No Responses to “Stimulus Dollars Headed To ACORN?”

1. RacerX

   ACORN deserves federal funding because it helps people get registered to vote. PERIOD

   3:05 PM on 1/27/09
2. Peeved Guy

   Heck, ACORN should get a bunch of money then because it helps some people get registered two and three times.

   Seriously, though, lets think about this. Lets have the government give bags of money to an organization that “helps” people register to vote, no doubt in the process “suggesting” for which party that person should then cast that vote. No chance of the government using the threat of the public well going dry to have ACORN push for one specific candidate or issue on the ballot on their behalf, now is there? Nah, I thought not.

   Also, if this is a lump of the bailout cash to go to non-profits, will organizations like The Heritage Foundation going to getting some? Maybe Focus on the Family Action?

   3:34 PM on 1/27/09
3. shfelby

   The Democrats are just following through with a bribe… with our money.

   4:11 PM on 1/27/09
4. Wayne

   ACORN is not a political group or a think tank like The Heritage Foundation or Focus on the Family. It is a voter registration organization aimed at low income minorities. They do not steer voters towards one party or the other. The Republican party has the option of reaching out to those voters instead of ignoring them.

   http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/10/10

   4:32 PM on 1/27/09
5. Peeved Guy

   So it doesn’t bother you that the government wants to give money to an organization that has some sort of influence on the political process? Especially one that has an obvious political bias? You don’t think that there even the tiniest possibility of some sort of voter fraud that might happen?

   4:56 PM on 1/27/09
6. shfelby

   Peeved Guy, you are trying to reason with person who linked to an article that reads like a mission statement and quotes The Nation.
   Seems point less, but keep trying.

   6:29 PM on 1/27/09
7. Peeved Guy

   Yeah, to be honest, I didn’t look at the link until after I had posted and realized the same thing. And to think that I didn’t link to some articles I felt relevant because I deemed them to be too right of center, therefore not a good unbiased source.

   I’ll give Wayne props though, most people that post here don’t bother to backup their assertions with any type of supporting documentation.

   6:41 PM on 1/27/09
8. Wayne

   Thanks for the props. Don’t shoot the messenger Shfelby, just find info to back up your assertions.

   I don’t believe that ACORN has influence other than registering voters. If you have info please post it. And I don’t see any obvious political bias. What do you mean by obvious?

   The ACORN story is untrue anyhow, just more of Rush stirring the pot.

   From media matters:

   Limbaugh’s claim that pursuant to the economic recovery plan, $4.19 billion “is going to ACORN” is false. The false claim is based on a misrepresentation of a provision that would appropriate $4,190,000,000 “for neighborhood stabilization activities related to emergency assistance for the redevelopment of abandoned and foreclosed homes as authorized under division B, title III of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008.” The provision requires that money to be distributed through competitive processes.

   10:49 AM on 1/28/09
9. Peeved Guy

   I should have updated my post once I decided to nix my link to rephrase the word ‘obvious’. On further consideration, thought, it would makes sense to post the link to the story.

   http://bit.ly/GKHv

   reading that, it seems obvious to me that they are not neutral by any measure. Keep in mind that the ACLU is supposed to be unbiased as well…

   I’m still troubled that they (or ANY organization like them, whether left or right of center) would be receiving money from the government at any level. I’d be just as concerned if they were now eligible to get money from a city or county.

   11:23 AM on 1/28/09
10. Wayne

    Thanks for the link Peeved Guy. This article however is not fact– it is editorial, an opinion piece. The one link on the page leads to more editorial. Just because the author says ACORN is part of “the new left”, whatever that means, does not make it a fact. And when he says Acorn “promotes a 1960s-bred agenda of anti-capitalism, central planning, victimology, and government handouts to the poor. As a result, not only does it harm the poor it claims to serve; it is also a serious threat to the urban future,” he provides NO examples.

    Opinions are one thing. Facts are another.

    And for the record, I should have stated earlier that I agree with you wholeheartedly about using public funds to promote a political party, especially done in a dishonest way. I don’t want to see that happen. If it becomes FACTUALLY clear that Dems (or Repubs) are doing so, I am completely behind you in protesting it.

    3:37 PM on 1/28/09
11. Peeved Guy

    I don’t mean to sound trite or argumentative, but just because the article you link to states “Fact:” does not make them actual “facts”, they didn’t really strike me as hardcore empirical data that was being cited, just a trick of the articles author to reinforce the readers belief in what he was saying.

    Such is the problem that we (I?) have when trying to figure out what the hell is going on, there just are simply NO unbiased sources of information. Seems like everyone have a dog in the fight.

    3:49 PM on 1/28/09