ACORN: Obama Gets It

Yesterday, ACORN's political action committee endorsed Barack Obama for President. This is an important nod from a group that understands the urgent needs of Americans most hurt by this economy and how to organize for social and economic justice.

ACORN is the nation's largest community organization of low- and moderate-income families, with over 350,000 member families, organized into 800 neighborhood chapters, in 104 cities nationwide. The endorsement reflects a belief that Obama – who worked as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago – understands that change must come from the ground-up, as part of a working coalition, rather than from position papers.

As Maude Hurd, ACORN's National President, put it, "What it came down to was that Senator Obama is the candidate who best understands and can affect change on the issues ACORN cares about like stopping foreclosures, enacting fair and comprehensive immigration reform, and building stronger and safer communities across America."

In last night's debate, Obama spoke as a candidate --and a former community organizer--when he said: "The reason that this campaign has done so well is because people understand that it is not just a matter of putting forward policy positions…. If we can't inspire the American people to get involved in their government… then we will continue to see the kind of gridlock and nonperformance in Washington that is resulting in families suffering in very real ways…. I'm running for president to start doing something about that suffering, and so are the people who are behind my campaign…. It is my strong belief that the changes are only going to come about if we're able to form a working coalition for change…. The problem we have is that Washington has become a place where good ideas go to die."

When it comes to rebuilding New Orleans, the foreclosure crisis, poverty, and an economy where growth doesn't just benefit the wealthy , change is going to come through ongoing organization and mobilization at the grassroots. Obama gets that fundamental political argument. That's one of the reasons The Nation endorsed him. That's why his campaign has been so successful against a powerful, top-down, Clinton machine. And that's why yesterday he won ACORN's important endorsement.

Comments (42)

1. Wow, I was really thinking they were going to endorse McCain. I'm sure the republicans are fuming over this loss.

   Posted by MATTMAN at 02/22/2008 @ 3:52pm

2. hmmmm...what if the subprime lenders had lent money to schmukos for submcmansions - affordable and appropriately priced/sized domiciles that schmuko proles might have afforded?

   pffft! if you build the mcmansions, the people who can afford them will appear! and if they don't, we'll extend usurous loans to those who can't and worry about the mess later!!!

   Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/22/2008 @ 3:54pm

3. Any comments on the CRITICISM of ACORN for pushing the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) which might have HELPED the subprime problem?!?!??!

   Posted by Mask at 02/22/2008 @ 3:54pm

4. Absudly, it seems Hillary xeroxed TWO passages into her "majestic" closing remarks. Hillary actually said last night that we should watch Obama's "plagiarism" on Youtube. So to be fair, now let's watch TWO of hers that came mere minutes after her "Xerox" and Youtube comments:

   http://youtube.com/watch?v=H60y8mHMpmU [youtube.com]

   My guess is her staff collects these xeroxes into grab bags and then forget they are actually appropriated material. Sigh. I actually like Hillary. But this is too absurd! Indeed, it IS "Silly Season!"

   Posted by eyecolor at 02/22/2008 @ 3:59pm

5. KVH: That's one of the reasons The Nation endorsed him.

   OK, I accept that as "one of the reasons"........however, isn't the BIGGEST reason TN endorsed him, AFTER Super Tuesday, was that Obama actually appeared VIABLE by then? Very, very different than my endorsing John McCain before Christmas last year when he wasn't even among the top two GOP candidates!

   The Nation is just among the `Herd' of Obama worshipers, at the most, in the middle of the Herd and not the rear, like ACORN!

   Posted by Happy at 02/22/2008 @ 5:03pm

6. That's one of the reasons The Nation endorsed him. That's why his campaign has been so successful against a powerful, top-down, Clinton machine. And that's why yesterday he won ACORN's important endorsement.

   Citizen involvement in government is perhaps the most striking difference between the campaigns. It is what makes the difference between things getting done or not.

   One of the most memorable moments in the debate last night is when Obama complimented Clinton for her efforts in 1993 to bring about universal healthcare and then explained that her failure was a result of not including ordinary citizens in the process and enlist others across the aisle that either agree with us on the issue or are forced to respond to citizen demands in their districts to remain politically viable.

   Doing healthcare reform behind closed doors favors the backroom politics of lobbyists, and shining the bright light of citizen input in the process counteracts this corrupt influence by forcing Congress to respond to the will of the majority of Americans.

   So whether it is healthcare, withdrawing our troops from Iraq, breaking our addiction to oil or any other issue that has majority support, citizen involvement is what keeps Congress honest, and Barack is the only candidate in the race with a plan and inspiration to get citizens involved.

   Posted by Metteyya at 02/22/2008 @ 5:08pm

7. Re: Wow, I was really thinking they were going to endorse McCain. I'm sure the republicans are fuming over this loss.

   Posted by MATTMAN 02/22/2008 @ 3:52pm

   Obama will probably fume when the American League of Lobbyist (ALL) endorses McCain.

   Quote from All website [alldc.org]:

   Membership in the exclusive American League of Lobbyists is limited to professionals whose employment requires them to spend a substantial portion of their time in government relations or related public affairs. Group or individual membership is available and a special program is also provided for those who work outside of the DC metropolitan area.

   Posted by oraibi1952 at 02/22/2008 @ 5:26pm

8. Here's a list of a few of Obama's contibutors. Think there will be an "upsidedown homeowners bailout? You're damn right there will be. Think the bailout will benefit the homeowners OR the investment banks who peddled the toxic loans? Well...take one more look at the list below. He's already bought and paid for. Change? Yeah whatever.

   Goldman Sachs $421,763 Ubs Ag $296,670 Lehman Brothers $250,630 National Amusements Inc $245,843 JP Morgan Chase & Co $243,848 Sidley Austin LLP $226,491 Citigroup Inc $221,578 Exelon Corp $221,517 Skadden, Arps Et Al $196,420 Jones Day $181,996 Harvard University $172,324 Citadel Investment Group $171,798 Time Warner $155,383 Morgan Stanley $155,196

   Posted by bleedingheart at 02/22/2008 @ 7:38pm

9. Posted by BLEEDINGHEART 02/22/2008 @ 7:38pm

   Why do you continue with the same smear?

   We all saw the movie SICKO and know that Michael Moore received "thousands" of letters from employees in the healthcare industry that disagreed with the practices of their employers.

   Trying to pass off "employee" donations as "employer" donations is dishonest, and unless you have proof that the employers directed these employees to donate to his campaign, this is an Obama smear!

   It is Hillary that is doing an upside down bailout by freezing "all" foreclosures and interest rates.

   Freezing all foreclosures lumps the real estate speculators who comprised over half of all new home buyers in the final years of the Bubble, with the poor. Why should these relatively well-off speculators get a break for their lying on their no-income-qualifier subprime loans to gamble on real estate?

   Interest rate freezes are actually economically unsound as the Fed needs the flexibility to "lower" interest rates to stimulate the economy or raise them to contain inflation. This highlights Hillary's "inexperience" and lack of understanding of how our economy works.

   Posted by Metteyya at 02/22/2008 @ 8:36pm

10. Posted by LVLIBERTY1 02/22/2008 @ 9:42pm

    LVLIB, in fairness to METTE, before he answers....

    don't you consider just about EVERYTHING done domestically since the New Deal to be a "destruction of the Constitution and implementation of a socialist agenda"?

    Posted by Mask at 02/22/2008 @ 10:06pm

11. Posted by RIO BRAVO 02/23/2008 @ 12:28am | ignore this person

    its me. i'm behind barack obama. me and millions more. its too bad you can't recognize true decency and talent, but then you're a republican, so its not a suprise.

    if jesus christ was a democrat you and satan a republican you would vote for satan.

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/23/2008 @ 01:16am

12. What is Obama's plan?

    I understand part of it. Conservatives would be inspired to work day and night to slow or prevent his attempts to destroy the constitution and implement a socialist agenda.

    Posted by LVLIBERTY1 02/22/2008 @ 9:42pm | ignore this person

    you can come here and spew rightwing satano-aynrando rhetoric but you can't go to his website and find out his positions for youeself? miraculous.

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/23/2008 @ 01:20am

13. Emphatically and demonstrably yes

    Posted by LVLIBERTY1 02/22/2008 @ 11:53pm

    Well, then why should Obama worry about you stopping him....when you haven't done all that great a job since 1933??!?!??!??

    Posted by Mask at 02/23/2008 @ 09:13am

14. on't you consider just about EVERYTHING done domestically since the New Deal to be a "destruction of the Constitution and implementation of a socialist agenda"?

    Posted by MASK 02/22/2008 @ 10:06pm

    Emphatically and demonstrably yes

    Posted by LVLIBERTY1 02/22/2008 @ 11:53pm

    WOW!. I guess that puts you in the mainstream.

    --

    And will we find out who is behind Barack in time, or will Barack and his backer(s) beat the clock and become America's first affirmative action president as well as Harvard Law Review's first affirmative action/political correctness president?

    Posted by RIO BRAVO 02/23/2008 @ 12:28am |

    John Danforth backing Clarence Thomas ring any bells with you?

    I doubt it.

    --

    I understand part of it. Conservatives would be inspired to work day and night to slow or prevent his attempts to destroy the constitution and implement a socialist agenda.

    Posted by LVLIBERTY1 02/22/2008 @ 9:42pm | ignore this person

    I read Rick Santorum's column "The conservative jury is still out on backing McCain" (Inquirer, Feb. 14) with great interest. I respect my conservative friends who don't share my enthusiasm about Arizona Sen. John McCain. Yet, I'm troubled that many critics are focusing on the specks of dust in McCain's eye while ignoring the plank in their own eye. The plank in the eye of some self-appointed conservative jurists, particularly those from former Republican leadership ranks, is this:

    Under their leadership, Republicans grew the government faster than the Democrats we replaced.

    Under their leadership, Republicans attempted to secure a governing majority through the corrupting practice of earmarking.

    Under their leadership, Republicans passed the largest entitlement expansion since Lyndon Johnson, passing on more than $9 trillion in new debt to the next generation so we could win the 2004 election.

    McCain fought against all of those trends while many so-called conservatives were marching our party off a Bridge to Nowhere.

    ...

    U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn (R., Okla.)

    does that ring any bells?

    Posted by crabwalk at 02/23/2008 @ 10:13am

15. So, where were the cons working night and day to stop Chimpy McFlightsuits socialist rampage agenda?

    Why, they were trumpeting the passage of the "Defense of Marriage Act".

    How many marriages has this Act saved?

    0, zip, zilch, nada, not one.

    Where were the cons when Chimpy decided that establishing a gulag in Cuba was the best way to fight terrorism, starting a war based on false premises and outright lies, nation building across the globe with borrowed money, undermining the FIAS rules, jailing US citizens without charges?

    Hiding under their baptismal fonts, that's where the cons were.

    OperationYellowelephant lives on.

    Posted by crabwalk at 02/23/2008 @ 10:22am

16. RIO, MAASCH, DAVEB(aka Sleepy), LENMOSSE etc

    Give this a gander

    http://bp1.blogger.com/_Y6pjMjsbYMk/R7jXaCpr7DI/AAAAAAAAAiA/WNa9UmY-geY/ s1600-h/2005179977045919593_rs.jpg

    Maybe one of you could explain why these guys are not in Iraq?

    Michigan State University (MSU) Young Americans for Freedom.

    This is funny, too. Funny ironic

    Attention Military Recruiters:

    With former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney's withdrawal from the Republican Presidential race comes an opportunity to encourage all his healthy heterosexual young male (and some female) volunteers to enhance their personal commitment to the War on Terror. This includes his five sons, of whom one, Tagg, has been working full-time on the campaign and should therefore be available.

    While we thank everyone actively participating in the political process for contributing to democracy, new developments can create new horizons for anyone. If you really want to demonstrate your confidence that your party will win in November, why not enlist now?

    Posted by crabwalk at 02/23/2008 @ 10:28am

17. YAHOO news

    Azzawi should have already been re-instated in Iraq's security forces. But he's still languishing on the fringes, like many other ex-Baathists unsure of whether to join the new order or keep pining for the past.

    The Saddam Hussein-era colonel, who asked to be identified by only his common tribal name for safety reasons, has seen others like him assassinated and kidnapped. So he stays mostly in his Baghdad home and says he's convinced that there is no place for him within the country's Shiite-led government.

    "The new law is twisted and incredibly unfair," says Azzawi. "I am filled with hope now more than ever that the Baath Party will lead Iraq again."

    A year ago, the US was pushing Iraq to pass what it called the "Reconciliation and Accountability" law as the cornerstone of political reconciliation, which it hoped would occur with the surge in US troops. It was also a benchmark among those devised by Washington to measure progress.

    That draft law, to which US Embassy officials contributed significant advice, offered pensions to high-ranking Baathist government employees. It gave lower-ranking members, like Azzawi, the chance to return to their jobs. All employees of the myriad security agencies during Mr. Hussein's era were covered by this. A whole section detailed reconciliation-promoting measures. The controversial de-Baathification commission, headed by one-time close Washington ally Ahmed Chalabi, was to be dissolved.

    But in sharp contrast, the new law keeps the commission in place indefinitely and simply changes its name.

    The new law means that automatically 7,000 in the Ministry of the Interior will have to retire and a considerable number in the Defense Ministry could loose their jobs," says Mr. Chalabi. He says Washington is misguided in its efforts to "legislate reconciliation," and should focus instead on promoting private enterprise to create jobs.

    A US Embassy official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, says the hope now is that the government would not implement the law in a way that would "alienate and embitter," while suggesting that US officials would intervene if this happens. "If we feel that some action they are going to do with the implementation of this law is going to set the government of Iraq back in some sense or endanger our troops by fueling a larger insurgency, we are going to step in."

    Warning of a possible clash between Iraq and the US over the law's implementation, Chalabi says Washington has no right to impose its will on the majority Shiites who still want retribution for past injustices. He says his commission was actively involved in lobbying against the first US-backed draft law.

    Bahaa al-Araji, head of parliament's judicial committee and a partisan of Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, says, "We in the Sadrist movement worked effortlessly to completely change the essence of the law as it was presented. Our goal is justice."

    the progress achieved by "the surge".

    another "benchmark" failed by while US soldiers protect these people from each other.

    Well, at least it's not socialism.

    Posted by crabwalk at 02/23/2008 @ 10:37am

18. But I'm not a quitter and I continue my fights in the arena of ideas which is the American way.----Posted by LVLIBERTY1 02/23/2008 @ 11:00am

    Really? You said if Romney got the nomination, you'd sit it out or vote third party, effectively GIVING the election to whoever the Democrats put up.

    Now that it's McCain....you're "not a quitter" again?

    Posted by Mask at 02/23/2008 @ 11:34am

19. Posted by LVLIBERTY1 02/22/2008 @ 9:42pm

    Here is Obama's plan to get citizens involved:

    II. Create a Transparent and Connected Democracy

    Open Up Government to its Citizens: The Bush Administration has been one of the most secretive, closed administrations in American history. Our nation's progress has been stifled by a system corrupted by millions of lobbying dollars contributed to political campaigns, the revolving door between government and industry, and privileged access to inside information--all of which have led to policies that favor the few against the public interest.

    An Obama presidency will use cutting-edge technologies to reverse this dynamic, creating a new level of transparency, accountability and participation for America's citizens. Technology-enabled citizen participation has already produced ideas driving Obama's campaign and its vision for how technology can help connect government to its citizens and engage citizens in a democracy.

    Barack Obama will use the most current technological tools available to make government less beholden to special interest groups and lobbyists and promote citizen participation in government decision-making. Obama will integrate citizens into the actual business of government by:

    • Making government data available online in universally accessible formats to allow citizens to make use of that data to comment, derive value, and take action in their own communities. Greater access to environmental data, for example, will help citizens learn about pollution in their communities, provide information about local conditions back to government and empower people to protect themselves.

    • Establishing pilot programs to open up government decision-making and involve the public in the work of agencies, not simply by soliciting opinions, but by tapping into the vast and distributed expertise of the American citizenry to help government make more informed decisions.

    • Requiring his appointees who lead Executive Branch departments and rulemaking agencies to conduct the significant business of the agency in public, so that any citizen can watch a live feed on the Internet as the agencies debate and deliberate the issues that affect American society. He will ensure that these proceedings are archived for all Americans to review, discuss and respond. He will require his appointees to employ all the technological tools available to allow citizens not just to observe, but also to participate and be heard in these meetings.

    • Restoring the basic principle that government decisions should be based on the best-available, scientifically-valid evidence and not on the ideological predispositions of agency officials.

    • Lifting the veil from secret deals in Washington with a web site, a search engine, and other web tools that enable citizens easily to track online federal grants, contracts, earmarks, and lobbyist contacts with government officials.

    • Giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days before signing any non-emergency legislation.

    • Bringing democracy and policy deliberations directly to the people by requiring his Cabinet officials to have periodic national online town hall meetings to answer questions and discuss issues before their agencies.

    • Employing technologies, including blogs, wikis and social networking tools, to modernize internal, cross-agency, and public communication and information sharing to improve government decision- making.

    Posted by Metteyya at 02/23/2008 @ 12:56pm

20. Posted by RIO BRAVO 02/23/2008 @ 12:28am

    Here are some sites that discuss Obama's law review writings:

    http://www.nysun.com/article/51131

    http://www.charleston.net/news/2007/dec/06/obama_writes_article_charlest on_law_revi24203/

    The eight issues that Obama presided over included articles on Martin Luther King Jr., and gender and racial discrimination in retail car negotiations, as well as an anonymous, student-written "Note" arguing the legal system had not provided adequate protections against discrimination for those who are both black and men.

    Fellow students and Senate aides say Obama was not the author of the Note, but as president, he gave each article the final substantive edit. - Washingtn Post

    Posted by Metteyya at 02/23/2008 @ 1:06pm

21. if jesus christ was a democrat you and satan a republican you would vote for satan. Posted by IBBLEBLIBBLE 02/23/2008 @ 01:16am

    If???

    But seriously, folks, there seems to have been a piece somewhere noting that the Secret Service contingent guarding Obama did NOT screen the public at a recent Obama appearance in .... Dallas. The Secret Service, when questioned about this lack of action, is said to have explained: It looked like a friendly crowd.

    What's going on? Any ideas, fellow posters? Mere incompetence from the SS?

    Are they trying to send Obama a message? Dress rehearsal rag?

    Posted by sloper at 02/23/2008 @ 1:59pm

22. Posted by SLOPER 02/23/2008 @ 1:59pm

    find it and post a link. not being snippy, but, you know...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/23/2008 @ 2:14pm

23. It was discussed on last night's Bill Maher's show (available in parts on youtube) & all 5 participants were aware of it, though no cite given (or missed by me). Frum (!) felt he had to explain it, and said there must be an explanation but that it was simply missing from the piece by accident.

    Posted by sloper at 02/23/2008 @ 2:26pm

24. "How would voting 3rd party to continue to make my voice heard be quitting? That is one way that voters can voice their dissatisfaction with what even their own party is doing."----Posted by LVLIBERTY1 02/23/2008 @ 12:46pm

    So your..."Go Ralph Go! Let's see if all of these posters who continuously bad mouth the Democratic Party as being no different than the Republicans come out in support of Nader or suddenly develop a "Anyone but McCain" attitude."----Posted by LVLIBERTY1 02/23/2008 @ 12:54pm

    Is simply because you want "dissatisfaction voiced"...

    and not because it would help the Republicans?!?!?!?

    ('member it's a sin to lie...even if you don't actually post it on a blog, but just think it!....heheh)

    Posted by Mask at 02/23/2008 @ 3:00pm

25. Posted by SLOPER 02/23/2008 @ 2:26pm | ignore this person

    ah - ok. will check it out later...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/23/2008 @ 3:11pm

26. Posted by MASK 02/23/2008 @ 3:00pm

    he's already accepted jeeeeezus as his personal savior. he can get away with murder now...so whats a few lies?

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/23/2008 @ 3:22pm

27. Posted by IBBLEBLIBBLE 02/23/2008 @ 3:22pm

    Actually what's the big deal about lying, if you can be a "Christian" and advocate mass aerial bombardment of civilian targets ("Think Dresden"...his "solution" for fighting terrorism).

    Posted by Mask at 02/23/2008 @ 5:30pm

28. Ibble... those of us who believe in the separation of church and state, and believe in both separately... might, like myself... find the words and thoughts you've expressed in "IBBLEBLIBBLE 02/23/2008 @ 3:22pm" quite repulsive.

    I would suggest that a separation of church and politics would be more suitable to 'engaging' political discussions...

    Pick your battles, be true to your values, and be respectful of those who 'mostly' agree with you.

    I'm just figuring this stuff out too...;^)

    Posted by ttr at 02/23/2008 @ 5:39pm

29. MASK 02/23/2008 @ 5:30pm

    Don't get me started, Mask...;^)

    Good point, well taken.

    Doesn't belong in the political arena though... Nor does it belong in the 'Colluseum'...

    Posted by ttr at 02/23/2008 @ 5:45pm

30. NEW - on YOUTUBE "OBAMA SONG PORTRAIT: WE ARE THE CHANGE by Bjarne O."

    As the composer, Bjarne O., writes:

    "I combined Latino Rhythms, Chinese Erhu, African- and Native-American Voices with the Contemporary Symphonic Orchestra - in the great spirit of Unity - for this Song in support of Obama's great and true message: "Our Time Has Come; We the People are the Change we've all been waiting for. We are the Hope for the Future - YES WE CAN."

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCQYTu8u7Sg

    CHECK IT OUT - AND SPREAD THE WORD

    YES WE CAN - ALL OF US TOGETHER

    Anne

    Posted by annevilla at 02/23/2008 @ 9:39pm

31. Posted by TTR 02/23/2008 @ 5:39pm | ignore this person

    well...i see LL, a (pentacostal?) fundamentalist evangelical christian. thats what i get from all he's said. ok...so what does that mean? does that mesh with his satano-aynrando sociopolitical point of view? how does it work? he seems to obsess with abortion and swallow conservative talking points against all evidence to the contrary. supports lies and cheats.

    so i think its a result of or is manifested itself in his religious beliefs - often literalist and based on "biblical science". to him, in order to be saved, one must "accept jesus as your personal savior"...from what i understand, if that has really happened, i think you're supposed to be good or something afterward...but if you are supper goody goody but don't say the magic words above...you go to hell...

    so his salvation is not based not so much on behavior but belief...

    and there are all sorts of possible pitfalls in that...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/24/2008 @ 11:44am

32. TTR and IBBLEBLIBBLE,

    Obama, a better constitutional scholar than we've had as a candidate in years (he taught Constitutional Law for years at UChicago), understands that we're a pluralistic society, not a Christian one. If we ever *were* a Christian nation, we are no longer. We're a nation of Jews and Sikhs and Muslims and Christians and Buddhists...

    And, Obama goes on to say (with my undying gratitude as a woman who treads the boundary land between atheism and agnosticism), we are also a nation of non-believers. He recognizes that, and also doesn't vilify those of us who don't profess a belief in God. The largely Deist founders of our nation would applaud Obama, were they here.

    Unlike the theocratic "faith-based" pols of the past years who did nothing other than throw red meat to their Evangelical base, Obama will support *all* Americans by focusing on ethics and fairness. He's shown his commitment to that focus during his years working as a community organizer.

    Bravo, ACORN, for your endorsement of Sen. Obama.

    Elise in NH The Obama Minute: quick, easy actions to support Barack Obama's candidacy http://www.obamastraws.blogspot.com

    Posted by drband36 at 02/24/2008 @ 1:24pm

33. IBBLEBLIBBLE 02/24/2008...

    Thanks for clarifying, Ibsle...

    If you're not religious... that hardly gives you the 'prerequisites' necessary to legitimately admonish a devout individual that has not successfully separated Church and State in their own behavior. This is just a statement of fact.

    Many 'Agnostics', as well as 'Christians'... are falling into this trap these days ... and it is a behavior that summons up a very similar scenario to that which 'encouraged' tens of thousands of religious people and their families to uproot themselves from their European worlds... and move to the 'new world'... a place where 'religious freedom' was eventually given 'legal' sanction.

    We got a lot of bad habits goin' down... in America.

    Posted by ttr at 02/24/2008 @ 3:01pm

34. And... I Forgot to include...

    Conversely... If you're not Political... ie. making a concerted effort to make 'informed' and educated decisions based on sound constitutionally based principles... that hardly gives you the 'prerequisites' necessary to legitimately vote in a Democratic Republic.

    Posted by ttr at 02/24/2008 @ 3:14pm

35. Posted by METTEYYA 02/23/2008 @ 12:56pm

    METT, nearly 80% of the US populace doesn't own a computer and many of them don't have cable. How will this this "tech" info reach them?

    Posted by ACook at 02/24/2008 @ 6:48pm

36. Posted by TTR 02/23/2008 @ 5:39pm

    Posted by TTR 02/24/2008 @ 3:14pm

    So....it's bad to say someones religious belief warps their logic, politics and therefore, vote...

    ...but then I get confused... If you are not "making a concerted effort to make 'informed' and educated decisions based on sound constitutionally based principles", like the superstitious amongst us, "that hardly gives you the 'prerequisites' necessary to legitimately vote in a Democratic Republic."

    Don't attempt to reason with them, figure out how to keep them from voting?!?

    What exactly are the "'prerequisites' necessary to legitimately admonish a devout individual"?

    Please clarify.

    Posted by Malcontent at 02/24/2008 @ 7:21pm

37. Hey, Malc...

    Bad? I guess you could say so... because religious beliefs don't 'warp' logic... anymore than , say... anti-religious beliefs do... when it comes to working together to establish and reinforce common ground issues. It's a big distraction, that elephant in the closet... and 'going there' is probably inevitably going to be divisive between people who in many other respects agree.

    Bottom line... religious choices (theirs and yours) are 'off the table' in political discussions for people who want to form large coalitions across the boards in this country... unless, of course you are on a 'fear based' agenda...;^)

    It is the separation of church and state that allows our Democracy to flourish.

    Leading a horse to water won't make him drink... and neither will whipping him, or yelling at him about the baggage others have put on his back...

    Drink some water yourself... calmly talk to him about what you really believe... listen to him... and leave him alone to think about it. The odds are... you will have learned something too!

    For me... the superstitions get in the way of my religion a lot... and I am constantly sorting them out for myself. I can only assume that others, like myself, pretty much have to keep one eye open to resolve for ourselves the changing issues that come up in the day to day... and I believe that this is the 'good' in people that actually 'want' to come together to create sustainable working solutions that win-win all the way to the bank... while retaining, fully intact, their spiritual integrity.

    The prerequisites for the scenario you mentioned would be... you would have to 'know' the basis for what Holy sustenance is... on each and every individual's own terms... and be able to have an in depth discussion with each of them for as long as it takes... and win each of them over on their own terms.

    Kinda like trying to drive around the world in a car with only twenty bucks in your pocket...

    Pick your battles.

    Politics is about facts and influence... and like Nader pointed out today on the tube... until the people of the US organize themselves into a mainstream (and intrinsically good) majority coalition... You know what will remain.

    BTW... I'm not endorsing Nader... but I always get a kick out of what he has to say...

    ttr

    Posted by ttr at 02/24/2008 @ 10:24pm

38. Posted by ACOOK 02/24/2008 @ 6:48pm ::: First, I find your "80%" statistic hard to believe- got any links or sources to back that up? Second- nearly every public library in America has computers and a connection to the internet. Anyone interested in taking advantage of the tech info just needs to visit their local library.

    Posted by jro555 at 02/25/2008 @ 2:40pm

39. ACORN: also known as a group that tries to register dead people and family pets to vote. I always wondered why dems and libs appose laws requiring ID to vote.

    Posted by viking10475 at 02/25/2008 @ 2:43pm

40. Posted by TTR 02/24/2008 @ 3:01pm |

    sure. but its a wonderful country where LL's can come and irritatingly proselytize to me and i can express my opining to them.

    honestly, not being a christian in that do not believe in the whole premise of "take jesus as your personal savior or go to hell", at least not in what i se as the literalist, limited, concrete objective manner they insist upon, i find such exclusiveist theologies to be evil despite their pretensions otherwise. such theological ideologies encourage ignorance, division, and ultimately tyranny. in my opinion. to not speak out against is to condone. to condone is to enable. if there is one thing i got out of my christian background it is to oppose evil. if evil wraps itself in sweet sounding promises and a few feelgood platitudes, in my book its still evil. god told me so long before i was born.

    he also told me to beware those who have all the answers to that about which they have no knowledge beyond a book.

    so...i respect LL like i respect anyone, and though i don't think he personally is evil (not being god here...) i still think his and most other forms of literalist christianity are evil and will speak my opinion as long as such does not get my leg broken and my freedom allows me.

    if i don't, i fear ultimately i will have no such freedom nor non-violent expectation.

    if LL is insulted, perhaps he should allow less to insult him. when i was easily insulted (a function of inordinate pride) i used to get highly insulted by notions that saying magic words like "i take jesus christ as my personal savior", devoid of actions, gets one to "heaven" while he who lives a moral life who does not utter such a magical formula goes to hell forever...

    but such is the nature of freedom of expression and a "free market" of ideas...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/25/2008 @ 2:57pm

41. Even if they did have ID Fido and Fluffy lack the opposing thumb and forefinger which would enable them to grasp a crayon to sign in on election day. ACORN might have an easier time of it with the dead. They just have to make sure the crayon is placed before rigor mortis sets in.

    Posted by viking10475 at 02/25/2008 @ 3:01pm

42. spelling correction: oppose

    Posted by viking10475 at 02/25/2008 @ 3:20pm