September 14, 2009

Wherefore ACORN?

Monique Chartier

A third ACORN office has been videotaped giving tax evasion and federal mortgage application tips to a couple who purported to be establishing a brothel for underage girls smuggled into the country.

This follows upon the exposure in 2008 of multi-state, multi-year voter registration fraud.

The Brooklyn District Attorney has opened an investigation into the organization.

The Census Bureau has had second thoughts about ACORN's involvement in the 2010 census.

All of this undue attention to the organization has served to highlight a fact that I, at least, was previously unaware of: ACORN has been the recipient of federal tax dollars and could receive a ton more from stimulus funds.

The question is, why?

Let's stipulate in its entirety the case for the defense: all of the above unethical and illegal activities were isolated incidents carried out by rogue affilates and do not in any way reflect the vast majority of ACORN staffers and activities.

As I was writing this post, TomW forwarded me the breaking news that the Senate had just voted 83-7 (with the junior senator from Rhode Island amoung the seven voting "nay") to withhold federal funds from ACORN. But this was done on the basis of bad behavior. ACORN may well "rehabilitate" itself as an organization and once again be deemed fit to receive federal funds.

Under what philosphy of good government should it do so? Is there any private organization to which federal tax dollars should be handed out? If yes, shouldn't the criteria for doing so be quite extensive and exacting, far more than the perfectly nice and perfectly vague goal of "social and economic justice"?

Comments, although monitored, are not necessarily representative of the views Anchor Rising's contributors or approved by them. We reserve the right to delete or modify comments for any reason.

This just in:
The US Senate voted to stop all funding of ACORN 83 to 7. Among the seven who want to continue finding this evil organization is Sheldon Whitehouse.
Bob W.

Posted by: Bob Washburn at September 15, 2009 9:04 AM

Is this story only on Fox News? Why can't the other three networks also publicize this? had the first story, but no follow up. Ugh.

Posted by: Patrick at September 15, 2009 9:19 AM

Sheldon Whitehouse is a disease organism.I can't believe we're stuck with this limousine commie cretin for years to come.The people of RI were complete idiots to elect this turd.

Posted by: joe bernstein at September 15, 2009 9:46 AM

Has Sen. Whitehouse offered any explanation for his vote?

Posted by: brassband at September 15, 2009 12:53 PM

It has been observed elsewhere that the probability of three offices providing the same consistent criminal advice without it being de facto policy at the organization level is vanishingly small. You cannot rehabilitate such an organization. You can try to have employees cross the street and start a new office under a new name, but under any name, a cow flop still stinks.

The descendants of slave women who were sexually abused now providing advice on how to get government money for housing to set up a brothel for illegal alien child sex slaves. And suggesting how to cheat the IRS on the back end. Wow. Just wow. Sasha Baron Cohen couldn't have dreamt this up.

Seekrit message to Joe B. - Hey, don't hold back. Tell us what you really think of Mr. Whitebread.

Posted by: chuckR at September 15, 2009 1:36 PM

ChuckR-I won't hold back on Sheldon,believe me.His picture is next to "effete fop"in the OED.

Posted by: joe bernstein at September 15, 2009 6:01 PM

Sent an email to Sen. Whitehouse yesterday asking why he did not vote for HUD funding cut off. No answer yet.

Posted by: Robert at September 16, 2009 11:30 AM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?

Important note: The text "http:" cannot appear anywhere in your comment.