ACORN Re-Brands Itself As, “Delawareans For Social And Economic Justice!”

ACORN, “The Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now,” has re-invented itself in Delaware, or so it seems. ACORN has opened an office on 408 East 8th Street in Wilmington, using the name, “Delawareans for Social and Economic Justice,” (DSEJ). It wasn’t too long ago that ACORN was giving prostitutes and pimps tips on how to claim underage El Salvadorian Girls as dependents on their taxes. James O’Keefe, a filmmaker and his associate named Kenya, posed as a pimp and a prostitute on July 24th, when they visited the Baltimore office of ACORN. The tape shows Kenya saying that she makes $8,000 a month and an ACORN employee saying that they could submit a tax return for $9600, for the whole year. The tape, later released in September of 2009, goes on to show the ACORN employee giving instructions to the couple, on how to work the underage girls from El Salvador as prostitutes without getting in trouble. There are instances in Brooklyn New York of ACORN Staff members coaching O’Keefe and his associate on opening houses of prostitution.” It was also reported, that ACORN would take part in counting people in taking the US Census and be paid, despite having a reputation of being involved in massive voter fraud. With elections coming and ACORN surviving obviously intact despite criminal charges in other states and allegations of voter fraud, Delaware voters must keep a vigilant eye at the polls this election cycle. Many people believe that voter fraud is not a problem in Delaware but, I would advise that people in the republican party and all persons interested in fair elections, to offer help in staffing the polls during the 2012 election cycle. Our adversaries have not been eliminated but have simply re-invented themselves to continue operations as usual. For every illegal vote that is cast, one honest vote in negated. Now is the time to be vigilant, don’t wait until the election is over to complain. As a voting citizen, if you don’t take action and become involved in the election process, you lose your right to complain later, if things don’t go your way. We, as a free republic and a free people must do our part to safeguard the election process and maintain the freedoms that our forefathers have shed their blood to provide us. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtTnizEnC1U

33 thoughts on “ACORN Re-Brands Itself As, “Delawareans For Social And Economic Justice!””

  1. But just remember, though — requiring one to show a photo ID before voting is “voter suppression” and will be fought tooth and nail by our esteemed Justice Dept.

  2. Hube
    Everyone I’ve talked to indicates to me that they expect massive voter fraud to keep the “cheap con man in an expensive suit,” in office.
    All we’re looking for is a fair election, if that’s possible.

  3. I attended the Delaware 9-12 Patriots meeting last night where they were talking about this and it does look like ACORN in alive and well in Delaware. We have a right to be concerned.

  4. “just remember, though — requiring one to show a photo ID before voting is “voter suppression” and will be fought tooth and nail by our esteemed Justice Dept.”

    Hube, you’re so cut off from the real world it would be laughable if it weren’t so dangerous. In the real world, not having a photo ID describes hundreds of thousands of people, mostly elderly, poor and students. You could look it up.

    I especially like the story of the 95-year-old retired charwoman in Tennessee who won’t be allowed to vote because she doesn’t have a drivers license or passport. It’s ironic because the job place she retired from, after 30 years, was the Tennessee statehouse.

  5. “Everyone I’ve talked to indicates to me that they expect massive voter fraud”

    Which illustrates nothing beyond the extremely limited backgrounds of the people who will talk with you.

  6. Geezer
    “Hube, you’re so cut off from the real world it would be laughable if it weren’t so dangerous. In the real world, not having a photo ID describes hundreds of thousands of people, mostly elderly, poor and students. You could look it up.”

    You are the one cut off from reality Geez. Asking someone to show a photo ID to vote is reasonable. It would sure cut down on voter fraud. It doesn’t describe “hundreds of thousands of people,” it just asks someone to prove who they are.

  7. My view is that I would like there to be a requirement for everyone to have some form of acceptable identification, be it a DL, Passport or just a state or federal issued identification card.

    Once, and if, that were to be ever implemented, then it would be acceptable for states to require a positive means of identification prior to voting.

    In general, I do not believe there is widespread voter fraud in this nation. However, I also see no reason a person cannot be required to demonstrate that they are residing in the district in which they are voting.

  8. Hube,

    Every fraudulent vote cast is a suppression of every legal vote cast.
    I don’t know how Geez gets his meds or cashes his checks or picks up lay-aways, etc, etc, but a photo ID is required for the rest of us.

  9. Geezer – what is hindering those elderly, students and poor from getting a state ID card? Are the too apathetic to get one?

  10. Dave, I don’t go quite as far as you, because I prefer to keep government mandates to a minimum, even seemingly simple and harmless ones. Rather than mandating that everyone have some form of government issued photo ID, I think that providing every citizen with access to a government issued ID is sufficient, and we are either at that point or very close to it already. I’d wager that even the 95 year old Tennessee woman has access to a state ID if she so chooses.

    If a citizen is able vote than chances are that they will also be able to obtain a valid ID.

  11. When the State of Indiana was sued by the leftists they could not find one instance of anyone being turned away due to the Indiana law. The case was thrown out of court. We already have voter ID requirements in Delaware. Who has been denied at the polling place?

    Leftists want to steal elections that is why they are opposed to ID requirements.

  12. Hube, you’re so cut off from the real world it would be laughable if it weren’t so dangerous. In the real world, not having a photo ID describes hundreds of thousands of people, mostly elderly, poor and students. You could look it up.

    Then all the other countries on the planet that require photo ID to vote are “cut off” from the real world, Geez. They must also be dangerous, too. Your soft bigotry of low expectations is perfectly in line with your pathetic brand of “progressivism.” You need an ID for myriad other basic things in life, but to cast a legal vote? Heaven FORBID!! That’s what’s laughable. You could look it up.

    I especially like the story of the 95-year-old retired charwoman in Tennessee who won’t be allowed to vote because she doesn’t have a drivers license or passport. It’s ironic because the job place she retired from, after 30 years, was the Tennessee statehouse.

    I especially like the story of a 95 year old retired chairwoman who can still vote by absentee ballot, provided she meets the requirements. I also especially like the story of a retired 95 year old chairwoman who, if she can actually take the time and effort to make it to a polling place, can take the same time and effort to get the necessary photo ID in order to vote.

  13. Geezer – what is hindering those elderly, students and poor from getting a state ID card? Are the too apathetic to get one?

    Most probably. That, and “progressives” like Geezer believe they’re “saving” the poor, elderly and minorities from those nasty GOPers … i.e. “The Man.” After all, “progressivism” posits that very thing — that said groups cannot take adequate care of themselves and NEED people like Geez to vouch for them.

  14. Over 70% of the American public supports voter ID. Similar percentages of various minority groups do, too, #s varying by state.

    You can look it up.

  15. Remember, Saul Alinsky wrote in his book “rules for Radicals,” that was originally named “Rules for Revolution, “The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the Revolution!”
    To progressive liberals or Alinsky radicals, democracy means getting those who are in, out. Their goal is to mobilize the poor and oppressed as a battering ram to bring down the system.
    Until he became a full-time elected legislator in 1996, the focus of Obama’s political activities was the largest radical organization in the United States, ACORN, which was built on the Alinksy model of community organizing.
    Hillary Clinton wrote in her Senior thesis: “Alinsky is regarded by many as the proponent of a dangerous socio/political philosophy. As such, he has been feared, just as Eugene Debs or Walt Whitman or Martin Luther King has been feared because each embraced the most radical of political faiths, democracy.”

  16. A quote from David Horowitz’s book regarding Saul Alinsky’s book, “Rules for Radicals,” formerly named “Rules for Revolution.”
    Unlike Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama never personally met Saul Alinsky. But as a young man, he became an adept practitioner of Alinsky’s methods. In 1986, at the age of 23 and only three years out of Columbia University, Obama was hired by the Alinsky team to organize residents on the South Side of Chicago. While learning and applying Alinsky’s philosophy of street-level democracy, the group that Obama joined was part of a network that included the Gamaliel Foundation, a religious group that operated on Alinsky principles. Obama became director of the Developing Communities Project, an affiliate of the Gamaliel Foundation, where he worked for the next three years on initiatives that ranged from job training to school reform to hazardous waste cleanup. A reporter who researched the projects sums them in these words: “The proposed solution to every problem on the South Side was a distribution of government funds.”

  17. I could be wrong, but I thought Delaware required everyone to have a state ID card in liue of a drivers liscense or other form of acceptable ID. If you do not have adequate identification you can be detained by the police for xx, untill they sort you out?

    The ID question is really allready a law, and it is a choice. If you choose not to obtain an ID and live off the grid, you can not be expect to participate in grid activities.

    Just for the record I was asked to show ID the last election cycle because the challenger had a problem with mu signature. I produced ID and voted. Everyone went away happy.

  18. “The proposed solution to every problem on the South Side was a distribution of government funds.”

    What this actually means is a redistribution of wealth which destroys the creation of wealth to the extent that it’s based on coercion/taxation instead of liberty/charity.

    But it seems like American politicians have found a way to have things both ways by stealing from the poor, the middle class and the rest of the world. I.e. they print money to “distribute” to bankers and other patrons while pretending that it’s the equivalent of wealth. Not that they understand their corruption given their ignorance and stupidity. They probably even think of themselves as noble, aristocratic and fit to be the ruling class.

  19. laffter what the “poll worker” did was in perfect compliance with the Delaware Code. If the signature did not appear to be the voter’s signature any poll worker can ask for additional identification. It is common policy.

    In addition there is no judge at the polling place. There are over 400 polling places in Delaware and even in a state overrun with lawyers one cannot find enough judges to sit for 13 hours in a polling place.

    There are 2 poll workers at every polling place that have the title of being a judge. One is a Democrat and the other is a Republican. They are basically poll workers who have done the job longer than the first people you see when you come in. Along with the inspector (another poll worker) they have the ability to deal with issues regarding identity for voting. However none of these people are really judges.

    Now maybe if you spent more time reading code and less time in here and you would be better off.

  20. mynym
    “The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the Revolution!” (Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals)

    If a progressive or radical (the same thing) can’t win on the issues, they will immediately change to an agenda of character assassination and personal destruction. They will always get away from the issue being discussed and personally attack the Poster.
    It can be seen right here on this site when commenters cross over from Delaware Liberal.

  21. As I clearly stated TW, I was exactly referring to poll judges dear – not court judges and that is exactly what I said – election judges.
    please take things in context – that is what they are called, election judges and they are on-site and that is also what I said.

    you may be asked to show an ID but you do not have to produce a PHOTO ID. – please link to the part of the DE code that states that

    Having worked the polls for as long as I have I have yet to see that part of the DE code.
    It is hysterical to read your post as you try to correct me, do a long explaination, then ultimately say the same thing I did.
    you state that the state is “overrun” with lawyers, and there are not enough judges to have them at polling places – then you go on to explain what Polling/election judges are – they are still JUDGES!!

    Too funny!! maybe you should re-read your posts before you hit “submit”

    TITLE 15 CHAPTER 47 § 4701 (b)(1) ..”2 judges of election, 1 from each of the 2 principal political parties”

    Yup – thats what I said = election judges in my original post

    this is what is required in DE for ID to vote – Photo ID
    Utility bill
    Paycheck
    Any government document with voter’s name and address

    TITLE 15 CHAPTER 47 § 4937. Voting procedure
    (a) A voter, upon entering the room where an election is being held, shall announce that voter’s own name and address and provide proof of identity, whereupon the clerks shall place a mark or make a notation of his or her name upon the election district record. In the event the voter does not have proof of identity with them, the voter shall sign an affidavit of affirmation that the voter is the person listed on the election district record.

    (b) If it appears that the voter is properly registered, an election officer shall hand to the voter a voter signature card which the voter shall sign. In the event that the voter is unable to sign a voter signature card for any reason the election officer shall sign the voter’s name on the voter signature card and the election officer’s name and make note that the voter is unable to personally sign the card.

    (c) In the event of a challenge as to the identity of the voter or residency of the voter, the voter’s right to vote shall be determined by a majority vote of the inspector and the 2 judges of the election. In the event that the voter is not permitted to vote, the voter’s signature card shall be marked “not permitted to vote” and signed by 2 election officers and shall be forwarded to the department at the same time and in the same manner as other voter signature cards are sent to the department.

    Any more questions TW?? I would be glad to clear them up for you?

  22. @Don Ayotte – not so sir……

    I think I have clearly won on the issue with waterpirate and TW – and there was no…”agenda of character assassination and personal destruction’

    please refrain from painting all people with the same brush

    thanks – i dont do it to you….

  23. …and for the record there is NO law in Delaware that mandates anyone carry an ID…[n]ow, there are two laws that you thought existed that dont – and you my friend got the bad end of one of them because you dont know your rights.

    spend more time reading code and less time in here and you would be better..laffter

    Uh, what don’t you understand about..

    I could be wrong, but I thought Delaware required everyone to have a state ID card in liue of a drivers liscense or other form of acceptable ID. If you do not have adequate identification you can be detained by the police for xx, untill they sort you out?

    And the police can detain you until you can be properly identified.

  24. NO – the police in DE can only detain you for approx. 2 hours – if they do not charge you (meaning they have probable cause to) even if they do not ID you in that time , they must release you.
    or habeus corpus kicks in….and you have a nice civil law suit for violation of several amendments and the Bill of Rights. – you know the unlawful search and seizure stuff.

    what part of that do YOU not understand?
    OH – thats right – you obviously dont know your rights

    I bet you think you have a right to a phone call too – LOL
    umm, no you dont.

    @Don – you must be feeling guilty – I sure dont – I simply took your comment in context.

    Maybe you missed waterpirate’s next sentance, “The ID question is really allready a law” that was not a question, that was phrased as on absolute – I simply pointed out the fallacy, but the truth hurts sometimes.

    I am amazed that a group of Liberty loving conservatives who espouse knowing and understanding the founding documents and their rights are confused about this rather simple basic concept – and remember, this conversation on voting and detention is Delaware specific… other states vary.
    I’m glad I didn’t take the Constitutional law classes you folks did!

    Law and Order is not how to understand the jurisprudence system in the US. Sorry… “Cops” doesnt work well either..

  25. Wow,
    Been gone awhile.
    Your being able to spout DE code on command is a true gift. What good it will do you when dealing with law enforcement is yet to be determined. As a participating member of society I carry a ID by choice, it is helpfull. When I was asked to produce it at the polls, I gladly did, issue over. I am sorry you think I am being duped, I would call it voluntary compliance for my own wellfare of being. If you choose civil lawsuits over voluntary compliance, you have more time to waste than I do.

  26. NO – the police in DE can only detain you for approx. 2 hours – if they do not charge you (meaning they have probable cause to) even if they do not ID you in that time , they must release you.

    Wrong. Failure to identify one’s self to police is against Delaware law. Hence, to charge you, you would need to be ‘processed’ (sent to SCI-Georgetown) and then arraigned. Of course, to be arraigned, you would need to be identified. How long do you think an individual would resist identifying him/her self (Also see US Supreme Court; Hiiber v. Nevada 6th District Court)? Trust me, it is a battle not worth fighting.

    …or habeus corpus kicks in….

    How? Under a ‘John/Jane Doe petition? Under what grounds would anonymity be necessary?

    …and you have a nice civil law suit for violation of several amendments and the Bill of Rights. – you know the unlawful search and seizure stuff.

    Again, see Hiibel v. Nevada 6th Judicial District…early 90’s I think.

    …what part of that do YOU not understand?
    OH – thats right – you obviously dont know your rights…

    Try again.

  27. LOL – failure to Identify is not the issue
    the inability to CONFIRM said identity IS the issue

    my bad for failing to make that more clear for you – I do forget who I am dealing with..

    If i say I am Jim Jones, and Jim Jones doesnt have an ID – how can they confirm that I am who i say I am , – I did not fail to identify, they simply cannot confirm said identity, and that cannot just snatch me up off the street without PC and haul me over to SCI or the Troop etc and run my prints for the sake of an identity….It just doesnt work like that, ever!

    LOL and you have never seen a “Jane Doe” warrant or “John Doe” warrant?? – I cannot count how many I have seen – thats how they process an open warrant when they are looking for a suspect but have not confirmed identity of the suspect…
    As for arraignement, really, do you have any idea how many John and Jane Does sit in SCI?? ask any guard…go ahead, ask, they may have a name, given by the person, but when its unverified, next to that but, before the SBI number is JOHN/JANE DOE – WOW! imagine that!! a little thing like a name will not stop an arraignment….they will arraign under John/Jane Doe too. its better than letting the suspect back out on the street to re-offend. you folks really have no idea of how it works – try a citizen’s police academy or something – but this darts in the dark game is only amusing me.

    WOW! – you have a lot to learn – obviously have never worked law enforcement/corrections/courts either… too funny

    a Habeus Corpus obviously would be filed by the petitioner and they would of course identify themselves in it – but that would be AFTER the fact of the unlawful arrest/detention..of course

    but good try on the research, Rick – but no dice, you are wrong – and relying on case law that is 20 years old is NOT a good thing – I can drag up case law that supports all sorts of things – you know, like Dred-Scott?? but ummmm, it no longer applies……..

    @waterpirate – maybe I can quote state/federal code and know code because I actually work with code- maybe its my job??
    and yes, it is VERY handy

    and remember sometimes those civil lawsuits protect folks like you from having your rights violtated – remember- never piss off a retired attorney with nothing but time on their hands.

    Good night all – start with the Bill of Rights and read ON!! great stuff!!

Comments are closed.