• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

ACORN Officials Scramble, Firing Workers and Shredding Documents...

Either the story is bogus, and Acorn has a pretty rock solid slander case, or the story has merit, and they DON'T have a rock solid slander case. And since no gag order has been served, or no other legal action taken, seeing as this story is still on their site...I'm gonna go with, there has to be a least a decent shred of truth to this story.

A car dealership got sued for accusing a rival of having links to terrorists. And I believe the settlement was quite a decent amount of money. For some car dealership out in bum fickle egypt, that NO ONE has heard of.

Acorn, on the other hand, and Fox News....are, well.....national, and most EVERYONE has heard of both of them. If a slander suet made the news for some unknown car dealership, I have to imagine that the other would be front page, at least a full 5 inches of text, with a nice big photo.

Just saying.
 
KevinKohler said:
Either the story is bogus, and Acorn has a pretty rock solid slander case, or the story has merit, and they DON'T have a rock solid slander case. And since no gag order has been served, or no other legal action taken, seeing as this story is still on their site...I'm gonna go with, there has to be a least a decent shred of truth to this story.

A car dealership got sued for accusing a rival of having links to terrorists. And I believe the settlement was quite a decent amount of money. For some car dealership out in bum fickle egypt, that NO ONE has heard of.

Acorn, on the other hand, and Fox News....are, well.....national, and most EVERYONE has heard of both of them. If a slander suet made the news for some unknown car dealership, I have to imagine that the other would be front page, at least a full 5 inches of text, with a nice big photo.

Just saying.
Click to expand...

I've actually been doing some research on whether or not it is actually illegal or inappropriate for NYCC to pay people to attend protests.

A look at their donation page reveals that contributions are not tax deductible.

Which means they are a 501(c)(4) organization who are allowed to engage in the kind of activities they are "accused" of:

501(c) organization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
What if...? said:
I've actually been doing some research on whether or not it is actually illegal or inappropriate for NYCC to pay people to attend protests.

A look at their donation page reveals that contributions are not tax deductible.

Which means they are a 501(c)(4) organization who are allowed to engage in the kind of activities they are "accused" of:

501(c) organization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

That's not the issue, the issue is, that the OWS would NOT, then, be a grass roots movement.

Just because, legally, you CAN do something, doesn't mean you SHOULD, in every case.
 
Tettsuo said:
It only takes a few lies and slants to make me doubt everything else said without a corraborating report from an different source. I don't take the word of a liar and run with it. Fox has already shown great bias against ACORN and a willingness to go directly to air and print will a dishonest report against them and then reluctance to recant that false report.
Click to expand...

You must hate MSNBC, CBS, CNN, NBC and ABC, too. You must REALLY hate Dan Rather...:lamo

How many times did they air completely nonsensical reports about Obama's place of birth not being Hawaii? I mean seriously, it's just plain stupid to trust their word on anything.
Click to expand...

Well, none, actually.
 
AdamT said:
They have also been caught on numerous occasions just plain making sh*t up and/or distorting the truth beyond all recognition. They are blatantly partisan and as such they are not a reliable source -- any more than MSNBC is a reliable source.
Click to expand...

No they haven't. That's a damn lie and you know it.
 
AdamT said:
According to your apparent definition, any rally or protest concerning any issue IS a political rally.
Click to expand...

This is a political rally. Face it. If ACORN wasn't in deep **** here, they wouldn't be conducting damage control.
 
LaMidRighter said:
So has Dan Rather at CBS, CNN has presented some obvious bull****, Jambalaya is right, they all do it. The Fox news hatred is the stupidest thing I've ever seen, they are a center right version of the news practice, the other organizations do the exact same thing.
Click to expand...

yeah, but cnn doesn't have the smarmy, stupid people of fox and friends. douchey doocy.
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
No they haven't. That's a damn lie and you know it.
Click to expand...

Lies are a vital part of the progressive ideology. Without them, nobody could possibly embrace such flawed beliefs.
 
Grim17 said:
Lies are a vital part of the progressive ideology. Without them, nobody could possibly embrace such flawed beliefs.
Click to expand...
Yes, Grim, we all know you get the "truth" from your hero Glenn Beck.:lamo
 
apdst said:
This is a political rally. Face it. If ACORN wasn't in deep **** here, they wouldn't be conducting damage control.
Click to expand...

Why don't you define "political rally" for us?
 
KevinKohler said:
That's not the issue, the issue is, that the OWS would NOT, then, be a grass roots movement.

Just because, legally, you CAN do something, doesn't mean you SHOULD, in every case.
Click to expand...

Participation of a group IN a movement does not prove the movement is astroturfed.by said participant.

Greenpeace, for instance, attends protests and rallys to spread its message, as it is chartered to do.

This participation DOES NOT prove greenpeace "astroturfed" the events it attends.

NYSS is apparently paying people to attend and hold THEIR OWN GROUPS SIGNS, not pretending to be "generic" protesters. This is a key distinction.
 
liblady said:
yeah, but cnn doesn't have the smarmy, stupid people of fox and friends. douchey doocy.
Click to expand...
The **** they don't. Larry King was a fixture on that network for years, would still be if he hadn't decided to retire. From what I understand he's a first class ass. Then of course there is Piers Morgan, and a few other questionable individuals I can't think of at the moment. I don't even watch Fox news all that much but to dismiss it because you don't like a personality or two is ridiculous.
 
LaMidRighter said:
The **** they don't. Larry King was a fixture on that network for years, would still be if he hadn't decided to retire. From what I understand he's a first class ass. Then of course there is Piers Morgan, and a few other questionable individuals I can't think of at the moment. I don't even watch Fox news all that much but to dismiss it because you don't like a personality or two is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

The reason to dismiss it -- as a serious news source, at least -- is that it is blatantly partisan. It's a virtual arm of the Republican Party ... or vice versa. It's the 24/7/365 Obama-bashing network.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
LOL "the tv never lies"
Click to expand...
I'm basically making a point that anyone can host a website, some are more legit than others. I don't accept just any website especially when their name is something obvious like "FOXlies.com".
 
rocket88 said:
That's 99% of what gets posted around these parts.
Click to expand...
Some sites are legit, but when someone uses a Salon.com article, or MediaMatters, or similarly on the right side when they use slanted sources there is only so much trust that can be put into the info, there should always be some kind of accredited backup. I have stopped myself from making quite a few points here at DP over the years because the information I wanted to back up came from partisan sources.
 
AdamT said:
The reason to dismiss it -- as a serious news source, at least -- is that it is blatantly partisan. It's a virtual arm of the Republican Party ... or vice versa. It's the 24/7/365 Obama-bashing network.
Click to expand...
So is MSNBC, so is CNN, NBC got pinged hard by viewers over the last couple of years for exposed biases, CBS and Rathergate, ABC is full of partisan libs. So if you don't trust FOX I guess you can't trust any of them because they do a mirror version of the exact same thing.
 
LaMidRighter said:
Some sites are legit, but when someone uses a Salon.com article, or MediaMatters, or similarly on the right side when they use slanted sources there is only so much trust that can be put into the info, there should always be some kind of accredited backup. I have stopped myself from making quite a few points here at DP over the years because the information I wanted to back up came from partisan sources.
Click to expand...

Almost anything is slanted to some extent. I've actually gone and found the same thing on Fox's website just so that Conservatives wouldn't attack the source. That's pathetic.

The best you can do is go to different sources to see through the bias. I'm a proud NPR listener, but I know it's slanted, and as a result sometimes I watch Bill O'Reilly just for a different perspective. I can't bring myself to Beck or Hannity (too many crazy theories on Beck, and Hannity doesn't even make an effort to be unbiased).
 
AdamT said:
Why don't you define "political rally" for us?
Click to expand...

Purdy much any rally/protest/assembly that supports, or opposes government policies is political. I know that you know that and you're just being obtuse.
 
apdst said:
Purdy much any rally/protest/assembly that supports, or opposes government policies is political. I know that you know that and you're just being obtuse.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but the government is not on Wall Street.
 
rocket88 said:
Almost anything is slanted to some extent. I've actually gone and found the same thing on Fox's website just so that Conservatives wouldn't attack the source. That's pathetic.

The best you can do is go to different sources to see through the bias. I'm a proud NPR listener, but I know it's slanted, and as a result sometimes I watch Bill O'Reilly just for a different perspective. I can't bring myself to Beck or Hannity (too many crazy theories on Beck, and Hannity doesn't even make an effort to be unbiased).
Click to expand...
Totally agree with this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom