Doug Hoffman ran as a conservative in NY-23rd. AP Photo Todd Bissonette
New York's 23rd Congressional district became the center of attention the last two months when conservative Doug Hoffman challenged the Republican candidate Dede Scozzafava. Hoffman gained significant endorsements from people like Glenn Beck and eventually was able to force Scozzafava to quit the race which left Hoffman to compete with Democrat Bill Owens in the Republican-dominated district.
Unfortunately for Republicans and conservatives the messy race split the conservative vote between Hoffman and Scozzafava which allowed Bill Ownes to win the race. Hoffman conceded the race that night after what appeared to be an insurmountable lead held by Owens.
Now however Hoffman is "un-conceding" as he alleges a conspiracy by unions and ACORN in order to fix the election for Democrats. In a letter to his supporters Hoffman claims that he was "forced to concede" on election night. Hoffman goes on to explain how he believes the election-night vote counts are inaccurate and announces he is "revoking my statement of concession." Finally Hoffman ends the letter by appealing for more donations to continue to fight for New York's 23rd district.
The "un-concession" comes on the heels of an urging by Glenn Beck to do exactly that. On Fox News Beck stated that he urged Beck to un-concede even though Beck believes there is no way for Hoffman to win. It turns out Beck was right (in saying it was impossible or Hoffman to win) as the counting of absentee ballots has narrowed Owens lead to 3,105 votes with just 3,072 ballots left to count. For those who are struggle with math (I empathize) that means it is mathematically impossible for Hoffman to win.
As for Hoffman's allegations that the election was somehow stolen by ACORN and unions, the Republican Elections Commissioner for the area involved has called such allegations "absolutely false." The Washington Post confirmed that ACORN does not even have an office in New York's 23rd district and made no volunteer efforts in the race. However upon calling ACORN they confessed to fixing the election saying the leader of their effort was none other than "Elvis Presley." Somehow it seems the race for New York's 23rd became more interesting.
Comments
I have read your posts for a while so I do not know what Acorn is, can you explain who they are and what they do? And what would lead him to make such charges?
Chef's Dad: They are non-profit organization with thousands of volunteers across the country. They aid workers in organizing to form unions, give people legal aid with house loans and such, and organize voter registration among many other activities. They generally aid liberal causes. Conservatives are not fans. There have been allegations of fraud in some voter registration drives. ACORN claims they are isolated incidents of a few workers who did not even directly work for ACORN and were subsequently fired. Many conservatives view the organization as undergoing a campaign of widescale fraud. No ACORN workers have been indicted thus far. There were also a number of undercover videos done which had ACORN workers advising people on how to evade laws dealing with prostitution (though the people were actors). Many of those were workers were also fired. ACORN contends they are the exception, conservatives contend this is the norm for ACORN.
Don't know if ACORN was involved in this, but it seems fishy to me that the counting was so far off on election night in favor of the democrat. Also that Scozzafava was pressured by the likes of Rahm Emanuel and others at he White House to endorse the democrat.
Another disgusting ACORN video came out today of employees helping with an underage prosecution business (sting) in LA. There's nothing too immoral or illegal for these people to encourage. They have close connections to this president and should be investigated from the bottom to the top, where the real corruption starts!
Chefs Dad,
A surprisingly fair and balanced intro into who and what ACORN is by Ryan. Note there is a Long history of the group going back several years before the Election. Think Chicago Politics as in Obama served in a legal capacity for them in Illinois.(conflict of interest?) Google has gaggles of stuff...much of it VERY interesting.
If there are 3,072 ballets left to count and the final count has "narrowed" to only 3,105 votes in Owens favor. Then theoretically if ALL 3,072 went to Hoffman that would only leave Owen with ONLY a {33 vote} lead over Hoffman!!! NOW THAT would send a HUGE message. Because even at this stage A known quantity with a lot of DEM money to back him only won by (At this Time) 3,105 votes. That isn't very much of a WIN!!! Even if the final 3,072 are split between them...Hoffman made a great showing coming from nowhere. This should hearten Conservatives...You rock Doug..we sent you $$$ too.
An ACORN consiracy? Yeah, ACORN registers lower income people, who tend to vote liberal, so conservatives act like it's a conspiracy against them.
I am well aware of ACORN. I wanted to get Witts take on them.
Although he misleads that "No ACORN workers have been indicted thus far". There have been CONVICTIONS around the country.
But facts matter little.
"Hannity: Are you saying, Andrew, that there are more tapes?
Breitbart: Oh my goodness there are! Not only are there more tapes, it’s not just ACORN. And this message is to Attorney General Holder: I want you to know that we have more tapes, it’s not just ACORN, and we’re going to hold out until the next election cycle, or else if you want to do a clean investigation, we will give you the rest of what we have, we will comply with you, we will give you the documentation we have from countless ACORN whistleblowers who want to come forward but are fearful of this organization and the retribution that they fear that this is a dangerous organization."
"Breitbart: There’s a lot of hypocrisy and the dust has settled for ACORN and at the end of the day they’ve recognized that Eric Holder, the Attorney General, has not initiated an investigation into ACORN after we now have seven tapes. There were five initially that came out, ACORN was defunded by the Senate, was defunded by the House, lost it’s link to the Census; while all that damage occurred, Congress didn’t come in to investigate them, obviously not the Attorney General’s office, and they’ve now realized let’s get back into business because they realized that the dust settled and they were not being investigated, it was Hannah, James, and me who were being investigated, that’s why we’ve been forced to offer this latest tape."
biggovernment.com/2009/11/20/breitbart-to-ag-holder-investigate-acorn-or-well-release-more-tapes-just-before-2010-election/#more-34218
Chef's Dad: Wrong again. No indictments of ACORN workers. They were either workers for a separate organization or ex-workers. I imagine if you look at any large organization (including conservative ones) the size of ACORN you would find MANY indictments of workers or ex-workers. The new tape is biggest load of crap I have ever seen. It is unbelievably doctored and edited. Question: Why will Big Government not ever release the full tapes? Answer: Because they know they are misleading with their editing and do not want to be found out.
Chef's Dad: In fact I am quite sure two of Big Government's workers are facing criminal charges for illegal taping. So at this time their are two more Big Government workers facing criminal charges than ACORN workers. Hmmmm...
What a tWitt! Here is a document for you to wrap your empty head around!
thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/68893-acorn-received-200000-in-doj-funds-report-says
For example, ACORN received a $20,000 sub-contract to do community outreach on crime prevention in New York. The organization that contracted with ACORN has not released the funds yet, claimimg that ACORN submitted reimbursements "outside the scope of the agreement," including "fringe benefits" for the salaried staffer working on the project.
In another instance the city of Phoenix contracted with the "ACORN Institute" to receive about $9,000 to canvass citizens and raise awareness about a tax credit and a tax assistance program. The city hasn't paid ACORN yet due to "poor reporting by the ACORN Institute regarding another project not related to DOJ grant funds." Phoenix is trying to terminate the contract with ACORN.
"Tim Asher, Executive Director of the Missouri Civil Rights Initiative. "ACORN workers have been convicted of election fraud. "
" Three of seven defendants in the biggest voter-registration fraud scheme in Washington history have pleaded guilty and one has been sentenced, prosecutors said Monday.
The defendants were all temporary employees of ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, when they allegedly filled out and submitted more than 1,800 fictitious voter-registration cards during a 2006 registration drive in King and Pierce counties."
You need to get your head out of your ass Witt.
"LAS VEGAS — A prominent antipoverty organization that drew criticism from Republicans during last year’s presidential race was charged by Nevada officials Monday with engaging in voter registration fraud.
Two former leaders of the group’s Nevada branch were also charged in connection with the submission of thousands of bogus voter registration forms."
NEED MORE?
"So, less than a week before the midterm elections, four workers from Acorn, the liberal activist group that has registered millions of voters, have been indicted by a federal grand jury for submitting false voter registration forms to the Kansas City, Missouri, election board. But hey, who needs voter ID laws?"
MORE?
"KANSAS CITY, Mo. -- Four people have been indicted on charges of voter fraud in Kansas City, officials said Wednesday.
Investigators said questionable registration forms for new voters were collected by the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, a group that works to improve minority and low-income communities.
The four indicted -- Kwaim A. Stenson, Dale D. Franklin, Stephanie L. Davis and Brian Gardner -- were employed by ACORN as registration recruiters. They were each charged with two counts.
Federal indictments allege the four turned in false voter registration applications. Prosecutors said the indictments are part of a national investigation." 2006
MORE?
Ryan Witt says: No indictments of ACORN workers.
google and memory are a terrible thing to waste.
Ryan Witt says: In fact I am quite sure two of Big Government's workers are facing criminal charges for illegal taping
In FACT, no charges have yet been filed against the 2 citizen journalists and Pulitzer Prize contestants!
But again, you care zip about facts as I have shown over and over again.
Chef's Dad: First care to provide some sources...what are you using here World Net Daily or Associated Press? Makes a difference. Secondly maybe you missed the words "former" and "were" employees of ACORN. That would mean that they are no longer employed by ACORN. Grammar is a terrible thing to waste. Third, you are right on the Big Government employees no charges have been filed. I was confused because they both were acting like the left was about to waterboard them using the Maryland Attorney General but it turns out no charges have been filed yet. I stand corrected on that one. Now if you could just understand what former means...
Witt, these were quotes from stories from many sources. You can google them to find them.
They were former and 'were' because most a re temporary workers!
What can't you wrap your head around? Why the deep denial?
google acorn indictments or acorn convictions for all your answers.
There will soon be a DOJ investigation by an independent investigator so it will all be out and you will be still in denial.
Chef's Dad: So you can't provide the sources? World Net Daily maybe? The same people who are questioning the Obama birth certificate... Are you a birther Chef's dad?
Exactly my point. These are not really ACORN workers. They were independently contracted or temp worker hired through a temp agency. They were not ACORN workers who were indicted. That is like me incriminating the army for what blackwater does. It is not an accurate charge. So you were wrong about ACORN workers being indicted. Glad we cleared that up.
seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003982533_acorn30m.html
"Three of seven defendants in the biggest voter-registration fraud scheme in Washington history have pleaded guilty and one has been sentenced, prosecutors said Monday.
The defendants were all temporary employees of ACORN"
www.nytimes.com/2009/05/05/us/05acorn.html
"Two former leaders of the group’s Nevada branch were also charged in connection with the submission of thousands of bogus voter registration forms."
www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009189
"four workers from Acorn have been indicted by a federal grand jury"
www.kmbc.com/politics/10214492/detail.html
"The four indicted -- Kwaim A. Stenson, Dale D. Franklin, Stephanie L. Davis and Brian Gardner -- were employed by ACORN"
THERE! I did your work for you. No not WND. Do you really believe I made those quotes up? When they could have been rebutted so easily if I did make them up?
Why do you remain blind?
Ryan Witt says: They were not ACORN workers
DAMN MAN! CAN'T YOU READ?
www.kmbc.com/politics/10214492/detail.html
"The four indicted -- Kwaim A. Stenson, Dale D. Franklin, Stephanie L. Davis and Brian Gardner -- were employed by ACORN"
WERE EMPLOYED BY ACORN!!!!!!!!!!
Don't show up to a gun fight with a paper knife Witt.
I PROVED my contentions. You lose!
Keep an eye on HR 911. It will prove to be the downfall of this ongoing criminal organization.
www.docstoc.com/docs/16956824/HRES911
Chef's Dad: Damn man don't you understand English? OK let me explain it to you. You see "were" implies past tense. So they "were" employed by ACORN but that does mean that they "are" employed by ACORN at the time of indictment. So you and I were employed by Wal-Mart ten years ago and we both "were" indicted yesterday you could also say we "were" employed with Wal-Mart. That does not mean we "were" employed with Wal-Mart at the time of the indictment.
Oh and you also neglect to mention that the article YOU CITE says that ACORN fired the workers AND that ACORN turned the four in AND that ACORN is actually happy they were indicted. Geez...talk about misleading.
"The four indicted -- Kwaim A. Stenson, Dale D. Franklin, Stephanie L. Davis and Brian Gardner -- were employed by ACORN"
What is the definition of 'is'?
Were as in FIRED because of the indictment!
Those charged were charged with crimes WHILE ACORN EMPLOYEES!
If they were indicted 8 months later when their employ ended, the fact is the alleged crimes were committed WHILE ACORN EMPLOYEES.
Chef's Dad: ha ha. I know when the other side resorts to name calling I have won. The articles you cite do not say that. In fact they say they imply the opposite. They were fired before the indictments and you know it. You have no proof otherwise and all the evidence points to their firing before the indictment. There is no reason to get emotional because you were wrong Chef's Dad. Just admit it. I came clean when wrong about the Big Government indictments you can come clean on ACORN. Really it is OK the world will not collapse I promise.
Chef's Dad: You also neglect to mention that many of them were not direct hires with ACORN. ACORN contracted out for people to go and register voters. Some of the contractors tried to scam ACORN by turning in false registration forms. This is why ACORN says they were HAPPY these people were indicted because in effect these people were stealing from ACORN by supplying a false product (fake registrations) for payment from ACORN. This was not part of a large ACORN conspiracy.
Oh and by the way conservatives have yet to find one, that is right ONE actual vote which can be attributed to ACORN voter fraud. Can we say overblown story?
Nah, what chef's dad REALLY neglects to mention is what ELSE is in that article:
'ACORN officials in Kansas City said they turned in the four people who were indicted.
"We're very happy that they were indicted," said Claudie Harris with ACORN.'
see, pappy, they cheated their employer, ACORN, by collecting pay for false registrations.
And both here and in the Seattle case, NO VOTES WERE CAST using the fraudulent registrations.
Why does it not surprise me that Witt is doing his mental contortionist act again in order to defend the indefensible...ACORN!
ACORN has revealed itself to the American people.
Even when the dirty politicians who have benefitted from their criminal actions have been shamed into defunded them, Ryan will not desert them and will condemn the citizens who so easily revealed them to the public.
Didn't you see that Jon Stewart video???? Even Jon Stewart thinks ACORN is beyond belief and that the investigators did a great job and showed up the shameless media in this country who refuse to do their job!
Gigi,
I surmise that Ryan is ultimately for state control and any mechanism the State uses to gain it's ultimate complete control must and will be defended. There are just NO articles or responses that I am aware of to contradict this. I have seen nothing written by him which even mentions The Constitution or Bill of Rights except in vague reference.
He doesn't seem to recognize Tyranny except as it relates to Republican or Conservative or "right-wing" opinions. Never even heard him defend individual freedom or a Constitutional Republic. And I can only guess that is because he really doesn't believe in them.
I know you know and others who post here do as well....You either get it, or you don't. And it's at that point that they're coming after whats yours including eventually your rights.
Once again you caught me. I spend my nights dreaming of a 1984 society and my days shredding copies of the Constitution. That is when I am not burning all the American flags I can find. Yes complete state control I am all for it. You must have found me out by reading in between the lines and finding my secret code since you could not cite on article which supports your argument. I should warn you that since you found out about the conspiracy the black helicopters will be coming to take you away to those FEMA reeducation camps. Then you will be one of us as part of the civilian national security force.
Ryan,
Typical liberal response.
After writing dozens of articles, defending tyrannical policies and attacking anyone who criticizes their creators, we will now endure your ridicule and sarcasm for stating the obvious.
Ryan,
I was just stating my opinion based on the evidence or lack thereof. In a way you confirmed it by not citing a counterexample where you state unequvically individual freedoms or our Constitutional Republic.
On the thread about Palin, there is a poster who states clearly "they are afraid of 60 % of Americans". And yet there is no comment about FEMA or Black Helicopters or ridicule from you....because she is also afraid of Sarah Palin. As a case in point. Those that oppose the Ideas or people that support the opposite of the Liberal Agenda you must defend at all costs. Nothing different than my first statement.
Jamie: Your argument is too illogical to put into words. Regardless I will try. You infer that because I DO NOT say something that I must not be in favor of it. So if I refuse to say I support individual liberties than I must be against them. That is a lie. Let me do the same to you right now. "Jamie has never before said that he is for the humane treatment of animals, therefore Jamie must be in favor of animal abuse. That is right Jamie favors the torture of dogs." Do I believe that...no, but the argument uses the same logic of your argument.
Here Jamie...cite me a quote from ONE of my articles that supports this statement you made about me. "Ryan is ultimately for state control and any mechanism the State uses to gain it's ultimate complete control must and will be defended." You can not support that statement with ANY actual quotes. Your problem is you make it personal and accuse with no evidence. Much like Hoffman does with ACORN in this article.
Ryan Witt,
OK, I'll bite. Name one of Obama's policies that you oppose and tell us why? We would like to be fair!
(Sigh!) I suppose one could use this as a teachable moment.
OK Ryan....You state 'I don't believe in the Humane treatment of Animals'. I will state categorically that I do support the humane Treatment of Animals. I in fact support it legislatively and financially out of my owm pocket...including shelters in the Mideast and India. Now, Notice that YOU did not state what you believe, or feel, or support or anything about Ryan's take on the Humane Treatment of Animals.
And THAT is a BIG difference between Liberal/Socialists and Conservatives. Liberals wiil resort to word games instead of clear definative statements.
Once again....I said clearly [I assumed ]your take on individulal Rights and Constitutional Republics was negative or perhaps even hostile...BECAUSE you have never stated otherwise when challanged. WHICH, as everyone can see you are STILL silent on. There is absolutely NOTHING illogical in what I said or how I said it. Do you want me to show you in Boolean Algebra?
So Jamie: Are you for the individual liberty of a woman's right to chose an abortion? Are you for the individual liberty of people homosexuals to marry.
I am for individual liberties but like everything there is a limit. That is the difference between liberals and conservatives. We recognize the complexities of government and life while you only think in absolutes. I am not for the individual liberty of anyone to murder someone for no reason. I believe individual liberties can be limited by consent of the people. So when the people voted to allow for an income tax through a constitutional amendment I believe that meant they consented to the limiting of the liberty to some degree. See that is part of a a "Constitutional Republic." The people can chose to give up some freedoms for what they view as a greater benefit. That is not tyranny that is democracy and the "Constitutional Republic" we live in.
Gigi: I opposed the way the stimulus was structured. Too much money went to corporations. I would have preferred something more along the lines of the New Deal where huge job programs like the CCC were created. I also oppose the current deal proposed with North Korea. Now can you name any conservative policies you opposed? Is government intervention EVER ok with you Gigi? Under what circumstances is government good instead of bad?
You never answered the simple question. Yes or No.
And I do not recognize your right to give up my rights or my freedom.
Unless you can unequivically say Yes you are for protecting Individual rights one can assume you are not.
The PEOPLE NEVER gave their consent to an INCOME TAX!! It was pushed through in 1913 when most of the congress was gone for Christmas Holiday.
That my friend is DISINFORMATION at best. And A LIE at worst.
You say " the INDIVIDUAL's rights can be limited by consent of the people". That IS NOT a Constitutional Republic. That is a Democracy. Our Government is (or was) A Constitutional Republic. Democracy is the rule of the Many OVER the FEW. It is the 51 people in the room voting themselves the property and rights of the other 49 people in the room. As such it is SOCIALISM and MOB rule...it eventually leads to a Totalitarian Oligarchy which pretends to rule on behalf of the "majority's" interest ie the 51 people in the room.
You do not have the Strength of Character or honestly to say what many who post here already know. That you are a Socialist/Liberal with strong communist leanings who believes that people with your predilections should be the "Deciders" in all matters relating to "Limiting Individuals rights" as dictated by the consent of your 51%.
Your argument below about the indiv. right to murder is a strawman argument. You reserve that right for the "deciders" correct?
Ryan Witt,
When you say that you would prefer 'more government' such as CCC in the 'stimulus' plan and less to the private sector, you are only admitting that you are to the 'left' of this liberal congress??
That's what I thought, since you defend ACORN and condemn
those young citizens for taking it upon themselves to expose what most people suspected about ACORN, but nobody would do anything about! Even your hero, Jon Stewart, thought 60 Minutes should have done it. But 60 Minutes is in the 'tank' too.
What you do with your articles is a very effective tactic of socialist/communist movement. You isolate and ridicule the opposition. You do not have popular support for your 'ideas', so you are always focused on destroying your opponents.
You riducule those who oppose you, without giving a good argument for your policies in the first place (trying the terrorists in NYC for example).
People are on your tactics, Ryan. We are awake and we know what's going on!
Jamie: Our "Constitutional Republic" prescribes ways in which the PEOPLE can in fact change the laws or even the Constitution itself. It is not a static document. So if the people consent to giving up liberty they can do so.
Your belief on the income tax amendment fascinates me though. Are you honestly saying that we have been living under an unconstitutional constitutional amendment for all these years? Why does the Supreme Court not agree with you as surely this has been challenged by people who think like you? I am honestly asking not trying to mock you here.
Gigi: I answered your question truthfully. You did not say how do you disagree with Obama in a conservative way you asked me how I have disagreed. Geez.
I do not ridicule. I point out what they say. In the above article I simply report what Hoffman said and what ACORN said in defense. If you view that as "ridicule" then maybe it is because your side is always making bad points as Hoffman does in this article. Do you have any evidence that in fact ACORN was conducting political activity in New York's 23rd? Because I have not seen one credible source that says they have.
Oh and by the way here is what I think of ACORN. I think they help a tremendous amount of people which is more than I can say for many conservative organizations. I think they grew quickly, too quickly. I think as a result they lost control of many operations and bad stuff went on that should not have. I think the bad stuff is the exception and not the rule however. They are not all good or all bad.
Gigi: Now where are the answers to the questions I posed to you? You love to attack me Gigi but do you stand for anything yourself?
As I explained already; the reason for my question as to your leftist beliefs was to address the fact that when Jaime pointed out that you believe in state control and will defend the mechanisms to get and keep that control (ACORN), you reacted with ridicule and scorn to the accusation instead of admitting it!
But since you asked, of cource I believe there are cicumstances when government is good. As an example, if there is no government, it is a free for all like the wild west. You would spend so much time defending your property and your life that you wouldn't be able to enjoy the fruits of your labor.
Government should protect your rights and freedoms. It should protect the borders from enemies. It should not take what's mine and give it to someone else. The private sector does a much better job of that through donations to charity..conservative organizations (churches) do a great job without the corruption and waste that government is guilty of.
Pages
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!