Defunding ACORN and Double Standards

Dave Schuler notes that the Senate has voted to “de-fund” ACORN and strip them of Federal Money. I think that this is an entirely appropriate action. There’s enough evidence that ACORN employees might have been willing to go along with and provide assistance with a sex-trafficking scheme that it’s worth cutting off their funds, at least while the matter is investigated.

That said, I am curious as to why the Federal government continues to fund Armor Group, North America, which has come under fire because the guards it provided to guard the U.S. Embassy in Kabul have apparently been illegally engaging in sex crimes as well:

[Former Armor Group manager James] Gordon said the company resisted “with outright hostility” his efforts as a manager to impose a no-brothel policy. And Gordon said he asked both the company and the State Department to investigate whether guards were personally involved in sex trafficking, and that to his knowledge nothing was done.

“United States law, known as the Trafficking in Victims Protection Act, prohibits contractors from procuring commercial sex while working on the contract,” Gordon said in a statement. “Many of the prostitutes in Kabul are young Chinese girls who were taken against their will to Kabul for sexual exploitation.”

Gordon said a trainee had boasted that he could purchase a girl for $20,000 and turn a profit after a month.

“I immediately notified both the State Department and AGNA’s president, and urged the company to thoroughly investigate whether sex trafficking was occurring among the guard force … To my knowledge neither AGNA nor the State Department conducted a follow-up investigation,” Gordon said.

ACORN, as far as I can tell, gets about $3 million from the Federal Government. Via E.D. Kain, AGNA’s contract is worth $187 milliion.

But that’s not all: the Federal govnerment provides billions of dollars to Halliburton, which is currently facing scrutiny because it tried to cover up the gang-rape of one of its employees.

Remember Jamie Leigh Jones, the Halliburton/KBR contractor who alleged she was gang raped by her co-workers in Iraq and then imprisoned in a shipping container after she reported the attack to the company? Well, it looks like she’s finally get to sue the company, in a real courthouse, over her ordeal.

Her legal saga started after Halliburton failed to take any action against her alleged attackers, and the Justice Department and military also failed to prosecute. Jones then tried to sue the company for failing to protect her.

This is not an attempt at a “they do it too!” deal. I seriously have zero problem with cutting off ACORN’s funds. I just hope that the Congress starts applying this principle across the board and prevents the Administration from contracting with companies that are involved in sex crimes–not just politically convenient targets. Defund ACORN, AGNA, and Halliburton all. Oh, and while we’re at it, could somebody please ask Halliburton to return to the Federal government the over one billion dollars that it can’t account for?

FILED UNDER: US Politics, , ,
Alex Knapp
About Alex Knapp
Alex Knapp is Associate Editor at Forbes for science and games. He was a longtime blogger elsewhere before joining the OTB team in June 2005 and contributed some 700 posts through January 2013. Follow him on Twitter @TheAlexKnapp.

Comments

  1. sam says:

    Head on over to Volokh.com and see the discussion,

    Would Defunding ACORN Be an Unconstitutional Bill of Attainder?

    The discussion is at Eugene Volokh, September 15, 2009 at 4:54pm. Eugene’s opinion: He doesn’t know:

    [W]ould defunding ACORN be an unconstitutional bill of attainder? My rereading of the precedents leads me to confidently and unambiguously say, “I don’t know.” The distinction between “punishment” and actions that “reasonably can be said to further nonpunitive legislative purposes” strikes me as generally elusive and perhaps even illusory, and especially so here.

    It might make for an interesting court case.

  2. Wayne says:

    If Armor Group or KBR has shown a consistent habit of doing those acts then you have a case. If the level of misbehavior is comparable to other organization of that size and manner then you don’t.

    ACORN has been caught doing misdeeds in the past and past it off as just a few bad apples in the barrel. That is a plausible explanation and they haven’t been punished as an organization for those. However the latest scandals are very hard to past of as anything but systemic.

    I will grant that it is hard to draw a hard line as when misbehavior is a fluke or systemic especially in a large organization.

  3. Zelsdorf Ragshaft III says:

    Alex, do you write for the Daily Kos as well as Outside the Beltway? Surely the Huffington Post has been the recipient of your writings. If not, you are missing a bet.

  4. Dave Schuler says:

    As I noted in the body of my post, I don’t think much of grants to NGO’s full stop.

  5. Crust says:

    Greenwald has a different take, though the same general angle that the standards being applied to ACORN aren’t being applied to other groups that have received orders of magnitude more money from the feds.

  6. Alex Knapp says:

    Zelsdorf,

    So is it your contention that it is perfectly acceptable for the Federal government to enter into contracts with companies that embezzle funds from it and cover up rapes committed by its employees?

  7. Alex Knapp says:

    As I noted in the body of my post, I don’t think much of grants to NGO’s full stop.

    I generally agree with you, though I might make exceptions for particular cases such as scientific research.

  8. andrew says:

    My best guess is that the companies like Halliburton probably do a very good job the vast majority of the time, despite the propaganda blitkrieg against them. ACORN appears to just be a criminal organization that the Democrats outsource some of their voting fraud operations to.

  9. Alex, the biggest difference is that I struggle to find any reason why Acorn was sucking at the government teat to begin with, whereas there were and are very clear and necessary roles being filled by Halliburton and Armor Group in war zones. In no way do I excuse any crimes or malfeasance by their employees, but your “This is not an attempt at a “they do it too!” deal.” rings a little hollow.

    FWIW, I read the “Dr. Evil $1 Billion Dollar” story, and let me just say that any article that includes the phrase, “Henry Waxman — invaluable chair of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee” isn’t to be taken without a few large grains of salt. No point in arguing with a jaundiced presentation that begins, “Those wacky government contractors. Will we ever tire of of their sportive tricks?” No agenda there.

  10. So is it your contention that it is perfectly acceptable for the Federal government to enter into contracts with companies that embezzle funds from it and cover up rapes committed by its employees?

    You know, you throw some very serious accusations about with a remakable sense of casualness. But then again, we’ve covered some of this ground before.

  11. Alex Knapp says:

    Alex, the biggest difference is that I struggle to find any reason why Acorn was sucking at the government teat to begin with

    Actually, Charles, federal funds appear to be only a tiny part of ACORN’s budget.

    very clear and necessary roles being filled by Halliburton and Armor Group in war zones

    But my problem is they’re NOT BEING FULFILLED.

    FWIW, I read the “Dr. Evil $1 Billion Dollar” story

    I agree that the blog post isn’t the best in tone–but I linked it because it links a lot of the primary sources. Bottom line: Army auditors found that Halliburton couldn’t account for over $1 billion and demanded it be paid back. Halliburton says that if they do, they’ll stop sending supplies to combat troops.

    That’s despicable, no matter how you slice it. I have no problem cutting off funds for ACORN at all, but as far as problematic organizations go it’s got nothing on Haliburton and the Armor Group.

  12. andrew says:

    “FWIW, I read the “Dr. Evil $1 Billion Dollar” story, and let me just say that any article that includes the phrase, “Henry Waxman — invaluable chair of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee” isn’t to be taken without a few large grains of salt. No point in arguing with a jaundiced presentation that begins, “Those wacky government contractors. Will we ever tire of of their sportive tricks?” No agenda there.”

    Exactly. The same people who are throwing around wild accusations against these contractors are the same type of people who gleefully reported that Marines had massacred civilians in Haditha.

  13. Alex Knapp says:

    andrew,

    The same people who are throwing around wild accusations against these contractors are the same type of people who gleefully reported that Marines had massacred civilians in Haditha.

    The people claiming that Halliburton basically embezzled $1 billion are auditors from the Department of Defense.

  14. Alex Knapp says:

    Charles,

    You know, you throw some very serious accusations about with a remakable sense of casualness. But then again, we’ve covered some of this ground before.

    ACORN is being defunded on the basis of accusations, not actual proof of wrongdoing. I don’t see why we can’t hold other organizations to the same standard. After all, the claim that Halliburton can’t account for over $1 billion in Federal spending comes from the Department of Defense itself.

  15. the q says:

    Alex, kudos, good even handed comments.

    I think, as a liberal, having read many of the insane comments by the conservatives on this blog, we should recall these words from FDR, which today in light of Cheney/Halliburton/Prince/Blackwater rip-offs and profits, sound almost quaint and naive.

    FDR said this in a fireside chat (google it cynics):

    “Our present emergency and a common sense of decency make it imperative that no new group of war millionaires shall come into being in this nation as a result of the struggles abroad. The American people will not relish the idea of any American citizen growing rich and fat in an emergency of blood and slaughter and human suffering.”

    Somehow, the “Greatest Generation” who btw elected FDR four times (those damn anti american liberal communists) realized that privatizing and profiteering from war was unseemly (thats why FDR put a 90% on millionaires to beat the Nazis and Tojo – can you conservatives imagine that happening today?…it would be the modern equivalent of the old Jack Benny line…your money or we lose to the Nazis…..current conservative response: I’m thinking, I’m thinking…)

    Conservatives, in a time of war, went ballistic over liberal rants against the moronic Bush, questioning our patriotism bla bla…and the tax cuts to millionaires during war (typical conservative selfish values at work)

    I really believe had they been in charge during WW2, they would not have rationed supplies, would not have taxed millionaires..in short we would all be “sprechen ze deutsch” right about now if these selfish, brain dead conservatives would have been in charge.

    FDR/Ike/Dougie Mac/Marshall destroyed two empires in 3.5 years. You conservative pansies have had 7 years to kill bin laden and totally failed.

    If you think I can’t stand conservative values and philosophies which are killing america, you might be a redneck.

    Please, would love to see the critical feedback.

  16. the q says:

    To Charles Austin, so Henry Waxman is so wrong to look into war profiteering?

    Harry Truman made his bones on just such inquiries during WW2…I can just imagine your prose in 1944…”any article which starts off with Harry Truman, invaluable chair of the senate select committee to Investigate the National Defense Program has to be taken with a grain of salt…”

    What are you afraid of? that Waxman may jeopardize your Halliburton stock holdings?

  17. andrew says:

    “FDR/Ike/Dougie Mac/Marshall destroyed two empires in 3.5 years. You conservative pansies have had 7 years to kill bin laden and totally failed.”

    So you prefer the bloodbath conventional war with tens of millions of people dying, carpet bombings, nukes, etc…?

  18. the q says:

    To Andrew, me thinks you support torture and the Haditha massacre, voted for Bush twice, hate Obama and would vehemently disagree with my above quote of FDR decrying “war millionaires”.

    But what do you expect from a conservative?

  19. andrew says:

    q, I’ll take your evasions as a yes to my question.

  20. the q says:

    Andrew, I supported going into Afghanistan, torabora, and killing bin laden…cutting off his testes, putting them in his mouth and sending that picture (ala Uday and Quisay)to all muslim media with this caption:

    “this is what happens when you kill 3000 americans”

    That we went into Iraq which was a disaster and was only done for the purpose of enriching bush’s military/industial buddies.

    For christ sake if Obama would have bertha lewis as his VP and acorn made off with billions, wouldn’t you question his relationship?

    Of course you would/do. But mention Cheney and his multi billions going to his former company and you conservatives glaze over like a German in 1945 disbelieving the Dachau death camps.

    Open your eyes for gods sake.

  21. the q says:

    No evasion here pal.

  22. the q says:

    andrew,

    do you agree with the FDR quote???

  23. To Charles Austin, so Henry Waxman is so wrong to look into war profiteering?

    Wow, you got me there.

    Glad he’s on your side Alex.

  24. the q says:

    I will take your evasions as a yes to my question

  25. Dave Schuler says:

    Actually, Charles, federal funds appear to be only a tiny part of ACORN’s budget.

    From everything I’ve read ACORN’s records are sufficiently opaque that I doubt that any reasonable conclusion can be drawn from them.

  26. the q says:

    typical non responses by conservatives, who like bullies when confronted with someone who will punch back much harder, scatter like roaches in the sun

  27. andrew says:

    “do you agree with the FDR quote???”

    Yeah, although given the stuff that FDR pulled I wish a more credible person had said this.

    “That we went into Iraq which was a disaster and was only done for the purpose of enriching bush’s military/industial buddies.”

    If you really believe that then you are truly deranged.

    “Of course you would/do. But mention Cheney and his multi billions going to his former company and you conservatives glaze over like a German in 1945 disbelieving the Dachau death camps.”

    Halliburton has been used by the US government for decades. Was Cheney VP for the last half century?

  28. PD Shaw says:

    The difference is that there are tight labor markets for providing security in a war zone compared with community organizing on Chicago’s south side. I suggest reducing Armor Group’s action and giving ACORN some play on foreign security details.

    Win! Win!

  29. the q – you get this one time, so pay attention. Follow Alinsky’s rules to your heart’s content but I am under no obligation to play your games or to respond to your supercilious statements, wild accusations, boilerplate fantasies, red herrings, McGuffins, or ad hominem attacks. It isn’t clever, it’s sad. Really sad.

    Reasonable people can differ, but we must begin by being reasonable. Calling people pansies, Nazis, war profiteers, rednecks, and bullies out of the gate as you have already done in this thread because you don’t agree with them disqualifies you as reasonable, as does using conservative as a perjorative term.

    Have a nice life.

  30. Davebo says:

    Halliburton has been used by the US government for decades. Was Cheney VP for the last half century?

    It was Dick Cheney, as defense secretary in 1992, who spearheaded the movement to privatize most of the military’s civil logistics activities. Under the direction of Secretary Cheney, the Pentagon paid $9 million to Halliburton’s subsidiary, KBR, to conduct a study to determine whether private companies like itself should handle all of the military’s civil logistics. KBR’s classified study concluded that greater privatization of logistics was in the government’s best interest. Shortly thereafter, on August 3, 1992, Secretary Cheney awarded the first comprehensive LOGCAP contract to KBR. The Washington Post reported “The Pentagon chose [KBR] to carry out the study and subsequently selected the company to implement its own plan.” Three years later, in 1995, Halliburton hired Cheney as its CEO.

    In 1997, two years after Cheney became CEO of Halliburton, KBR’s LOGCAP contract was not renewed and the government alleged the company engaged in fraudulent billing practices. The independent auditing arm of Congress, the GAO, had criticized KBR’s performance during America’s war in the Balkans. GAO said KBR’s cost-overruns in the Balkans inflated the original contract price by 32 percent. After KBR was effectively fired by the Army in 1997, the LOGCAP contract was awarded to Halliburton competitor DynCorp. But, after Cheney became vice president in 2001, DynCorp was fired and KBR was re-awarded the contract.

    Today, 90 percent of KBR’s work under LOGCAP is being done in Iraq. Over 24,000 Halliburton employees and subcontract workers are employed to carryout LOGCAP in the Iraq-Kuwait region.

    Halliburton’s revenue from LOGCAP increased from $320 million in the second quarter of 2003 to over $2 billion in the fourth quarter of 2003. As of May 2004, the federal government had spent nearly $5 billion on LOGCAP since KBR became the sole contractor in 2001. The original value of LOGCAP in Iraq was estimated at over $4 billion, but the value of the contract is now over $8 billion and could reach $18 billion.

  31. just me says:

    I think the main difference is that they are providing two totally different services to the government.

    ACORN was collecting money for something that didn’t necessarily need government support for, and there are likely many other organizations that can do the work and do it ethically.

    The kind of work done, like in Kabul, is often very specialized-there aren’t people all over the place applying to do it, and even more so I kind of have the opinion that few of them act ethically.

    Also, cutting off funding to ACORN sort of has that “check off the bipartisan box” feel to it where congress members can point to it to show that they are ethical and bipartisan. ACORN’s story isn’t that complicated-and makes for easy headlines.

    All that said-I would be perfectly happy if the government cut off funding to organizations that as an organization seem to encourage or permit law breaking. There is no reason they should collect taxpayer money if they are going to cheat the taxpayer or break the law.

  32. the q says:

    So Andrew, why did we go into Iraq after NOT killing bin laden.

    Oh I forgot…its because of 911…er, no link there…wait it was for WMD’s…none there..oh, I forgot, he moved them to Syria….wait it was to kill al qaida there….ooops they weren’t there till AFTER we invaded.

    Sooooooooo, using Occams razor….maybe, just maybe it was for….MONEY and OIL????

    Of course not liberal hater right?

    And yes, lets look at Halliburton prior to Iraq war and their contracts by the u.s gov.

    pre war $2.5, after $25 billion.

    Great point you made…obviously not about the money.

    Next?

  33. Davebo says:

    Replace the name Cheney with Murtha in that story and we’d be hearing a lot of howling.

  34. floyd says:

    It’s tough enough to understand why anyone would call himself a liberal, but what confounds me is why each and everyone who does, apparently feels compelled to support the wrong doing of every Marxist bully/thief in the country.
    If you could contrive enough to come up with an honorable definition for “liberal”, then the least you could do is demand that others who make a claim to the term be held to a standard before receiving your support.
    Is ACORN really the kind of despicable criminal enterprise that deserves your support?

    Do you think that citing FDR adds credibility to any modern “liberal” argument? If so, why not cite his ideological comrade, Stalin?

  35. the q says:

    charles austin, I have a nice life. I guess you never listen to Hannity, Beck, Oreilly, malkin, savage, limbaugh, coulter et al. Right? and if so, have written them or called to tell them to get a life right?

    thanks for reading, and not responding to uncomfortable facts that you avoid by dismissing the messenger.

    Davebo didn’t diss anyone, what’s your response to his missive?

    There won’t be any, because you conservatives can never admit you’re wrong…just look at andrew’s insane defense of the Iraq war after all that we know now….

  36. the q says:

    floyd, what a ridiculous comment…here’s why…I never stated I supported Acorn, that is just your preconceived limbaugh brain washing i confront continously from you brain dead conservatives. Nor did I say I was a Marxist (again brain dead reciting of right wing radio)

    I am a New Deal democrat and believe dems seriously fuc#ed up when we decided we would spend most of our time making the world safe for lesbians to kiss at disneyland or justifying why its ok to syphon off the brains of an 8 month old fetus or why affirmative action should be based more on race than income…I believe in the free market system..it works fabulously about 80% of the time, but when it doesn’t, government must step in.

    I believe we screwed the pooch by not crushing bin laden’s balls when we had the chance.

    I guess the founding fathers liberalism (after all they killed the kingsmen and took the land from england) inspired me.

    Oh, please, idiots, don’t write in to say that the founding fathers were “conservatives”

    I will barf.

  37. the q says:

    One last thing Floyd, please elucidate on your imbecilic remark “why not cite his ideological comrade, Stalin?”

    I mean, WTF….did you just read Newsmax or WorldNet Daily.

    Please explain that ridiculous comparison?

  38. Crust says:

    charles austin, just curious but if using “conservative” as a pejorative term disqualifies someone as reasonable, does that also apply to the pejorative use of “liberal”? floyd might also like to know your answer.

  39. Davebo says:

    It’s not the obvious patronage that Halliburton got via their former CEO that truly angers me.

    It’s that when DOD caught them embezzling over a billion dollars Halliburton basically blackmailed the Pentagon by threatening to withhold vital services to force them to ignore the theft. That was much more criminal than the initial theft.

    And as I pointed out, Halliburton has a long history of ripping off the Pentagon.

  40. andrew says:

    “There won’t be any, because you conservatives can never admit you’re wrong…just look at andrew’s insane defense of the Iraq war after all that we know now….”

    I didn’t even defend the war, I just pointed out one statement of yours that was deranged.

  41. the q says:

    Ok, I promise not to use anymore insulting terms, will not commit ad hominem, so please conservatives bring the ball back and lets play, this time I’ll be nice so you don’t go crying back to mommy…ooops sorry…couldn’t help myself.

    Seriously folks, there are some good conservative points to be made, but unfortunately the level of discourse on both sides gets blotted out by trivializing and ridiculing the opposition.

    Any Catholics out there?

    Daniel Bell the famous sociologist wrote:

    “What the right as a whole fears is the erosion of its own social position, the collapse of its power, the increasing incomprehensibility of a world — now overwhelmingly technical and complex — that has changed so drastically within a lifetime.”

    Describing current conservative reaction to Obama?

    Not hardly, it was written in 1962 and it was said about JFK, the catholic not Obama the negro.

    I truly believe that we are headed for the 60s again and I fear some crazy right wing loon is gonna off Obama.

    Homeland security comes out with a report about their fears of violent right wing hate groups and the typical conservative response was hysterical and dismissive.

    Then the right wing nut kills the guard in the jewish museum, then the right wing nut kills an abortion doctor.

    And the right wing response…”Yawn, lets go to the town hall meeting with an AK 47″.

    Just look at the responses to my points…filled with incredible ignorance and absolute avoidance of any credible argument against what I said.

    I absolutely take apart conservatives that I argue with in person, because in their frustration of being completely unable to articulate a rebuttal, go the standard route of “marxist, stalin lover (see above from floyd)…liberal, hater, blame america first etc.

    So, of course, I love it when I badger and beat conservatives because quite frankly, most have turned off their critical thinking faculties.

    I mean, go back to the night of 9/11/01, after watching live the horror of the buckling towers it would be inconceivable to think that 8 years later, bin laden would still be lobbing videos at us.

    In fact most conservatives would have thought, “oh great, it must be because we elected in 2004, some pansy like gore or hillary to be president, and of course, those liberals love terrorism. No wonder bin laden is still on the loose”.

    In fact, just think of how united we were after 911.

    If another attack comes, do you really think we will rally around Obama the same way?

    Read Cheney’s comments last month, basically saying Obama is responsible for any next attack because he refuses to torture people like we did.

    His redmeat to charles and andrew et al. is simply this: we kept you safe (forget that Clinton kept us safe…and the 3000 dead in NYC came under cheney’s watch), but Obama will get you killed.

  42. andrew says:

    “I truly believe that we are headed for the 60s again and I fear some crazy right wing loon is gonna off Obama.”

    Given history it’s much more likely to come from the Left.

    “Homeland security comes out with a report about their fears of violent right wing hate groups and the typical conservative response was hysterical and dismissive.”

    It was a preemptive strike by the Left to politicize any shooting and blame everybody on the Right.

    “Then the right wing nut kills the guard in the jewish museum, then the right wing nut kills an abortion doctor.”

    There was nothing right wing about the Holocaust Museum shooter. The anti-abortion guy could be argued to be right wing although I’ve never heard about his politics outside of abortion.

    There was recently an anti-abortion activist murdered, do you think that the Left is to blame?

    “I absolutely take apart conservatives that I argue with in person, because in their frustration of being completely unable to articulate a rebuttal, go the standard route of “marxist, stalin lover (see above from floyd)…liberal, hater, blame america first etc.”

    All you seem to do is to randomly spout of a few talking points you apparently have memorized. If anyone has trouble responding it’s because you’re crazy.

  43. Here is a list of the representatives who did not vote to defund ACORN.

    If you see your representative on the list, please contact them and tell them how you feel about their vote.

  44. the q says:

    Andrew,

    “Given history it’s much more likely to come from the Left.”

    Yeah, you’re right, someone on the left will smoke Obama…anyone want odds??? You really think that?

    “It was a preemptive strike by the Left to politicize any shooting and blame everybody on the Right.”

    Ok, no paranoia there. This is exhibit A in the trial of “do you right wingers actually believe what comes out of your mouth.” or see my previous post about “turning off one’s critical faculties”.

    Please explain how that bastion of Bolshevism, homeland security is setting up the right to take a fall?

    You re saying that a whole department of the federal government decided to come up with a fake report on angry right wing hate groups in order to blame right wingers in case that actually happened.

    Can anyone say “grassy knoll” and “martians have landed and hide amongst us”.

    You want me to take seriously anything you say after that?

    Also, the guy that killed the anti abortion protester also killed a gravel pit owner later that day and was about to kill a third person (real estate agent) who had pissed him off (and wasn’t an anti abortionist btw) The police trace no motive to his abortion views. He was just a pissed off moron with access to automatic weapons.

    Dr. Tiller had been a target for years (previously shot at), so please don’t conflate the two. As for the Holocaust guard murderer, James von brun, he is a “white supremest and Holocaust denier who lived in Idaho, in the town where the “Aryan Nation” was based” so do you really want me to go there…obviously he was a liberal right?

    Finally, you wrote:

    “All you seem to do is to randomly spout of a few talking points you apparently have memorized. If anyone has trouble responding it’s because you’re crazy.”

    I’m sorry, were you looking in the mirror when you wrote that inane comment?

    I mean REALLY?

    I

  45. the q says:

    Andrew, I hate to say it buddy, but you are taking a beating.

    You remind me of the black guy at Altamont that was stomped on by all the hells angels with pool cues.

    Give it up pal. Don’t respond anymore.

    I feel like Dr. Kevorkian and need to end my arguments with you through voluntary euthanasia.

  46. andrew says:

    “:Yeah, you’re right, someone on the left will smoke Obama…anyone want odds??? You really think that?”

    No, I don’t think anyone will get a shot at him. But there’s as much of a chance it will come from the far Left as anywhere else. JFK was killed by a communist, everybody knows that, but the Left likes to blame the rhetoric of people on the Right for it anyways.

    “Ok, no paranoia there. This is exhibit A in the trial of “do you right wingers actually believe what comes out of your mouth.” or see my previous post about “turning off one’s critical faculties”.”

    What’s the paranoia? Leftists like yourself gleefully slander the entire conservative movement for stuff it has nothing to do with.

    “You re saying that a whole department of the federal government decided to come up with a fake report on angry right wing hate groups in order to blame right wingers in case that actually happened.”

    Where did I say a whole department did it? Most people who work in any department don’t write memos.

    “Also, the guy that killed the anti abortion protester also killed a gravel pit owner later that day and was about to kill a third person (real estate agent) who had pissed him off (and wasn’t an anti abortionist btw) The police trace no motive to his abortion views. He was just a pissed off moron with access to automatic weapons.”

    http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/11/michigan.shooting/index.html
    “Authorities say the suspect, Harlan James Drake, was offended by anti-abortion material that the activist had displayed across from the school all week.”

  47. andrew says:

    “Dr. Tiller had been a target for years (previously shot at), so please don’t conflate the two. As for the Holocaust guard murderer, James von brun, he is a “white supremest and Holocaust denier who lived in Idaho, in the town where the “Aryan Nation” was based” so do you really want me to go there…obviously he was a liberal right?”

    The Holocaust guard shooter hated a lot of people, there was no way to pin him down politically. Not for a thug like you obviously, I’m talking about rational people.

  48. Davebo says:

    “Authorities say the suspect, Harlan James Drake, was offended by anti-abortion material that the activist had displayed across from the school all week.”

    And he really hated gravel!

  49. Davebo says:

    The Holocaust guard shooter hated a lot of people, there was no way to pin him down politically.

    Actually he apparently hated Jews and the Federal Reserve. Ever read The Creature from Jekyl Island?

    My bircher father in law gave me a copy.

  50. the q says:

    Andrew, I have to admit, I admire your chutzpah.
    You’re reminding me of Paul Newman in cool hand luke when george kennedy was smashing him to the ground continuously, but he wouldn’t quit.

    Bravo. Good for you.

    But, I will have no mercy. Your errant viewpoint must be destroyed.

    To wit, I wrote:

    “Homeland security comes out with a report about their fears of violent right wing hate groups and the typical conservative response was hysterical and dismissive.

    And your response was:

    “It was a preemptive strike by the Left to politicize any shooting and blame everybody on the Right. Where did I say a whole department did it? Most people who work in any department don’t write memos.

    Well, it wasn’t a memo, it was a department report read it here:

    http://www.wnd.com/images/dhs-rightwing-extremism.pdf

    So, do you still insist that this was done for the purpose of “a preemptive strike by the Left to politicize any shooting and blame everybody on the Right.”?

    And, again you compare a deranged lunatic who planned on killing 3 people who pissed him off with Dr. Tiller who had:

    a. been a constant target of the anti abortion movement for 30 years (clinic firebombed in 1986, shot in both arms in 1993, then finally murdered in May).

    b. been the story on oreilly in 29 episodes and referred to as tiller the baby killer.

    c. targeted for litigation by operation rescue.

    Please, show me ONE article, quote, by any liberal anti abortionist saying that they would “hate to be James Pouillon on judgment day.”

    Just another example of right wing fuzzy thinking by linking the two.

    Apples and oranges my friend.

    As to your remark about James von brunn and that “there was no way to pin him down politically”, I guess being the author of a 1999 self published book, “Kill the Best Gentiles”, which praises Adolf Hitler and denies the Holocaust wasn’t a bit of a hint as to his views?

    My retort is for you to put down the crack pipe and call AA for the nearest meeting.

    You are the living embodiment of what I referred to as conservatives closing down the rational faculties of the brain which promotes reasoned thinking and cognitive activity.

    Please try again.

  51. Crust – yes, I believe it is wrong and simplistic to use liberal as a simple perjorative. I am a liberal, a classical liberal who believes in freedom and respect for the individual. FWIW, I am not a Republican nor a Democrat since neither party has much in common with classical liberalism any longer.

  52. andrew says:

    “So, do you still insist that this was done for the purpose of “a preemptive strike by the Left to politicize any shooting and blame everybody on the Right.”?”

    The bureaucrat who wrote that report was either extremely lazy (and just copied what the Southern Poverty Law Center said) or was a far Left nut job like you. The DHS had to issue an apology to veteran’s groups over it. How do you explain that? I remember the mid 90’s when the Left pulled the “there are militias everywhere, talk radio made Tim McVeigh blow up a building” narrative. It’s not a surprise the instant another Democrat was in the White House again the Left would pull the same crap.

    “And, again you compare a deranged lunatic who planned on killing 3 people who pissed him off with Dr. Tiller who had:”

    First off, you should admit you were wrong when you said the police could trace no motive. The authorities did say that he was upset by the anti-abortionist’s views. You think it’s a coincidence that this nut shot someone on the street and it happens to be a well known abortion protester. What are the odds of that?

    Second of all I’m not really comparing the two murderers in each case. I am pointing out how easy it is to tar an entire political viewpoint with the actions of individuals.

    “As to your remark about James von brunn and that “there was no way to pin him down politically”, I guess being the author of a 1999 self published book, “Kill the Best Gentiles”, which praises Adolf Hitler and denies the Holocaust wasn’t a bit of a hint as to his views?”

    Yes I was aware he was a neo-Nazi. And I also pointed out he held a lot of crazy beliefs and there was no way to pin him down as simply on one side of the political spectrum. But you are clearly a thug and quite intellectually dishonest and are clearly incapable of even the slightest nuanced thought.

    “My retort is for you to put down the crack pipe and call AA for the nearest meeting.

    You are the living embodiment of what I referred to as conservatives closing down the rational faculties of the brain which promotes reasoned thinking and cognitive activity.

    Please try again.”

    You’re a legend in your own mind, pal.

  53. Davebo says:

    And yet the Veterans of Foreign Wars, of which I’m a member, defended the report.

    Go figure eh?

  54. the q says:

    Andrew,

    Again, you think that this report “just copied what the Southern Poverty Law Center said” or was “written by a far Left nut job like you”.

    And you write:

    ‘I remember the mid 90’s when the Left pulled the “there are militias everywhere, talk radio made Tim McVeigh blow up a building” narrative. It’s not a surprise the instant another Democrat was in the White House again the Left would pull the same crap.

    Then you write:

    “Second of all I’m not really comparing the two murderers in each case. I am pointing out how easy it is to tar an entire political viewpoint with the actions of individuals.

    Like you just did in the above paragraph when you wrote:

    “It’s not a surprise the instant another Democrat was in the White House again the Left would pull the same crap.”

    Grow up you infant.

    I am done. No use talking to a close minded right wing boor.

    Have a great weekend….

  55. anjin-san says:

    It’s tough enough to understand why anyone would call himself a liberal

    Aside from an IQ over 90?

  56. andrew says:

    “Second of all I’m not really comparing the two murderers in each case. I am pointing out how easy it is to tar an entire political viewpoint with the actions of individuals.

    Like you just did in the above paragraph when you wrote:

    “It’s not a surprise the instant another Democrat was in the White House again the Left would pull the same crap.”

    Except the difference is that the Right is getting blamed for the actions of one or two people out of 300 million people. When nobody on the mainstream Right is calling for deaths of people that they disagree with. It’s absurd to blame regular folks who just disagree with you for actual murder.

    When I say that the entire Left is pulling scare tactics from the old 90’s play book it’s because as far as I can tell the entire Left is doing it. I’m not aware of anyone on the Left calling for their own side not to pin violence on individuals from the Right. Why would they, when you have 80% of the media on your side you’re not going to be called on it.

    “I am done. No use talking to a close minded right wing boor.

    Have a great weekend….”

    Don’t go away mongoloid, I’m not done kicking your teeth in yet.

  57. floyd says:

    The q;
    Oh , that’s right you did say you were a Liberal didn’t you, so I guess you could infer that I was speaking to you by virtue of my first sentence.:)
    Even so, I certainly didn’t call you a Marxist nor did I call the general subject of the comment a Marxist.
    The Acorn sentence is of course a question… May I then infer that, since you “never said” that you support ACORN, that you reject them?

    I made no “imbecilic remark” as you claim, so I can see no need to respond to “your one last thing”, which I am confident it won’t be anyway.

    It is apparent to me that you do not like being labeled even though you chose a label for yourself.
    You also chose a label for me as well, and I guess, if your idea of a “Conservative” is the opposite of your idea of a “Liberal”, you have given me no cause for umbrage![lol]

    I understand that you would have your readers believe that your’s are the considered opinions of a mature mind, I get only a glimpse of that…..behind your facade of blind rage!

    BTW;Feel free to barf since you seem to spew virtual barf all over the virtual page anyway!{;)

  58. floyd says:

    “”Aside from an IQ over 90?””
    “””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””

    So, you mean it gives you a false sense of a superior intelligence?

  59. An Interested Party says:

    Reasonable people can differ, but we must begin by being reasonable. Calling people pansies, Nazis, war profiteers, rednecks, and bullies out of the gate as you have already done in this thread because you don’t agree with them disqualifies you as reasonable, as does using conservative as a perjorative [sic] term.

    Hmm…let’s look at this statement through a slightly different lens at about 5-6 years ago, shall we?

    Reasonable people can differ, but we must begin by being reasonable. Calling people (who are opposed to the war in Iraq) pansies, Nazis traitors, war profiteers terrorist sympathizers, rednecks elitist snobs, and bullies out of the gate as you have already done in this thread because you don’t agree with them disqualifies you as reasonable, as does using conservative liberal as a pejorative term.

    Or, we could look at this statement through a slightly different lens in our current environment…

    Reasonable people can differ, but we must begin by being reasonable. Calling people the president (and his supporters) pansies, Nazis, war profiteers socialists, rednecks elitist snobs, and bullies out of the gate as you have already done in this thread because you don’t agree with them disqualifies you as reasonable, as does using conservative liberal as a pejorative term.

    There must be so few reasonable people…

    I made no “imbecilic remark” as you claim…

    On the contrary…writing that Stalin was FDR’s “ideological comrade” is quite stupid…

  60. anjin-san says:

    My retort is for you to put down the crack pipe and call AA for the nearest meeting.

    Ummmm. A person with a crack problem would be looking for an NA meeting.

  61. anjin-san says:

    So, you mean it gives you a false sense of a superior intelligence?

    Based on your comments in this thread, my goldfish are more intelligent than you. Really, you would be much better off not bringing brainpower into the discussion. In your case, its like going to a knife fight armed with a pair of horn-rimmed glasses…

  62. floyd says:

    You have cut me to the bone, but of course, only I could see that, Mr Limpet!

  63. glasnost says:

    Q, I speak as a liberal here with no love for charles austin, zeldorf ragshaft, or whomever – you’re not helping. Pick a point and stick with it. And the graituitous insults never actually cause anyway to start responding MORE factually.

  64. ggr says:

    Andrew, I hate to say it buddy, but you are taking a beating.

    You remind me of the black guy at Altamont that was stomped on by all the hells angels with pool cues.

    Give it up pal. Don’t respond anymore.

    I feel like Dr. Kevorkian and need to end my arguments with you through voluntary euthanasia.

    Do you realize how using trash talk totally destroys your credibility in this kind of discussion? It makes it hard to take anything you say seriously, even some of your good points – its hard to avoid the impression you’re just trolling.

  65. An Interested Pasrty – No. You are wrong to quote me this way and to change my comment to suit your needs. All I did was point out that another commenter was using repeated ad hominem attacks and how silly and uncivil that was and your response is to change a few terms to make your own own silly ad hominem attacks. If you can find me saying any of those things then bring it on. Otherwise all you are doing is tapping into your own paranoid fantasies to fling a little more feces.

    Grow up or seek help. Please.

  66. glasnost – I am disappointed you have no love for me, but I will strive to do better.

  67. An Interested Party says:

    Don’t take things so personally, Charlie…by altering your comments, I didn’t say or imply that you ever made such claims (although such claims have been and are made around here all the time and I notice you don’t seem too mortified on those occasions)…still, it’s nice to know that you don’t think people who oppose/opposed the war in Iraq are pansies, traitors, terrorist sympathizers, elitist snobs, and/or bullies and that you also don’t think that the president and the people who support him aren’t pansies, Nazis, socialists, elitist snobs, and/or bullies…finally, it’s nice to know that you find the use of the term liberal (in the modern progressive sense) as a pejorative to be unreasonable…I have a newfound respect for you! And with that in mind, I will take your advice under consideration…thanks! 🙂