$548,000 worth of unpaid payroll taxes.
Tax problems continue to build for the New Orleans-based national activist group ACORN, with the IRS filing a $548,000 lien this month for two years worth of unpaid payroll taxes, according to records in the Orleans Parish Clerk of Court’s office.The latest federal tax filing lists seven different payments that were missed for unemployment taxes from July 2007 through March of this year. That adds to an existing IRS bill of more than $1 million, which The Pelican Institute detailed in an August report.
The latest federal filing, recorded Sept. 3, comes as Louisiana Attorney General Buddy Caldwell investigates delinquent state payroll taxes from the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now and its myriad related groups. Caldwell is also investigating other allegations against the group.
Will ACORN Chief Crook Organizer Bertha Lewis use the Turbo Tax defense?
(h/t SBP)
Comment by Joe on 9/19 @ 1:58 pm #
Get ye under the olde Obama Bus!
racism.
Comment by Joe on 9/19 @ 2:03 pm #
What I want to see is ACORN lose its tax exempt status and essentially be put out of business.
Comment by pdbuttons on 9/19 @ 2:04 pm #
acorns become trees
like some taxes become fees
water them with tears
Comment by CDR M on 9/19 @ 2:05 pm #
I wonder how many other ACORN offices have similar tax issues? Time to start investigatin’
Comment by Matt on 9/19 @ 2:07 pm #
Its tough out there for a pimp.
Comment by Matt on 9/19 @ 2:07 pm #
pd, i’d water acorn but it wouldn’t be with my tears…
Comment by Bob Reed on 9/19 @ 2:07 pm #
I guess they should have buried those records, “in a tin out in the backyard, and don’t tell anyone but yo’self where it is…”
This may have a negative impact on their reputatuin for giving out sounds tax ecasion advice!
Comment by badanov on 9/19 @ 2:09 pm #
Could someone explain the photo of the bunny with regard to this story?
Comment by happyfeet on 9/19 @ 2:10 pm #
ACORN is a corrupt and criminal organization and now one of their own is our president. The more we learn of what truly sick, anti-American, anti-capitalist thugs these ACORN-SEIU ones are, the more conceivable it becomes that our little country is really and truly fucked.
Comment by Ron on 9/19 @ 2:18 pm #
Does anybody really give a fuk? With all the fruad and waste in gov’t , bailed out CEOs are pocketing millions and a group dedicated to helping the poor gets bashed. Obama has proposed capping compensation for executives at banks that take taxpayer bailout money at $500,000. Republicans oppose the idea. Thats right… “leave no CEO behind.” WTF is wrong with this picture?
Comment by pdbuttons on 9/19 @ 2:22 pm #
Matt/ have u ever read that book-yellow river nutrients and the effect on acorns? by I.P.Daleynbarnyfrankmouth/?
titillating!
Comment by Darleen on 9/19 @ 2:26 pm #
badanov
every ACORN post I have put up draws trolls desperate to distract from the issue. You know, Look over there! Bunnies!. I thought I’d save ‘em the trouble.
Comment by pdbuttons on 9/19 @ 2:29 pm #
bunny pees freely
turtle has a catheter
turtle always wins
Comment by Matt on 9/19 @ 2:31 pm #
I am familiar with that work PD- a classic. Your taste, as usual, is impeccable.
I would be happy to similarly water the trolls. Fla-Tenn is on so its been a 4 beer afternoon already…
Comment by Bubba Thudd on 9/19 @ 2:41 pm #
It seems to me that ACORN has made many enemies over the years with its bullying tactics. Their enemies could do nothing because ACORN was so well connected and protected at the highest levels. That protection is being stripped away, and now that blood is in the water watch as the feeding frenzy begins. Payback’s a bitch Baghdad Bertha!
Comment by pdbuttons on 9/19 @ 2:42 pm #
so many good crucial early on games…
just wish abcnbccbs marketin dept was half as bright…
as wolf blitzer!
Comment by Mikey NTH on 9/19 @ 2:43 pm #
Fuzzy Bunny….
And now, on the topic of bunnies, we have:
Comment by Ron on 9/19 @ 2:18 pm #
Does anybody really give a fuk? With all the fruad and waste in gov’t , bailed out CEOs are pocketing millions and a group dedicated to helping the poor gets bashed. Obama has proposed capping compensation for executives at banks that take taxpayer bailout money at $500,000. Republicans oppose the idea. Thats right… “leave no CEO behind.” WTF is wrong with this picture?
“Group dedicated to help the poor”. According to Ron ‘help the poor’ means ‘help poor pimps import child-sex-slaves’.
How much did you get for your soul, Ron? I hope you held out for top-dollar.
Comment by pdbuttons on 9/19 @ 2:47 pm #
i like to help the pour
Comment by JD on 9/19 @ 2:47 pm #
Was that Ron/Ron Burgundy/Gordo ?
Comment by Darleen on 9/19 @ 2:51 pm #
Mikey NTH
Ron really has that non-sequitor thing going, eh? Looks like many of the banks that took government loans have been paying them back and Obama wants to have the government regulate wages and salaries right down to individual loan officers REGARDLESS of whether or not the business takes taxpayer money. The exact same thing as an lobbying group using taxpayer money to engage in voter fraud, housing fraud and willing to engage in hiding prostitution, even of minors.
Comment by pdbuttons on 9/19 @ 2:52 pm #
da doo run ron
Comment by Darleen on 9/19 @ 2:53 pm #
JD
this Ron posting with a unique IP (never posted here before) out of Nashville, TN.
Comment by JD on 9/19 @ 2:54 pm #
So, this Ron managed to be promoted to certifiable ignoranus in one comment. Brava. Why do you hate hate hate capitalism, Ron?
Comment by JD on 9/19 @ 3:05 pm #
Did Teblow turn his ankle yet?
Comment by JD on 9/19 @ 3:09 pm #
ACORN is a one-day one-note story.
Comment by JD on 9/19 @ 3:11 pm #
Albert Pujols minus one !!!
Comment by happyfeet on 9/19 @ 3:13 pm #
Indra Nooyi is a skanky anti-American dirty socialist whore I think.
Comment by sdferr on 9/19 @ 3:19 pm #
Ankle, no JD but he has thrown an interception. Vols off. and def. lines are stoutly making a game of it. Hats off to ‘em.
Comment by Spiny Norman on 9/19 @ 3:22 pm #
#8 badanov
#12 Darleen
Wasn’t it ever-so-kind of Ron to show up and prove Darleen’s point?
Heh.
Comment by pdbuttons on 9/19 @ 3:22 pm #
hpp[y)ftt hts vwls
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 3:36 pm #
Hi, Darleen-
Can you explain what constitutes a “criminal enterprise?” For instance, does an organization become a criminal one by way of several employees or volunteers committing crimes on the organization’s behalf? Thanks.
Comment by Darleen on 9/19 @ 3:40 pm #
Hi BB
Can you explain how ACORN doesn’t constitute a criminal enterprise? For instance, an organization that ostensibly works as an advocacy group for “the poor” but engages in wide spread illegal activities while depending on protection from well-connected politicians on its behalf? Thanks.
Comment by SBP on 9/19 @ 3:41 pm #
Barrett: spin away, but be forewarned that we’re just going to laugh at you.
Comment by Matt on 9/19 @ 3:41 pm #
*Vols off. and def. lines are stoutly making a game of it*
True but the 2nd quarter is always better for the Gators. I don’t know if teams just tire out from working so hard in the first but that’s usually when the Gators pull away. Teebow does stuff with the football that shouldn’t be possible. And he’s 2nd to Herschel Walker in SEC rushing touchdowns. Amazing.
Comment by SBP on 9/19 @ 3:43 pm #
Salient points from the above:
Under RICO, a person who is a member of an enterprise that has committed any two of 35 crimes—27 federal crimes and 8 state crimes—within a 10-year period can be charged with racketeering. Those found guilty of racketeering can be fined up to $250,000 and/or sentenced to 20 years in prison per racketeering count.
Under the law, racketeering activity means:
* Any violation of state statutes against gambling, murder, kidnapping, extortion, arson, robbery, bribery, dealing in obscene matter, or dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in the Controlled Substances Act);
* Any act of bribery, counterfeiting, theft, embezzlement, fraud, dealing in obscene matter, obstruction of justice, slavery, racketeering, gambling, money laundering, commission of murder-for-hire, and several other offenses covered under the Federal criminal code (Title 18);
* Embezzlement of union funds;
* Bankruptcy or securities fraud;
* Drug trafficking;
* Money laundering and related offenses;
* Bringing in, aiding or assisting aliens in illegally entering the country (if the action was for financial gain);
* Acts of terrorism.
Comment by JD on 9/19 @ 3:43 pm #
Barrett – ACORN has had people charged, convicted and/or plead out for criminal activities all over the country. Couple that with the ongoing 20+ investigations, the new tax charges, and their willingness to aid in the child sex slave trade, calling them a criminal enterprise is a kinder gentler way to refer to them.
Comment by SBP on 9/19 @ 3:44 pm #
So, this Ron managed to
be promoted to certifiable ignoranusget TrollHammered in one comment.Fixed it for ya, JD. :-)
Comment by SBP on 9/19 @ 3:52 pm #
San Diego County Supervisors to audit ACORN.
Comment by happyfeet on 9/19 @ 3:55 pm #
I lrv vwls I thought
Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/19 @ 4:00 pm #
LOOK!
A BUNNY RACISM!Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/19 @ 4:00 pm #
RACISM!!!!
Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/19 @ 4:04 pm #
Comment by Ron on 9/19 @ 2:18 pm #
That, badanov, is a “LOOK! BUNNIES!” post.
Comment by Mikey NTH on 9/19 @ 4:05 pm #
Hi BB – long-time, no comments!
Does the phrase ‘culture of corruption’ ring any memoty bells? As Jon Stewart noted, no ACORN personnel in those videos was surprised in the least by the requests of the ‘pimp’ and ‘prostitute’. That lack of surprise combined with their willingness to help implies that the organization does not disapprove of these actions. The lower level employees do not fear any repercussion from what they are doing, hence the management has let the institutional culture know that what they are doing will not result in punishment. And what is not punished is encouraged. See the sexual harrasment laws for what happens when the management does not actively address employee bad-behavior.
Vicarious liability, under tort, the employee – employer (anciently, the master – servant) relationship doctrine. Th eemployer is liable for the actions of the employee while under the employers direction and doing the employer’s bidding.
Now, BB – why are you defending what is indefensible?
Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/19 @ 4:09 pm #
“Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 3:36 pm #
Hi, Darleen-
Can you explain what constitutes a “criminal enterprise?” For instance, does an organization become a criminal one by way of several employees or volunteers committing crimes on the organization’s behalf? Thanks.”
Yes.
Along with voter fraud, tax evasion and housing scams, of course.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/19 @ 4:13 pm #
BTW, Barret, you’re a moron.
Comment by happyfeet on 9/19 @ 4:13 pm #
the little president man’s hoochie bought vegetables and also fruits and it heralds a new era of community in our little country NPR says.
Yay!! I go first can I please??
Hey Darleen where did you get those peaches??? Also hey Mr. buttons what is fresh?
This is gonna be so great.
Comment by geoffb on 9/19 @ 4:14 pm #
ACORN, some history.
During Katrina. Seems rather mobster style behavior.
Comment by geoffb on 9/19 @ 4:14 pm #
And whistleblower Anita Moncrief.
Comment by SBP on 9/19 @ 4:15 pm #
Barrett would probably argue that the Mafia isn’t a criminal organization, because “The Mafia” doesn’t commit crimes — just individual members of the Mafia.
Comment by Barbula on 9/19 @ 4:15 pm #
There’s always room for cute bunnies.
Limiting Executive compensation is bassackwards.
Let bad organizations fail – that’s how to limit compensation. (see ACORN)
Comment by pdbuttons on 9/19 @ 4:16 pm #
thnkngs 4 bgnnrs
Comment by pdbuttons on 9/19 @ 4:19 pm #
fresh on my peach leash..
a little grease/..more grease..more
it’s gonna be fun!
Comment by Mikey NTH on 9/19 @ 4:19 pm #
Look, Barrett; the least thing that those ACORN offices should have done when given the premises that O’Keefe and Giles gave is say (a) Repent; (b) get out before I throw you out; and (c) you better hope that I don’t call the cops.
Saying ‘let me get our tax person, she can tell you who to hide the imported child sex slaves’ is absof’inglutely the WRONG thing to say.
And the tax-person does not have a problem with the propositions at all.
Local Offices: Rotten.
District Management: Has to be rotten to let this kind of rot seem to be BAU.
Over-Arching National Organization: The fish rots from the head.
Those who have contracted with ACORN for any services: Consulting lawyers and accountants; cutting ties as fast as humanly possible.
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 4:19 pm #
Darleen-
I’m not saying that ACORN is not a criminal enterprise or otherwise defending the organization. Want I’d like is the criteria by which you deem a political organization to be a criminal enterprise. It sounds like an organization which “engages in wide spread illegal activities while depending on protection from well-connected politicians on its behalf” would be that criteria. Is that the case?
Comment by pdbuttons on 9/19 @ 4:21 pm #
dang me/ dang me/
put me on a peach tree
and taxed me
Comment by happyfeet on 9/19 @ 4:25 pm #
The UAW is also criminal how it stoled the dirty socialist douchemobile factories, but not as criminal as ACORN.
Comment by geoffb on 9/19 @ 4:27 pm #
I believe we are seeing an example of the “quantum” approach.
Comment by Mikey NTH on 9/19 @ 4:29 pm #
“We know that when we start coming out to those markets, we’re going to start talking to each other,” Obama said. “We’re going to talk about, ‘Where did you get those peaches?’ and ‘What’s fresh?’ We talk to each other in different ways. So this market is not just about food. It’s about our community.”*
Does anyone else but me get the idea that this guy does not have much experience just talking to regular people?
We talk to each other in different ways? I agree; I talk in North American Average Human. You talk in Academic Elitist on a National Geographic Expedition to explore the wlids of the Upper Food Market.
B.O.: “I take position behind the classic Toledo Scale; before me I spot an indigenous inhabitant of this middle class suburb. He is magnificent; tall and slightly round in the middle. It is a Saturday so he has not shaved his face as he would on other days. Pushing a primitive cart with a balky front wheel, he consults the message his mate has given him. He turns abot, gazing on the racked rows of produce, perplexed; I can see it, I have experience; he does not know what ‘arugula’ is. I shall gain his trust now by answering the question going through his baseball-capped brain.”
Comment by Cowboy on 9/19 @ 4:33 pm #
I haven’t seen you in a while, pdbuttons.
Glad you’re back.
Comment by No one you know on 9/19 @ 4:33 pm #
geoffb @ 57
It seems more like a low budget Socrates. Get a definition and then start to poke holes in it, leading to the common socratic fallacy.
Comment by Mikey NTH on 9/19 @ 4:43 pm #
B.O: “He startles as I approach, hands raised in a blessing. he may be wary of strangers, or as my teaches have insisted, just is a common racist. I greet him.”
Shopper: “Hi.”
B.O.: “He does not react with violence. Now to gain his trust. ‘So has your mate, the woman you wed in your strnage rites, sent you out to bear back arugula? I can assist you in finding that’.”
Shopper: “Huh?”
B.O.: “I repeat what I have said.”
Shopper: “Isn’t it a little early to be drinkin’?”
B.O: “I explain my need to pursue this MacArthur Foubdation grant.”
Shopper: “Oh, one of those guys – explains the camera crew over by salad dressings. No, I am not married, I don’t want ‘arugula’ – what ever the hell it is, and I am looking for cilantro because my Colombian sister-in-law needs it to make that shrimp hors d’oeuvre – I can’t remember the name – but I have the limes, the shrimp, and I just need – ah! There it is! Cilantro. Good look with that grant, pal.”
B.O.: “He moves off to the liquor, beer, and wine aisle to find ’sangria’. I have made contact with the natives of this place. All is well.”
Comment by Mikey NTH on 9/19 @ 4:45 pm #
I have so got to stop commenting while watching the football. The typos! They burn!
Comment by sdferr on 9/19 @ 4:46 pm #
Mikey, you’re not going to win any points with the Pres. when you refer to his wife as a guy. Heh.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/19 @ 4:48 pm #
“Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 4:19 pm #
Darleen-
I’m not saying that ACORN is not a criminal enterprise or otherwise defending the organization.”
Yse you are.
Because you’re a moron.
Comment by happyfeet on 9/19 @ 4:55 pm #
my bad I should have made that more clear
Comment by happyfeet on 9/19 @ 4:56 pm #
Barrett is back which is nice cause he was gone so long.
Comment by Mikey NTH on 9/19 @ 4:57 pm #
sdferr:
I think I was thrown off by the hose-clamp belt.
That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.
Comment by Mikey NTH on 9/19 @ 4:58 pm #
I call that ‘Shoppers In The Produce-Aisle Mist-Spray’.
Comment by Mikey NTH on 9/19 @ 5:02 pm #
I canna’ blame you, haps.
Let us just say that the level of vapid speechifying was such that I assumed (my bad!) that it was the pater Obama, not the mater Obama.
Comment by Rusty on 9/19 @ 5:02 pm #
Yes! Buttons is back with our daily dose of Zen.
I don’t know Barret. Could it be a tax exempt organization that depends on taxpayer money is encouraging people to break the law so they can get more mtaxpayer money? How many drug dealers have they financed?
Comment by JD on 9/19 @ 5:08 pm #
Barrett – your mendacity is readily apparent.
Comment by pdbuttons on 9/19 @ 5:17 pm #
peaches=taylor swift
fresh equals kanye west
hush your mouth…
did anyone else hear-”hush your mouth-boy?”
rascist!
Comment by Evil Pundit on 9/19 @ 5:34 pm #
White bunnies are racist.
Comment by geoffb on 9/19 @ 5:34 pm #
no one I know, ;-)
I was thinking of the first response which was to take it to the personal, just a few bad apples, arena. After Mikey NTH responded then we went into the definition game.
Comment by geoffb on 9/19 @ 5:35 pm #
But hey, I’m JARAIP, so there is that.
Comment by Snowcone on 9/19 @ 5:39 pm #
Never thought I’d see conservatives cheering on the I.R.S.
Comment by geoffb on 9/19 @ 5:42 pm #
Yeah, we so loved that Capone guy also.
Liking a law and obeying it are two different and separate things, frozen vegetable dessert item.
Comment by Danger on 9/19 @ 5:45 pm #
JD,
Valiant effort by your Vols sir!
Comment by Mikey NTH on 9/19 @ 5:49 pm #
geoffb:
I’m flattered. But that is what this expose of ACORN has been all about, trumpeting with proof all of the actions that go beyond mere common-or-garden-variety corruption to real unforgivable evil.
And the trolls here really can’t spin ‘child-sex-slavery – there are some things that no damage control can fix. All they do defending this is prove what soulless spawn they are.
‘Won’t someone think of the children?”
‘We don’t want ACORN thinking about children. For the sake of children, we don’t.’
Comment by sdferr on 9/19 @ 5:49 pm #
Danger, check this. Heh.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/19 @ 5:49 pm #
“Comment by Snowcone on 9/19 @ 5:39 pm #
Never thought I’d see conservatives cheering on the I.R.S.”
Another moron heard from.
Comment by SGT Ted on 9/19 @ 5:57 pm #
Eh, Ron, ACORN was slated to gain BILLIONS in government pork. Try again, crap weasil.
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 6:07 pm #
“Never thought I’d see conservatives cheering on the I.R.S.
we’re still waiting for doj to do their jobs visavis the black panthers
Comment by Danger on 9/19 @ 6:09 pm #
sdferr,
I think Zbigniew Brzezinski and Jimmy Carter both need their meds adjusted.
Comment by geoffb on 9/19 @ 6:09 pm #
#80, sounds like Brzezinski is still the Carter NSA. I love how wiki describes him as the Democrat’s version of Kissinger. Does that make Carter, the Democrat’s Nixon?
Comment by Mikey NTH on 9/19 @ 6:16 pm #
Kissinger should demand a retraction.
But really, who else can Pres. Obama turn to in foreign policy now?
Jimmy Carter has been waiting nearly thirty years for this.
Comment by sdferr on 9/19 @ 6:19 pm #
It does have that “we’ve always been at war with Eastasia” feel about it though, doesn’t it?
Comment by geoffb on 9/19 @ 6:39 pm #
Now there is a conundrum. Which contains the higher nuclear weapons grade of stupid on the mid-east? Carter/Brzezinski or Wolfie?
Comment by SBP on 9/19 @ 6:45 pm #
I’m not saying that ACORN is not a criminal enterprise or otherwise defending the organization.
Of course you aren’t…
Comment by Danger on 9/19 @ 6:47 pm #
Yeah sdferr,
You would think the broken record would wear out.
Here is some more of Zbigniew Brzezinski: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mk18af8z9Y Apparently he just cant help the Israel bashing.
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 6:48 pm #
“dope and strange”
Comment by Danger on 9/19 @ 6:52 pm #
If I were National Security advisor during the Iranian embassy hostage episode I think I would avoid Middle East discussions altogether but that’s just me.
Comment by cynn on 9/19 @ 6:53 pm #
Kill ACORN. Let the more nonaligned groups such as United Way do that job. They’re better organized, and not all into that “Oh, but I’m only a product of the swamp I serve!” bullshit. At least in my experience, the United Way has a lot of money with smart people deploying it well.
Comment by sdferr on 9/19 @ 6:54 pm #
Humph, geoffb. Which one is dumber doesn’t cut it. Blitzer wasn’t on the faculty of Columbia University teaching International Relations when Obama was there taking a degree in political science with international relations as a specialty (though my best beloved at the time was). Blitzer isn’t likely to have the President’s ear, where Zbig, either directly or through his many students indirectly, just might.
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 6:59 pm #
So, does anyone want to define “criminal enterprise,” as opposed to just listing examples of things that a criminal enterprise might do? For instance, does an organization become a criminal enterprise by virtue of several members committing crimes in serve to the organization, or does it become a criminal enterprise by virtue of its leadership trying to cover up these crimes? And is the number of people employed by an organization compared to the number that commit crimes a factor as well? As has been noted here, I’m kind of stupid and have trouble with logic, so an exact definition would be really helpful.
Comment by Snowcone on 9/19 @ 7:02 pm #
If I were National Security advisor during the Iranian embassy hostage episode I think I would avoid Middle East discussions altogether but that’s just me.
But giving a promotion to the guy who was running the N.S.A. on 9/11 and making him the head of the C.I.A. was a masterstroke?
Comment by Mikey NTH on 9/19 @ 7:02 pm #
Barrett – for the love of God and for your own reputation – please do not come here and defend ACORN in this. It is beyond toxic – let the lawyers do the defending. They are paid to deal with this.
Comment by cynn on 9/19 @ 7:02 pm #
Barrett: It’s criminal because it just is. Look at who’s involved!
Comment by Danger on 9/19 @ 7:03 pm #
Are trolls doing there own sockpuppeting now?
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 7:05 pm #
“Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 6:59 pm #
So, does anyone want to define “criminal enterprise,””
stealing taxpayer money for the purpose of enabling a ngo to steer money to a political party.
Comment by Danger on 9/19 @ 7:06 pm #
Snowblower,
Not quite the level of brilliance of making someone with no intelligence experience the CIA director.
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 7:08 pm #
who did this ice-9
“But giving a promotion to the guy who was running the N.S.A. on 9/11 and making him the head of the C.I.A. was a masterstroke?”
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 7:08 pm #
Mikey-
Thanks for your concern for my career, but I’m not defending ACORN, being opposed to many of that organzation’s ideological goals and not having much respect for some of their methods anyway. My questions have a different objective which itself should be pretty obvious.
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 7:10 pm #
“My questions have a different objective which itself should be pretty obvious.”
please spell them out for us “bitter clingers”.
Comment by Mikey NTH on 9/19 @ 7:10 pm #
#93 – Cynn:
I think that is great advice. I also think that advice is coming in a little too late.
Comment by happyfeet on 9/19 @ 7:11 pm #
I don’t think you’re stupid Barrett. You’re real good with apostrophes and sentences and stuff I think.
Comment by Mikey NTH on 9/19 @ 7:13 pm #
Your career Barrett? I know nothing about your career. I was referring to your reputation here and whereever else you post under that handle. Some things are too toxic to defend, and defending ACORN now is a stupid thing to do.
Comment by happyfeet on 9/19 @ 7:13 pm #
Danger can spell Zbigniew Brzezinski.
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 7:15 pm #
you guys are hung up with the child sex slavery. man this be the demorat party dude
Comment by happyfeet on 9/19 @ 7:15 pm #
Barrett is a libertarian not a dirty socialist. He’s just a very grumpy libertarian sometimes cause of… I can’t remember. I think he’s mad at Bush.
Comment by Danger on 9/19 @ 7:16 pm #
Barrett probably wants to roll out the evil Haliburton line of attack.
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 7:17 pm #
“stealing taxpayer money for the purpose of enabling a ngo to steer money to a political party.”
Is that really your definition? If so, does that mean that organizations which don’t steal taxpayer money for the benefit of a political party do not constitute criminal enterprises? For instance, would a group that abducts infants for the purpose of eating them across state lines not constitute a criminal enterprise?
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 7:17 pm #
yo dudes jefferson the founder of the demorat “par ty” liked his black biotches
Comment by happyfeet on 9/19 @ 7:18 pm #
You’re not opposed to eat babies, Barrett. They’re not like squid or cupcakes.
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 7:18 pm #
“Some things are too toxic to defend, and defending ACORN now is a stupid thing to do.”
Again, I’m not defending ACORN, and I’m not a liberal, as Jeff Goldstein and some of the more attentive and honest commenters can tell you.
Comment by SBP on 9/19 @ 7:19 pm #
So, does anyone want to define “criminal enterprise,”</I
See my #33, which you are ignoring.
Hint: the “Corrupt Organizations” part of the name of the statute should provide even you with a clue.
And yes, you are defending ACORN using your patented sophomore-level sophistries.
We’ve seen your schtick before, Barrett. It’s stale.
Sorry.
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 7:20 pm #
“For instance, would a group that abducts infants for the purpose of eating them across state lines not constitute a criminal enterprise?”
dude we be dealing with luscious sal vadorans 13 year olds. across get this country lines. yo dude welcome to the slave “par ty”
Comment by SBP on 9/19 @ 7:20 pm #
I’m not a liberal
Yet by some strange coincidence you always wind up carrying water for the Obama administration.
‘Cause we all know that “libertarians” are all about massive federal government power grabs, right?
Comment by Danger on 9/19 @ 7:20 pm #
Well Barret is Happyfeet correct what is your story?
Is Ron Paul your Hero or is Rosie O’Donnell more your type?
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 7:21 pm #
“Again, I’m not defending ACORN, and I’m not a liberal, as Jeff Goldstein and some of the more attentive and honest commenters can tell you.”
dude be an idiot
Comment by Snowcone on 9/19 @ 7:27 pm #
Not quite the level of brilliance of making someone with no intelligence experience the CIA director.
Speaking of brilliance, looks like Rush Limbaugh has succeeded in turning the Republican party into a regional party:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_09/020010.php
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 7:29 pm #
SBP-
Yes, I see that, but there are also other types of criminal enterprises that do not fall under RICO, so obviously RICO does not exactly coincide with the definition of criminal enterprise since there others which RICO does not cover. And again, I am not saying that ACORN is not a criminal enterprise; I am simply trying to establish what a criminal enterprise consists of. I just need a definition. Can anyone give me one?
Comment by geoffb on 9/19 @ 7:30 pm #
BINGO! as usual.
Comment by Danger on 9/19 @ 7:31 pm #
From Snowblowers article:
A REGIONAL PARTY…. I was looking over the new results from the weekly Research 2000 poll conducted for Daily Kos.
Need I say more.
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 7:32 pm #
“Not quite the level of brilliance of making someone with no intelligence experience the CIA director.”
yea b/c you asshats on the left LOVE the CIA.
“Speaking of brilliance, looks like Rush Limbaugh has succeeded in turning the Republican party into a regional party:”
CONSERVATISM NATIONWIDE dummy
Comment by happyfeet on 9/19 @ 7:32 pm #
Meghan’s daddy actually has a lot more to do with the Republicans’ troubles than Mr. Limbaugh. He was such an amazing loser but worse than that he wiped his daughter’s fat ass with the party platform to where no one’s even sure what the party stands for anymore. He was such an extraordinary disaster it’s hard not to think the geriatric douchebag didn’t do it on purpose.
Comment by happyfeet on 9/19 @ 7:33 pm #
I’m sorry. I meant *skanky* fat whore ass.
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 7:36 pm #
“Well Barret is Happyfeet correct what is your story?
Is Ron Paul your Hero or is Rosie O’Donnell more your type?”
I like Ron Paul and his politics generally coincide with mine, though I do have a couple of problems with some of his contentions about history as well as his interpretation of federalism. I would not piss on Rosie O’Donnell if she were on fire unless I’d been drinking enough beforehand that my urine would fuel the flames.
I have also written quite a few articles that attack Democrats and liberals on a number of issues, and in fact have another book coming out that attacks about half-a-dozen major liberal columnists, but this fact is ignored by many of the commenters here, including several people that Goldstein despises because they’re turning his blog into something less honest and literate than he had in mind. But my actual ideological background can be easily confirmed with about twenty seconds on Google if you want to verify it.
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 7:37 pm #
lazy loser
“And again, I am not saying that ACORN is not a criminal enterprise; I am simply trying to establish what a criminal enterprise consists of. I just need a definition. Can anyone give me one?”
“Summary
Under RICO, a person who is a member of an enterprise that has committed any two of 35 crimes—27 federal crimes and 8 state crimes—within a 10-year period can be charged with racketeering. Those found guilty of racketeering can be fined up to $250,000 and/or sentenced to 20 years in prison per racketeering count. In addition, the racketeer must forfeit all ill-gotten gains and interest in any business gained through a pattern of “racketeering activity.” RICO also permits a private individual harmed by the actions of such an enterprise to file a civil suit; if successful, the individual can collect treble damages.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RICO_(law)
Comment by Danger on 9/19 @ 7:39 pm #
So Snowblower why do the last 7 CIA directors take Eric Holder to task for his witch hunt while John Podesta sits on his hands?
Comment by happyfeet on 9/19 @ 7:40 pm #
That was kind of tacky about the despising. Jeff has never been shy about speaking his mind about honesty and literateness and things like that.
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 7:44 pm #
“any two of 35 crimes—27 federal crimes and 8 state crimes—within a 10-year period can be charged with racketeering.”
voter fraud, taxes, child sex slave all in 10 years
Comment by SBP on 9/19 @ 7:44 pm #
, so obviously RICO does not exactly coincide with the definition of criminal enterprise since there others which RICO does not cover.
So the definition of “subset” is also a mystery to you?
Shall I draw you a Venn diagram?
Comment by JD on 9/19 @ 7:45 pm #
Barrett – what would you call an organization that uses taxpayer dollars to engage in illegal activities in re elections, tax evasion, are being investoigated by 30+ states, likely Congress, and had employees nationwide willing if not eager to assist people in establishing a brothel for child sex slaves?
This idea that a term has to have a specific definable meaning that you agree with is the sophistry we expect from you, focusing on a definition rather than the issue.
Comment by XBradTC on 9/19 @ 7:46 pm #
Organized Crime
Glossary
Criminal Enterprise
The FBI defines a criminal enterprise as a group of individuals with an identified hierarchy, or comparable structure, engaged in significant criminal activity. These organizations often engage in multiple criminal activities and have extensive supporting networks. The terms Organized Crime and Criminal Enterprise are similar and often used synonymously. However, various federal criminal statutes specifically define the elements of an enterprise that need to be proven in order to convict individuals or groups of individuals under those statutes.
Comment by royf on 9/19 @ 7:47 pm #
No danger you need say mo more Dkos says it all. Thanks for looking because I would never open one of snowcone links, although I can usually tell what site he is listing. Mostly nothing but lefty propaganda sites mostly with a occasional fringe media site thrown in.
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 7:48 pm #
barrett: al capone feels your pain
Comment by XBradTC on 9/19 @ 7:49 pm #
The Continuing Criminal Enterprise statute, or Title 21 of the United States Code, Section 848(c)(2), defines a criminal enterprise as any group of six or more people, where one of the six occupies a position of organizer, a supervisory position, or any other position of management with respect to the other five, and which generates substantial income or resources, and is engaged in a continuing series of violations of subchapters I and II of Chapter 13 of Title 21 of the United States Code.
Comment by XBradTC on 9/19 @ 7:49 pm #
Organized Crime
Glossary
Criminal Enterprise
The FBI defines a criminal enterprise as a group of individuals with an identified hierarchy, or comparable structure, engaged in significant criminal activity. These organizations often engage in multiple criminal activities and have extensive supporting networks. The terms Organized Crime and Criminal Enterprise are similar and often used synonymously. However, various federal criminal statutes specifically define the elements of an enterprise that need to be proven in order to convict individuals or groups of individuals under those statutes.
The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statute, or Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 1961(4), defines an enterprise as “any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity, and any union or group of individuals associated in fact although not a legal entity.”
The Continuing Criminal Enterprise statute, or Title 21 of the United States Code, Section 848(c)(2), defines a criminal enterprise as any group of six or more people, where one of the six occupies a position of organizer, a supervisory position, or any other position of management with respect to the other five, and which generates substantial income or resources, and is engaged in a continuing series of violations of subchapters I and II of Chapter 13 of Title 21 of the United States Code.
Organized Crime
The FBI defines organized crime as any group having some manner of a formalized structure and whose primary objective is to obtain money through illegal activities. Such groups maintain their position through the use of actual or threatened violence, corrupt public officials, graft, or extortion, and generally have a significant impact on the people in their locales, region, or the country as a whole.
Significant Racketeering Activity
The FBI defines significant racketeering activities as those predicate criminal acts that are chargeable under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations statute. These are found in Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 1961 (1) and include the following federal crimes:
* Bribery
* Sports Bribery
* Counterfeiting
* Embezzlement of Union Funds
* Mail Fraud
* Wire Fraud
* Money Laundering
* Obstruction of Justice
* Murder for Hire
* Drug Trafficking
* Prostitution
* Sexual Exploitation of Children
* Alien Smuggling
* Trafficking in Counterfeit Goods
* Theft from Interstate Shipment
* Interstate Transportation of Stolen Property
And the following state crimes:
* Murder
* Kidnapping
* Gambling
* Arson
* Robbery
* Bribery
* Extortion
* Drugs
Comment by XBradTC on 9/19 @ 7:49 pm #
Does that answer your question, dumbshit?
Comment by happyfeet on 9/19 @ 7:50 pm #
It doesn’t say anything about eating babies.
Comment by royf on 9/19 @ 7:51 pm #
Geez I screwed that one up.
mo more = no more
propaganda sites mostly with= propaganda sites with
Comment by XBradTC on 9/19 @ 7:53 pm #
I think eating babies falls under the sports fraud, but I could be mistaken.
Comment by Danger on 9/19 @ 7:54 pm #
Barrett,
Is this your work? http://www.eclectica.org/v4n4/brown_christ.html
Pretty lame stuff for a guy who thinks his name should be recognized.
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 7:55 pm #
“So the definition of “subset” is also a mystery to you?”
No, I’m familiar with the term subset, obviously. I did not ask for a subset; I asked for the definition of criminal enterprise, not for the definition of a subset of a criminal enterprise.
“Jeff has never been shy about speaking his mind about honesty and literateness and things like that.”
I know. For instance, he has actually posted on this very blog that I’m obviously not a liberal as some would like to pretend, and has asked those people to stop declaring otherwise, because he wants the discussions here to be predicated on honesty and fairness.
Comment by XBradTC on 9/19 @ 7:56 pm #
Barrett Brown 19, lives in Austin. He is a college drop-out.
From the link Danger posted.
Comment by JD on 9/19 @ 7:56 pm #
Brad – It is just trying to divert from talking about Barcky’s little ACORN.
Comment by happyfeet on 9/19 @ 7:56 pm #
Mr. Brown wrote a book about creationism if I remember right. He was at the Huffington Post thinger not long ago.
Comment by royf on 9/19 @ 7:56 pm #
These trolls are getting more and more Baghdad Bob-ish everyday. As the old saying goes Denial is not just a river in Egypt.
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 7:56 pm #
“Pretty lame stuff for a guy who thinks his name should be recognized.”
I don’t think that my name should be recognized. That piece was written when I was 17. I’m sorry that you don’t approve of it.
Comment by XBradTC on 9/19 @ 7:57 pm #
I did not ask for a subset; I asked for the definition of criminal enterprise, not for the definition of a subset of a criminal enterprise.
Asked and answered. What’s your point? You’re not a liberal? Maybe. But you’re obviously a douche.
Comment by happyfeet on 9/19 @ 7:59 pm #
here … and apparently he posts at Vanity Fair, which has JFK’s hoochie on the cover of the current issue I know cause I saw it at Ralph’s.
oh. Someone put devil horns on the nice crippled man. That’s a choice when that happens.
Comment by Ron on 9/19 @ 8:01 pm #
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. They had completed fewer than two dozen false registrations — out of more than a million new voters registered by ACORN during that cycle. The mythology that suggests that thousands or even millions of illegal registrants voted is itself a fraud. 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, virtually no mention of this on Fox News. They were too busy generating “controversy” over ACORN in a transparent and racist effort to bite at the ankles of President Obama.
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 8:01 pm #
“Brad – It is just trying to divert from talking about Barcky’s little ACORN.”
No, what’s happening, as usual, is that several people would like to avoid having to define criminal enterprise lest they accidentally write off several movement organizations by the same definition. My ideology and background are always brought up by others, as it was in this very thread, at which point I am blamed for bringing up things that I myself did not bring up.
Comment by happyfeet on 9/19 @ 8:02 pm #
oh. It says Barrett Brown’s second book, Caught, Fat, and Clouded: The Manifold Failures of the American Punditry, will be released in 2010.
ohnoes. Pundit Fail.
That can’t be a good thing.
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 8:02 pm #
“That piece was written when I was 17. I’m sorry that you don’t approve of it.”
yea 37 and still stuck on stupid
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 8:04 pm #
“My ideology and background are always brought up by others, as it was in this very thread, at which point I am blamed for bringing up things that I myself did not bring up.”
dude likes 13 year old girls and thinks not this be a criminal matter
Comment by Swen Swenson on 9/19 @ 8:04 pm #
Ah yes, ACORN. Where “Hope and Change” became “Dope and Chains”.
Comment by Snowcone on 9/19 @ 8:04 pm #
These trolls are getting more and more Baghdad Bob-ish everyday.
Oh yeah, roy…the Republicans are at the height of their power and the poor hapless Dems are in full retreat, right?
No denial on the Right…none whatsoever!
Comment by Danger on 9/19 @ 8:05 pm #
“My questions have a different objective which itself should be pretty obvious.”
So Barrett out with it what is your point?
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 8:06 pm #
“My ideology and background are always brought up by others”
the straw man needs a coat.
Comment by XBradTC on 9/19 @ 8:08 pm #
It’s interesting that Mark Jacoby was arrested, tried and convicted in Orange County. Since Orange County is a very Republican/conservative county. I guess your point was that if you want to see vote fraud prosecuted, look to where Republicans are in charge?
Comment by happyfeet on 9/19 @ 8:08 pm #
I would happily and a lot enthusiastically write off several movement organizations as criminal organizations I think. Focus on the Family is creepy I always thought. Anything with family in the name is often pretty sketch I think. I like the NRA one ok. And the National Association of Manufacturers are cool I guess. The John M. Olin Foundation is supposed to be conservative but I think they support NPR, which is a dirty socialist money laundering operation that makes propaganda as a cover, near as I can tell.
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 8:08 pm #
“poor hapless Dems are in full retreat, right?”
Mr. O! explaining acorn
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 8:11 pm #
“I would happily and a lot enthusiastically write off several movement organizations as criminal organizations I think.”
You and I are probably in agreement, then; you clearly don’t feel the need to defend organizations just because they may be somewhat on your side or at least opposed to the other side, which is why I think you’re keen and neat (and an inimitably nifty commenter to boot).
Comment by Rusty on 9/19 @ 8:11 pm #
150.Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 7:56 pm #
“Pretty lame stuff for a guy who thinks his name should be recognized.”
I don’t think that my name should be recognized. That piece was written when I was 17. I’m sorry that you don’t approve of it.
If it’s any consolation, you’re still a very bright seventeen year old.
I would think it obvious that any tax exempt organization encouraging interstate fraud would be a criminal enterprise. But, hey. I’m from Chicago. What would I know about about corruption?
Comment by happyfeet on 9/19 @ 8:14 pm #
thank you. I have to go work out now cause of I got fat after I quit smoking.
Still relatively unclouded though.
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 8:15 pm #
“I would think it obvious that any tax exempt organization encouraging interstate fraud would be a criminal enterprise.”
I agree. Again, though, that’s an example, whereas I’m looking for a comprehensive definition.
Comment by Danger on 9/19 @ 8:16 pm #
G’night all,
Someone let me now if Barrett offers something worth following up on.
I would search Vanity Fair and Huffington Post articles for a clue but that is one of those areas I’m told even Angels fear to tread.
Comment by XBradTC on 9/19 @ 8:16 pm #
The comprehensive definition is above.
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 8:18 pm #
” i hear chitown wants a big olympic carbon footprint”
Comment by royf on 9/19 @ 8:19 pm #
Hey snowcone what I think of dems is they are lying, thieving cowards. They have a overwhelming majority (see my denial) in Congress yet all they seem to be able to do is whine like little titty babies.
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 8:20 pm #
“whereas I’m looking for a comprehensive definition.”
No you are too stupid for that
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 8:24 pm #
““whereas I’m looking for a comprehensive definition.”
““whereas I’m looking for a comprehensive definition.””
No you’re looking for loons(ie birdbrains) like yourself
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 8:27 pm #
“The comprehensive definition is above.”
I’m afraid I missed it, being a little slow; could you please point out the post number where this comprehensive definition may be found?
Comment by SBP on 9/19 @ 8:27 pm #
crim·i·nal
Pronunciation: ‘kri-m&-n&l
Function: adjective
1 : relating to, involving, or being a crime
en·ter·prise
Pronunciation: ‘en-t&r-”prIz
Function: noun
: an economic organization or activity; especially : a business organization
Now, Barrett, why don’t you look into the definition of TrollHammered. Buh-bye.
Comment by SBP on 9/19 @ 8:34 pm #
Since Barrett is simply going to ignore the US Code and FBI definitions given in XBradTC’s #138 and #139, I thought I’d provide the dictionary definition of the terms. Not that he’ll accept those, either. He’s a spoiled child running the “Why? BECAUSE WHY?” game. I suggest that any further posts from him on this topic simply be ignored.
Comment by XBradTC on 9/19 @ 8:34 pm #
Here’s a suggestion, BB. Google “Criminal Enterprise US Code” like I did. Check the very first hit. Spend time reading it carefully. Very carefully.
Take a year or two to read it. Then ask your mom to explain it. For another year or two.
Then get back to us.
Comment by royf on 9/19 @ 8:34 pm #
And one other thing is snowcone I have never belonged to any political party, But the way that the democrats voted after 9/11 to send American soldiers into war then did EVERYTHING in their power to kneecap their missions, costing Americans their lives.
And since they take the side of every tin pot dictator against American interests. I would rather be shot dead than support or vote for a democrat, so it leaves me little option.
Voting for a third party IMO is giving support to you sorry bastards so I will vote and support Republican, while working to rid that party of RINOs so they are less like scum sucking democrats.
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 8:34 pm #
“#
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 8:27 pm #
“The comprehensive definition is above.”
I’m afraid I missed it, being a little slow; could you please point out the post number where this comprehensive definition may be found?
”
Summary
Under RICO, a person who is a member of an enterprise that has committed any two of 35 crimes—27 federal crimes and 8 state crimes—within a 10-year period can be charged with racketeering. Those found guilty of racketeering can be fined up to $250,000 and/or sentenced to 20 years in prison per racketeering count. In addition, the racketeer must forfeit all ill-gotten gains and interest in any business gained through a pattern of “racketeering activity.” RICO also permits a private individual harmed by the actions of such an enterprise to file a civil suit; if successful, the individual can collect treble damages.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RICO_(law)
Comment by XBradTC on 9/19 @ 8:42 pm #
Could someone give me a definition of criminal enterprise or RICO? I’m a little fuzzy on it…
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 8:43 pm #
“Here’s a suggestion, BB. Google ‘Criminal Enterprise US Code’ like I did. Check the very first hit. Spend time reading it carefully. Very carefully.”
Well, I was originally asking for Darlene’s definition, which she has yet to provide, or a definition from one of you. Obviously, I’m aware that terms such as these are already defined by the feds.
Comment by SBP on 9/19 @ 8:47 pm #
Could someone give me a definition of criminal enterprise or RICO? I’m a little fuzzy on it…
Yeah, me too. It’s only been covered five or six times. At some point, Brad, people are going to decide that we’re being deliberately obtuse and either ignore us or point and laugh.
I’m sure Barrett’s “play stupid” routine worked WONDERS at the regional high school debate championships, though.
Comment by poppa india on 9/19 @ 8:48 pm #
Barrett, why are you looking for a comprehensive definition of a criminal enterprise, and why are you looking here instead of, say, over in The Volokh Conspiracy? Is this going to be another demonstration of your cleverness, where you show us how our definitions are wrong, thus proving how bright you are? ‘Cause it seems to me that’s what most of your previous posts on any subject are about.
Comment by SBP on 9/19 @ 8:51 pm #
Is this going to be another demonstration of your
clevernessmendacious sophistry, where you show us how our definitions are wrong, thus provinghow brightwhat a rhetorical one-trick pony you are?Fixed that for ya’, poppa.
Comment by XBradTC on 9/19 @ 8:52 pm #
Is ACORN a criminal enterprise? INAL, but it would sure seem so. At the very least, I think there’s sufficient evidence to begin a RICO investigation, and there’s certainly more than enough evidence for people to be outraged that their tax dollars are being spent on them.
And anyone who doesn’t agree is tacitly arguing that child prostitution isn’t a big deal.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/19 @ 8:55 pm #
“Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 6:59 pm #
So, does anyone want to define “criminal enterprise,” as opposed to just listing examples of things that a criminal enterprise might do?”
Sure: ACORN.
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 8:56 pm #
Fine, I’ll cut to these chase. If ACORN is a criminal enterprise, then the Catholic Church is also a criminal enterprise insomuch as that at least hundreds of employees have committed at least thousands of crimes while engaged in their duties over the past couple of decades, insomuch as that high-level employees have conspired to cover up these crimes and even relocate the perpetrators in order that they might escape prosecution, and have used political influence and connections to accomplish this, with many of these crimes qualifying as federal due to their interstate nature and others qualifying as international due to their global nature.
And, of course, these crimes all involved the molestation of children.
Inevitably, several of you will now explain how it is that the Catholic Church is not all a criminal enterprise.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/19 @ 8:56 pm #
Oh.
Always glad to help, barrett, you fucking moron.
Comment by SBP on 9/19 @ 8:57 pm #
For ACORN, Video Is Only Latest Crisis. Sunday’s edition of the WaPo. Obama is mentioned, prominently.
While I’m sure that Nipply/Snotcone, Barrett, and their fellow travellers have a few more bunnies to pull out of their asses, this isn’t going to go away.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/19 @ 8:57 pm #
“Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 7:08 pm #
Mikey-
Thanks for your concern for my career, but I’m not defending ACORN”
Sure you are.
You’re a fucking moron that way.
Comment by JD on 9/19 @ 8:58 pm #
Ron has assumed the ostrich position. LALALALALALALALALA
Barrett – How would you define what ACORN is, given their ever lenghtening list of criminal transgressions?
People have repeatedly provided definitions for you, which you ignored. People have asked you specific questions, which you again ignore.
I will make a prediction. When you actually get around to responding to the multiple definitions provided, you will do one or both of the following – 1) use the provided definition and try to force some conservative group into said definition, or 2) pull on some relatively insignificant part of a definition, and quibble about it. Eventually, we will be discussing the origins of the word cretin and how France really did kick the snot out of the Ivory Coast thus proving that USC is over-rated and Martha Stewart is annoying.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/19 @ 8:59 pm #
“Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 7:18 pm #
“Some things are too toxic to defend, and defending ACORN now is a stupid thing to do.”
Again, I’m not defending ACORN”
Sure you are, barnett.
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 9:02 pm #
“Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 8:56 pm #
Fine, I’ll cut to these chase. If ACORN is a criminal enterprise, then the Catholic Church is also a criminal enterprise insomuch as that at least hundreds of employees have committed at least thousands of crimes while engaged in their duties over the past couple of decades, insomuch as that high-level e”
is acorn a criminal enterprise? yes or no? shithead changes the subject.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/19 @ 9:03 pm #
“Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 7:36 pm #
“Well Barret is Happyfeet correct what is your story?
Is Ron Paul your Hero or is Rosie O’Donnell more your type?”
I like Ron Paul and his politics generally coincide with mine”
Ah, the loon magnet attracts a loon.
Comment by Rusty on 9/19 @ 9:03 pm #
#188
Apples and submarines. One of these things isn’t like the other. One of these things isn’t the same.(I got the apples and submarines thing from a guy at Aces.)
Barret has spiked my bullshit meter.
Comment by XBradTC on 9/19 @ 9:04 pm #
BB, Ordinarily, I’d agree with your assessment of the Catholic Church in the US. The problem is when the US attorney looks at a RICO investigation, he runs into a 1st Amendment issue. I don’t know the relevant case law, but criminally prosecuting a church, any church, is just about impossible.
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 9:04 pm #
“is acorn a criminal enterprise? yes or no?”
Yes.
Comment by JD on 9/19 @ 9:05 pm #
Barrett – Wouldn’t it have been a bit more honest if you would have just yelled BUNNIES in your first comment?
Comment by XBradTC on 9/19 @ 9:05 pm #
And bullshitting for 150 comments is hardly “cutting to the chase.” You could have asked your question without asking a definition of criminal enterprise.
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 9:06 pm #
“#
#
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 8:56 pm # ”
“pick the target freeze the target rule #13″
Comment by Snowcone on 9/19 @ 9:07 pm #
Mr. O! explaining acorn
I think you guys have done Obama a favor knocking ACORN down a peg or two…and your timing, so far from the next election, couldn’t have been any better, either.
Obama owes the Right a solid.
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 9:08 pm #
“BB, Ordinarily, I’d agree with your assessment of the Catholic Church in the US. The problem is when the US attorney looks at a RICO investigation, he runs into a 1st Amendment issue. I don’t know the relevant case law, but criminally prosecuting a church, any church, is just about impossible.”
Agreed on all counts. A church can get away with quite a bit – and probably should, frankly, as the alternative is the dangerous potential for government interference in matters of religion.
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 9:08 pm #
“#
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 9:04 pm #
“is acorn a criminal enterprise? yes or no?”
Yes.
”
shut up
Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/19 @ 9:09 pm #
“Comment by happyfeet on 9/19 @ 7:50 pm #
It doesn’t say anything about eating babies.”
Here, hf:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2QGouUrn5Q
Comment by SBP on 9/19 @ 9:09 pm #
Thanks for quoting the choice bits of Barrett’s stupidity, folks.
So all this was just to change the subject and work in a bit of Catholic bashing?
Yawn.
Hint: after you google up “criminal enterprise”, Barrett, you might want to try “tu quoque fallacy”.
Whether or not the Catholic Church meets the definition of “criminal enterprise” is utterly irrelevant to the subject under discussion. You want to talk about the Catholic church? Get your own blog and put up a post on the subject.
Comment by poppa india on 9/19 @ 9:09 pm #
There’s that kung-fu word trick I knew was coming. Everybody’s looking at Acorn and he whacked us with the Catholic Church, right out of the blue! Well, from now on, no one can talk about anything, unless they talk about everything else at the same time-thats Barrett’s Law.
Comment by SBP on 9/19 @ 9:10 pm #
and your timing, so far from the next election
Yes, we know this is going to be a one day story, Nipply. You told us so. A week ago.
Did you see my link to the Sunday WaPo, Nipply?
How many packs of Kools do you suppose Teleprompter Jesus has gone through this week?
Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/19 @ 9:11 pm #
“Comment by Ron on 9/19 @ 8:01 pm #
In reality, ACORN has registered close to 2 million low-income citizens across the country over the past five years”
Of which 47 were real people.
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 9:11 pm #
“A church can get away with quite a bit – and probably should, frankly, as the alternative is the dangerous potential for government interference in matters of religion.”
the “church of algore” can get away with what exactly!
Comment by Obstreperous Infidel on 9/19 @ 9:12 pm #
Come on regulars. Juxtapose, with me here, Barrett with Ron and snowcone/alphie/actus/monkeyboy/assortedotherloons. Barrett is a libertarian in the classical sense. So am I, I think, although I may disagree with some of Barrett’s foreign policy positions (I didn’t hate Bush, although I disagreed with some of his Foreign policy). He’s a tad full of himself, but that’s neither here nor there. He’s not an alphie or Ron. Those people are not to be taken seriously and frankly, if they were in my line of sight, I’d beat the shit out of both of them. I think Barrett’s request was reasonable. However, it seems to have been answered a few times already. Just my .02 cents.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/19 @ 9:12 pm #
“— a laudable record with a very low incidence of fraud of any kind.”
HAHAHAHAHAHHAAAAA!!!!!!
OHOHOHOHOHHHHHOOOOOO!!!!!!
BBWWWAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA!@!!!!!11!1!!’
Oh, this one’s good.
Comment by SBP on 9/19 @ 9:14 pm #
Barrett is a libertarian in the classical sense.
No, he isn’t.
Saying something doesn’t make it true.
Comment by XBradTC on 9/19 @ 9:16 pm #
And since Acorn isn’t a religion, it won’t have that nifty protection from RICO prosecution. The feds and local law enforcement can still go after individual malefactors, in addition to ACORN as an organization. Just like the feds and local law enforcement went after individual priests. And of course, there’s the civil litigation that ACORN might be liable to. Just like the Catholic Church.
Of course, when the Catholic Church was sued, at least they paid out with their own money. ACORN’s bookkeeping is so tangled that we have no idea what money is theirs from private donations and what is from the feds.
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 9:17 pm #
“And bullshitting for 150 comments is hardly ‘cutting to the chase.’”
I know. I didn’t say that it was. I said that I was going to “cut to the chase” now, which is why I wrote, “I’ll cut to the chase” and not “I’ve been cutting to the chase this whole time.” But I think it’s great that you’re learning English.
And, of course, I didn’t bullshit for 150 comments so much as I wrote several comments on the issue at hand, whereas many other comments were simply about me and how I’m a moron and need to ask my mommy about what words mean. I don’t mean to say that those comments weren’t intelligent or thoughtful or that they don’t reflect highly on the people who wrote them or anything like that.
“You could have asked your question without asking a definition of criminal enterprise.”
Well, no, seeing as how the point of the question was to discern the resident definition of criminal enterprise, I really couldn’t have.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/19 @ 9:20 pm #
Comment by Obstreperous Infidel on 9/19 @ 9:12 pm #
Sorry, OI, barnett is nothing more that semi-clever lunatic.
Comment by XBradTC on 9/19 @ 9:20 pm #
And given that about a third of all ACORN registrations are tossed for being either fraudulent (Mickey Mouse, anyone?), I’m not going to jump up and down celebrating that they help people register to vote. Because registering to vote is about the easiest thing to do in America. You can register to vote at any post office, DMV, Armed Forces Recruiting Station, county courthouse, or office of a federal agency in America. And if you can’t make it to them, they will mail you the registration form, with a return envelope.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/19 @ 9:21 pm #
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 9:17 pm #
See, OI?
Comment by XBradTC on 9/19 @ 9:23 pm #
BB, I’m somewhat astounded someone as clearly retarded as you has managed to get the velcro on your shoes fastened without putting an eye out.
Comment by JD on 9/19 @ 9:24 pm #
None of that mattered, Barrett, since your intention was to compare ACORN and the Catholic Church as criminal enterprises. Pray tell what definition would have led you to not present that BS comparison. Were you not mendoucheous nearly every time you dropped by here, maybe the responses to you would be different. Now, you are just predictable.
Comment by XBradTC on 9/19 @ 9:24 pm #
The point of your question was to open the line of questioning about the Catholic Church.
You got beat up a lot in school, didn’t you?
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 9:25 pm #
“No, he isn’t. Saying something doesn’t make it true.”
True. You might want to apply that same maxim to your own habit of saying that I’m a liberal. Or you might not.
Both Infidel here and Jeff Goldstein have access to information about me that you do not, and both of them back up my otherwise demonstrable claim to being a classical liberal. Give that some thought. Or, better yet, give it no thought whatsoever.
Comment by Obstreperous Infidel on 9/19 @ 9:25 pm #
LOL, though at #188 BB’s irrational hatred of the Catholic Church rears it’s ugly head.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/19 @ 9:29 pm #
“True. You might want to apply that same maxim to your own habit of saying that I’m a liberal”
Ok, bartlett, you’re not a liberal, you’re just a fucking prejudiced, hateful lunatic.
Comment by JD on 9/19 @ 9:30 pm #
Earlier you were a libertarian, now a classical liberal. Which is it? Not that it matters, as you have proven to be mendoucheous no matter what you self-identify as.
Comment by guinsPen on 9/19 @ 9:30 pm #
access to information about me that you do not
Sweet, spy stuff.
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 9:32 pm #
“s I wrote several comments on the issue at hand, whereas many other comments were simply about me and how I’m a moron and need to ask my mommy about what words mean. I don’t mean to say that those comments weren’t intelligent or thoughtful or that they don’t reflect highly on the people who wrote them or anything like that.”
yes pedophile priests are like sex slave acorn activists. gottcha
Comment by Obstreperous Infidel on 9/19 @ 9:32 pm #
SBP and N.O ‘Brain, I’m familiar with some of BB’s work, as you may be too. Nothing I have ever read from him suggests to me that he isn’t what he claims to be. I’m not sure why the attempt to deflect in regards to Acorn (well, maybe his #188 was the reason), but the guy does seem to be legitimate in regards to his professed politics. Again, I don’t think he should be as marginalized so easily (or at all) the way everyone here should do with a Ron or an Alphie. He is not a friend to the whacky, statist left.
Comment by SBP on 9/19 @ 9:33 pm #
Trying to get my head around some definition of “libertarian” that would account for Barrett showing up here on a semi-regular basis to defend the Obama administration.
Yeah, that GM takeover and the Porkulous bill have “laissez-faire” written all over them.
Barrett: if you’re planning to reply to me again, you can save your fingers. You’re in the troll bin.
I have no interest in “debating” someone who is intelectually dishonest. It more or less defeats the purpose.
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 9:33 pm #
“LOL, though at #188 BB’s irrational hatred of the Catholic Church rears it’s ugly head.”
I’m quite the eccentric, disapproving as I do of organized child molestation.
“The point of your question was to open the line of questioning about the Catholic Church.”
Well done!
“You got beat up a lot in school, didn’t you?”
No. I was fortunate enough not to attend the sort of school where priests routinely beat children when not otherwise engaged in beating off to them.
Comment by BJTexs on 9/19 @ 9:35 pm #
wow, Barret Brown crawls out of the ether and makes an appearance!
Sadly he eschews his former witty riposte and channels our current trolls by trying to change the subject.
“Look! The Catholic Church! FULL OF BUNNIES!!!!!”
Comment by BJTexs on 9/19 @ 9:37 pm #
I’m very disappointed in you, Barret. You did not bring the funnee.
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 9:37 pm #
“Earlier you were a libertarian, now a classical liberal. Which is it?”
Both. One is a subset of the other.
Comment by XBradTC on 9/19 @ 9:38 pm #
He is not a friend to the whacky, statist left.
He may not be. But he’s still a flaming asshole. Right, left or center, I don’t like assholes. You got something to say, say it. Otherwise, STFU.
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 9:39 pm #
“I’m very disappointed in you, Barret. You did not bring the funnee.”
When have I ever?
Comment by JD on 9/19 @ 9:41 pm #
Yeah, douchebags are teh suck.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/19 @ 9:42 pm #
“Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 9:39 pm #
“I’m very disappointed in you, Barret. You did not bring the funnee.”
When have I ever?”
What, your Mom dropped you on your head as a child and dislodged your sense of humor?
Heeeyyyy….
That could explain a LOT.
Comment by Obstreperous Infidel on 9/19 @ 9:43 pm #
BB, yes the entire Catholic Church and all it’s adherents and leaders approve of child molestation./sarc off That’s irrational. You got something else going on with the church and that’s your thing, however much I disagree. BTW, I practice my Christian faith in the Catholic church, more out of habit than allegiance, and I recognize they handled it entirely the wrong way. It was in excusable, imo. But you’ve got to leave it alone, my man. At least be on topic. You agreed that Acorn is a criminal organization, so why bring the Catholic church into it? That’s your own private battle. It does make you look just a little unhinged here. Take it up with the Pope.
Comment by SBP on 9/19 @ 9:44 pm #
In case Nipply/Snotcone is still here: that article is on the FRONT PAGE of the WaPo website. For Sunday.
But no one reads that, of course. It’s like the Pumpkin Landing Weekly Shopper that way.
I wonder if any of the “journalists” involved in Obama’s multi-network fellation-fest tomorrow morning will have the balls to ask him about it to his face.
HAHAHAHAHAHA! I kill myself sometimes.
Comment by Darleen on 9/19 @ 9:46 pm #
Barrett Brown
I’ve been gone until now (and my last post was scheduled ahead of time) because I was doing something more important than playing word games with you … I was entertaining my twin grandsons (who will be 7 next week). Taking care of and interacting with children is to really be focused on the now.
And I believe that is why non-leftists are happier than leftists. They tend to marry more and have children more. One can’t be a good parent and live 95% of your waking hours in the future lusting for utopia and being pissed off at the present because it isn’t.
and I see you were/are just playing a game, not wanting to engage in any good faith arguments. This was just a set up to engage in a little Catholic bashing.
Barrett, you are a capable writer but I wonder about your humanity.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/19 @ 9:48 pm #
“Comment by SBP on 9/19 @ 9:44 pm #
In case Nipply/Snotcone is still here: that article is on the FRONT PAGE of the WaPo website. For Sunday.”
Wait.
This has lasted longer than one day??????
Comment by Obstreperous Infidel on 9/19 @ 9:48 pm #
Well, BradXTC, I’ll let him defend the whole asshole, thing. He just may be one. My whole point is that he shouldn’t be lumped in with the severely intellectually challenged morons such as alphie and Ron. Jeff’s blog is more than just a political blog, but politically guys like Barrett are good allies against the idiots that comprise the aforementioned whacky, statist left. BB’s alleged “assholery” doesn’t effect me, or you, really at all. The ron’s and alphie’s whacky statist bullshit most definitely does, though.
Comment by sdferr on 9/19 @ 9:48 pm #
Perhaps our relevant comparison ought to be between the two as institutions or enterprises offering their members moral guidance? The divine revelation dealio might get in the way somewhat I suppose, but we can probably work around it one way or another.
On the other hand, do we reckon there are as many conservative republican type voters in the ACORN ranks as there are progressive or liberal democrat voters in the Catholic Church ranks? Is the tax status of the Church ever actually threatened by its stance on political questions, which is not to say open advocacy of particular candidates?
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 9:55 pm #
“BB, yes the entire Catholic Church and all it’s adherents and leaders approve of child molestation./sarc off. That’s irrational.”
I never implied anything of the sort, and in fact I wrote very specifically what had happened with the church in hopes of avoiding these sorts of strawmen attacks. What I wrote was that a significant number of church employees committed crimes and that many high-ups at the Vatican and elsewhere actively worked to cover up many of these crimes and to shuttle perpetrators across the globe lest they be punished.
“But you’ve got to leave it alone, my man. At least be on topic. You agreed that Acorn is a criminal organization, so why bring the Catholic church into it?”
My point is that many here are not actually concerned with criminal activity; rather, they are concerned with criminal activity that can be used in attacks on the opposition. I use the Catholic Church as an example because child abuse is one of the big issues with ACORN and this post, and the Catholic Church happens to be an organization that conservatives will tend to defend despite its own crimes which are comparable to those of ACORN.
I have no problem acknowledging that ACORN is a poverty-pest organization whose members often break the law; living as I do in Brooklyn, I’m very familiar with the sorts of nonsense that such groups perpetrate. Again, my point is that the new-found obsession with ACORN among many movement conservatives is disingenuous in light of their own support for organizations that commit crimes in serve to scattershot conservatism.
Comment by newrouter on 9/19 @ 10:03 pm #
“My point is that many here are not actually concerned with criminal activity; rather, they are concerned with criminal activity that can be used in attacks on the opposition.”
FUCK YOU AND ALINISKY TRAIN
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 10:08 pm #
“On the other hand, do we reckon there are as many conservative republican type voters in the ACORN ranks as there are progressive or liberal democrat voters in the Catholic Church ranks?”
We could probably go ahead and assume that there are not, insomuch as that ACORN is basically a hard-left organization whereas the Catholic Church does not entirely coincide with what are termed “conservative” views in this country (church opposes death penalty, waterboarding and the like, and I recall it having been vocally opposed the Iraq War) and at any rate claims a number of liberal Democratic members. So the comparison is certainly not perfect, particularly with regards to the ideological composition of their respective memberships.
“Is the tax status of the Church ever actually threatened by its stance on political questions, which is not to say open advocacy of particular candidates?”
Not in any significant fashion that’s likely to result in the church actually losing its tax-exempt status, I don’t believe.
Comment by Darleen on 9/19 @ 10:08 pm #
new-found obsession with ACORN
Yeah, new found. Just like the 20 years in the business actor who is an “overnight success”.
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 10:16 pm #
“Yeah, new found. Just like the 20 years in the business actor who is an “overnight success”.”
I’m sorry, Darleen, but are you really trying to assert that the current heavy conservative interest in ACORN is comparable to the conservative interest in ACORN even five years ago? I’ll make this simple and to the point: I can demonstrate very easily that that is very obviously not the case by of a news search of this year and of one from five years ago. Perhaps you’d like to revise and extend your remarks?
Comment by XBradTC on 9/19 @ 10:24 pm #
Wow, people reacting to new information regarding ACORN. That’s a fucking shock, BB.
Somehow, I suspect that if we’d seen the tapes earlier, we might have reacted in much the same way.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/19 @ 10:27 pm #
“I’m sorry, Darleen, but are you really trying to assert that the current heavy conservative interest in ACORN is comparable to the conservative interest in ACORN even five years ago?”
Google is your friend.
Moron.
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 10:31 pm #
“Wow, people reacting to new information regarding ACORN. That’s a fucking shock, BB.”
I didn’t say that it’s a shock or even an inherently bad thing for people to react to new information on ACORN. I noted that the heavy interest in ACORN is somewhat recent; Darleen asserted that heavy interest in ACORN is not recent at all; I responded that it was; and now you’re trying to claim that my position is that there’s something strange about people reacting to new information on ACORN. Is this your first debate?
Comment by XBradTC on 9/19 @ 10:34 pm #
This isn’t a debate. It’s a forum.
You posit that there wasn’t as much interest in ACORN 5 years ago. D’uh. There wasn’t information available that there is now.
However, I think you’ll find that conservative interest in ACORN has been steadily growing, as we learn more about it and its pattern of lawlessness.
And I fail to see what Darleen says or does not say has anything to do with my position on the matter. I speak for me, and no one else.
Comment by bastiches on 9/19 @ 10:37 pm #
I think Barrett’s request was reasonable. However, it seems to have been answered a few times already. Just my .02 cents.
Disagree. It was a transparent attempt at non sequitur. The discussion at hand was ACORN. His obtuse, repetitive line of questioning was the set up for a round of good ole Catholic bashing.
This rhetorical two-step is obnoxious and trolls-like. That is why he received a hearty round of “Piss off.”
Comment by Lamontyoubigdummy on 9/19 @ 10:42 pm #
>Again, my point is that the new-found obsession with ACORN among many movement conservatives is disingenuous in light of their own support for organizations that commit crimes in serve to scattershot conservatism.</em
I’ve only read some of this thread, but my immediate reaction is “come on man.” I don’t know that you’re trying to yell “look over here” or move goal posts, but comparing the Catholic Church to ACORN?! Again, come on man. I agree with some of what you’ve said. There was child molestation and an attempt to cover it up by the Catholic hierarchy. Disgusting and criminal indeed. The church was then subjected to a microscope by the media, law enforcement and civil attorneys. A small percent turned out to be evil. Such is the nature of man even in the most noble or holy of collectives. While I don’t believe all that should have been punished at the Bishop or Cardinal level were, the church purged, and that tarnish lingers (as it should). I think the church knows the consequences should a scandal of that nature occur again, and will actively seek to eliminate it and not supress it.
But everyone knows what ACORN is. It is a wholly corrupt criminal enterprise feeding off the poor. For all it’s faults, the Catholic Church has proved itself the exact opposite. It is a champion of the poor.
In short, let me know when ACORN pony’s up a few Mother Teresas or builds and then operates tens of thousands of refuge camps, orphanages, fully staffed medical clinics, state of the art level I & level II trauma centers all across the globe on their own dime (not the tax-payers). Because with ACORN, $95 million in tax-payer funds has apparently only bought criminal tax advice for child-whoring pimps.
Oh…I for got. It’s also bought a lot of dead peoples votes for the Democratic Party in 2008.
And here I thought you progressives didn’t believe in the after life.
>*No, I’m not catholic.</em
Comment by Lamontyoubigdummy on 9/19 @ 10:45 pm #
HTML explosion. There’s < and : and () and ” and href’s & all over the friggin place!
Sorry.
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 10:47 pm #
“This isn’t a debate. It’s a forum.”
A forum is a venue. A debate is a type of engagement which may occur within a venue. It can thus be both, and is this case.
“You posit that there wasn’t as much interest in ACORN 5 years ago. D’uh. There wasn’t information available that there is now.”
I know. I posited that in response to Darleen’s contention that there was indeed similar interest in ACORN 5 years ago. As you and I both know, she is wrong.
“However, I think you’ll find that conservative interest in ACORN has been steadily growing, as we learn more about it and its pattern of lawlessness.”
I know, which is why I referred in passing to the “newfound obsession” among conservatives with ACORN, only to have Darleen contend that the obsession is not “newfound” at all.
“And I fail to see what Darleen says or does not say has anything to do with my position on the matter. I speak for me, and no one else.”
I’m aware. You were taking issue with me pointing out to Darleen that the obsession with ACORN is fairly new. Basically, I said, “A is true,” Darleen replied, “A is not true,” I responded, “A is indeed true and I can prove it,” and you replied to me, “Of course A is true, duh.” I suggest you take it up with Darleen, since you and I are in agreement that ACORN is a relatively new concern among conservatives whereas Darleen does not.
Comment by Lamontyoubigdummy on 9/19 @ 10:57 pm #
“I’m aware. You were taking issue with me pointing out to Darleen that the obsession with ACORN is fairly new.”
Untrue. Fairly new to the vast majority of American voters? Yup. Independents? Sure, I’ll give you both. New to “conservatives”? No. New to this audience? No. New to people that at the very least wanted Obama somewhat vetted by the US media vanguard prior to the general election in 2008? Hell no.
You go Google “Stanely Kurtz ACORN” and come back.
Comment by XBradTC on 9/19 @ 10:58 pm #
BB, you may not be the dumbest piece of shit I’ve seen here (alphie’s got a mile high berm you gotta get over), but you sure are the equivelant of an ingrown taint hair.
Comment by Darleen on 9/19 @ 11:04 pm #
Barrett
Basically, I said, “A is true,” Darleen replied, “A is not true,”
I didn’t say that –
My use of the “overnight success” analogy is apt. Is ACORN getting more attention now — widespread and not “just” by “conservatives”? Yes. Why? Because an amateur film maker did what Legacy media should have and didn’t. Regardless of the articles written on ACORN and their dubious and thuggish beginnings and their continued thuggish behavior over the years (again my analogy to an actor working 20 years in his craft before being “newly discovered”) nothing has quite caught the attention of the public at large then two people purposefully dressed in outrageous costumes and not causing one raised eyebrow from the people being so helpful in advising them how to get away with criminal activities.
ACORN is less than 40 years old and has been the subject of numerous investigations, probes, criminal hearings and convictions throughout its history.
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 11:08 pm #
“Untrue. Fairly new to the vast majority of American voters? Yup. Independents? Sure, I’ll give you both. New to “conservatives”? No. New to this audience? No. New to people that at the very least wanted Obama somewhat vetted by the US media vanguard prior to the general election in 2008? Hell no.
You go Google “Stanely Kurtz ACORN” and come back.”
I’m aware that some conservatives have known about ACORN for quite a while and that a few national commentators even written about it way back when. What I’ve said several times in very clear language – their “newfound obsession,” specifically – is that conservatives have displayed a vastly increased interest in ACORN over the last two years. The Weekly Standard, for instance, first mentions the organization in passing in 2007; the other dozens of articles have have either focused on or mentioned ACORN appear in 2008 and 2009. A similar dynamic may be found by searching other conservative outlets. Again, it is a “newfound obsession,” as I said, and frankly, I’m amazed that I’ve had to explain this at such length. Perhaps you should have Brad explain this to you and other guy since he understands the concept.
Comment by geoffb on 9/19 @ 11:09 pm #
If you do manage to somehow (though very doubtful) bring down the bureaucratic hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church, priests, bishops, pope, all of them over the child sex abuse scandal, the Church would still remain. Heretic though they are from the perspective of my wife’s Church and I won’t even go into what the Church of my childhood thought of the RCC. The RCC is a system of belief and the organization and all the worldly things are extraneous, though helpful to, and can be expressive of, that belief.
In part ACORN also is a belief system. That part can survive the destruction of the physical organization if the belief is actual and strong. If so then perhaps it can find a more worthy physical expression of the belief.
Of course it may be that what we are seeing is the true physical expression of that belief. That is my belief about ACORN. It is not my belief about the RCC but I can see you have a different view of that.
Comment by Darleen on 9/19 @ 11:10 pm #
Lamont
Kurtz wrote a definitive article on ACORN 16 months ago. Sol Stern wrote an earlier article in City Journal in 2003. In the 90s they were involved in kickbacks, embezzlement and voter fraud.
Like I said, ACORN “overnight discovery” after years of exposure and scandal.
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 11:16 pm #
“My use of the “overnight success” analogy is apt. Is ACORN getting more attention now — widespread and not “just” by “conservatives”? Yes. Why? Because an amateur film maker did what Legacy media should have and didn’t.”
Obviously, the obsession with ACORN predates these videos by two years, as may be verified by searching THe Weekly Standard and various conservative blogs in the manner described above. These new incidents from this week have simply given this obsession an added jolt.
I’ve got a thing to go to at the moment, but it’s been moderately enjoyable.
Comment by Darleen on 9/19 @ 11:19 pm #
Barrett
You stated “new found obsession”, I made my appropriate analogy and you immediately felt I was saying something the OPPOSITE of your statement. Hence, I can only conclude you were, in the first instance, attempting to imply that this “new found obsession” didn’t exist in any form before now…sprung whole like Athena from Zeus.
Now you’re backpeddling.
Ooops, BB, you didn’t have a good hold of that figleaf. Don’t worry, you’re not revealing much.
Comment by Snowcone on 9/19 @ 11:20 pm #
that article is on the FRONT PAGE of the WaPo website. For Sunday.
Looks like a nice wrap up of the ACORN story to me.
Comment by SBP on 9/19 @ 11:24 pm #
Yesterday: Paterson orders hold on ACORN contracts
Today: Obama tells Paterson to drop out of governor’s race.
BUNNIES! NOTHING TO SEE HERE!
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 11:27 pm #
No, Darleen. You wrote, “Yeah, new found. Just like the 20 years in the business actor who is an “overnight success”. That is clearly a sarcastic remark insomuch as that a longtime actor is not actually an overnight success. I’m amazed you’d even try to pretend otherwise at this point, even after several commenters obviously took your contention and ran with it, having understood what you meant just as well as I did.
“Ooops, BB, you didn’t have a good hold of that figleaf. Don’t worry, you’re not revealing much.”
Every bit as clever as your Photoshops, and it will do doubt be just as widely celebrated.
Okay, goodnight for real this time, all.
Comment by sdferr on 9/19 @ 11:27 pm #
“It was unclear whether that message had been delivered in any form to Paterson.”
Well it has been now.
By the way Maggie, Barack says “Thanks.”
Heh.
Comment by Darleen on 9/19 @ 11:28 pm #
Obviously, the obsession with ACORN predates these videos by two years
Wait, you just said “newfound obsession”…something 2 years old is not “newfound”.
Barrett, I don’t think you’re as smart as you think you are.
Comment by Lamontyoubigdummy on 9/19 @ 11:43 pm #
But…but, Darleen… Barrett’s “amazed” he’s had to explain this to us poor fools at such length!
You’re windy Barrett and you can string a sentence together, but your soap box tipped over a while ago. We all knew about ACORN and voter fraud & slum lord shit. Their direct, HUGE involvement in the housing crisis.
You now blather about how we’re all too blind and stupid to except your “newfound obsession” premise (and obviously beneath your great intellect because you keep having to ’splain it to us). Your premise has been proven horse shit, and now we’re all too dumb to understand? You’re “aware” of “some conservatives”? Were you in everyones homes in 2008? Did you sit around everyone in America’s dinner tables? What’s your authority on who and of what political persuasion knew what about ACORN and when?
I’ll give you this, we didn’t know they were the IRS partnered “Jackson-Hewitt” for child whoring pimps. That one’s a “newfound obsession” for us.
Jesus your a condescending asshat.
To defeat the brilliant Barrett in a debate all one needs to master is Vincent Gambini’s opening argument in State VS. Gambini & Rothenstein:
“Everything that guy just said is bullshit”.
Comment by SBP on 9/19 @ 11:58 pm #
Chicago Tribune OpEd calls for independent prosecutor.
Look, bunnies!
Comment by SBP on 9/19 @ 11:59 pm #
London Times.
Look! Bunnies!
Comment by Stephanie on 9/20 @ 12:00 am #
Or everything that guy’s argument is predicated on is unicorn farts and bunnies.
Comment by sdferr on 9/20 @ 12:01 am #
I first learned of the existence of ACORN when they set up a tent village squatting on an empty lot they did not own around N. American St. & Cecil B. Moore in North Philly, oh, about 1996, I think it was. They spent the better part of five or six months camped out there, taking turns living there in shifts it looked like. I used to drive past there every few days on the way to my shop. I thought, man, what a bunch of filthy commie hippies these fuckers are, I wonder what the hell they’re up to? Never did look into them though, too damned busy minding my own business to spend any time looking into theirs.
Comment by Lamontyoubigdummy on 9/20 @ 12:03 am #
“Chicago Tribune OpEd calls for independent prosecutor.”
It’s coming you bastards.
Comment by Darleen on 9/20 @ 12:04 am #
Lamont
You need to understand “libertarian” Barrett Browning, communications direction for ::::ahem:::non-partisan::::ahem:::: Enlighten the Vote.
Veritable fount of Liberty folk at that site, you betcha!
Comment by Lamontyoubigdummy on 9/20 @ 12:08 am #
“Or everything that guy’s argument is predicated on is unicorn farts and bunnies.”
Then he’s safe. Only because
Obamaunicorns fart bunnies.And Skittles.
Not tasting that rainbow though.
Comment by Darleen on 9/20 @ 12:08 am #
Jesus your a condescending asshat.
There’s a reason poor Barrett is single.
Comment by geoffb on 9/20 @ 12:11 am #
Views haven’t changed much then.
Comment by sdferr on 9/20 @ 12:18 am #
It must have been fairly startling to learn that Pat Leahy, of all people, wanted nothing to do with them. What a spur to action! Double down then men, denounce the Catholic Church wherever you can. That’ll learn those religious droolers to trifle with your disbelief. Steady on atheons, those piles of votes are sure to be coming…
Or they could think about this instead.
Comment by Lamontyoubigdummy on 9/20 @ 12:24 am #
Darleen,
I’m not much for folk that start out their “great society” mission statement with what they expressly “oppose”. Because you know that list of “grievances” has plenty of room at the bottom, and the rest of us will eventually do something to offend these great thinkers and our “crimes” will be added to the list.
And pardon my French while I laugh my ass off, but for a libertarian bunch, that flat out fucking explodes the irony meter.
They could shorten their coda by just saying “We’re the Libertarians that get to tell you what you can and can’t do”.
Yeah, Barrett fits.
Comment by newrouter on 9/20 @ 12:36 am #
“These new incidents from this week have simply given this obsession an added jolt.”
call for Haliburton mr. Haliburton.
Comment by Snowcone on 9/20 @ 1:13 am #
Kurtz wrote a definitive article on ACORN 16 months ago.
“He’s out there operating without any decent restraint, totally beyond the pale of any acceptable human conduct. And he is still in the field commanding troops.”
Comment by Lamontyoubigdummy on 9/20 @ 1:33 am #
“These new incidents from this week have simply given this obsession an added jolt.”
Good catch newrouter.
So , Barrett you admit the “obsession” has been going on for years now? “Added jolt”, right?
Let me rephrase…
Dear Barrett,
How does your “newfound obsession” posit for all of us get a…wait, what did you call it?…an “added jolt”?
I’m bad at math, but doesn’t some kind of number/ integer / mass / object/ thing-a-ma-bob/ proof have to be there in plain view to “add” to it?
“added jolt” indeed.
Dude, your bucket has a hole in it.
Comment by Lamontyoubigdummy on 9/20 @ 1:39 am #
“He’s out there operating without any decent restraint, totally beyond the pale of any acceptable human conduct. And
heObama is stillin the field commanding troopsThe Commander in Chief.”There. Fixed that for you Snowcone.
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/20 @ 1:50 am #
I’m back, hooray.
“So , Barrett you admit the “obsession” has been going on for years now? “Added jolt”, right?”
Yes, for two years. Not only do I “admit” it, but I have been asserting it from the beginning.
“Wait, you just said “newfound obsession”…something 2 years old is not ‘newfound’.”
Yes, it is. Within the context of a movement that is decades of years old by the shortest reckoning, a sudden strong interest in a subject constitutes a “newfound obsession” if it has only been obsessed over for two years. Perhaps you all disagree, in which case you should tell me exactly how long something remains “newfound” in the context of a decades-old movement. Six months? A year? Just a few weeks? I look forward to your capable and honest responses. Likewise, I’m glad to know that I’m not going to be blamed for nitpicking in this thread, since of course it is others that have decided to take issue with the definition of “newfound” and I’ve dealt with you all enough to know that I certainly would never be criticized for something someone else did. Ouch, that hurt.
Comment by Lamontyoubigdummy on 9/20 @ 2:18 am #
#286
You’ve been all over the fucking place. Columned and paragraphed in this thread, bright as can be without a place to hide. On about ACORN and the Catholic Church, “newfound” obsessions, etc. Now you’re trying to “qualify” your previous arguments and fall back on that indispensable progressive petard…nuance.
“How long something remains newfound”?
How ’bout “how many licks to the center of a Tootsie Pop”?
Good grief.
As a preface in your future comments, please have the fucking courtesy to let us know where exactly you’ve moved the goal posts.
Comment by Rusty on 9/20 @ 6:09 am #
No. I was fortunate enough not to attend the sort of school where priests routinely beat children when not otherwise engaged in beating off to them.
Wow! THAT was objective. Every priest a pedefile, every nun a bully.
The only nitpickery going on is all on your side Barret. Except, you know, when you’re handing out assertions.
Comment by SDN on 9/20 @ 6:14 am #
“I think you guys have done Obama a favor knocking ACORN down a peg or two…and your timing, so far from the next election, couldn’t have been any better, either.”
Depends on what you mean by far. It’s close enough to 2010 that knocking ACORN and friends out of voter registration will cut down on the fraud…. and knocking them out of the Census means they won’t have as much impact on the redistricting process.
Comment by Pablo on 9/20 @ 6:30 am #
What “decades old movement” has this “newfound” obsession? Is this like when Rudy Giuliani became “obsessed” with the Mafia after 4 decades on the planet? Please enlighten us, “Barrett”.
Comment by JD on 9/20 @ 6:30 am #
People don’t treat Barrett poorly becuase of his political views. They treat him like a prick because he is, demonstrably, a prick. You racist wingNazis are obsessed!!!
Comment by Pablo on 9/20 @ 6:35 am #
Does the Communications Director write their blog?
We’re all gonna die because of Teh Wingnuttttttz!!! Send money, fast! ROFLMAO.
Comment by Pablo on 9/20 @ 6:40 am #
What is it, 20 states with open investigations/prosecutions? And that’s before these videos broke. That number will only go up.
What’s with all these obsessed people?
Programming note: Bertha Lewis will be on Fox News Sunday, coming up at 9:00 on the broadcast network. Should be a hoot.
Comment by SBP on 9/20 @ 6:40 am #
This time they are holding up the nomination of Gov. Sebelius
Ah yes, another well-known “libertarian”.
stopping funding for pandemic flu preparation
This, of course, is a lie.
Just as they criticized volcano monitoring right before Anchorage’s volcano exploded
There is no volcano in Anchorage, much less one that “exploded”.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/20 @ 6:47 am #
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/19 @ 11:16 pm #
THAT was just pitiful.
Comment by royf on 9/20 @ 6:55 am #
I found this little video on youtube this morning, its quite amusing. I think many here will like it. Snowcone will love the audio because I’m certain he like Rachel Maddow, the video he probably won’t like. Anyway here it is.
Liberal Media Hypocrisy Test
Comment by sdferr on 9/20 @ 6:58 am #
What is Obama going to be doing for the whole hour of Letterman’s show tomorrow? And will his appearance there stand as anything akin to his address to the schoolchildren a week ago, ya think, boring the poor ordinary Letterman viewer to tears while attempting to keep himself from being drenched in Dave’s drool?
Comment by guinsPen on 9/20 @ 7:00 am #
Remember your umbrella, Mr. President.
Comment by Rusty on 9/20 @ 7:10 am #
#291
Nope. Just don’t like being lied to.
Comment by Pablo on 9/20 @ 7:17 am #
Bertha is on with Darrell Issa. She absolutely refuses to so much as look at him. She also refuses to answer whether she’ll open the books to an independent audit.
Good stuff.
Comment by SBP on 9/20 @ 7:23 am #
Second-hand from President Zero’s appearance on one of the talking head shows: he “didn’t know” that ACORN was getting all that federal loot.
Oh, the wheels on the bus go “thump-thump-thump”, “thump-thump-thump”, “thump-thump-thump”…
Comment by geoffb on 9/20 @ 7:24 am #
The Enlighten the Vote site is brimming with gems to help understand Mr. Brown’s world view. Such as this response to this Declaration of American Values. I particularly notice that this in the Declaration,
Bring forth this response from the “Enlighten the Vote” group
Quite libertarian and classical liberal both there eh?
Comment by sdferr on 9/20 @ 7:25 am #
Apropos of royf’s linked video, Wretchard is on to something here, I think. Take a moment to read the comments at Bob Kagan’s linked post on his WaPo blogpost, a tribute from Kagan on Irving Kristol’s death. The comments there are another hatefest, a reminder of the gastly outpouring at Tony Snow’s death. Wretchard is prompted to ask, why are these political battlelines so sharply contested, why is the level of vitriol so intense?
Comment by SBP on 9/20 @ 7:26 am #
Yep, Geoff. I’m sure that Thomas Jefferson, John Locke, Milton Friedman, and Ayn Rand would be in 100% agreement with those statements.
Comment by SBP on 9/20 @ 7:32 am #
#301: Confirmed. It was on Georgie’s show.
Can we call him a liar yet?
Comment by SBP on 9/20 @ 7:35 am #
Let’s see if Couric and Gregory have the balls to ask him any questions about ACORN, even a softball one like Stephanopoulos.
Comment by Rusty on 9/20 @ 7:35 am #
What a tool.
Comment by geoffb on 9/20 @ 7:49 am #
sdferr, @ #303
I believe Wretchard starts to strike gold with this,
Comment by BJTexs on 9/20 @ 7:58 am #
If Obama, brilliant intellect and Constitutional scholar, had attempted run that weak crap through a debate class, he would have flunked.
More importantly that is a bald faced lie. He seems to be consistently gravitating towards bald faced lies as his approval numbers tank.
Comment by sdferr on 9/20 @ 8:00 am #
Exactly on point geoffb, that’s what I was referring to as his being “on to something” (though I didn’t bother to quote it, leaving it for folks to find on their own).
I just caught a bit of a colloquy between Stephanopolos and G. Will in which they agreed that Obama, in his interview with G.S., was seeding the ground on Afghanistan for a crop of “bug the heck out of there”. Not a very heartening prospect. R. Reich chimed in with “Afghanistan is a classic case of mission creep” and blah, blah, blah. Shivers, all round.
Comment by BJTexs on 9/20 @ 8:01 am #
24K gold, I’d suggest.
Comment by geoffb on 9/20 @ 8:05 am #
Looks like there will be some interesting things to read after I get back from, that most horrible and un-american of things according to some folks, my Church.
Comment by sdferr on 9/20 @ 8:07 am #
The conundrum contained in Fernandez excellent analysis however, is that one faction is cheering on precisely that greater concentration and enlargement of power, while the other faction is variously trying and failing at holding it back, holding in place or in the best of all possible worlds, rolling it back into a serious diminishment. And yet the latter can’t be achieved without gaining some control over the very levers of power they’ld diminish.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/20 @ 8:08 am #
I don’t know, American politics has ALWAYS been vitriolic.
Look at some to the things President Lincoln was called, ‘ape’, ‘the original gorilla’, etc etc etc.
Comment by sdferr on 9/20 @ 8:12 am #
That strikes me as too sweeping a generalization, too static a picture or model to be of any use to understand the stuff we see before our eyes, N.O’Brain.
Comment by BJTexs on 9/20 @ 8:26 am #
So, sderr, maybe what I wrote in the Pub reflects my frustration with this fear of dynamic discourse.
“Fine for thee but not for me!” may very well be a losing proposition (I’d link but my html skilz have been atrophied by smart buttons.)
Comment by sdferr on 9/20 @ 8:34 am #
“this fear of dynamic discourse.”
Help me out here BJTex by filling this in a bit more (by the by, I’ve responded back there yet again).
Comment by BJTexs on 9/20 @ 8:56 am #
I’d admit to being a little overheated when I wrote that 40 ton post over at The Pub.
This fear “dynamic discourse” seems to be insidious within the Republican Party. George Bush was a man I personally admired despite my problems with some of his “statist, compassionate conservative” legislation but what drove me nuts was his unwillingness to come out firing against his critics. Maybe that was a reflection of his crafted public persona but we have more than a few anecdotes that suggest he was significantly more “biting” in private.
I’ll agree that, for the most part, the ilk that you identify above are generally followers but that didn’t stop the Republican party from nominating one. The political battle lines are as clearly drawn as they have ever been since the The Civil War. We are facing an Administration, backed by a leftist Congress, which clearly seeks to fundamentally extend the power of the Federal Government to new and unprecedented levels and will do whatever dissembling, outright lying and dirty tactics to accomplish this goal. Guys like Axelrod and Emmanuel make Karl Rove look like a small town PR guy in the length and breadth of their influence peddling.
The very idea that we need to be restrained and less “dynamic” in the public way that we stand up to this fundamental attack on conservative/classical liberal principles is not only unrealistic but also represents friendly fire from those who would be our political brethren. The lockstep media laps up these these hand wringers and it makes it that much harder to fight the vast advantage that the Dems have in the news cycle.
Right now, plain speaking “dynamic discourse” is our friend, not the insidious virus that is “killing conservatism.”
Comment by B Moe on 9/20 @ 9:05 am #
Epic thread jacking Barrett. Too bad you aren’t defending ACORN, you are better at it than those who really are.
Comment by sdferr on 9/20 @ 9:06 am #
Oy, you “ilked”, hauwk’mgag … bastard.
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/20 @ 9:23 am #
“What “decades old movement” has this “newfound” obsession?”
Movement conservatism. I thought that was obvious from context.
Did you have fun searching through my PAC in search of things written by other people, Pablo? You’ve already seen me appear on Fox and Friends (which you apparently watch – seize the day!) on the organization’s behalf, so you should know that my position (and the organization’s) is the same as that of several of the more important Founding Fathers and early American statesmen – Treaty of Tripoli and all that, you know.
Comment by sdferr on 9/20 @ 9:25 am #
“the same”
Are you sure of that? Just how do you know what the same would be?
Comment by SBP on 9/20 @ 9:26 am #
Is Barrett still yammering about religion rather than addressing the topic?
Why are you letting him get away with it?
Comment by SBP on 9/20 @ 9:28 am #
Let’s see if Couric and Gregory have the balls to ask him any questions about ACORN, even a softball one like Stephanopoulos.
Answer: no.
Correction: Schieffer, not Couric. I misread the schedule and thought she was subbing this week.
Comment by JD on 9/20 @ 9:33 am #
ZOMFG how incredibly racist can you wingnutNazis be?
Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/20 @ 9:33 am #
“Are you sure of that? Just how do you know what the same would be?”
Because I agree with their writings on the subject, and particularly with the Treaty of Tripoli, which received wide support among both the better-known and lesser early statesmen.
Comment by JD on 9/20 @ 9:49 am #
Barrett – You can call yourself anything you wish, but that does not make it so. So far, all you have done is prove you are a prick, a little one.
Comment by B Moe on 9/20 @ 10:02 am #
LOL! Dude, if it weren’t for nit-picking you would cease to exist.
Comment by sdferr on 9/20 @ 10:20 am #
Identities along the lines “this thing is the same as this other thing” are easy to assert. They often prove to be less easy to establish. Still, you haven’t begun to state a position here, let alone identify the position or the particular founder’s positions you claim to agree with, let alone that you do in fact grasp what their positions are. That, we are invited to take on your say so as sufficient in itself. Twice now.
I would note one striking apparent difference with the founders however. Generally speaking, the founders were accomplished politicians in their day. You have, to the contrary, got a way to go on that front, it seems to me, based solely on the typical reaction you receive here, though I may be a poor judge of the matter. Now you might choose to blame the audience that is put off by your manner, if you like. Their reaction could be altogether due to their error; they are simply dunces who cannot see that you really are a sweet and beloved fellow where e’re you’re honestly met. On the other hand, it may be that that audience’s disposition to be put off stands in some direct relation to your choice of approach. Which of the two or what combination is the case is ultimately for you to decide.
Pingback by Obama claims: “I have no clue about the criminal enterprise ACORN” … [Darleen Click] on 9/20 @ 10:22 am #
[...] SBP) Posted by Darleen @ 10:22 am | Trackback SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: “Obama claims: “I [...]
Comment by N. O'Brain on 9/20 @ 10:36 am #
“Comment by BarrettBrown on 9/20 @ 9:23 am #
“What “decades old movement” has this “newfound” obsession?”
Movement conservatism. I thought that was obvious from context.”
Did you hurt your back, bartlett?
Comment by Mark A. Flacy on 9/20 @ 11:34 am #
Your love of the Treaty of Tripoli is solely for Article 11. Support for the treaty by those statesmen may well have been in spite of Article 11.
Comment by happyfeet on 9/20 @ 11:38 am #
oh. oh no nonononononono. You are not who you think you are.
Comment by happyfeet on 9/20 @ 11:39 am #
it’s a whole douchebag beach party … omg.
did he just twirl? At 2:39.
I think he just twirled.
Trackback by Tax write-off Question on 9/27 @ 4:20 am #
Tax write-off Question…
IRS files tax lien against criminal enterprise ACORN [Darleen … is an excellent post about the Tax write-off Question….
Comment by Gerald Gallagher on 12/21 @ 6:10 am #
race pimpin’ and vote buyin’ ain’t what they used to be! These are heady times for “progressives”(democrats) as they will get health care for everyone while killing every job in sight.Yeah,screw those rich bastards! Whhoooops, except those in hollywood or in politics or that lobby-yeah,but every other one.This administration will be shown by history to be the most corrupt ever. We will never forget.