Biden Wrong About ACORN-Obama Connection

Biden Wrong About ACORN-Obama Connection

Sunday, October 26, 2008 9:28 PM

By: Lowell Ponte

 

Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Biden did not tell the truth Thursday when hit with tough questions about ACORN from a veteran journalist.

 

“Aren’t you embarrassed by the blatant attempt to register phony voters by ACORN, an organization that Barack Obama has been tied to in the past?” said Orlando, Fla., WFTV anchor Barbara West.

 

“I am not embarrassed by it,” Biden replied. “We are not tied to them. We have not paid them one single penny to register a single solitary voter . . . We register the voters ourselves, and so there is no relationship.”

 

A Newsmax Fact Check shows that Obama has had a long relationship with the group, and the Obama campaign did indeed pay an ACORN subsidiary more than $800,000. The radical Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) is a multi-faced creature its founders spun off into about 100 separate legal entities.

 

In our Oct. 6 investigation, Newsmax reported that ACORN’s founders “created a shell game under which money acquired by one ACORN front group, Project Vote (run in Illinois in 1992 by Barack Obama), would be moved to other ACORN-controlled groups,” some openly political and others tax-exempt and prohibited from direct political activism.

 

[Editor’s Note: See “Obama and ACORN: You Can Run, But You Can’t Hide.”]

 

The New York Times, following Newsmax’s lead, reported on Oct. 22 “concerns about (ACORN’s) potentially improper use of charitable dollars for political purposes; money transfers among the affiliates; and potential conflicts created by employees working for multiple affiliates, among other things.”

 

Was Biden answering the question put to him honestly? As Newsmax reported, “leading up to the 2008 Ohio Democratic Primary, Obama’s campaign between Feb. 25 and March 17 paid Citizens Services Inc. (CSI), a subsidiary of ACORN, $832,598, apparently for get-out-the-vote activities.”

 

Money given to one arm of the ACORN octopus frequently is shared with other arms, and because ACORN’s loose bookkeeping blurs the distinction between political and non-political uses of this fungible money, Biden was at best misleading when he claimed, “We have not paid them one single penny to register a single solitary voter . . . We register the voters ourselves, and so there is no relationship.”

 

In fact, the Obama campaign paid an ACORN-run organization more than $800,000. In Federal Election Commission required filings, the Obama campaign reported that this money was paid for polling, advance work and event staging. After watchdog scrutiny called this claim into question, the Obama campaign revised its filing and acknowledged that CSI was paid for “get-out-the-vote” projects.

 

CSI Executive Vice President Jeff Robinson last August told Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reporter David M. Brown that CSI is a “separate organization entirely” from ACORN. But as Brown reported, CSI has the same office address as ACORN’s national headquarters, ACORN itself described CSI in 2006 as its “campaign services entity.” Coincidentally, the widely identified “national deputy political director for campaigns and elections” for ACORN is Jeff Robinson.

 

“But in the past,” West responded to Biden in the interview, “Senator Obama was a community organizer for ACORN. He was an attorney for ACORN. And certainly in the Senate he has been a benefactor for ACORN.”

 

“How has (Obama) been a benefactor for ACORN?” replied Biden. “He was its organizer.”

 

According to the Obama-Biden official campaign Web site, fightthesmears.com, “Barack Obama never organized with ACORN” and “was never an ACORN community organizer.” But in this interview, Biden unequivocally affirms that Obama “was (ACORN’s) organizer.”

 

As to Barack Obama’s being ACORN’s benefactor, House Minority Leader Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, documented on Oct. 16 that ACORN and its linked entities in recent years have been given $31 million in taxpayer dollars. From 2004 to 2006 just one tentacle, the ACORN Housing Corp., pocketed $7,329,323 in taxpayer money, fully 40 percent of the housing arm’s total budget.

 

Before that, Obama, as a member alongside former Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers on the board of the Woods Fund for Chicago, funneled many grants to ACORN-run organizations. These not only enriched these radical entities, but also legitimized them in the eyes of other charitable foundations.

 

Was Biden answering truthfully about Barack Obama’s relationship with this radical organization ACORN?

 

 

  • The Obama campaign paid an ACORN front group more than $800,000 but revised its filing about this to say it was for “get-out-the-vote” projects, not “to register a single, solitary voter.” But ACORN entities that do register voters could easily have shared this large Obama payment, and those names, real or fake, on voter rolls could help elect Obama-Biden this November. 

     

     

  • Obama has long had a complex “relationship” with ACORN, but Biden cunningly said, “We are not tied to them . . . There is no relationship,” evasively using only the present tense to answer a reporter’s question that was explicitly about Obama’s past, not present. 

     

     

  • An official Obama-Biden website claims Obama “was never an ACORN community organizer,” but Biden now confirms that Obama “was (ACORN’s) organizer.” One of these two voices of the Obama-Biden campaign is lying. 

     

    West, an Emmy-winning anchor with 16 years experience at central Florida’s most popular station, WFTV, was the principal assistant to network anchor Peter Jennings at ABC News before that. Her questions to Biden were tough, but no tougher than those aimed daily at John McCain and Sarah Palin.

     

    But during this interview, Biden testily said, “I don’t know who’s writing your questions,” as if they were out of bounds. Following the interview, the Obama-Biden campaign canceled a scheduled WFTV interview with Biden’s wife, Jill.

     

    “Further opportunities for your station to interview with this campaign are unlikely, at best, for the duration of the remaining days until the election,” Laura K. McGinnis, the Central Florida communications director for the Obama-Biden campaign, wrote to WFTV news director Bob Jordan.

     

    Political campaigns in general pick and choose the stations they like, Jordan told Orlando Sentinel media columnist Hal Boedeker, and stations often pose softball questions during satellite interviews.

     

    Several Democratic candidates during the primaries refused to appear or debate on Fox News Channel, preferring instead to go on liberal cable channel MSNBC both to boost its ratings and to avoid tough questions.

     

    “Mr. Biden didn’t like the questions,” said WFTV’s Jordan. “We choose not to ask softball questions

  • Biden Shuffled off to the sidelines after gaffe

    Biden Shuffled off to the sidelines after gaffe

    Rick Moran
    Two weeks before the election and the Democratic candidate for Vice President has no public events scheduled. None. Zero. Zilch.

    It couldn’t be because of what Biden said on Sunday in Seattle about Obama’s inexperience being tested by a deliberate crisis fomented by one of our enemies? Or was it that Biden warned Obama’s response would be so weak it was up to the good little liberals of Seattle to support him anyway?

    Bill Kristol
    dissects Biden’s inadvertent flash of honesty:

    So Biden expects a test of the kind Kennedy faced after his disastrous meeting with Khrushchev in Vienna in June, 1961, less than five months into Kennedy’s presidency. Biden’s presumably thinking of the Soviet-backed construction of the Berlin Wall a couple of months later. Kennedy did nothing, and was criticized for his weakness back home.

    So–leaving aside the merits of what Kennedy did or didn’t do in 1961–Biden is forecasting that Obama will have what seems to be a weak response to a provocation from, say, Iran or Russia, and he’s urging the liberals of Seattle and elsewhere to stand with Obama against the expected domestic criticism.

    In other words, Biden is forecasting inaction by Obama in the face of testing by a dictator. I suspect he’s right in this forecast. McCain might want to clarify this point. It’s not just that Obama’s own running mate expects an international crisis early in his presidency. t’s not just that Obama has a weak foreign policy record. It’s that Biden himself expects what will appear to be a weak response from Obama to testing by a dictator.

    It may be of interest to you that while the press has been castigating Sarah Palin for her lack of access to the press, Joe Biden has not had a press conference in a month.

    Just sayin…

    Archbishop scolds pro-choice Biden Valerie Richardson and Julia Duin

    Archbishop scolds pro-choice Biden

    Valerie Richardson and Julia Duin

    DENVER | Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. arrived at the Democratic National Convention on Monday amid rumblings over whether his pro-choice Catholicism would help or hurt the Democratic ticket.

    An Irish-Catholic from a working-class upbringing, Mr. Biden won the nod as presumptive presidential nominee Barack Obama’s running mate in part because of his appeal to blue-collar Catholics, the same voters who swung during the primary for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.

    Although he represents Delaware in the Senate, Mr. Biden grew up in Pennsylvania, a must-win state for Democrats in November.

    But the party’s hopes of winning the critical Catholic vote took a hit Sunday when Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver said Mr. Biden should avoid taking Communion as a result of his pro-choice stand on abortion.

    Archbishop Chaput, who was scheduled to lead a pro-life candlelight vigil Monday night here in front of Planned Parenthood, called Mr. Biden’s support for abortion rights “seriously wrong,” said archdiocese spokeswoman Jeanette De Melo.

    “I certainly presume his good will and integrity,” said the archbishop, “and I presume that his integrity will lead him to refrain from presenting himself for Communion if he supports a false ‘right’ to abortion.”

    The archbishop, who was not invited to speak at any convention events in what appeared to be a deliberate snub, told the Associated Press that he would like to speak privately with Mr. Biden.

    The debate underscored what has emerged as a central theme of this year’s convention: the tension between the Democratic Party’s renewed outreach to religious voters and its long-standing support for unfettered access to abortion.

    At a panel discussion Monday sponsored by Google on “The Shifting Faith Vote: What It Means for the Election,” panelists said that concerns over social issues, such as poverty, are moving some faith-based voters away from the Republican Party.

    At the same time, they haven’t aligned with the Democrats, primarily because of the abortion issue.

    “The push for the Democratic Party is to have a new position on abortion,” said Steve Waldman, editor of the religious Web site beliefnet.com. “When you look at Catholics and evangelicals, you see that they agree with 80 percent of what [Mr. Obama] says, but there’s this stumbling block with abortion.”

    Whether pro-choice Catholics should take Communion became a major issue in 2004 during Democrat John Kerry’s run for the presidency when more than a dozen bishops, including Archbishop Chaput, publicly asked the senator from Massachusetts not to present himself for the Eucharist.

    Their stance may have given a boost to President Bush, who increased his share of the Catholic vote from 47 percent in 2000 to 52 percent in 2004.

    Catholics, the nation’s largest religious voting bloc, represent 26 percent of the electorate. Alexia Kelley, executive director of Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, said that 11 percent of those this year are considered “swing voters,” more than in any recent election year.

    Catholic advocacy groups didn’t wait long before weighing in on the “wafer wars.” The conservative Catholic group Fidelis condemned the selection of Mr. Biden.

    “Now everywhere Biden campaigns, we’ll have this question of whether a pro-abortion Catholic can receive Communion. … Selecting a pro-abortion Catholic is a slap in the face to Catholic voters,” said Fidelis President Brian Burch.

    Julia Duin reported from Washington.

    The Democrats’ ‘Soft’ Jihadist

    The Democrats’ ‘Soft’ Jihadist

    By Frank J. Gaffney Jr.
    FrontPageMagazine.com | 8/26/2008

    On Sunday, Democratic delegates convening in Denver were prayed over by representatives of various faiths.  One stood out: Ingrid Mattson, president of the Islamic Society of North America.  With this choice, Barak Obama’s campaign has committed a strategic error of the first order.

    After all, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) has been identified by the Department of Justice not only as a front for the Muslim Brotherhood – a global Islamist movement with the stated mission in America of “destroying Western civilization from within.”  Worse yet, it has also been named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the United States’ largest alleged terrorism financing conspiracy. 

    Like other Brotherhood operations, ISNA’s purpose is to promote what might be called “soft jihad” – the task of steadily insinuating the brutally repressive and subversive program the Islamists call Shariah through da’wa, proselytizing and social networking.

    The more one learns about Dr. Mattson and her organization, the more questions will be raised about Barak Obama’s judgment and that of his party in affording them a prominent role in the 2008 Democratic convention.  For example:

    Ingrid Mattson is director of the Macdonald Center for the Study of Islamic Studies and Christian-Muslim Relations at the Hartford Seminary in Connecticut .  Her program is used to credential Muslim chaplains for U.S. prisons and our military.   (The armed forces require its chaplain candidates to take 72 credit hours from Dr. Mattson’s program.) This credentialing was previously performed by organizations founded by Abdurahman Alamoudi, once among the most prominent Muslim Brotherhood operatives in America.  Today, Alamoudi is serving a 23-year prison sentence for his involvement in terrorism-related crimes.

    A course taught by Mattson at the Hartford Seminary entitled The Koran and Its Place in Muslim Life and Society” featured readings from texts by two of the Islamofascist ideology’s most revered figures: Syed Abul A’la Mawdudi and Sayyid Qutb.  She has publicly credited the former with producing “probably the best work of [Koranic commentary] in English.”  As Robert Spencer has observed in his invaluable Jihad Watch blog, Maududi succinctly described the Islamists’ Shariah agenda as follows:

    “Islam wishes to destroy all states and governments anywhere on the face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and program of Islam regardless of the country or the nation which rules it. The purpose of Islam is to set up a state on the basis of its own ideology and program, regardless of which nation assumes the role of the standard bearer of Islam or the rule of which nation is undermined in the process of the establishment of an ideological Islamic State….Islam does not intend to confine this revolution to a single State or a few countries; the aim of Islam is to bring about a universal revolution.”

    As to Qutb, an amicus brief filed last week by the Center for Security Policy before the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals noted that his “writings expand on [Maududi’s] theme of Jihad against wayward Muslim regimes and the infidel West and the establishment of a hegemonic Shariah-based political order.  His work has been credited as a central doctrinal source for al Qaeda’s doctrine of Jihad, as well.”  According to the brief prepared for the Center by two of the West’s foremost scholars of Shariah, attorneys David Yerushalmi and Stephen Coughlin (resident expert on the subject for the Joint Chiefs of Staff until he was purged by an ISNA admirer in the office of Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England), “Da’wa is used to prepare the battle space for violent Jihad.”

    Unbeknownst to most Americans, such Da’wa is being systematically advanced through the Islamists’ take-over of the vast majority of U.S. mosques, Islamic centers and madrassas (Muslim parochial schools).  This onslaught is being accomplished as Saudi money flows through another Muslim Brotherhood front spun off by ISNA, the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), which acquires the mortgages of existing religious facilities or creates new ones.  Along with titles to these properties comes Saudi Wahhabi influence in the form of virulently Shariah-adherent clerics, textbooks and other materials. In her capacity as president of ISNA, Mattson also is an ex officio member of NAIT’s board.

    Insofar as the Muslim Brotherhood explicitly seeks and is working for the destruction of our government and Western civilization more generally, it is engaged in a criminal conspiracy that constitutes treasonous sedition.  That reality has two critical implications: 

    First, the Brotherhood must be formally designated a terrorist organization, putting an end to the reckless notion – promoted by, among others, the U.S. State Department – that practitioners of soft jihad are less dangerous and an effective antidote to co-religionists who are prepared to use violence immediately, rather than later on.

    Second, under 18 US Code 2382: ” Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to [appropriate officials] is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both.”

    Senator Obama, his party, Bush administration officials and, for that matter, ordinary citizens of the United States are obliged to take steps to counteract seditious Muslim Brotherhood activities in our midst.  To do otherwise is not just suicidal.  It is a crime.



    Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. is the founder, president, and CEO of The Center for Security Policy. During the Reagan administration, Gaffney was the Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Forces and Arms Control Policy, and a Professional Staff Member on the Senate Armed Services Committee, chaired by Senator John Tower (R-Texas). He is a columnist for The Washington Times, Jewish World Review, and Townhall.com and has also contributed to The Wall Street Journal, USA Today, The New Republic, The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Christian Science Monitor, The Los Angeles Times, and Newsday.
    Follow

    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

    Join 55 other followers