|
Arpig -> RE: ACORN responds and its a doozie... (9/14/2009 4:34:55 PM)
|
quote:
Arpig... In Baltimore, then DC and now Brooklyn, ACORN people didn't even bat an eye and freely gave advice on how to break the law. They should have pick up the phone, called the police and tried to keep them there until the police arrived, especially give the crime the supposed. I have already stated my position on the appropriateness (or rather lack there of) of what was done. I feel that the workers involved should be fired, and if this hadn't been a media sting,then I would have included them all in a conspiracy charge.
quote:
Given legal advice is for lawyers to do...if pimps needs advice on civil rights I suggest they go to legal aid or use some of the money they confiscate from their workers to see a paid attorney. Agreed, for specific legal advice one should go see a lawyer, but unfortunately many people cannot afford one, and legal aid, in Ontario at least...I don't know about anywhere else) will not provide you with free legaladvice of anything but the most basic type...usually they advise you to either dropthe matter or to hire a lawyer...great advice that is. Now I grant you that any pimp worth his salt should already have a lawyer or two on retainer....I know I sure as hell would if I were making a living in an illegal trade.
quote:
BTW... do you even know what a pimp is??? Seriously... because suggesting that community based, tax supported, poverty advocacy groups should help them find housing, food and medical care thus helping and allowing them to keep exploiting sex slaves doesn't sound like you know what they do. Should House of Ruth offer them those things too? How about The "Unmentionable Ones" Welfare Fund? Maybe the Rainbow Collation? Yes I know exactly what a pimp is,and what one does. That in no way changes their rights. The Constitution has no waiver provision for people who are scum, it applies to all. And yes, an advocacy group that is not religion-based really has no place making value judgments about the moral worthiness of those who come to them for advice/help. That is what they are there for, not to decide who should or should not get the help.
Seeing as the House of Ruth, as far as I can see, is involved with helping women and children I fail to see how they would be relevant to the question...what would a pimpbe doing dealing with them? Unless said pimp were a woman with some kids I guess, in which case then I guess she should be helped, assuming she meets the other criteria that HoR uses for determining who to help.Its pretty much the same thing with the Child Welfare Fund (I am not sure just which one you mean...google it and you'll come up with a whole lot of them). They are there to fund projects to aid children on welfare...hardly the description of the average pimp if you ask me. As for the Rainbow Coalition (again, there's a whole shitload of them) the best I can figure they are basically a PAC and thus wouldn't be dealing directly with anybody the way ACORN does, but they would be an appropriate group to advocate for the rights of sex workers.
quote:
Also... how do you feel about James O'Keefe and others on the Right using Alinksy's methods so effectively here and in other arenas? Such tactics seem a little dangerous in the hands of the other side do they not? O'Keefe btw is a self proclaimed Alinksy Scholar and he has quoted him in just bout every interview he's given this week.
Curious indeed if Barrak Obama's health care initiave and possibly the remander of his agenda, not to mention the hopes and dreams of a generations of 60's and 70's activists, are brought to a spectacular crashing end by the political Right adopting the tactics of Saul Alinsky. How do I feel about it? Nothing, makes no difference to me. And no the tactics don't seem scary tome in the slightest...sorry. In fact I had never heard of Alinsky until a few weeks ago when one of the righties on CM mentioned him...and since then the righties seem to mention him at least once every thread. I have no idea really who the guy is,or what he wrote,other than what has been posted on CM and what I gleaned from a quick read over of the Wiki article on him. Hey if his tactics work...go for it, what do I care.
As for Obama's healthcare reform...its a joke, it doesn't reform anything really...other than to guarantee the insurance companies even greater profits in the future, and thats about it...health care costs in the US will continue to rise faster than anywhere else in the world. So what do I care if it fails, especially if they remove the public option...the only halfway decent idea in the whole plan. As for the rest of his agenda, well we'lljust have to wait and see what it is to decide if it should or should not get carried out, but from what little we have seen so far I suspect that it should...the guy's a moderate and has no really out-there ideas so far as I can see. As to them being defeated by using Alinsky tactics...whoopdeedooo, what difference does it make. If I am not mistaken the book you are all referring to is some sort of "Handbook for Radicals", and it doesn't specify that it is for left wing radicals, so why wouldn't it be useful for right-wing radicals...after all a radical is a radical, no matter what political stripe.
You all seem to think that somehow this guy and the tactics he wrote about are the cause of the progress the left has made over the last few decades, well I hate to be the one to break it to you, but it isn't Alinsky or his tactics...its the basic correctness of the initiatives, the basic decency of welfare and similar programs, and the fact that most people in the Western world support those ideas. Most people are soft-left on social issues, nobody wants to see kids go hungry or to see young mothers beaten black and blue...its just human nature to want to help them...ergo welfare systems.
|
|
|
|
