The Associated Press has taken to quoting hecklers at McCain rallies;
McCain’s remarks about Obama were interrupted with shouts of “socialist,” “terrorist” and “liar.” At another time, a man in the bleaches [sic] shouted “No more ACORN,” referring to a group that registers poor voters.
Poor poor voters! This guy must really have it in for them!
Actually, as it turns out, poor voters aren’t the only ones Acorn—an acronym for Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now—registers. The group has been in the news in several key states the past few days:
The Sun-Times report notes that “Obama successfully represented ACORN in Chicago in its effort to protect the law that allows people to register to vote when they get their driver’s licenses.” For more on Acorn’s agenda and Obama’s connections, see this Stanley Kurtz piece in National Review Online.
Of course, fraudulently registering to vote is not the same as fraudulently voting (except possibly in Ohio, where a federal judge ruled that voters could cast absentee ballots as they were registering). Acorn is paying people to sign up voters, so it arguably is a victim of this fraud.
All this suggests we should have a degree of skepticism about claims of a surge in Democratic voter registration. If those voters don’t materialize at the polls, it may be because they never existed to begin with.
Read More of The Mighty Oak Was Once a Little Nut off-site...Zygote99 says:
FlaLady, Hmmm, where do I begin? ACORN was not a factor in the housing market meltdown - BusinessWeek said that 80% of the loans made in the subprime market were made by banks not subject to the Community Reinvestment Act. That means that 80% of those subprime loans were made strictly for profit and not due to pressure from the government or ACORN. On top of that, the biggest problem we face in our economy is the collapse of the credit default swap market, which adds up to around $60 trillion, while the subprime mortgage market is only one trillion dollars. We shouldn't be in Iraq in the first place, but Obama has made it very clear that he wold pull troops out in the most responsible way, which is phased and gradual. On top of that, his website says that "a residual force will remain in Iraq and in the region to conduct targeted counter-terrorism missions against al Qaeda in Iraq and to protect American diplomatic and civilian personnel." And he's made it very clear that an attack in Pakistan territory would only happen if we had actionable intel on Osama's whereabouts there, and the Pakistan govt. refused to take action. Duh. And in regards to the economy, his policies are close to B.Clinton's, and if you'll recall, the economy was much healthier then.
FlaLady says:
How many negatives must there be against this man? How many questionable associations? How many times can he change his position on the issues to get more votes? His economic policy would be poison to a sick U.S. economy! The Democrats in charge of Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac were a huge contributor to the housing market meltdown (ACORN Housing involved here, too) and yet no one is questioning them? The federal investigation into FM/FM has been postponed until after the election by Democrats who do not want the results of the investigation to reflect poorly on Obama at the polls! Where is the public outcry? Obama wants to pull out of Iraq prematurely on the one hand and advocates attacking Pakistan without provocation on the other! Is he dangerously naive or just dangerous? What the heck are we, as a nation, doing? Allowing Democrat-sponsored suicide???