Yeah, had to catch the 6:00 DN rerun after school today, after a class in therapeutic communication of all things. Thanks for therapeutically communicating to the world Brad and all!

The Times will get around to acknowledging their failure with the ACORN story some time after they publish their big Sibel Edmonds piece....

Atlas has the basic story largely right back in September as the following quote will show (ignore the part apart being turned away from offices and the news value) It's too bad he's chosen to tell the completely fabricated after-the-fact narrative constructed by Boehlert and others now.

"Like all large organizations made up of human beings, ACORN is not without flaws. But it has a long history of quickly responding to its weaknesses. After the videotape prank by two young right-wing activists posing as a pimp and prostitute seeking tax and business advice, ACORN’s CEO Bertha Lewis quickly dismissed the offending employees. Although no tax returns were filed, no loans provided, and ACORN’s management oversight mitigated any further harm from taking place, Lewis has appointed a group of eminent experts, including former Maryland’s former Lt. Gov. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, to help implement necessary internal reforms. This week, a former Massachusetts attorney general was named to oversee an internal review.

Meanwhile, Fox news broadcast these "gotcha" videos on a virtual round-the-clock basis, causing a controversy far out of proportion to its news value. We now know the hidden tapes were doctored, misleading and in some cases probably taken illegally, and that contrary to the filmmakers’ claims, they had been turned away from several ACORN offices."

http://blog.nj.com/njv_j..._few_bad_seeds_ruin.html

Yesterday, Daleyrocks wrote:

The "hoax" narrative only works on those who did not watch the videos as they came out or are too stupid to understand what they are seeing since it was clear from the first video O'Keefe did not wear the gaudy pimp outfit into the ACORN offices and that footage was edited onto the beginning and end of each video for effect.

This drew a response from me that blew so many holes in the good ship Daleyrocks that it swiftly sunk to the bottom of the lake that can be found at the corner of Brad Street and Democracy Blvd.

Today, @3 Daleyrocks writes [emphasis added] that John "Atlas has the basic story largely right back in September, quoting from Atlas' piece wherein Atlas, whose piece emerged before the Harshbarger analysis and which gives no indication that Atlas had reviewed and compared the transcript and doctored videos, referred to the incident as a "prank by two young right-wing activists posing as a pimp and prostitute seeking tax and business advice.

But of course, the Harshbarger report, and the painstaking research reflecting in the numerous pieces posted here at The BRAD BLOG reveal that, for example, when they entered the ACORN Baltimore office, O'Keefe and Giles posed as a "dancer" and a "college" student --- a point Daleyrocks willfully choose to ignore.

Daleyrocks then adds something that is manifestly inconsistent with what he and the smear merchants at Fox, at Patterico and throughout the right-wing echo chamber have been saying.

Fox news broadcast these "gotcha" videos on a virtual round-the-clock basis, causing a controversy far out of proportion to its news value. We now know the hidden tapes were doctored, misleading and in some cases probably taken illegally, and that contrary to the filmmakers’ claims, they had been turned away from several ACORN offices."

That last paragraph has be thunderstruck, Daleyrocks. Is this you being converted, finally, to the truth?

Judging from everything else you've written, I suspect that I would be unduly optimistic to expect a Daleyrocks epiphany, but it would indeed be refreshing.

Ernie - No holes here, dream on. I included that second paragraph of Atlas' out of fairness and also because it does no harm.

Now Ernie, contrast how you just referred to what happened in Baltimore above, with how you did in the comments to your 3/10 post:

What a load of crap!

"O'Keefe wore the outfit outside one ACORN office; spliced it into every video, used voice-overs to make answers to what had been innocuous questions appear as if the ACORN employees were giving advice to a pimp and a prostitute when, in fact, they had posed, in the Baltimore office, for example, as a "dancer" and a "college student.""

Since I just ripped you a new one in the comments down there about denying O'Keefe and Giles posed as a pimp and prostitute in Baltimore, I take it by your language above you have decided to stop lying about the situation. That makes me happy.

Hey daleyrocks, do you want the unedited versions released?

I might add, because I damn sure do to shut your ignorant, obfuscating, egotistical, time-wasting mouth up! Sorry Brad, I've had enough of wealth funded ignoramuses.

Sonali Kolhatkar did a segment on her show, Uprising (KPFK), on this story this morning with someone from FAIR --- and gave Brad a big credit for following this story so thoroughly.

Crickets...(actually roaring creek about to flood in this neck of the woods)...go figure. Wonder what energy policy ole bigoted duhrock stands for? Probably embraces dickless cheney's.

Daleyrocks @5 wrote that I denied that "O'Keefe and Giles "posed as a pimp and prostitute in Baltimore."

_____________________

I'm beginning to understand why it is so difficult to communicate with you, Daleyrocks. You're dyslexic!

I never said that Giles did not, at some point during the Baltimore ACORN interaction, "pose as a prostitute."

I wrote that when the scurrilous duo "entered" the Baltimore ACORN , Giles posed as a "dancer" and O'Keefe posed as a "college" student."

If you read the Harshbarger report and actually take time to read and digest what I wrote in my article, and in my comment to you, Daleyrocks, you would know that:

a) Harshbarger interviewed many, many ACORN employees who were not on the supposedly complete transcripts. Harshbarger says that the pair told a third part-time Baltimore ACORN employee, a receptionist, that Giles was a "dancer" and O'Keefe was a "college student." That receptionist was not recorded on audio, which suggests that the audiotapes and transcript do not provide a complete record of the representations Giles & O'Keefe made to ACORN and ACORN Housing employees.

b) The first 14 pages of the Baltimore transcripts reveal that your deceptive, hero, the accused federal felon James O'Keefe, and his accomplice, Hanna Giles, hid what it was that Giles supposedly did for a living. The word "prostitute" does not appear once until they secured the juicy sound-bites they were looking for and the ACORN tax lady says she's looking for a code to apply to Giles' theretofore unlabeled and undefined "business" that O'Keefe pops up with "there's a code for prostitution"?

c) I did not say and have never said that Giles did not, at some point during their interactions at the Baltimore ACORN office, pose as a prostitute. I did say that at no time did O'Keefe refer to himself as a pimp. Giles never said O'Keefe was her pimp. Neither said that O'Keefe would solicit customers for Giles or any other person.

d) I did say that it was utterly disingenuous for Patterico aka L.A. County Deputy DA Patrick Frey to extract the words "we" and "cash for my campaign" out-of-context from page 40 of a 46 page transcript and make the claim that this amounted to "posing as a pimp" when the entire thrust of the transcript reveals O'Keefe representing time and again that he is a law student who was simply trying to help a friend, Giles.

Perhaps if you are incapable of reading and digesting what I actually write, you can get someone else to read my posts and comments to you aloud so as to overcome your dyslexia.

Further, Daleyrocks, you have failed to answer some direct questions I have posed to you.

1) Are you aware of any published news reports that suggested that ACORN was involved in aiding pimps or prostitutes before O'Keefe & Giles initiated "The Great Pimp Hoax"?

2) If not, can you tell me what motive, if any, O'Keefe & Giles had for conducting this little charade in the first place? --- other than the unassailable inference that they targeted ACORN for this charade only because the hard-right's years-long efforts to smear ACORN as a voter fraud organization has repeatedly blown up in the smug faces of the likes of Hannity, O'Reilly, Beck and the rest of the Fox propaganda team.

Per the Congressional Research Study 49 federal, state and local investigations of ACORN as of Oct. 2009 which failed to produce a single case in which someone improperly registered by an ACORN employee actually cast a ballot.

Wipe the floor with me? In your dreams my deluded right-wing friend.

How they go from blowing your face off to dickless in one observant lesson... is understood by bradblog readers. Paper ballots, strict-chain-of-custody and citizen oversight during counting are the only way to end the insanity. And believe me, nytimes won't tell you that complete story. These changes are ALL VERY DO-ABLE WITH FORETHOUGHT and COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION...JUST LIKE ACORN. IMAGINE AND TAKE PART IN THAT!

Okay, that should have been observable above upon insta edit, since the flood is still rising.

Ernie the Attorney @10 - In comment 5 I merely quoted from a comment of yours in the thread to your post of 3/10. If you do not believe the words "as if the ACORN employees were giving advice to a pimp and a prostitute when, in fact, they had posed, in the Baltimore office, for example, as a "dancer" and a "college student" are intended to tell your readers that you do not believe Giles and O'Keefe posed as a pimp and a prostitute in Baltimore or you cannot write plain english if you believe they mean something else. Please explain since you seem to have so many problems with words.

"Further, Daleyrocks, you have failed to answer some direct questions I have posed to you." Ernie - It's stupid of you to ask me about the motivations of O'Keefe and Giles. As I've mentioned before here, O'Keefe explained his motivations on Biggovernment.com when the videos first came out. Why are you so dense?

Ernie, you calling Patterico disengenuous because the pimp mention doesn't come until page 40 of 46 - how many times and how early would have been sufficient to meet your standards? Are there rules about this sort of stuff, because you seem to be just sort of making it up as you go. It's not as bad as you and Brad picking out eight stories or clips that mention O'Keefe wearing a pimp outfit inside ACORN offices out of the thousands of stories and clips about the videos, though, and deciding those eight drove the story. That's disengenuous!

Ancient - Halliburton
Diebold
Kyoto
Haditha
Blackwater
WMD

Peace!

Hey there duhrocks, your point is what until you answer my initial query? Your very specific with Ernest, but where or what are you specifically talking to me about,unless, that is my initial query?

So, plain an simple for ya, do you want the unedited versions released?

Come on there big bog, that shouldn't take a consultant's worth of time to answer.

Yeah, that should be big boy.

Waiting, but not too long for a discredited failure like you.

Night night ignorant, obfuscating, egotistical, time-wasting person.

RE: Daleyrocks remedial schooling here...

It's amazing to watch these corporate-wealth funded trolls appear and demand they we hand walk them through line by line every story. Personally I think that's what they intend, for Bradbloggers to be weak readers and lazy writers so the trolls can have a "gotcha" moment.

I appreciate Brad and Ernie's attention to detail and tedious spelling out of the matter at hand. Even if the Daleyrocks types aren't paying attention or even care about the facts...it does show the world that Brad and Ernie have a strangle hold of every issue they report or write about.
Brad and Ernie's availability to hang around and defend their work has to be a mundane neccesity...but I'm glad they do.

I amazed that the right wing operatives still send only B-league trolls like Daleyrocks to this site to get their asses handed to them...Brad, Ernie and the commenters here use guys like Daleyrocks as batting practice.

Maybe some time in the future...we'll see a major league right wing challenge here, Patterico could of been a contender...but he turned out to be just a pretender.

Nevertheless...Ernie that was a thorough dismantling of Daleyrocks best effort.

Hats off to Brad and Ernie...

daleyrocks @13 wrote:

Ernie, you calling Patterico disengenuous because the pimp mention doesn't come until page 40 of 46 - how many times and how early would have been sufficient to meet your standards?
____________________________________

Fact #1 I did not say that O'Keefe called himself a "pimp" until page 40.

Fact #2 O'Keefe did not call himself a "pimp" on page 40 or anywhere else in the transcript. The word "pimp" appears only once, well into the discourse and this relates to the matter of rescuing Giles from her pimp, who is elsewhere described as "this other guy."

Fact#3 During the first 40 pages of transcript, O'Keefe poses as a law student trying to simply help a friend. At page 37 he says that he would have nothing to do with the house and that Giles would be completely "independent." At p. 40 O'Keefe slips in the word "we" and then says that they would use "cash for his campaign."

While this would technically suffice to raise the question posed to a law student on a bar exam asked to spot a potential violation of CA PC 266h (which does not actually apply in MD) so as to prosecute for pimping under CA law (accepting money from a prostitute can qualify as pimping in CA), it clearly did not meet the classic definition of a "pimp", that is, someone who procures clients for a prostitute; panders.

This point has been made over and over and over again to you, but you keep coming back either because you are too intellectually challenged or too dishonest to accept the unassailable truth.

Blue Hawk @21: I'm not certain there are any "A" league trolls. Patterico, aka LA County Dep. DA Patrick Frey, was so overwhelmed by the unassailable facts that Brad and I assembled that he retreated back to his own site where he has been left to post mumblings about how ill Brad and I supposedly treated him. Frey told his mindless followers that Brad and I have asked him to resign his position as an LA County Deputy DA --- something which neither of us ever suggested, though, if Frey wanted to take such a course, I wouldn't protest either.

DaleyRocks continued carrying water for Dep. D.A. Patrick "Patterico" Frey, who has been attempting to carry water for admitted liar Andrew Breitbart, who has been attempting to carry water for accused felon and known hoaxster James O'Keefe @ 13 with:

O'Keefe explained his motivations on Biggovernment.com when the videos first came out.

Well then, I guess we should just take the known liar and accused felon's word for it then! Why not? BTW, O'Keefe also said ACORN "receive[s] billions in tax money" when "the videos first came out" (he reported as much on Breitbart's site with his very first video, over six months ago, and neither he nor Breitbart have yet bothered to issue a retraction or correction for that bit of "journalistic malpractice" as both would call it, to this day.)

It's not as bad as you and Brad picking out eight stories or clips that mention O'Keefe wearing a pimp outfit inside ACORN offices out of the thousands of stories and clips about the videos, though, and deciding those eight drove the story. That's disengenuous!

Really? You're sticking with that one? I have shown some 8 instances of the misreporting in just the New York Times alone since Harshbarger's report was released in December (unreported by the Times). That doesn't account for all of their misreports prior to the Harshbarger report. Nor the scores and scores and scores of similar misreports by CNN, Fox "News", AP, NPR, Washington Post, Dallas Morning News, Baltimore Sun and hundreds of other papers and media outlets.

So you're serious with the above? Or being a disingenuous tool of the L.A. County Dep. D.A. Patrick Frey who keeps stepping on the same rake over and over again, and then lying about it in hopes of hiding the bumps on his own head?

Remedial Logic for Slippery Rocks:

From Comment #13:

If you do not believe the words "as if the ACORN employees were giving advice to a pimp and a prostitute when, in fact, they had posed, in the Baltimore office, for example, as a "dancer" and a "college student" are intended to tell your readers that you do not believe Giles and O'Keefe posed as a pimp and a prostitute in Baltimore or you cannot write plain english if you believe they mean something else. Please explain since you seem to have so many problems with words.

To say that Giles and O'Keefe posed as a pimp AND a prostitute means that O'Keefe posed as a pimp AND Giles posed as a prostitute. This statement would be true if BOTH are true. The statement is false if only ONE of the propositions is false:

Giles and O'Keefe posed as a pimp and a prostitute.

If true, then:
Giles posed as a prostitute.
AND
O'Keefe posed as a pimp.

If only ONE of these propositions is false, then the entire statement is false.

So:
Giles posed as a prostitute.
BUT
O'Keefe did NOT pose as a pimp.

Because the second proposition is false, the entire statement:

Giles and O'Keefe posed as a pimp and a prostitute

is FALSE, as Ernest stated.

Totally Off Topic ...
"Corporate entity becomes ‘candidate’, kicks off bid for Congress"

Quote ..."When the Supreme Court decided the case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, henceforth allowing corporate soft money to influence U.S. elections, Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL) cynically opined that it would lead to the election of the "congressman from Wal-Mart."

Turns out, he may be right.

Meet Murray Hill, Inc., the first corporation to run for Congress in the United States.

"Until now, corporations only influenced politics with high-paid lobbyists and backroom deals," the company's YouTube account declares. "But today, thanks to an enlightened supreme court, corporations now have all the rights the founding fathers meant for us. That's why Murray Hill Incorporated is taking democracy's next step-- running for Congress.""

http://rawstory.com/2010...date-kicks-bid-congress/

"Ernie the Attorney" ROTFL Sounds like one of those Attorney ads on late night TV. All apologies to Earnest, thank you for taking the time to help these imbeciles in discovering who they are, even if they haven't quite figured out that they are imbeciles yet. I'm not naming any names, but everyone knows the people I am talking about.

No ads from me, Chris Hooten, I've been trying to wind down my practice for the last two years so that I can retire altogether. The last thing I would want is more clients.

BlueHawk (#21) writes:

"It's amazing to watch these corporate-wealth funded trolls appear and demand they we hand walk them through line by line every story. Personally I think that's what they intend..."

Dead on right, you are, sir B. But I disagree that they're intended goal is:

"...for Bradbloggers to be weak readers lazy writers so the trolls can have a "gotcha" moment."

I think their intent is to keep Brad, Ernest (and us) posting round in circles, on the defensive, pre-occupied with minutia, arguing for fact as if it's an intangible, repeating their echo chamber of lies, holding our debate captive to their despicable derision, making us play-actors to their chest-beating, stooping-to-conquer, adolescent bravado. I worry that we're over-feeding them. According to the lastest research, 5-7 times a day is asshole-engorging. (*)

Ernest writes in a previous thread:

"...They can't compete with the facts or the law, so they repeatedly raise bogus points, time and again, hoping that, if nothing else, they can get the two of use expending enormous time chasing facts they are already fully aware of --- or, in the case of Daleyrocks, misquoting me out-of-context, thereby forcing me to make the same point I had already provided in the body of this piece..."

Exactly.

I responded: (forgive me for reposting myself but the comment in question is hung up in moderation over there (? ...Was it that pu*&y joke I told that time?)

"Any other commenters would have been long banned for so many despicable turns of tide. While I wouldn't mind seeing that happen, I am not advocating it. I very much appreciate that you and Brad are giving them every benefit of the doubt to post here in good faith(as they do not extend the same) and every good grace to try to make their case based here based on the merits of rational debate (as they can not rise to meet you in the same) no matter much they whine and wheeze and call foul. Friends. You have defeated them. They are unraveling in front of us. I know you meant to hoist them on their own petard, but haven't they successfully hoisted their own petards to the moon and back by now?..."

Not for nothing, but I've been brainstorming some suggested ways of keeping their lies in check without allowing them to waste our time and talents ad infinitum (tho I seriously doubt we'll be seeing much of them over here now that they've been so publically perma-stomped.)

What if we:
1. Limit our number of collective written rebukes per ridiculous comment / accusation / misleading info or lie / and or insult from them per post. One rational steps up to do the smacking (reassert the facts), redirect to sources that refute their bad / wrong data, and then we move on; free to gleefully continue on our rightful track without giving them control of our discussion, reshape the facts to suit their nasty agenda.

2. Try to economize your responses to them - they don't read them, anyway. They don't. Long, carefully worded, accurate responses are lost on them. A gift they will return damaged and with no receipt. You're writing just to practice your writing when you're writing to them.

So instead of prepping mini-essays, provide several strong sentences and include one or two Hot Links to reliable sources that refute their ever-parroted misinformation.

3.) Help Brad and Ernest by linking new readers to this series and the comment sections here as rejoinder for new and future attacks. It's all been said, said again, re-said, re-iterated, re-hashed, re-visitied, discussed and dismembered with each of us bearing witness. Anyone with some residual gray matter will see right through them.

Oh, and it should be painfully obvious by now that they are NEVER going to answer your fine questions. Ever. They can't, so they won't, as Ernest rightly reasons above. Ask them if you must, but don't expect respect or response.

4.) Don't call them by name. They're narcissistic and love the attention, even when it's for all the wrong reasons. Call them by the number of their comment.

Just sump-pumpin'the brain.
That's all I got for now.

Why is Brad still talking about this b.s. story that was stale 3 months ago? Jesus, we've got the world economy melting down around us, and you guys are out here talking about some dumbass in a fur coat!

If you want to know what your government is really up to, listen to this interview with Dr. David Anderson....

http://www.youtube.com/w...ENH4&feature=related

or visit his web page here...

http://www.andersoninstitute.com/

Dr. Anderson has been involved in government funded time travel experiments for 20 years, and they've definitely cracked the code, folks. We're talking about the ability to move forward and backwards in time, building on the work of Tesla and others. This technology also proves the existence of zero point energy that would totally transform this planet.

The problem is this knowledge is now in the hands of other governments around the world who are rapidly catching up to us. If you think a nuclear war is a threat, imnagine a war between governments with the ability to manipulate time and space.

Dr. Anderson is trying desperately to raise public awareness that our government is suppressing this technology, and this is just one technology they are sitting on. It's time to wake up, folks. Stop wasting time with this b.s. and understand who is really in control of your life.

Brook @29

Brook...I respectfully ask you just what do you expect a political-social commentary blog to do about time travel ?

What this site can address rather effectively is the lies we're being told presently.

Come back to earth David...

For the record I'm an avid coasttocoast listener...I log onto the streamlink whenever I have the time. The thought of time travel is indeed intriguing Brook...but this forum wouldn't do it justice.

Here's my twilight zone contribution...time travel won't be our doom Brook, time travelers will be our redeemers.

Go back in time, David, first to 1963 and then to 1968. Save JFK, then MLK and RFK. At that point, everything that's happened since can be written off as a bad dream.

Jeanie Dean @28

I believe it was you that first verbalized the observation I made earlier in this thread; regarding right wingers requiring hand holding through the particulars of the facts presented here.

Also you stated...

I think their intent is to keep Brad, Ernest (and us) posting round in circles, on the defensive, pre-occupied with minutia, arguing for fact as if it's an intangible, repeating their echo chamber of lies, holding our debate captive to their despicable derision, making us play-actors to their chest-beating, stooping-to-conquer, adolescent bravado. I worry that we're over-feeding them. According to the lastest research, 5-7 times a day is asshole-engorging. (*)

Well said Jeanie...

Indeed Jeannie. Well-said. Especially the asshole-engorging comment!

I must admit I can't resist trying to come up with a bullet-proof line of reasoning to stop them in their tracks, so to speak. Also at times you just don't want to let their shit stand. But still, I get your point. Enough is enough.

I like your suggestions and will try to follow them.

I'd like to add a possible #4: how about a little anagram we can all use to respond to the same ole same ole bullcrap: something like, hmmm...

FART SMELLER

Facts Are Right There...Some Mental Exertion Like Learning Effectively Required

Sorry --- that would be suggestion #5, not #4

Brook:

That guy is a total whack-job. He seems kind of reasonable at first, and then ends up saying shit like this. Don't even bother, bradbloggers.

Not that any of you were that stupid, I just wanted to save you the time of even being curious.

Here's the "game" they played: they purposely mislead the media and everyone into thinking O'Keefe wore the Halloween pimp costume in the ACORN offices. They knew everyone would think this. The proof is that everyone DID think it. Including the media. Now they say: "Well, O'Keefe (and we) never specifically said that".

Yes...BUT, you sat by quietly when your plan worked to deceive everyone into believing he did. THAT is how the whole plan works. THEN, you say: "Well, we never SPECIFICALLY said that blah blah blah".

But you never answer these questions:

- Why did you sit by idly when everyone thought that?
- Why didn't you proactively say: "Wait a minute! He never wore the pimp costume" as media outlets were reporting that?

The answer: it's because the PLAN was to mislead everyone to think that and then be quiet about the truth. THEN, if it was outed, you could honestly say: "We never specifically said that".

But saying that, doesn't get you off the hook, because that was your backup plan all along.

PERIOD! So stop saying: "We never specifically said he wore the pimp costume". Do you think we're stupid???

And you didn't think of the plan to mislead people into thinking something, and the backup plan of saying you never specifically said it.

Bush mislead everyone into thinking Sadaam attacked us on 9/11. He never specifically said it, he just kept saying "Sadaam" and "9/11" a million times a day and showing pictures of Sadaam and the twin towers. Then Bush honestly said: "I never said Sadaam did 9/11". When asked, he was forced to say, "No, he had nothing to do with 9/11".

But that was never the point, was it! The point was "ASSOCIATION". You can associate things and never specifically say it.

ASSOCIATION is as guilty as specifically saying it.

THAT is the point you are missing!

Not specifically saying it DOES NOT GET YOU OFF THE HOOK, WHEN YOU PURPOSELY ASSOCIATED THE IDEA!!!

...and then sat by quietly when the ASSOCIATION WORKED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sibel Edmonds on the Corbett Report:

http://www.youtube.com/w...p;index=0&playnext=1

Thanks, Big Dan. Excellent link. Now if we could somehow break through the corporate media's electronic curtain and have the Sibel Edmonds story available in full to every citizen.

NYT didn't "botch" anything. They set out to deceive, with malice aforethought, period. Why does the NYT hate America?

Lora (#33) ~ High Art. If they gave Oscars for acronyms, you'd grab some gold for that one and be the most sought after acronym writer in the business.

And for what it's worth (and at the risk of coming across semi-smug) - yours WAS a bullet-proof line of reasoning. As was BlueHawk's. And Ernest's. And Brad's. And Bob Ross's. And T.R.O.'s. And MacSwain's. And (of course) Big Dan's. Even our Lasagna's 'benefit of doubt extended' further revealed them to be Gurus of DooDoo and Princely Purveyors of Poop.

When there is this much abundant, ample proof of poop (A.A.P.O.P.) as we have seen squeezed out again and again in this repugnant case, there can be no common ground green enough for any seedlings to take root. All the Ca-ca in the world don't make a bullshit garden grow.

This might be a good time to reiterate how much I appreciate your "deceiver" vs "believer" terminology as a way to distinguish our own course of rehabilitation; possible deprogramming vs. dissembling strategies. That's a critical determination, as intent is all. And as our beloved David Lasagna is keen to remind us, the believers are frightened and therefore may be better suited to the "Lasagnified empathic methodology."(L.E.M.)

FYI - I tend to not care that the believers are "frightened", because it's clear they WANT to be frightened. My Aunt Sue could never articulate what it was that was scaring her so - it was all these abstract and meaning-mauled FOX-isms. Besides I've been "frightened" by a TON of things the government has done in the last decade and it hasn't driven me to bite off any fingers.

Tho' I do harbor fantasies about severing a phalange or two on Liz Cheney's right hand.

(Great link, Big Dan! I'd never seen this news source before but hung out and watched a few other vids including that incredible backstage footage of ABC w/ Hero Coleen Rowley. Woah! Is Corbett reliable?)

If it were up to me, I'd vote for Jeannie Dean as having posted the greatest line on this thread: "Gurus of DooDoo and Princely Purveyors of Poop."

The whole ACORN thing was orchestrated top to bottom by a cabal of right wing operatives and their cohorts in the government and media.

Observing closely, you can read through this simply by the timing of the elements:

Planted news reports > pundit commentary > fake grassroots outrage > hearings.

Look at what's happening to Toyota right now. This is obviously being engineered to bring them down, with "real news" stories breaking about these massive recalls (even NPR's Diane Rehm convened a panel to exclusively douse Toyota in fear, doubt and suspicion). Then Congress starts hearings, lawsuits ensue. But the giveaway is the laser focus on Toyota, the #1 ranked car.

In all this, not one defect or recall by Honda, Nissan, Subaru, Mazda, Scion, Hyundai, Mitsubishi...or god forbid an American make. Toyota was targeted by the smear machine, the new American way of doing business.

Gus W @44

That's the playbook my friend...

We've seen them run the same smear scam for at least 15 years now...It's how America deals with dissent and opposition...lie and smear it into submission with a complicit main stream media; The Soviet Investia was child's play compared to the lies of American mainstream media...

I agree...The smear machine...it's the new American way of doing business...