Barack Obama trained ACORN in Ethics

More ACORN stories: here collectivism: here Alinsky: here

Part Three of a series: "What did Barack Obama teach ACORN?"
Read the entire series: here

It's time for America to learn what Barack Obama knows

Before entering elective politics, Barack Obama was a community organizer and trainer for an ACORN subsidiary, Project Vote. Barack taught from the 1971 book 'Rules for Radicals', by the late socialist Saul Alinsky. In the photo above-left, Obama is teaching Alinsky's principles of "Power Analysis" and "Relationships built on self-interest" as seen written upon the blackboard [click photo to enlarge.] This post contains another selection from Alinsky's "playbook of the Left."

Let's find out more about the man expected to be elected President of the United States next month.

The selection, below, reveals:

• Community organizers employ the 'act now, think later' model of conduct.
• Community organizers believe that life is a corrupting process.
• Community organizers are revolutionaries who are not bound by ethical considerations that are normal to regular folks in our everyday interactions.
• "Hope" and "Change" are deliberate nostrums intended to mask unethical behavior.
• To revolutionaries like community organizers, it's all about power. The means always justify the ends.
• We should fully expect the Obama Administration to set new standards for unethical conduct.
excerpted from "Rules for Radicals", by Saul Alinsky: Of Means and Ends

We cannot think first and act afterwards. From the moment of birth we are immersed in action and can only fitfully guide it by taking thought. - Alfred North Whitehead

That perennial question, "Does the end justify the means?" is meaningless as it stands; the real and only question regarding ethics of means and ends is, and always has been, "Does this particular end justify this particular means?"

Life and how you live it is the story of means and ends. The end is what you want, and the means is how you get it. Whenever we think about social change, the question of means and ends arises. The man of action views the issue of means and ends in pragmatic and strategic terms. He has no other problem; he thinks only of his actual resources and the possibilities of various choices of action. He asks of ends only whether they are achievable and worth the cost of means, only whether they will work. To say that corrupt means corrupt the ends is to believe in the immaculate conception of ends and principles. The real arena is corrupt and bloody. Life is a corrupting process from the time a child learns to play his mother off against his father in the politics of when to go to bed; he who fears corruption fears life.

The practical revolutionary will understand Goethe's "conscience is the virtue of observers and not of agents of action"; in action, one does not always enjoy the luxury of a decision that is consistent both with one's individual conscience and the good of mankind. The choice must always be for the latter. Action is for mass salvation and not for the individual's personal salvation. He who sacrifices the mass good for his personal conscience has a peculiar conception of "personal salvation"; he doesn't care enough for people to be corrupted by them. [...]

I present here a series of rules pertaining to the ethics of means and ends: first, that one's concern with the ethics of means and ends varies inversely with one's distance from the scene of the conflict ...

The second rule of the ethics of means and ends is that the judgment of the ethics of means is dependent upon the political position of those sitting in judgment. ...

The third rule of the ethics of means and ends is that in war the end justifies almost any means. ...

The fourth rule of the ethics of means and ends is that judgment must be made in the context of the times in which the action occurred and not from any other chronological vantage point. ...

The fifth rule of the ethics of means and ends is that concern with ethics increases with the number of means available and vice-versa. ...

The sixth rule of the ethics of means and ends is that the less important the end to be desired, the more one can afford to engage in ethical evaluations of means. ...

The seventh rule of the ethics of means and ends is that generally success or failure is a mighty determinant of ethics. ...

The eighth rule of the ethics of means and ends is that the morality of a means depends upon whether the means is being employed at a time of imminent defeat or imminent victory. ...

The ninth rule of the ethics of means and ends is that any effective means is automatically judged by the opposition as being unethical. ...

The tenth rule of the ethics of means and ends is that you do what you can with what you have and clothe it with moral garments. ...

The eleventh rule of the ethics of means and ends is that goals must be phrased in general terms like "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity," "Of the Common Welfare," "Pursuit of Happiness," or "Bread and Peace."

Obama, Union Bigs: As close as you can get

More EFCA stories: hereMore card-check stories: here

Barack Obama preps Big Labor payoff: Forcing disinterested workers into unions without a secret ballot election

Poor George McGovern. For some time, people were comparing Barack Obama to the former candidate and his left-wing campaign of 1972. But as it turns out, Obama is far more liberal than McGovern was.

Video: "McGovern: EFCA cannot be justified"

This fact is highlighted by a new ad campaign featuring McGovern as an advocate for American workers, in opposition to a bill long sought by labor unions that would limit their freedoms when it comes to unionization. The bill, known by the misleading name of the “Employee Free Choice Act,” would help unions take over American shops by eliminating the requirement that the employee vote take place by secret ballot.

Labor unions have declined in relevance and influence for private sector workers over the last 50 years — they now represent just 7.5 percent of private sector workers, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Labor leaders hope that the Employee Free Choice Act will reverse this trend. And under an Obama administration, they are likely to get what they want.

Currently, unions attempting to organize shops must allow employees a secret-ballot election. Under the Employee Free Choice Act, union leaders could simply convince a majority of workers to sign cards — with no privacy — in what is known as the “card check” system.

This is what worries McGovern, a longtime ally of labor unions.

“I’m concerned about a bill in Congress that would effectively eliminate an employee’s right to a private vote when deciding whether to join a union,” McGovern says in the new ad. “It is hard to believe that any politician would agree to a law denying millions of employees the right to a private vote.”

Workers around the country, including in Minnesota and Pennsylvania, have complained of union officials using misleading tactics in order to get them to sign cards. For example, workers have been told that if they sign, they will receive more information about the union — not that they are voting for unionization.

McGovern’s stance on this issue stands in contrast to the posture Democrats have adopted in Congress. This is why the Employee Free Choice Act offers an excellent example of the “change” that an Obama administration will bring about.

When it came up in the U.S. House last year, the Employee Free Choice Act passed by a very wide margin, 241 to 185. In the Senate, it failed after receiving 51 votes out of a needed 60 for cloture. Every Democrat present supported it, as did one Republican, Arlen Specter (Pa.). One Democrat, Sen. Tim Johnson (S.D.), was not present.

If Democrats do well in this election, they could gain Senate seats in Minnesota, Alaska, Oregon, Colorado, New Mexico, Virginia, and New Hampshire. If one more domino falls — in North Carolina or Georgia, for example — there will be no protection for workers who do not want their preference in unionization to be known publicly.

Barack Obama has a history of empowering union bosses. He did so in Illinois, carrying water for the Service Employees’ International Union (SEIU) as chairman of the state Senate Health Committee. He also makes his position vis-à-vis the unions clear in his 2006 political memoir, The Audacity of Hope:

I owe those unions. When their leaders call, I do my best to call them back right away. I don’t consider this corrupting in any way; I don’t mind feeling obligated.

In the same book, Obama offers his own candy-coated explanation of the “card check” system:

Employers should have to recognize a union if a majority of employees sign authorization cards choosing the union to represent them.”

Note how Obama completely misrepresents the issue at hand, implying that the question is whether employers should recognize a majority vote. Obama gives no mention of the fact that employees currently have a right to a fair and federally supervised secret-ballot election to choose a union. In fact, unions won 56 percent of such elections held in 2005. By removing the context from the issue, Obama makes it seem like he is doing a service for workers by taking away the guarantee that they can make their own choice, free of harassment.

In his next sentence in Audacity, Obama refers obliquely to another provision in the Employee Free Choice Act, known as “binding arbitration”:

Federal mediation should be available to help an employer and a new union reach agreement on a contract within a reasonable amount of time.

This again refers to a problem without actually describing it. “Binding arbitration” would allow an Obama Labor Department to get involved — and to force employers to accept union terms quickly. “Binding arbitration” gives unions an upper hand, and a reason to eschew reasonable negotiated terms before the government becomes a player.

It should be no surprise that Obama is willing to do whatever union bosses ask. For what unions do best is help Democrats win elections. In 2006, they spent $58 million to that end. This year, just one union — the SEIU — has pledged to spend $85 million, and total union expenditures could exceed $300 million. With the Employee Free Choice Act, Barack Obama will pay back the labor leaders with a larger base of dues-payers — many of whom wouldn’t have voted for the union in a private-ballot election.

- David Freddoso


New ACORN website launched

New ACORN website: here

Is union-backed Barack Obama compromised by ACORN?

After days of trying to tie Barack Obama to a 1970s radical, John McCain's campaign is now aggressively trying to link him to a community organizing group accused of submitting fake voter registration cards.

ACORN is under scrutiny for possible irregularities in at least eight states. In 1995, Obama and two other lawyers from his firm represented the group in a lawsuit against the state of Illinois to make voter registration easier.

Related video: Barack Obama and ACORN

Obama's campaign says McCain is trying to spin "outlandish conspiracy theories" as he sinks in the polls.

This afternoon, McCain's camp launched a 90-second web ad and an accompanying website that seeks to tie together the allegations, Obama's ambitiousness, and the housing crisis.

"Who is Barack Obama? A man with 'a political baptism performed at warp speed, vast ambition," the announcer says in a foreboding tone. "After college, he moved to Chicago. Became a community organizer. There, Obama met Madeleine Talbot, part of the Chicago branch of ACORN. He was so impressive that he was asked to train the ACORN staff.

"What did ACORN in Chicago engage in? Bullying banks, intimidation tactics, disruption of business. ACORN forced banks to issue risky home loans. The same types of loans that caused the financial crisis we're in today. No wonder Obama's campaign is trying to distance him from the group, saying, 'Barack Obama never organized with ACORN.'

"But Obama's ties to ACORN run long and deep. He taught classes for ACORN. They even endorsed him for president. But now ACORN is in trouble."

The web ad then has audio of a reporter saying, "There are at least 11 investigations across the country involving thousands of potentially fraudulent ACORN forms."

"Massive voter fraud," the announcer continues. "And the Obama campaign paid more than $800,000 to an ACORN front for get out the vote efforts. Pressuring banks to issue risky loans. Nationwide voter fraud.

"Barack Obama. Bad judgment. Blind ambition. Too risky for America," the ad concludes, using the same language as a TV ad launched earlier today about radical William Ayers.

Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor called the ACORN attacks “another effort by the McCain campaign to throw out false charges to ‘turn the page’ from the issues that matter to American families. Barack Obama strongly condemns voter registration fraud or any other breach of election law by any party or group. The McCain campaign’s allegations about Sen. Obama are completely transparent and false. He believes that the registration of voters at record levels is good for our democracy, and the McCain-Palin campaign’s false claims are nothing more than another dishonorable, shameful attempt to divert voters’ attention from the unprecedented challenges facing their families and our nation.”

This afternoon, ACORN, which bills itself as the nation's largest grassroots community organization of low- and moderate-income people, defended itself.

The group said that along with Project Vote, it has signed up 1.3 million new voters and said it is under "partisan attack."

"The two organizations undertook an aggressive voter registration campaign in 16 states including Ohio, Florida, Michigan, New Mexico, and Pennsylvania, to help close the historic gaps in the American electorate that have misrepresented the true demographic breakdown of the American population," ACORN said. "Now their powerful new voices will be heard in the voting booths, not just this year but for many years to come."


Obama silently ashamed of ACORN

More ACORN stories: hereVoter-fraud stories: here

At one time, union-backed candidate was proud of 'social justice' group

Barack Obama's Involvement with ACORN Unearthed, Missing Article Recovered

While Barack Obama's connection with the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) has not gone entirely unreported, it has not been fully explained. Most media background pieces simply note Obama's involvement in a 1995 lawsuit on behalf of ACORN. Obama's own website, as well as most major media, fail to reveal the full depth and extent of his relationship with the organization.

Attempts to hide evidence of Obama's involvement with ACORN have included wiping the web clean of potentially damaging articles that had appeared, and were previously publicly accessible. Unfortunately, those behind the attempted cover-up failed to realize that in today's day and age, nothing disappears forever. There also exists another layer of the web, the hidden web, which is full of information included in proprietary scholarly databases where these very same "missing" articles can be easily uncovered.

Obama's campaign website states:

Fact: Barack was never an ACORN trainer and never worked for ACORN in any other capacity.

Is that really a FACT, or just another lie? Let's take a look at a quote from a 2004 article - Case Study: Chicago- The Barack Obama Campaign - written by Toni Foulkes, a Chicago ACORN Leader, which was published in the journal Social Policy. Did we mention that Social Policy recently pulled this particular article from their website, while leaving links to all other articles up?

"Obama took the case, known as ACORN vs. Edgar (the name of the Republican governor at the time) and we won. Obama then went on to run a voter registration project with Project VOTE in 1992 that made it possible for Carol Moseley Braun to win the Senate that year. Project VOTE delivered 50,000 newly registered voters in that campaign (ACORN delivered about 5,000 of them).

Since then, we have invited Obama to our leadership training sessions to run the session on power every year, and, as a result, many of our newly developing leaders got to know him before he ever ran for office. Thus it was natural for many of us to be active volunteers in his first campaign for STate Senate and then his failed bid for U.S. Congress in 1996. By the time he ran for U.S. Senate, we were old friends."

Not only does Foulkes boast of Obama's ACORN leadership training, but also makes it clear that Obama's post-law school organizing of "Project VOTE" in 1992 was undertaken in direct partnership with ACORN. The tie between Project VOTE and ACORN is also something that Obama and others have attempted to disprove in recent weeks as ACORN has come under fire for allegations of voter registration fraud.

As recently as March 2008, the Los Angeles Times also made reference to Barack Obama's involvement with ACORN:

"At the time, Talbot worked at the social action group ACORN and initially considered Obama a competitor. But she became so impressed with his work that she invited him to help train her staff." (LA Times, March 2, 2008)

All this information was easily pulled up with minimal time investment. It took less than thirty minutes to find, despite attempts by some to bury the truth. If I could find this with little effort, imagine what could be dug up with a serious, in-depth investigation. Scary, isn't it?

Nevertheless, Barack Obama's campaign website continues to lie and deny the truth about his involvement and association with ACORN. No matter how many times you say it, it does not make it true. The facts do not lie, Senator Obama. It's time to come clean and tell the truth, and it's time for the American people to demand it.

***Update: A person who left a comment on the story below (thank you) has notified us that the Obama website has changed. We have done a follow up story that can be read following this link Here is our follow up story: http://www.clevelandleader.com/node/7231 ***


HillDogs: Obama campaign a corrupt enterprise?

Related: "Team Hillary exposes ACORN network"
More ACORN stories: hereVoter-fraud stories: here

Clinton supporters sharing evidence for RICO case against Obama campaign

If you haven’t been a regular here at HillBuzz, you might not know about Gigi Gaston’s documentary “We Will Not Be Silenced” on the caucus fraud deliberately orchestrated by the Obama campaign during the primaries. Voter intimidation, registration fraud, vandalism, threats of violence, you name it, Obama’s supporters did it. For veterans of the McGovern ‘72 campaign who remembered thugs and hooligans engaged in similar tactics in service of their own far left candidate, the actions of Obama’s followers were so bad that even people who’ve lived through the last 36 years of ups and downs in America testified that this is the worst thing they’ve ever seen happen to our democracy.

Gaston’s documentary continues to gather testimonials from people across the country — and we have word now that the people behind these efforts to document what Obama did during the primaries are also cooperating with law enforcement in an investigation into the Obama campaign’s efforts to undermine the true will of the people in the general election.

Republicans and centrist Democrats are joined together on this effort to get the truth out about Obama before the November election. We firmly believe in McCain’s victory and do not believe it hinges on any developments with RICO. The polls, in our opinon, are wrong, and the internal numbers we see coming out of NC, VA, PA, OH, IN and FL show McCain wins in all of those states (there is no mathematical possibility for Obama to win without taking PA, OH, or FL). We believe after McCain’s win there will be a continued prosecution of Obama and members of the Democratic party for voter fraud under RICO statutes in the months and years ahead. ACORN and leftist Democrats have gone too far this time — for years ACORN has engineered deliberate election fraud using taxpayer dollars funneled to it by Democrats. This time, with both Democrats and Republicans joined against them, ACORN Is going down…and we believe it will ultimately take Obama, Axelrod, and most of today’s Democratic leadership down with it.

What we have talked about here on HillBuzz, and what other stories like the one posted below have also noted, is just the tip of the iceberg. We have no idea what is going on behind closed doors: only what we observe in the news and what people more closely involved relate to us.

People leave comments here saying, “What’s the update? What’s the update? What’s the update?”. Well, there won’t be an update on this every day. We luck out and are told things, and we happily share them as soon as they make sense to us. Sometimes things fall in our lap, like noticing the story at the bottom of this post — which gives us the idea to make a few calls of our own — and that confirms things we’ve suspected, but can then write about fully.

There IS a RICO investigation of ACORN and the Obama campaign underway - this has now been established by the mainstream media. Right now it’s rumored here in Chicago that Patrick Fitzgerald is heading it (confirmation on that has not come yet). There is a lot of activity in Chicago right now, with a lot of IRS agents looking into the finances coming in and out of this city, and across state lines (this was established on Monday when the GOP issued emergency press releases that much of Obama’s campaign contributions could very well be illegal foreign contributions - what appears to be deliberately poor record keeping designed to hide the true identities and monetary sources of online donors is at issue here). We see in 15 states now that ACORN is being busted for attempted voter fraud, and for fraudulent, illegal voter registratons in the hundreds of thousands, if not a million. The article below states, and we have confirmed this with people who know for sure, that the people who gathered evidence of Obama’s fraud and voter intimidation techniques during the primaries against Hillary Clinton are sharing everything they have with the Republican Party and the federal government.

What’s happening here is something we have never seen before: centrist Clinton Democrats and Republicans are working together to expose the DNC and Obama campaign’s illegal activities and orchestrated, coordinated fraud. Both parties are working with federal agents to investigate ACORN, which has been funded with upwards of $800,000 in questionable donations from the Obama campaign (in what appears to be the expressed and explicit direction to engineer voter fraud in the general election). The tactics being employed now in the 15 states currently under investigation are the VERY SAME TACTICS we saw on the ground in Iowa, Texas, Colorado, Nebraska, Indiana, and other states working for Hillary Clinton in the primaries.

And all of this ties back to Chicago.

Where the Obama campaign and DNC are now based.

Where people we know tip us off to little things to pay attention to that, when pieced together with all the other little pieces that are revealing themselves, leads to a single conclusion: there will be indictments for all of this.

We don’t know when they will come — but they will come. There is just too much here to ignore.

“Why didn’t the federal government get involved in the primaries?”, some people ask in comments. Well, we aren’t lawyers, but someone told us yesterday that the primaries are party affairs and are not governed by federal election laws. We’re sure a legal scholar will comment on this and set us straight. The parties set the rules for their primaries…but the general election IS governed by federal election law. This is why Florida and Michigan were allowed to be such a mess for Democrats, and why Donna Brazile and Howard Dean got away with taking delegates away from Hillary Clinton and giving them, unearned, to Obama for Michigan: no federal agency had any ability to step in and ensure a fair resolution of the Michigan and Florida votes. This was 100% in the hands of the Democratic party, which intended to award Obama its nomination since 2004. The party never intended to allow Hillary Clinton to win this thing — they always wanted Obama, and the party thus turned a deaf ear to our constant and repeated complaints of voter fraud, intimidation, and other thuggery by the Obama campaign from January through June.

That means, technically, nothing Obama did during the primaries was illegal…if our understanding of election law is true and political party primaries are not safeguarded under federal law. Tthe things his campaign is orchestrating now, however, ARE violations of the law.

Thus, all the evidence Clinton supporters and Republicans have gathered of fraud and voter intimidation during the primaries establishes the pattern of behavior that’s allowing RICO investigators to clearly discern a national conspiracy, rooted in Chicago, to hijack this election and defraud the will of the people. It’s all background information, with the RICO case seemingly evolving from the 15 separate investigations now underway in all states busting ACORN offices.

The Obama campaign, meanwhile, is in damage control mode, trying to amend FEC filings to erase ACORN from all of its paperwork — including claiming the $800,000 the Obama campaign paid ACORN for voter fraud (including registering the dead and enlisting homeless people and college kids to illegally multi-vote in multiple states or multiple intrastate polling places) was actually awarded to an unrelated, though wholly owned, subsidiary of ACORN.

The media, which risked all its credibility betting on an Obama win, will not report any of this because when Obama falls, he will take America’s faith in journalism with him. Democrats, especially, will never trust the media again, since they will come to realize they lost a sure shot at taking back the White House with Hillary Clinton, because the media wanted to run an Obama campaign, and Howard Dean and Donna Brazile were all too pleased to oblige. Republicans never trusted the media to begin with — so chalk that up, surprisingly, to yet another thing centrist Democrats now agree with Republicans on.

All of this is still developing and we do not know how many more breaks in this story will come before November 4th. We do detect a purposeful breaking of something new in this story every few days. Monday was the reports of illegal contributions to the Obama campaign from overseas that tied into the $800,000 given to ACORN by Obama. On Wednesday, all Hell broke lose in 15 states with ACORN offices left and right busted for massive voter fraud operations. We don’t know about other cities, but lawyers here in Chicago are talking about something BIG going down. On in-trade, someone short-sold Obama and bought $140,000 in shares for a McCain win on November 4th, dropping Obama’s intrade price from roughly $75/share to $64/share or so.

When a storm is coming, some know, some don’t. The ones that know do odd things that make sense only in retrospect. Right now, we are noticing a lot of odd things and are piecing this together as best we can to see patterns emerging.

Whenever a storm brews for Obama, the media ratchets up its cheerleading, and those in the tank for him do whatever they can to protect him. That’s why we’ve also noticed the polling companies changing their party ID samples in the last two or three weeks, upping Democrats’ party ID to 50% in some polls, and dropping Republicans down to just 20%, with 30% Independent. If you look at this critically, you’d see that Democrats have never enjoyed more than a 4% historical party ID advantage. In 2006, a year that Democrats RAGED against both Bush and the sex-scandal plagued GOP (Mark Foley, Larry Craig, and other characters), Democrats had just a 3% party ID advantage. All of this means polls should be using samples with 39% Democrats, 35% Republican, and 26% Independent.

The polling samples are manipulated to give Obama higher poll numbers than he really in fact has, as reflective of support in the electorate. Some people believe this is all being done as cover for the voter fraud — so that Obama polls higher than he should in states where ACORN’s activities are meant to pump illegal votes in to push him much higher than he would be in an actual, legitimate election. The polls, in essence, are thus showing that ACORN is expected to deliver that 11% party ID advantage to Democrats, by bringing the dead, ineligible felons, and homeless multi-voters to the voting booths. The polls thus seem rigged to produce the results Obama wants…and ACORN is the muscle to make sure results are delivered to match the established polls.

That’s one theory.

Another is that the polling companies and networks are working independent of the Obama campaign, but that the networks, which fund the polls, demand good Obama poll numbers because those drive ratings. MSNBC, in particular, will most likely go under when Obama loses — they are so in the tank for his campaign, and are behind so much of the mischief of the past year, that when Obama loses we are certain Jeff Zucker, Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, and others will lose their jobs, with the network collapsing a year or two later. MSNBC is already in last place. Republicans and centrist Democrats won’t touch it. The only people left watching it are Obama supporters (or sadomasochistic Eeyores who enjoy watching propaganda engineered specifically to depress them,and in turn cause them to depress everyone around them with “We’re all doomed! Obama is unstoppable! The TV told me this and now I need be constantly reassured otherwise so I will drain the energy from all those around me!” woe). Obama supporters disappear when MSNBC is not providing enough cheerleading for him. And Obama supporters are all MSNBC has left.

So, in our opinion, the media and the polls are linked, since both depend on Obama followers remaining loyal viewers, never becoming disillusioned in his campaign. His support in polls is thus inflated for network business reasons, with Potemkin Vilage idiots like Matthews and Olbermann reading from Jeff Zucker’s predictably pro-Obama script. Manupulation and propaganda like this happen all the time.

We can’t think of a more classic modern example of this than “Baghdad Bob” during the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, when American tanks rolled into the city, right behind Bob, on camera, who would assure journalists that Saddam Hussein was winning and that Americans would never conquer the country. Americans were nowhere to be seen! Except right behind you, in that column of tanks that just almost ran you over, Bob.

Every time we hear pro-Obama cheerleading that he’s winning Virginia and North Carolina and Ohio and Pennsylvania, we hear the rumble of those tanks in Baghdad again…and know what’s going to happpen on November 4th. McCain will win all the states the media claims Obama’s leading in…the very same way Hillary Clinton won California, New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, Ohio, Texas, Indiana, South Dakota, and Pennsylvania: all states the media insisted Clinton would lose.

We have seen this movie before.

We know how all of this ends.

The only thing we’re left guessing at is what the finished product of “We Will Not Be Silenced” will look like. Gigi Gaston is working incredibly hard on what we believe will be one of the most important films released next year. It will NOT be completed before the election. No one ever planned to make a movie about democracy-threatening fraud this year, so understand this film is being made as quickly as possible.

But, read the article below for more on this…and remember, before you ask repeatedly “What’s the update? What’s the update? What’s the update?” that we’re not the only ones who can play detective. Ask questions yourself. Get on the phone and call the governors in your state and ask them what’s being done about voter fraud, what’s being done to stop Obama from subverting the will of the people in this election. If you find out anything, head over to www.HillaryClintonForum.net and post it so the 5,000 campaign veterans there can read it and get the information out to others.

Instead of constantly asking “What’s the update?” or demanding people hold your hand, get off your butt and help get to the bottom of all this. If you are so damn curious, then start calling your local news stations and demanding to know what they are doing about investigating all of this rampant fraud engineered to help Obama. Call NBC and keep calling into you get through to Jeff Zucker. Call every sponsor you see advertising on NBC and MSNBC and tell them you will stop using their products because they support the Obama propaganda machine. That’s sure as Hell more helpful than asking “What’s the update?” ad nauseum.

If Obama can win this thing fair and square in an honest election, then so be it — we don’t believe he honestly can. Those of us who have been on the ground for Hillary Clinton the last 2 years haven’t seen much honesty come out of the Obama Nation.

Have sure seen a lot of fraud, though.

And we aren’t the only ones:
New trouble brewing for Obama – intimidation in Missouri tip of iceberg

Citizen groups say “We Will Not Be Silenced”

Posted by: DLindleyYoung

Friday, October 3, 2008 at 04:50PM CDT

20 Comments (2 new) –>
LOS ANGELES (10/1) – Today a Beverly Hills based film producer Bettina Viviano, founder of Viviano Entertainment, announced the start of a “30 Day Campaign for Truth” about presidential hopeful Barack Obama. The campaign will center on a documentary film entitled “We Will Not Be Silenced” produced by Viviano Entertainment and directed by Gigi Gaston. See www.wewillnotbesilenced2008.com.

The 30 Day Campaign for Truth will include the presentation of substantial evidence of a pattern of threats, voter intimidation, criminal violations, violation of Democratic party rules, unfair and unethical acts, and various statewide caucus irregularities that occurred across the nation in the Democratic Primaries. Similar conduct is now continuing in the general election.

According to Viviano, “over the next 30 days we will show that what the Obama campaign admittedly did in Missouri is just the tip of the iceberg. Recently, Missouri Governor Matt Blunt said Senator Claire McCaskill, Missouri prosecutors and sheriffs ‘have attached the stench of police state tactics to the Obama-Biden campaign.’ Governor Blunt also added, ‘Enlisting Missouri law enforcement to intimidate people and kill free debate is reminiscent of the Sedition Acts - not a free society.’”

The documentary “We Will Not Be Silenced” shows that there were thousands of complaints to the DNC about illegal and improper conduct by the Obama Campaign during the caucuses and it establishes, among other things, falsification of documents, that results were changed, that unregistered people were allowed to vote, that there were threats to Hillary supporters to scare and intimidate them, that they were stalked, and even locked out of their polling places.

“We Will Not Be Silenced” presents interviews with numerous witnesses including teachers, professors, civil rights activists, lawyers, janitors, physicists, ophthalmologists, accountants, mathematicians, retirees and others in caucus states. They recount their personal stories of threats, acts of intimidation, lies, stolen documents, falsified documents and much more. According to screenwriter/director Gigi Gaston, a Hillary supporter, “everyone turned a blind eye to thousands of complaints - at least 2000 complaints, in Texas alone. The DNC and the media chose to sweep this under the rug by looking the other way. It is as though they had their pick from the beginning and were going to make sure they had a winner. It is not that Hillary lost, rather how she lost that concerns me. What are my party’s principles, and why would they turn their back on millions of voters who cried out for justice?”

Viviano concluded, “I believe the leadership of the Democratic Party participated in the suppression of questionable, unfair, unethical, and sometimes criminal practices by the Obama campaign and disregarded thousands of complaints about such conduct in order to assure a victory by Obama in the Democratic Primary. Now Obama continues his thug tactics and no one says anything. The Chicago way is not the American way.”

The “30 Day Campaign for Truth” will include numerous nationwide press releases to at least 1,400 media outlets; presentations on numerous blogs; You Tube presentations; press conferences and a viewing of the documentary. Numerous groups including Cristi Adkins and Clintons4McCain.com, The NoOBamaProject.com, CitizenAdvocates.org, YouTube sensations Paul F. Villarreal and John D. Villarreal with Villarreal Media, and others will participate.


Barone: The coming Obama-Labor thugocracy

More EFCA stories: herecard-check: here collectivism: here

Obama's pro-union fascism about to sweep America

"I need you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors," Barack Obama told a crowd in Elko, Nev. "I want you to talk to them whether they are independent or whether they are Republican. I want you to argue with them and get in their face." Actually, Obama supporters are doing a lot more than getting into people's faces. They seem determined to shut people up.

That's what Obama supporters, alerted by campaign emails, did when conservative Stanley Kurtz appeared on Milt Rosenberg's WGN radio program in Chicago. Kurtz had been researching Obama's relationship with unrepentant Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers in Chicago Annenberg Challenge papers in the Richard J. Daley Library in Chicago -- papers that were closed off to him for some days, apparently at the behest of Obama supporters.

Obama fans jammed WGN's phone lines and sent in hundreds of protest emails. The message was clear to anyone who would follow Rosenberg's example. We will make trouble for you if you let anyone make the case against The One.

Other Obama supporters have threatened critics with criminal prosecution. In September, St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch and St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce warned citizens that they would bring criminal libel prosecutions against anyone who made statements against Obama that were "false." I had been under the impression that the Alien and Sedition Acts had gone out of existence in 1801-02. Not so, apparently, in metropolitan St. Louis. Similarly, the Obama campaign called for a criminal investigation of the American Issues Project when it ran ads highlighting Obama's ties to Ayers.

These attempts to shut down political speech have become routine for liberals. Congressional Democrats sought to reimpose the "fairness doctrine" on broadcasters, which until it was repealed in the 1980s required equal time for different points of view. The motive was plain: to shut down the one conservative-leaning communications medium, talk radio. Liberal talk-show hosts have mostly failed to draw audiences, and many liberals can't abide having citizens hear contrary views.

To their credit, some liberal old-timers -- like House Appropriations Chairman David Obey -- voted against the "fairness doctrine," in line with their longstanding support of free speech. But you can expect the "fairness doctrine" to get another vote if Barack Obama wins and Democrats increase their congressional majorities.

Corporate liberals have done their share in shutting down anti-liberal speech, too. "Saturday Night Live" ran a spoof of the financial crisis that skewered Democrats like House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank and liberal contributors Herbert and Marion Sandler, who sold toxic-waste-filled Golden West to Wachovia Bank for $24 billion. Kind of surprising, but not for long. The tape of the broadcast disappeared from NBC's Website and was replaced with another that omitted the references to Frank and the Sandlers. Evidently NBC and its parent, General Electric, don't want people to hear speech that attacks liberals.

Then there's the Democrats' "card check" legislation, which would abolish secret ballot elections in determining whether employees are represented by unions. The unions' strategy is obvious: Send a few thugs over to employees' homes -- we know where you live -- and get them to sign cards that will trigger a union victory without giving employers a chance to be heard.

Once upon a time, liberals prided themselves, with considerable reason, as the staunchest defenders of free speech. Union organizers in the 1930s and 1940s made the case that they should have access to employees to speak freely to them, and union leaders like George Meany and Walter Reuther were ardent defenders of the First Amendment.

Today's liberals seem to be taking their marching orders from other quarters. Specifically, from the college and university campuses where administrators, armed with speech codes, have for years been disciplining and subjecting to sensitivity training any students who dare to utter thoughts that liberals find offensive. The campuses that used to pride themselves as zones of free expression are now the least free part of our society.

Obama supporters who found the campuses congenial and Obama himself, who has chosen to live all his adult life in university communities, seem to find it entirely natural to suppress speech that they don't like and seem utterly oblivious to claims that this violates the letter and spirit of the First Amendment. In this campaign, we have seen the coming of the Obama thugocracy, suppressing free speech, and we may see its flourishing in the four or eight years ahead.


Workers disagree with Obama on secret-ballot

Daily Secret-Ballot News: here
More EFCA stories: hereMore card-check: here

Rank-and-file in fight v. Obama's workplace fascism

Controversial federal legislation targeting unions is drawing solid support from union leadership and staid distain from some workers and business leaders.

The Employee Free Choice Act says that if a majority of workers sign their names to cards favoring a union, timelines for bargaining are automatically set. After 90 days, a union could apply for arbitration, and at 120 days, the matter would go to an arbitrator. The arbitrator would decide on wages, working conditions and other issues.

That contract would then be put in place for the period originally consented to by both sides for the contract they had failed to complete negotiating.

The legislation is currently bogged down in Congress, but national union groups are spending money on ad campaigns to keep the issue in the forefront.

“The Employee Free Choice Act is good for workers. Period,” said Vince Beltrami, president of the Alaska AFL-CIO, the state's largest organized union.

Joey Merrick, business manager for Laborers Local 341 in Anchorage, supports the new legislation, which he feels will offer workers a speedier method of unionizing, should they choose to.

“If people want to be union, they should be. If they don't want to be, they don't have to be,” he said.

Glenn Spencer, with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said the measure is a dramatic rewrite of the nation's labor laws.

“We think it's one-sided,” he said. “Every position is designed to take shots at employers. It denies the employer the ability to make their case to workers during union-organizing campaigns. With the NLRB (National Labor Relations Board) everybody gets a chance to make their case.”

But union leaders say the current methods gives employers the upper hand as businesses try to keep unions out. Employees seeking a union are a captive audience when employers call meetings and go through a playbook of reasons why they shouldn't form a union, Beltrami said. John Palmatier, executive secretary treasurer of the Alaska Regional Council of Carpenters, which represents all carpenter unions in the state, agreed.

Those opposing the measure, including some longtime union workers, say their biggest concern is the loss of the secret ballot method historically used. Conducted similar to a government election for, say president, a ballot is filled out privately, with only the person casting the ballot knowing its contents. No names are attached.

Stephan Patterson, a member of the Carpenter's Union for 34 years, said the legislation opens the ballot up to scrutiny, allowing union leadership see how workers voted. That allows the opportunity for union leaders to intimidate.

“My gripe and the gripe of many of us is that these union reps now have taken so much power away and destroyed the democracy in the unions,” Patterson said.

“What this does is allow, once the union gets 50 percent plus one, they become the representative of the employees without the (secret ballot) election,” said Bill Watterson, owner of Watterson Construction Co., a non-union construction firm.

“The right to a secret ballot is fundamental in the U.S.,” said Jennifer Spall, public affairs spokeswoman for Walmart, where unions have tried unsuccessfully for years to organize.

But the idea that the legislation bans the secret ballot is incorrect, according to Merrick, with the Laborers union. Merrick said that if 30 percent of the employees voting in the election want a secret ballot, they can still have a secret ballot election.

Most people are simply more comfortable with the secret ballot, and that's a sticking point with George McGovern, the 1972 Democratic presidential candidate and former senator for South Dakota.

“I believe in the principal of the secret ballot,” said McGovern, now with the McGovern Center for Leadership and Public Service at Dakota Wesleyan University. “If I am going to vote for a senator or congressman, I like to cast my vote without somebody looking over my shoulder. I've been a strong friend of labor in all of my public career. The importance of the secret ballot; I hate to see this given up. There are a handful of labor leaders really interested in this, thinking they will get more union contracts this way. They may be right.”

In an article written in August for the Wall Street Journal, McGovern said of the Employee Free Choice Act, “Instead of providing a voice for the unheard, EFCA risks silencing those who would speak.

“The key provision of EFCA is a change in the mechanism by which unions are formed and recognized,” McGovern wrote. “Instead of a private election with a secret ballot overseen by an impartial federal board, union organizers would simply need to gather signatures from more than 50 percent of the employees in a workplace or bargaining unit, a system known as Ôcard-check.' There are many documented cases where workers have been pressured, harassed, tricked and intimidated into signing cards that have led to mandatory payment of dues.”

The AFL-CIO's Beltrami said that sometimes the current method simply doesn't work for the employees to want to organize.

“One of the worst examples in Alaska was Nabors Drilling,” he said. “It took 11 years from the time they (the workers) first started organizing to the time they gave up and abandoned contract negotiations.”

Nabors workers voted to join the Laborers Union Local 341 in Anchorage and Local 942 in Fairbanks, but in the end, they never got a contract, he said.

Another example is the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers won a couple of elections with the Red Dog mine, but has yet to get a contract, and that has been going on for at least three years, he said.


Worker-choice weighed in Colorado

More worker-choice stories: here

Right to Work Advances Freedom for Colorado

If you start your own company, nobody would say you must join a chamber of commerce in order to stay in business. If you grow corn, nobody would say you must join the Corn Growers Association. Or the Cattlemen’s Association if you raise cattle.

Yet thousands of Coloradans are forced to join or pay dues to private organizations against their will at many workplaces across Colorado. Seem unfair that someone could force you to join a private organization as a condition of employment? It is. But this is what thousands of Colorado workers endure by being forced to join a union in order to get a paycheck.

There are plenty of reasons to join private organizations that might benefit you or the community at large, but we don’t think anybody should be forced to join. That’s why we support Amendment 47.

Amendment 47, the Colorado Right to Work Amendment, is simple – it says that a worker cannot be forced to join a union or pay union dues in order to get or keep a job. But it also preserves a worker’s right to voluntarily join or financially support a union.

Take for example, the Plumbers Union Local 3, the Colorado Education Association, or the Fire Fighters Local 1290. All are unions whose members choose, freely, to join. They exist because their members see something of value in being part of these private organizations. Amendment 47 affords every worker the same right to freely choose to join or not, without risking their job.

Amendment 47 is not anti-union; it’s pro-freedom and pro-worker. The benefits are two-fold.

1) It’s a freedom issue. We believe all workers should have the freedom to choose whether or not to join a union or pay union dues. Current law in Colorado allows some unions to force workers to pay dues, whether that worker wants to or not. That’s un-American and fundamentally flawed.

2) There are 22 right-to-work states already, and studies consistently show that right-to-work states perform better economically than non-right-to-work states. That means more jobs, higher paying jobs and a better economic environment for the entire state.

In the West, we value individualism and personal responsibility. Forcing thousands of Coloradans to join a private organization in order to keep a job is wrong. The loss of revenue might be feared by union bosses who get paid whether they do a good job or not, but the freedom to associate with whom we choose is a freedom we all deserve.

Amendment 47 doesn’t prohibit unions in Colorado. In fact, it might actually strengthen the collective voice of workers. By making a union boss actually earn his membership, he’ll have to better represent workers, be more responsive, and make a bigger difference for those workers. If a union is truly effective and does a great job for its membership, it only makes sense that a worker would voluntarily join.

Amendment 47 is about guaranteeing worker rights for all Coloradans, because the freedom to associate with whom we choose is too important to ignore. It’s also about strengthening this economy by bringing new companies, higher wages, and a better job market.

Samuel Gompers, the founder of the American Federation of Labor and considered by many to be a father of America’s labor movement, believed that unions should be voluntary institutions. Right to Work compliments Gompers’ vision, affording every individual that basic freedom to decide for him or herself whether or not to participate with a labor union. It’s the American way. It’s the Colorado way.

Amendment 47 will make Colorado a better place to live, work, and to do business. In America, freedom is among our highest ideals. Let’s advance freedom together in Colorado. Please visit www.VoteYESon47.com for more information.


There are no limits on union-dues

More union-dues stories: here

Letters: Dues measure makes sense

I agree with The Denver Post’s endorsement of Amendment 49. The practice of automatically deducting union dues from an employee’s paycheck to fund political campaigns should not be allowed to continue.

Political donations must remain voluntary for our electoral system to maintain its integrity. Informed individuals voluntarily donating a portion of their income to a political organization to spend or donate on their behalf — such as the Sierra Club or the Colorado Union of Taxpayers — is an important part of the political process. These groups are subject to a complex set of campaign finance laws designed to bolster the public’s trust in the system.

Labor unions’ exemption from the campaign finance laws that govern all other nonprofits, political action committees, and citizen activist groups automatically places the ethics of labor unions, their leadership, and the candidates who benefit from their donations into question.

Although Amendment 49 will not completely unravel the special status that labor unions enjoy in Colorado campaign finance law, voting “yes” on this amendment will be a step towards fully establishing fairness in our elections.

Athena Dalton, Denver


Any major issue that finds The Denver Post and Jon Caldara in agreement is one that voters of all parties and perspectives should look at carefully. The Post deserves to be congratulated for endorsing Amendment 49.

It’s not easy to take on the big special interests that are spending millions of dollars to deceive Coloradans about this badly needed good-government reform. But The Post got this one right. Government needs to get out of the business of collecting money for unions and other special-interest groups that turn around and lobby the politicians. Organizations that do a good job representing their members can ask those members directly for their contributions through convenient private banking options. They shouldn’t be able to use our public payroll systems for fundraising.

Let’s follow the lead of The Denver Post, former Sen. Hank Brown, and dozens of business groups, civic organizations, and community leaders. The time is right for Colorado to pass Amendment 49.

Shirley Seitz, Denver


Teachers abuse public resources for politics

More union-dues stories: here

Teachers union wants no limits on union-dues

A teachers union improperly used the Jefferson County (CO) School District's e-mail system to urge a "no" vote on three ballot measures, including one that would affect union dues.

School district honchos sent out their own missive, reminding employees they can't use the e-mail system to advocate a position on a campaign issue. "Employees wishing to participate in a campaign activity should take personal leave and use personal e-mail accounts," the district warned.

The union message rankled Republican Jon Caldara, president of the Independence Institute think tank and the chief backer of Amendment 49. The ballot measure would halt the current practice of allowing government workers to have their employers subtract union or other dues from their paychecks on behalf of groups they belong to.

"I am glad to see that Jefferson County put a stop to this very quickly," Caldara said.

The e-mail was sent Wednesday by Kerrie Dallman, president of the Jefferson County Education Association. She used the union's e-mail account to contact association representatives.


IAM's paltry strike-pay sustains Boeing strikers

IAM-Boeing stories: hereMore strike stories: here
"Nation gets a preview of Barackonomics" • "Trickle down strike-onomics"

The strike fund was depleted by political election campaign donations

Rosie "The Riveter" Gough works on an assembly line of sorts across the street from the Boeing Co.'s jet factory.

In the Machinists hall kitchen, Gough fixes tuna sandwiches while Al Jones bags and labels the completed product. Like their fellow Machinists who picket Boeing's factory gates, Gough and Jones put in a four-hour shift for the union, serving her time in the Machinists kitchen. With members constantly manning the picket line, the union runs the strike like a business: coordinating picketers, kitchen help, shuttle van drivers and firewood distributors.

"Boeing runs on food," Jones said.

And so do the Machinists picket lines. That's why the union has members making sandwiches, soups and coffee 24 hours a day. Van drivers shuttle new batches of food out to members stationed at Boeing's various gates around Everett. The operation will persist until the union and Boeing come to terms on a new labor contract, sending the Machinists off the strike lines and back to building aircraft. Company and union leaders are expected to meet this weekend to try to bring an end to the more than monthlong work stoppage.

Gough, who transferred to Everett from Wichita, Kan., enjoys her job at Boeing. Good food goes along with the job -- whether someone brings doughnuts in on the weekend or a manager orders teriyaki take-out for dinner.

The meals the Machinists are making on a Wednesday morning aren't quite as gourmet as what they might eat on the job. But later in the day, the next shift of members might make spaghetti, ribs or ravioli, Jones said.

"Some people are surprised that we feed them so well," he said.

But Jones notes that many of the workers who usually make meals inside Boeing's factory have been laid off due to the Machinists strike. He knows the strike affects more than just the company and union members.

"It's hard to tell how many people are affected," he said.

An hour and a half into Gough's and Jones' shift, the first van arrives, setting the kitchen workers into motion.

Richard and Cheryl Earhart, descendants of the famous Amelia Earhart, are 3 1/2 hours into an 8-hour shift driving one of the union's shuttle vans. Richard works for Boeing, while Cheryl supports her husband and the strike by accompanying him. The Everett couple drive the van two or three times weekly -- putting in more hours than the union requires to be eligible for the $150 weekly strike check.

"I get more joy out of driving shuttle -- I'd rather serve than wave a sign," Richard Earhart said.

Earhart thinks the union shocked Boeing when 87 percent of the members who voted supported the strike. After visiting with members on the line, he's confident the union has the resolve to stick it out until the members are satisfied with Boeing's offer.

"The picket lines are strong," he said.

The Earharts aren't the only union members putting in extra hours. Paul Richards, a Boeing Machinist since 1989, started hauling firewood in his own truck to the different gates on Sept. 6, the day the strike began.

"I believe in the cause," Richards said.

Richards said his wife is still working, which means he doesn't need to find temporary employment during the strike. So he donates his time, eight to 10 hours daily, to aiding the striking Machinists. He also donates the money the union reimburses him for fuel back to the Machinists' hardship fund.

"My wife, she's happy I'm doing this," he said.

As for himself, "I'm having fun. I enjoy it," Richards said.


ACORN blunts Obama

More ACORN stories: hereVoter-fraud stories: here

'ACORN pays me in cash and cigs'

A man at the center of a voter-registration scandal told The Post yesterday he was given cash and cigarettes by aggressive ACORN activists in exchange for registering an astonishing 72 times, in apparent violation of Ohio laws.

"Sometimes, they come up and bribe me with a cigarette, or they'll give me a dollar to sign up," said Freddie Johnson, 19, who filled out 72 separate voter-registration cards over an 18-month period at the behest of the left-leaning Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now.

"The ACORN people are everywhere, looking to sign people up. I tell them I am already registered. The girl said, 'You are?' I say, 'Yup,' and then they say, 'Can you just sign up again?' " he said.

Johnson used the same information on all of his registration cards, and officials say they usually catch and toss out duplicate registrations. But the practice sparks fear that some multiple registrants could provide different information and vote more than once by absentee ballot.

ACORN is under investigation in Ohio and at least eight other states - including Missouri, where the FBI said it's planning to look into potential voter fraud - for over-the-top efforts to get as many names as possible on the voter rolls regardless of whether a person is registered or eligible.

It's even under investigation in Bridgeport, Conn., for allegedly registering a 7-year-old girl to vote, according to the State Elections Enforcement Commission.

Meanwhile, a federal judge yesterday ordered Ohio's Secretary of State to verify the identity of newly registered voters by matching them with other government documents. The order was in response to a Republican lawsuit unrelated to the ACORN probe in Cuyahoga County, in which at least three people, including Johnson, have been subpoenaed.

Bribing citizens with gifts, property or anything of value is a fourth-degree felony in Ohio, punishable by up to 18 months in prison. And it's a fifth-degree felony - punishable by 12 months in jail - for a person to pay "compensation on a fee-per-registration" system when signing up someone to vote.

Johnson, who works at a cellphone kiosk in downtown Cleveland, said he was a sitting duck for the signature hunters, but was always happy to help them out in exchange for a smoke or a little scratch. He'd collected 10 to 20 cigarettes and anywhere from $10 to $15, he said.

The Cleveland voting probe, first reported by The Post yesterday, also focused on Lateala Goins, who said she put her name on multiple voter registrations. She guessed ACORN canvassers then put fake addresses on them. "You can tell them you're registered as many times as you want - they do not care," she said.

ACORN spokesman Kris Harsh said the group does not tolerate its workers paying people to sign the voter-registration cards.

ACORN's political wing has endorsed Barack Obama for president, but Ben LaBolt, a spokesman for the Obama campaign in Ohio, said ACORN has no role in its get-out-the-vote drive.

During the primary season, however, the Obama camp paid another group, Citizen Service Inc., $832,598 for various political services, according to Federal Elections Commission filings. That group and ACORN share the same board of directors.

In Wisconsin yesterday, John McCain blasted ACORN.

"No one should be corrupting the most precious right we have, that is the right to vote," he said.

It's a right Johnson will exercise. "Yeah, I've registered enough - I might as well vote."


ACORN breaks out

More collectivism stories: here
ACORN: hereVoter-fraud: hereWade Rathke: here

Shock troops of the Left finally get well-deserved headlines

The most underreported story of this election season is the Association of Community Organizers For Reform Now, known by its acronym, ACORN. ACORN grew out of what wins the prize hands-down for one of the silliest and most destructive advocacy groups America has ever known – the National Welfare Rights Organization.

Founded by George Wiley, the NWRO became an army of single minority mothers whom he sent out to disrupt welfare offices through sit-ins and demonstrations demanding an end to oppressive eligibility restrictions. His aim was to so flood welfare offices as to cause the system to burst, creating a crisis he hoped would correct America's "unjust capitalist society." From 1965 to 1974, the nation's welfare rolls more than doubled to 10.3 million during generally good economic times. Clearly, it was a winning tactic.

One of ACORN's later tactics was to flood banks and mortgage companies the same way, insisting that they do away with those pesky mortgage eligibility requirements.

ACORN was among those most responsible for the failure of the mortgage market and, astonishingly, until some sharp-eyed lawmaker noticed and stripped them out, ACORN was among those named as bailout recipients.

ACORN is also under investigation by the feds for what may well be the most massive case of organized voter fraud in American history.

James Terry, chief public advocate for the Consumers Rights League, testified on Sept. 25 before a joint House Administration and House Judiciary Committee oversight hearing on "Federal, State and Local Efforts to Prepare for the General 2008 Election," where he highlighted "corruption at every level of ACORN including embezzlement, cover-ups, misuse of taxpayer funds and voter fraud."

ACORN attracted Barack Obama in his youthful community organizing days. He was hired to train ACORN staffers in their shakedown tactics. Obama later funneled millions to ACORN through the Woods Fund, on whose board Obama sat, together with William Ayers, founder of the '60s domestic terror group the Weather Underground.

Obama represented ACORN as its legal counsel in a lawsuit aimed at pushing "motor voter" laws that make it easier for non-citizens to vote by presenting a driver's license.

ACORN's voter fraud tactics have been entirely to benefit their mentor and instructor, Sen. Barack Obama, who listed on his resumé for qualifications for president, "community organizer."

Now follow along with me – I'll type slowly so Obama supporters can follow along: The mortgage crisis has two primary causes. The first was banking legislation overseen by Democrats Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, and the second "predatory" lending practices that were mandated by a Democratic Congress to help low-income families achieve the American dream of home ownership.

In this insane financial and political environment, it is worth remembering that the so-called "Bush economy" worked just fine for six years, until the Democrats took both houses in 2006 – and that it is the Congress to which the Constitution entrusts the economy. The Democrats opposed revamping Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's policies, and Barack Obama has been entangled in the whole mess, one way or another, going all the way back to the mid 1990s.

One can draw a straight line from ACORN to domestic terror to radical anti-American leftism to the mortgage crisis to the economic meltdown to the most massive case of voter fraud ever investigated and finally, straight to Sen. Barack Obama. Without even trying. And nobody seems to care.

It takes one's breath away.


Barack Obama knows ACORN

More ACORN stories: hereVoter-fraud stories: here

When will "The One" come clean?

If you believe Crystal Gail Mangum, the ex-convict stripper still falsely posing as a gang rape victim, you probably believe that the innocuously named ACORN (the acronym for Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) is a fine association honorably pursuing laudable goals.

That's nuts!

Mangum is a con artist still lying outrageously and ACORN is a sinister association out to take over America by putting politicians of its choosing, especially Barack H. Obama, Jr., in power, by doing whatever it takes, despite the law.

ACORN is dangerous.

Bowing to ACORN's political power and thuggish tactics resulted in many of the bad loans that resulted in the current financial crisis and Congressional Democrats blocking the reform and Treasury Department oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that Republicans, led by President Bush and Senator McCain, had urged.

ACORN is hypocritical.

Wikipedia: "ACORN filed a lawsuit in California seeking to exempt itself from the state's minimum wage of $4.25 per hour in 1995. ACORN alleged in its complaint that 'its workers, if paid the minimum wage, will be less empathetic with ACORN's low and moderate income constituency and will therefore be less effective advocates.' The court denied ACORN's petition; the denial was sustained on appeal."

And ACORN is secretive about its scandals!

Wikipedia: "Dale Rathke, the brother of ACORN's founder Wade Rathke, was found to have embezzled $948,607.50 from the group and affiliated charitable organizations in 1999 and 2000. ACORN executives did not inform the board or law enforcement, but signed an enforceable restitution agreement with the Rathke family to repay the amount of the embezzlement. Wade Rathke stated to the New York Times that 'the decision to keep the matter secret was not made to protect his brother but because word of the embezzlement would have put a “weapon” into the hands of [...] conservatives who object to [ACORN]'s often strident advocacy on behalf of low- and moderate-income families and workers.' A whistleblower revealed the fraud in 2008, leading to the departure of both Dale and Wade Rathke."

Obama is a longtime ACORNian and The One chosen to fool the voters and then implement the ACORN agenda.

Michelle Malkin, in "The ACORN/Obama Voter Registration 'Thug Thizzle": "Despite his adamant denials of any association with the group (his Fight the Smears website now claims 'Barack Obama never organized with ACORN'), Obama's political DNA is encoded with the ACORN agenda."


Obama is ACORN's guy, and Obama and ACORN shamelessly lie.

Malkin: "Systemic corruption of our election process continues. Barack Obama and his old friends at ACORN and Project Vote are leading the way. This radical revolution is taking place in your backyard. And as I've reported before, this voter-fraud racket is on your dime."

As usual, Malkin is right.

Unfortunately, with Obama and ACORN, the bulk of the mainstream media is ignoring instead of scrutinizing and publicizing the danger.

To put it simply, Obama is lying about his ties to ACORN, lest voters see behind the curtain and realize he is a front man and a fraud.


"In 1992, Newman hired Obama to lead Project Vote efforts in Illinois. The Illinois drive's motto: 'It's a Power Thing.'

"....Obama also trained ACORN members in Chicago. In turn, ACORN volunteers worked on his Illinois campaigns and ACORN's PAC endorsed his primary bid with full backing and muscle."

ACORN has posed as a non-partisan organization.

It is not.


It took taxpayer money with one hand and promoted its political favorites with the other.


"ACORN, which receives 40 percent of its revenues from American taxpayers to pursue an aggressive welfare-state agenda, has already helped register over 1.27 million people nationwide. The rest of their funding comes from left-wing heavyweights like billionaire George Soros and the Democracy Alliance.

"Project Vote, a 501(c)(3) organization, was founded by left-wing lawyer Sandy Newman to register voters in welfare offices and unemployment lines with the explicit goal of turning back the Reagan revolution.

"The two groups are inextricably linked -- and at their nexus is Barack Obama."

Obama is NOT oblivious.

He's worse than oblivious.

- Michael J. Gaynor

Related Posts with Thumbnails