ACORN Paste
You may recall that several weeks ago I noted a Patterico post wherein he demolished the lies that were being perpetrated on behalf of ACORN. Latest news is that ACORN is disbanding permanently, although the administration has tried to come to their aid while the HCR debate was at its hottest. At any rate, they're supposed to be closing their offices nationwide on 4/1, though that being April Fools Day, I will believe it when their hydra-headed self-revisions haven't raised their head for longer than Osama bin Laden.
Clark Hoyt of the Times, having researched the evidence, finds that James O'Keefe did indeed pose as a pimp when he went into ACORN offices with "prostitute" Hannah Giles. We've noted that the defense has been to suggest that because he wasn't wearing outlandish pimp gear when he went to those offices, he was not posing as a pimp, though the unedited transcripts have been made available and clearly establish otherwise, and Breitbart has offered to sit down for a viewing of the unedited videos and auditing of the unedited tapes with anyone from the MSM who has been trotting out this red herring. So Hoyt's declaration has caused a great deal of gnashing pseudo-consternation on the part of Brad Friedman, who has greatly invested himself in peddling these falsehoods. Indeed, he wants his readers to deliver their OUTRAGE that such OUTRAGEOUS truths could be conveyed by The NYT.
Meanwhile, Friedman continues to claim that ACORN Housing is an entity separate from ACORN, though the use of shell corporations and slushing of funds has been documented. ACORN's housing wing was a clearinghouse for fraudulent mortgage applications; ACORN's voter registration activities were frequently fraudulent, and its treatment of its employees was abusive and invited fraud; it was fraudulent for ACORN to represent any of its political activities as non-partisan. Yet despite all of this fraud, and counseling to fraud, Friedman claims that O'Keefe, Giles and Breitbart are dishonest.
There is something frankly diabolical about such a one as Friedman.
Thanks to Commenter Joe
For dropping links to some of our posts, here and there. Just one link in the comments to one Hot Air post brought 125 visitors here. It's nice to know someone's looking.
More About Tim Geithner and Lehman . . .
As Lehman Brothers careened toward bankruptcy in 2008, the New York Federal Reserve Bank came to its rescue, sopping up junk loans that the investment bank couldn't sell in the market, according to a report from court-appointed examiner Anton R. Valukas.
The New York Fed, under the direction of now-Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, knowingly allowed itself to be used as a "warehouse" for junk loans, the report says, even though Fed guidelines say it can only accept investment grade bonds.
Meanwhile, the Fed and Geithner both strongly oppose a congressional measure to authorize an independent audit of the central bank and its lending facilities. The provision passed the House but is under attack in the Senate, where Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) says he hopes to stop it.
Without an audit, the Fed is able to conceal the specifics of what it holds on its balance sheet. If the Lehman deal is any indication, the Fed is hiding billions of dollars in toxic loans on its books.
*******
The Valukas report found clear evidence that the New York Fed knew that Lehman was sending it garbage that it had no intention to market. In other words, the baskets of assets were created for the specific purpose of selling to the Fed for far more than they were worth.
Lehman knew it too: "No intention to market" was scrawled on one of the internal presentations about the assets. A separate bank, Citigroup, later characterized the assets as "bottom of the barrel" and "junk" when Lehman tried to push them their way, according to the report.
TARP was supposed to buy up "toxic assets," but it wasn't supposed to do so by paying face value for junk and rewarding the institutions that gamed the system, and Geithner should be gone.
Oh, and by the way, fellow suckers, Senior Congressional Staff are exempt from HCR provisions. Nice, huh? One of many, I am sure, hidden f*ck you "Easter eggs" hidden throughout this sludgislation.
On Recusancy
Stupak will get his tarmacs, paved with the corpsies of wee babies.
For me, there is no Just War Doctrine of infanticide, though. It's not as though I make a lot of money, heaven knows, but I must in care of my soul make sure that as little of it as possible goes to any "health care" system that funds abortion. I will look to tax experts first, and civil disobedience second, to see that I minimize my personal guilt, because I have been made a dhimmi by this legislation.
Recusants during Elizabeth I's reign were subject to dhimmitude. Shakespeare's father, as Alderman of Stratford, was forced to take part in the whitewashing of the local church, covering the medieval murals for a religion that viewed them as idolatrous. Later, he paid the enormous fine of 20 pounds for not taking the loyalty oath that was imposed by the Queen and her counselors as they ratcheted down the instruments of their control. If someone was suspected of disloyalty in matters of religion---increasingly absorbed by the state---a pretext was as good as evidence to obtain a conviction and confiscate the property.
Remember that it was English settlement by dissenters that took root in this land, and not by the orthodox, who failed notoriously at Jamestown. For they could go back. Now, the Panopticon and the Star Chamber are here, and where shall we go? I do not like to preach sedition, but we must stop these totalitarians before they implement the means of policing their mandates.
Here is thy Union.
*******
"But cannot I create?
Cannot I form? Cannot I fashion forth
Another world, another universe,
To overbear and crumble this to nought?
Where is another chaos? Where?"
They bought this crap sandwich on your credit card, America, over your objections, and now they will try to convince you it's what you always wanted. Mmmmm. Delicious.
David Obey Defends the “Dignity of the House”
Courage. Conviction. Transparency. (via Patterico)
VDH puts this historic debacle into context. Some possible reasons for not having read the bill.
Highway to Hell
Highway To Hell (1979)
LIVE (1992)
SINGLE: Highway To Hell/If You Want Blood (1979)
(Young, Young, Scott)
Living easy, living free
Season ticket on a one-way ride
Asking nothing, leave me be
Taking everything in my stride
Don't need reason, don't need rhyme
Ain't nothing I would rather do
Going down, party time
My friends are gonna be there too
I'm on the highway to hell
No stop signs, speed limit
Nobody's gonna slow me down
Like a wheel, gonna spin it
Nobody's gonna mess me round
Hey Satan, payed my dues
Playing in a rocking band
Hey Momma, look at me
I'm on my way to the promised land
I'm on the highway to hell
(Don't stop me)
And I'm going down, all the way down
I'm on the highway to hell
Joan Walsh Demagogues [UPDATE x2]
Jimmie Bise noticed Mark Knoller's reference, on Twitter, to anti-HCR protesters as "tea baggers," and the issue was swiftly taken up by Stacy and Dan Riehl (who never links here).
I understand completely the necessity of calling leftists on their double standards regarding Civility NOW! and I think that it was a stupid thing for Knoller to do. Still, I've followed his stream at Twitter for a long time, and I think that he's shown himself to be an honest broker of information. It's just possible that it was meant ironically, though it would have been better for him to place the expression in quotation marks. Be that as it may, I don't think it's possible for him to comment publicly on what he meant by it.
Much more egregious, in my view, are Salon editor Joan Walsh's lies regarding Stupak and the nuns, which nobody seems to have made an issue of. The Anchoress got her back up over the underlying issue, in an excellent post, and as I've mentioned, there's a precipitous drop in Dante's Inferno to the malebolge, where the fraudulent unexist, for good reason. The upshot, though, is that today Joan Walsh is demanding denunciations of others' behavior, while still not addressing her own. Perhaps I simply don't read Walsh's column enough, but I don't recall her having denounced the Purple Shirt beatdown of Kenneth Gladney, do you?
In Liberal Symbolic World, though, sticks and stones are much less violent than words. For that matter, Gibbsy continues not to have information regarding whether or not Sestak was offered a position---in other words, a bribe---for his vote on health care. Perhaps Joan Walsh would care to denounce this stonewalling on the part of the Obama administration, which threatens to make it a combination of the worst of the Carter and Nixon administrations. No? Crickets?
Ace (who never links here) is the place if you want continuous updates on where the vote buying stands at the moment. And pace Joe's comments, Jeff is entirely right about where things stand, and what's incumbent on us as citizens.
I'm sorry, Joan, but after the journalistic lies about racist catcalls at a Palin rally in 2008, it really is incumbent on you to produce some evidence that isn't hearsay before I'll denounce these "tea baggers." Meanwhile, I think you owe a retraction and apology regarding the nuns lies, and as much as I agree with Kyle-Anne's sentiments, I think she has unfortunately amplified the dimensions of the nun trouble.
Having said that, if these reports are true, I do denounce the behavior of the catcallers, and the spitter ought to be arrested and tried on assault charges. Considering the appalling contempt that's been shown for citizens and for democratic process by Congress in this whole debacle, though, perhaps they should reserve a little of their criticism for themselves, as should Joan Walsh.
And, please: if you follow the link that claims that the Capitol Police arrested the alleged Clyburn spitter, but that the Congressman is declining to press charges, you will find that the AP says that there was no arrest at all. So, somebody, it appears, is lying. Lying like an HCR backer spinning the CBO's numbers.
Speaking of truth and lies, by the way, here is Clark Hoyt on the truth of James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles' ACORN videos:
Acorn’s supporters appear to hope that the whole story will fall apart over the issue of what O’Keefe wore: if that was wrong, everything else must be wrong. The record does not support them. If O’Keefe did not dress as a pimp, he clearly presented himself as one: a fellow trying to set up a woman — sometimes along with under-age girls — in a house where they would work as prostitutes. In Washington, he said the prostitution was to finance his future in politics. A worker for Acorn Housing, an allied group, warned him to stay away from the brothel lest someone “get wind that you got a house and that your girlfriend is over there running a house of women of the night. You will not have a career.”
Read the whole thing. It is clear, as I have asserted over and over, that ACORN are almost everywhere counseling the "clients" to commit fraud. That seems to me to be a bad thing. (Via Hot Air, which never links here.)
UPDATE: William Jacobson on the Panopticon into which so-called liberals are delivering the American public.
UPDATE x2: Oh, gosh . . . looks as though my skepticism was warranted. (Naturally, Memeorandum never links).






