Something to consider: imagine the filmmakers had chosen the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, or the Sierra Club instead of ACORN to run this gag on. It’s hard to imagine any employees of any of them biting.
I don’t have much of a problem with most of your post, and agree that the compensation schemes ACORN has in place can encourage this type of misbehavior (the voter registration fraud, not the tax-liability advice). However, many people keep making the same mistake you are and I think it needs to be continually corrected. The charges in this case (and in most, if not all, of the others I’m familiar with) are voter registration fraud. Not voter fraud. The crime was submitting fraudulent registrations, not attempting to vote fraudulently.
Until somebody produces evidence that someone is attempting to vote based on these registrations it seems pretty clear to me that it is not an attempt to swing elections so much as an attempt by ACORN-hired workers to make easy money. The fact that in almost all of these cases the workers were turned over by ACORN itself seems to support his interpretation.
You do? I for one suspect the point was to demonstrate that Obama’s presidency is illegitimate.
Not demonstrate. Imply.
Right - there has not only been no proof or even assertion that anyone with an invalid registration via ACORN has actually voted illegally, there has been no proof or even assertion that any have even tried. None.
But give the Sams of the world credit for using their imaginations, at least.
To their target audience, those are synonyms.
It’s more than just a suggestion, Slugger.
They aren’t.
Cite that they are instructed to do this?
Let’s turn this around. Let’s say a Halliburton employee was caught bribing a government official to look the other way while Halliburton broke the law. Would you be jumping to the company’s defense?
From this cite:
Some examples:
In general, if an employee breaks the law while acting on behalf of a company, the company will be held liable. If the company appears to tolerate such behavior through lax standards or a ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ type of policy, the company can expect to be hammered by the courts with punitive fines as well.
Why should ACORN be held to a different standard?
That may have been part of it, but I think it goes deeper. There has been a push for stricter requirements to vote for a long time based on the idea that we need to prevent voter fraud by people voting who shouldn’t. Making voting inconvenient reduces voter turnout. These efforts usually make things less convenient for poor people without really affecting anyone else. So it makes cynical political sense to support these measures if the poor don’t vote for you, and oppose them if they do. But the only non-political reason to do this is if it actually solves a problem with voter fraud that is worse distortion of the people’s will then the effect of putting selective barriers up to be able to vote.
Jonathan
ETA: The fact that Obama was even slightly connected with ACORN did raise the amount of negative coverage that focused on this, but even if he hadn’t run, I suspect we still would have heard about all these fake registrations and how dangerous they were to our country.
Do you just run around screaming for cites all day? Did you not catch the “as some have suggested” part at the end of his sentence?
Psst. He wasn’t making a claim.
I have no problem with ACORN, but I do think it is ridiculous that in this country voter registration is driven by private organization “drives”.
Anybody at all can do it themselves if they want to; it isn’t hard at all. What any of these private organizations do is simply educating and energizing people who had heretofore lacked sufficient motivation to participate.
What difference do you see with any other political advocacy groups’ “get out the vote” campaigns in election season?
Wow…Do you have any evidence of this other than the fact that you dislike some of their reporting? I’m starting to see that you have zero substance and that responding to your posts is a waste of time
I suspect he’s saying it shouldn’t be up to those groups. In Canada, you either check a box on your tax return which allows Elections Canada to collect your info, or you’re surveyed by a non-partisan volunteer from said same.
I’m going to be charitable and presume you worded this poorly. The implication in what you wrote is that Halliburton, as a company and with the express blessing of its top executives, is breaking the law. The single act of an employee bribing a government official is just part and parcel of the company-blessed illegal activity.
Now, if it can be shown that a small group of Halliburton employees took it upon themselves to break the law for the company’s benefit, which is what I think you meant in the first place, and management found out and fired them? Like people here, I might question the company’s screening process for new employees, but I wouldn’t accuse the company itself of engaging in illegal activities.
You know as well as I do, Sam, and probably better, that a company is viewed as an individual entity in the eyes of the law. So it’s pretty important to make clear whether it’s the company or an employee (or group of employees) who’s breaking the law.
Yeah. And technically, providing a map to a nice, quiet wooded area with soft soil where I can bury the body I’ve got in my trunk counts as “giving directions.”
“Gotcha” journalism or not, this is (barring the revelation that the whole thing is a hoax) a major fuckup, an indelible shitstain on ACORN, and a huge score for Obamaphobes.
What reason do you have to believe there is a non-political reason in play at all?
I strongly suspect otherwise, but we’ll never know.
yorick73, here’s a clue: If it’s news, if it’s factual, you’ll find it reported in at least a few other places than the Moonie Times. So can you or can’t you? :dubious: Sheesh.
No they weren’t, they were arrested for registration fraud, and ACORN itself is who reported them. Try to follow along. We’ve already covered this. ACORN hires people to go into neighborhood registering voters (and this is the REAL issue that righties have with ACORN – that they register minority voters). Some of those workers falsify registration forms to pad their pay. ACORN is not permitted to disallow these bogus forms. They have to flag them and send them onto the appropriate state agency. The state then discards the fake applications. At no point in this scenario is ACORN doing anything wrong, and at no point is there any voter fraud.
You can’t cite a single example of institutional fraud or corruption in ACORN. The smearing is purely political.
I think the confusion is that most people don’t understand what Acorn does. From their mission statement:
This was probably a low or no cost tax or financial advice service to help people who can’t afford going to an accountant.
I have no cite, but I mentioned it originally as one of the possible explanations for what happened her. It would not be unheard of for community aid, or even government aid, organizations to have policies not to inquire into certain things, such as immigration status. Even people with nothing to hid may avoid going for help if they fear that they would be investigated somehow. I can see a policy meant to insure even people on the margins get the help without fear of getting arrested or deported warp the way people interact.
Jonathan
With the caveat that their deniability becomes a lot less plausible because the company benefitted from the bribes. Whereas every sane person can see that ACORN cannot benefit from the alleged acts.