Lefty corruption....again

Heh, okay buddy, so it's the GOP's fault and they are viciously trying to fuck over the poor, despite these completely uncontested facts:

1) It passed 83-7.
2) Census Bureau had already cut ties with ACORN.
3) 43 democratic Senators voted to cut funding, along with (I'm guessing) all 40 Republicans.
4) The Republicans can't get ANYTHING passed without substantial support from the Dems, whereas the Dems can run the whole table on their own.
5) ACORN has been caught doing really shady things in quite a few states.

So yes, if you want to ignore all the facts, it's clearly "just" the GOP doing this.
 
Joined
Mar 5, 2009
Messages
2,299
Location
VA
Silly Rith, the left is utterly pristine. Any evidence to the contrary is just distortion by the vast right wing conspiracy. Pristine, man. Halos and harps.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,545
Location
Illinois, USA
Well, my main point is if this was a 51-49 vote, then sure, it would be mostly the GOP's fault. But more democrats voted for this then there are GOP senate members, and to characterize their vote as wanting to screw over poor people is to ignore the fact that ACORN has been caught doing really shady things, the point where the Census Bureau (which is not run by the GOP) cut ties with them before this vote was even held. Why bother actually examining if there are legitimate concerns when you can just tar the other side with being racist/classist/sexist/against freedom/against security/etc/etc?

I mean, with this logic I can say things like this:

1) The Democrats are responsible for the PATRIOT Act and the Iraq war vote. They voted completely in support of this, and despite the fact that their votes were hardly necessary and the GOP far outnumbered them in manpower and votes, the GOP is blameless because it is obviously the minority party's fault.
2) Any Democrat who wanted to close down Gitmo because of the torture program conducted by the CIA is obviously doing it because they hate America and want us all to be killed by terrorists. There was absolutely no legitimate policy concern involving torture and it was all a scheme for them to get rid of (or harm) organizations they did not like.

Those two arguments are just as valid, IMO.
 
Joined
Mar 5, 2009
Messages
2,299
Location
VA
2) Any Democrat who wanted to close down Gitmo because of the torture program conducted by the CIA is obviously doing it because they hate America and want us all to be killed by terrorists. There was absolutely no legitimate policy concern involving torture and it was all a scheme for them to get rid of (or harm) organizations they did not like.
Ummm, I thought you intended these examples to be silly and obviously flawed.... :D
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,545
Location
Illinois, USA
The problem is ACORN"s fault. The exploitation of the problem for political capital is the right's fault. The support of corrupt federally funded institutions and programs is the whole government's(and public's) fault.

So have we solved anything now that we figured out whose fault it is? Can a woman whose profession is legal in some states but not in others apply for a loan for a house, or is that immoral and corrupt as well?

If you compare every case of fraud and abuse in ACORN with the rest of society--the banks, the lobbyists, the crookedness of elected officials,private sector CEO's and so forth, just what is it that really stands out about ACORN and makes their faults so huge and so much more egregious?

I'd be thinking about that one, myself. Mirrors, you know. Good to look in them sometimes, not just shine them in other people's eyes.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,834
Sorry DTE, I'm independant. Gotta save your rainbow unicorns or halos comments for someone else, unless you want to include independants in that field now. I'm just sick to death of this bickering and games.

I focused on this one part of ACORN and left out the other parts of ACORN. Maybe I shouldn't of, but aren't even you a little fed up with this kind of politics? Just a little?

Let's put aside whether or not ACORN is corrupt or what have you. They probably are and I just don't know it. But an organization that gets the vote to the poor is not a bad thing. I just wish to god that there were organizations out there that didn't have to become corrupted in the process of helping.

That's it. I've said my piece and in the end it still is good news for republicans because they went after and are now taking out ACORN. I just hope some other organization can do a better job next time and for god sakes if your giving advice check to see if they have spy cameras on them ;)
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2007
Messages
5,347
Location
Taiwan
I'd like to state for the record I want every corrupt politician, businessman, government employee, etc thrown behind bars. I'm glad ACORN is losing public funding until it gets its act together. I'm all for said money being used with a similar organization (or multiple organizations) doing the same sort of work if they have a clean record. I'm not opposed to ACORN's mission statement, just what it's been doing to go about it ... if that makes any sense. ACORN played dirty, it should lose its money (as should Blackwater and a whole host of other organizations).
 
Joined
Mar 5, 2009
Messages
2,299
Location
VA
It seems so small to be pursuing this stuff with ACORN, with the much bigger fish that need to be fried. Hell, we almost fell into another great depression because of larger corruption issues in banking and finance!
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
15,682
Location
Studio City, CA
OMG, before I just read the news reports about this ACORN thing. I didn't actually see the video. I just got watching the video and let me say OMG again. Even I would draw the line when they started going into 13 young El Salvadorian women coming to living there. That's going way too far people.

If they want advice on their taxes for what they do, then fine, but El Salvadorian slaves? I take back everything I said about this. EVERYTHING. They deserve to get shot down after that.
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2007
Messages
5,347
Location
Taiwan
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,545
Location
Illinois, USA
Well, you're going to have to interpret the article for me dte. I read it and it's mostly banking gibberish to me, but I couldn't see any overt wrongdoing. What I'm getting is that they've set up relationships for big money with banks to finance mortgages or build homes in minority areas. That's generally what they're supposed to be doing afaik. If they're funneling the money away from projects into their own pockets or something, then I get the gripe. I kept looking for something about them using the CRA to screw over banks but didn't catch anything solid. That Arizona deal starts out like it's a conflict of interest story, but it's hard to tell since the guy at JPMorgan Chase seemed to pretty well keep his distance legally. (I'm probably missing something, since you've sneakily worked some numbers and finance into the picture.)

After the last fiasco, I'm not sure I should be defending them much, since apparently they have a serious problem with corruption, not to mention incompetence, but I'm just not seeing where the crime is in this particular instance.

Looks like the bad publicity is finally sinking in, though, with BOA and others jumping ship.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,834
The theory is that it's a "pay to play" situation. If ACORN's branches don't get the mortgage business, ACORN proper starts a CRA investigation. As soon as the bank gives in, the investigation magically goes away.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,545
Location
Illinois, USA
Ah, Thanks. I did get that allegation but didn't see the article tying it up to anything. I'll pay attention to the investigation and we'll see what comes out of it.

It is an interesting problem about the role of government that the CRA presents; I can understand the banking industry not wanting to invest in minority neighborhoods or finance mortgages for high risk clients—though they seemed to be happy to package up the derivatives from them—-but I don't see how that's a natural win for society, and I do see how they have to be …encouraged by law to spread their assets around in areas where they might prefer not to in order for cities as a whole to get dragged out of the decay cycle.

Case in point: Here in OKC we've got a traditional black area called the Deep Deuce. A few years ago the city passed a sales tax to redo the are it abuts on, which would be the core downtown area (Bricktown) so that the Bass Proshop and Toby Keith could build businesses there and they could suck in development money. They did do a lot with it, and the area is really booming and yupped out now, despite being previously a run-down slum full of homeless people and crime. A lot of people want to do the same with the Deuce, bu there's no one to front the money, and there's no question of floating a sales tax in a recession for working white people to pay for restoration of a historic black neighborhood. Yet said restoration benefits the whole city, and helps lift the area from being a burned out den of crackheads into a family neighborhood of locallly run small businesses.

So this is where something like the CRA and ACORN would come in, in a perfect world, and improve the ciity against the will of the banks who wouldn't want to be bothered or were not interested in taking the risk.

So in my mind, there's nothing majorly evil about ACORN or some other group working to get banks to do projects in minority areas because only someone with more unicorns and rainbows in their head than myself would assume the banks would do it of their own free will. And I would expect the banks to go to their party of choice and ask someone to raise hell about it if said minority group did hold the CRA over their heads, so I'm going to have to wait for the investigation to pan out before I get too worried about banks being taken for a ride.

The track record of repubs vs ACORN is pretty rocky, but so is ACORN's so I'll try to keep an open mind.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,834
The theory is that it's a "pay to play" situation. If ACORN's branches don't get the mortgage business, ACORN proper starts a CRA investigation. As soon as the bank gives in, the investigation magically goes away.

I'm not sure I follow . . . looks like an organisation whose remit is to widen access to finance and other benefits of society for disadvantaged communities is using a law intended to help disadvantaged communities to carry out their remit . . .

Am I missing something or is that basically what's happening? Are they shaking the banks down to offer business that they're middlemen on so that they can make profits they embezzle / use for other political purposes or something?
 
Joined
Feb 2, 2007
Messages
2,351
Location
London
Are they shaking the banks down to offer business that they're middlemen on so that they can make profits they embezzle / use for other political purposes or something?
This (allegedly), although you don't need the embezzle step for it to be illegal. There are other potential middlemen besides ACORN that the banks could use to fulfill their CRA obligations. The others just don't resort to extortion like our buddies at ACORN.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,545
Location
Illinois, USA
How is it extorion to expose banks that are in violation of the law? By your argument, collection agencies would be extortionists, as would attorneys for class action lawsuits against corporations.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
15,682
Location
Studio City, CA
This (allegedly), although you don't need the embezzle step for it to be illegal. There are other potential middlemen besides ACORN that the banks could use to fulfill their CRA obligations. The others just don't resort to extortion like our buddies at ACORN.

Presumably if the banks were actually meeting their CRA obligations then ACORN wouldn't be able to extort?

Even so, it is all bit murky, unless there are restrictions that mean that any profits ACORN makes have to go towards certain things.
 
Joined
Feb 2, 2007
Messages
2,351
Location
London
Ever heard of bogus accusation? ACORN files the complaint. Doesn't matter whether the complaint is justified or not, the bank has to spend time and money to defend it. If it was really a horrible crime-against-humanity violation and ACORN is saving the world from evil corporations, why does the complaint magically go away once ACORN gets business from the bank? It's no different than a mob protection racket. Except that it's a wildly pro-lefty organization cloaking their extortion in pro-lefty politics…
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,545
Location
Illinois, USA
Not to mention it strikes me as hypocritical to complain about bank malfeasance and corruption with one hand while your other hand is aiming a gun at them and forcing them to give out rotten loans to people who can't possibly afford them.
 
Joined
Mar 5, 2009
Messages
2,299
Location
VA
Back
Top Bottom