In Defense of ACORN - Are You Kidding Me?

Salon.com's, Joe Conason opines that:

"Both the Senate and the House have voted over the past few days to curtail any federal funding of ACORN's activities. While that congressional action probably won't destroy the group, whose funding does not mainly depend on government largesse, the ban inflicts severe damage on its reputation."

You got to be kidding us, Joe. Inflicts severe damage on its reputation? How many ACORN offices are under investigation for voter registration fraud? And now we have these reprobates suborning tax fraud and child prostitution on the taxpayer's nickle and you talk about damaging their reputation. ACORN may not primarily depend on the government dole, but, seeing how they already received $56,000,000 and was slated for $8,500,000,000 in the "stimulus" package, they sure do get a large chunk of it.

Yeah, Joe, glad to see my tax dollars at work.

But, Joe doesn't stop there. He further bemones:

"Like so many conservative attacks, the crusade against ACORN has been highly exaggerated and even falsified to create a demonic image that bears little resemblance to the real organization. Working in the nation's poorest places, and hiring the people who live there, ACORN is not immune to the pathologies that can afflict institutions in those communities. As a large nonprofit handling many millions of dollars, it has suffered from mismanagement at the top as well -- although there is nothing unique in that, either."

Highly exaggerated and falsified? Have you seen the videos, Joe? Granted that there are only five of them, but the content speaks volumes of just how this outfit "helps" poor people; unless you consider suborning tax fraud and child prostitution as helping the poor. You say that ACORN is not immune to the pathologies that can afflict institutions. That may be true, however, you are failing to see the main issue. This organization is a 501(c), but, when any organization receives money from the taxpayer they must be scrutinized to keep them honest. I don't know what planet you're on, but maybe you have conveniently forgotten that ACORN has a history of questionable ethics.

Many are saying that ACORN should be dismantled. However, since you say that they don't primarily receive funding from the government, then they shouldn't have anything to worry about; after all George Soros has deep pockets and I'm sure Wade Rathke and his brother can help. Of course, you know that if the President signs the current bill into law, ACORN is doomed without the government's largesse.

Continuing on with Joe's defense:

"Among the most popular canards on the right, repeated constantly by conservative pundits and politicians, is that ACORN has been found guilty of engaging in deliberate voter fraud, using federal funds. In reality, ACORN has registered close to 2 million low-income citizens across the country over the past five years -- a laudable record with a very low incidence of fraud of any kind."

No, Joe we are saying that they are being investigated for deliberate voter registration fraud, using taxpayer money. When we see Mickey Mouse as being registered to vote, yeah, that causes sane people to raise an eyebrow. When are you going to get that right?

He goes on:

"If only the Republicans who have worked up a frenzy over ACORN's alleged crimes were so indignant about real and damaging voter fraud -- such as the amazing case of Young Political Majors, the firm that ran GOP registration efforts in California, Massachusetts, Florida, Arizona and elsewhere before the authorities in Orange County, Calif., busted its president, Mark Anthony Jacoby, and sent him to jail last year. He had built a lucrative partisan career by teaching his minions to deceive thousands of voters into registering as Republicans rather than Democrats, among other scams. Of course, the only on-air mention of the Young Political Majors scandal on Fox News was made by blogger Brad Friedman -- and the national media, mainstream and conservative, generally ignored it. They were too busy generating "controversy" over ACORN."

But, here's the major difference, Joe. Mark Jacoby was acting on his own WITHOUT government funding and he wasn't spreading like a cancer inside of the White House. ACORN, on the other hand, receives taxpayer money and is in bed with politicians. Of course, I am not going to defend the lack of reporting on his sleaziness and his arrest.

Joe goes on to say that Bertha Lewis will be "conducting" an internal audit of ACORN. Is that something like White House politicians investigating themselves? Yeah, we know how that goes. However, for Bertha Lewis to assert that the videos were doctored and then threaten to "go after" the people that made them, as well as FoxNews for airing them is a bit strange. Here we have two young people doing what the fringe media won't do and she has an issue with being secretly video taped?

Mr. Conason, you're pathetic.