Tuesday, November 24, 2009
On an Acorn Fallen Pretty Far From the Tree
Posted by Jackson Baker on Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 2:00 AM
- Wade Rathke
I recall being holed up in a Little Rock hotel late one night in 1982 while I was working on an Arkansas political campaign and listening to a meeting of the group transpire either overhead or in an adjoining room. In whichever case, it was like I was right there, hearing every voice as a passionate argument went on between ACORN field reps over the best recruiting strategies to pursue in Arkansas.
What I recall most, beside the aforesaid passion, was the absolute sincerity and sense of commitment, even zeal, of the participants for doing something about the living conditions of the poor and powerless. That leaked through the partition, and, though it eventually became a drone that I went to sleep by, I was not unimpressed.
Well, here I was Monday morning looking at an email from the Tennessee Republican Party (being in the business, as it were, I’m on everybody’s send list) noting that one Wade Rathke was due to speak at the University of Memphis that night.
He was identified as ACORN’s co-founder and taken to task by the anonymous GOP scribe for concealing the embarrassing fact that his brother had embezzled almost $1 million from the group — a circumstance that supposedly prompted Rathke to resign from ACORN only last month.
I gather that the point of the email was to entice Republicans to go heckle Rathke or, at the very least, to monitor his activities. For myself, remembering the intensity and righteous energy I’d overheard in that Arkansas hotel way back when, I thought I would go give the ACORN man a fair hearing if circumstances permitted.
Later in the day, though, I got another email alerting me to an entry in the aforesaid Rathke’s personal blog. (Like I said, I’m in the business.)
Discussing a meeting sometime Sunday with “twenty community leaders” here in Memphis, Rathke went on to deal with a recent controversy involving developer Harold Buehler’s ultimately successful application, under a federal program, to acquire 140 vacant lots to develop rental property on.
Said Rathke: “I found a squib by Jackson Baker in something called the ‘political beat’ in the Memphis Flyer. Despite Baker’s bias in favor of Buehler and his contempt for Commissioner Henri Brooks, and anyone who opposes this project, his piece does confirm the facts behind the minister’s disgust and my new friends’ revulsion at this action.”
Whereupon he went on to quote several paragraphs from my coverage of a commission meeting, and, sure enough, those paragraphs could be used to support criticism of Buehler’s project. Or mayhap to support the project, for that matter. Or whatever one chose to think, really, since all I was aiming to do was, as Rathke would put it, to “confirm the facts” behind the controversy. Not to argue them one way or the other.
I own up to contributing “squibs” on a regular basis to “something called the ‘political beat’ in the Memphis Flyer” (that would be online) and to something else called “Politics” in the print edition of the Flyer. I disclaim, however, any “bias in favor of Buehler” and, most certainly, any “contempt for Commissioner Henri Brooks, and anyone who opposes this project.” Au contraire. I confess to a regard for several opponents of the project, and a genuine respect for Commissioner Brooks, especially for her determination to go it alone if need be on behalf of causes she holds dear. (Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act never had a more dedicated watchdog.)
What I have “contempt” for is someone who rolls into town and, on the basis of a single ex parte conversation and a hasty skimming (and misreading) of one article, becomes an instant authority on people, places, and things he knows not of. For the record, Rathke should know that most of the certifiable progressives on the commission, those who would be expected to underwrite the goals of organizations like, say, ACORN, voted with Buehler. Rightly or wrongly.
On the evidence of Mr. Rathke’s capacity for blatant prejudgment, I find myself at least leaning to the notion that the conscientious members of ACORN might be well rid of him, whatever his contributions of the past. And that’s the end of this squib.
Showing 1-24 of 24
Jackson, educate yourself on ACORN's shenanigans by starting here, a new story that broke Monday:
http://biggovernment.com/2009/11/23/breaki…
I saw a poll recently showing that a clear majority of Republicans believe that ACORN stole the 2008 presidential election on behalf of Barack Obama. Of course, this is also the proffered explanation for Doug Hoffman's loss in NY-23. As long as ACORN is standing in for George Soros as the right's favorite boogeyman, I'm going to take any "shocking exposes" or "massive document dumps" from conservative websites with a grain of salt. Like the latest non-scandal known as Climategate, or the supposed suppression of turnout at the Teabagger rally based on a photo from the Promise Keepers march, these things usually turn out to be a whole lot of smoke and not much fire.
ACORN is way too large, and too long lived an organization for the premise that they are all bad or all good to hold up.
I sympathize, Jackson. In my earlier more radical days, I worked with ACORN organizers on a few things. In many communities they represented the best in public advocacy. Unfortunately, as in all politics and most religion, the size and "success" of the organization led to corruption and failed accountability.
It is most unfortunate that in this time so ripe for change, our change-making movements have become so institutionally moribund.
I think ACORN has done much good, and hopefully they will avoid future problems. Republicans needed a scapegoat to blame for losing the election. Instead of blaming the economy, the war, Bush, Cheney, and Palin, ACORN became the culprit.
ACORN IS A LIGHTNING ROD! Don't know what to believe, but one thing is for sure...they know how to get press, even though it's mostly negavitve
Oh Derek, you big ideophobe. Here you go, pre-sanitised for your ideological protection:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/11/24/…
Mike, I'd trust you before I'd trust the Tiffany Network. I figured you knew that by now.
Wow, you really are an ideophobe! Tell ya what. Give me a few days to drive around Midtown / Downtown and see if I can find it graffito'd on a wall. Would that pass muster for ya?
What the hell does that even mean?
A rather older article on ACORN from a Libertarian perspective.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilor…
Here is Wade's blog - http://chieforganizer.org/2009/11/23/memph…
Thanks for the post, Tom. I could find little to disagree with in Wade's blog. I find it amazing that an out of towner could roll in, have one meal with community activists, and then turn around and so succinctly nail our problems to an electronic wall.
OT, but just ran across this:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/…
We may have seen the last of Junior....
If he could beat Gillibrand, which is a stretch in and of itself, he would be running against Rudy Giuliani, who, though a Republican, is far, far more liberal than he is. It would be the Corker race all over again, only with a much more liberal electorate this time around. He would get crushed and we could say hello to Senator Giuliani.
Scott, I, too, find Mr. Rathke's capacity for instant toetap analysis "amazing," but in a different sense. I'd say "incredible," rather. Literally. I wonder, again, if he realizes the Buehler initiative was led on the county commission by the closest facsimile we have in these parts to an ACORN sensibility.
I wasn't really considering that he would win. I was considering that it indicated a commitment to establish residency elsewhere. I wouldn't want him -- or Rudy -- in the Senate. He is too conservative.
Yes Jr is considered a conservative, but I like to think of him as more of a "popularist." Which ever route is the most popular is the one he will take. I think he is much better suited for Hollywood (which is where I think he would truly rather be) than D.C.
Just my opinion and observations.
Hey! You Jr. posters can go to the article (also in "Political Beat") about him and Gillibrand. It's up now.
I'm sorry, JB, are you saying that Mulroy is the closest thing to an "ACORN sensibility" in these parts?
Life is complex, and the following things can all be true (and I think they are):
1. Baker has not shown bias in his reporting of the Buehler item, and was correct to say that most Commissioners generally considered "progressive" were in fact supportive of the item.
2. There was a respectable "progressive" argument for the Buehler item: i.e., that affordable new rental housing in blighted inner city areas is better than weed-filled vacanot lots in those areas.
3. Rathke was rash to jump to conclusions about it based on such little knowledge.
4. Nonetheless, ACORN has accomplished much good over the years, and the fundamentals of its policy goals are still worthwhile.
5. Nonetheless, ACORN's exposed behavior in encouraging illegal and fraudulent behavior exposes some real problems of culture in the organization.
6. Whatever an ideophobe is, exactly, autoegocrat is not one.
Having received the same e-mail, I can report that its purpose was to "encourage [recipients] to contact U of M President Shirley Raines and respectfully express [their] concern about left-wing bias at our hometown University campus," rather than to, as you put it, "entice Republicans to go heckle Rathke or, at the very least, to monitor his activities."
By that measure, one could just as easily "gather" that the purpose of this article was to advocate the monitoring of Rathke's activities and entice hecklers.
So it's ironic that your chief complaint with Rathke, elicited by his poor textual analysis, is one that must be applied to your own failed offering.
It's also telling that your romantic view of ACORN would flip not because of an egregious embezzlement scandal that surely drained resources that might otherwise have been enjoyed by those "poor and powerless" individuals the organization professes to help, and not because of an array of nationwide voter registration fraud convictions that has etched away at its reputation and ability to represent the under-privileged, nor because of the series of videos exposing their eagerness to conspire in tax fraud, human smuggling, prostitution and other, assorted criminal activities. No, you are souring on ACORN because of what is essentially a personal pique.
Oh, it's young Mick. I'd almost (like everybody else) forgotten about him. You're on point, Mick, about the motive to "advocate the monitoring of Rathke's activities and entice hecklers." And I'm not "souring" on ACORN or anybody else except for interlopers who shoot first and ask questons later and want very, very badly to get noticed. Come to think of it, Mick, does that shoe fit? (Talk about failed offerings!)
THIS WEEK'S ISSUE
Comments (24) RSS