ACORN benefits in a couple of ways: they take a small fee from the mortgage applications they successfully process, and (more indirectly) they increase the number of people they help, which assists their numbers for federal grants for the purpose of assisting lower-income mortgage seekers obtain mortgages.
It should be obvious, though, hat it benefits ACORN in some way – that’s what they do. That’s the (or ONE of the) businesses they’re in.
???
Don’t you need to weigh both sides of the equation?
So, there is an upside to ACORN (you claim). The upside is what? A handful of applications relatively speaking? A smidge of goodwill from those people?
For that you have a colossal downside. A downside that could single-handedly tank the whole organization not to mention quite possibly see the leadership, who you presume knew about this, in jail and ruined for life.
Not seeing it. Even ignoring you have to assume colossal moral bankruptcy from a lot of people at one place the risk v. reward ratio is massively skewed to “Bad Idea[sup]tm[/sup]” territory. So much so that you must now also assume colossal stupidity from the people running the place.
That’s a lot of mighty big assumptions and pills to swallow.
If you want to pursue this argument why can’t it be turned around as your admittance Bush is a war criminal, in light of the torture his employees committed in the execution of his goals?
How about the elevated terror alert during the 2004 election? That certainly helped Bush.
How about The Bush Admin arranging torture an innocent Canadian cause he had an Arab name? Is this your admittance, that Republicans, including you, who actively supported Bush, are evil inhuman monsters? His admin was acting inline with your goals for other things, and empowered by your vote. How does this not reflect badly on you?
Do you want to push farther with this argument?
Well, in the case in the OP, the Republican campaign worker was arrest for molesting a child “left in his care so the boy’s mother could attend a rally for McCain’s running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.” In addition the Republican campaign worker “faced similar allegations at least five times since 1982 without being convicted of a crime, according to the Pueblo Chieftain’s Nick Bonham.” Seems to me that those are just as much a link between the Republican campaign worker and the Republican party as the idiots at ACORN who helped the conservatives with their faux child prostitution. Yet, oddly enough, I haven’t seen Sam Stone discussing respondent superior, or you yourself speculating that maybe the Republican party has a “culture” of supporting and accepting the support of child molestators. Funny how that works out, isn’t it.
I think some of us are misunderstanding Bricker’s point. If I’m reading him right, ACORN as an institution is, among other things, in the (NFP) business of aiding low-income potential homebuyers to obtain mortgages – as any homebuyer knows, a rather complex and paperwork-intensive process. This activity is moral and laudable even if you’re the form of conservative who believes “government shouldn’t be in the mortgage business”, helping people cope with red tape is a good thing. If I’m understanding him correctly, a few less-than-wholesome types have taken advantage of that good thing for abusive ends. That, not the worthwhile goal, is what he’s condemnatory of. Am I close to grasping your point, B?
On the money.
Ruthless selfishness, a contempt for the rights of those weaker than themselves, the attitude that they have a literal divine right to do what they want to whom they want? I’ve never heard of any studies on the subject, but I’d expect for molesters to be attracted to the Republican party more than they’d be to the Democrats ( or most other political affilations ). I’d expect that pattern with anything unethical; their worldview is tailor made to encourage and excuse selfish, vile behavior. I expect they have more rapists, more embezzlers, more liars, more wife beaters, more of everything bad.
Ahah, but on the other hand it’s possible that most child molesters are discovered by sharing pictures on the internet or what-have-you. This would make a disproportionate number of them be affluent/white.
So how is this reflective of ACORN on the whole?
I think some of you are … more then generous interpreting Brickers’s motives and actions in starting his other thread. It is blindingly obvious that aiding and abetting a child prostitution ring is a bad thing. That’s the kind of “point” that doesn’t need to be made, let alone debated. Which makes me seriously question his motive for starting that thread.
What the real purpose of that thread he started is to make ACORN look bad, to toe the party line and try and disparage a group that the powers that be in the party has decided needs to be vilified. It’s a tried and true formula for the right and more and more, for Bricker.