Acorn has generated a lot of news this week. All of the news was bad for Acorn and almost all of it bad for the United States. Acorn said each case was isolated and not reflective of Acorn’s standards. Let’s look at the cases and see if we can figure out if it was isolated or a pattern.

The first case that hit the news was a voter fraud case out of Florida. Acorn ended up firing 11 people because of this case. Has Acorn ever been accused of voter fraud? Was that just one time or many times? In the 2008 election, Acorn was involved in registering new voters for Barack Obama and the Democrats. That is just fine as long as they do it legally. But, almost immediately cries of voter fraud started up all over the country. In Nevada, one county registered the entire starting lineup of the Green Bay Packers. Those men live in Wisconsin, not Nevada. They also registered every Disney character. A county in Pennsylvania had more registered voters than there were people in the county. That was counting men, women and children in the total number of people. So, voter fraud was rampant wherever Acorn was involved in voter registration. Those areas also were where allegations of voting irregularity took place. In Philadelphia, there was a report of a bus that took a group of people from one polling place to another around Philadelphia. The driver of the bus was worker from Acorn. So, I think we can safely say that voter fraud is a trademark issue for Acorn and not an isolated incident.

The next two involve a man and a woman coming to Acorn to ask for help in obtaining a house. The house was to be used as a brothel involving underage sex slaves from El Salvador. In Baltimore, the Acorn employees immediately helped the man and woman. They told them how to make the income legal and how to report it to the IRS. They even told them how to use the underage girls from El Salvador as tax deductions. In Washington, D.C., the man and woman took longer to convince Acorn to help them with their brothel. In both cases the Acorn workers seemed very well acquainted with the law and how to get around IRS regulations. These were the only two times this couple made this attempt. When you have nearly identical results in two different locations it would indicate to me that there is something there. There is a small chance it could be isolated, but with two similar outcomes, that is not likely. The employees were too sure of themselves for it to be just isolated incidents. It had to be something they either practiced with regularly or dealt with regularly. I am not talking the exact details, but in general of an illegal activity that they try to make legal.

The fourth incident involving Acorn is kind of a mixed bag result. It is bad for Acorn and great for the United States. The Census Dept. decided that they will not use Acorn in any capacity in the 2010 census. That should greatly reduce the amount of census fraud that will take place. Acorn will lose some funding, which is great. And the US will reduce census fraud which is great. The US came out way ahead on this incident.

Why is Acorn important? They were written into the stimulus bill to receive $8.5 billion. For an organization as corrupt as Acorn to receive that much money is terrible. The money has not been spent, so it can be rescinded. It should be rescinded as soon as possible. Also any contracts the federal government has with Acorn should be ended right now. We should not be funding an organization that is this corrupt. Any organization that advises citizens on how to break the law should be put out on the street as soon as possible. The only problem with this scenario is that Barack Obama worked for and trained Acorn personnel. He will not like the fact that Acorn will be cut out of the stimulus bill. He promised them a place at the trough, I mean table. He will be the biggest obstacle to ridding ourselves of this obviously corrupt organization.

Glen Beck said this week that no legislation should move in Washington until we remove the massive corruption from Washington. I completely agree with that assessment. As long as corruption rules the roost, no good can come out of Washington. The Book of Mormon has the civilization falling primarily because of this type of corruption. We can still rescue ourselves from this corruption. We have to do it soon. Encourage our leaders to rid ourselves of corruption, now. The cost will be high in the short run. The cost will go higher the longer we wait. If we do nothing at all, it will be the highest cost of all. The activities of today will help in that regard. We need to sweep Washington clean of corruption. We will lose a lot of politicians in the process. Some of them may even agree with us, but if they are corrupt, they must go.

Van Jones bit the dust. Officially, he “retired” (at about 40) from federal service. He did not retire; he was pushed out by the Obama administration. He and they did not want their finger prints on the event, so the thought up this story to cover the actual truth.

Who is responsible for Van Jones taking a long hike? World Net Daily first broke the story when Van Jones was appointed. But, they were not able to generate a lot of heat to get Van Jones to quit or even get the Obama administration to blink. Glen Beck has been raking Van Jones over the coals for about the last 10 days. The amount of heat Glen Beck generated would have to be what caused Van Jones to quit. Sean Hannity started to do stories on Van Jones this past week. To sum up the credit, World Net Daily has to be given partial credit for breaking the story. Glen Beck has to be given credit for actually getting Van Jones to quit because he was generating a lot of heat. Other talk show hosts were playing off of what Glen Beck had uncovered. Glen Beck’s research team is second to none. They make absolutely certain that Glen is protected when he stands in front of a camera or a microphone and tells it like it is. Part of the credit also has to be given to the Obama team that fumbled the ball at every opportunity. They would have to be likened to the “Keystone Kops” of old movie fame.

The question that has to be asked now is: Who is the next target on the Obama team? There are a lot of shady characters as Czars on the Obama team. Some have already been exposed during the Van Jones exposure as being communist or part of communist groups.

The remaining question about Van Jones is: how did this man get so close to the President? With the background he had there is no way he could have been vetted by the FBI. He must have been vetted by the White House. That says a lot about the White House and their lack of ability to get things done. Either they did not know who Van Jones was, which makes them incompetent. Or they knew who Van Jones was which makes them part of the problem. If they knew who Van Jones was and still approved him, how did these people get approved? Keep walking backwards until you get to the person or persons who are responsible for all these communists and socialist sympathizers getting high level access to the President of the United States. I don’t know about you, but I get real nervous whenever any President gets near a communist. But I am especially worried when THIS president gets near a communist. Barack Obama always seems to have a lot of communists around him. That is probably just a coincidence.

 The next Czar to fall will most likely be the Science Czar, John Holdren. John Holdren advocates forced sterilization of women. That position and many other controversial positions will put John Holdren in the cross hairs of Glen Beck and other conservative talk shows. Now that one Czar has fallen because of an investigation into the background of Van Jones, it is fair game to investigate the background of any Czar. Any Czar with a shaky background will find himself/herself on the hot seat real fast. Since the Obama administration is particularly thin skinned, being on the hot seat is another way of saying that they are on the way out. If I was an Obama Czar with a shady past or thin resume, I would look for better pastures real fast. That is before the hammer falls from an external investigation. The Obama administration would do well to clean house before another investigation shoots another one down. Of course, I do enjoy the show of one investigation after another turning up dirt on some new Czar. The question is will Obama do the right thing or try and hide other incompetent person, only time will tell.

Glen Beck is still under attack from the left. In a way that is a good thing. It means that he is being effective in finding the skeletons in their closet. It is also a bad way because it shows how many companies are spineless lapdogs of the left.

Glen Beck has a terrible time slot to get high ratings, yet he is now frequently the top show on all of cable news. Bill O’Reilly has had the top slot for a long time. Glen is now getting ratings that challenge Bill for the top spot each day. Bill O’Reilly undoubtedly does not like that, but it is the nature of TV that shows wax and wane in the ratings. Right now, Glen Beck is hot and it shows. Both Bill O’Reilly and Glen Beck are on Fox News. Either one gets more people viewing their shows than view the total of the top shows for any other cable channel.

The higher the viewership a show has the more advertisers generally want to advertise on that show. The reason is that you want to be seen. You also want to be seen on the “best” shows. The “best” shows are usually defined as those that bring in the highest viewers. A side note to this is that conservative show viewers tend to be more loyal than viewers for other shows. All of this would lead one to believe that advertisers are knocking down the door to get on the Glen Beck TV show. After Van Jones started the boycott, a number of advertisers have pulled their ads from Fox News and the Glen Beck show in particular. In my mind, those are advertisers to avoid. If they don’t want to advertise on Glen Beck, then I don’t want to buy their products. All I need now is a list of those advertisers and I can change my buying habits.

Why are advertisers boycotting Glen Beck? A couple of weeks ago, Glen Beck said that Barack Obama is a racist on his TV show. The next day on his radio show, he explained why he believed Barack Obama was a racist. Whether you agree with Glen Beck or not, he has a right to his opinion. Viewers have a right to watch his show after a comment like that. His viewership is through the roof. Obviously viewers are not put off by the comment about Barack Obama being a racist. Advertisers also did not have a problem with it until Van Jones started his boycott movement.

Just like I support Michael Savage in his effort to remove the stain of being “Banned in Britain”, I support Glen Beck in this effort. Whether or not talk show hosts will support one another is not important to me. I understand why other talk show hosts do not support Michael Savage’s efforts in regards to England. They believe if they put their support behind Michael Savage’s efforts then they will be lumped together with his views. I can’t really tell much difference between the views of Michael Savage, Mark Levin, Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity. If you boil them down to their essentials, they agree on most issues. That is as it should be because they are all conservatives. But, they also all believe that they are the best talk show on the radio/TV. To put their support behind another host would acknowledge that the other host is important. Their egos will not allow another talk show to be nearly as important as their talk show. That is why they will not support one another, even though they should.

As a private person who has no ax to grind, I can support multiple hosts and have no problem with that support. I listen to all of them and more to gain as much information as possible. Dismissing one or more as unimportant would diminish my information base. When one of my sources of information is in trouble, all of my sources of information are in trouble.

Glen Beck has been exposing the circle of advisors to Barack Obama. Van Jones is one of the closest advisors to Barack Obama. After the revelations this past week, Van Jones cannot last much longer as the Green Jobs Czar. I look for him to disappear from the White House this weekend or early next week. That will diminish the standing of Van Jones, but will most likely cause him to work that much harder to stop Glen Beck from broadcasting. That will kick this battle up one notch. Van Jones has a problem in his fight with Glen Beck. The problem is that Glen Beck only uses highly researched information. Van Jones is using lies to support his position. Glen Beck is using facts to support his position. Eventually the advertisers will see the light and tell Van Jones where to stick it. Companies can lose only so much money over principle.

Here are some random thoughts to fill the day. My mind will not settle on one issue to discuss. Or even two issues like yesterday. So, I thought I would borrow a page out of Thomas Sowell’s playbook and do a random thoughts blog.

I read an article on Townhall.com that said Democrats should not call themselves progressive. She felt that they should call themselves regressives. The reason is that progressives connote forward thinking. Democrats do everything except think of how to improve the body politic. Democrats are always trying to take us back to something that failed in the past. They will argue that it failed because they were not there to make sure it worked well. There is no arguing with that, but it will still fail because the idea is faulty, not the implementation.

Glen Beck has been warning us about the President’s advisors and Czar’s for the past two weeks. While I knew that some were communists and radicals, I had no idea they were all that way. The big concern with this group of individuals is that they just might decide to seize power. If the military went along with their power grab, they could get away with it. Without the support of the military no coup could ever be successful in the United States. The signs point to a possible coup attempt by Obama and his camp some time prior to the 2010 elections, especially if they are poised to lose the House and Senate. I am not saying they will do anything. I am just saying that there are signs that point in one direction. With this group, signs that point in one direction could be completely wrong.

Democrats never want you to connect the dots on anything they do. The reason they do not want you to connect the dots is that they are always making things worse, not better. They always claim things are better or at least, not worse. When you look at what they do, it always turns out to be a problem. For examples, just look at the federal government. The Democrats always point to Social Security as one of their successes. If you give it an impartial look, you see a program that is broke and failing. It is impossible to fix it because the Democrats cry to the Senior Citizen groups, mostly from AARP. If you talk about reforming Social Security, you suddenly get deluged with calls from senior citizens worried about you taking away their Social Security. Of course the people are mis-informed about what is happening, but that never stopped them from contacting their representatives. Nothing will be done about Social Security until it starts to be a drain on the budget. Then, it will be possible to reform the system. Unfortunately, the time for action will have passed.

Every program promoted by or originating in the liberal wing of either party has either failed, is failing or will fail. Their batting average for success in this is awful. Why anyone still believes them is beyond me.

Michael Savage has been banned from entering England. Putting him on that list was incredibly stupid. Leaving him on the list tells me there is more to the story than just putting him on a list. He is getting vindication of sorts by receiving and accepting an invitation from the Cambridge Debating Society. They asked him to participate in their debate scheduled for later in September. They have hosted Theodore Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan, Winston Churchill and other great names. Michael will have to participate by satellite, but at least he will have a presence in England. I fail to see what danger a 67 year old man who talks for a living poses to the English people.

Why Michael Savage does not get more support here at home is another question that I do not understand. I know he says controversial things, but his message is conservative and very accurate. The only thing I can think of is jealousy. The big talk show hosts generally do not acknowledge any of the other talk show hosts. This is like they do not exist. It is silly and childish. This is an issue that transcends any jealousy they may have. If all the talk show hosts made this an issue, England would have to respond. That would help solve the problem.

On the Mike Broomhead show this morning, a caller mentioned one aspect of the Obamacare bill that should frighten everyone who has a bank account. The provision gives the government the authority to tap into your bank account if the bill becomes law. Democrats screamed bloody murder when the Bush Administration wanted to listen to terrorists from overseas call Americans. The liberals claimed that the tactic of listening to phone calls was essentially tyranny. They stomped their feet and screamed at the top of their lungs that they would never stand for this kind of interference with American privacy. Then, when they get in office they want to tap into your bank account. Talk about hypocrisy!

This just brings us to a larger question: What exactly IS in the bill? Democrats tell us that it will be business as usual. But, every time we check up on what they say we find that it is incorrect. So we cannot believe the Democrats story that it will be business as usual after the Obamacare bill is passed. The people that show up at the Townhall Meetings that question the Democrats seem to be accurate in what they say. They tell everyone exactly where to find the information they reference. What do they say about this issue? Well, those that have commented on this issue agree with the caller that passing the bill as originally passed in the House will give the federal government access to your bank account.

That is a really scary thought to me. I do not like people poking around in my bank account unless I know who they are and that I can trust them. One thing I know about the federal government, because I worked for them, if it is possible to screw it up, they will. That means that if it is possible to screw up your bank account, the federal government will manage to do just exactly that. The problem will be caused by them, but you will have to solve it. That thought just warms my heart and makes me want to jump up and support this bill, NOT.

The bigger question is what else is hidden in this bill? Glen Beck has a series of reports this week asking about who is advising the President. One of the reports highlighted the fact that ACORN and other fringe groups wrote the “stimulus” (Porkulus) bill. We can assume that these groups probably also had a hand in writing the Obamacare bill. We can say that because it obviously was not the Democrats in Congress. They have absolutely no idea what is in the bill. If they had any hand in writing the bill, they would get their stories a little closer to the truth. Because they are all over the place and are almost always 150% wrong, we can safely assume that they did not have any hand in writing the bill.

The fringe groups that Glen Beck is exposing on his show are almost all radical or communist or both. There is not one patriotic American group that is currently advising the President. That is a really scary thought. These groups are providing the “Czar’s” that are advising the President on different parts of the government. So far, each and every one has been a committed radical and/or communist. You have to wonder about the quality of the advice coming from a communist about how to improve capitalism. Communists hate capitalism and want it to disappear. Obama has been committing acts that harm capitalism and might cause it to disappear. There seems to be a pattern emerging. This pattern is not encouraging to any patriotic American.

We have people that are from groups that we cannot trust, writing the Obamacare bill that was passed by the House. We have Democrats telling us things that are easily disproved about what is in the Obamacare bill. We have a White House that cannot seem to get its numbers correct from day to day, saying it will only add $1 trillion over the next 10 years. If you look at how far they are off with their other numbers, this $1 trillion becomes $6-7 trillion real fast. We cannot afford $1 trillion. We really cannot afford $6-7 trillion. This Obamacare bill needs to die on the vine and we need to start over using supply and demand principles. When you apply capitalism to any problem, you get the solution for much less than you imagined. If you doubt me, just look at computers. Government basically stayed out of the computer revolution and they have gotten better and cheaper. If the government had been involved, the price would have gone up and the quality would have gone down.

Keep the government out of my bank account. Keep the government out of your bank account. We have a right to privacy, even Democrats agree. Let us exercise our right to privacy and keep the federal government out of our financial affairs.  

This evening, I read that Focus on the Family decided to kill an interview they did with Glen Beck because he is a “Mormon”. They claim that Mormon ideology is incompatible with evangelical Christian ideology. We went through all this during the primary season with the bigot Mike Huckabee. Now, we have to deal with the bigot organization Focus on the Family.

I call them bigots because they are intolerant of views that do not completely agree with their position. That is a classic definition of a bigot. A bigot says that in order for me to have any interaction with you, you have to agree with everything that I believe in. First, nobody ever agrees completely with everything that you believe in. Everyone has their own interpretation of what is “true”. Second, if you only deal with people that agree with you, you have a very narrow world to move in. Now, I will admit that I am most comfortable doing activities with other members of my own faith, but I do not exclude other faiths (even non-Christian faiths). That is the way that everyone should be. If I had a radio show or a magazine and someone did something that I felt was good, I would take the time to interview them and give them a forum to state what they did and why. That way we build relations between groups. Excluding groups that you do not agree with builds walls that are difficult to tear down when you need to.

This action by Focus on the Family on the heels of the actions by Mike Huckabee will be difficult for Mormons or members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints to forget. When an evangelical Christian person comes to us asking us for our votes, we will remember when we were rejected out of hand by evangelical Christians. We are not asking that evangelical Christians believe as we do (though we would like you to), we are just asking you to treat us as equals. You treat us as if we are “evil”. We do not treat you as if you are “evil”. You call us terrible names and say things about us that are not true. We do not call you names and do not say things, on purpose that are not true.

It is my understanding that Jesus taught that we should be kind to others. We should not bear false witness against our neighbor. Who is being the better “Christian” in this situation? You who bear false witness and call names or us who bear this with little outcry? Is Glen Beck the better Christian for his actions and telling the truth or Focus on the Family for dealing falsely with him? I think that evangelical Christian people and organizations should look into their own souls and determine what is driving this hate. Is it Christian love that is driving the hate or does the hate come from some other place?

If the hate comes from something other than Christian love, shouldn’t evangelical Christians repent and deal truly with their neighbors? I am not saying that evangelical Christians have to endorse everything that “Mormons” believe. Shouldn’t you encourage “Mormons” to do and say things that you believe to be true? Isn’t that the better way to lead someone to the truth than denouncing everything they do no matter how good it may be?

I for one am through endorsing evangelical Christians for political office. Evangelical Christians need to start embracing and supporting the truth wherever they find it. We members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints believe that we should look for truth wherever we can find it. We believe that all groups have some truth and as such need to be encouraged. That is why we do not denounce any group or organization as evil unless it exhibits a total disregard to the truth like radical Muslim groups. I do not like supporting bigots and am tired of trying to pretend that evangelical Christians are not bigots.