Yes, We Can — without ACORN!
Senator Barack Obama told the media yesterday that his campaign for President is proving itself to be the best machine in politics and “we don’t need ACORN’s help.”
ACORN’s sloppy voter registration activities have led to fraud investigations in several states, including Missouri. Senator John McCain says that he believes ACORN’s activities could unfairly cost him key battlegrounds states like Florida.
PubDef.net reported two years ago on the problems inside ACORN, most of which stem from the organization recruiting desperate people, giving them very little training or oversight, and paying their workers very little — or not at all.
In 2006, Fox News picked up on our ACORN reports.
http://pubdef.net/flash_video/pubdef-on-fox-news.flvUnfortunately, both of these reports featured Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill, who despite the trouble we occasionally cause her, we really do like.
Loading ...
25 Comments
CWEGuy
Wednesday, 15th October 2008 at 12:33 PM
Of course, we will never really know, will we? All those fraudulent registrations…do you really believe all the fakes will be found?
Antonio D. French
Wednesday, 15th October 2008 at 12:42 PM
CWEGuy, speaking as someone who’s investigated ACORN before, this isn’t a case of people filing false registrations in hopes of coming back on Election Day and voting 13 times.
This is a case of a sloppy organization paying workers by the number of registrations they turn in. That leads to lazy workers often heading to the nearest phone book and just filling them out themselves. ACORN doesn’t do a good enough job checking those registrations before they turn them in — although on several occasions, it was ACORN themselves who flagged registration cards and reported its own workers to election authorities.
The system does work. These fraudulent cards are usually caught. And even if all of them aren’t, there are still checks and balances on Election Day to prevent people from voting multiple times.
fox news thanks you
Wednesday, 15th October 2008 at 3:05 PM
Who needs Bill O’Reilly to spread the Republican misinformation and lies, when we have our own Democratic Committeeman French?
Antonio, if you did any research into the issue you would see that this is a smoke screen by the Republicans, so that they can use legal challenges to disenfranchise thousands of Democratic voters, primarily people of color. Not to mention the fact that ACORN is a majority African-American group, and allows the Republican to tacitly play the race card.
Sounds like someone’s still sore from ACORN’s contribution to Rep. Wright-Jones’ victory. You know, that campaign folks said didn’t have a chance, and then out hustled you.
For a reality check, go to http://www.acorn.org.
Antonio D. French
Wednesday, 15th October 2008 at 4:20 PM
Fox News guy, ignoring the fact that ACORN is, at best, sloppy doesn’t score any points for the Blue Team. In fact, it just drags the story on. There is no doubt that ACORN is sloppy. True, Republicans are making a mountain out of a mole hill, but when folks like you argue that ACORN’s shit doesn’t stink — well, that just gives Fox News (and now, CNN, ABC, and even NPR) reason to write yet another story on the controversy.
Call it sloppy and move on.
fox news thanks you
Wednesday, 15th October 2008 at 4:34 PM
Well what about the part, in this same interview, where Obama talks about having run a Voter Registration drive himself, and he acknowledges that duplicates and fakes happen? You can cherry-pick a quote if you want, but Obama himself says that there is nothing unusual about the issues that ACORN faces.
If anything, bloggers continuing to parrot GOP talking points does more to keep this thing going, more than someone defending ACORN. I find your arguement here pretty ridiculous. Defending ACORN in a blog comment keeps the controvsery in the news, but the post that the comment was left on is entirely blameless? How does that make any sense?
Of course only dumb folks, like me ,would defend ACORN… well, Julian Bond, Pres. of the NAACP, today held a press conference defending ACORN and stating that the attacks are simply a way to distract from the elections, and that ACORN’s voter registration efforts are an important part of insuring that African-Americans are afforded the right to vote. So is the NAACP also dumb?
CWEGuy
Wednesday, 15th October 2008 at 4:53 PM
Antonio: ACORN’s sloppiness will allow the Rs to argue for the next 4 (8?) years that this election was tainted.
Fox News Guy: There is no right to vote.
fox news thanks you
Wednesday, 15th October 2008 at 5:05 PM
Dear CWEGuy,
1. The R’s will continue to try and suppress minority voting, ACORN or not. A scapegoat can always be found, when the need arises.
2. No right to vote? I’m pretty sure that the requirements, making one eligible to vote, are enumerated in the constitution and subsequent relevant amendments. Just because one does not exercise their right, does not mean that it doesn’t exist. That right can be curtailed, in the case of felons or permanently for people that have been found guilty of voting-related felonies, but the right is there, none the less.
Clark
Wednesday, 15th October 2008 at 5:22 PM
ACORN has tightened up its quality control considerably since 2004 and 2006, Antonio.
Independent Voter
Wednesday, 15th October 2008 at 5:36 PM
If Barack can win on his own, why the hell did he try to cover up the FACT that he gave ACORN $800 thousand for its get out the vote efforts? Come get this land I got to sell U guys!
flyover
Wednesday, 15th October 2008 at 6:03 PM
This year, all the ghosts will stick around after Halloween to vote four days later.
Douglas Duckworth
Wednesday, 15th October 2008 at 7:22 PM
Vote early and often. This isn’t news.
Clark
Wednesday, 15th October 2008 at 7:33 PM
Who is voting often
Turd Ferguson
Wednesday, 15th October 2008 at 8:58 PM
Wow, they were crucified fast. I heard they were being framed. But then, what do I know?
CWEGuy
Thursday, 16th October 2008 at 6:57 AM
Nope, no “Right” to vote.
Read the complete text of the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of George W. Bush, et al., Petitioners v. Albert Gore, Jr., et al. Take a look at Section II, Paragraph B. The very first sentence there reads: “The individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States unless and until the state legislature chooses a statewide election as the means to implement its power to appoint members of the Electoral College. U.S. Const., Art.II, §1.”
I believe we dilute the rights that are actually in the constitution when we allow ignorant people to say there is a right to health care, a good paying job, or some other silliness.
fox news thanks you
Thursday, 16th October 2008 at 11:41 AM
Ummm….. CWEGuy, did you even read your last comment? So, the arguement is that you don’t have the right to vote for president… unless there is an election for president. Also, since you wanna get all legal on this, what about other offices/referenda. Am I to assume that even though this individual finding, which the Supreme Court says does not set precident for any subsequent cases, also means that I don’t have the right to vote for anything else?
The right to vote is clearly enumerated in the constitution, amendments, and laws that govern this nation.
notalacyfan
Thursday, 16th October 2008 at 5:36 PM
Like McDaddy said, as an entrepreneur, who worked twelve plus hours a day, seven days a week for five plus years straight, living below my means and using a pallet to sleep on the office floor, I don’t need anyone spreading the fruits of my hard labor to others who CHOOSE not to work but depend on government handouts that keep them below the poverty level while making corrupt politicians such as Obama rich! HELL to the NO, I will not sit quiet and let anyone pick my pocket and distribute my PAPER how they see fit especially not this FRAUD Obama!
CWEGuy
Thursday, 16th October 2008 at 10:17 PM
Fox News–Please point me in the direction of the part of the US Constitution that says I have a right to vote. I just read it again and I didn’t see it. I’m a little slow so please be specific.
fox news thanks you
Friday, 17th October 2008 at 11:16 AM
Here are some links from the cornell law review, wher ethe phrase right to vote is explicitly used in decisions.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode42/usc_sec_42_00001973—a000-.html
http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/Elections
Or how about this little line, from the fifteenth amendment:
Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
Umm…
I think that is pretty clear.
Sorry CWEGuy, you lose. America wins!
CWEGuy
Friday, 17th October 2008 at 1:18 PM
There is no “right to vote” explicitly stated in the U.S. Constitution, but only that they cannot be denied based solely on the aforementioned qualifications, however, the “right to vote” may be denied for any other reason (i.e. being convicted of a felony).
Would you accept Congressman Jesse Jackson’s word for it? Read the second sentence of his article in The Nation. http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060206/jackson He has proposed a Voting Rights Amendment to the Constitution. Why would he do that if we already had the right?
If that passes, THEN we would have the RIGHT to vote.
ps. Fox News, I think Congressman Jackson is talking about you in the 3rd paragraph…
fox news thanks you
Friday, 17th October 2008 at 3:45 PM
It seems that you don’t really get the point that Rep. Jackson is making.
The right to vote is explicitly mentioned in the fifteenth amendment. The amendment Rep. Jackson speaks of would basically make the National Voters’ Rights Act part of the constitution, and not a statute, which must be renewed every few years. Also, he is hoping to set a national standard on reasons that a state can abridge this right. He mentions the fact that diffferent states have different rules on ex-felons, this would be an example of the standardization that the proposed amendment would set out.
Sorry, try again.
CWEGuy
Friday, 17th October 2008 at 4:40 PM
This is probably the only time Mr. Jackson and I will ever be in 100% agreement.
The ability to vote is something given to you by statute. Therefore, it is not one of our rights defined by the constitution.
Calling everything a right devalues the very few things that are actually rights. Please don’t confuse them.
Done.
fox news thanks you
Friday, 17th October 2008 at 6:11 PM
umm… well the fifteenth amendment to the constitution of the United States of America seems to think there is one, but hey, it’s just a piece of paper, right?
Quit Playan'
Sunday, 19th October 2008 at 5:06 AM
McCain Keynote Speaker @ ACORN Feb, 2006
February, 2006 ACORN in Miami Senator McCain Keynote Speaker Here’s a news clip of McCain as speaker to an audience of Red ACORN member shirt attendees!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qytuaimbk6U
john w.
Sunday, 19th October 2008 at 9:39 PM
John McCain and Stupid Palin can go to hell.
john w.
Sunday, 19th October 2008 at 9:41 PM
John McCain can shove acorns up his ass.
Leave a Comment