Quipster

Obama And ACORN Taketh From Your Pocket

October 26, 2008 · Leave a Comment

“‘From Tiny ACORN.  Mighty Obama Grew.’  ACORN Election Fraud.  ACORN, the controversial voter registration and housing advocacy group is partially government-funded and “non-partisan.”  This “non-partisan” group has endorsed Obama for election.  Obama’s campaign paid ACORN $800,000 for working on his primary campaign.  19 ACORN workers in 5 states have been convicted of election fraud.  There are ongoing investigations in at least 7 states.   ACORN’s founder was recently ousted after the discovery that his brother had embezzled $1 million from ACORN.”
Image courtesy of Jerry Breen at www.newbreen.com via http://jasperjottings-daily.com/2008/10/22/cartoon-obama-and-acorn-by-breen-jerry-mc1971/.

Senator Barack Obama, a.k.a, Senator ACORN, and his history of entitlements (amongst other shady associations and dealings), and vast ambition for the presidency, should be kept in mind come voting time.  And so too those of his House and Senate contemporaries, particularly those who support and benefit from ACORN. The checks and balances that result from having Democrats and Republicans opposing one another throughout can actually rein in control.

Let’s go back and look at ACORN’s history and federal money, and how YOUR tax dollars are being used by ACORN.

Given that federal funding is used “flexibly” within the ACORN empire, what kind of return is the government getting on its investment? Historically, failed 1960s-style leftism, intimidation and rabble-rousing, and questionable business practices — and hypocrisy. The EPI study documents ACORN’s involvement in an $850,000 labor-union embezzlement scheme in the late 1990s; in 2003, ACORN was found to have violated the National Labor Relations Act and was ordered to “rehire and pay restitution to employees terminated for attempting to form a union.”(ACORN’s in-house union-busting starkly contradicts its prescriptions for private-sector unionization, and is especially two-faced considering that ACORN’s chief organizer and co-founder — Wade Rathke — is also the chief organizer of Local 100 of the Service Employees International Union in New Orleans.)

ACORN’s hypocrisy also extends to its stand on the minimum wage. While it has often attempted to force minimum-wage increases on private businesses through ballot initiatives and local ordinances, ACORN tried to exempt itself from California’s minimum-wage requirements. According to EPI, “ACORN argued that being forced to pay higher wages would mean that they would hire fewer employees — the very dilemma faced by businesses. Incredibly, ACORN stated that paying its employees a lower wage would allow them to be more sympathetic to the low- and moderate-income families they were attempting to help. ACORN argued that abiding by the state minimum wage would limit their ability to promote their agenda and would therefore be a violation of their First Amendment rights.”

Inside Obama’s ACORN reveals the following.

According to the New York Times, Obama’s memberships on those [Woods and Joyce] foundation boards, “allowed him to help direct tens of millions of dollars in grants” to various liberal organizations, including Chicago Acorn, “whose endorsement Obama sought and won in his State Senate race.” As best as I can tell (and this needs to be checked out more fully), Acorn maintains both political and “non-partisan” arms. Obama not only sought and received the endorsement of Acorn’s political arm in his local campaigns, he recently accepted Acorn’s endorsement for the presidency, in pursuit of which he reminded Acorn officials of his long-standing ties to the group.

Supposedly, Acorn’s political arm is segregated from its “non-partisan” registration and get-out-the-vote efforts, but after reading Foulkes’ case study, this non-partisanship is exceedingly difficult to discern.

This video summarizes well.

“Obama’s ties to ACORN run long and deep.”
Image courtesy of http://bsimmons.wordpress.com/2008/10/10/new-video-acorn/.

Now what about ACORN and other politicians.  Well, ACORN did figure largely in the initial financial crisis bailout.  Congressional leaders like Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and the the majority of Democrats had a lot of difficulty getting the initial package to pass.  Partly because Democratic junior congressmen and congresswomen were up on an election year, and they would risk their political careers if they voted for the package.   The package with large entitlements for organizations such as ACORN.  Republicans were in opposition.  They had no intentions of passing a bailout bill that would shoulder taxpayers with an exorbitant cost, with tremendous amount of entitlements to boot.  Result:  half hearted efforts by Democrats to pass the bill, mainly because of election year jitters over the vast entitlement handouts such as ACORN’s.  Michelle Malkin.

…$100 million more in funding for the left-wing housing entitlement thugs and heavily tax-subsidized fraudsters at ACORN. Under the original bailout proposal, apparently, a large portion of any repayment of the $700 billion would go to Barack Obama’s good friends at ACORN with a smaller allocation to debt repayment. Readers heard him say it was 20 percent.

Keep this all in mind at the voting booth.  Is it such a good thing to have the House, Senate, and President all of the same party affiliation, when their primary motivations are not the people they represent, but rather their own political careers and egos?  And the entitlement kitty that we all pay for but not all of us benefit from?  On your tax dollars?  Remember Senator “ACORN” Obama and his Democratic cronies who they support on your dime.  Send them all a message that you do not support ACORN entitlements. 


“Simon Cowell.  Thumbs Down.”
Image courtesy of http://forums.usanetwork.com/index.php?showtopic=406097&view=findpost&p=956770.

See:

Categories: Uncategorized
Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment