I read the Maddow transcript on MSNBC and found her interview with David Iglesias to be credible. Iglesias is pimping his book, but I think the interview was thorough enough and not one of those sound bite gotchas we’ve seen in other news stories lately.
So, with the Democrats firmly in control of both houses of Congress, why does ACORN seem to still be in some hot water?
I’ve never really thought anything bad was going on at ACORN. The more conservatives bash it, the more I support them. From what we’ve heard on the news, it doesn’t really follow that anything corrupt was going on at their top levels, just a few low level employees acting like idiots. It would be like eliminating WalMart for something an assistant manager in store #42 did. Unfortunately, the fears and smears got to the cowardly Congressmen who pulled federal funding
Because the Democrats are not firmly in control of the media. If you every needed proof that the much touted “Liberal Media Bias” is a myth, the effectiveness of the anti-Acorn smear campaign is a pretty decent example. More charitable (and less biased) observers than myself point out that the media has a bias towards “easy” subjects to report, and a bias towards “sexy” subjects. So a BS entrapment story with fake pimps is “sexier” and much easier to report than the actual story that Maddow is covering. She’s been on this story for weeks and has devoted more than an hour to it. I wouldn’t be surprised if Frontline follows her lead on this story.
Acorn doesn’t have to be guilty of anything to be thoroughly smeared. As Ray Donovan said: "Which office do I go to get my reputation back?
Maybe the spineless “centrists” who have run the Dem party for so long ought to love ACORN, but they don’t. They are very uncomfortable with the notion that Democrats actually stand for something. They still hold boquets of bipartisan flowers for their beloved, who has flung them to the ground and peed upon them.
And, you know, its possible that they don’t even recognize what ACORN has accomplished. I’m relatively savvy, politics wise, and I was surprised to see the extent to which the Pubbies were willing to go! These are some very serious misdeeds, in my opinion, using the enforcement arm of government to advance a partisan electoral agenda is Nixonian.
I didn’t think ACORN was important enough to do that. But, apparently, they may well be! Well, I’ll be dipped!
As related in the transcript, the AZ Republicans viewed them as drawing ever nearer, crucifix, mallet and stake at the ready.
So perhaps the Dems underestimate them just like I did. Mr Rove, it would seem, did not.
-It is alleged that Republicans wanted prosecuters to go after cases of voter fraud in election years.
-David Iglesias says he was fired for not going after voter fraud on the part of Acorn.
-He says he didn’t go after them, because they weren’t good cases. He wrote a book which is out now, about this.
-Republicans are threatened by Acorn, and this is a political attempt to discredit Acorn.
Ok, I watched it. My head didn’t explode.
Assuming, just for the sake of argument that everything said there is true. So?
Acorn does things politically that the Republicans don’t like, so they attack it politically, right?
Palin was driven out of office by political ethics attacks that exploit the fact that she must defend herself with her own wallet.
This is life in the big city. This is the adversarial party system. This is a system of checks and balances.
What’s the problem?
What a refreshing dose of clear, brisk cynicism you bring to the debate, Scylla.
Though I didn’t specifically intend to exclude you from our conversation, I really only anticipated participation by people who would be disgusted and offended that the enforcement branch of our government be used to sway elections.
Many of us are.
Somewhat left of center? Your posts are so slanted left that I sometimes fall out of my chair attempting to read them.
People in this thread seem to think the the problems ACORN is having are still the fault of the Big Bad Bush. Explain the decisions by both the Census Bureau and the IRS to discontinue relations with ACORN. Doesn’t the current administration hold any influence with these agencies? Or is the Big Bad Bush still running those out of Texas?
ACORN is digging it’s own hole without the need for outside help. The usual response from an organization when errors are made by underlings is for someone at the top to accept responsibility for looking into the matter, announcing new procedures and safeguards that will prevent the reoccurrance of what ever problem has happened, and a firm commitment to regain the trust of the customers and donors that support the organization.
I just don’t see any of this from ACORN. Nobody at the top is taking responsibility for reforming procedures and personnel. The professional approach is to nip criticism in the bud, make a media assault to convince people to remain supportive, etc.
It is this lack of professionalism that disturbs me.
You only want to debate with people who agree with you?
You act as if Acorn is this apolitical entity being unjustly persecuted. I’m shocked that you would be surprised that Republicans are being mean to the Democratic special interest organization that is trying to unseat them.
I also found it Really really funny that Rachel professed shock at the idea that Republicans were really only interested in voter fraud during election years.
HMMMMMMMMMMMMMM. I wonder why that might be?
Can anyone guess? Bueller?
I thought you said she was smart.
To be fair, debate about stuff like Diebold machines goes on during non-election years too. 
Plus, she may be referring to the whole “make a big deal during an election year then do nothing about it at any other time” thing that goes on in politics.
Yeah, I’m pissed about the hypocrisy, too. How come Repbulicans never seem interested in prosecuting all the voter fraud that occurs in non-election years?
It is not apolitical, but it has been and is being unjustly persecuted, in ways not only mean but dishonest.
I’m sorry. Are you suggesting that Republican politicians are being not only mean but also dishonest? That’s a bold statement that requires evidentiary backing.
Dishonesty, hmmm. I must be missing something.
Acorn was a partisan activist group with a liberal agenda seeking to Replace Republican leadership with Democratic leadership. Republicans, as you might guess, openly disagreed with this agenda, and sought to destroy and discredit Acorn by investigating, and prosecuting anything that had the appearance of impropriety.
What am I missing?
Say what you want, but I think the Republicans should be lauded for the openness they’ve displayed in their enmity for Acorn.
ACORN on the other hand claims to be non-partisan on their “about” page.
Uh-huh.
So, perhaps you could tell me about the Republican dishonesty here.
Republicans - Hate ACORN, mean to destroy it. That’s what I get. Seems honest.
That would be wrong. They fired the people who did not do the registrations properly. When a manager was involved ,he got fired. When he was not they retrained the manager. They took every case seriously and dealt with it in a professional manner.
You misunderstand me. It’s not just limited to “prosecuting” voter fraud. It’s also investigating and preventing it. Those things can go on in non-election years, no?
(Obviously, who we should be investigating and how to do the preventing is up for debate. But voter fraud should be a non-election year concern, wouldn’t you say?)
Further shame on ACORN for their ineptitude at the art of lip service.
Indeed. I misunderstood the thrust of your point.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/22/whoops-anti-acorn-bill-ro_n_294949.html The rushed through ACORN legislation may be unconstitutional. It would be a “bill of attainer” .You can not have legislation that is for one company only. The bill was written broadly to make sure ACORN could not escape. IF it does apply to other government contractors then the thieves in military contracts can be dumped along with Halliburton and Blackwater. So it may wind up being a positive development comes out of republican thuggery. But they will backtrack fast if their friends get hurt too.
That makes zero sense - if it is written broadly and snares other companies it isn’t a bill of attainder.