Oh man I know! It's so cool how we have these ghetto denizens hoodwinked into voting Democrat 95% of the time, and all we need to do is confiscate other people's tax money and give it away! Meanwhile we can scream "RACIST!" whenever the heat gets a little to close, even though by simple examination the cities which are the biggest sewers of corruption, poverty and crime are all run by us on the left! What a scam! We rock!

Some people hate ACORN for a variety of reasons. You're trying to justify obviously illegal activity by saying "well, look at the other good things they've done." There's no defense here, people. An entity receiving taxpayer dollars engaged in illegal activity: counseling people on how to violate the tax laws and actively encouraging underage child prostitution. If this doesn't offend you, then there's no hope. Don't try the "few rotten apples" argument, either. In one city: possible. Two cities: looking fishy. Three cities: not a coincidence anymore, is it? Four cities: it's over, this organization is rotten in too many places.

Stop trying to change the focus by saying "well, you know, the right just hates this entity." So what if they do? It doesn't change the fact that ACORN employees tried to circumvent the laws of this country. Should they get a get-out-of-jail-free card simply because the right hates them? Illegal activity doesn't mean anything if you have the proper enemies?

Please explain to me how encouraging underage prostitution is "look[ing] out for the interests of the people the right likes to blame for the nation's problems." Honestly, can you make a more ridiculous argument than this? Give it a try.

To kungfoochimp: Sarcasm doesn't *have* to be the lowest form of wit.

That's just liberal propaganda.

To Rob: Netiquette requires such transparent strawmen - the *whole* "trying to justify"/change focus thing - be posted at a different blog or publication. Plopping it down under the piece you distort makes it very hard to maintain suspension of disbelief.

Don't ask too much of your reader.

OTOH, if you're just trying to sarcastically demonstrate Adam's point... kudos! kungfoochimp, take note.

V.O.R.

You don't read very well, do you? Adam Sewer posts a link to an article by Joe Conason that tries to, as Mr. Sewer puts it, "put the outrage in context." Conason then goes on to emphasize what ACORN does "every day" for low income people. It doesn't matter what ACORN does every day if they are also doing illegal things on several of those days, does it? Mr. Sewer then tries to make the feeble point that the "real" reason the right hates ACORN has nothing to do with the pimp and ho scandal. Nope, the right hates ACORN because ACORN does all these wonderful things for the people the right blames for all the nation's problems. You know, wonderful things like find ways to manipulate the federal income tax code so as to enable childhood prostitution. According to Sewer, this is the "real" reason the right hates ACORN. It has nothing to do with the illegality just revealed in the past week.

Do you even understand why the makers of the video chose such a patently ridiculous disguise and an incredibly ludicrous scheme (underage childhood prostitution)? It's because you cannot defend an agency that tries to manipulate the law to encourage that kind of behavior.

I may not be asking too much of intelligent readers but clearly, I'm asking too much of you. Talk about straw men, citing netiquette for anything is just asinine. Where is the big Emily Post handbook on netiquette? You're unable to address the substance of my argument so the best you can do is to say I should have posted it elsewhere? C'mon. This is clearly a post trying to put what ACORN does into a larger, helpful context. It doesn't work because what ACORN does is break the law. It's been proven. There's no escaping it. Let me know when you can be bothered with addressing the substance of my argument as opposed to its placement.

Hey Rob, If and when Gale Norton is indicted, does that mean that THE INTERIOR DEPARTMENT is breaking the law. Or can we put that in perspective. Just asking?

P.S.
I've asked Mr. Serwer to stop all Tapped funding for ACORN. Hope you're happy.

P.S.
I've asked Mr. Serwer to stop all Tapped funding for ACORN. Hope you're happy.

Nice try, Red. Hmmmm, let's see, we're not going to blame the entire entity for one bad apple, right? That's the argument you're making with Gale Norton: ONE bad apple. It's not a good argument. You better try again.

Newsflash: the "perspective" is that ACORN doesn't just have one office encouraging illegal activity.

I'll tell you what, let's work with your weak argument anyway. If Gale Norton is indicted and then three or four other top officials from the Department of the Interior are also indicted within a matter of days or weeks, we can then agree that there's a big problem at that department that needs to be remedied. What do you think, Red? If that happens, do you think the government should do something about it or should we just argue about "perspective" and let that department go about its merry business?

It's the difference between an isolated incident and a pattern of illegal behavior. Here, I'll help you out a bit since people here are struggling with this concept. When something happens only ONCE, that's what you call an isolated incident. When it happens three more times, that's a PATTERN. When it happens in four different cities with four different branches of the same entity, that's when it's time to defund that entity. Your average Congressperson has all the courage of a wet dishrag. It's no surprise that when the videos started piling up, Congress was going to get as far away from that mess as it could.

Prior to uncovering ACORN's decidedly cavalier approach to our nation's federal tax laws, would ANY of you have put good money on a bet that four offices in four different cities would fall for one of the most patently absurd hoaxes in recent years? Be honest with yourselves.

The arguments here are getting weaker. Surely readers of TAPPED can do better than this. Lest you think I'm picking on you personally, let's just keep it in perspective, shall we? It's all about perspective today, I see. It could be that just a few of you received poor educations but I'm willing to keep that in perspective.

Rob,
Sep 11, 2008 ... The Interior Department agency that collects oil and gas royalties has been caught up in a broad ethics scandal
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/11/washington/11royalty.html.
Matter of days or weeks!!

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/11/washington/11royalty.html

Just in case.

This argument is as ridiculous as claiming the left hated Gerry Falwell because he helped the poor. Perhaps the left hates Evangelical Christians because they send 1000s of Missionaries to African to help the sick and poor?

..."Yet ACORN's troubles should be considered in the context of a history of honorable service to the dispossessed and impoverished."

Right. This is an old criminal tactic. Cloak your organization in altruistic purposes and "good works".

Even the nation's most notorious gangster, Al Capone, was a public hero and enjoyed massive "community support" because of the two dozen soup kitchens for the poor, that he sponsored.

Coincidentally, Capone was also involved in income tax evasion, voter registration fraud and prostitution.

After the recent stink, I made a contribution to ACORN to support their good work. I urge others to do the same, and don't believe the lies spread by hardmanb and others.