Acorn Continues to Make Headlines
Acorn, the organization who says its goal is to register as many voters as possible regardless of their party preference, continues to make headlines. The Wall Street Journal published an article on Tuesday, for instance, that exposes the fraud committed by Acorn workers and the organization’s ties to leading Democrats such as Barack Obama.
The article takes a closer look at the ties between the fraudulent organizations and the Democratic Party’s nominee for president and concludes that the two worked together rather closely for years. Obama’s attempt to distance himself from the organization in recent weeks, then, is deemed highly hypocritical.
The conservative Wall Street Journal is not the only outlet spending time and attention to Acorn and Obama, however. CNN, which is generally considered to have a liberal bias, also covered the subject recently. CNN’s Drew Griffin explained for the American network:
The only question is whether Acorn will be sued or not. All the available evidence suggests these are not mistakes but, rather, an orchestrated effort to boost Barack Obama’s chances of winning in November (Acorn’s main concern is registering people who vote for Democrats).
Lastly, not only is Acorn breaking the law, it is also being funded by the U.S. federal government. Congressional Democrats have sponsored Acord for years. They even wanted to include Acorn in the bailout bill, meaning that the organization would receive hundreds of thousands of dollars for their ‘charity’ work.
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
“Let me tell you another way we could have helped prevent this. And that is, to have election officials do their job… We ask election officials and law enforcement to prosecute our employees, so we could tell our employees that no, this isn’t just a firing offense. This is an offense that can lead you to jail. Then we could put that up in the .. into on ready rooms whe(n? re?) we train people”
In other words, “Forget whether we’re doing OUR job or not. Why take responsibility when we blame it on the government?”