Obama and ACORN

gardener, I would agree with you, but not in the case of someone who has insisted he is not a republican tool. Once you put it out there, you should back yourself up. He made a claim of non-partisanship, and I am asking for clarification.

 

I see you have been taking a liking to my posts, but yet haven't done your homework. I was going to make you work for this one, but I'll answer you.

I am likely going to vote for McCain this time. I admit that I liked Obama until the primaries when I started looking into his policies, his record, and his character. As I stated before, McCain has not convinced me yet and Palin is not qualified to be in the top position (don't think Obama is either), but there is more than enough reasons for me to not vote for Obama (many of the reasons are not what I have discussed here). The more I look into the guy, the more I dislike him. I haven't had the time to look into the independants, but again, am leaning more towards McCain just as preventative measure from Obama being elected. That said, I do think Obama will win. Too much money being thrown at him, too many uninformed people, and the Republican party is completely tainted after 8 years of Bush.

 

Thank you wacky.

 

Trust me, I wish there were more choices.

 

And i do enjoy your posting.

 

Do you facists tools recieve training on how to twist people words and use half truths that are devoid of any logic whatsoever?

You know full well that I meant that the same people that sang Tim McVeigh's praises are probably ATTACKING Bill Ayers. If you didn't figure that out then you have truly demonstrated that you lack the ability to use logic. THe notion that a Liberal Democrat that might be defending Bill Ayers would also defend Tim McViegh is absolutely ridiculous!!!!

 

Actually, what I meant was that the same Liberal Democrats that sympathize with Ayers, probably sympathize with Tim McVeigh, as well as bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. In fact, I can provide you some quotes that have been posted here over the years. Would you like to see them?

Terrorist sympathizer or hypocrite? You choose.

PS, you think I didn't know I was holding a mirror in front of you? haha

 

From the original post, someone tried to run down Katherine Harris. Anyone remember Harris from the 2000 Presidential campaign?

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/10/28/absentee_ballots_may_be_missing/

"October 28, 2004

Police say car was aimed at lawmaker

SARASOTA -- A man was arrested yesterday after he was accused of trying to run down Representative Katherine Harris and a group of supporters with his car. Witnesses said a silver Cadillac sped through an intersection and swerved onto the sidewalk. The car headed straight toward Harris before swerving at the last minute and driving off, according to police. Harris told police she feared for her life and could not move as the vehicle sped toward her, police records show. Witnesses gave the car's license plate number to police, and they tracked it to Barry M. Seltzer, 46. He was charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and held without bond. He was scheduled for his first court appearance today. (AP)"

.

 

From your link.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/ar...ay_be_missing/

Four years later I see that ACORN has their shit together.

 

Come on wacky, do you really believe what you are posting?

More importantly, do you feel this line of reasoning will make headway with anyone who hasn't already made up their mind? It's one thing to question your opponent's record, but it's another thing altogether to question their motives without good evidence.

Now are you really asserting that Obama and all democrats are secret terrorist sympathizers? Are you saying Obama is a secret terrorist?

It's a line of attack that reveals more about the attacker than anything else.

More importantly, I would like to gloat over Friday's supreme court ruling. OWNED!

 

No I don't. Because I know that there are people out there like you who do not care that the democratic process is being tainted, as long as it is in favor of your party. The reason I posted this is not to change anybody's mind, it is to inform them of what is going on. Frankly, I am a little surprised that more people do not find this unacceptable. Whether this fraud is in favor of your party or not, when has it become acceptable? How low our standards have become.

Of course not. That was in response to this following exchange, which began with BooBoo's asinine comment.

I knew the false premise that BooBoo was trying to make, I just wanted to let her see it. I mean come on, read the last quote above by her. Hahaha. Pathetic.

Sometimes a line of defense reveals more. **ahem, ahem**

This is something you want to gloat over?

OWNED? Do you honestly find this potential fraud acceptable?

I have no problem with an organization that wants to register legitimate new voters. I think it is sad the very low percentage of people that get out and vote in this country. But what is even more sad is the idea that it is acceptable to allow more fraud and corruption into the democratic process. Whether it is registered fraudulant voters, purging legitimate voters, voting under false identification, etc... When we allow an organization with an agenda to corrupt the democratic process, the only thing that it accomplishes is that it dilutes the power of a vote that everyone is entitled to.

 

By the way, I don't think anyone can DENY that ACORN has been linked to voter registration fraud. If they do, they are denying fact and lying to themselves.

The idea that a Presidential candidate defends an organization, and pays a front company of that organization hundreds of thousands of dollars, is something that causes me to lose a lot of respect for that candidate.

 

Try to find any voter registration drive that hasn't been associated with some type of voter registration fraud or allegations of it.

It's also sad that political parties and groups with an agenda use cases of voter registration fraud or allegations of it to throw the issue into the courts. It's a way of trying to prevent many legitimate newly registered voters from voting, to cripple the efforts to register new voters legitimately, and to shape public opinion against the opposing party. That type of tactic can have a much greater effect on the election outcome than the effect of voter registration fraud itself. Political groups know this and that's why they use that tactic.

.

 

That doesn't mean that we should find it acceptable.

Not stopping these organizations from committing fraud will allow the actions you mentioned to continue. Stop the fraud, you will stop the lawsuits. Stop the fruad, you will stop the prevention of legitimate newly registered voters from voting. Stop the fraud, you will stop opposing parties from using that corruption to shape public opinion.

There is no doubt that Obama has lost more votes from the allegations of his ties with ACORN, than the possible fraudulantly registered voters that will actually make it to the polls to cast more than one vote. That punishment is well deserved. Shame on him for condoning the actions of ACORN by choosing to associate with them and not putting forth an effort to stop the corruption of that organization.

 

it's like bugs in you wheaties wacky. how many bugs do we a want to eat? none. but seriously, i'm not going to give up wheaties.

To pick apart your main line of attack though, I find it disingenuous that you would link Acorn to voter fraud, then claim "Acorn has been linked to voter fraud" as if it means something. "Has been linked". Yeah. By scurrilous lies and a smear campaign as a backdoor attempt at voter suppression.

Semantics IS important.

And not that it matters, but I'm not a registered Democrat. Not my party, buddy. Just the better of the only two options in this election.

 

ACORN earns income by taking referal fees from large mortgage lenders for the referal of mortgage applicants for home loans.

That sounds to me like the definition of a mortgage broker. ACORN should be licensed and regulated like a mortgage broker if they are going to act like one.

In todays climate we hear so much about the lack of regulation but these same folks calling for more regulation are adverse to regulating ACORN.

Could it be that Regulation is for your idealogical opponents only?

 

That's why we have the FDA, to put forth regulations that prevent bugs from getting in your Wheaties.

You continuously make statements like this that seem to deny that workers for ACORN have ever been convicted of Voter Registration Fraud. THEY HAVE. The indictments, arrests, and convictions have been occurring for over a decade. Why do you keep denying this?

Here's a couple more videos for you.

CNN says ACORN employees convicted of fraud, will benefit from bailout, etc...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXqy9bG9arM&feature=related

Obama says he will call on ACORN to "shape the agenda of his Presidency"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vJcVgJhNaU&feature=related

Liberal Alan Colmes confronts ACORN and Voter Fraud Issue-WATCH!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdtSacytM3I&feature=related

ACORN and it's 150 subsidiaries who have $110 million budget, may receive part of bailout.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6rMSd-JRuk&feature=related

CNN Lou Dobbs-Electoral Fraud Threat to Democracy-WATCH!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dTvZKjaVFw

 

You see wacky, what you don't get, is that there will always be bug parts in your wheaties. There will always be rat poop. We have standards that approach 0% because we have good regulations. But we never reach 0%.

As for the rest, http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/acorn_accusations.html

here's the summary:

 

You continually show that you are an apologist for fraud. Why?

I wouldn't try and discredit your link, which is provided by FactCheck.org, which is funded primarily by the Annenberg Foundation (you know, the organziation in which terrorist Bill Ayers and Obama served together), as it is not directly responding to the issues that I have posted in this thread.

This is unrelated to this thread, but relates to another. FactCheck.org, funded by Annenberg, was chosen by the Obama campaign as the arbitrar of Obama's "certificate of birth" to determine it's authenticity. I'm not implying anything, but it is interesting nonetheless. Also is the relationship between ACORN, Annenberg, Ayers, Obama, Woods Fund, and FactCheck. They all seem to kind of helped each other out over the years.

 

CNN Exposes thousands of fraudulant Voter Registrations

CNN shows how thousands of fraudulant Voter Registration Cards were submitted the last few days before the deadline, making it impossible to verify all submitted forms.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkUKOSnv2zY

CNN Special Investigation into ACORN

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRhrT22BsIY


Obama/ACORN ties

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1GCxX76SYs