How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Questions about ACORN   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  ]
 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Questions about ACORN

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


0 posted 09-25-2009 12:41 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     I got a fund raiser in my e-mail from Media Matters.  I usually try to avoid bringing sources slanted my direction into these forums as a matter of principle.  This one raised some questions that I'd been wondering about on my own and had mentioned in previous posts on the subject but they offered some details I didn't have.

     I wanted some reaction from my friends on the right, the left and in the center about this — to me at least — new set of views about ACORN and the new information supplied.  

     Thoughtful is better for my purposes than not, but anything you have to offer is appreciated.

quote:

In a new study released yesterday, Media Matters for America methodically exposes how both Beck and Hannity have spent years obsessively attacking ACORN under the guise of exposing corruption at an organization that receives government funding. Consider the following staggering numbers:

On Beck's and Hannity's respective television programs combined, ACORN was mentioned 1,502 times between May 8, 2006, and September 18, 2009. More than 1,500 times. Remember that ACORN has not been charged with any wrongdoing. Not only that, but the organization has been awarded just $53 million in federal funding over the past 15 years -- an average of $3.5 million per year.

Compare that to the coverage Beck and Hannity gave to Jack Abramoff, former Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH), Blackwater, Halliburton, and Kellogg, Brown, and Root (KBR) -- stories of well-documented political scandals and of corruption by companies that have received thousands of times more money from the government than ACORN has in the past 15 years. Abramoff and Ney were involved in influence peddling corruption that reached the highest levels of the Bush administration and Republican-controlled Congress. The aforementioned military contractors have all been involved in major controversies and scandals, some of which reportedly contributed to the deaths of U.S. troops, contractors, and Iraqi civilians alike. Combined, these contractors have been awarded at least $25 billion in contracts since 2001.

So how many times were these names mentioned on Beck's and Hannity's programs?

Abramoff and Ney: 62 times
Blackwater/Xe: four times
Halliburton/KBR: 43 times

In other words, Beck's and Hannity's programs combined were approximately 35 times more likely to discuss ACORN than any of the military contractors. They were also 24 times more likely to discuss ACORN than Abramoff and Ney.

Beck and Hannity have been willing to run with any story that accuses ACORN of corruption, even if the accusations remain unproven and the details were gathered using ethically and legally questionable tactics. But as we show in our study, these two hosts didn't lift a finger to report on the massive cases of corruption involving prominent military contractors and Republicans in Congress.



     Sincerely, Bob Kaven
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


1 posted 09-25-2009 05:38 AM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

Maybe Beck & Hannity primarily focus on issues that the 'main stream media' refuse to even mention? Just a thought.
JenniferMaxwell
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 09-14-2006
Posts 2275


2 posted 09-25-2009 06:42 AM       View Profile for JenniferMaxwell   Email JenniferMaxwell   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for JenniferMaxwell

Maybe Beck and Hannity haven't a clue what fair and balanced means and focus primarily on topics that fuel the anti-Obama, birther, czar-er, death panel hysterics.
http://www.newshounds.us/

Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


3 posted 09-25-2009 08:39 AM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
In other words, Beck's and Hannity's programs combined were approximately 35 times more likely to discuss ACORN than any of the military contractors.

So?

I'm about a thousand times more likely to talk about my kids than your kids. That's probably because I'm a little more interested in mine than yours. I honestly can't believe anyone would really have a problem with that?

Fortunately for all of us, everything comes out in the wash. Since you're going to be equally more likely to talk about your offspring than mine, between the two of us both sets of kids will get plenty of air time.

p.s. Just because I talk about my children all the time, it doesn't necessarily follow that I'm telling the absolute truth about them all the time. I might exaggerate. Just a little.  
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


4 posted 09-25-2009 09:27 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

You can't be serious, Bob. With all of the things the network media has completely ignored or downplayed (which have been well-documented on threads here), someone is complaining that FOX has not given enough coverage to the things network news covers? That's a hilarious thing...

Perhaps I could give the same response you gave to the lack of ACORN coverage on network news....they didn't consider it newsworthy enough. If that worked for you, shouldn't it work for me?

FOX covers them because no one else has the journalistic integrity to do so. Media Matters is whining because ACORN got caught and exposed? Tough cookies. FOX did not initiated the "stings" against ACORN. They simply reported them, something the networks didn't do. Ask yourself why. Ask yourself why network news reported nothing on the cap and trade bill as it sailed through the House, why they reported nothing on the billions of pork slipped into the stimulus package, why they said almost nothing about the scandals involving Democrats over the years and yet they would make Haliburton a household word just because of Cheney's involvement in it.

I can assure you that, if there were a Republican sitting in the Oval Office right now, you would see a remarkable change in what network news covers and things like ACORN would be getting top billing. What do we get now? George S asking Obama about ACORN and getting a response like "Acorn? I haven't followed that closely. They get federal funding? I didn't know that."...and then it  gets dropped. That's what you get from network news. It's good for the country that we DO have FOX, believe me.

Btw, if you want to see the school children in NJ singing a song praising Barack Obama,  go to FOX. If it had been to Bush, you could have gone to any network news station
JenniferMaxwell
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 09-14-2006
Posts 2275


5 posted 09-25-2009 10:41 AM       View Profile for JenniferMaxwell   Email JenniferMaxwell   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for JenniferMaxwell

“Acorn? I haven't followed that closely. They get federal funding? I didn't know that”

Balladeer, you have misquoted the President of the United States.

STEPHANOPOULOS:  How about the funding for ACORN?

OBAMA:  You know, if -- frankly, it's not really something I've followed closely.  I didn't even know that ACORN was getting a whole lot of federal money.

STEPHANOPOULOS:  Both the Senate and the House have voted to cut it off.

OBAMA:  You know, what I know is, is that what I saw on that video was certainly inappropriate and deserves to be investigated.

STEPHANOPOULOS:  So you're not committing to -- to cut off the federal funding?

OBAMA:  George, this is not the biggest issue facing the country.  It's not something I'm paying a lot of attention to.

Perhaps the President was putting things in the proper perspective including when he said “a whole lot of federal money”.

"The amount of money that ACORN has received in the past 20 years altogether is roughly equal to what the taxpayer paid to Halliburton each day during the war in Iraq."

Nearly 54 million a DAY to a company that not only defrauded the government at tax payer expense but whose subsidiaries Dyncorp and KBR actually were involved in human trafficking and a child sex slave ring.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


6 posted 09-25-2009 10:50 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Yes, Jennifer, as I said "something like..". I don't  see much of a difference between  the two. Obama knows exactly how much ACORN gets, I have little doubt. He also knows how much they are in line to get in his stimulus package...he wrote it in. The old, "There are more important things..." is a standard ploy to dismiss what one doesn't want to discuss any further.

whose subsidiaries Dyncorp and KBR actually were involved in human trafficking and a child sex slave ring.

I see. So THAT bothers you but condoning and giving advice to people setting up prostitution houses for underage children smuggled into the country doesn't? How selective of you....
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


7 posted 09-25-2009 11:07 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Only one of the five television networks that interviewed President Obama for their Sunday shows bothered to ask him about Acorn, the left-wing community organizing group whose federal funding was cut off

hmmm...wonder what happened to the other four???

"Frankly, it's not something I've followed closely," Mr. Obama claimed, adding he wasn't even aware the group had been the recipient of significant federal funding. "This is not the biggest issue facing the country. It's not something I'm paying a lot of attention to," he said.

Mr. Obama took great pains to act as if he barely knew about Acorn. In fact, his association goes back almost 20 years. In 1991, he took time off from his law firm to run a voter-registration drive for Project Vote, an Acorn partner that was soon fully absorbed under the Acorn umbrella. The drive registered 135,000 voters and was considered a major factor in the upset victory of Democrat Carol Moseley Braun over incumbent Democratic Senator Alan Dixon in the 1992 Democratic Senate primary.

Mr. Obama's success made him a hot commodity on the community organizing circuit. He became a top trainer at Acorn's Chicago conferences. In 1995, he became Acorn's attorney, participating in a landmark case to force the state of Illinois to implement the federal Motor Voter Law. That law's loose voter registration requirements would later be exploited by Acorn employees in an effort to flood voter rolls with fake names.

. In 2007, in a speech to Acorn's leaders prior to their political arm's endorsement of his presidential campaign, Mr. Obama was effusive: "I've been fighting alongside of Acorn on issues you care about my entire career. Even before I was an elected official, when I ran Project Vote in Illinois, Acorn was smack dab in the middle of it, and we appreciate your work."

But the Obama campaign didn't appear eager to discuss the candidate's ties to Acorn. Its press operation vividly denied Mr. Obama had been an Acorn trainer until the New York Times uncovered records demonstrating that he had been. The Obama campaign also gave Citizens Consulting, Inc., an Acorn subsidiary, $832,000 for get-out-the-vote activities in key primary states. In filings with the Federal Election Commission, the Obama campaign listed the payments as "staging, sound, lighting," only correcting the filings after the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review revealed their true nature.

Given his longstanding ties with Acorn, President Obama's protestations of ignorance or disinterest in the group's latest scandal seem preposterous. Here's hoping White House reporters will press the president to clarify just how much he really knows about Acorn and when he knew it.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204488304574427041636360388.html

This is the fellow who doesn't really follow ACORN much and had no idea how much they were getting in government funds? I need more swampland to sell!!!
JenniferMaxwell
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 09-14-2006
Posts 2275


8 posted 09-25-2009 11:17 AM       View Profile for JenniferMaxwell   Email JenniferMaxwell   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for JenniferMaxwell

Now you’ve gone and misquoted yourself, Balladeer. You didn’t say “something like” but rather  “getting a response like”.

“Obama knows exactly how much ACORN gets, I have little doubt.” Pure speculation on your part with no supporting evidence whatsoever.

Saying “"There are more important things..." can be a ploy, or, as in this case, the truth, plain as the nose on your face.

And, before you go on about the stimulus package you might want to check http://www.factcheck.org/2009/02/the-stimulus-bill-and-acorn/

PS - instead of editing your posts to add to them or change the focus, I think it would be a courtesy to readers to put changes in a separate post so that they don't have to keep going back and checking your previous posts for edits.
JenniferMaxwell
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 09-14-2006
Posts 2275


9 posted 09-25-2009 11:27 AM       View Profile for JenniferMaxwell   Email JenniferMaxwell   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for JenniferMaxwell

Oh please, I certainly do not condone what was on those videos. Please don’t try to discredit me by implying I do. That’s a despicable ploy that has no place in this forum. You owe me a retraction and public apology.  
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


10 posted 09-25-2009 11:41 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

I don't see where I went back and edited my posts.If you do, please point them out.

Nor did I imply you condone child prostitution. What I implied was that you attacked Haliburton for child sex rings and had no reference to ACORN for their child prostitution advice. That doesn't mean you condone it - it simply means you are very selective in your attack methods as to what you go after and what you ignore..no apology necessary for stating the obvious.
JenniferMaxwell
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 09-14-2006
Posts 2275


11 posted 09-25-2009 12:31 PM       View Profile for JenniferMaxwell   Email JenniferMaxwell   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for JenniferMaxwell

Your post # 6 with the despicable assertion implying that “ condoning and giving advice to people setting up prostitution houses for underage children smuggled into the country” doesn't bother me, has been edited.

Turn about is fair play so I guess it’s fair to assume since you haven’t spoken out, you’re not bothered by the fact that Halliburton subsidiaries have been involved in human trafficking, child sex slave rings and defrauding American taxpayers. How selective of you to ignore those heinous crimes.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


12 posted 09-25-2009 12:39 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
That doesn't mean you condone it - it simply means you are very selective in your attack methods as to what you go after and what you ignore ...

But you do the same thing, Mike.

You complain about people giving advice to pimps for underage children smuggled into America, but remain silent about similar child exploitation in Russia, India, or South Africa. You don't even really condemn it in this country; you apparently just don't want others giving them tax advice? In a weird way, I guess that makes sense since there weren't actually any El Salvadoran girls being exploited; it was just fabricated. Lamentably, the stories about Dyncorp and KBR don't appear to be fictional.

Of course, in reality, we're ALL selective with our condemnations. Sadly, there's way to much in this world to condemn collectively every time we want to address a new item. We have to pick and choose and hope our condemnations accumulate rather than start from scratch every time we speak. Decrying Halliburton this week shouldn't mean we've forgiven Nixon or forgotten Jimmy Hoffa.

But you know all that, Mike. Are you sure you weren't perhaps just trying to shift focus?
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


13 posted 09-25-2009 08:30 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



Dear Denise,

          Thank you for that thought, and for being kind enough to reply here.

     For myself, I hadn't been aware that the federal funding for ACORN had been 3.5 million dollars per year.  From the amount of rage and press time devoted to it by Beck and Hannity, I would have thought it had gotten at least an eighth or a tenth as much money as Halliburton, when it turns out that Halliburton, if what J.M. says is accurate, got as much in one day as ACORN has pretty much ever gotten.  J.M. has always seems very good with her facts.

     Surely, Fox will always fill this Robin Hood sort of function for you, though you understand it doesn't do the same for me.  Thanks for your considered reply, though, and any further thoughts you have.  Hope the kids continue well.

All my best, Bob Kaven
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


14 posted 09-25-2009 10:52 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Trying to shift focus, Ron? I was trying to do just the opposite. I was speaking of ACORN. The title of this thread is QUESTIONS ABOUT ACORN. Now, if Jennifer or anyone wants to discuss the sins of Haliburton, that's fine by me. They can open a Haliburton thread and we can discuss it there. The only reason it was gone into such detail here was to get the subject off ACORN. ACORN, in four different offices, gave advice on how to cheat on their taxes and how to hide illegal child prostitution rings...period. I consider that to be a pretty bad thing. The network news doesn't. Obama doesn't, either, claiming that there are many more important things to discuss and he didn't really pay a lot of attention to ACORN, even with his history with them as listed above. Jennifer wants to discuss the sins of Haliburton? Fine...do it in a Haliburton thread. To see the non-coverage the networks gave to ACORN, the stimulus waste, the cap and trade bill that got slipped through the House without mention and then complain that FOX didn't mention Haliburton enough is laughable.

Btw, Jennifer, either your computer or your eyes need to be checked. The edit you claim I made was non-existent. The comment is there in it's original form. We could always ask Ron to verify that (since he has very little to do) but that would almost have you apologize for your accusation, which we both know wouldn't happen. Hopefully you were just mistaken instead of deliberatly making a false accusation.

As far as ACORN is concerned, they have been bounced from the 2010  census, they have lost their HUD funding, new investigations are springing up all over the country...so SOMEONE, even the Congress, actually DO consider it something worth mentioning. That is vindication enough for FOX's attention to them and accusatory enough to the network news stations who closed their eyes to it.
Ringo
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 02-20-2003
Posts 3696
Saluting with misty eyes


15 posted 09-25-2009 11:42 PM       View Profile for Ringo   Email Ringo   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Ringo

I was going to let this one go; however, me being who I am cannot do so in good concsience. SO, here are thing in my view:

Today's "issue" of mediamatters.org contains the following:

Acorn Videographers- 3 negative stories
Glenn Beck- 7 negative stories and a tag to even more negtive stories
Sean Hannity- 5 negative stories and a tag for more negative stories
Rush Limbaugh 3 negative stories, and a tag for more negaitve stories (it must have been a slow day)
Bill O'Reilly- 1 negative story with tagsg for more (did I read that right? ONLY ONE for Bill???)
Chris WAllace- 1 negative story
Fox News- only 1 negative story... with a LARGE tag for an entire section slamming anything they do.
Other Concervative Outlets- 11 negative stories with yet more tags.

They DO have links to liberal content... only in that it completely slams conservatives... and THESE are the people complaining about Fox News?

Let's take a quick look at some of the more reviled people on that particular network:
Glenn Beck- He does not host a news show... he has an OPINION show... and until this year, had it on CNN... with absolutely no one complaining about anything he said.
Bill O'Reilly- Once again, Mr. O has an OPINION show. Not only that, he has liberals on that he allows to give their opinion and is respectful to. (point of order, Madame Speaker- He has liberal professor and Fox News contributom Marc Lamont Hill, PhD on at this very moment). He had the CEO of ACORN on a couple of months ago, and was unerringly respectful to her, and never raised his voice to her. He gave President Obama a very tough, yet severely respectful interview during the campaign.
Sean Hannity- Another OPINION show. His nightly Great American Panel ALWAYS has a liberal or two (and on quite a few nights, all three members were liberal). Sean NEVER goes after them disrespectfully. He usually asks a question, and sits back to allow the guests to argue it out.
Rush Limbaugh- Yet another OPINION show (on the radio, this time). He doesn't usually allow guests on his show from either side of the isle.

I would tend to think that, in this case, What's not good for the Fox is perfectly fine for the Media.

One interesting thing about a Fox News personality that no one seems to have a hassle with.... Geraldo Rivera. I guess it is only OK to slamm the white guys and gals on Fox. Because he is Latino, Geraldo gets a pass.

Anyhow. Air America has had such liberal hosts as Jenine Garafolo (who demanded that the only reason people didn't like Obama is because they were racist) and Al Franken (who never met a concervative he was willing to allow the freedom to breathe. They are nowhere near being fair, or willing to give both sides of an issue.

I do not aften watch MSNBC, and do not, under any circumstances watch the nightly broadcast news, so I will ask you, Bob, to point to me ANY member of the MSNBC staff that allows concervatives onto their shows unless it is to make them look foolish, and where having their reporters call the people who attended the teaparties redneck racists is being fair?
I would also invite any other member of our little family who resides on the opposite side of the isle to admit that they ever watch Fox News, or any of the people I have mentioned in this post. I seem to hear many of the lineral party wailing and gnashing their teeth at the mean and vile Fox News, yet they cannot give example one of anything they know to be "true" that they have seen first hand.
I saw the video where Speaker Pelosi called the health reform protesters "astroturf" and "brown shirts"; I saw the video where Charles Rengel stated that he had not read HR 3200 (the health reform bill), and yet was demanding that it be passed; I saw the video of liberal college students shouting down a conservative speaker, and praising the Iranian leader who villifies America; I have seen the video of ACORN supporters beating a black man for selling t-shirts outside of a town hall meeting; I have seen with my own eyes ACORN members being led through a side door of a town hall meeting where the "regular" citizens were being pushed out the door, and being told they could not attend because there was no room at the inn.
The White House admitted that they were accepting e-mails from citizens who wished to send in the names of people who were speaking ill of the administration. The White House admitted that they were paying people to search the internet for stories that were not complimentary to the Administration.
If "media matters" then where is their coverage of these stories?

This post, Bob, got much longer than I wanted, or anticipated. If you wish more examples of why it is *I* feel that Media Matters doesn't really matter at all, please feel free to e-mail me, and wer can continue this discussion.


Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting, "WHAT A RIDE
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


16 posted 09-26-2009 03:01 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



Dear Ringo,

           Sorry for the confusion here, Ringo.  I thought I'd made it clear by the apology in the first posting that I did not consider Media Matters an unbiased source, and that was the reason I ordinarily did not use it as a matter of policy in my postings here.  I feel that media matters is clearly a left wing source.  I have a left wing bias that I try to keep out of my references, though not out of my opinions, since I believe that I want my opinions to be backed by facts that are pretty much beyond dispute as coming from unbiased sources.  If that isn't too convoluted.

     I wouldn't have brought the Media Matters in if it weren't in relationship to specific facts that you might find other places. If you feel that I have used to to say something untrue, I would urge you to be specific about it.  I don't believe I have.  Nor would I knowingly do so.  I have, in fact, repeatedly suggested the use of right wing sources with solid  reputations for accuracy, and I have on occasion, used them myself for those reasons.

     If you believe I've done otherwise, we can talk about that straightforwardly.  I'm certainly not trying to be deceptive here any more than I believe you are.

     I posted the Media Matters excerpt stating clearly that it was from a fund-raising e-mail and without any intention of trying to pull anything over on anybody.  Please read the posting again to see If i've mislead you in any way.  It's to avoid squabbles like this that I try to avoid biased sources.  

     I posted this excerpt because they raised a perspective on the ACORN brouhaha that I had not seen raised before in these pages or, actually, anywhere, other than as speculation here by me a while back.  The facts and figures that the Media Matters posting quoted seem to be correct, and do seem to require some sort of address.  Your form of address is as good as any other.  I'm not sure that it actually addresses the facts and figures that M/M. actually raises, however, though it does go to show the amount of enmity it does arouse.

     And, Mike, while the title of the thread does say Questions about ACORN, you seem to have excluded the topic paragraph and elaboration that the initial posting traditionally supply.  It's your privilege to do so, of course.  
But sooner or later the question should be addressed.  It was intended that it be addressed here in this thread, should folks feel able to tolerate coming to grips with the question, which is frankly a threatening one and which requires a certain amount of willingness to put some amount of partisanship aside.

     Putting all partisanship aside is impossible, since we're all touchy as porcupines on one level or another, I think, but some amount is probably possible.  To the degree that we can do this, I believe it's to everybody's  benefit.  The more common ground we have, the better in a Democracy, as long as the common ground is honestly come by.  In my opinion, at least.  It's difficult enough to gain in times such as these, at any rate.

Sincerely, Bob Kaven

JenniferMaxwell
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 09-14-2006
Posts 2275


17 posted 09-26-2009 04:30 AM       View Profile for JenniferMaxwell   Email JenniferMaxwell   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for JenniferMaxwell

It seems highly unlikely, Balladeer,  I would have missed your personally directed insult and false accusation in #6 had it been there when your post first went up. If I’m wrong, I most certainly would have the courtesy to apologize. Very sad that you haven’t extended me that same courtesy.

False accusations aren’t my style at all, I prefer to rely on facts to support my arguments. Unfortunately, since that was (at least) the second time you’ve falsely accused me of something, I have to assume that you do quite the opposite - use false accusations (and personally directed insults) when you have no facts to support your arguments. I guess I should have expected no less from someone like yourself who gives war profiteers a pass on human trafficking, child sexual exploitation and defrauding the United States government and the American taxpayer.

My post contrasting the amount of federal money given to Halliburton and ACORN was not the least bit off topic, providing you actually took the time to read all the material in Bob’s post  #1, and had the ability to understand it, but this one is, and I do apologize to Bob for that.

JenniferMaxwell
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 09-14-2006
Posts 2275


18 posted 09-26-2009 05:31 AM       View Profile for JenniferMaxwell   Email JenniferMaxwell   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for JenniferMaxwell

“I have seen the video of ACORN supporters beating a black man for selling t-shirts outside of a town hall meeting; I have seen with my own eyes ACORN members being led through a side door of a town hall meeting where the "regular" citizens were being pushed out the door”

Ringo, could you possibly give me links to those videos? I can’t find either one or any text material to support your claim that members of ACORN did those things. Thanks, would be most appreciative!

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


19 posted 09-26-2009 05:46 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

So the amount of money received by an organization from the government is the key then?

I repeat...with all of the things mainstream media has chosen to ignore over the years having democratic ties, it is disingenuous of them to complain about FOX not giving enough coverage to the things they DO go after. Had Haliburton had Clinton ties with VP Gore previously on the board, I feel fairly confident it would have gotten the same lack of coverage by network news as anything democratic. As Ron stated, people are going to talk about what interests them the most and, as Ringo said, what FOX brings up is supported by facts with video to back them up. These points rankle mainstream media and the left because (1) things get coverage they don't want covered and (2) the public sees how these things don't get covered by network news and (3) they can't refute them. What's a left wing organization to do? Oh, yes, as this post indicates...scream foul, as MediaMatters has done here.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


20 posted 09-26-2009 09:11 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

I have to assume that you do quite the opposite - use false accusations (and personally directed insults) when you have no facts to support your arguments

Jennifer, I have offered many facts to support my arguments. So has FOX, which makes them the target of the left wing smear campaigns. When one can't overcome the facts, one screams foul.

..and you do know what they say about assume, I'm sure.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


21 posted 09-26-2009 09:17 AM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch

I wouldn't know half of the left or right wing commentators you're all talking about if I fell over them and can honestly say that I get none of my opinions from any of them. I suppose you could say that's why I don't know what I'm talking about most of the time, I'd argue that I prefer to form my own opinions based on the available information.

Which sources would I recommend?

All of them and none of them. It doesn't really matter where you get your information - the only thing that matters is whether the information you're getting stands up to close examination. That's the problem. People tend to hear what they want to hear, as Mike has pointed out a couple of times, what they should be doing is checking that what they're hearing is actually true, which is Bob's advice.

My own advice is to presume that everything you hear is an out and out lie and contrary to everything you know and believe then gather enough facts to prove that you're wrong. I guarantee that the answers you come up with won't be 100% conclusive but the opinion and understanding you obtain in the process will be of far more value than any media source.

It'll definitely be worth more to me. Almost daily I see posts with either just a link or a quote from some news source presented as if the fact that they exist attests to their validity. Personally I'd prefer to hear what the poster thinks rather than what Glenn Limbaugh or Rush Beck etc. thinks but I don't mind pointing out the flaws they present as fact. After all it gives me a starting point to go out and increase my understanding and form my own opinion, so I can't really complain.

The truth is out there - it's just unlikely to be all in one place - you need to work to find it.

That's my opinion.

.

[This message has been edited by Grinch (09-26-2009 10:27 AM).]

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


23 posted 09-26-2009 10:47 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

All of them and none of them. It doesn't really matter where you get your information - the only thing that matters is whether the information you're getting stands up to close examination.

True words indeed, sir. That's why FOX uses videos to substantiate their claims and that's why mainstream media prefers to ignore situations they don't want to get airtime. If FOX were to come out with unsubstantiated charges, the media would be all over them. FOX presents facts. Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck and O'Reilly are all opinion shows, as Ringo pointed out. They will take the video, or whatever evidence backs up FOX's claims, and run with it. One can agree, disagree or simply laugh at them. Same with liberal opinion shows.

FOX is despised by the mainstream media and feared by the left-wingers because they will expose things the others don't want exposed - and they do it in a way that the left can't refute. Many liberal politicians run from FOX because they know they will be asked questions that mainstream media won't ask. 4 out of 5 stations Obama was on didn't even bring up ACORN to him, even after congress cut off it's funding and the census dropped it. Ask yourself why. Mainstream media didn't even mention the cap and trade bill on the day it was being voted on in the house, a bill with monumental consequences to the average American. Ask yourself why. No one asked Obama how Van Jones got through his vetting process. Why not?

It's not chance that FOX is the most-watched news channel. It's because people know they have to go there to get news mainstream media tries to white-wash...and they are successful because they back it up with facts. Does that make organizations like MediaMatters go after them with a smear campaign? You betcha...
JenniferMaxwell
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 09-14-2006
Posts 2275


24 posted 09-26-2009 11:17 AM       View Profile for JenniferMaxwell   Email JenniferMaxwell   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for JenniferMaxwell

Thanks so much for the links, Denise, but I don't see any ACORN workers in any of those videos.
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Questions about ACORN   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors