Yea, two of the biggest idiots in Congress.

(AP) – 17 hours ago

Fixed it for ya.

Barney is posting on the cellar???? Who is he really, Redux or Spex?

If directed solely at ACORN, it could very well be unconstitutional.

What is known as a Bill of attainder:

A bill of attainder (also known as an act or writ of attainder) is an act of the legislature declaring a person or group of persons guilty of some crime and punishing them without benefit of a trial....

...Up until 2002, only five acts of Congress had ever been overturned on bill of attainder grounds. The Elizabeth Morgan Act was overturned in 2003 as a bill of attainder. Many suggested that the Palm Sunday Compromise in the case of Terri Schiavo was also a bill of attainder. The cases of U.S. v. Brown,[6] U.S. v. Lovett,[7] and In re Yung Sing Hee[8] establish bills of pains and penalties as punishment without trial, and included within the prohibitions of bills of attainder. The precedent that best reflects most of the original intention of the mandates is from Cummings v. Missouri.[9] It states

A bill of attainder, is a legislative act which inflicts punishment without judicial trial and includes any legislative act which takes away the life, liberty or property of a particular named or easily ascertainable person or group of persons because the legislature thinks them guilty of conduct which deserves punishment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_attainder

What Congress may need to enact is something much more sweeping that would apply to most or all non-profit organizations across the political spectrum that accept federal grants. C

Consider the consequences...a family values organization (or any organization) that accepts federal grants with one hand and lobbies with the other and there might be questions (but no finding of guilt) about the co-mingling of funds...or if employees of that family organization is accused of hitting on minor boys and girls but, again, no finding of guilt.

What makes this different from those listed above in the wiki, is that the "punishment" is taking away federal grant money (and/or their right to apply for grant money) without any due process.

An interesting Constitutional question and I dont know the answer.

*chortle*

Your mom is Barney.

:lol:

Spexx is on a roll!

Spex :notworthy

Acorn is apparently filing suit against the person who videotaped them telling him how to commit fraud.

That takes balls...

"Yes, we're crooks but we're big business so that makes it alright."

They have a solid case. It's apparently against the law in Maryland to make an audio recording of someone without their consent. It doesn't vindicate ACORN in any way, but it would put the hurt on the "pimp" and his assistant.

I remember in the Bill O'Reilly sexual harassment lawsuit, which gave us the falafel/loofa snicker, there was a similar law at play, so the tape recorded conversation never saw the light of day, but the transcript was produced and nobody questioned it. In fact, they never even said there was a tape recording, even though it was obvious there was.

In this case, there was clearly a recording. It's been released.

Thats fine - the kids will pay a small fine or whatever. I'm sure there are enough "extremists" with plenty of money to take care of that for them.

At least it has helped bring down another government subsidized criminal organization marauding as a service organization. They shouldn’t have any problem in getting people to donate to their defense against ACORN.

The bush administration is already out of office.:crazy: