Derek Hunter gives a thoughtful, thorough review of Righteous Indignation at The Daily Caller:

You won’t find too many people who are indifferent toward Andrew Breitbart. But love him or hate him, you can’t ignore him. With his ever-growing collection of “Big” websites (Big Government, Big Hollywood, Big Journalism and Big Peace so far), Andrew has redefined how the political right views and uses the Internet. He makes no apologies for his “in your face” style, nor should he. That style has won him many victories and many enemies. He seems to occupy the time of a disproportionate number of left-wingers, including many employees of the ultra-left-wing censorship factory called Media Matters. Those “senior fellows” are about to have their weekends ruined as Breitbart moves from the virtual world to the book world with Righteous Indignation: Excuse Me While I Save the World (2011 Grand Central Publishing) this Friday, April 15th.

If you know Andrew, or have ever cornered him for a few minutes of conversation, you know his brain is like a shotgun — going a thousand miles an hour in every conceivable direction at once. He attributes this to ADHD, but constantly being pulled in 50 directions at once by everyone in the room doesn’t help either. But in Righteous, Breitbart is more focused than he’s ever been. He has a tale to tell — three, actually. (more…)

First, he won the health care debate handily. President Obama had no answer to Paul Ryan’s charge that ObamaCare double-counted the $500 billion “savings” it had cut from Medicare to spend elsewhere. Later, even Obama’s own head of Health and Human Services had to admit that Ryan was right.

Then Ryan won the debate over the budget and the economy. His 2012 budget, which was the first in modern political history to tackle the fundamental causes of America’s long-term public debt, was so much better than Obama’s that the President asked for a “do-over.” Yesterday, he flubbed that chance.

In the foreign policy debate, Ryan has won by forfeit. (To be fair, almost anyone, aside from the tiny isolationist minority inside both parties, would defeat the President’s policy of appeasement and incoherence, which has drastically reduced American power and strengthened our enemies.)

What is even more remarkable about Rep. Ryan’s victories in these debates is that he has been able to bring the rest of the country along with him on some of the most controversial and consequential issues facing our Republic, arguing from conservative principles that the left had once dared the GOP to try.

When Paul Ryan joined me in Chicago last September–just seven months ago!–for my congressional fundraiser, only 13 Republicans in Congress had endorsed his fiscal Roadmap. The hard-left and their rent-a-crowd protestors picketed the event, even bursting into the hall at one point.

When he heard the shouting at the back of the room, Ryan smiled and winked. “That’s when you know you’re winning,” he told me quietly.

(more…)

On, Wisconsin! On, Wisconsin!
Plunge right through that line!
Run the bill clear through that crowd,
Get out of debt this time! (U rah rah!)

On, Wisconsin! On, Wisconsin!
Or it’s Cloward-Piven time.
Fight! Fellows! – fight, fight, fight!
Or it‘ll be our behinds!

I imagine you are aware of all those greedy capitalists in Moscow, Wisconsin, demonstrating so they can keep working in collusion, to siphon public money for their power hungry interests and their own bank accounts.

Sorry for the bad typing; make that government workers, in Madison. “Kill the bill!” they shout and likely spit when they do.  The name of it is the Budget Repair Bill, but much of the Marxstream media call it Gov. Scott Walker’s “anti-union bill.”

Fightin' Bob La Follette, progressive to the ends of his hair

I live forty-some miles northwest of Mad City, in the town where the nation’s first Progressive Party presidential candidate, Robert La Follette married his leftist, feminist wife, in 1881. Yeah, 1881. Politically precocious, we are, here in Badgerland. “Fighting Bob” learned his social justice from U. of W. president, John Bascom, who came from Massachusetts’ Andover Seminary (essentially of the same United Church of Christ denomination as the so reverent Jeremiah Wright).   Those Congregationalists stem from the Puritans, whom, as the name implies, had a soft spot for utopianism and legalistic perfectibility.

Progressivism, but also unvarnished Marxism made inroads very early here in Wisconsin, including within the state and region’s labor movement.  In 1904, the University of Wisconsin became the home of John R. Commons, one of the first progressive incrementalists, a label which tends to cover radical interests of unknown lengths.  He was called the spiritual father of Social Security and he specialized in union studies.  He was also one of America’s progressive eugenicists.

Barry Obama’s hero, Harold Washington was not America’s fist socialist, big city mayor.  That distinction goes to Emil Seidel, elected as Milwaukee’s Marxist boss in 1910, the same year that Victor Luitpold Berger was elected America’s first socialist representative in Congress.

Socialsts tried and convicted, 1919

It was Berger that gave union leader Eugene Debs a copy of Das Kapital and won him over to Marxism.  Debs became the Socalist Party’s candidate for president in 1912, with Mayor Seidel his VP candidate.  However, their Socialist Party of America chose not to run their own candidate for president in 1924, eagerly backing La Follette, instead, much as confessed socialists backed Obama, in 2008.

The Department of Justice was on to Berger and he was tried and in 1919, convicted of rather tenuous charges under the Espionage Act of that time.  Four others were also convicted for their own doings.  Yet, Berger continued to be a political celebrity in Wisconsin.

Those names are just the tip of the top of the iceberg. Extensive information on the Wisconsin front on the Marxist war against American freedoms is available in numerous books and at the Wisconsin Historical Society in Madison, where they have a curious pride in their collection.  Compiled, it is enough to satisfy the appetite of one much more skeptical than our state’s own Sen. Joe McCarthy. (more…)

Conservative author Dinesh D’Souza recently published an insightful, much-discussed article in Forbes, “How Obama Thinks.”

Drawing upon Obama’s writings and history, D’Souza concludes that his policy agenda—so at odds with traditional American values and principles—is rooted chiefly in the anti-colonialist intellectual influence of his Kenyan-born father:

What then is Obama’s dream? We don’t have to speculate because the President tells us himself in his autobiography, Dreams from My Father. According to Obama, his dream is his father’s dream. . . .

[T]o his son, the elder Obama represented a great and noble cause, the cause of anticolonialism. . . . Anticolonialism is the doctrine that rich countries of the West got rich by invading, occupying and looting poor countries of Asia, Africa and South America . . . .

Obama Sr. was an economist, and in 1965 he published an important article in the East Africa Journal called “Problems Facing Our Socialism.” Obama Sr. . . saw state appropriation of wealth as a necessary means to achieve the anticolonial objective of taking resources away from the foreign looters and restoring them to the people of Africa . . . . As he put it, “We need to eliminate power structures that have been built through excessive accumulation so that not only a few individuals shall control a vast magnitude of resources as is the case now.” The senior Obama proposed that the state confiscate private land and raise taxes with no upper limit. In fact, he insisted that “theoretically there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income so long as the people get benefits from the government commensurate with their income which is taxed.”

Like father, like son, says D’Souza:

It may seem incredible to suggest that the anticolonial ideology of Barack Obama Sr. is espoused by his son, the President of the United States. That is what I am saying. From a very young age and through his formative years, Obama learned to see America as a force for global domination and destruction. He came to view America’s military as an instrument of neocolonial occupation. He adopted his father’s position that capitalism and free markets are code words for economic plunder. Obama grew to perceive the rich as an oppressive class, a kind of neocolonial power within America. In his worldview, profits are a measure of how effectively you have ripped off the rest of society, and America’s power in the world is a measure of how selfishly it consumes the globe’s resources and how ruthlessly it bullies and dominates the rest of the planet.

(more…)

If he were alive today, Saul Alinsky would be beaming over President Obama’s Labor Day speech at the Milwaukee Area Labor Council Laborfest. It hit all the right divisive, class-warfare notes, each one sounded to prod the down-trodden Have-nots into even greater envy of the evil Haves. And to no one’s surprise, the Milwaukee mice were more than happy to take the bait—cheering, smiling, applauding, even as the metal bar of the mousetrap is about to snap their necks.

Despite campaigning for the office as the Great Unifier, once in it Obama displays over and over his preferred role of Great Divider. His true talent is not in uniting America, but in fomenting, fragmenting, fracturing it. He wields his Alinskyite ideology like a giant chisel, cleaving America into two fractious lumps of stone, probably beyond reunification, at least under the current will-of-the-people-ignoring administration.

The first third of Obama’s 3422-word oration is dedicated to a platitudinous paean to America’s historically aspirational work ethic, a flattering, feel-good affirmation no one could disagree with. Even so, early on, Obama hints at the class-envy rhetoric that later wall-to-wall carpets his speech:

When I was still a candidate for this office…we talked about how, for years, the values of hard work and responsibility that built this country had been given short shrift…about how some on Wall Street took reckless risks and cut corners to turn huge profits, while working Americans were fighting harder and harder just to stay afloat.

In the Alinsky-Obama world paradigm, it’s always Us (the working downtrodden) versus Them (the non-working, reckless greedy). In the A-O paradigm, the housing bubble was unilaterally caused by rapacious brokers and bankers, while borrowing-beyond-their-means Tulipomaniac home-buyers are absolved of all blame.

(more…)

As we mentioned in our last article, the prevalence of the Triple Bottom Line philosophy is signaling a changing paradigm, a time of transformation. Our question, then, is this: What exactly are we transforming into?  The knee-jerk answer might be that we are transforming from a capitalist system to a socialist system. However, the widespread adoption of 3BL belies such a simple answer. Socialism, with its complete government control of production, is hardly desirable for private business interests. American corporations are willingly embracing 3BL without even a government mandate. There is something deeper going on than simply a tug of war between two economic systems, and we are seeking to explore just what that may be.

Our first clues as to where we are going lay in the past, with the origin of the term “Triple Bottom Line.” For that we can credit John Elkington (his personal website and blog is here), who introduced the public to the term for the first time in his 1997 publication Cannibals With Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business. Elkington is a longtime advocate for corporate environmental and social awareness, having cofounded the business development consulting firm SustainAbility in 1987. In fact, we may consider him a “founder” of corporate sustainability, having been called a “dean of the corporate responsibility movement for three decades” by BusinessWeek.  Elkington currently serves as the Executive Chairman of the sustainability think tank Volans, which he helped found in 2008. His work with Volans is what provides a real glimpse into the end game of 3BL, in a concept termed “The Phoenix Economy.”

The Phoenix Economy is a concept professing that the failure of an existing economic system will leave a void and an opportunity for a new system to take its place.  (The term “phoenix” refers to the bird of that name which, in ancient mythology, dies in a self-created fire and is then reincarnated from the ashes.)  Old paradigms and established principles are replaced by a new way of approaching economics — and indeed the culture. Elkington recognizes this as an opportunity to establish a new paradigm based on 3BL philosophy. Global sustainability is the principle by which the economic and social culture will be driven. The Volans website provides a concise explanation of the Phoenix Economy.

According to Volans:

From the ashes of the downturn, a new economy is self-assembling—focused on providing social and environmental solutions, where markets and governments have failed.

(more…)

As the November mid-term elections draw near, race arsonists’ political distractions are seen in full action.  Facing defeat at the polls, the Left is desperately resorting to its only remaining trick.

With different styles and brands of utopian-driven influence — from the dependent welfare state of the American Democratic party, the socialism of Marxist/Leninists’ Workers’ Paradise, the Open Society of Soros’ idol Karl Popper, or any of the current collective salvations of social justice — examining the tactics as they occur is an enlightening exercise.

On Sunday’s This Week, President Obama’s defacto spokesman, V.P. Joe Biden, was sent to poison the well. Host Jake Tapper asked, “The NAACP had a convention in the last week, and they passed a resolution saying that elements of the Tea Party are racist. Do you think elements of the Tea Party are racist?”

The presidential reply is as follows:

Well, the truth is that at least elements that were involved in some of the Tea Party folks expressed racist views, you saw that on television. But, I don’t think — I don’t — I wouldn’t characterize the Tea Party as racist.

There are individuals who are either members of or on the periphery of some of their things, their — their protests — that have expressed really unfortunate comments. And, again, it was all over TV, all over your network, you know? A black Congressman walking up the stairs of the Capitol.

But, I don’t believe, the president doesn’t believe that the Tea Party is, uh, is a racist organization.  I don’t believe that. Very conservative.  Very different views on government and a whole lot of things.  But it is not a racist organization.

The day before, on Geraldo at Large, New Black Panther Party leader Malik Zulu Shabazz, in more blunt language, likewise endorsed the NAACP:

“A black man, really, or a black leader cannot be a racist… I have the right to use different language… We endorse fully the NAACP resolution.”

Obama’s mentor, Saul Alinsky would describe his disciple as a “realistic radical,” while denouncing Shabazz as a “rhetorical radical.”

(more…)

Context is everything.

As the Left (including the NAACP) has tried to brand the Tea Party movement as ‘racists’ over the last year, they’ve engaged in racial politics at their worst using the tactics of Saul Alinsky to try to “pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it” [see Alinsky Power Tactic #13].

Now that the very same tactic has been brilliantly used on the NAACP (and unintentionally caught the White House in the net as well), they’re attempting to pose as victims to some nefarious trickery.  The flaw in their argument though is that they did it to themselves.

The fact is, those who capriciously take words out of context for political purposes were warned about “context” at the beginning of Breitbart’s Monday post, were never told that Ms. Sherrod caused harm to the farmers (except through Ms. Sherrod’s own words), and were even given the proper context:

In the first video, Sherrod describes how she racially discriminates against a white farmer. She describes how she is torn over how much she will choose to help him. And, she admits that she doesn’t do everything she can for him, because he is white. Eventually, her basic humanity informs that this white man is poor and needs help. But she decides that he should get help from “one of his own kind”. She refers him to a white lawyer.

The problem for both the NAACP and the White House was that they took it out of context on their own and reacted as any victim of an Alinsky-style tactic might—by overreacting.  However, in so doing, they also threw Shirley Sherrod under their bus.  In other words, they got beaten at their own game, with their own bat, and they chose the politically expedient way out of it.

That was their fault, not Breitbart’s.

(more…)

The incredible reporting by my colleagues at Big Government and Big Journalism on the shameful demonstration of intimidation by SEIU President Mary Kay Henry and her purple-shirted thugs this past Sunday in Washington DC has brought to light so many revelations exposing the corrupt nature of this union and their bought and paid-for allies.

SEIU President Mary Kay Henry, protesting Bank of America, her union's biggest creditor

But one over-riding story has yet to be discussed.  And to me, it is the obvious one:  What have we come to when these kind of bullying tactics are allowed to occur in our society?

The plan to invade the neighborhood and storm the front door of the private residence of a bank executive to shame them or intimidate them into changing the bank’s policy must be denounced from all sides of the political spectrum.  What kind of America do these people want?

Do they really want to encourage this kind of disturbance of the peace and sanctity of an individual’s home merely as a means to a political end?  Is this a road we as a society are willing to go down?

(more…)

The left-wing militants of SEIU and the National People’s Action group plan to shut down K Street, the heart of the lobbying industry in the nation’s capital, at a massive in-your-face rally and march planned for Monday.

The goal of the “action” –in organizing parlance— is a show of force calculated to intimidate bank lobbyists and show support for sweeping anti-bank legislation pending in Congress.

The action, called The Showdown on K Street, is listed at the website of Jobs With Justice. JwJ works closely with ACORN, other community organizing groups, and the labor movement.

“This is the first time that they’re going to hit K Street all out,” said a source in the progressive movement. “They want to intimidate bank lobbyists, who aren’t used to this kind of confrontation.”

“It’s an anti-Wall Street march. In many ways it mirrors what happened on Wall Street about a month ago.”

The source was referring to another in-your-face anti-bank march on April 30 in New York City’s financial district led by National People’s Action (NPA). Also known as National People’s Campaign, the Chicago-based organization filed its first tax return in 2008.

As Andrew Marcus reported, the federal government cut off funding for NPA’s sister organization, the National Training and Information Center (NTIC) in 2003. Investigators found NTIC had misused millions of taxpayer dollars by spending them on training community organizers to lobby the government instead of on community development projects. NTIC also committed fraud by carrying out a cover-up.

(more…)

April was a busy month for bad:   lame financial reform legislation, served up three days in a row like rancid leftovers, SEC fraud filings, Wall Street Hearings in Congress, Greek bailouts, oil spills in the Gulf of Mexico and car bombs in Times Square.  With so much occurring, on so many fronts, little attention has been paid to President Obama’s often inflammatory commencement speech at the University of Michigan.

Let’s consider a few of President’s Obama’s pearls of wisdom that he shared with Michigan graduates.

“All you hear in Washington is the clamor of politics – a noise that can drown out the voices of the people who sent you there.” This, of course, is precious, coming as it does from  the leader of the Democratic party, which had to twist arms and bribe legislators to vote for a flawed healthcare bill because members of congress–who were listening to the “voices of the people”–were afraid to vote for a bloated bill that did little to address the most pressing problems in healthcare, a bill which their constituents loudly and repeatedly told congress they didn’t want.

“We’ve got politicians calling each other all sorts of unflattering names.” which may be why in 400 speeches and Q&A sessions, delivered in his first year in office, Obama finds occasion to demonize or blame President George W. Bush, and why Obama, 16 months  into his presidency, continues to use Bush as the whipping boy for bad left wing policies.

(more…)

The American Thinker did an outstanding job describing the events on March 20th, when democratic members of Congress in Washington DC were reportedly taunted by tea party activists with racial and sexual slurs. It appears from the timeline of the events that this race-baiting story was in the works before the Black Caucus members paraded through the tea party crowd on Capitol Hill.

Now Doug Ross found this—–

McClatchy released their story on the reported attacks on the Black Caucus members at 4:51 PM EST. The McClatchy reporter William Douglas refers to Huffington Post contributor Sam Snead as a source in his article.

But… The Huffington Post did not post their article until 4:56 PM EST:

Amazing.

If this timeline is accurate, it looks like the democratic-media complex was working on this story before it even occurred.

…If it even occurred.

(more…)

UPDATE: The bounty is now $100,000 for any audio/video footage of the N-word being hurled at Congressmen John Lewis and Andre Carson.

***

After 14 months of committing 100% to health care reform, the day after the signing of the Health Care bill was to mark the Democratic Party’s new primary concern: destroy the uprising, annihilate by all means necessary, the Tea Party movement.

The first sign that a plan was in place was the ham-fisted, high-camp posturing of the most controversial members of the Democratic caucus walking through the peaceful but animated “Tea Party” demonstrators on Capitol Hill. There is no reason for these elected officials to walk above ground through the media circus amid their ideological foes. The natural route is the tunnels between the House office buildings and the Capitol. By crafting a highly symbolic walk of the Congressional Black Caucus through the majority white crowd, the Democratic Party was looking to provoke a negative reaction. They didn’t get it. So they made it up.

The proof that the N-word wasn’t said once, let alone 15 times, as Rep. Andre Carson claimed, is that soon thereafter — even though the press dutifully reported it as truth — Nancy Pelosi followed the alleged hate fest, which allegedly included someone spitting, by walking through the crowd with a gavel in hand and a shit-eating grin on her face. Had the incidents reported by the Congressional Black Caucus actually occurred the Capitol Police would have been negligent to allow the least popular person to that crowd – the Speaker – to put herself in harm’s way.

That crowd was a sea of new-media equipment. Not only were tens of thousands people armed with handicams, BlackBerrys and iPods, so also was the mainstream media there, covering every inch of the event. Why did not one mainstream media outlet raise the specter that perhaps a video would exist to prove the events occurred? I am still dealing with the same press telling me we didn’t prove that ACORN was aiding and abetting criminal activity because we “did not provide enough audio and video evidence.” (Insert laugh track.) Is there not a blatant double standard at play here? Nancy Pelosi tipped her hand that race was a central part of her strategy. She invoked the Civil Rights Act and compared it with the universally reviled health care bill. Her caucus is doubling down on the civil-rights rhetoric. There are no coincidences.

(more…)

A Christian pundit, Dawn Eden, thinks my daughter Hannah Giles and her partner James O’Keefe should not have used Saul Alinsky’s deceptive tactics against ACORN because Saul was “evil,” his methods sneaky, and he dedicated his book, Rules for Radicals, to Lucifer.

In addition, Eden took a swipe at Lila Rose, Planned Parenthood’s main pain in the butt, for being deceptive in her undercover vids which exposed Planned Parenthood’s illegal activity. Oh, and I almost forgot: Dawn also busted on Hannah for being un-Christlike for wearing a miniskirt and dressing like a hooker.  Sounds a little catty to me—and a wee bit like Dana Carvey’s Church Lady—but I digress.

First off, Ms. Eden, if you ever drum up the nerve to expose a scandalous multimillion dollar Obama-backed, taxpayer-funded organization for doing illegal crap and then undergo death threats (versus sitting on the sidelines and simply critiquing those who have the cojones to do so) you will find that the lawbreakers are rather reticent in telling journalists, who are intent on exposing and destroying their world, exactly how they’re breaking the law.  Yeah, I know.  It’s weird, eh?

You’d think that nefarious organizations would just spill their guts, throw up their hands, give up their hard drives, refrain from dumping tens of thousands of documents in a dumpster, and just cooperate to the fullest extent with the FBI and the DOJ, but alas, they don’t because they’re criminals, and criminals, generally speaking, aren’t known for truthfulness, contrition and full disclosure with cops.

(more…)

The ACORN crime syndicate is not going away anytime soon, but it’s going to look different.

ACORN will probably run out of money and fold by year’s end but a dozen ACORN state chapters reincorporated to seem like new, independent organizations will spring up in the next week to carry on ACORN’s business, a leaked email from ACORN’s online director suggests.

“The truth is that it is hard for us to forsee [sic] any scenario where ACORN continues beyond the end of 2010 and some of us think it might not last that long,” writes Nathan Henderson-James, director of ACORN’s online campaigns, in an apparently authentic Feb. 22 email.

“Last one to leave turn out the lights and wipe the server,” he writes at the end of the message.

In the email Henderson-James explains the subterfuge ACORN will use to lead Americans to believe ACORN is breaking apart.

“It is definitely true that over the next week or so we should see a dozen or more organizations launched on the state level by staff who used to work for ACORN and leaders who developed their skills as ACORN members. These are not just simple name changes, but reimaginings of how best to organize low and moderate income constitiuencies [sic] without any of the legal problems and funding issues dogging ACORN, not to mention the brand damage.”

(more…)

Below is the full length speech Andrew Breitbart delivered to CPAC 2010. We have also taken the liberty of breaking out some of the best soundbites from the speech.

1. Mr. Podesta, we are watching you!
2. What I learned from Kurt Cobain
3. E Pluribis Unum
4. The Frankfort School roots of multiculturalism and political correctness
5. Big Education
6. MSM – You are not on the American team!
7. CPAC cuts Breitbart short

Barack Obama is using our public school system to recruit for his Alinsky-inspired private army. Organizing for America (OFA), formerly Obama For America, is recruiting in our high schools to “build on the movement that elected President Obama by empowering students across the country to help us bring about our agenda” – that is, his agenda of socialism for the United States of America.

Chuck, a reader of my website AtlasShrugs.com, has a daughter in the eleventh grade in a public high school, Perry Local in Massillon, Ohio. The teacher in her government class passed out a propaganda recruiting paper – headed with Obama’s distinctive “O” logo — asking students to sign up as interns for Organizing for America. You can see the entire intern recruiting form at AtlasShrugs.com.

And what will these “interns” be force-fed? The mother’s milk of the left — anti-war agitation, anti-capitalism, Marx, Lenin, Ayers, LGBT agenda promotion, global warming, pro-jihad, and illegal immigration. For starters. Maybe “Ellie Light,” who has in the last few weeks published the same Letter to the Editor supporting and defending Obama in over a dozen newspapers across the country, can give lessons in astroturfing.

(more…)

President Obama’s State of the Union obviously was a first in more than one way.  Obama point blank, called out (to use the modern vernacular) our Supreme Court Justices on national TV.  He did so because he politically disagreed with their legal decision.  In doing so, Obama demonstrated his supreme arrogance – and let America know just how far he is willing to go to get his way.

As we know, our Federal Judicial system is one of three separate but equal branches.  Historically, the judiciary has been the least political of the three branches.  That status reaches well beyond our own system.  Prior to judges and courts, civilizations tended to rely on counsels of elders to pass judgment on the actions of their village or tribe.  Those elders held a special place, as dispensers of wisdom, in their societies.

The roles of judges today evolved from those wise elders.  Importantly, our system and theirs was based on the notion that the decisions made were made dispassionately and not subject to mob rule or pressure.  By publicly ridiculing the Supreme Court, and subjecting them to a standing ovation from the complicit Democrats that surrounded them, Obama demonstrated to everyone how little regard he has for our system.  That disregard is in keeping with his Saul Alinsky radicalism and the methods he employed.

Obama, to be sure, is not the first President with a constitutional changing agenda to take on the Supreme Court – nor the most crass about it – at least so far.   That dishonor belongs to Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

(more…)

I participated in listen-only mode in the teleconference call Monday in which ACORN’s allegedly independent “audit” was released.

I regret it was difficult to make out what the players were saying.

That’s because as the left ferociously circled the wagons, all the creaking wheel noises in the background drowned out much of what was said.

Scott Harshbarger, ACORN ally and former attorney general of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts

One the main points that ACORN ally and former Massachusetts Attorney General Scott Harshbarger and ACORN CEO/chief organizer Bertha Lewis were trying to make was that ACORN, i.e. the lead entity that controls the ACORN network, and ACORN Housing, are separate entities.

Because ACORN Housing and ACORN are different organizations neither is responsible for the other, they argued. In other words, ACORN is not responsible for ACORN Housing employees caught on video encouraging illegal behavior, and vice versa, they reasoned.

Harshbarger said on the conference call

(more…)

Citigroup executive Eric Eve (pictured below) has resigned from ACORN’s phony, allegedly independent panel of inquiry, a move that removes one of the few people on the panel who could even remotely claim to actually be independent.

If you read between the lines, it also seems to mean Citigroup agrees the panel is a sham.

Eve, senior vice president of Global Consumer Group, Community Relations, at Citigroup, quit after the National Legal and Policy Center pressed Citigroup CEO Vikram Pandit to cut ties with ACORN.

In a letter to NLPC president Peter Flaherty, Citigroup announced Eve’s resignation from the panel.

“We too are deeply concerned about the recent media reports regarding ACORN and, because of those reports, have suspended our charitable financial support and program relationships with ACORN, and we are awaiting the results of the independent audit of ACORN activities now underway,” wrote Natalie Abatemarco, Citigroup’s vice president, Global Community Relations.

“On a related topic, please be advised that Eric Eve has resigned his position on the ACORN Advisory Council,” she added.

(more…)