict of the Scooter Libby trial today. Quite frankly, here's really all you need to know. Politics, politics, politics. Blah, blah, blah. Scooter Libby, found guilty on four of the five counts of obstructing of -- obstructing justice and lying to the feds. Really, that's it. You know, oh, wait, there is one more thing. When will people in Washington ever learn it's not the crime, it's the cover-up? This doesn't affect anybody's life. Well, Scooter Libby's. But it doesn't affect mine, doesn't affect yours."
  • Limbaugh: "I think it was always a fraud." On the December 9, 2008, edition of his radio show, Limbaugh said: "We also know that Pat Fitzgerald, who was the special prosecutor in the leak of the name Valerie Plame as some sort of a CIA James Bond, which was -- I think it was always a fraud." Limbaugh has also spread the false claim that Richard Armitage alone was "the leaker" of Plame's identity and the baseless claim that Plame's neighbors were aware of her covert status.
  • Gingrich: "Wilson guaranteed that his wife would be outed." On the October 19, 2005, edition of Hannity & Colmes, Gingrich stated, "As you know, I've always been very doubtful about this whole case, because I always thought that [Plame's husband] ambassador [Joe] Wilson guaranteed that his wife would be outed when he became a public figure in a job that she had gotten for him."

U.S. attorney firings: Justice Department inspector general says further investigation needed to determine if criminal statutes were violated. A report on the U.S. attorney firings by the Justice Department's Office of Inspector General stated:

[W]e believe a full investigation is necessary to determine whether other federal criminal statutes were violated with regard to the removal of [U.S. Attorney David] Iglesias. For example, Iglesias and others have alleged that he was removed in retaliation for his failure to accelerate the indictment of a public corruption case and his alleged failure to initiate voter fraud investigations. Iglesias said that Representative [Heather] Wilson, who was running for reelection in a close race, called him before the 2006 election and asked him about delays in public corruption cases being handled by his office, apparently referring to the courthouse case.

[...]

It is possible that those seeking Iglesias's removal did so simply because they believed he was not competently prosecuting worthwhile cases. However, if they attempted to pressure Iglesias to accelerate his charging decision in the courthouse case or to initiate voter fraud investigations to affect the outcome of the upcoming election, their conduct may have been criminal.

In response to the scandal regarding the firing of the U.S. attorneys:

  • Limbaugh makes false claims about U.S. attorney firings in order to downplay scandal. Limbaugh falsely claimed of the scandal that Bush "left a lot of Clinton U.S. attorneys in office, did not sweep them. Only in his second term did [Bush] start replacing some" U.S. attorneys. Limbaugh continued, "and the Democrats tried to impeach the attorney general at the time, Gonzales, for supposedly playing politics with the Justice Department. And of course the White House did not fire back, did not defend itself." In fact, Bush reportedly replaced 88 of the 93 U.S. attorneys with his own appointees during the first two years of his presidency.
  • Gingrich: "This is the most mishandled, artificial, self-created mess that I can remember in the years I've been active in public life." On the April 8, 2007, edition of Fox Broadcasting Co.'s Fox News Sunday, Gingrich stated, "The president has every right to have the U.S. attorneys he wants. It is not a prerogative of the Senate or anyone else to question if he says he no longer pleases me, they're supposed to resign, period. This is the most mishandled, artificial, self-created mess that I can remember in the years I've been active in public life."
  • O'Reilly cut off co-host's mike when she discussed U.S. attorney scandal, called firings "unimportant." Discussing the U.S. attorney firings in 2007 during his former radio program, The Radio Factor, O'Reilly told his listeners that the U.S. attorney scandal is unimportant because "[i]t has nothing to do with your life." After co-host Lis Wiehl insisted that it did matter, O'Reilly said: "And now you made a terrible mistake, and you're smarter than that, and you misled my audience, and I'm furious. I am furious at you." At one point during the broadcast, O'Reilly cut off Wiehl's mike after she accurately pointed out that the Bush administration had offered to allow White House staffers to appear before the congressional committees investigating the firings only if no transcript of the interviews is produced.

Alleged abuse and torture by U.S. officials: CIA IG report "identified concerns" about use of waterboarding, DoJ OPR "recommends that the Department reexamine previous decisions to decline prosecution in several cases." In its 2004 report, the CIA inspector general found:

Inasmuch as EITs have been used only since August 2002, and they have not all been used with every high value detainee, there is limited data on which to asses their individual effectiveness. This Review identified concerns about the use of the waterboard, specifically whether the risks of its use were justified by the results, whether it has been unnecessarily used in some instances, and whether the fact that it is being applied in a manner different from its use in SERE training brings into question the continued applicability of the DoJ opinion to its use. Although the waterboard is the most intrusive of the EITs, the fact that precautions have been taken to provide on-site medical oversight in the use of all EITs is evidence that their use poses risks.

In his August 24 statement regarding the opening of the preliminary review into whether laws were violated in connection with the interrogation of specific detainees at overseas locations," Attorney General Eric Holder stated:

The Office of Professional Responsibility has now submitted to me its report regarding the Office of Legal Counsel memoranda related to so-called enhanced interrogation techniques. I hope to be able to make as much of that report available as possible after it undergoes a declassification review and other steps. Among other findings, the report recommends that the Department reexamine previous decisions to decline prosecution in several cases related to the interrogation of certain detainees.

In response to the scandal regarding alleged torture and prisoner abuse by U.S. officials:

  • Beck: The investigation "will destroy -- not only anybody advising the president, nobody is going to give advice to the president." From the April 22 edition of Beck's Fox News program [transcript from Nexis]:

BECK: Right. And the other part of that is, our CIA -- even though Barack Obama says, "Oh, we're not going after the CIA, we're not going to go after the guys who did any of these things," just the White House. If people are out in the field and they see the White House being taken down, a president being taken down or his closest advisors, and then I come to you and say, "Hey, by the way, I need you to go get this guy, get this guy, and go and get the information. It is just between us, me and you, CIA, that's it." Who in the right mind is going to do that?

[...]

BECK: Colonel, you tell me, who would serve in our military? This will destroy -- not only anybody advising the president, nobody is going to give advice to the president. This has -- this has almost -- this has almost -- this has never haven't -- this has never happened before.

OLIVER NORTH (Fox News host): Well .

BECK: We didn't go after Abraham Lincoln for habeas corpus. We didn't go after Truman. We didn't go after FDR. We didn't go after any of these guys on things like this, because it was wartime. Now we're going here. Who's going to advise the president and who's going to serve in our military?

  • Limbaugh: Obama is "declaring war against the CIA," "doing the bidding of terrorists." On August 25, Limbaugh asserted: "Now Obama, in declaring war against the CIA, picking up where his buddy Bill Ayers left off. It's the same mentality. We actually have an administration doing the bidding of terrorists." Limbaugh has also said that the investigation is "all about destroying United States national security."
  • O'Reilly claims Holder should be investigated, not Bush administration officials. Discussing the possibility that the Obama Justice Department could prosecute Bush administration officials who authorized torture, O'Reilly falsely claimed during the April 22 edition of his Fox News show that "Eric Holder and [former Attorney General] Janet Reno put the wall up between the FBI and the CIA, which led to the 9-11 attacks. If anybody should be prosecuted it's him. ... Holder is your guy." O'Reilly has also said that an investigation into torture allegations would result in "show trials." And in 2006, O'Reilly argued against an investigation into torture allegations made by FBI investigators, saying, "the FBI agents have never been on this program. We've never seen them, counselor. They won't step up. And until they do, they don't mean anything." Additionally, in 2005, O'Reilly used a State Department report on human rights around the world to argue that the Bush administration is adequately addressing allegations of torture by U.S. interrogators. In fact, the report did not examine alleged human rights violations by the United States.

Beck, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Gingrich call for investigation of ACORN

Beck: Unless ACORN investigation "goes all the way to the top," including Congress and the White House, "it's all going to be a sham." During the September 15 edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck, Beck said [transcript from Nexis]:

BECK: While the government is going to make speeches and throw you a bone of cutting off funding -- you know, we're going to cut off funding. Really? Until the Republicans and the Democrats rise together and demand a full independent rigorous investigation that doesn't concentrate just on the local level and these few dirtbags, but goes all the way to the top, to the power brokers at the highest levels of ACORN, and in our own halls of Congress, and this administration, it's all going to be a sham. You won't be able to trust anything in Washington.

O'Reilly: "Mr. Obama should order" the Justice Department to investigate ACORN. O'Reilly said of ACORN:

The president should be paying attention because political corruption is involved and that corruption involves taxpayer dollars. While it's true that ACORN is not Afghanistan or health care, it is a situation that should be investigated by the Justice Department. Mr. Obama should order that right now. It's what leaders do. [The O'Reilly Factor, 9/22/09]

Limbaugh: "What's really called for here, folks, is a genuine wide-scale investigation of ACORN activities." In his September 16 "Morning Update" (subscription required), Limbaugh stated:

What's really called for here, folks, is a genuine wide-scale investigation of ACORN activities. Will it happen? No. The Community Activist-in-Chief and his Democrat Party cannot afford to have the inner workings of their surrogates fully exposed. Obama is ACORN ... and verse-visa.

Gingrich calls for attorney general to "empower a U.S. justice task force to look at ACORN across the whole country." Fox News contributor Newt Gingrich said on the September 15 edition of Hannity [transcript from Nexis]:

GINGRICH: Congressman John Boehner is introducing a Bill tonight to defund ACORN. I hope that the Congress is going to press not only to cut off all money to ACORN. I hope they're going to press to go back over the past five years and have a very careful audit to see whether or not, in fact, the U.S. taxpayer has been subsidizing a criminal organization.

I think these are amazing tapes. They're an extraordinary achievement. I don't see how any reasonable person can look at these tapes without believing that ACORN has engaged in a great deal of criminal behavior and needs to be thoroughly investigated. And it's a real test for the attorney general to see whether or not he is prepared to empower a U.S. justice task force to look at ACORN across the whole country. I think that's his job as attorney general.

Fox News hosts attack ACORN based on misinformation. Beck and other Fox News hosts have repeatedly attacked ACORN with misinformation in their campaign against the organization and its supposed ties to the Obama administration. For instance, Beck and Sean Hannity both ran with the false allegation that White House political affairs director Patrick Gaspard "was ACORN boss Bertha Lewis's political director in New York." Fox News hosts also frequently promoted the fake claim that an ACORN employee killed her husband without fact-checking the allegation or indicating that they had contacted ACORN for a response. Beck also hosted a guest to claim that the White House was connected to ACORN because a White House employee previously worked for an organization that has had a partnership with ACORN. Hannity has also advanced the false claim that Obama "earmarked eight and a half billion" for ACORN.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by right ON (October 01, 2009 6:31 pm ET)
        9
      Liberal media websites demanding Bush administration investigations opposed, downplayed investigations of Obama scandals.

      And I never would even put ACORN in the scandal category, but it looks like MMfA does.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by knowlies (October 01, 2009 7:03 pm ET)
        8  
        Maybe it's because one set of scandals included egregious violations of the Constitution and possibly acts of a treasonous nature, while the other set are attempts by the opposition to make something out of very little (or just make stuff up, period).
        Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (October 02, 2009 11:05 am ET)
        3  
        There ARE no "Obama scandals", jackass. Or "Acorn" scandals, for that matter. Just a bunch of stuff the likes of Beck, Limbaugh, Rove, etc... just made up and which the mainstream press has run with, both brainlessly and baselessly.

        The were no "Bush Scandals" either, but that's because that same press, in all their folly and cowardice, choise not to make stories out of ACTUAL WRONGDOING by then President Bush.

        -----------------------------------------------------------------------
        Prove me wrong. ONE example. I dare ya.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by right ON (October 02, 2009 11:22 am ET)
            6
          When one partisan outfit complains about another partisan outfit and how they ratchet up one scandal and downplay another, I don't give it much credence because it's pot calling the kettle black.

          You don't see it because you're knee keep in it yourself, and probably why your blog that you incessantly keep prodding people to go to is just more black kettle wisdom.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by NiceguyEddie (October 02, 2009 11:42 am ET)
            3  
            Blah ... Blah ... Blah ...

            WHAT am I not seeing? WHAT SCANDAL is escaping my attention? What STORY OF THE CENTURY in the MSM sitting on here?

            Having an opinon, agenda or partisan leangins, as you, me, and MMFA all do, in and of itself means nothing. It only serves at our motivation to go and find the evidence or counter- evidnece. It DOES NOT allow for the dismissal of that evidence. The FACTS are FACTS and they must be dealt with.

            MMFA has provided EVIDENCE. And they have shown, time and time again, how the "evidence" provided by the right is demonstrably false.

            So I've ask you for a single example. Just as I did to another poster yeatserday. And just like that poster, you give me nothing but more ad hominen gobbledegook. Sure, both sides can play he-said/she-said, but one is right and one is wrong, and that can only be determined by examining the evidence presented.

            You got any? Give me one, actual, honest to God, Obama "Scandal" and I'll take it all back.

            ----------------------------------------------------------------
            And I'd rather have black-kettle wisdom than tea-kettle "wisdom"
            Report Abuse
          • Author by NiceguyEddie (October 02, 2009 1:08 pm ET)
            1  
            your blog that you incessantly keep prodding people to go to

            Dude, give me a break.

            If you ever see me saying, "GO TO MY BLOG!" "GO TO MY BLOG!" "GO TO MY BLOG!" "GO TO MY BLOG!" "GO TO MY BLOG!" "GO TO MY BLOG!" "GO TO MY BLOG!" "GO TO MY BLOG!" "GO TO MY BLOG!" "GO TO MY BLOG!" "GO TO MY BLOG!" "GO TO MY BLOG!" "GO TO MY BLOG!" "GO TO MY BLOG!" "GO TO MY BLOG!" "GO TO MY BLOG!" "GO TO MY BLOG!" "GO TO MY BLOG!" "GO TO...


            Then, by all means, I hope you're the first one to call me out for it. That would be pretty annoying.

            But I try to put some though into it, so that I don't end up just saying, "MY BLOG" at the end of every post.

            That being the case, would you mind telling me what you think is so wrong with putting in a little parting shot that just happens to have a link made out of it?

            ----------------------------------------------------------------
            Speak Truth to Power ;)
            Report Abuse
    • Author by oscar the grouch (October 01, 2009 7:49 pm ET)
      1  
      Looks like the AG of California may be another wingnut.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by worrierking (October 01, 2009 7:57 pm ET)
        1  
        A wingnut?

        Jerry Brown used to be a moonbat. He was called Governor Moonbeam when he was the governor.

        What the hell happened?

        I always liked him. During one of his runs for the presidency, he said that there was no hope for the human race if we continued the way we were headed. I think you could find some on both sides who'd agree with that.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by oscar the grouch (October 01, 2009 8:09 pm ET)
          1  
          Well, the CA AG is apparently looking into investigating ACORN. The other day, I was told by "easytorefutewingnuts" that only wingnuts were bringing up the wrongs within ACORN when I mentioned the Nevada AG was launching an investigation also.
          If we continue the way we are going politically in this country, there may not be hope for the human race here. Things could boil over as the fringes on both sides get more strident in word and deed. I have hope that cooler heads will prevail in the long run, but there are a lot of problems ahead of us.
          Not knowing what the nut cases in N. Korea or Iran will do in the near future, there is also so concern that they could contribute to much disruption in civilization as we know it now.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by NiceguyEddie (October 02, 2009 1:40 pm ET)
               
            Oh please. The threat from the "left fringe" is vastly overstated. The perception of the center has been so skewed by the likes of Fox News and Talk Radio and the MAIN STREAM PRESS, that now anyone 'left of center' seems extreme. This is all in an effort to make them appear mainstream. But it's all b*llsh!t. Let me tell you... based on where the public's perception of the center now is...? Anyone who's still to the RIGHT of center HAS to be a wing-nut!

            -----------------------------------------------------------------
            That's the problem with eschewing big-tent politics!
            Report Abuse
    • Author by loonz (October 01, 2009 9:39 pm ET)
         
      Do they have any evidence that ACORN is involved in anything criminal?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by oscar the grouch (October 02, 2009 12:53 am ET)
           
        I think that is what investigations should be about, to determine if there is/was anything criminal undertaken. At best (for ACORN), it seems the leadership has very loose control of the organization, at worst, they may have complete control.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by loonz (October 02, 2009 6:00 am ET)
             
          Should the government have the right to investigate you if there's no evidence you committed a crime?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by oscar the grouch (October 02, 2009 9:23 am ET)
              1
            The investigation would be to search for evidence, right? If there was evidence they could go directly to an indicment or at least to a grand jury. There are some things happening within that organization that need to be brought into the open. As noted above, at best any investigation may show that ACORN leadership needs better controls over policies,procedures, etc. At worst, it may find they have that control and are the root cause of some of the problems. If one does not investigate, one does not know whether incriminating evidence exists or not.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Brabantio (October 02, 2009 9:44 am ET)
                 
              I'm not sure why this is supposed to be related to policy or procedure. If you went to a hundred Burger Kings and asked a random guy at the counter if he had pot for sale, you might get a couple who say yes. You might also get a couple who say they've got a meth lab in their van and then call the cops on you. Would there be any reasonable accusation that the organization was liable for that, especially after they fired those people?

              There needs to be some grounds for the charge that there's something systemic involved here.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by oscar the grouch (October 02, 2009 8:01 pm ET)
                   
                Apparently Mr. Brown (CA AG) thinks there is something out there. Don't what he will find, that is up to him.
                About policies and procedures, the company I work for has told us that if we see something ethically wrong taking place within the Co and don't report it, our job is in as much jeopardy as the guilty party. Does that smack of "tattling"? Perhaps, but it also gives each of us the opportunity to rethink our postion before taking actions. Ah well, we will have to wait and see what NV and CA may find. ACORN is innocent until proven otherwise.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by Brabantio (October 03, 2009 9:13 am ET)
                     
                  So not having that "tattling" policy makes them liable for individual actions on the lower rungs of the corporate ladder? I'm not seeing the relevance to my point there.
                  Report Abuse
        • Author by wookie (October 02, 2009 8:44 am ET)
          3  
          Don't investigations generally identify a crime and then search for a culprit? I mean a real one not hypothetical statements. Cops don't just go door to door until they find a crack house.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by REBEL (October 02, 2009 11:39 am ET)
        2
      ALL fraud on the US taxpayers MUST be AGGRESSIVELY investigated! Whether that be ACORN (with a long history of legal action against it), Barney Frank running a prostitution ring out of his office (old history), Chris Dodd getting perks due to his position (typical of those in such position was the offical ruling I think), Nancy Pelosi using US jets to fly family around the nation (more old news), or Franklin Raines cooking the books at Fannie/Freddie to get $24.5M in bonuses while running the organizations into bankrupcy, or conservatives in bed with military contractors, or sealing the records on JFK's assasinaiton, it ALL needs to be PUBLICALY released so the legal citizens of this nation (you know the folks who own this nation and make it work) can see the dirt our politicans have/are creating and we are picking up the tab for.

      So, when do the Congressional hearings on Obama's presentation to school kids start? (we had hearing when GW did this!) Right after the release of his birth records you say? GREAT!!!

      Inquiring minds want to know!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
      Report Abuse
      • Author by DellDolly (October 02, 2009 12:45 pm ET)
          1
        Boy, you've come to this site and spewed more nonsense than what most people do in their first attempts at 'conversation' here. Most trolls pretend for a while at first - not you.

        You don't have a leg to stand on with any of your false accusations, and you think you're the righteous one? God help you (he helps fools).
        Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (October 02, 2009 2:10 pm ET)
        1  
        OK. This it meant for all you CON's whining about the profanity filter.

        I just wrote a ~400 word piece skewering this @$$-clown, and there was not ONE WORD of profanity in it. (Not even a call of b*llsh!t, warranted though it may have been.)

        And I hit "save," got the "profanity filter" and lost THE WHOLE F---ING THING!

        I'm not typing it again. Forget it. REBEL isn't worth it. Just do me a favor and stop whining about political "censorship" because I'm almost as militantly liberal as they come, and I get zapped by this thing all the time.

        And not even for actual (or even hidden) profanity! Whenever there's something I'm not sure I'll get away with, which is a lot, I ususally ctrl-a/ctrl-c it before I hit 'save', just in case. And it USUALLY goes thorugh anyway!

        And then I lose soemthing it took me 10 minutes (or more) to type for no apparent reason at all!

        Hey, MMFA - how about you make it so your filter (1) PRESERVES the text that was written (2) IDENTIFIES the offending word via HIGHLIGHT and (3) Let's the poster fix only what was WRONG, Huh?

        ----------------------------------------------------------------------
        Bacause it's really annoying to have to type something like that all over again!
        Report Abuse
        • Author by John Paradox (October 02, 2009 4:40 pm ET)
             
          A suggestion:
          Don't write directly to the blog... use Notepad or some other text editor (NOT Word, it formats like s**t.. something that saves as basic ASCII, or .txt) to write any long posts. Then use 'select all' and 'copy' then 'paste' online.
          I use TurboNote (v.3.4, it's available free, because it's an 'old' version) to make notes while reading, then paste the text to the blog once I reach the end of the comments. It's also handy for saving quotes and URLs, plus you can either save the full comment or delete the note.. I currently have 'sticky notes' thru TurboNote for various reminders.. works like Post-It [TM] Notes for the computer.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by fishgimp (October 03, 2009 9:49 am ET)
         
      The leaders that are vocal now, were silent then. Yes, as is this.
      The leaders that are silent now were vocal then.

      Partian politics at its finest.
      How about they BOTH speak up now AND then, then maybe normal people might get answers for once. Unlikly, it's just that all that would do is out some of the crooks in that town nobody would stand for that.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by fishgimp (October 03, 2009 10:10 am ET)
         
      Who cares about saying what side was more wrong, that is all we do these days. Just once why can't it be like this? 1. If wrong, investigate it 2. If in suspect of being wrong, invesigate.
      Is is possible that for once maybe we put a side the"your worse, no YOUR WORSE" playground thinking and finally bust some of these corupt and crimanal politicians that are able to keep buisness as usual?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by fishgimp (October 03, 2009 10:43 am ET)
         
      I am niether a fan of or watch beck and i am not a conservative. I disagreed with some of Bush's policies and don't like some of Obama's. But ACORN has been acussed of alot of things for a while and strangly it's often the same complaint over and over(regestrationfraud). Those "videos" were just what got Beckophiles roaring. ACORN has been accused of registration fraud in a numerus states, covering for embesslement, also openly pushing for democatic candident which they can't do if they are getting money from government. Guilty or not it deserves a closer look into. Even if the third one is bogus there is no doubt about the first two. Also that refusal of theirs to open books like I heard. They have helped a lot of poor and no matter what that shouldn't change. If they are guilty of something they can still be a great help to poor without them having anyting to do with polatics. If no wrong doing, then its back to work for them.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by fishgimp (October 03, 2009 10:58 am ET)
         
      Both sides sides say the middle has fled the other party and both sides broadcasters keep ramming it through.

      All anyone has to do is simply find a respected poll and you will see it in black and white and please no NYT, they have been consistently 6 points or more but everyother poll is within the margin of error
      Report Abuse
    • Author by 4freedomstill (October 04, 2009 4:02 am ET)
         
      Well there is a bit of a difference between underage prostitution and Mrs. Plame who put herself on the front of magazine covers, also ACORN stood to take in how many taxpayer dollars?
      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.