»
Discussion
»
The Alley
»
Makes Census to Me...
| The Alley |
|
Makes Census to Me... |
|
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA 
|
WASHINGTON D.C.--Today Rep. Jason Chaffetz announced he will introduce legislation requiring the Commerce Department’s execution of the 2010 Census to be conducted in partnership with the United States Post Office. The Census previously announced a need to hire in excess of 750,000 people to conduct the Census. The Post Office has 760,000 employees. In a controversial approach, the Census previously announced it is partnering with a multitude of community organizations, including ACORN, to find people to hire to gather Census data. In committee hearings Rep. Chaffetz and others expressed serious reservations about the lack of standards offered by the Census to ensure nefarious organizations and individuals are excluded from gathering this sensitive data. “It is imperative the American People have the utmost confidence in the collection of Census data. We should not rely upon ACORN to gather Census data. I don’t trust ACORN and neither do the American people. “We already have a trusted workforce. This is a common sense business approach. Rather than hire 750,000 new, unknown people, let’s use people and assets already in place. This should save money, help the Post Office in a time of financial need, and give confidence and credibility to the collection of personal information. Postal carriers know the people on their routes, they know how to find them and how to count them. “The census is a good example of an inefficient government program with billions of dollars of cost overruns that could immediately become more efficient with this common sense approach using resources already at our disposal,” said Rep. Chaffetz. FACTS: 760,000+ Postal employees 750,000+ Anticipated new hires needed to conduct the 2010 Census $11 Billion+ Appropriations to conduct the 2010 Census $ Billions Projected US Post Office revenue shortfall for FY 2009 April 1, 2010 Census Day (Thursday) Website http://2010.census.gov Rep. Chaffetz’ bill will create a “postal holiday” on the “Census Day” to allow the collection of Census information rather than the delivery of mail. http://chaffetz.house.gov/2009/06/census-should-partner-with-post-office-not-acorn.shtml Chaffetz has also said that he has discussed the plan with the union leaders, who endorse it 100%, being faced with losses and probable layoffs in the near future. It should be fun to see what Congress's response will be (if we get to see it). You can be sure they will fight it, with ACORn being a darling of theirs and Obama's. So what do you think? Good idea? Bad idea or what? |
||
| © Copyright 2009 Michael Mack - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
Stupid idea. . |
||
Ringo 
since 2003-02-20
Posts 3684Saluting with misty eyes |
I think it is an idea worth checking into; however, I find it a bit unpractical. Using these numbers woulds require everyone in the post office, just about, to participate... all three shifts... Then, you have to deal with the fact that people at the post office are, very simply, people trying to pay their bills, and the money that Acorn and other would offer them to...uh... "share" the information would be too great for many of them. Besides, with the White House overseeing the entire operation anyhow, what does it matter who does it? For those who have fought for it, Freedom has a flavor the protected will never know. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
grinch, thank you for such an eloquent and informative response. Ringo, not sure what you mean. Yes, postal workers are people trying to pay their bills. Are you saying the thousands of ACORN workers who would be hired aren't? and the money that Acorn and other would offer them to...uh... "share" the information I don't understand that statement. What money would ACORN be offering them? ACORN would not even be in the picture. What does it matter who does it? Aside from the fact it would save many postal workers jobs? Aside from the fact that ACORN, the organization that has more than a dozen indictments and court cases going on based on their shoddy and proported illegal practices might not be the most wonderful people to have the personal information of millions of people? Remember, the census is not simply a head count. You are required to divulge your job, your income, and many personal items about your life. You see no difference between ACORN having that information as opposed to a responsible organization? Just asking...... If you are going to hire hundreds of thousands of people and pay billions of dollars for them to go to houses that another organization already goes to every day, the only things needing to be changed is that for the one time every 10 years they gather information while they are there, you don't see any merit in that, especially when it would save the government a lot of money and save many postal workers jobs? Are you sure? |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
I understand the premise -- and in reality -- the Postal Service is already involved in the census, since those people who are known to the government by name and address are sent forms to fill out and send back voluntarily. I disagree with the notion though -- that the Postal Worker on my street knows me. I certainly don't know him/her. At one point in time, in certain more rural areas (you know those places where Sarah Palin says the 'real' Americans are) that would have been true-- as I used to go grab my mail from my P.O. Box every morning and have a chat with the Postmaster (even though I had a box in front of my house where I also got delivery.) I remember also as a kid when my mother was a Census worker the very difficult time she had trying to do the job -- because the people who don't fill out those forms and send them back in -- they're very hard to find Mike -- and they don't want to talk to 'the government'. I think the idea should be on the table -- but those are my concerns -- bottom line -- I don't think one day off from regular postal work will do the job -- not to mention one more day of mail/commerce interrupted. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Thank you, reb. You make some valid points. However, as far as not knowing your postal worker, I have little doubt you don't know much about the ACORN employee who will be coming by, either. I realize that liberals (and not necessarily you) seem to disregard the black marks against ACORN, from their strong-arm tactics concerning forcing banks to give loans to unqualified buyers, to all of the legal proceedings against them but they are not an organization I would trust for a second. if you do, that's your right. Yes, there would have to be some logistical manuevering to make it work and I don't know if it could work or not but saving postal employee jobs and keeping ACORN away from such a wealth of personal information would make it worth checking into, I think. Btw, since you saw an opportunity to throw a Palin dig in there, I'll tell you a little story. While I was living in Venezuela, I came back to the states to represent Venezuela (sounds weird, I know) in the world bowling championships held in Indianapolis. My companions in the trip were an elderly Venezuelan couple who had been to the states several times. We drove through the midwest to my home town in Missouri and then on to Indiana. I remember them saying, as we drove through the farmlands, "At last, we are really seeing AMERICA!" I said, "Yes, you are." I'm not sure Sarah Palin's comment was so innacurate.  |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
Of course I don't know that person either Mike... and that's the point. There is no inherent value to having Postal employees do the job because of 'knowing' the people. And, to a degree, anonymity is important to the process and not knowing the person asking the questions is a lubricant. Of course your guests were really seeing America -- but they weren't seeing all of America. It's more than purple mountains and amber waves. Real Americans live in East L.A., Gary, Indiana, Harlem, N.Y., South Beach, Harligen, Tupelo, and, even in Hawaii and Alaska too. It gives me a bit of comfort Mike -- to see people squirm at the notion of Acorn conducting a census -- it's almost how cynical and wary of the process those African Americans were that all but refused to talk to my mother. But, alas, in reality -- I don't have a problem with Acorn -- it has nothing to do with being liberal or conservative either. It's just being objective. Acorn moved against the people who were defrauding THEM in submitting false voter registrations. They weren't soliciting them -- they were policing them. But I know that Rush and Hanity and Beck have made them into the big bad boogey man -- and doesn't every propaganda hack need one? |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Oh, please! Don't even think about playing the race card here...that should be beneath you. Can't even believe you would go there...even though that does seem to be a last ditch tactic with democrats today. Very disappointing... We're discussing how the census would be conducted the best way and you bring up Palin, Limbaugh and Hannity. Be sure to mention Bush somewhere so you can cover all the bases. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Mike, When one uses "Oh please" in this fashion, one runs the danger of being heard as offering dismissal without engagement, often heard as an expression of contempt. I don't believe this could be your intention. I am also somewhat concerned about the reference to "the race card;" and to "playing the race card." This suggests that racially biased behavior is a thing of the past, and no longer effects current behavior, personal or political. And that any attempt to point this out is somehow a foul. I suspect that this particular point of view has not had its validity established in any sort of verifiable way. Speaking of "the race card" suggests that it has. While you are free in sharing your disappointment that others, especially Democrats, might bring up such unpleasant subjects, I would be more impressed by some actual information from reliable sources that would prove that there is no racial bias involved. My information is that the original capitals of the various states were deliberately situated in rural areas as a way of favoring a rural, land-owning lifestyle over the lifestyles of city dwellers. While you may share that bias, I believe that it does need to be recognized as the bias that it is. Rural Americans have no particular extra claim on nationality or reality that I can see over urban Americans other than furthering the bias of Romans and later the English landed aristocracy. Should you have another viewpoint, I'd be happy to discuss it. You've taught me a great deal from time to time, as have the other folks here. I'm always up to learn something new. Sincerely, Bob Kaven |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
That doesn't make enough nonsense to get government approval. |
||
|
Poet deVine
Administrator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-05-26
Posts 22612Hurricane Alley |
Sorry but it's too logical. The government officials (no matter their affiliation) will never agree to it. They like it convoluted and complicated. Republicans or Democrats - to me they are interchangable - once they get in office someone sneaks into their room at night and removes all logic function from their brain. |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
Oh please Mike.  I can't even believe you would go there. You bring up the evil of ACORN and the untrustworthiness of the Obama administration in the guise of a census discussion and then complain when the talking points of the radio heads are called out.All we have to do is go back to the Constitution Mike -- to see why African Americans have always been skeptical of the census -- you know that document that counted them as 3/5ths of a person. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Of course,reb. By all means go back a couple of hundred years to make your point. May as well throw in separate water fountains and riding in the back of the bus, too. Believe it or not, there have been changes since then - a black president and thousands of mixed marriages, for example. Bob, I dismiss the race insinuations here because they are easily dismissable. In the first place, the top leaders of ACORN are white. Second, the charges against ACORN in the courts are due to illegal operations, not because they are black. I can assure you and LR that Hannity, Limbaugh or Beck do not serve on any of the many state governments who have ACORN under indictments. The chant of "You're just against me or him or her because I or we or they are black and not because my hands were around his throat while he was being choked to death" is tiresomely overrused but has found renewed life since the election. If Obama had lost, it would have certainy been because he was "black" and not because he was nothing more than a glib talker with nothing more than community organizing and two years congressional experience behind him. You don't like his policies? It's because he's black. You speak against ACORN? It's because they are black. You want to point out all of the lies he made on the campaign trail? You're prejudiced. ACORN is the elephant in the room and the darling of the administration, probably because of the fact they are Obama's old bosses. When the bill came up recently to give them more money and the Republicans wanted to challenge it, Pelosi - who is on record as saying every congressman should have his right to be heard - refused to even let them discuss it. ACORN brought in votes for Obama and ACORN is an intregal part of the mob that runs Washington and, if you don't believe that, you must be a prejudiced Federalist or something and why do you hate blacks so much? Anyone who wants to study ACORN with an unbiased eye can google them and make up their own minds. Essorant and PDV, thank you for your comments. They are appreciated. There is a common saying on the golf course that, when a golfer makes a lucky or horrible shot with good results, he says "Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn once in a while". This administration is filled with blind squirrels... |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
What pettifoggery Mike. I'm discussing why the African American community has been wary and skeptical of the census -- and you think Conservatives are being called racist. quote: Yes we should throw in all of that stuff Mike. You want to go back a couple hundred years in history to that Civil War thing and discuss with native Southerners why they still have a problem voting for someone from Boston? History doesn't die just because laws change or progress is made. More later. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
No, history doesn't die but, when someone does not recognize and acknowledge the changes, that's not history, that's hysteria. You may want to check on the number of elected black public officials in the south these days (You know, that racist part of the country). You may find more than a few. A distrust of ACORN is not racial, it's common sense, in my opinion. Do I prefer them having my personal and financial information in their computers? In a word...no. |
||
|
rwood Member Elite
since 2000-02-29
Posts 3793Tennessee |
I've never seen my postal person out here in my stretch of fence posts. My mail seems to magically disappear/appear. As for a new Census from the Nutbunch? I suppose my "Forever" stamps will suddenly have an expiration date on them to help pay for the new recruits. Oh well, what's a few more forever cents. Will the NutJobs pay well?? What does the USPS say bout all this? I can't really speak for them, as I'd say the mail is enough to deliver & collect let alone huntin' down folks that don't want anyone asking them questions on their porch or in their hood. quote: Wha? Heyyyy...my backwoods folks rode pack mules 'cross the gap and down the mountain just to vote for JFK. He was the pick of my folks and still is my main presidential favorite. But what is so UP with this ACORN stuff. I admit, I'm not one to subscribe to conspiracy theories at all, well maybe the whole Area 51 or 52 thing weirds me out, but why does something stinketh so bad about ACOBB?? I dunno but it's beginning to bother me and I hope it's not just yalls' vibes rubbin' off on me. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
As I said, Regina, just google ACORN and you'll get a wealth of information. As far as the USPS thoughts, their union loves the idea, knowing that layoffs are coming up and they see it as a way to bring money in and save jobs at the same time. Congress will have to find a way to axe the idea without irritating the union...should be fun to watch. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: You’re welcome. I was going to add a few reasons why it’s a stupid idea but I didn’t know where to start. I could have pointed out that the additional census staff wouldn’t be employed for a single day, that the census requires additional staff for at least three months after the census date deadline. The extra staff being employed to chase up people who hadn’t returned their forms by the closing date. I could have pointed out the impact and costs incurred for the subsequent delay in mail delivery if the postal workers did the job instead. Even if they could somehow take on the abilities of Father Christmas and undertake such a mammoth task in a single day instead of the estimated three months it’s likely to take. Even those nice friendly postal workers would struggle to do that – they might even “go postal” under that kind of pressure. I could have built an argument against the census itself – the figures being traditionally so inaccurate as to be almost useless. I didn’t though, largely because the obvious answer isn’t to let the postal workers do it, it isn’t to get your favourite whipping boys ACORN to do it. The most sensible thing to do in this economic climate is to postpone or cancel it completely and spend the money on something a little more useful. |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: quote: The census, like any other poll ('cause that's what it is, of course), is eminently useful so long as one accounts for the biases. quote: Useless information is perhaps the ultimate oxymoron, Grinch. Even Balladeer's ACORN rumors tell us something useful (just not about ACORN). The biggest problem I have with this idea is that Bill, my current mailman, is my friend. There's a lot of information I'm willing to share with our government that is, frankly, none of Bill's business. In these parts, there's three ways to get a message out: telephone, telegraph, and tell-a-mailman. |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
Ok.... now I'm beginning to find the use in this red-herring conversation -- Ron just made me laugh.  quote: Well Craig, that would be unconstitutional -- and the ultimate purpose is merely the enumeration of the population so as to apportion Congressional representation -- all the other info is merely required to be answered by whatever law the Congress directs -- finable by 100 dollars for failing to answer or 500 dollars for lying -- so one way or another a census is taking place. But, I've played in the sand long enough -- okay Mike -- It isn't true... http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/is_acorn_providing_workers_for_the_2010.html ACORN isn't going to be taking the census -- anymore than Fox News is a News channel. Sorry Reg... you're right of course -- I was over-generalizing -- but -- statistically we know what the political tilt is for Southern states -- and about those guys running up and down the road with the Confederate battle flag pasted all over their truck... Of course I'm from Tennessee and I alone am not representative of my own generalization. From now on when you serve Red Herring Mike -- I'll have mine, um... blackened...  |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
I understand the legal requirements LR. You'd have thought they'd have built a process into the system that allows amendments.  Times and situations change and needs must when the devil bites your butt and all that. In this case I'm not sure the "bangs" gained by getting 74% of the population to say hello is worth the bucks. . |
||
|
rwood Member Elite
since 2000-02-29
Posts 3793Tennessee |
quote: Oh my, you're not alone, dear Reb. There's country and there's the confounded, which has recently hit home with me and it's a great topic for a new thread. BUT...why is it that the Union (not that of the North during the Civil War, but THE current Workers Union) tends to be so uncivil? Why would the Union flaunt any machination of progress when America, by large, is currently suffering joblessness ten-fold. The expense is already fewer jobs for unionized industries: the byproduct of unionization. They might strike? the mail will be so not delivered. And the Union will defend their postal stance how??? With electronically deposited checking. How Ironically comical. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
As I said, Regina, just google ACORN and you'll get a wealth of information allegations. Ok, I see, Ron. All that google will bring up is allegations. I wonder why that is.... |
||
|
Ringo
since 2003-02-20
Posts 3684Saluting with misty eyes |
quote: Just a thought... isn't "pettyfog" one of Bill O'Reilly's words of the day?  Mike- If ANYONE other than ACORN does the census, it is my belief (and I soeak only for myself, here) that the mighty ACORN would definitely have moles paying people to copy the information they receive. As for the postal workers- Yes, there are 760,000 people working for the USPS, however those people are split between three shifts. Many of them are pilots, or are engaged in flight activities (from flight crew, to flight line workers, to etc.) and would, generally, not truly be available to do the census. The census also is going to take more than one day to complete, so a one day mail stoppage would not do the trick. After that one day, the postal workers would have to do overtime to play catch-up... which offsets any of the savings. Also, with President Obama already saying that he was going to oversee the census himself, and with his penchant for hiring a "Czar" for any job he feels he doesn't think he can control through the normal "legal" government channels, you can bet your last full, non-pay czar adjusted paycheck that he will have a Census Czar to gather that information and to ensure the district lines are drawn to ensure the Democratic majority for decades to come. For those who have fought for it, Freedom has a flavor the protected will never know. |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: Uh, because ACORN has yet to be convicted of anything? After reading Ringo's post, however, I think I would like to add conspiracy theories to the possible results Google is likely to return. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Mike, “Playing the race card” is your phrase. I would enjoy hearing your definition of the term. I hear it as a conservative catch phrase which is used whenever a reference is made to past or current mistreatment of minorities because the minorities were not in a position successfully to resist politically. The rejection of the possibility of any legitimacy is often done dismissively or with contempt by offering first an overdone or ridiculous first clause, coupled with the contemptuous dismissal following behind, as in quote: Having set up a debatable and unlikely conclusion supported by contempt and a made up example, it now appears possible to make comments that have some validity based on race. Even those places where there is justification to the statements (for example, “You want to point out all of the lies he made on the campaign trail?” where clearly a candidate’s lies, misstatements and misrepresentations should be addressed), when clumped together with statements that make use of charged racial language and innuendo lose creditability due to their company. quote: In fact, I could have cared less about ACORN when I responded to Mike’s mention of “The Race Card.” I wasn’t thinking of them at all. I was thinking of the number of challenges the Republicans had issued against minorities, especially blacks, during elections over the past ten years or so, and the number of times they’ve made concerted effects to cull blacks from the voting rolls. I thought about the number of times they tried to do this especially in black precincts as opposed to white precincts, and I thought about the difficulty they have made in allowing blacks and other minorities to vote. This has been the case apparently in Florida, in New Mexico, in Michigan and in Ohio that I’ve read about in articles by Greg Palast that I’ve previously referenced. Many of the voter irregularities that ended up being attempted in those states began with Republican assaults on the Census process, and I’m afraid that we may be seeing more of the same here, with more of the same attacks on the people that the Republicans have spent much of the last fifty years trying to disenfranchise, the poor, the sick, the minorities, the children. It makes me heartsick to see it. Sincerely, Bob Kaven |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
What does playing the race card mean, Bob? Try OJ, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpeton...they can describe it much better than I. Jackson and Sharpeton have made nice personal fortunes by employing it. Your republican bias theory really doesn't hold a lot of water. Before Obama, you had to look very hard to find blacks in prominent positions in the democratic party or the government when democrats ruled. They had no Connie Rice or Colin Powell, for example. They paid a lot of lip service to blacks but little on substance but then that's fodder for a whole new thread. |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
What about the outrageousness of the Justice Department dropping the case against the New Black Panther thugs who harassed and threatened voters and poll workers in Philadelphia, even with video and eyewitness testimony? They were simply admonished not to do that at a polling place again! It sure helps to have friends in high places, I guess. Racism is okay in this instance, I suppose. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
quote: But Mike, you were using it as part of your argument. You are responsible for defining your terms, aren't you? Pointing at other people and saying they [in]can[/i] describe it doesn't actually take responsibility for the use of the term in an argument now, does it? Just because they [in]can[/i] describe it, doesn't mean that they actually have described it at all. Nor does it mean that whatever definition they might offer is the one you agree with. Near as I can tell, it only means that you haven't answered the question. In order for me to talk about with you sensibly about something you call "the race card," you're going to have to tell me what that thing is in terms that both of us understand. I'm not dumb, I am willing to admit flaws on my own part, those flaws that I see in the Democratic party position and difficulties I have with President Obama. You and others who have seen me write have seen me do so. I ask that you simply explain what "the race card" is clearly, so I can understand it and so that other folks can understand it; and to bear with whatever difficulties I have in getting this and in understanding it. In the end, I may not agree with you, but I do want to understand you and the thinking around this notion. It's something that I've been hearing for years and it makes little sense to me at all. quote: I was very specific about my Republican bias comments. You changed the subject to Black office holders rather than Republican suppression of the black vote, and didn't address the comments I did make. Let me address the comments you did make, however, because, while the Republican party has not in the last perhaps 75 years been much of a haven for working class or poverty level folks of any sort and blacks (people of color these days, perhaps) have seldom risen out of that group, the Republicans have been active in seeking folks for high appointive office and for major responsibility. For that I believe they (and you, Mike) deserve great credit. The offices that you mention are of course appointive offices, and I suspect that it may be difficult for the Republican base to support a person of color for a major elective office. That is only a supposition on my part, and perhaps an unfounded one. In fact, I believe that the Democratic Party's history with race has been very poor overall. I think I've been over this with you before. The Democrats remained in power for a very long time through a sort of devil's bargain with the Dixiecrats, and by not so covertly supporting segregation in the South. I think this is one of the great shames not only of the Democratic Party, but of the United States as a whole as well. But right now, I feel a special responsibility as a Democrat to that history. We as Democrats have a lot to make up for. I am pleased to say that the party broke with the Dixiecrats over the Civil Rights act in 1968. This is one of the many reasons we lost that election. The entire south, pretty much en masse either became Republican or went with Wallace, who openly supported segregation. When the Wallace party withered, many of his folks became Republicans as well. The Republicans, which till that time had been a center right party, began its slide to the far right. A lot of the more moderate voices in the Republican Party died off or were discarded. Even today, some Republicans in are nostalgic for those grand old days of yesteryear. I remind folks of Trent Lott's speech of last year or the year before. A fair number of those Republicans are former Democrats. This speaks well for nobody. And there are plenty of fairly racist Democrats as well. I think that everybody has a bit of it simply rooted in the sense of who are people who are like my family and who are people who aren't like my family that a kid acquires when growing up. That opinion could get me shot some places, I'm fairly sure. I know it did when I brought it up a long time ago in social work school. I would put it to you, Mike, that if you believe that there aren't many prominent black Democrats, that you haven't looked at the Democratic national conventions to see how many black folks are there. These are the same folks who are powers in the national, state, county and local party structures. You might try comparing that to the Republican party conventions. If you get a chance, you might try responding to my comments about Republican attempts to exclude blacks from the election rolls in the states I mentioned. Also, how are things going on any actual convictions on any of the stuff about ACORN? Has ACORN been found guilty of any wrongdoing? If so, where might I read about it? Sincerely, Bob Kaven P.S. I hope you're feeling much better, Mike. My trip had to be extended, but you were much on my mind and I was rooting for you. |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
Why is ACORN requesting space to train new census employees, LR? What would that training consist of? That sounds a bit more involved than just "helping to get the word out" about the importance of completing the census. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Actual ACORN convictions, Bob? The cases are still in court. Honestly, do I expect to see any? Not really. They have Obama, their previous training manager in their corner along with a congress majority that loves them and, in no small way, owes the democratic electoral success to their efforts. It would take on hell of a judge to go against that lineup, and there seems to be a real lack of those kinds these days. Does that mean they are not guilty? I suppose so, in the same way OJ did not butcher two other human beings. Why did I bring up the race card? Simple. Throughout the whole thread up to that point, nothing was mentioned about race or anything regarding it. LR saw fit to get the "African-American" comment in there (along with Palin, who also had no relevence in the thread) and I saw it as nothing more than injecting race into the conversation and I responded in the way I did. Nothing more... I appreciate your well-wishes, Bob. Disagree on things as we may, and take little pot shots at each other as we may , I consider you a good friend and I appreciate your concern. |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: They're not, Denise. They're offering space. Which is also not the same as doing the training. quote: I don't think it would be a stretch, Mike, to suggest the Congressional majority owes its electoral success, not to ACORN, but to the Republicans. |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
quote: What I said: quote: Okay Mike... that was 'the race card' -- now was it a King? or a Queen? an Ace? Explain it? Did it trump something you wanted to play? How does mentioning the fact that African Americans my mother was trying to survey were skeptical and wary of the process amount to 'playing' the race card? Give me a break Mike. quote: Well Mike, Federal judges only have to worry about 'that lineup' (the one the American people voted for) if they do something impeachable -- so unless they run off to a foreign affair in Argentina without telling anyone (at taxpayer expense) they should be quite capable of calling the shots as they see fit. Do you think the Supreme Court is shaking in it's robes? quote: Yes, Palin's comments have relevance to the thread Mike -- because they are related to Chaffetz's own tunnel-vision view of America. An endemic problem in the Republican ranks. Of course Chaffetz real objective -- since he already knew that the Census Bureau has to handle the Census -- was in fact just an offering to the base -- something for them to chew on -- a dig at Acorn, a dig at Obama -- something else for Bachman to make a fool of herself over. |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
Sorry Ron, I misread the piece. So why are they offering to lend the space for training of census workers, and why are they offering to help identify job candidates? I think the Census Bureau did just fine in the past with recrutiment and training without their assistance. I think the problem some people have this time with the census is in moving the oversight of it strictly from the Commerce Department to the White House. It's just seen as another power grab. No matter how he wants to dance around the issue, he put it under his oversight, making it vulnerable to politics. |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
quote: http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/is_acorn_providing_workers_for_the_2010.html |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
Yes, LR, I know what they are saying. I'm just not buying it though. And this also comes as a big surprise: http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jun/25/conyers-abandons-plan-probe-acorn/?feat=home_headlines |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
It isn't what you're shopping for! |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
No, it's not, LR. I've never cared much for bologna.  |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
Perhaps you've just had too much WND Spam!  |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
quote: My understanding is that the census, far from being apolitical, has tended to be highly political historically. I believe LR mentioned the original census counted Blacks as 3/5ths of a white person when coming up with population densities. This meant also that the slave states were over-represented in congress, since I'm trying to be clear here. It was one of the compromises that several southern states demanded before they were willing to join the Union. More recently, the clashes between Democrats and Republicans has been pretty loud over census issues. Who is and who should be a citizen has been one of the key issues, and it's often fought as a battle on immigration. New immigrants to this country have very often voted with the Democratic Party, and the Democratic Party knows this and takes a more generous stance toward immigrants. The Republicans have taken the opposite tack for a reverse set of reasons. The pro-immigration tactics have gone back at least as far as Aaron Burr and New York City politics. New York City politics, at least for some of that time, were national politics. If I'm not mistaken, the political version of this issue showed itself over the last census by the Democrats asserting that a well handled statistical estimation would probably be more accurate than an actual head by head count, and that we should go with that (quite possibly true). And the Republicans countered by saying that the constitution demanded an actual head count and that nothing else was acceptable (I don't know if this was true, but it's not a bad debating position to take). This essentially worked itself down to the basic positions I mentioned above. The Democrats thought they could get more Democratic Representatives if things were counted their way, and the Republicans thought they could get better Representation if things went for them. The Republicans won. There was a lot of redistricting around the country and a strong Republican surge, not only because of people's agreement of Republican thinking at that time, but also because of the redistricting process as well. I believe, therefore, that the census is highly political; and that to imagine that it isn't or that there has been a time in the past the it wasn't is probably a way of making history more mysterious than its mysterious self already is. That last sentence was way too complicated. I'm sorry. About the phrase "the race card." At some point I think it would be useful to talk about it if we can get some ground-rules down about how to talk about it honestly without stigmatizing people and yet also retaining some degree of respect and decorum. This thread has enough freight on it already, but I'd like to know if anybody else would be interested in a discussion on "the race card," what we think it means and what use we make of it and other people make of it. If nobody's interested, we need not pursue it further. And if only one part of the political spectrum joins in, I'm afraid nobody learns anything. Thoughts? Sincerely, Bob Kaven |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
