The Brad Blog has the audio of his LA KTLK am 1150 interview on Wednesday with:

BERTHA LEWIS, CEO and Chief Organizer of ACORN on the now-infamous ACORN "Pimp" Hoax, mainstream media failure, their own failure, and the future for the four-decade old anti-poverty national community organization.

That page also has links to all his stories about his running battle to try to get the NYT to actually correct their story on the hoax.

"Never pick up a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel" should perhaps be updated to "...unless you're really determined, focused, and have a blog."

jgriffin, I suggest you get a grip. Also some facts.

jgriffin,

1. It's Minnesota.
2. ACORN's main role, if I'm not mistaken, has been getting black people to vote. Do you have a problem with this?
3. Your analysis of the role of Fannie and Freddie is rather simplistic. Read the book 13 Bankers for a better than reactionary knee-jerk analysis

ACORN's main role, if I'm not mistaken, has been getting black people to vote

With their own money, No. With taxpayer money, Yes. They focus on registering Democrats.

Although the organization prides itself for its registration efforts, it also has a long history of scandal. In the state of Missouri in 1986, 12 ACORN members were convicted of voter fraud. But that case was not an isolated incident in the state. In December 2004, in St. Louis, six volunteers pleaded guilty of dozens of election law violations for filling out registration cards with names of dead people and other bogus information. Authorities launched an earlier investigation after noticing that among the new voters was longtime St. Louis alderman Albert ?Red? Villa, who died in 1990. The volunteers worked for ?Operation Big Vote? ? a branch of ACORN ? in St. Louis.

On February 10, 2005, Nonaresa Montgomery, a paid worker who ran Operation Big Vote during the run-up to the 2001 mayoral primary, was found guilty of vote fraud. Montgomery hired about 30 workers to do fraudulent voter-registration canvassing. Instead of knocking on doors, the volunteers sat at a St. Louis fast food restaurant and wrote out names and information from an outdated voter list. About 1,500 fraudulent voter registration cards were turned in.

In October 2006, St. Louis election officials discovered at least 1,492 ?potentially fraudulent? voter registration cards. They were all turned in by ACORN volunteers.

In November 2006, 20,000 to 35,000 questionable voter registration forms were turned in by ACORN officials in Missouri. Most all of these were from St. Louis and Kansas City areas, where ACORN purportedly sought to help empower the ?disenfranchised? minorities living there. But the ACORN workers weren?t just told to register new voters. The workers admitted on camera that they were coached to tell registrants to vote for Democrat Claire McCaskill.

In 2007, in Kansas City, Missouri, four ACORN employees were indicted for fraud. In April of this year eight ACORN employees in St. Louis city and county pleaded guilty to federal election fraud for submitting bogus voter registrations.

And, that was just Missouri.

This year there have been several accusations of fraud against ACORN. Over a dozen states are investigating the organization already. Here is a complete list of the ongoing investigations:

North Carolina ? State Board of Elections officials have found at least 100 voter registration forms with the same names over and over again. The forms were turned in by ACORN. Officials sent about 30 applications to the state Board of Elections for possible fraud investigation.

Ohio ? The New York Post reported that a Cleveland man said he was given cash and cigarettes by aggressive ACORN activists in exchange for registering an astonishing 72 times. The complaints have sparked an investigation by election officials into the organization, whose political wing has supported Barack Obama. Witnesses have already been subpoenaed to testify against the organization.

Nevada ? Authorities raided the headquarters of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now on Tuesday October 7, 2008, after a month-long investigation. The fraudulent voter registrations included the Dallas Cowboys starting line-up.

Indiana ? More than 2,000 voter registration forms filed in northern Indiana?s Lake County filled out by ACORN employees turned out to be bogus. Officials also stopped processing a stack of about 5,000 applications delivered just before the October 6 registration deadline after the first 2,100 turned out to be phony.

Connecticut ? Officials are looking into a complaint alleging ACORN submitted fraudulent voter registration cards in Bridgeport. In one instance, an official said a card was filled out for a 7-year-old girl, whose age was listed as 27. 8,000 cards were submitted in Bridgeport.

Missouri ? The Kansas City election board is reporting 100 duplicate applications and 280 with fake information. Acorn officials agreed that at least 4% of their registrations were bogus. Governor Matt Blunt condemned the attempts by ACORN to commit voter fraud.

Pennsylvania ? Officials are investigating suspicious or incomplete registration forms submitted by ACORN. 252,595 voter registrations were submitted in Philadelphia. Remarkably, 57,435 were rejected ? most of them submitted by ACORN.

Wisconsin ? In Milwaukee ACORN improperly used felons as registration workers. Additionally, its workers are among 49 cases of bad registrations sent to authorities for possible charges, as first reported by the Journal Sentinel.

I don't vouch for the site. Will continue.

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/the-complete-guide-to-acorn-voter-fraud/2/

phony voting in a large number of races

Well, obviously, everybody knows (poor) black people's votes only count 3/5 of everyone else's....

Yup, ACORN is so very criminal that they've been aquitted. Because they didn't do anything illegal, you see. Except register people to vote. And not control how those people voted after registration. Because all they did was help them get registered, and get out to vote.

You'll notice a trend. I'd support generally republican groups which did this too. Unfortunately, the republican groups more often seem to work to make sure people DON'T vote, rather than the other way around.

Anyways, I figure we need more groups like ACORN, encouraging people to vote, not fewer. More voters means more democracy, right?

kattw
9 Apr 2010, 10:10PM

More voters means more democracy, right?

In this case, more Democrats. Just don't use taxpayer funds for any partisan activities.

Part 2 of pajamas media, which I don't vouch for.

Florida ? The Pinellas County Elections supervisor says his office has received around 35 voter registrations that appear to be bogus. There is also a question of 30,000 felons who are registered illegally to vote. Their connections with ACORN are not yet clear.

Texas ? Of the 30,000 registration cards ACORN turned in, Harris County tax assessor Paul Bettencourt says just more than 20,000 are valid. And just look at some of the places ACORN was finding those voters. A church just next door is the address for around 150 people. More than 250 people claim a homeless outreach center as their home address. Some listed a county mental health facility as their home and one person even wrote down the Harris County jail at the sheriff?s office.

Michigan ? ACORN in Detroit is being investigated after several municipal clerks reported fraudulent and duplicate voter registration applications coming through. The clerk interviewed said the fraud appears to be widespread.

New Mexico ? The Bernalillo County clerk has notified prosecutors that some 1,100 fraudulent voter registration cards were turned in by ACORN.

That?s not all. So far this year at least 14 states have started investigations against ACORN. Talk about a culture of corruption. It is so bad that Representatives of Congress have asked for the Justice Department to investigate, and GOP presidential candidate John McCain is bringing it up in his stump speeches. The Obama camp is stealthily altering its ?Fight the Smears? website to distance themselves from the organization ? quite a challenge considering how close their candidate?s association has been with the group.

The liberal vs. conservative, voter fraud vs. voter intimidation debate will no doubt continue after this election. But this year, with the assistance of scandal-plagued ACORN, it appears that ? so far ? the voter fraud side is winning.

October 14, 2008 - by Jim Hoft

I assume Jim Hoft is a Republican

Really? Does ACORN only take people who check off democrat on their private vote after the fact? What do they do when the voters vote for a republican? Raid the ballot box and withdraw the slip of paper? Reprogram the buggy voting machine?

ACORN takes PEOPLE and helps them vote. They focus on the poor, yes. Maybe the poor would vote republican more often if republicans weren't so anti-poor?

kattw -

Do you know what acquitted means? Refusal to prosecute doesn't qualify.

Well, 'in a common law trial, an aquittal formally certifies the innocence of the accused' (wikipedia). So my apologies if I have misused the word based upon technical meaning, but I believe it has been used correctly in general meaning - not guilty. Like oh so many words in our language, it has common uses as well as technical ones.

kattw -
"Anyways, I figure we need more groups like ACORN, encouraging people to vote, not fewer. More voters means more democracy, right?"

YES YES YES! I hope for increased voter participation and I love the turnout the last presidential election brought it. It was amazing.

kattw -

"not guilty"

A District Attorney does not have the authority to pronounce a party guilty or not guilty. The general meaning you're after is also incorrect. The Obama administration has refused to prosecute Bush-administration officials for torture. This is the same thing. Are they guilty? They will never see a jury, so we will never know.

Bojnik
9 Apr 2010, 10:22PM

kattw -

Do you know what acquitted means? Refusal to prosecute doesn't qualify.

I am sure you can explain why refusal to prosecute means ACORN is guilty. In the US, Bojnik, we believe in "innocent until proven guilty". It's one of our finest legal traditions. I commend it to your attention.

Does this even count? ACORN runs voter registration drives for the Democratic Party and two DEMOCRATIC Party officials (Hynes and Brown) don't feel like prosecuting them. Whoopey. Maybe that's why nobody's reporting the non-news.

And from NYT:

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- California Attorney General Jerry Brown determined Thursday that ACORN broke no criminal laws, after reviewing videotapes that sparked a recent political firestorm.

Brown's office said it would not pursue charges against the now-defunct community organizing group. But it said ACORN engaged in inappropriate behavior that may prompt other state agencies to take a look, such as dumping 500 pages of confidential records into the trash and failing to file a state tax return.

''A few ACORN members exhibited terrible judgment and highly inappropriate behavior in videotapes obtained in the investigation,'' Brown said in a statement. ''But they didn't commit prosecutable crimes in California.''

Besides not filing taxes and throwing away confidential papers, the attorney general's report found four instances of possible voter registration fraud by ACORN in San Diego accompanying the 2008 election

I, personally, have always found the rightwing/Republican whining about ACORN (an NGO engaged in voter registration activities--and the hysterical attempts at a portrayal that they engaged in something scurrilous) to be a large charge, when compared to the actual governmental and abusive actions by Harris in Florida in the run up to the Bush/Gore election of 2000. The use of private contractors to (wrongfully or erroneously--a distinction without a difference, when one is talking about our basic right to vote) disqualify voters is much more egregious than anything ACORN may have ever done.

But, I guess we aren't supposed to talk about the Bush/Gore travesty because the Decider isn't President any more--and we have been ordered to get over it.

Even about the deficits and the broken economy which were caused by 6 years of absolute control by the Republican Decider and both Houses of Congress.

It might make someone cry to bring up real governmental abuse concerning the Constitutional right of voting.

So, I won't.

Yeah, well EVERYONE knows that both sides entrap NGOs into saying things on hidden video that can be sliced up and recontextualized into incriminating looking film.
So why is this even an issue?

goodbye Mike and good luck to you
i have deleted any links to the guardian and i promise you,
i will not be back. this rag just too darn restrictive and besides,
i know that it's dying and i don't want to be around for the final passing-too sad
Still, i wish you luck and sucess - keep working on that novel!
Best Regards
just me

Why oh why did American journalists swallow whole the lies and manipulated video of O'Keefe? Why did no major news outlet dig a little deeper to expose O'Keefe's sleazy deception? Surely this is a huge failure of mainstream journalism -- encouraging the public lynching of Acorn without investigating the facts of the case.

According to Rachel Maddow, the Acorn staffer in one video who appeared to be listening sympathetically to the "pimp" and "prostitute" in fact called the police with the information he'd gathered as soon as they left. I spent many years as a journalist, and what amazes me about this is the ease with any of the news sources that reported so credulously on the videos--including the mighty New York Times--could have checked this fact: one call to Acorn, one to the police department. And that Democrats in Congress could have responded in such a damaging way without even bothering to check.

Well, what's the successor organization to ACORN? It's not like their staffers or constituents disappeared. For God's sake, I voted for Obama because he was an organization man, unlike that awful awful woman.

Interesting discussion.

Clearly the Republicans don't like black people voting because they tend to vote democrat (ACORN's mission is registering voters, not democrats). I gather too that they have engaged in voter suppression activities that are every bit as nefarious as any improprieties committed on the other side.

So what the republicans want is "democracy" for the well off? We don't see bipartisan efforts to reduce electoral fraud and improve voter registration. Why?

Better, surely, to insure that everybody has a vote and uses it, and feels that it matters. Here in the UK electoral reform may make some progress in the event of a hung parliament, and if it happens it will change politics here for the better.

Voterpower.org.uk is worth a look (it shows how much your vote counts depending on where you live). I believe that America has the same problem only far worse.

The single transferrable vote system is a great way of ensuring every vote counts, but established duopolies resist it.

SamJohnson
10 Apr 2010, 10:40AM
There are disparities here too, as you probably know. Smaller states gain from the two Senator rule, which also impacts the electoral college count. Most House seats are sliced in such a way that Representatives select voters rather than vice-versa. And the party running the state legislature maximizes its likely voters. I don't think this will change. It's too obscure.

I have read that your system favors Labor. Comparing 2001 and 1992, with about 41% of the vote, Labor ended up with over 60% of the Commons seats and Tories slightly over 50%. I would say reform is critical as this seems unfair to the team I favor, but maybe there are anomolies I'm missing.

I hope Cameron wins, for many reasons. But mostly, I want to see the impact of the marriage friendly policies.

SamJohnson
10 Apr 2010, 10:40AM
Democrats mostly point to churches as the vehicle for Republican registration. I'm not sure why taxpayer funds should be paid to help one party register friendly voters. Both pieces of ACORN and churches have tax-exempt status, which is less helpful.

I'm not sure any organization that targets Republicans receives taxpayer funding (Not exempt 501n status) for registration, but would happily be corrected. We should start one.

And you're making this sound racist, but it's about winning elections. Everyone should send in a voter registration card. And a census form, BTW.

But Acorn has gone el foldo. An organization whose real crimes were to be liberal and to try to do things for poor people.

the real crime was signing up black voters. And wacobloke you make a good point about the Bush/Gore vote. Republican apologists such as ngavc will ignore that and focus on Acorn giving somebody cigarettes to vote.

I would also argue that encouraging people who may not feel they are part of the system to vote is a very American thing to do, and actually strengthens our democracy.

As far as Acorn receiving taxpayer dollars is concerned, how much are we talking here? What percentage of the federal budget? And why does this bear so much more scrutiny than any other part of the budget which favors one particular segment of the population?

jwitts

I spent many years as a journalist, and what amazes me about this is the ease with any of the news sources that reported so credulously on the videos--including the mighty New York Times--could have checked this fact: one call to Acorn, one to the police department. And that Democrats in Congress could have responded in such a damaging way without even bothering to check.

That frightens me too.

Bojnik

YES YES YES! I hope for increased voter participation and I love the turnout the last presidential election brought it. It was amazing.

Me too. And we should all feel that way.

'Wasted Time--

As some of my UK friends might say "Good riddance to bad rubbish."

And if they don't/won't I will.

Mike Tomasky is a breath of fresh air for many. The Guardian serves a good and literate function, too, and certainly isn't a carbuncle on the ass of society like propaganda mills such as Fox "News".

Did you used to cry and pick up your toys and go home, too?

Thanks much for deciding to not waste our time anymore.

One more point to ngavc about Acorn receiving so much taxpayer money.

Republican tax cuts to the rich also cost the taxpayer money.

Now, republicans argue that those tax cuts may lead to wealth creation - Reagan's famous trickle down theory. Well, I would argue that helping poorer people becoming a productive part of society may also lead to wealth creation.

Lets face it, no matter where tax dollars are spent they do not necessarily benefit all segments of the population equally.

Yet you focus on Acorn because you think that it has received a disproportionate amount of public funds. Do you have any proof?

I think the concern about taxpayer dollars is a deflection, ngavc. You won't condemn Fox for their bad journalism so instead you try and focus the blame on Acorn. I am really a little disappointed in you.

Elena24
10 Apr 2010, 3:15PM

Or is it mommy? I wish you weren't disappointed in me. (A little fun, there). And isn't it ACORN?

As an accountant, you know we don't tax wealth (The Rich). We tax income. The high earners pay most of our bills now. They receive no additional government services than the poor, arguably less. In a truly fair world every citizen would pay an equal amount of money based on availability of government services - the same. The high earners are getting ripped off. After all, what's income got to do with bill paying, objectively? Nothing. The high earners deserved relief. They objectively deserve much more. But that won't happen.

The Bush tax cuts were a huge benefit to low and middle income earners, with the child credits and the new 10% bracket. This year 46% of filers will pay no income tax - nothing. A married couple with two kids earning $50,000/annum will pay nothing after child tax credits and work credit - Nothing. In a couple of years they may get $9,000 for health insurance. Who pays for this? People earning over $50K and later, over the subsidy cap. But it is disproportionately paid by very high earners.

We ought to have a "High Earner Appreciation Month" (April). Those who actually pay over the average income tax (About $3,500K/capita) will get a sticker they can wear, colored based on contribution to everybody else's bills.

Back to ACORN. ACORN goes to neighbourhoods where there are disproportionately potential Democratic voters. It's like an arm of the DNC. Does the failure by two Democratic politicians to indict an essential subsidiary of the Democratic Party impress me? Not really. It's a little conflicted, which may be why the liberal media ignored it. Did I say ACORN got a disproportionate share of taxpayer money? I don't think so. I don't know why anybody should get taxpayer money to target potential voters who favor a particular Party. If you're a citizen, go register. It's your duty. Why do you need some government contractor to hold your hand? I'm sure you're registered, or is it mis-registered. (Lame wrong party joke.)

That said, I never thought the stupid ACORN staffer actions were a big story. And didn't everyone report it? We sure got oodles of reporting on Sarah's dresses - Worth every penny - She looks great and now can afford her own - God bless her. I wish she'd open a Republican ACORN. And we heard about the RNC staffers visit to the SM strip club. We enjoy scandalous politics.

BTW, I have avoided Social Security and health (Medicare) insurance, also called payroll taxes. Those disproportionately favor low earners.

Bye. Hope the above made sense. I can ramble with my two typing fingers.

Thanks for your response. I am sure this is taken from the republican play book - it sounds phoney to me, but I can

As an accountant, you know we don't tax wealth (The Rich). We tax income

Wealth generates income.

They receive no additional government services than the poor, arguably less

Why? They get Social security and medicare. they get military protection. Possibly they send their kids to public schools, possibly not. Don't see how you can argue this.

But it is disproportionately paid by very high earners

Yes, the more you earn the more you pay. And your point is?

I will absolutely agree with you that some people need help. But I would argue that in the end we all benefit. I don't want to live in a society with a permanent underclass. Isn't that what third world countries are like? If I wanted to live in India, I would move there.

And I would further argue that if the "rich" ever do become "poor" then they will be able to obtain the same social benefits which will enable them to get back on their feet. I think societies are civilized if they provide social mobility.

I am sure your Palin remarks are meant to rile. they don't, she is inconsequential. But as I said on the other thread if she did open a Republican Acorn she would quit after a year.

There's a word for what O'Keefe and the blowhards at Faux Neus did: Fraud.

O'Keefe and Faux Neus need to be held liable to the tune of tens of millions of dollars. I'd love to see a court decision that empties out Faux's treasury and gives it to a Acorn, recreating that organization with double or triple the money it had before, bankrupting and discrediting Faux Neus into the gutter.

Alternately, ngavc, in a truly fair world everyone would pay what they could afford to keep society on its feet, whether they needed the services directly or not. The income tax may 'disproportionately' hit the wealthy, but every other tax seems to disproportionately hit the average or less than average earner. Also, what conservatives seem to love to ignore in their ranting is that the wealthy get that way by leeching money from the poor. If they were actually spending and investing money (the way trickle down economics suggests these things work), well, they wouldn't be rich! They'd just be middle class, and there'd be a whole lot more people with reasonable wealth reserves right now. But there aren't.

Point being, whether they use services directly or not, the wealthy benefit from the existence of those government services. The CEO of pfizer will never be on Medicaid, but he benefits whenever a Medicaid patient needs pfizer drugs. This is a common phenomenon - money needs to flow, or it's worthless. And the poor can only help the economy if they have help. I use economic arguments here because merely moral arguments, involving life, limb, health, etc., seem to fall on deaf ears where the average conservative is involved.

What the GOP is doing in trying to criminalise ACORN, at least in the popular mind, if not in the courts, is very underhand. The equivalent of ACORN, on the right, is often the local church. You can't very easily criminalise a church, in the same way, without upsetting a lot of people. But its pretty much the same thing, making sure that people who you think are largely going to vote in the same way as you want them to are registered to vote.

The attack on Obama's civic activism, community organising,whatever you want to call it, is the same.

And as for NGAVC;s comments on ACORN's fuding, wasn't there at least a proposal that religious groups could get government funding to perform social/welfare functions?

Ngavc, please think about some things you write.

The rich don't benefit less from government than the poor. Quite better minds than mine have written about goverrnment welfare for the rich. Let's start with an extremely corrupt defense budget for 30 years to keep the cost of oil flowing at a subsidized price. The rich drive on the same roads, and use the same public services. They benefit enormously from government letting them strip employment laws and contracts and hire people for less money than the previous contract. They benefit from lavish defense contracts handed out with no bidding, so work is taken away from small American businesses. The largest of these enriched companies, Halliburton, left the country after receiving its largesse. The poor and middle class of the US have been recently forced to bail out the US financial class, whose wild speculations destroyed the economy. I believe the top 5 managers at Bear Sterns and Lehman Bros. took home 250 million dollars between them from 2000 to 2008. NO ONE IN GOVERNMENT made them pay back these amounts in return for the bailout.

Rich also benefit from the change from taxing income to charging fees. I recently renewed my driver's license for 5 years. The cost? $75. To one of the CEO's above that figure means nothing, to me on cut wages that means a lot.

When ACORN comes up, I never hear one person protest the no bid contracts given out by the government. That's waste of taxpayer's money too.

ngavc,

I'm voting for the Liberal Democrats because I favour proportional representation. For me it's a non-negotiable prerequisite and I will vote for the party that commits to it until it is introduced.

British politics has been bedevilled by over-correcting swings to the right and left that have been horribly destructive and alienating for a significant, alternating, proportion of the population -- and I write mostly as a disinterested observer, as I am of US politics.

The Tory party has announced a 150 pound annual tax break for married couples. This a joke. It's not going to change anything. It's to be paid for with a tax on banks. That's a joke too. It's just a soft option, designed to make many people say "oh that's alright then". The right answer, if they're serious, is to give people higher state pensions for every year they've been married with a built-in incentive to stay married. It won't matter much to the well-off but it might help put an end to successive generations of single-mothers living on state benefits.

If I were Osama bin Laden and I wanted to harm the UK I would simply a lot of very good looking young men here with instructions and money to make as much love as possible. It's possible that things are already as bad as they could be in that regard, but that would certainly make people think more about what an appropriate response would be -- more than they have so far.

adult

When ACORN comes up, I never hear one person protest the no bid contracts given out by the government. That's waste of taxpayer's money too.

its the hypocrisy that gets me. Oh and the lying.

kattw

This is a common phenomenon - money needs to flow, or it's worthless.

Beautifully said, dear katt. If you help a family of 4 on $50,000 (barely scraping by, in NJ anyway) then that family will have more disposable income to put into the economy. If you don't then they won't. Then the restaurants in the area close, the nicer stores close, and we will have slums. Poverty generates more poverty, and slums generate more slums.

I can't even believe as Americans we're arguing about this. Our ability to take people in and offer them the opportunity to help themselves and their family and contribute to society is what makes us special.

Sounds like the republicans want to reverse all this.

This whole thing is wrong, wrong, wrong and ngavc is just so fixated on giving a dime of his money to somebody he deems unworthy.

I checked to see how many were viewing the James O'Keefe article in Wikipedia. Also the article about the video itself.

I was just rereading this. Andrew Breitbart thought O'Keefe should get the Pulitzer Prize. Bill O'Reilly thought O'Keefe should get a congressional medal. Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Chris Wallace, Rich Lowry all heaped praise on him without checking out the facts...are these the sort of people the Tea Partiers "pal around" with?

ngavc seems to be confused between voter fraud and voter registration fraud.

Obviously, Acorn can NOT be guilty of voter fraud.

Voter registration fraud can be committed by the person registering to vote, or by the one doing the registering.

The usual stories of turning in 'Mickey Mouse' are generally the former. Are those forms turned in? Of course. It's illegal to withhold any forms. Period. Some parents do give their children ridiculous names, and if any forms are thrown away as presumably being 'fake', that's breaking the law. They have to be turned in, even if they're accompanied with a note pointing out skepticism.

Now if some worker is trying to generate a lot of fake registrations (NOT votes), they're much more likely to use believable names, right? Or even real people who aren't already registered? But that would still not be voter fraud. Do you see the difference? More importantly, do you see why so many wingnuts keep trying to muddy the difference, implying elections have somehow been 'stolen' by Acorn?

Let's try, just for today, to not be so incredibly gullible. We've had one entire Administration who believed the likes of Chalabi and Curveball, so I'm not surprised their supporters are equally naive and trusting. We don't need a replay. That's why we elected some responsible adults to replace them in 2008, and why we'll keep on electing them in 2010, 2012....

Two ladies work on an assembly line. They both make $15/hour and work 40 hours/week. They pay the same for a pound of chicken, national defense, their eventual Medicare health insurance benefit and Social Security insurance benefit.

Both are offered overtime. Lady 1 now works 50 hours/week. Lady 2 continues to work 40 hours/week. Lady 1 still pays the same as Lady 2 for a pound of chicken. She now pays about $6.75 more for national defense, 6.30 more for the same Medicare health insurance benefit, and about $34.40 more for an additional smidgen of social security insurance.

It is fair if everything works like the pound of chicken. The prices stay the same. It's the same chicken, Medicare health insurance benefit and national defense. Anything else is objectively unfair. We just have to judge how unfair for Lady 1 we want to make it.

All ballpark calculations include both sides of the insurance benefit (SS & Medicare).

Elena - I'm okay with my tax level, and I'm not rich. But what is the incentive for the $50,000 family to cut government in any way. They get it for next to nothing. This is why Hugo Chazev is destroying Venezuela. Over half the population pay no tax, so they happily support any and all take from the high earner programs.

Many economists talk about government investment. Education, roads, airports are investments. Health care and food programs are on a temporary basis, but only if they improve employment effort. I am debating degrees here, BTW, not all or nothing. We need a productive society to maximize the overall wealth of that society. How we get there is debatable.

And I said "They receive no additional government services than the poor, arguably less". By arguably less, I was thinking about bypassing public education.

SamJohnson
10 Apr 2010, 7:43PM

The Tory party has announced a 150 pound annual tax break for married couples. This a joke. It's not going to change anything. It's to be paid for with a tax on banks. That's a joke too. It's just a soft option, designed to make many people say "oh that's alright then". The right answer, if they're serious, is to give people higher state pensions for every year they've been married with a built-in incentive to stay married. It won't matter much to the well-off but it might help put an end to successive generations of single-mothers living on state benefits.

If I were Osama bin Laden and I wanted to harm the UK I would simply a lot of very good looking young men here with instructions and money to make as much love as possible. It's possible that things are already as bad as they could be in that regard

Actually, we agree on the problem and I like your solution. What I like about the piddly three quid/week is the message sent that a self-supporting family should be respected.

Doesn't PR often provide a hung parliament? Then again, our 90's government worked pretty well. Your Lib-Dems do regularly get screwed.

Lady 1 works at a factory for 35k per year. Lady 2 works at a factory as a CEO for 5 million per year. Taxes are changed such that each pays 10k in taxes, total. Lady 1 no longer able to reasonably support her family. Lady 2 now has 4.9 million more than she needs. This is unfair. Asking Lady 2 to pay more of the public cost, since she receives more money in the first place, is the only fair alternative. Talking of charging each the exact same amount tends to ignore reality.

Remember, that 5 million came from somewhere. It came *gasp* from the pockets of folks lucky to be making that 35k or so. It's ALWAYS wealth redistribution. The only question is, should we be distributing wealth to those who already have too much, or to those desperately in need?

@ngavc

I don't vouch for the site

Well I'm not gonna read it.

Is it unfair that the rich pay more tax? Ngavc takes the view that everyone should pay the same, it would seem. If thats true, why not just institute a poll tax? The point is that the rich can afford to pay more, and so it is right that they should. They buy a better quality of chicken and pay more. The rich have the responsibility of paying the greater share of tax, because things that are for the public good need to be paid for and the rich can afford to pay more. To me it really is that simple.

"An organization whose real crimes were to be liberal and to try to do things for poor people."

There is nothing liberal about using poor people to serve the political interests of a party nor to embezzle money into a racket.

The tapes just showed the level of depravity in this organization run by two criminal brothers.

ACORN is now finished, though it has changed names and has reformed itself.

They will not be able to fool as many people in 2010 and 2012.

wiki

More importantly, do you see why so many wingnuts keep trying to muddy the difference, implying elections have somehow been 'stolen' by Acorn?

Especially when I believe they actively worked to steal the 2000 Presidential election.

ngavc

How we get there is debatable.

maybe. What is not debatable is the Fox News went after Acorn based upon phoney evidence. And I would guess they knew those tapes were not kosher.

If everything boils down to politics - and winning is far more important than upholding any kind of standards of truth and integrity - then in my view we all lose.

What is not debatable is the Fox News went after Acorn based upon phoney evidence. And I would guess they knew those tapes were not kosher.

Roger Ailes only has stories checked out which run counter to the reality in his alternate universe - so they can cherry-pick some factoids and claim they aren't true.

Stories which support his alternate universe he runs as is, claiming it's "news" and therefore validity is irrelevant. Any which are so obviously fake that running them as news would make them look like even greater idiots than usual, are first run on the 'talk/opinion' shows such as Fox and Friends, The Big Show, and so forth. The secret is to have those stories on immediately so they have some deniability - if required, they can later claim they hadn't had time yet to check it out, and were just repeating what they had 'heard'. That's Ailes's definition of a talk show: repeat rumors which make the other side appear evil.

Sometimes I suspect Roger Ailes even lies to himself. I know he lies to Rupert Murdoch.

If everything boils down to politics - and winning is far more important than upholding any kind of standards of truth and integrity - then in my view we all lose.

In the World According to Ailes and Murdoch, only money matters. As long as they're not actually breaking any laws, their personal moral standard has been met.

Elena

If everything boils down to politics - and winning is far more important than upholding any kind of standards of truth and integrity - then in my view we all lose.

Like showing a profit from the healthcare reform law by adding ten years of revenue and subtracting five years of expenses. I agree. And it's pretty serious money.

I can't speak for Fox News, or what they knew. Neither can you.

saintlymark
10 Apr 2010, 11:20PM

The rich have the responsibility of paying the greater share of tax, because things that are for the public good need to be paid for and the rich can afford to pay more. To me it really is that simple.

I don't agree they have that responsibility. It took a constitutional amendment to even permit an income tax. The high earners typically generate income for everybody else by providing jobs. That said, I don't know how else we will pay for government. Those at lower incomes should pay some amount of income tax, so they feel the bite of extra government and enjoy the benefits of less. If I didn't pay tax I'd be all for the rich buying me a car, house, food, healthcare, whatever. Why should they? Taxes that redistribute income are a theft of the time it takes to earn money. What right does anybody have to another's time?

ngavc, in your example above, if somebody works an additional 10 hours per week, say at $15 per hour, that would be an addiitonal $150. Social security and medicare are taxed at 7.65% to the employee. Since you are talking about "incentives' the employer tax is not applicable. Therefore the employee who chooses to work longer hours would pay an additional $11.47. I would guess additional income tax would be around $30.

Ok, lets round up the increased tax burden to $50 since there will be additional state taxes too.

The lady would be working 10 hours a week for an additional $100 in her net pay. And thats conservative.

I think if you offered anybody that in today's climate they may well jump at it. So I am not sure I agree with your disincentive argument at all.

And of course you would have to deduct from the additional tax expense the additional benefit one would get at retirement.

Anyway, we both made our points and I guess we should just agree to differ on this.

I mean its pretty sad on a Saturday night to be sitting here doing tax calculations.

By the way, folks, have we all done our 2009 tax returns yet?

Elena24

10 Apr 2010, 11:46PM
If everything boils down to politics - and winning is far more important than upholding any kind of standards of truth and integrity - then in my view we all lose.

Well, ngavc has made it pretty clear: All that matters is the Republicans stay in control of the country. Morals, ethics, finance, the overall benefit to the populace?not important. Personally, I think his opinion is pretty much in line with the modern GOP attitude.

>ngavc ("Steele Responds")
30 Mar 2010, 1:35AM
All that matters is that Steele does all he can to get back control of Congress. This sideshow is pretty irrelevant, except that it indicates the organization may be poorly managed.