Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Bobboau on September 16, 2009, 07:09:53 am
-
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/15/eveningnews/main5313869.shtml
this got brought up randomly in one of our other topics.
the jist:
an undercover conservative filmer caught ACORN workers in several cities providing explicit help in hiding illigal activities from the IRS, specifically he and a girl helping him, posed as a pimp and prostitute and ACORN told them how to get a mortgage and how to hide there activities from the government.
now this comes on the heels of months of conservatives claiming foul from ACORN acting as a voter registration organization AND helping on the Obama campaign. and a billion other things the conservatives are going after them for, that I'm sure someone will flesh out for me before too long, but before we get into that lets all just agree this right here is pretty ****ing bad.
-
The voter registration fraud was about individual volunteers who were being paid to go around registering people to vote. To flesh out their individual numbers, they made up voters and registered them.
So people can go ahead and stop freaking out about that.
As for this thing... Doesn't pretty much everyone try to get as many write-offs on their taxes as possible? They weren't telling them to run away to Mexico, they were telling them how to stretch the truth on their taxes. Looking at the "pimp" and "hooker"... they look like a couple of upper middle class teenagers/college assholes at a "ghetto party."
-
I was just mentioning that to establish the conservatives have been assaulting them relentlessly for the last year or so.
and they were telling them how to lie to the IRS, that's 'bad'.
-
Monday night the Democratic-controlled Senate voted 83-7 to deny ACORN access to millions of dollars in federal housing funds.
c.f any scandal under the last Republican Senate.
-
Prostitution remains a somewhat dubious "crime" for the people who actually commit it.
-
It's only a crime if you don't photograph it and sell copies. Dumbest thing ever.
-
I agree that it should not be illegal, but it is, and they were telling people how to get around the law. now I can get down with ignoring a law cause you don't think it's valid, and I can get down with civil disobedience, but I kinda draw a line with an organization getting government money telling people how to break the law and not get caught. but that's just me, and I think we have established that I'm crazy.
-
This definitely sounds pretty shady.
-
I can't imagine anyone looking at that pair of morons and believing that they are really a pimp and prostitute.
-
and yet they still told them how to get around the law in detail.
-
I would have too, so maybe that's why I'm not bothered.
-
you aren't being payed by the government to do it.
-
Though. Why would the prostitute need to say she was a "performing artist" unless she was actually reporting her income? Odd. I would just not report it.
-
in order to get a mortgage you need to prove you have an income, in order to prove you have an income you need to have a tax record.
or at least that is what I believe her reasoning was.
-
I see. So (and from here on, I'm ignoring the actual pair who tried this) a couple wanted to buy a house, but their income came from prostitution. So the ACORN employee told them they could call prostitution "performing art" so that they could report their income to the IRS.
I'm even more confused about why this is a big deal now.
-
because prostitution is illegal, you cannot report illegal income to the IRS (because you will be arrested for it because it is illegal), so they told them how to sanitize it i.e. they told them how to launder it.
-
In that case, my opinions on ACORN are back where they started: it's a waste of time to think about.
-
try this imagine they were selling ammo for banned assault rifles without a license and that was their only source of income.
-
Were they?
-
no, you seem to be having a hard time understanding why this is a big deal, so I changed the context to a hypothetical situation similar to this one only using an illegal act that you would find less palatable. some people don't think that assault riles should be banned, just like you and I don't think that prostitution should be illegal, so if I shift the crime involved to one you don't have such support for, do you suddenly become a hypocrite?
-
I don't really know much about guns or gun control laws. I'd say selling anything dangerous without the applicable license is highly irresponsible and bad. So I would be pretty annoyed if the ACORN rep didn't advise coming up with a different way to make money. I certainly wouldn't freak the **** out, though.
Also, just because I change my judgment based on the specific crime being committed in this hypothetical situation doesn't make me a hypocrite. What would make me a hypocrite would freaking out about prostitution and then picking up a hooker.
-
try this imagine they were selling ammo for banned assault rifles without a license and that was their only source of income.
I wasn't aware the ammo was banned.
-
It isn't.
You can buy all the 5.56 or 7.62 you want.
-
I'm sure there is some sort of ammo isn't banned, and that was just a hypothetical to take her political bias out of the equation.
-
Good to know I'm not too far out of the loop.
At any rate, I don't see why prostitution is really illegal. Their body, their choice (to an extent. I'll think up that extent later. Too tired now).
-
We're not discussing whether or not it SHOULD be illegal, we're discussing the fact that it IS illegal. If some government sponsored group sold me marijuana, would you be defending them by saying "well, it really shouldn't be illegal anyway...".
-
Would you like the smart-ass or non-smart-ass answer?
smart-ass: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_cannabis
non-smart-ass: No. My feelings on the matter are irrelevant.
EDIT: Does that link work? It's not coming up for me.
-
Not only is this repugnant, but it's worse due to the fact that ACORN was willing to assist the 'prostitute' and 'pimp' run a child sex trafficking ring bringing under-age El Salvadorian girls illegally.
-
Not only is this repugnant, but it's worse due to the fact that ACORN was willing to assist the 'prostitute' and 'pimp' run a child sex trafficking ring bringing under-age El Salvadorian girls illegally.
I have yet to see any evidence of the truth of this statement.
-
I heard the sound-byte, I might not be able to find it, but yeah, they said that they where bringing underage girls from El Salvador. the acorn lady said that the can count them as deductibles.
-
Count them as dependents, actually. But then, since we have another ACORN worker on camera saying "I killed my husband", when it turns out that no, no she did not actually kill her husband(s) and was just screwing with the posers since they were so transparent, that's not out of the question in the case of the Salvadoreans, either. Even if she was being since in not having a problem with sex slavery, well, that's a couple employees. Why you would take them as representative, and not the offices where the posers were kicked out, I don't know.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UOL9Jh61S8
-
Count them as dependents,
that's what I meant, I fail lol.
-
Not only is this repugnant, but it's worse due to the fact that ACORN was willing to assist the 'prostitute' and 'pimp' run a child sex trafficking ring bringing under-age El Salvadorian girls illegally.
I have yet to see any evidence of the truth of this statement.
It should be noted that ACORN also has fired the two employees seen in the link Bobbau has posted.
-
To be perfectly honest, I would have done exactly the same as these employees if only because these two were clearly not even close to who/what they said they were. But then I'm a jackass, so whatever.
-
I still have yet to see any truth to it. The phraseology is ambigous. (And the people presenting it painfully obviously lying.) Child prostitution is so far outside the normal sort of activity that you would have to be pretty direct, or pre-prepared by the Youtube blurb, to draw the inference, much less if you were working in the office of a legal organization.
-
I still have yet to see any truth to it. The phraseology is ambigous. (And the people presenting it painfully obviously lying.) Child prostitution is so far outside the normal sort of activity that you would have to be pretty direct, or pre-prepared by the Youtube blurb, to draw the inference, much less if you were working in the office of a legal organization.
Can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they were lying? Don't you think it's strange that ACORN would immediately fire two employees if they were honest and being set up?
At best, you could make an attempt at arguing that ACORN itself is legit, and these two employees are complete idiots and its an isolated incident. Yes, you could, but that argument begins to lose credibility when you consider that you have more videos exposing different offices. Am I to assume that all ACORN employees are just plain idiots?
I'm just thankful to God that the Census Bureau severed ties with them.
-
I still have yet to see any truth to it. The phraseology is ambigous. (And the people presenting it painfully obviously lying.) Child prostitution is so far outside the normal sort of activity that you would have to be pretty direct, or pre-prepared by the Youtube blurb, to draw the inference, much less if you were working in the office of a legal organization.
Can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they were lying? Don't you think it's strange that ACORN would immediately fire two employees if they were honest and being set up?
At best, you could make an attempt at arguing that ACORN itself is legit, and these two employees are complete idiots and its an isolated incident. Yes, you could, but that argument begins to lose credibility when you consider that you have more videos exposing different offices. Am I to assume that all ACORN employees are just plain idiots?
I'm just thankful to God that the Census Bureau severed ties with them.
I don't think it's strange. That's how political organizations do things. Fire first, ask questions later.
You can say the same about any organization.
The Census Bureau is just gonna hire some other organization with just as many lying, cheating morons.
-
I still have yet to see any truth to it. The phraseology is ambigous. (And the people presenting it painfully obviously lying.) Child prostitution is so far outside the normal sort of activity that you would have to be pretty direct, or pre-prepared by the Youtube blurb, to draw the inference, much less if you were working in the office of a legal organization.
so did you click on the youtube link I posted or didn't you? that was THE video in question. I believe.
-
Can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they were lying? Don't you think it's strange that ACORN would immediately fire two employees if they were honest and being set up?
I think you have the burden of proof mixed up. The posers with the camera are the ones making accusations, thus it is they who would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. If they were making those accusations in court, that is, which they most certainly are not.
-
I'm sure there is some sort of ammo isn't banned, and that was just a hypothetical to take her political bias out of the equation.
You're making the assumption here that all illegal activities are equally bad and interchangeable which is why your hypothetical doesn't work.
-
so did you click on the youtube link I posted or didn't you? that was THE video in question. I believe.
I did. I even explained it. Perhaps you should read the post again.
-
There are so many non-profit organizations that need to be looked into it is crazy. the only time you should have that status is if you provide aid to homeless, less fortunate, nature disasters, first aid to citizens. Anything else should be looked into, for example Roxanne Spillette, national head of Boys and Girls Clubs of America, for example, received $557,013 in total compensation in 2008. That is a non-profit organization but can afford to pay its CEO that much $$?
-
I did. I even explained it. Perhaps you should read the post again.
I did like 3 times, I wasn't sure what you meant, so I asked.