PogueMoran
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2009
- Messages
- 2,834
- Reaction score
- 331
- Location
- Northeast
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Do you have anything to show otherwise? Perhaps that they aren't receiving anymore government money? I mean, there's a reason that Congress is voting to defund them. It's because Congress is funding them, to begin with.
If you bothered to open the link, you would see it.
So you're asking me to disprove your claim which you can't prove yourself. You said an earmark for acorn. Nowhere in the bill does it say ACORN will be receiving 8 billion dollars. No they're defunding the small amount they had gotten from the government.
So again show me the language in the bill where Acorn is earmarked for 8 billion dollars or in the words of Sarah Palin: "In honor of our troops serving overseas quit making stuff up"
So, they are getting taxpayer monies?
:doh Jesus, I didn't compare ACORN to the military. I used a quote Palin stated about how she thought the media was making things up about her and she brought the military into it. Its from her resignation speech.Comparing ACORN to our military is an insult to every man and woman that's ever worn the uniform.
So, they are getting taxpayer monies?
They've gotten a total of around 53 million over the course of 15 years under democrat and republican administrations. That comes to about 3 million a year. Minute in comparison to the money they get through donations. So in other words you have no proof acorn would be getting billions from the government yet you continue to say this.
I don't about where you're from, but down here on the bayou, 53 million bucks is a ****load of money.
:doh Jesus, I didn't compare ACORN to the military. I used a quote Palin stated about how she thought the media was making things up about her and she brought the military into it. Its from her resignation speech.
You said that ACORn deserves the same amount of respect that our service members do. That's just offensive.
I don't about where you're from, but down here on the bayou, 53 million bucks is a ****load of money.
You said that ACORn deserves the same amount of respect that our service members do. That's just offensive.
You said that ACORn deserves the same amount of respect that our service members do. That's just offensive.
Its not when its spread out over 15 years. Compare that to the amount they get in donations its minute.
That's not even close to what I said. You might want to consult your eye doctor. I said show me the language in the bill earmarking money specifically to acorn or in the words of sarah palin: "how about honoring our troops overseas and quit making stuff up". If you read her resignation speech you'd see how ridiculous that line was. The point is quit making stuff up.
No, he said quit making stuff up.
It's government money, just the same, plus they were slated to receive even more from the Stealfromus Package.
That's exactly what you said. How 'bout an apology to all the service members on the board for dragging their service through the muck.
Too bad I'm not making anything up, huh?
Too bad I'm not making anything up, huh?
No they weren't. You keep claiming it but have already shown that you don't know what you're talking about. I'll take this as you conceding. I asked you for the specific language earmarking ACORN for billions. You could not so I'll take that as you making things up.
That's not even close to what I said. You obviously can't read. I was quoting sarah palin and telling you to quit making things up. How about you apologize to every member of the board for having to sit through your continued ignorance?
Tell us the other community orginizer groups that were in the running for the money? To say that ACORN would receive none of the money is ludicrous. All the help they gave to the Dems to get them elected and the Dems are going to leave them out of the pecking order? Somehow, I seriously doubt that's going to happen.
Translation: "I can't prove it so I want you to prove me wrong." Logical fallacy you're asking me to prove a negative that would be like me asking you to prove that you're not a child molestor. Again if you state something so emphatically the onus is on your to prove it. Now I suggest you prove it or stop derailing my thread.I'm not making up anything, unless you can prove to us where it was specifically stated that ACORN wasn't going to receive any Stealfromus money. Can you?
I know what I said and so do others who can read. I don't owe an apology for something I didn't say. You owe me an apology for trying to libel me for claiming I said something I didn't. You also owe the board an apology for having to sift through your continued trolling ignorance.I think we all know what you said. You owe us an apology. Might as well go ahead and get it over with.
To say that ACORN would receive none of the money is ludicrous. .
I mean, why investigate an orginization that was earmarked to receive 8 billion dollars of taxpayer money
Again I ask you since you stated they were earmarked for the stimulus money. Where in the stimulus bill is ACORN earmarked? You state something try proving it for once. Not everyone is as paranoid as you apdst. I know how to look at a bill and read what it means meanwhile you rely on people like Malkin to tell you what it means. Besides the neighborhood stabilization program. Do you even understand what that is?
You know, it’s — frankly, it’s not really something I’ve followed closely. I didn’t even know that ACORN was getting a whole lot of federal money. --PBO
But that is NOT what you said. You said:
And?......
So, you're claiming that there's no way that ACORN was going to get a piece of the 8 billion dollars earmarked for community organizers? You can't be serious.
It shouldn't be hard for you to prove that claim, since obviously there would be some specific language saying that ACORN was inelligible for the funs.
Hell, even PBO admits that ACORN was getting a, "whole lot", of federal money.
http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/investigative/documents/mmsoil-081908.pdf
I hereby crown you Mr. Epic Fail.
Come again? Did I explicitly state republicans? Besides, the Department of the Interior has a long and "illustrious" history of corruption. Warren G. Harding anyone? And interesting how you think that it will end up in the crapper when several interior department members are in jail. J. Steven Griles anyone?
Typical TD. Argument from position of absolute sheer ignorance.
And I said this where? You know, just because you're partisan hack doesn't mean that everyone who points it out is one as well.
Gotta wonder where I ever said this. Could you please show me anything resembling this in any of my posts?
Quote: Originally Posted by Truth Detector
Once again what we see from you are hysterical assertions not based on anything that could be considered rational or credible.
All these stories are based on one single report that the inspector, Devaney, uses asinine emotional Hyperbole to apparently justify his wasting everyone's time and money on an investigation that uncovered what amounts to almost nada.
This story charges no one but rather implies that there is corruption SHORT of anythgin criminal. I am sorry, if there is no criminal activity and no rules broken, I am struggling to comprehend where this supports your hysterics.
“Simply stated, short of a crime, anything goes at the highest levels of the Department of the Interior,” charged Earl E. Devaney
Gee, give me a great big DUH.
This story is pure hysterics, much like your rants:
The investigation uncovered a "culture of substance abuse and promiscuity," Devaney said in a memo to Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne.
The alleged misconduct involved at least 13 current and former employees of the department's Minerals Management Service (MMS) accused of rigging contracts and accepting gifts and engaging in "illicit sexual encounters" with subordinates and industry representatives, Devaney said.
Danielle Brian, executive director of the non-partisan watchdog Project on Government Oversight, said that "given the billions of dollars at stake, and the number of people involved, this is easily the worst instance of government misconduct that POGO has seen."
Yet the Department of the Interior employs more than 72,000 employees. I am betting that any major corporation in America would see this as a positive thing that out of all the investigations, only 13 current and FORMER employees were seen as violating company policy. Let’s do some math here……13 divided by 72,000 equals OMG, the percentage is so small I can’t put enough zeros in front.
Good lord, you have to laugh at the assertions of DeVaney; what a pile of chicken little bile.
Here is the REAL story quoting someone with a brain and lacking the emotional hysterics of your rants:
Randall B. Luthi, said that he takes the report "very seriously" and added that the small number of people implicated "does not represent a culture" in an agency of about 1,700 employees. The royalty-in-kind program, where the lapses cited in the report occurred, has about 50 employees.
It is obvious that Devaney has a political agenda, however, let me quote the memorandum to point out this hysterical conclusion he arrived at:
While the dollar amount of gifts and gratuities was not enormous (In other words MINOR), these employees accepted gifts with prodigious frequency.
Gee, I guess someone better start enforcing the rules then and/or charge these people with the humungous crimes they have committed eh?
I think you should crown yourself; the "Epic Fail" is on your typical emotional hysterics which latch onto a report that hysterically makes absurd claims and then in its own report acknowledges the amounts were minor.
In any major business in America, this is an anomaly that can easily be rectified by strict enforcement but hardly the signs of, how did you and Devaney describe it? Oh yes; “easily the worst instance of government misconduct that POGO has seen."
This is the level of “chicken little” reporting and outrageous emotional nonsense we are getting used to from Liberal Democrats and people like you. It is to the point where it is not just laughable from a credibility point of view, but more like the little boy who kept crying wolf where after a while we just find it extremely hard to take anything they say serious.
Quote: Originally Posted by Truth Detector
I have to laugh at your link as well; Jay Yarrow?
P.S. This story will end up in the same place as the other efforts to impugn Bush Administration officials; in the crapper because there is no substance to the asinine allegations.
Once again, when you have a bureaucracy that contains over 72,000 employees and have a few examples of criminal activity which has been prosecuted, that would be considered a fairly good percentage; unless of course you are a naïve inexperienced person who wears your emotions on your sleeve and are apt to erupt into emotional hysterics about the vast corruption of the empire of Amerika.
Typical OC argument; basing your entire emotional rant on a single report that itself contains more in the way of emotional hyperbole than anything it claims is within the report.
Quote: Originally Posted by Truth Detector
Carry on your populist tirades about those evil corporations and corrupt politicians though; it is amusing at best.
OC, every time you post we are subjected to your emotionally charged hyperbole about how corrupt AmeriKa is with widespread rampant corporate greed and corruption and the collusion with the evil corporations with the widespread corruption within Government. Please stop pretending this is not an ongoing method of debate with you.
Quote: Originally Posted by Truth Detector
Not because they don't exist, but because to listen to you everything is corrupt and that there is some perfect mythical place where corruption doesn't exist, companies only do what is good for communities regardless of profits and Government officials are of the highest integrity and intelligence and money is not a part of any process.
You imply this with your emotional hysterics. Perhaps if you read the gobbledy gook you post you would see it yourself? Just a suggestion; and by all means, carry on.
Quote: Originally Posted by Truth Detector
Once again what we see from you are hysterical assertions not based on anything that could be considered rational or credible.
All these stories are based on one single report that the inspector, Devaney, uses asinine emotional Hyperbole to apparently justify his wasting everyone's time and money on an investigation that uncovered what amounts to almost nada.
This story charges no one but rather implies that there is corruption SHORT of anythgin criminal. I am sorry, if there is no criminal activity and no rules broken, I am struggling to comprehend where this supports your hysterics.
“Simply stated, short of a crime, anything goes at the highest levels of the Department of the Interior,” charged Earl E. Devaney
Gee, give me a great big DUH.
This story is pure hysterics, much like your rants:
The investigation uncovered a "culture of substance abuse and promiscuity," Devaney said in a memo to Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne.
The alleged misconduct involved at least 13 current and former employees of the department's Minerals Management Service (MMS) accused of rigging contracts and accepting gifts and engaging in "illicit sexual encounters" with subordinates and industry representatives, Devaney said.
Danielle Brian, executive director of the non-partisan watchdog Project on Government Oversight, said that "given the billions of dollars at stake, and the number of people involved, this is easily the worst instance of government misconduct that POGO has seen."
Yet the Department of the Interior employs more than 72,000 employees. I am betting that any major corporation in America would see this as a positive thing that out of all the investigations, only 13 current and FORMER employees were seen as violating company policy. Let’s do some math here……13 divided by 72,000 equals OMG, the percentage is so small I can’t put enough zeros in front.
Good lord, you have to laugh at the assertions of DeVaney; what a pile of chicken little bile.
Here is the REAL story quoting someone with a brain and lacking the emotional hysterics of your rants:
Randall B. Luthi, said that he takes the report "very seriously" and added that the small number of people implicated "does not represent a culture" in an agency of about 1,700 employees. The royalty-in-kind program, where the lapses cited in the report occurred, has about 50 employees.
It is obvious that Devaney has a political agenda, however, let me quote the memorandum to point out this hysterical conclusion he arrived at:
While the dollar amount of gifts and gratuities was not enormous (In other words MINOR), these employees accepted gifts with prodigious frequency.
Gee, I guess someone better start enforcing the rules then and/or charge these people with the humungous crimes they have committed eh?
I think you should crown yourself; the "Epic Fail" is on your typical emotional hysterics which latch onto a report that hysterically makes absurd claims and then in its own report acknowledges the amounts were minor.
In any major business in America, this is an anomaly that can easily be rectified by strict enforcement but hardly the signs of, how did you and Devaney describe it? Oh yes; “easily the worst instance of government misconduct that POGO has seen."
This is the level of “chicken little” reporting and outrageous emotional nonsense we are getting used to from Liberal Democrats and people like you. It is to the point where it is not just laughable from a credibility point of view, but more like the little boy who kept crying wolf where after a while we just find it extremely hard to take anything they say serious.
Quote: Originally Posted by Truth Detector
I have to laugh at your link as well; Jay Yarrow?
P.S. This story will end up in the same place as the other efforts to impugn Bush Administration officials; in the crapper because there is no substance to the asinine allegations.
Once again, when you have a bureaucracy that contains over 72,000 employees and have a few examples of criminal activity which has been prosecuted, that would be considered a fairly good percentage; unless of course you are a naïve inexperienced person who wears your emotions on your sleeve and are apt to erupt into emotional hysterics about the vast corruption of the empire of Amerika.
Typical OC argument; basing your entire emotional rant on a single report that itself contains more in the way of emotional hyperbole than anything it claims is within the report.
Quote: Originally Posted by Truth Detector
Carry on your populist tirades about those evil corporations and corrupt politicians though; it is amusing at best.
OC, every time you post we are subjected to your emotionally charged hyperbole about how corrupt AmeriKa is with widespread rampant corporate greed and corruption and the collusion with the evil corporations with the widespread corruption within Government. Please stop pretending this is not an ongoing method of debate with you.
Quote: Originally Posted by Truth Detector
Not because they don't exist, but because to listen to you everything is corrupt and that there is some perfect mythical place where corruption doesn't exist, companies only do what is good for communities regardless of profits and Government officials are of the highest integrity and intelligence and money is not a part of any process.
You imply this with your emotional hysterics. Perhaps if you read the gobbledy gook you post you would see it yourself? Just a suggestion; and by all means, carry on.
How about Hassan Nemazee?Irony. /\ Railing on and on about ACORN who hasn't been indicted who hasn't been investigated while ignoring an investigation showing officials doing illegal acts and the deputy secretary being ordered to jail.
How about Hassan Nemazee?
And there you have it, folks, yet another example of a right winger - one who isn't shy about ranting about lefty malfeasance - doing somersaults to exonerate yet another darling of the right wing. Go figure.
And here you have it folks, another hyper partisan Liberal who lacks any credible honesty, lacks in reading comprehension and engages in trolling and baiting incorrectly thinking it is a substitute for credible honest intellectual debate.
:2wave:
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?