Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Gee, delusianne...the very idea that an American president would be in favor of allocating funds for worthless causes like this is unthinkable!
And had the numbers been reversed, the same RWs would be screaming
that we need that money here first! Then too, there's the whole issue of
the thread topic being based on a....distortion of the facts.
Well, that was a short wait. And second-hand conversations aren't acceptable citations for accuracy.
Gee, delusianne...the very idea that an American president would be in favor of allocating funds for worthless causes like this is unthinkable!
And had the numbers been reversed, the same RWs would be screaming
that we need that money here first! Then too, there's the whole issue of
the thread topic being based on a....distortion of the facts.
Ah knows it. "Still a man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest, mmm-mmm-mmmmm...."
According to Saganista the All-Knowing, it remains to be seen how much ACORN will get.
So the $6 billion was a load of crap, and the $2 billion was a load of crap, and in fact any claim above $0 would be a load of crap at this point as no one has any documentation relating to any of the appropriated funds having yet gotten as far as the local contracting stage. Then there is the misrepresentation of the $50K for Italy as well, leaving us to conclude that this entire thread is only another deliberate right-wing misconstruction of distorted facts on unrelated topics illogically juxtaposed for the simple purpose of creating a false impression that Obama must have bungled something. This you fail to denounce.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC
In his world, I guess it's too presumptuous to think that an organization that has been able to obtain sizeable input into the 2010 Census should be completely considered out of the running for funds to do such? ACORN, no matter how it is referenced in the budget, will get a sh*tload of money and we all know it.
That's part of your problem. You think you know far more than what you actually have the first clue about. The Census Bureau has had recurring problems getting enough censustakers who are willing and able to go into particularly low- and moderate-income urban communities, a problem which has led in the past to numerous well-established lawsuits claiming significant undercounting in such areas. Now let's see...what organization can you think of that might already have many hundreds of people on hand who spend almost all their time in exactly such communities, who are known to the residents of such communities, and who are entirely comfortable coming and going in those environments at all hours of the day and night? Do you think it would be a sensible idea to contact any such organization as that with regard to the potential recruitment of 2010 censustakers?
Meanwhile there is no reason at all to exclude any capable organization from competing on any CDBG programs that state and local entities put out for bid, and your supposition that ACORN is somehow going to end up with boatloads of contracts that should have gone to someone else is based on the grand total of nothing at all other than your own misinformed biases.
So the $6 billion was a load of crap, and the $2 billion was a load of crap, and in fact any claim above $0 would be a load of crap at this point as no one has any documentation relating to any of the appropriated funds having yet gotten as far as the local contracting stage. Then there is the misrepresentation of the $50K for Italy as well, leaving us to conclude that this entire thread is only another deliberate right-wing misconstruction of distorted facts on unrelated topics illogically juxtaposed for the simple purpose of creating a false impression that Obama must have bungled something. This you fail to denounce.
That's part of your problem. You think you know far more than what you actually have the first clue about. The Census Bureau has had recurring problems getting enough censustakers who are willing and able to go into particularly low- and moderate-income urban communities, a problem which has led in the past to numerous well-established lawsuits claiming significant undercounting in such areas. Now let's see...what organization can you think of that might already have many hundreds of people on hand who spend almost all their time in exactly such communities, who are known to the residents of such communities, and who are entirely comfortable coming and going in those environments at all hours of the day and night? Do you think it would be a sensible idea to contact any such organization as that with regard to the potential recruitment of 2010 censustakers?
Meanwhile there is no reason at all to exclude any capable organization from competing on any CDBG programs that state and local entities put out for bid, and your supposition that ACORN is somehow going to end up with boatloads of contracts that should have gone to someone else is based on the grand total of nothing at all other than your own misinformed biases.
So you agree that ACORN will get boatloads of money then? Good, thought so. The amount they end up receiving is anyone's guess, I'll concede that. I'm sure if we stay tuned , we'll find out soon enough.
So you agree that ACORN will get boatloads of money then? Good, thought so. The amount they end up receiving is anyone's guess, I'll concede that.
If there were more businesses that did what ACORN does, ACORN would get less of that "anyone's guess," wouldnt you say?
So you're admitting you DONT think this is a payback of billions to ACORN. Good for you, you're coming up to the fresh air....
Payback for what, by the way? They already got paid for the job they were contracted to do - registering voters - as they are by all companies and campaigns that have hired them through the years.
The House passed the "Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act" - or the GIVE Act - last week. The Senate took up the companion "SERVE Act" Tuesday afternoon. According to a Congressional Budget Office analysis of the Senate bill, S. 277, the bill would cost "$418 million in 2010 and about $5.7 billion over the 2010-2014 period." And like most federal programs, these would be sure to grow over time. The bills reauthorize the Clinton-era Americorps boondoggle program and an older law, the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973.
I never said $6 billion. You've not seen one word from me agreeing with the $6B mentioned. Get it right.
I posted the House budget document for all to see, which says $2B for "neighborhood stabilization" ......it would take a dumbarse liberal to not get that that is speakeasy for ACORN and the likes.
Can you seriously sit there and think that $2B means nothing for ACORN? If not then who? Enlighten us please.
This is your allegation, not mine. If you can't come up with some proof, maybe you oughta hold off on the headsmacking emoticons.
There is no ACORN in my community. If we get any neighborhood stabilization funds, they'll likely go to the community policing project or the Boys and Girls Club. Oh the liberal horror!!!
Really though. All you have is an unsubstantiated supposition about who is going to get any of that $$. Get back to me when you have some proof.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm a prophet!
