A right winger I work with says Obama was part of Acorn which led to the current crisis?

[still_one]

Can someone suggest how I can refute this?

Thanks in advance

[sakabatou]

1. Ask him for proof.

The burden is on him.

[still_one]

2. He sent me the following link from the NY Post

http://www.nypost.com/seven/09292008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/os_dangerous_pals_131216.htm

anything from the ny post I do not trust, especially written by kurtz

[sakabatou]

7. Yep

[Ashy Larry]

14. That is an opinion piece.

Just saying that Obama is connected to ACORN is not proof. Anyway, there is no data or evidence in that article which would support the claim that groups like ACORN forced huge multi-billion dollar corporations to act against their own interests. It doesn't make any sense. That is not the way corporations function.

[still_one]

17. Actually, that is probably the best argument /nt

[PA Democrat]

37. Send him this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/28/opinion/28sun1.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin

Almost all of the people I know who are facing forclosure are white and middle class. OMG, they are so crafty, posing as middle class white people when they are really poor black people! :sarcasm:

[speakclearly]

32. Be careful

Just a heads up when arguing this issue.You don't want to get hammered with facts if the guy has done his homework.

ACORN has a "mortgage" unit with Citibank:
http://www.acornhousing.org/TEXT/mortgage1.php

And that unit has worked a lot with undocumented workers to help them get home loans. Many of those types of loans from several banks (Citi and Bank of America) have gone into foreclosure. None can specifically be tied to ACORN, but that is not a strong case to argue. Just say, "none have been tied directly to ACORN".

Obma did work for ACORN. That was his "community organizer days", and a bit later. He has helped get them earmarks since he became a politician.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/700499,CST-NWS-Obama-law17.article
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=N2Y5MTc0ZTAyMmE1Mjk3NGE3OWRiY2FkMjZlN2YxYzc=

Some people say that ACORN is a group of irresponsible leftists:
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/archive/s_584829.html
And there has been some criminal cases in several states regarding ACORN activists (mostly voter fraud)
http://www.kmbc.com/politics/10214492/detail.html
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/crl-testimony-acorns-voter-fraud/story.aspx?guid=%7B573B31D0-6AB7-4353-B8E7-91300F4DFF81%7D&dist=hppr
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003808207_votefraud27m.html
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009189

But you can argue that Obama worked for ACORN over a decade ago, and there were no charges against them during the time he worked for them. They hadn't been convicted of voter fraud at that stage.

The reason this issue comes up now is because in the "Wall Street Bailout", the Democratic leadership inserted earmarks to give ACORN billions of dollars if the "investments" were paid back by the banks. Right-wingers will be trying to make a big deal out of this, so watch out! And they will "hype" the connection to Obama from his early days as an activist lawyer. Back then ACORN was much smaller, adn was not nationwide like it is today.

[BridgeTheGap]

3. Acorn and the current crisis? What am I missing here? There are no stats to back this up

that I've seen.
In fact, most of the mortgage problems were from refinancing, more so than first mortgages.

[still_one]

5. here is the link that he sent me. I don't believe anything from the NY Post

and from kurtz either

http://www.nypost.com/seven/09292008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/os_dangerous_pals_131216.htm

[sandnsea]

8. It's minorities and poor peoples' fault

We forced Wall Street to create this shitty loan packages. :eyes:

[tblue]

4. I agree with Reply #1. Then move on to: 1) Rick Davis, 2) Keating 5

[sandnsea]

6. I remember poor people lined up on Wall Street

with torches and pitch forks, demanding that there be no interest, adjustable rate, no income verification loans.

Don't you?

[alstephenson]

9. Here's a good post on ACORN.

Tell your friend to quit listening to Lou Dobbs.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=4134738

[pnutbutr]

10. supported

He supported ACORN which lobbied congress to ease lending restrictions for unqualified home buyers and money. Not really much you can do to refute it unless you want to bend the truth or redirect the discussion to a similar but unrelated topic in order to throw him off.

[alcibiades_mystery]

19. ACORN did not lobby Congress to ease restrictions on unqualified buyers

It lobbied Congress to stop practices of refusing to lend to qualified buyers.

The mortgage industries did everything in their power to lend to unqualified buyers once they could package and dump the unqualified loans.

[pnutbutr]

28. huh?

Stop practices of refusing to lend to qualified buyers?

I assume you mean unqualified and in that case there is not much difference between that and easing restrictions except the wording.

[kevsand]

33. No, I think they said exactly what they meant.

You've misread this completely. ACORN has been fighting for a long, long time against refusals to loan to qualified buyers. It's called redlining, and it still goes on today.

[alcibiades_mystery]

34. No, I mean qualified

QUALIFIED.

Get it, yet? Acorn HAD zero to do with causing banks or mortgage companies to lend to UNqualified buyers. They try to get banks and mortgages companies to STOP their practices of refusing to lend to QUALIFIED buyers for reasons that have nothing to do with their financial stability.

So cut the fucking bullshit.

[pnutbutr]

39. I understand

now. I didn't get that before when reading stuff about it, guess I was just reading it wrong. I appreciate you helping to clear up my miconception.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

22. Bullshit! Less than a quarter of subprime mortgages went to poor minorities

Here is a conservative debunking your nonsense:

http://www.stephenbainbridge.com/index.php/punditry/they_make_you_embarrassed_to_be_a_conservative/

No go back to Free Republic or wherever you came from.

[still_one]

27. Thanks, excellent link. Incidently, it is an associate at work, not free repuke /nt

[pnutbutr]

29. good link but...

I never said anything about subprime mortgages or minorities.

[alcibiades_mystery]

35. You're not fooling anybody

with this racist trash.

[pnutbutr]

38. What

the hell are you talking about? I never said anything or even made an insinuation about race.

[mrJJ]

11. If he has powerpoint send him this

Subprime for dummies MS powerpoint req
http://marktomarket.typepad.com/marktomarket/files/financial_crisis_for_dummies.pps

[LSK]

12. I got 2 words for you: Ownership Society

Enjoy:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/achievement/chap7.html

"This Administration will constantly strive to promote an ownership society in America. We want more people owning their own home. It is in our national interest that more people own their own home. After all, if you own your own home, you have a vital stake in the future of our country."

- President George W. Bush, December 16, 2003

The Accomplishments

Increasing Homeownership

* The US homeownership rate reached a record 69.2 percent in the second quarter of 2004. The number of homeowners in the United States reached 73.4 million, the most ever. And for the first time, the majority of minority Americans own their own homes.
* The President set a goal to increase the number of minority homeowners by 5.5 million families by the end of the decade. Through his homeownership challenge, the President called on the private sector to help in this effort. More than two dozen companies and organizations have made commitments to increase minority homeownership - including pledges to provide more than $1.1 trillion in mortgage purchases for minority homebuyers this decade.
* President Bush signed the $200 million-per-year American Dream Downpayment Act which will help approximately 40,000 families each year with their downpayment and closing costs.
* The Administration proposed the Zero-Downpayment Initiative to allow the Federal Housing Administration to insure mortgages for first-time homebuyers without a downpayment. Projections indicate this could generate over 150,000 new homeowners in the first year alone.
* President Bush proposed a new Single Family Affordable Housing Tax Credit to increase the supply of affordable homes.
* The President has proposed to more than double funding for the Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity Program (SHOP), where government and non-profit organizations work closely together to increase homeownership opportunities.
* The President proposed $2.7 billion in USDA home loan guarantees to support rural homeownership and $1.1 billion in direct loans for low-income borrowers unable to secure a mortgage through a conventional lender. These loans are expected to provide 42,800 homeownership opportunities to rural families across America.

[fulllib]

13. Acorn has been fighting predatory lending all along

It didn't lead to it- it warned against it. It sued banks for predatory lending and unfair practices in regards to minorities throughout the last decade, including Wells Fargo, which wasn't even one of the main players in the predatory lending stuff.

And a good number of the foreclosed mortgages are not just minorities, but middle class people, and some of those even McMansions.

[TahitiNut]

41. Oh... that's just the "liberal bias" of FACTS ... for shame.

:rofl:

[tandot]

15. Of course he is right:

Acorn = Minorities
Obama = Minority

therefore

Acorn = Obama



:crazy:

Tell your co-worker he is a racist asshole.

[Breeze54]

16. First off, it's total BULLSHIT accusations & rumors from the Right Wing and...

ACORN Issue Fueling Bailout Opposition

By Ryan Grim

Sep 27, 2008

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/27/politics/politico/thecrypt/main4483168.shtml

Earlier today, when House Republican leadership framed its opposition to the bailout bill as it currently stands, a principal objection focused on the group ACORN, which the e-mail alert called "the scandal-tarnished 'community organizing group'" -- with scare quotes in the original.

They're referring to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, a group generally allied with Democrats and derided by the GOP as corrupt, inefficient and a front-group for Democratic efforts on the ground.

In issuing the statement, House leaders are reflecting -- and also feeding -- a reaction to the provision that has exploded in the last day or more. Our colleague Ben Smith says he's gotten more than a dozen anti-ACORN e-mails in just the last few hours. The viral uprising is both organic and institutionally driven. Prominent bloggers have fed the flames and so has the Wall Street Journal editorial page; several of the e-mails sent to Smith reference a House leadership alert on the "ACORN Slush Fund" and others refer to the Journal opinion. On Thursday night, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told The Crypt that his friend Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) opposes the provision.

"The draft bill includes a left-wing giveaway that would force taxpayers to bankroll a slush fund for a discredited ally of the Democratic Party," reads one leadership alert. "At issue is ACORN, an organization fraught with controversy for, among other scandals, its fraudulent voter registration activities on behalf of Democratic candidates. Rather than returning any profits made in the long-term from the economic rescue package, Democrats want to first reward their radical allies at ACORN for their (often illegal) help in getting Democrats elected to office."


snip--->

In the end, how much of the bailout's potential profits are earmarked for ACORN? "None. Absolutely none. All funds would go to state and local governments," said Steven Adamske, spokesman for Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), the chairman of the Financial Services Committee and a lead negotiator.

The opposition has grown so intense that critics refer to the measure in arcane legislative lingo. Erick Erickson titled a Friday morning blog post at RedState: "Section 105(d) of the Bailout Must Go."

***** Here's the relevant language:

TRANSFER OF A PERCENTAGE OF PROFITS.

DEPOSITS. Not less than 20 percent of any profit realized on the sale of each troubled asset purchased under this Act shall be deposited as provided in paragraph (2).

USE OF DEPOSITS. Of the amount referred to in paragraph (1) 65 percent shall be deposited into the Housing Trust Fund established under section 1338 of the Federal Housing Enterprises Regulatory Reform Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 4568); and 35 percent shall be deposited into the Capital Magnet Fund established under section 1339 of that Act (12 U.S.C. 4569).

REMAINDER DEPOSITED IN THE TREASURY. All amounts remaining after payments under paragraph (1) shall be paid into the General Fund of the Treasury for reduction of the public debt.

And here's Frank's one-page summary of the Affordable Housing Trust Fund and to find the relevant bill go here and search for H.R. 2895.

State and local governments can then dole out the funds and could send money to ACORN if they so choose and if the organization's efforts meet the standards set out in the law. For their stand against the provision, Adamske tweaked House Republicans, who have long called for more state control of federal funds.

"Are they worried that the Governor of Alaska and the Mayor of Wasilla will give money to Acorn?" he asked.

Regardless, House Republicans are saying that unless the possibility of ACORN seeing any money from this bailout is eliminated, there's no deal. "Doling out favors to ACORN and other liberal special interest groups are a non-starter for House Republicans," said Behner spokesman Kevin Smith. "If Rep. Frank wants to keep ACORN in the bill he can secure the necessary Democratic votes for passage because he'll need every one of them."

More....

---------------

..... and the RW is ALWAYS attacking ACORN. ACORN works for social justice
and is a well known left leaning group. Yes they've had some mistakes made
but the RW hates them because ACORN works against the GOP and the RW! ;)

I mean look at what he quotes!

They're referring to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, a
group generally allied with Democrats and derided by the GOP as corrupt, inefficient
and a front-group for Democratic efforts on the ground.

a front-group for Democratic efforts on the ground? DOH! DUH! Of course they're Democratic!!:P

[BridgeTheGap]

20. ACORN's problems had to do with slackers fraudently filling out voter reg forms

It was not, in any way, the organization's policy.

[Breeze54]

25. Exactly and those so-called "slackers" may have been GOP operatives.

At least that was some of the thinking back when that happened.

Just more RW BS, imho!

:hi:

[BridgeTheGap]

42. Very well could be...these bastards will try ANYTHING! n.t

[still_one]

26. Thanks. Of course they are blaming the victim. Typical repuke B.S. /nt

[NYCGirl]

18. Here's more about the author, Stanley Kurtz. Seems he's a hack.

http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck/2008/09/23/annenberg_1.php

[still_one]

21. Thanks /nt

[wryter2000]

23. Send him the link in this thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=4096961

And ask him where Acorn is in this.

[JHB]

24. some links to start you

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4134738&mesg_id=4134738
http://firedoglake.com/2008/09/30/racism-and-betrayal-what-the-bailout-failure-taught-obama-about-republicans/
http://docs.google.com/TeamPresent?docid=ddp4zq7n_0cdjsr4fn&skipauth=true

[still_one]

30. Thanks to everyone DU IS GREAT!!!!!! /nt

[Waiting For Everyman]

31. Acorn is used by the FHA and Bush's HOPE Now Counseling.

I just checked out both FHA and the HOPE network, which it's a part of, myself a few days ago. It's a housing agency among lots of similar others which coordinates with implementing federal mortgage programs. It seems Acorn is the new RW whipping post like the ACLU was/is.

[TayTay]

36. The argument is that the CRA forced banks to make bad loans

This is just plain untrue.

From a study of the Community Reinvestment Act done by the oversight firm of http://www.traigerlaw.com/publications/traiger_hinckley_llp_cra_foreclosure_study_1-7-08.pdf">TRAIGER & HINCKLEY LLP

Our study concludes that CRA Banks were substantially less likely than other lenders
to make the kinds of risky home purchase loans that helped fuel the foreclosure crisis.
Specifically, our analysis shows that:

(1) CRA Banks were significantly less likely than other lenders to make a high cost loan;

(2) The average APR on high cost loans originated by CRA Banks was appreciably lower
than the average APR on high cost loans originated by other lenders;

(3) CRA Banks were more than twice as likely as other lenders to retain originated loans in
their portfolio; and

(4) Foreclosure rates were lower in MSAs with greater concentrations of bank branches.

Also, read this article from the http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=did_liberals_cause_the_subprime_crisis">American Prospect from April of 2008. This rumor has been swirling around all year. The Repubs will do anything to lay blame at the feet of anyone but them.

Did Liberals Cause the Sub-Prime Crisis?

Conservatives blame the housing crisis on a 1977 law that helps-low income people get mortgages. It's a useful story for them, but it isn't true.

But CRA has always had critics, and they now suggest that the law went too far in encouraging banks to lend in struggling communities. Rhetoric aside, the argument turns on a simple question: In the current mortgage meltdown, did lenders approve bad loans to comply with CRA, or to make money?

The evidence strongly suggests the latter. First, consider timing. CRA was enacted in 1977. The sub-prime lending at the heart of the current crisis exploded a full quarter century later. In the mid-1990s, new CRA regulations and a wave of mergers led to a flurry of CRA activity, but, as noted by the New America Foundation's Ellen Seidman (and by Harvard's Joint Center), that activity "largely came to an end by 2001." In late 2004, the Bush administration announced plans to sharply weaken CRA regulations, pulling small and mid-sized banks out from under the law's toughest standards. Yet sub-prime lending continued, and even intensified -- at the very time when activity under CRA had slowed and the law had weakened.

Second, it is hard to blame CRA for the mortgage meltdown when CRA doesn't even apply to most of the loans that are behind it. As the University of Michigan's Michael Barr points out, half of sub-prime loans came from those mortgage companies beyond the reach of CRA. A further 25 to 30 percent came from bank subsidiaries and affiliates, which come under CRA to varying degrees but not as fully as banks themselves. (With affiliates, banks can choose whether to count the loans.) Perhaps one in four sub-prime loans were made by the institutions fully governed by CRA.

Most important, the lenders subject to CRA have engaged in less, not more, of the most dangerous lending. Janet Yellen, president of the San Francisco Federal Reserve, offers the killer statistic: Independent mortgage companies, which are not covered by CRA, made high-priced loans at more than twice the rate of the banks and thrifts. With this in mind, Yellen specifically rejects the "tendency to conflate the current problems in the sub-prime market with CRA-motivated lending.? CRA, Yellen says, "has increased the volume of responsible lending to low- and moderate-income households."

[still_one]

40. Really appreciate your help /nt