Conservative View of the Acorn Undercover Video

This sort of points-up the difference between fear-mongerers and conservatives. My father was a conservative, but he would never have tolerated Glenn Beck.

Wow,

I do not know Debra J. Saunders work, so I will refrain from judgement on her.

However, as far as fact checking goes, hmm, did anyone fact check obama on his claims about illegal aliens obtaining health care? (thats rehtorical, of course not and the man was disengenious at best when he said it. Thats what caused wilson to call him a liar.)

The facts stand for themselves. Acorn is a criminal enterprise and it took Glenn Beck to point it out, and it took four videos before any of the corporate media to cover it.

Even the left wingnut John Stewart admits the media did not do their jobs....I think that is one of the signs of the apocolypse :-)

Quit attempting to defend the indefenseable. Facts are bipartisian.

You should have done a little fact-checking on the English language before you posted this comment. It looks as if you deliberately set out to look like a fool.

See, this kind of thing... a perfect example, you can't/won't discuss the facts so you want to deride.

de⋅ride  /dɪˈraɪd/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [di-rahyd] Show IPA
Use deride in a Sentence
See web results for deride
See images of deride
–verb (used with object), -rid⋅ed, -rid⋅ing. to laugh at in scorn or contempt; scoff or jeer at; mock.

Actually, no. I think when you cannot communicate effectively, your message is automatically weakened, and it becomes difficult to take seriously whatever it is you're trying to say. It's already difficult when you describe ACORN as "a criminal enterprise" and admit that you don't "know Debra J. Saunders work [sic]," although a link is provided for the purpose of seeing her work. The fact that you say Jon Stewart is "a left wingnut" but have no qualifying words for the likes of Glenn Beck marginalizes you as much as your shaky grasp on what I assume is your native language.

Thanks for the definition, but I already speak English.

hehe, close, you mean Mxyzptlk, not mixelplix.

Kris M.

Glenn Beck may be a right wingnut. In fact, probably the biggest difference between JS and GB, other than GB is more entertaining, has a bigger audience is that he provided facts.

Acorn not a corrupt organization well, be happy in your dumbness if you must.

Actually, the term you used was "criminal organization." Find someone to read it back to you.

I'm not that happy, generally speaking, so the good wishes of a semiliterate partisan whore mean even less than a fool like you calling anyone else on this site dumb. Go back to Fox News, and don't forget to wipe the drool off your chin once every few hours. Thank you for calling!

Sue just created this latest alter today.

Moron.

That's highly unlikely, Sharon (if you mean Sue B). Even if she created alters that can't spell to throw people off track (and I doubt that), the "flow" or logical structure of Sue's discourse doesn't resemble M. M.'s at all.

I don't think that is highly unlikely at all considering Jonathan.

"Quit attempting to defend the indefenseable."

Huh? I hardly think that Saunders' claim that the video doesn't meet news gathering standards typically observed by newspapers, TV, and radio is indefensible. You might want to read her column and see what she said in its entirety. She's not an ACORN supporter.

As far as corruption within ACORN is concerned, it doesn't surprise me that there is some. The broad brush criminal enterprise accusation is an exaggeration. That's like calling the Republican Party a criminal enterprise because Tom De Lay turned out to be a crook.

Actually the republicans are a criminal organization...so are the dems.

I agree Nippy, but is Saunders holding these self admitted "novices" to her professional standards? Now how fair is that?

I do agree ACORN is an absolute criminal organization, headed by those millionaire white guys using all those of minorities under them as if it were a plantation...

No, she is defending her occupation, and she is doing it by attemting to demean amateure reporters that at least did the work.

The Corporate media could have done the storey to "their" standards at any time.

A better report for her and all to do would be "Why did the media not even attempt to do an undercover story about acorn?" They had ample evidence in the many voter fraud investigations to warrant such a story.

To acuse someone who does not claim to be or work for a major media org of not living up to the standards of the major media outlets is very disengenious.

The major media outlets should have done this story themselves then they wouldn't have to defend themselves by saying it doesn't live up to their standards.

I have seen many of them do undercover stories, why not this one?

I think "provocateurs" is closer to the truth than "amateure reporters." I think Saunders' "Borat" comparison was apt.

So, then by your reasoning anyone who (good or bad) does Karaoke that they are provocateurs?

The facts still stand, acorn is a corrupt organization and should have been investigated years ago.

Now don't mis understand, i do not think anyone at acorn should go to jail, I do not think that acorn should be disbanded, I simply believe they should not get any federal monies.

I was in the JayCees for several years and we never received any federal or state funds, we asked people to donate.

All charities should be local, not national. They can do good on a local level, on a national level it always leads to this.

You know, that Karaoke comment was really stupid. You're welcome to any opinion you care to have, but when you're trying to make a point, can't you at least use intelligent examples? That just makes you look dumb.

The rest of what you say isn't awful or anything, but to start with some reference to Karaoke really put me off. Charities might be better off run locally, but I don't agree that being national "always leads to this" as you say.

All charities should be local, not national. They can do good on a local level, on a national level it always leads to this.

Bake sales, craft fairs, car washes, art auctions . . . take it down a notch or ten so that only their local neighborhoods are affected by what they do.

Mixelplix Mixelplix Sep 17, 2009, 3:04pm EDT
So, then by your reasoning anyone who (good or bad) does Karaoke that they are provocateurs?

The facts still stand, acorn is a corrupt organization and should have been investigated years ago.

Now don't mis understand, i do not think anyone at acorn should go to jail, I do not think that acorn should be disbanded, I simply believe they should not get any federal monies.

I was in the JayCees for several years and we never received any federal or state funds, we asked people to donate.

All charities should be local, not national. They can do good on a local level, on a national level it always leads to this.

"So, then by your reasoning anyone who (good or bad) does Karaoke that they are provocateurs?"

Huh???

My article and Saunders' column were about the video, not really about ACORN. Saunders doesn't think much of ACORN. She thinks the video was better entertainment than journalism.

The word provocateurs means to provoke. Specifically, a person who provokes trouble, causes dissension, or the like; agitator.

This indicates your intent to demean, my reference to amateur does not carry a good or bad connetation. A karaoke participant may well be abhorant in their delivery of a song, this does not make them a provocateur, it makes them an amateur.

If you are demeaning their video, then you obviously are more concerned with symantics than what is "right".

These kids, and yes even fox news did the right thing and that is what is important, not whether some reporter or you like their "standards" of reporting.

Well I see that a character from the old Lil Abner comic strip has appeared here. Just as stupid as ever aren't you.

Some things never change.

"To acuse someone who does not claim to be or work for a major media org of not living up to the standards of the major media outlets is very disengenious."
Maybe somebody could decipher the above sentence for me...........seems a little like the word 'genius' but .........but...........LOL

"A karaoke participant may well be abhorant in their delivery of a song, this does not make them a provocateur, it makes them an amateur."

I know LOTS of amateur singers that are quite good. The term does not refer to ability, but to the reason one does something.
Someone who is a terrible karaoke singer provokes me do do anything in my power to STOP them from offending my ears.

Fact-checking? Who needs that?

I applaud Saunders for standing up and pointing out how weak that video is from a journalistic standpoint. Unfortunately, there are those who don't grasp that there are actually supposed to be some standards when it comes to journalism.

Unfortunately, there are those who don't grasp that there are actually supposed to be some standards when it comes to journalism.

Just wanted to see this repeated in a spotlight ;-)

Who on earth IS that non-gender-specific person up there? They come off as very strange. Almost reminds me of someone else I know here. I've been rather turned off on endless definition of words through other endless rants.

I thought this was an interesting article, Nippy, and I am silently applauding Saunders for questioning the video. I heard ACORN claimed it had been dubbed, but in watching the hand movements and what I could see of the lips, it doesn't particularly look dubbed. But it could very easily have been faked. I dunno. Or it could be true, who knows? Maybe the person thought it was all a big joke and just went along with it?

I thought those two "amateur film makers" looked pretty darned funny ... her in her teeny mini-skirt and the guy in a fur coat that I think I saw in some comedy movie somewhere. Very odd.

Anyway, it's refreshing to see a little intelligence from the right for a change. (I'm not counting Mixelplix ... anyone who can't say things under their own ID isn't worth worrying about in my book.)

(Heavy Sigh)

I must have really touched a nerve here.
Odd that those who profess to love all and want a wonderful world where we all feed each another are the same ones so full of anger.

I have seen a lot of anger directed at fox news, the members of the 9/12 project and vague arguments about journalism standards... how about what the showed on the videos?

Fact checked or not, the truth remains the truth.

To attempt to malign the videos by attacking the kids that made them is truly unconscionable.

Perhaps we just don't like the stupid. There are people on this site with whom I, and others, disagree politically, but they make coherent, well-reasoned, and mature arguments. You, on the other hand, are tiresome, mentally lazy, and now displaying an attitude of unearned confidence.

As for "Fact checked or not," the truth remains the truth if it stands up to a fact check. It's this kind of disdain for accuracy that makes us collectively sick of the likes of you.

It has now officially been fact checked... You would have pointed out any real fallacy if one existed.

Your refusal to accept the truth will not change the truth.

Facts are Bipartisan.

Also, I did not call you stupid, so you have proven my point about where the anger is coming from.

Thanks

Golly..Gee! Did a couple ACORN employees get trapped doing something that is reserved ONLY for the the obscenely wealthy in this country? Shame on them! LOL

I can't read this b*tch's column without wanting to see her flayed.

She has a surprisingly libertarian stand on recpharm and gay marriage. She's also been campaigning for years to do something about the insane federal mandatory sentencing rules for cocaine.

OTOH she supports most Republican stuff.

I'm afraid that it's the 'other hand' that makes me blow chunks.

I wonder why she's not as popular as Beck/Limbaugh...

Could it be because she's a columnist and not a talking head?
I've no doubt that many of Rush's 'ditto heads' have extremely poor reading skills.

That too, but she's a bit of a party pooper, isn't she? She spoils some of their best fun.

Maybe it's because she is challenging a story after Acorn fired everybody involved and that the democrats in congress took the lead in de-funding ACORN? She isn't popular because when Glenn Beck is getting Van Jones fired and ACORN investigated and de-funded, she is defending a network that was stupid enough to produced phony documents in a Bush national Guard story. I am not sure but her feel for the American pulse might be lacking and that San Fran culture might explain why she is so far behind the ball. Just a guess. It's not rocket science geniuses.....

It wasn't rocket science, Jeff, that my question was rhetorical and sarcastic, and that my answer is "because she's not catering to the lowest common denominator on the right but speaking her mind honestly, and expects a certain level of integrity and sense of fairness from her readers".

People who are "out of the box" are ignored by the slogan-chanting masses, on both (or all) sides.

Well it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know the true answer to your original question is that she is a columnist to a local newspaper that almost nobody outside of San Fransisco ever reads, let alone knows who their columnists are. She's not being ignored she is simply obscure.Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh have highly successful national broadcasts. I have no problem with her point of view but once again, when she proclaims ""But I won't join those who are hailing the enterprising O'Keefe and Giles for doing the sort of work "60 Minutes" should have done. "" she loses almost all credibility as 60 minutes got busted airing phony documents. I bet she wishes that she could take that analogy back. It was asinine at best despite any legitimate point she may have had.

You're missing the point, Jeff. Of course she's "obscure"--that's a rephrasing of my "question", not an answer. (Why isn't she well known? Because she's obscure...)

(I'm sure she wishes she could take the 60 Minutes reference back, but that's just called bad luck.)

Aniko, she isn't as popular as Beck and Limbaugh BECAUSE she is obscure. So it's not a rephrasing of your question unless you assume she has tried to get into radio and television broadcast but has been rejected. Conservatives have nothing to do with her obscurity, as you are implying, the job she took does.

Come on Aniko, just admit that Giles and O'Keefe did an incredible job. There is no foul play here.

I'm not talking about anyone rejecting her, Jeff. I'm talking about the appeal of what she's saying. Zooming in on this detail or that detail doesn't change the obvious fact that you have to be saying what a lot of people want to hear if you're going to be popular.

My only opinion on the Giles/O'Keefe video is that any organization large enough will contain some people who will be easily led to do or say the most outrageous things. It's like when you go out on the streets and ask people who George Washington was, and throw away all the correct answers and put all the ridiculous ones together to show Americans/Texans/young people today/soccer moms don't even know who George Washington was. It demonstrates no such thing; all it demonstrates is that this kind of thing can be done.

(I have not seen the video--only read about it.)

How much fact checking do you have to do when a video is the story? Other than checking to make sure the video wasn't doctored, what was said and done was said and done.

By the way, I'm a liberal just like she is a conservative. LOL!

Good point Jeff! "what was said and done was said and done."

AND these were professed amateurs.... journalism students, who first went to an internet site and the head guy there clued them in, phone calls had been made to a couple of the other networks.....

So, if you want real news and not political progandanda, go to "Fair and Balanced"....

Nora good point. I think that if Muggsy was half as smart as he thinks he is it would be a scientific miracle. Ignorance is bliss.

Umm...high school newspapers have fact checking. It's not some hermetic secret that is only revealed to the inner circle of journalists.

"""
Umm...high school newspapers have fact checking. It's not some hermetic secret that is only revealed to the inner circle of journalists. """"

Apparently 60 Minutes didn't get the memo.....

What facts were missed regarding the ACORN videos Nippy? It is amazing that a story the MSM completely missed caused mass firings, investigations, and the defunding of the largest community organizing group in America. This was an amazing story and giant accomplishment for O'Keefe and Giles which has obviously entrenched them in journalistic history. An absolutely incredible story.

Okay, I will ask the obvious question... If a woman claims on tape that she murdered her husband and the public learns later that she didn't, how does that constitute poor fact checking?

I watched the interviews. O'Keefe and Giles were quite clear that they did not know whether a murder had taken place. They contacted the San Bernardino Sheriff who conducted an investigation.

They did everything they were supposed to do. I fail to see how they were at fault.

Even Glen Beck and O'Reily were careful not to claim a murder had taken place, only that a woman claimed to have murdered someone.

Could it be that it is Debra J. Saunders who did not check her facts?

The point is people can claim anything on some amateur tape. If that tape is then used as some kind of evidence of wrongdoing to hype up those who want to believe the worst, some kind of factchecking become essential. At least a disclaimer needs to address the fact that these tapes are not journalism.

libramoon,

You are missing the obvious. There is no need to check a fact that you have on video tape.

Only the woman who made the statement asserted that a murder took place. The only thing that O'Keefe and Giles were required to support was the fact that she made the claim.

They did that.

The claim of murder was only background to the greater truth of a government funded intake worker gleefully, (from her point of view), aiding an under-age prostitution scheme.

Remember “Heidi Fleiss is my hero!!”?

Remember that she said that in reference to underage sex slaves!!

As for journalism.... These tapes were that and more. The kids deserve the Pulitzer.

Trying to somehow spin this all away only serves to confirm in the public's mind that the progressive left has not only lost its moral and ethic footing, but raises the question of whether they were ever morally or ethically grounded in the first place.

Jon Stewart summed up it all up like this .... "WHAT THE F***"

If the progressive left had any brains....they would repeat that mantra until the outrage sinks in.

Good point Greg. The fact was that she claimed to have killed her husband. Whether or not she did wasn't the story. ACORN and the character of it's employees was.

what happened?? did they produce it on a laser printer and fool CBS????

I've never read the woman, might later.. far Beck goes he's kind of the professional wrestling of teevee, and msnbc and the rest of the liberal arts crowd are sort of like a teevee on at a painters demonstration tuned to a golf channel...

There are a great many I've found to be insuffereable asses. In retrospect, many of them have been proven correct. Which face it, is even more infuriating.