Page 1 of 1
Acorn gets 4.9 BILLION in stimulus pork?
Posted: January 28th, 2009, 12:53 pm
by MacUser
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first10 ... s-dollars/
$4.19 billion for "neighborhood stabilization activities." That means groups like ACORN would be eligible for a portion of the funds.
Sen. David Vitter, R-La., told FOX News Tuesday that the money could be seen as "payoff" for groups' political activities in the last election. ACORN generally supports Democratic candidates and actively backed President Obama last year.
****
Zowie. Can a Church apply for some of these $billions in neighborhood activities stimulus funds? Get creative people!
Re: Acorn gets 4.9 BILLION in stimulus pork?
Posted: January 28th, 2009, 1:05 pm
by Pastor Gary
MacUser wrote:Zowie. Can a Church apply for some of these $billions in neighborhood activities stimulus funds? Get creative people!
I suspect I could stabilize my neighborhood for about 1/10 of 1% of that.
Re: Acorn gets 4.9 BILLION in stimulus pork?
Posted: January 28th, 2009, 1:15 pm
by Tim Elston
MacUser wrote:$4.19 billion for "neighborhood stabilization activities." That means groups like ACORN would be eligible for a portion of the funds.
In other words, No, Acorn does not get $4.9B in stimulus pork.
Re: Acorn gets 4.9 BILLION in stimulus pork?
Posted: January 28th, 2009, 4:04 pm
by DaJudge
Tim Elston wrote:MacUser wrote:$4.19 billion for "neighborhood stabilization activities." That means groups like ACORN would be eligible for a portion of the funds.
In other words, No, Acorn does not get $4.9B in stimulus pork.
That's right, keep sticking your head in the sand.
Re: Acorn gets 4.9 BILLION in stimulus pork?
Posted: January 28th, 2009, 4:57 pm
by EagerBeaver
Title of post: Acorn gets 4.9 BILLION in stimulus pork?
Text of your post: $4.19 billion for "neighborhood stabilization activities." That means groups like ACORN would be eligible for a portion of the funds.
MacUser you would make a HORRIBLE journalist. Captivating headline (leading people to believe ACORN would get all the $4.9 billion) then you say in the post, they would merely be eligible.
Misleading, shame on you.
Posted: January 28th, 2009, 5:08 pm
by bibleguy
It's not
his headline. And, while the bill doesn't specify ACORN, ACORN is the likely recipient for the bulk of it. This is very similar to the complaints about the Bush administration bills allocating money that would likely end up going to Halliburton contracts. While there is an application (or bidding) process, there is a high probability that one entity benefits. ACORN is Obama's Halliburton!
Here's the NEWSMAX article:
Obama’s Bill Hands ACORN $5.2 Billion Bailout
Here's an excerpt:
According to Matthew Vadum of the Capitol Research Center, the stimulus package now under consideration includes:
$1 billion stashed away in Community Development Block Grant money that ACORN often vies for successfully.
$10 million to develop or refurbish low-income housing, a specialty of ACORN’s.
$4.19 billion to stave off foreclosures via the Neighborhood Stabilization Program. Vadum states the current version of the bill would allow nonprofits to compete with cities and states for $3.44 billion of the money. Some $750 million, however, would be exclusively reserved for nonprofits such as ACORN, which is actually an umbrella organization for over 100 progressive organizations.
Regarding the Neighborhood Stabilization Program, Vadum writes in American Spectator: “Although ACORN operatives usually get their hands on such funds only after they have first passed through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development or state and local governments, the new spending bill largely eliminates these dawdling middle men, making it easier to get Uncle Sam's largess directly into the hands of the same people who run ACORN's various vote fraud and extortion rackets
Posted: January 28th, 2009, 5:57 pm
by EagerBeaver
Just because NewsMax did something similar doesn't make it right.
Spin is spin, whether right-wing or liberal.
The NewsMax headline says 5.2 billion, yet in the article it says specifically 750 million.
It is plain wrong to mislead.
Posted: January 28th, 2009, 6:02 pm
by MacUser
Eager,
I love your icon.
Posted: January 28th, 2009, 6:03 pm
by EagerBeaver
Good, I knew you would. I like it too.
Re: Acorn gets 4.9 BILLION in stimulus pork?
Posted: January 29th, 2009, 7:02 am
by MacUser
Pastor Gary wrote:I suspect I could stabilize my neighborhood for about 1/10 of 1% of that.
Lets figure out a way to setup a Not For Profit - Community Group and attempt to access some off these funds since it's coming regardless. Might as well put some of it to actual good use instead of political payments.
Posted: January 29th, 2009, 1:09 pm
by Full Quiver
Sorry but from what I have heard the bill does not name Acorn as a recipient of any such funds. Acorn will be eligible as will many, many other groups. We need to watch what we pass on as truth. If I am wrong please clear me up but FOX News has already stated the same as I.
Posted: January 29th, 2009, 1:19 pm
by bibleguy
Full Quiver wrote:Sorry but from what I have heard the bill does not name Acorn as a recipient of any such funds. Acorn will be eligible as will many, many other groups. We need to watch what we pass on as truth. If I am wrong please clear me up but FOX News has already stated the same as I.
Yes, FQ but as I said, ACORN is the likely recipient of the funds because of the nature of the funds and the scope of ACORN. Much like Halliburton wasn't specifically named for certain contracts under Bush, but was the likely (and eventually the actual) recipient.
If Obama signed a bill to make a million dollars available to red pots manned by people ringing bells outside of shopping centers, and the headlines said "Salvation Army gets $1M in new Obama Bill" even though SA isn't specifically named, it would not be a terrible stretch (although there is a possiblity some other group will get
some of it).
There was another thread discussing bias in the media. I posted my dissatisfaction with the fact, stating that news entities should report fact without slant. I was quickly reminded that they have a right to do so.