Hey, there! Log in / Register
NSFW State Senator Scott Brown and ACORN
By Anonymous on Wed, 09/30/2009 - 8:35pm
Republican State Sen. Scott Brown, and candidate for US Senate,
"has filed a bill to prohibit ACORN from receiving state grants or serving as a state-approved housing counselor in Massachusetts." link
Scott did not cite a single specific allegation, never mind a specific indictment or conviction of wrong-doing by ACORN or ACORN employees in Massachusetts stating only,
"This is a group that has investigations, indictments and prosecutions pending against it around the nation. We should cut all our ties to ACORN until these issues have been resolved."(emphasis mine)
If Scott can cite bona fide indictments and prosecutions never mind convictions, well then I'm all ears. Otherwise, we might as well be a third-world banana republic where the standard of evidence is video broadcast on party news television.
ACORN Housing received a $33,000 grant last April from the Massachusetts Office of Consumer Affairs and Business Regulation. It used the money to counsel first-time home-buyers and homeowners facing possible foreclosure.
If ACORN is doing an effective job counseling homeowners facing possible foreclosure and first-time home buyers then why would it be in the interest of the Commonwealth to de-fund this service on the basis of videos recorded in Baltimore and elsewhere and aired on Fox News with breathless commentary by outraged pundits like Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly?
Recommit this piece of shyte legislation to committee and insist on due process to determine who gets funding and who gets de-funded, not some GOP hysteria-generated wedge issue.
[center]
[size=9]Keep your eye on the ACORN.[/size][/center]
Republicans exploit how the Fox News/Glenn Beck/Rush Limbaugh leadership trains its protesting followers to focus their resentment and anxieties on largely powerless and downtrodden factions like ACORN, while ignoring, and even revering the outright pillaging by virtually omnipotent corporate interests like Halliburton/KBR and Blackwater/Xe, and those who serve them Abramoff/Ney.
[center][size=9]Mentions of recent Political Scandals on Glenn Beck and Hannity
May 8, 2006 - September 18, 2009[/size]
[/center]
ACORN first rose to prominence about five years ago during voter fraud allegations by Karl Rove in prior election cycles. Rove claimed voter fraud and mobilized the Department of Justice to investigate. US Attorneys who did not find evidence of voter fraud and therefore failed to prosecute were terminated December 7, 2006 and replaced by candidates Domestic Policy Advisor Karl Rove and White House Counsel Harriet Miers thought would be more likely to prosecute, especially at the critical time just prior to the election like Brad Schlozman.
Republicans have successfully pressured Congress to sever ACORN from participating in registering voters in the US.
Here is what happens when Fox News pundits stoke animosity towards ACORN:
[center]
[size=9]video[/size]
[/center]
Follow the news about Republicans prejudiciously and without due process, calling for the de-funding of ACORN.
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
kudos to Coakley and Patrick
for leaving the torches and pitchforks in the shed and letting due process, not GOP-hysteria, take the day:
“I’m disappointed that Attorney General Martha Coakley and Governor Deval Patrick did not agree with my request for an immediate and stern response to allegations of corruption involving ACORN,” said Brown.
NSFW...
Anyone who reads this blog through an RSS feed like google reader just saw the entire thing. An NSFW jump doesn't help where this is read without a jump.
Fox vs Acorn
GOP Initiation Rite
The GOP has no "bench" right now, with all the recent moral turpetude hall of fame contenders in the spotlight. As a result, the local talent is scrambling and jockying for the GOP fast track that Palin found. After what happened last November, the GOP decided that they need to have some sort of vetting process. Unfortunately, the only vetting processes that they are familiar with are fraternity initiations.
To get National GOP Cred Points, initiates like Brown have to kill a bunch of chickens at midnight while wearing cheezily fake voodoo priest getups. Then they have to file Anti-ACORN legislation and blame ACORN for finding taxpayer-subsidized housing for all the illegal alien chicken murderers.
If their grandstanding gets good media coverage, they get to go through the naked paddling line and only then are they allowed into all the good country clubs (the ones that don't allow Michael Steele to visit).
Seriously
Hey, come on, man. First, you've restarted doing what you stopped doing a while ago here: shoehorning national politics into "local flavor" to escape the very valid complaints about whether this should even be posted here to begin with. Second, there's absolutely NO reason a "NSFW" post should be on the front page of this website EVER...especially when there's absolutely NO reason (other than as an editorial photoshopping) for there to be a NSFW picture related to the topic! Finally, what's the matter? Nobody wants to talk to you over at BlueMassGroup? Please knock it off here.
This is local
This was about legislation filed by a MA State Senator.
Enough with the nudie pics ... it's lunch time.
Fair enough
Yet, halfway through his tirade, Anonymous left the local and started in on the national. It's his usual modus operandi and were it filed as a blog post, I'd have little to complain about. It wasn't, it was pushed front-page in all of its screed-ing glory.
This front-paged rant, the 40 license plates, the previous NSFW pics, it's all too much...and I'm pretty sure Anonymous has been told as much before during the last election cycle.
First,wrong; Second;wrong
Wrong. It's about legislation State Senator Scott Brown filed which is really weird becuase there have been 0 reports about ACORN employee or ACORN organization breaking the law in Massachusetts. It appears the the national GOP party is intent on cutting off funding for ACORN from the federal government and state governments in every one of the fifty states. Now why would they do that? It certainly is not because a 20-some year old film maker dressed like a pimp and his "ho" elicited felonious tax and real estate advice under the watchful eye of their candid camera in Baltimore. The GOP is trying to kill the organization's funding becuase they register minority voters. Scott Brown is a party to that effort.
The phrase NSFW is in the title so you can choose whether you want to open it or not. Your Choice. Open it, read it and comment if you like. Don't blame me if you do. Since both your objections are baseless, I'll assume you want to apologize. As such, I don't expect one in writing.
There was no reason to post
There was no reason to post the photo , again. It is not new news, you just keep photo shopping his picture. I think a link to it is much more appropriate.
Also I believe you must have a crush on Scott Brown because you obsess over this picture and really enjoy drawing all over his midsection. I realize he is a sexy man but you need to get your hormones under control.
if its not clear to you
then you can ask me for my reason
Excuse me?
What part of this half of your entire post was local again?
As for your penchant for naked politicians, maybe I *wanted* to discuss Brown's state bill request for defunding ACORN on the local level but refuse to do so under a FLASHING naked cheesecake photo of him that you keep obsessing over.
Please do hold your breath waiting for that apology.
"outside massachusetts" objection sounds whiny to me
Scott Brown is not acting alone in trying to defund ACORN. Scott Brown is part of a nationwide movement by the GOP (video-satire) and party tv FoxNews to defund the organization. Try to wrap your head around that.
The campaign against ACORN by Republicans, Conservative activists, and conservative media outlets is documented in two videos here and here. See both parts to see how Scott Brown's legislation is related to the US Attorney Scandal.
Scott Brown is the GOPs operative in MASS in the defund ACORN campaign. He's running for US Senate and submitted this legislation only after her declared himself a candidate (after he and Andy Card touched base.) I wonder what he got in return for pushing this legislation.
Scott Brown's legislation comes now after a half decade long campaign on ACORN that included using the US Department of Justice for political purposes. You can choose to agree or disagree on the merits but your weak "it's an outside Massachusetts story" objection sounds whiny to me.
Don't click here if you don't want to see the new NSFW Meet Scott Brown advertisement.
Lame
UHub is going to get really lame if it's just going to be a place to post hyper-partisan missives.
a partisan act by a partisan candidate for US Senate
Some people perceive Scott Brown's legislative attack on ACORN to be hyper-partisan. It is the nature of the story happening right here on Beacon Hill and I'm not making it up.
If the GOP initiative to defund ACORN of Federal and State aid is because they register new voters, mostly minorities who tend to vote mostly Democrat, and not because of a pimp/ho video, then we should read it in the press. If they haven't put 2 and 2 together yet or even asked the question, then I'll say it.
OK, but enough with the Cosmo shots
We all know about it and it causes issues for people reading UH in RSS, so no need to keep posting the thing.
NSFW: Anti scott brown acorn attack image
I saw that comment too and it bothered me that I caused that person some distress, despite my effort to caution everyone so they could choose for themselves. Then I remembered that I use Google newsreader, that I use it in list mode (not expand mode) so that way I can see if the title contains "NSFW" and choose to open the post of not.
Doesn't the reader have the responsibility to make the choice when the title contains NSFW? I learned that here.
Scott Brown's attacks on ACORN is the worst kind of politics because no one is standing up for the least powerful and downtrodden people in our society, and the attack is prejudicial, based on amateur video not an indictment or a conviction, or in the case of Massachusetts not even one report of malfeasance.
When Scott was in college he decided to pose for some nudie mags. I'm using the images he made to get his attention and at the same time poking fun that his attack on ACORN is a fig leaf for his own indiscretion. If he withdraws the legislation then the young buff Scott Brown images will be shelved.
Here is the new image (actual size here NSFW!!!) I plan to roll out soon.
[/center]
[center]
how about you just stop posting the image?
it adds nothing to the discussion here, and your repetitive use of it is bordering on obsession. others have asked you nicely to stop posting it. i'll so the same.
can you please just stop? link to it elsewhere. feel free to keep sending it to scott brown in some attempt to shame him into withdrawing his legislation. but it no longer has a place here.
link provided
There's a link provided if you want to see the new image. If you don't, don't click on it.
Not everybody uses Google Reader
No, please don't keep using that thing here. Set up nsfwscottbrown.blogspot.com and link to that if you must.
You will notice I provided a
You will notice I provided a link instead of an embed for my new image.
Don't be a hypocrite. If you don't want it here say so but don't pretend it is because newsreader technology does not provide a means of pre-screening post titles for the indicator "NSFW"
Every complaint was that people don't like the image. The post was CLEARLY marked. Tell the truth, you don't want it because readers complain despite the very clear NSFW indicator. It's your blog and your choice.
Suddenly
I'm pining for a good "the zak" post.
It's the image, sorry
OK, sure, let me be clearer: I don't want to see NSFW images on Universal Hub, at least, not repeatedly.
Once is OK. Showing a Senate candidate's 20-year-old Cosmo shots was newsworthy, once, "below the fold." Using it over and over again gets annoying.
And yes, dammit, I WILL bring up the newsreader issue.
First, an apology for a bug in UH's Atom feed. For some reason, it disregards the "break" tag that normally would have kept your image from getting through (this isn't an issue with the RSS 2.0 feed). I've known about it for awhile, never did anything because I was planning to move to a new version of the backend software anyway and because, to be honest, NSFW images were never an issue here. So in some cases, somebody might open the post expecting it to be a link to an image, not the image itself, only to find out they're wrong. That's my fault (again, with the caveat that NSFW photos have not been an issue on the site).
Second, don't be so smug about newsreaders. FeedDemon, which is one of the more popular Windows RSS aggregators, has a couple of styles in which all the contents of a post are automatically displayed when you call up a folder. If somebody has a small group of sites she follows, chances are she has an idea of what to expect and in this case that clearly doesn't include photos of naked men.
fair enough, its the image
... a naked man with no more exposed than one wearing a bathing suit. Puritans, meh
Pull your head out of your ass
Yes, the guy is covered up, but the image is NSFW. Obviously. You stated it yourself. So quit trying to rationalize why it's not your problem that you clearly stepped over a line. People have asked you not to do it again, so try to play well with others, mmkay?
I work at an extremely open-minded sort of place where no one gives a rat's ass what we do in our downtime, but I don't want a picture of some dude in a swimsuit who is obviously posing in a sexualizedish manner popping up on my screen at work. Big difference between that photo and, say, someone's blog where they've posted a few vacation pics of the family in swimsuits while at the beach.
You're clearly a very smart and perceptive person. You know as well as I do that there's a different message that we take from "snapshot of average-looking dude standing on the beach wearing swimsuit" and "professional photograph of perfectly bronzed, airbrushed dude lying in hey-look-I-have-a-penis position and sporting a flirtatious smile."
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
http://1smootshort.blogspot.com
You seem to take a very
You seem to take a very confrontational tone here, I would think that with this being a free site he can do what he wants. Even more so because so many of his readers take offense to your image.
I think he has given you tremendous leeway when it comes to speaking your mind and seems to have one request and that is to stop posting these images in any size shape or form.
Stop being an attention mongler.
capable
Adam and I are perfectly capable of debating an issue about what he wants and what he doesn't want at Uhub, and why without your advice on how we should conduct ourselves.
You will also notice he agreed that it was becuase he dosen't like the image and not becuase newsreaders can't provide sufficient NSFW notice, his original contention.
Not really
First, it's an open forum - anybody can jump in (for one-on-one, well, you know my e-mail address).
Also, there is an RSS-reader issue, as I explained.