Get E-Mail Updates

Culture Watch Blog

Human Trafficking, Justice, and CSI

by Julie Clawson 11-23-2009 | 5:00pm
Print
95 Comments | Login or Register to post comments

091123-csiI've gotten used to popular TV shows going the after-school special route and highlighting some issue or another. Granted, it boosts their ratings, but it also brings attention to issues that need attention. So I was intrigued recently when the CSI franchise did a story-arc across all three shows that focused on the issue of human trafficking. It pulled no punches. They showed the horror involved in trafficking and what a complicated system it is. From moving girls around to sell for sex, or as wombs, or for body parts there are a lot of people making money off of the exploitation of others. And there are so many people involved in such a large and complex system, that there are no easy solutions to the problems. In other words, the CSIs weren't able to solve the crime and and have all the perpetrators behind bars by the end of the 60-minute episode. The writers were smart enough not to trivialize the issue by giving it a neat solution. But they were also smart enough to make trafficking about real people. These girls aren't just nameless faces -- they are someone's daughter. And even if those working for justice can't fix the entire system, they can do something to help one girl, and that is significant.

They also hit the (obvious) nail on the head in trying to explain why this happens -- basically, because the demand is there. Trafficking isn't just some evil crime committed by sociopaths; it's done by corrupt and greedy guys who know that there is a high demand for human flesh. If the businessmen at conferences in Vegas weren't looking for sex on demand, then kidnapping, abusing, raping, and breaking women into submissive prostitutes wouldn't be such a lucrative business. But evil and injustice continue to exist because we demand it. From cheap sex to cheap clothes or candy, we demand that others be oppressed for our benefit.

At one point in the CSI episode, the bad guy of the week, a Russian pimp (played by the amazing Mark Sheppard), tried to justify why girls supposedly choose to be prostitutes. He said, "inside, [all women] are whores. They will love to hear the things they want to believe -- they are so beautiful, so fascinating, so special that they deserve the best of everything, the finest clothes, champagne, and jewels that money can buy. And you know how you get the whore to emerge? Tell her there is an easy way to get all of this." His words were ironic coming after the unfolding story of girls being kidnapped, drugged, raped, beaten, and murdered by traffickers. Instead of describing the girls, they more accurately described the traffickers and the johns. But they also describe all of us who have found easy ways to get whatever we want even if it is at the expense of others. We will sell our souls because we believe we deserve the best of everything.

The sad thing is, there are no CSIs out there working to put us behind bars so that the oppression stops. We are not going to be punished for benefiting from crimes like human trafficking and slave labor. And we wont be rewarded either for choosing to step outside of systems of oppression. There is no carrot or stick when it comes to making a deliberate choice to love others. We just have to decide that we care enough for someone else's daughter or son to stop demanding that they be oppressed so that we can have everything we desire.

Julie Clawson is the author of Everyday Justice: The Global Impact of Our Daily Choices (IVP 2009). She blogs at julieclawson.com and emergingwomen.us.

95 Comments | Login or Register to post comments
Sojourners relies on the support of readers like you to sustain our message and ministry.

Related Stories

Resources

Like what you're reading? Get Sojourners E-Mail updates!

by: BlueDeacon

11-25-2009 @ 3:21pm

You probably wouldn't have heard about this illegal, reckless, and unethical action if you listen to or watch liberal news media. I know I haven't heard it there. Big surprise.

The AP had little more than a brief when it first came out because, unlike right-wing media, it didn't jump to any immediate conclusions.

by: Chris "Jesdisciple"

11-25-2009 @ 3:23pm

That's the primary source of the whole affair. Since you're in the media, maybe you would like to interview the PI.

I know you don't fear big government; that's the point. There's a reason to do so.

by: squeaky

12-04-2009 @ 12:37am

Chris,

"Thanks for pointing out my bias. Failing to examine my premises is a fault I've noticed before, but it may be more of a problem than I thought."

I was bored so went back to the old threads I had been active on. I see you responded to my last post (my e-mail notifications from Disqus are on an old e-mail address that is not longer active, and I haven't switched over yet).

Anyway, I just want to say that I hope I am as honest when someone points out my bias as you. I have appreciated the openness in your posts. I wish more conservatives and liberals were like you--willing to listen and discuss issues with thoughtful respectfulness. Too often, especially in more recent years, I have seen people quick to close their ears and open their mouths rather than Proverbs' admonition to do the opposite. I strongly believe that our varied perspectives are vital to finding solutions to our problems, but more recently, few people seem to value that diversity. Thanks for bucking that trend.

by: BlueDeacon

11-25-2009 @ 10:12pm

If this had been six McCain/Palin campaign offices committing some sort of fraud, you know as well as I that it would've been all over the news, accompanied by outrage and calls of "Off with their heads!" along with a bunch of polls asking Americans if they think McCain/Palin should quite the campaign.

And you wouldn't have heard a peep from the Fox News Channel; more likely, they would have accused the government of overstepping its bounds and liberals of persecution. And you would have heard similar bellyaching in Christian media as well.

by: BlueDeacon

11-25-2009 @ 10:15pm

I know you don't fear big government; that's the point. There's a reason to do so.

The only time conservatives fear big government is when they're not running it. Period. Had Ronald Reagan governed as a "true conservative" he would have never lasted one term, let alone two.

by: BlueDeacon

11-25-2009 @ 10:12pm

If this had been six McCain/Palin campaign offices committing some sort of fraud, you know as well as I that it would've been all over the news, accompanied by outrage and calls of "Off with their heads!" along with a bunch of polls asking Americans if they think McCain/Palin should quite the campaign.

And you wouldn't have heard a peep from the Fox News Channel; more likely, they would have accused the government of overstepping its bounds and liberals of persecution. And you would have heard similar bellyaching in Christian media as well.

by: BlueDeacon

11-25-2009 @ 10:15pm

I know you don't fear big government; that's the point. There's a reason to do so.

The only time conservatives fear big government is when they're not running it. Period. Had Ronald Reagan governed as a "true conservative" he would have never lasted one term, let alone two.

by: KentuckyBlue

11-26-2009 @ 8:02am

It's not just ACORN's affiliations/ties to the Democrat party. The federal government has also given ACORN hundreds of thousands of dollars. There needs to be an investigation into what's' happened, not only because of the legality of it all, but also because they receive government money.

by: Chris "Jesdisciple"

11-26-2009 @ 4:53pm

I know Reagan didn't go as pure as I would have liked, but he did better than most. And anyway, that just means I need to fight both parties on certain points.

The Repubs still grow the government, but they're slower than the Dems. Since I'm still holding out hope that we can repair it, I'm not gonna vote Dem so we crash faster and get it over with.

by: KentuckyBlue

11-26-2009 @ 8:02am

It's not just ACORN's affiliations/ties to the Democrat party. The federal government has also given ACORN hundreds of thousands of dollars. There needs to be an investigation into what's' happened, not only because of the legality of it all, but also because they receive government money.

by: squeaky

12-03-2009 @ 10:37pm

Chris,

"Thanks for pointing out my bias. Failing to examine my premises is a fault I've noticed before, but it may be more of a problem than I thought."

I was bored so went back to the old threads I had been active on. I see you responded to my last post (my e-mail notifications from Disqus are on an old e-mail address that is not longer active, and I haven't switched over yet).

Anyway, I just want to say that I hope I am as honest when someone points out my bias as you. I have appreciated the openness in your posts. I wish more conservatives and liberals were like you--willing to listen and discuss issues with thoughtful respectfulness. Too often, especially in more recent years, I have seen people quick to close their ears and open their mouths rather than Proverbs' admonition to do the opposite. I strongly believe that our varied perspectives are vital to finding solutions to our problems, but more recently, few people seem to value that diversity. Thanks for bucking that trend.

by: Chris "Jesdisciple"

12-01-2009 @ 11:09am

Umm...exactly. You seem to be making my argument for me. =)

I'm not sure what you mean, unless it's just that individualism is fine so long as it's not rugged. In that case, we are making the same point.

However, on this issue I don't know that actions of the ordinary individual are resulting in any more harm than their inaction or different actions would.

Thanks for pointing out my bias. Failing to examine my premises is a fault I've noticed before, but it may be more of a problem than I thought.

by: squeaky

11-28-2009 @ 3:39am

I have to admit--I don't really understand much of what you just said. It seems to me you read way, way, way too much into the article. I prefer to discuss posts based on what the authors actually SAY, rather than reading meanings that were not stated either explicitly or implicitly.

I barely see the connection with illegal immigration, but see it on a much broader scale, which is what I think the author intended. This is clearly a matter of perspective.

Why?

Could be because I'm a woman, and these women's rights issues hit me harder than you.

Could be because I have a more liberal viewpoint and don't see immediate connections to the hotbutton issues of illegal immigration.

Or maybe it is as simple as I have very likely watched more CBS crime dramas than you (might not be true, but since I used to be an avid viewer of all of them, seems a safe bet), and CBS has dealt with the show on pretty much all their crime dramas from a multitude of facets, not just those dealing with illegal immigration.

Having been exposed to these facets by CBS, as well as other sources, such as documentaries on stings, when I hear of human trafficking, I don't immediately think of illegal immigration. Rather, my mind goes first to SE Asia and 6 year old girls forced to work as sex slaves. Hence my offense when you say the issue is worn out. Perish the thought if six year olds being forced to perform sexual favors for nasty old mean is a worn out issue! I do think you need to be careful when you say things like that because, as should be clear by now, not everyone thinks of illegal immigration when they hear of human trafficking.

It is no more valid to make such assumptions on this issue than it is on abortion. I would far prefer people actually listen to each other, rather than just assume a more sinister meaning behind each other's words. It is, in fact, why we (the collective "we", not you and me) get nowhere on the abortion debate. As with abortion, this is too important an issue to let semantics and perceived hidden meanings block well-meaning people from making progress towards finding solutions. And as you admitted, the author didn't suggest government was the answer. In fact, I thought she pretty clearly suggested that the solution starts with each of us.

And I have to admit, I have seen far more thoughtful posts from you, and so am surprised by your posts on this issue.

"Individualism doesn't contradict love; it just doesn't imitate it."

Umm...exactly. You seem to be making my argument for me. =)

I'm not talking, by the way, about some legislated form of ethics, but rather a recognition that rugged individual can do much harm when we don't recognize that our actions can hurt others in ways we cannot always recognize. A national attitude where we understand our connections to each other might help us make fewer of the mistakes we make as individuals. Our culture tells us "I" am the only one who matters. Therefore, if I dump my garbage into the river, as long as I do it on my property, it should be just fine--who cares if the garbage floats downstream and affects my neighbor? In a world where rugged individualism is a very new idea, it is hard to argue that it is a Biblical concept.

Sorry about the long post--it's probably tedious to read, especially when

it

is

all

compressed

and

skinny...

by: Chris "Jesdisciple"

11-27-2009 @ 1:15am

Apparently I missed something--where did she mention illegal immigration?

As I mentioned, I perceive a pattern on the issue and this perception becomes a bias. Additionally, as CSI is set in America and so am I, I immediately focused in on the American brand of human trafficking, which depends on illegal immigration. Obviously this is a very biased focus. Given the pattern mentioned above, I would suggest an explicit statement in the article that we're not talking about illegal immigration.

How are young girls being used for sex a worn-out issue? I really take offense at that statement, so perhaps you should qualify it, as it sounds heartless, and I don't think that is what you mean.

As a political talking point it is very worn-out. I'm tired of people screaming at me that the government's got to do something!!! The government is doing what it should, just not as well as I wish it would. The article didn't try to send that message, but I still have a sore spot from all the ones that do.

And even if only illegal immigrants were involved (which isn't the case), why would that matter? Is it less heinous a crime because the women involved are illegals?

Heinousness is not the difference. I reject the typical messenger that brings this issue up, not the issue itself. I would guess that liberals feel similarly about abortion. The government's got to do something!!! Doesn't that get old?

How, exactly, is the horror of human trafficking a liberal issue only? What Conservative values are being ignored?

Note that I distinguished the problem from the solution. We all agree that it's a problem, but when you offer the solution you'll probably offend someone's values.

It's something I've been thinking quite a bit about more recently--if it is all about me, then why should I care how my neighbor is affected by what I do?

Umm... love? If we need an intellectual system of ethics that simulates love, we're in trouble. Individualism doesn't contradict love; it just doesn't imitate it.

I have to agree with Jane, by the way. This is a liberal blog, so I am always a little perplexed when people complain about its liberalism. I can only hope you are at least fair about it, and that you visit conservative blogs and complain about how conservative they are.

I don't attack liberalism, per se. I can agree to disagree with a liberal, but stubborn bias for one's side or against the other aggravates me. And yes, I have secular conservatives who think I'm an idiot because I take liberals seriously and criticize conservatives. I even had one Christian conservative hastily accuse me of not studying Scripture when we disagreed.

by: Chris "Jesdisciple"

11-26-2009 @ 8:37pm

The point is that you're not going to have the same situation in reverse because the liberals simply don't see politics as Armageddon as conservatives do;

No, liberals are in the OT instead of Revelation. EDIT: And I don't know that either section of Scripture is better to live in.

where they have come against conservatives it's because of what conservatives themselves have said or done.

I can't find any meaning in that whatsoever. If liberals hadn't said or done anything but conservatives had, we still wouldn't be against each other.

by: Chris "Jesdisciple"

11-26-2009 @ 8:29pm

MSNBC would have. Your point?

by: BlueDeacon

11-26-2009 @ 7:17pm

Hardly. But, because it tends to project and the Washington Post broke the scandal, the conservative movement has since tried to transform that into a partisan hit job; that was when and why it decided to form its own media. Remember the anger that came from leading conservatives active then when the late Mark Felt outed himself as "Deep Throat," the secret secondary source that gave Woodward and Bernstein ammunition. The point is that you're not going to have the same situation in reverse because the liberals simply don't see politics as Armageddon as conservatives do; where they have come against conservatives it's because of what conservatives themselves have said or done.

by: Chris "Jesdisciple"

11-26-2009 @ 5:22pm

I come to exchange views. I originally came here to get a liberal perspective on the issues, and the way I do that is to offer my own perspective so liberals can contrast theirs with it. So that's my primary goal.

Then I got ticked at the Repubs and found a conservative board to validate liberal concerns at. I received conservative concerns to counter the liberal ones and brought them back over here. So I am acting as courier to both educate myself and foster communication.

by: Chris "Jesdisciple"

11-26-2009 @ 4:53pm

I know Reagan didn't go as pure as I would have liked, but he did better than most. And anyway, that just means I need to fight both parties on certain points.

The Repubs still grow the government, but they're slower than the Dems. Since I'm still holding out hope that we can repair it, I'm not gonna vote Dem so we crash faster and get it over with.

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 3:37pm

"...there are no CSIs out there working to put us behind bars..."

Is Julie Clawson trying to make us all feel guilty for human trafficking? If she is (and it's hard to read her conclusion any other way) then she fails miserably.

Her biggest mistake is to equate sex-for-money with other consumer goods: "From cheap sex to cheap clothes or candy, we demand that others be oppressed for our benefit." This is silly. Prostitution is wrong regardless of the price. Modesty is virtuous regardless of whether one's outfit is expensive or cheap.

I know a lot of people won't want to here this, but our failure to enforce immigration law has made human trafficking easier.

On a related note, still has yet to condemn ACORN for a lackadaisical attitude towards human smuggling that is widespread throughout that organization.

When Sojo is either ready to support meaningful immigration law enforcement without preconditions, or at least willing to call for sanctions against ACORN, then we'll know they are serious about human trafficking.

LV

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 4:01pm

On a related note, Sojo still has yet to condemn ACORN for a lackadaisical attitude towards human smuggling that is widespread throughout that organization.

You know this for a fact? Because what was reported on Faux News, as things turned out, was confined to only a couple of offices and the people responsible were let go.

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 5:17pm

Funny you should mention this. The Los Angeles Times just ran a report on another ACORN office that got caught. This is the L-O-S A-N-G-E-L-E-S T-I-M-E-S, which to the best of my knowledge is Not Affiliated With Fox.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009...

The LA tape makes six, not "a couple", the first five were in.

Washington DC
Baltimore MD
Brooklyn NY
San Bernardino CA
San Diego CA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_O'Keefe

(note: To the best of my knowledge Wikipedia is not affiliated with Fox either.)

ACORN's Philadelphia office apparently filed a police report, so we'll give them that one. That means six out of seven ACORN offices were willing to aid in human trafficking, or at least turn and look the other way.

That's not good, Deac.

LV

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 5:47pm

Out of how many? We all know that ACORN was targeted because it was registering voters -- mostly as Democrats. Otherwise we wouldn't have heard a peep.

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 6:13pm

Six out of seven, Deac. Six out of seven.

LV

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 6:15pm

I mean, nationwide. The office in my city wasn't involved.

by: TN_Horseman

11-23-2009 @ 6:19pm

I am appalled, so far this has become a back and forth about ACORN, which is a story of its own, rather than the problem of human trafficking which is real blight on society.

From the age of 19 to 21 I was stationed in one of the great fleshpots of the world, Clark Air Force Base, Philippines with side trips to Bangkok. The poverty there caused many families to sell their daughters into prostitution or seduced young women into the trade because of the money to be made.

I will admit I was young, with raging hormones, and occasionally made my contributions to the local vice lords. Several years ago, while watching "Miss Saigon" on Broadway I realized that my sins were more than carnal. Thank you for holding this issue before us, the question is what are we going to do about it.

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 6:32pm

Seven that we know of so far. What's your point? That we didn't do an exhaustive examination of every ACORN office in the country all at once? Sorry, there's only so many young Christian conservative women willing to dress up like hookers.

LV

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 6:35pm

Okay, who removed my comment and why?

Please tell me where I am wrong about the connection between mass illegal immigration and human trafficking.

Please tell me where I am wrong about ACORN and the blase attitude about human trafficking found at many of its offices.

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 6:51pm

Unfortunately, that was part for the course in some precincts, where people simply want to use the issue to make cheap political points.

Back to the topic: The Human Life Matters ministry at my church has recently decided to focus on this issue. We haven't met of late because of conflicts and a restructuring of the church's overall ministry, but when we do return I anticipate that we will tackle it head-on -- the immediate neighborhood has suffered from prostitution (and who knows just who's behind it?).

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 3:37pm

"...there are no CSIs out there working to put us behind bars..."

Is Julie Clawson trying to make us all feel guilty for human trafficking? If she is (and it's hard to read her conclusion any other way) then she fails miserably.

Her biggest mistake is to equate sex-for-money with other consumer goods: "From cheap sex to cheap clothes or candy, we demand that others be oppressed for our benefit." This is silly. Prostitution is wrong regardless of the price. Modesty is virtuous regardless of whether one's outfit is expensive or cheap.

I know a lot of people won't want to here this, but our failure to enforce immigration law has made human trafficking easier.

On a related note, still has yet to condemn ACORN for a lackadaisical attitude towards human smuggling that is widespread throughout that organization.

When Sojo is either ready to support meaningful immigration law enforcement without preconditions, or at least willing to call for sanctions against ACORN, then we'll know they are serious about human trafficking.

LV

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 4:01pm

On a related note, Sojo still has yet to condemn ACORN for a lackadaisical attitude towards human smuggling that is widespread throughout that organization.

You know this for a fact? Because what was reported on Faux News, as things turned out, was confined to only a couple of offices and the people responsible were let go.

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 7:05pm

That's the point -- it's local, not national and the result of a right-wing sting operation to boot that was out to silence its critics.

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 5:17pm

Funny you should mention this. The Los Angeles Times just ran a report on another ACORN office that got caught. This is the L-O-S A-N-G-E-L-E-S T-I-M-E-S, which to the best of my knowledge is Not Affiliated With Fox.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009...

The LA tape makes six, not "a couple", the first five were in.

Washington DC
Baltimore MD
Brooklyn NY
San Bernardino CA
San Diego CA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_O'Keefe

(note: To the best of my knowledge Wikipedia is not affiliated with Fox either.)

ACORN's Philadelphia office apparently filed a police report, so we'll give them that one. That means six out of seven ACORN offices were willing to aid in human trafficking, or at least turn and look the other way.

That's not good, Deac.

LV

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 7:46pm

Deac,

Right-wing sting operation I'll grant you, but when you've got offices of the same organization in California, New York and DC responding the same way to human trafficking ("Sure, we'll be happy to help!") this isn't just a "local" problem any more.

If McDonalds had half a dozen people get sick from tainted burgers sold at stores scattered across the country, I doubt you'd say "well, it's just a local problem", and I'd have to imagine McDonalds has a lot more locations than ACORN does.

Nobody is trying to silence ACORN, we're just trying to figure out what kind of people they are and what they're doing with the money we turn over to them.

Look, you don't want the outfit shut down completely, I understand that. But something's rotten at ACORN and there's not much point in pretending otherwise.

LV

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 5:47pm

Out of how many? We all know that ACORN was targeted because it was registering voters -- mostly as Democrats. Otherwise we wouldn't have heard a peep.

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 8:10pm

That's completely beside the point, which is probably one reason your original post was removed. That said, it IS an attempt to silence ACORN; it's not the first time that such an organization was targeted.

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 6:13pm

Six out of seven, Deac. Six out of seven.

LV

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 6:15pm

I mean, nationwide. The office in my city wasn't involved.

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 9:12pm

I was going to respond, but what would be the point?

LV

by: TN_Horseman

11-23-2009 @ 6:19pm

I am appalled, so far this has become a back and forth about ACORN, which is a story of its own, rather than the problem of human trafficking which is real blight on society.

From the age of 19 to 21 I was stationed in one of the great fleshpots of the world, Clark Air Force Base, Philippines with side trips to Bangkok. The poverty there caused many families to sell their daughters into prostitution or seduced young women into the trade because of the money to be made.

I will admit I was young, with raging hormones, and occasionally made my contributions to the local vice lords. Several years ago, while watching "Miss Saigon" on Broadway I realized that my sins were more than carnal. Thank you for holding this issue before us, the question is what are we going to do about it.

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 6:32pm

Seven that we know of so far. What's your point? That we didn't do an exhaustive examination of every ACORN office in the country all at once? Sorry, there's only so many young Christian conservative women willing to dress up like hookers.

LV

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 6:35pm

Okay, who removed my comment and why?

Please tell me where I am wrong about the connection between mass illegal immigration and human trafficking.

Please tell me where I am wrong about ACORN and the blase attitude about human trafficking found at many of its offices.

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 6:51pm

Unfortunately, that was part for the course in some precincts, where people simply want to use the issue to make cheap political points.

Back to the topic: The Human Life Matters ministry at my church has recently decided to focus on this issue. We haven't met of late because of conflicts and a restructuring of the church's overall ministry, but when we do return I anticipate that we will tackle it head-on -- the immediate neighborhood has suffered from prostitution (and who knows just who's behind it?).

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 10:23pm

The point is that you were trying to hijack the thread to make a cheap
political point.

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 7:05pm

That's the point -- it's local, not national and the result of a right-wing sting operation to boot that was out to silence its critics.

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 7:46pm

Deac,

Right-wing sting operation I'll grant you, but when you've got offices of the same organization in California, New York and DC responding the same way to human trafficking ("Sure, we'll be happy to help!") this isn't just a "local" problem any more.

If McDonalds had half a dozen people get sick from tainted burgers sold at stores scattered across the country, I doubt you'd say "well, it's just a local problem", and I'd have to imagine McDonalds has a lot more locations than ACORN does.

Nobody is trying to silence ACORN, we're just trying to figure out what kind of people they are and what they're doing with the money we turn over to them.

Look, you don't want the outfit shut down completely, I understand that. But something's rotten at ACORN and there's not much point in pretending otherwise.

LV

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 8:10pm

That's completely beside the point, which is probably one reason your original post was removed. That said, it IS an attempt to silence ACORN; it's not the first time that such an organization was targeted.

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 9:12pm

I was going to respond, but what would be the point?

LV

by: WaveTossed

11-23-2009 @ 11:51pm

"Please tell me where I am wrong about the connection between mass illegal immigration and human trafficking."

Actually, the exploitation of immigrants considered "illegal" is yet another form of human trafficking. Think of it: People are offered jobs, and yet when they are trafficked into the U.S. the jobs end up being held in sweatshop conditions with wages well below minimun. No resistance can be organized because the employers threaten deportation.

And yet: so many anti-immigrant activist, including those who go on campaigns against "illegals" completely ignore this sort of exploitation. Instead, they go on about how these immigrants are "breaking the law" and should be immediately deported.

If the US had decent immigration quotas, people who want to work could come in legally, get legal protection, pay taxes and Social Security. Instead, anytime anyone mentions immigration reform, too many anti-immigrant people go on and on about "illegals," how they all want welfare, blah, blah, blah. And that's how this form of exploitive human trafficking can go on.

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-24-2009 @ 12:01am

Looks like I succeeded. But I couldn't have done it without your help.

Look, the fact that you were willing to get into such a long and heated discussion of ACORN proves one thing at least: ACORN matters. You might doubt the reliability of Breitbart (the original source) or argue with me about what it all means, but you know ACORN is influential and that the allegations, if true, are devastating.

Even with the original post taken down, I think I've said what needs to be said. The last word is yours if you want it.

LV

Comments sorted by highest rated. After voting you must refresh your page to see the sort order change.

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 3:37pm

"...there are no CSIs out there working to put us behind bars..."

Is Julie Clawson trying to make us all feel guilty for human trafficking? If she is (and it's hard to read her conclusion any other way) then she fails miserably.

Her biggest mistake is to equate sex-for-money with other consumer goods: "From cheap sex to cheap clothes or candy, we demand that others be oppressed for our benefit." This is silly. Prostitution is wrong regardless of the price. Modesty is virtuous regardless of whether one's outfit is expensive or cheap.

I know a lot of people won't want to here this, but our failure to enforce immigration law has made human trafficking easier.

On a related note, still has yet to condemn ACORN for a lackadaisical attitude towards human smuggling that is widespread throughout that organization.

When Sojo is either ready to support meaningful immigration law enforcement without preconditions, or at least willing to call for sanctions against ACORN, then we'll know they are serious about human trafficking.

LV

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 3:37pm

"...there are no CSIs out there working to put us behind bars..."

Is Julie Clawson trying to make us all feel guilty for human trafficking? If she is (and it's hard to read her conclusion any other way) then she fails miserably.

Her biggest mistake is to equate sex-for-money with other consumer goods: "From cheap sex to cheap clothes or candy, we demand that others be oppressed for our benefit." This is silly. Prostitution is wrong regardless of the price. Modesty is virtuous regardless of whether one's outfit is expensive or cheap.

I know a lot of people won't want to here this, but our failure to enforce immigration law has made human trafficking easier.

On a related note, still has yet to condemn ACORN for a lackadaisical attitude towards human smuggling that is widespread throughout that organization.

When Sojo is either ready to support meaningful immigration law enforcement without preconditions, or at least willing to call for sanctions against ACORN, then we'll know they are serious about human trafficking.

LV

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 4:01pm

On a related note, Sojo still has yet to condemn ACORN for a lackadaisical attitude towards human smuggling that is widespread throughout that organization.

You know this for a fact? Because what was reported on Faux News, as things turned out, was confined to only a couple of offices and the people responsible were let go.

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 4:01pm

On a related note, Sojo still has yet to condemn ACORN for a lackadaisical attitude towards human smuggling that is widespread throughout that organization.

You know this for a fact? Because what was reported on Faux News, as things turned out, was confined to only a couple of offices and the people responsible were let go.

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 5:17pm

Funny you should mention this. The Los Angeles Times just ran a report on another ACORN office that got caught. This is the L-O-S A-N-G-E-L-E-S T-I-M-E-S, which to the best of my knowledge is Not Affiliated With Fox.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009...

The LA tape makes six, not "a couple", the first five were in.

Washington DC
Baltimore MD
Brooklyn NY
San Bernardino CA
San Diego CA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_O'Keefe

(note: To the best of my knowledge Wikipedia is not affiliated with Fox either.)

ACORN's Philadelphia office apparently filed a police report, so we'll give them that one. That means six out of seven ACORN offices were willing to aid in human trafficking, or at least turn and look the other way.

That's not good, Deac.

LV

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 5:17pm

Funny you should mention this. The Los Angeles Times just ran a report on another ACORN office that got caught. This is the L-O-S A-N-G-E-L-E-S T-I-M-E-S, which to the best of my knowledge is Not Affiliated With Fox.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009...

The LA tape makes six, not "a couple", the first five were in.

Washington DC
Baltimore MD
Brooklyn NY
San Bernardino CA
San Diego CA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_O'Keefe

(note: To the best of my knowledge Wikipedia is not affiliated with Fox either.)

ACORN's Philadelphia office apparently filed a police report, so we'll give them that one. That means six out of seven ACORN offices were willing to aid in human trafficking, or at least turn and look the other way.

That's not good, Deac.

LV

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 5:47pm

Out of how many? We all know that ACORN was targeted because it was registering voters -- mostly as Democrats. Otherwise we wouldn't have heard a peep.

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 5:47pm

Out of how many? We all know that ACORN was targeted because it was registering voters -- mostly as Democrats. Otherwise we wouldn't have heard a peep.

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 6:13pm

Six out of seven, Deac. Six out of seven.

LV

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 6:13pm

Six out of seven, Deac. Six out of seven.

LV

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 6:15pm

I mean, nationwide. The office in my city wasn't involved.

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 6:15pm

I mean, nationwide. The office in my city wasn't involved.

by: TN_Horseman

11-23-2009 @ 6:19pm

I am appalled, so far this has become a back and forth about ACORN, which is a story of its own, rather than the problem of human trafficking which is real blight on society.

From the age of 19 to 21 I was stationed in one of the great fleshpots of the world, Clark Air Force Base, Philippines with side trips to Bangkok. The poverty there caused many families to sell their daughters into prostitution or seduced young women into the trade because of the money to be made.

I will admit I was young, with raging hormones, and occasionally made my contributions to the local vice lords. Several years ago, while watching "Miss Saigon" on Broadway I realized that my sins were more than carnal. Thank you for holding this issue before us, the question is what are we going to do about it.

by: TN_Horseman

11-23-2009 @ 6:19pm

I am appalled, so far this has become a back and forth about ACORN, which is a story of its own, rather than the problem of human trafficking which is real blight on society.

From the age of 19 to 21 I was stationed in one of the great fleshpots of the world, Clark Air Force Base, Philippines with side trips to Bangkok. The poverty there caused many families to sell their daughters into prostitution or seduced young women into the trade because of the money to be made.

I will admit I was young, with raging hormones, and occasionally made my contributions to the local vice lords. Several years ago, while watching "Miss Saigon" on Broadway I realized that my sins were more than carnal. Thank you for holding this issue before us, the question is what are we going to do about it.

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 6:32pm

Seven that we know of so far. What's your point? That we didn't do an exhaustive examination of every ACORN office in the country all at once? Sorry, there's only so many young Christian conservative women willing to dress up like hookers.

LV

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 6:32pm

Seven that we know of so far. What's your point? That we didn't do an exhaustive examination of every ACORN office in the country all at once? Sorry, there's only so many young Christian conservative women willing to dress up like hookers.

LV

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 6:35pm

Okay, who removed my comment and why?

Please tell me where I am wrong about the connection between mass illegal immigration and human trafficking.

Please tell me where I am wrong about ACORN and the blase attitude about human trafficking found at many of its offices.

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 6:35pm

Okay, who removed my comment and why?

Please tell me where I am wrong about the connection between mass illegal immigration and human trafficking.

Please tell me where I am wrong about ACORN and the blase attitude about human trafficking found at many of its offices.

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 6:51pm

Unfortunately, that was part for the course in some precincts, where people simply want to use the issue to make cheap political points.

Back to the topic: The Human Life Matters ministry at my church has recently decided to focus on this issue. We haven't met of late because of conflicts and a restructuring of the church's overall ministry, but when we do return I anticipate that we will tackle it head-on -- the immediate neighborhood has suffered from prostitution (and who knows just who's behind it?).

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 6:51pm

Unfortunately, that was part for the course in some precincts, where people simply want to use the issue to make cheap political points.

Back to the topic: The Human Life Matters ministry at my church has recently decided to focus on this issue. We haven't met of late because of conflicts and a restructuring of the church's overall ministry, but when we do return I anticipate that we will tackle it head-on -- the immediate neighborhood has suffered from prostitution (and who knows just who's behind it?).

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 7:05pm

That's the point -- it's local, not national and the result of a right-wing sting operation to boot that was out to silence its critics.

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 7:05pm

That's the point -- it's local, not national and the result of a right-wing sting operation to boot that was out to silence its critics.

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 7:46pm

Deac,

Right-wing sting operation I'll grant you, but when you've got offices of the same organization in California, New York and DC responding the same way to human trafficking ("Sure, we'll be happy to help!") this isn't just a "local" problem any more.

If McDonalds had half a dozen people get sick from tainted burgers sold at stores scattered across the country, I doubt you'd say "well, it's just a local problem", and I'd have to imagine McDonalds has a lot more locations than ACORN does.

Nobody is trying to silence ACORN, we're just trying to figure out what kind of people they are and what they're doing with the money we turn over to them.

Look, you don't want the outfit shut down completely, I understand that. But something's rotten at ACORN and there's not much point in pretending otherwise.

LV

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 7:46pm

Deac,

Right-wing sting operation I'll grant you, but when you've got offices of the same organization in California, New York and DC responding the same way to human trafficking ("Sure, we'll be happy to help!") this isn't just a "local" problem any more.

If McDonalds had half a dozen people get sick from tainted burgers sold at stores scattered across the country, I doubt you'd say "well, it's just a local problem", and I'd have to imagine McDonalds has a lot more locations than ACORN does.

Nobody is trying to silence ACORN, we're just trying to figure out what kind of people they are and what they're doing with the money we turn over to them.

Look, you don't want the outfit shut down completely, I understand that. But something's rotten at ACORN and there's not much point in pretending otherwise.

LV

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 8:10pm

That's completely beside the point, which is probably one reason your original post was removed. That said, it IS an attempt to silence ACORN; it's not the first time that such an organization was targeted.

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 8:10pm

That's completely beside the point, which is probably one reason your original post was removed. That said, it IS an attempt to silence ACORN; it's not the first time that such an organization was targeted.

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 9:12pm

I was going to respond, but what would be the point?

LV

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-23-2009 @ 9:12pm

I was going to respond, but what would be the point?

LV

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 10:23pm

The point is that you were trying to hijack the thread to make a cheap
political point.

by: BlueDeacon

11-23-2009 @ 10:23pm

The point is that you were trying to hijack the thread to make a cheap
political point.

by: WaveTossed

11-23-2009 @ 11:51pm

"Please tell me where I am wrong about the connection between mass illegal immigration and human trafficking."

Actually, the exploitation of immigrants considered "illegal" is yet another form of human trafficking. Think of it: People are offered jobs, and yet when they are trafficked into the U.S. the jobs end up being held in sweatshop conditions with wages well below minimun. No resistance can be organized because the employers threaten deportation.

And yet: so many anti-immigrant activist, including those who go on campaigns against "illegals" completely ignore this sort of exploitation. Instead, they go on about how these immigrants are "breaking the law" and should be immediately deported.

If the US had decent immigration quotas, people who want to work could come in legally, get legal protection, pay taxes and Social Security. Instead, anytime anyone mentions immigration reform, too many anti-immigrant people go on and on about "illegals," how they all want welfare, blah, blah, blah. And that's how this form of exploitive human trafficking can go on.

by: WaveTossed

11-23-2009 @ 11:51pm

"Please tell me where I am wrong about the connection between mass illegal immigration and human trafficking."

Actually, the exploitation of immigrants considered "illegal" is yet another form of human trafficking. Think of it: People are offered jobs, and yet when they are trafficked into the U.S. the jobs end up being held in sweatshop conditions with wages well below minimun. No resistance can be organized because the employers threaten deportation.

And yet: so many anti-immigrant activist, including those who go on campaigns against "illegals" completely ignore this sort of exploitation. Instead, they go on about how these immigrants are "breaking the law" and should be immediately deported.

If the US had decent immigration quotas, people who want to work could come in legally, get legal protection, pay taxes and Social Security. Instead, anytime anyone mentions immigration reform, too many anti-immigrant people go on and on about "illegals," how they all want welfare, blah, blah, blah. And that's how this form of exploitive human trafficking can go on.

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-24-2009 @ 12:01am

Looks like I succeeded. But I couldn't have done it without your help.

Look, the fact that you were willing to get into such a long and heated discussion of ACORN proves one thing at least: ACORN matters. You might doubt the reliability of Breitbart (the original source) or argue with me about what it all means, but you know ACORN is influential and that the allegations, if true, are devastating.

Even with the original post taken down, I think I've said what needs to be said. The last word is yours if you want it.

LV

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-24-2009 @ 12:01am

Looks like I succeeded. But I couldn't have done it without your help.

Look, the fact that you were willing to get into such a long and heated discussion of ACORN proves one thing at least: ACORN matters. You might doubt the reliability of Breitbart (the original source) or argue with me about what it all means, but you know ACORN is influential and that the allegations, if true, are devastating.

Even with the original post taken down, I think I've said what needs to be said. The last word is yours if you want it.

LV

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-24-2009 @ 12:06am

Fair enough, but you're talking about a very different situation from the one that Clawson is addressing. Her story is about women used essentially as sex slaves. I can understand your sympathy for underpaid workers, but I'd be willing to bet that the women held in these brothels would trade places with your illegals in a heartbeat.

ACORN was willing to aid in the importation of underage girls for precisely that purpose. Sojo's silence only makes their screams easier to hear.

LV

by: Lord_Voldemort

11-24-2009 @ 12:06am

Fair enough, but you're talking about a very different situation from the one that Clawson is addressing. Her story is about women used essentially as sex slaves. I can understand your sympathy for underpaid workers, but I'd be willing to bet that the women held in these brothels would trade places with your illegals in a heartbeat.

ACORN was willing to aid in the importation of underage girls for precisely that purpose. Sojo's silence only makes their screams easier to hear.

LV

by: WaveTossed

11-24-2009 @ 2:20am

"Fair enough, but you're talking about a very different situation"

Not really. Human trafficking is human trafficking. As much as those who hold to the anti-"illegal-immigrant" viewpoint would like to deny it; so they can blame the immigrants, make up erroneous stereotypes, rather than the exploiters.

I'm not sure that either set of human trafficking victims would like to trade places with the other. And I also don't think that it helps any of the victims to play games i.e. "these people are more exploited than those people." All exploitation is wrong and must be opposed.

by: WaveTossed

11-24-2009 @ 2:20am

"Fair enough, but you're talking about a very different situation"

Not really. Human trafficking is human trafficking. As much as those who hold to the anti-"illegal-immigrant" viewpoint would like to deny it; so they can blame the immigrants, make up erroneous stereotypes, rather than the exploiters.

I'm not sure that either set of human trafficking victims would like to trade places with the other. And I also don't think that it helps any of the victims to play games i.e. "these people are more exploited than those people." All exploitation is wrong and must be opposed.

by: BlueDeacon

11-24-2009 @ 2:45am

Actually, it really doesn't matter as much as you think. ACORN, in
that context, represented only a means to an end -- which is the most
frightening issue to me. Whom will people tear down next for the sake of
power?

by: BlueDeacon

11-24-2009 @ 2:45am

Actually, it really doesn't matter as much as you think. ACORN, in
that context, represented only a means to an end -- which is the most
frightening issue to me. Whom will people tear down next for the sake of
power?

by: KentuckyBlue

11-24-2009 @ 4:10am

The political affiliation of the two young people who caught ACORN's behavior on tape is compeletly IRRELEVANT. If they were left-wing, Democrats, ACORN would still be guilty. Of course, left-wing Democrats wouldn't report on their own, even if their own was aiding a prostitute and giving tax evasion advice!

The ACORN "sting" was far from local. There were several offices in different cities where the undercover "pimp" and "prostitute" recorded ACORN employees' unacceptable, unethical, and illegal behavior. And... supposedly there is even more that has not yet been released.

BUT, even if it was only local, does that in any way negate the unacceptable and unethical behavior that took place? NO.

by: KentuckyBlue

11-24-2009 @ 4:10am

The political affiliation of the two young people who caught ACORN's behavior on tape is compeletly IRRELEVANT. If they were left-wing, Democrats, ACORN would still be guilty. Of course, left-wing Democrats wouldn't report on their own, even if their own was aiding a prostitute and giving tax evasion advice!

The ACORN "sting" was far from local. There were several offices in different cities where the undercover "pimp" and "prostitute" recorded ACORN employees' unacceptable, unethical, and illegal behavior. And... supposedly there is even more that has not yet been released.

BUT, even if it was only local, does that in any way negate the unacceptable and unethical behavior that took place? NO.

by: KentuckyBlue

11-24-2009 @ 4:21am

Have they, Deacon? I haven't been here long and don't know if they have or not? Do you know if they have? If not, I would have to agree that it does seem odd that Sojo, a social issue blog, would ignore the atrocities committed by ACORN employees in which they offered assistance to a "prostitute" and "pimp" and even offered advice to the "pimp" on how he could smuggle under-age children into the States.

I know how you feel about the "sting" itself and the motives of the undercover videographers (because I read your comments here), but how do you feel about the advice given by the ACORN employees?

by: KentuckyBlue

11-24-2009 @ 4:21am

Have they, Deacon? I haven't been here long and don't know if they have or not? Do you know if they have? If not, I would have to agree that it does seem odd that Sojo, a social issue blog, would ignore the atrocities committed by ACORN employees in which they offered assistance to a "prostitute" and "pimp" and even offered advice to the "pimp" on how he could smuggle under-age children into the States.

I know how you feel about the "sting" itself and the motives of the undercover videographers (because I read your comments here), but how do you feel about the advice given by the ACORN employees?

by: KentuckyBlue

11-24-2009 @ 5:22am

I'm not sure that either set of human trafficking victims would like to trade places with the other. And I also don't think that it helps any of the victims to play games i.e. "these people are more exploited than those people." All exploitation is wrong and must be opposed.

I am a woman, and I can tell you without hesitation, that I would much rather be an exploited illegal immigrant than a slave with no rights living a life of sexual abuse. Yes, a life of exploitation would be horrible, BUT a life of sexual abuse would be utterly unthinkable and unbearable. I'd rather die than be raped/sexually abused or to live a life as a sex slave.

I could one day get over the trauma of having lived as an exploited illegal. But I don't know if I could ever get over the trauma of having evil, perverted men rape and sexually abuse me on an ongoing basis as a "sex slave."

Many of those who are trafficked are women and children sold as sex slaves. And it's hard for me to hear someone say that a trafficked woman or child, who has been forced into literal slavery, most often as a sex slave, might not want to "trade places" with an exploited illegal.

Are you by any chance a man? I ask that because I think there are many men who have no idea of what a woman would feel being raped and sexually abused. After all, it's men who rape and sexually abuse women.

Yes, all exploitation is wrong, BUT sexual abuse against women is an unimaginable, horrific life!

by: KentuckyBlue

11-24-2009 @ 5:22am

I'm not sure that either set of human trafficking victims would like to trade places with the other. And I also don't think that it helps any of the victims to play games i.e. "these people are more exploited than those people." All exploitation is wrong and must be opposed.

I am a woman, and I can tell you without hesitation, that I would much rather be an exploited illegal immigrant than a slave with no rights living a life of sexual abuse. Yes, a life of exploitation would be horrible, BUT a life of sexual abuse would be utterly unthinkable and unbearable. I'd rather die than be raped/sexually abused or to live a life as a sex slave.

I could one day get over the trauma of having lived as an exploited illegal. But I don't know if I could ever get over the trauma of having evil, perverted men rape and sexually abuse me on an ongoing basis as a "sex slave."

Many of those who are trafficked are women and children sold as sex slaves. And it's hard for me to hear someone say that a trafficked woman or child, who has been forced into literal slavery, most often as a sex slave, might not want to "trade places" with an exploited illegal.

Are you by any chance a man? I ask that because I think there are many men who have no idea of what a woman would feel being raped and sexually abused. After all, it's men who rape and sexually abuse women.

Yes, all exploitation is wrong, BUT sexual abuse against women is an unimaginable, horrific life!

by: KentuckyBlue

11-24-2009 @ 5:37am

I believe that the reason it has become a "back and forth" about ACORN is because ACORN employees were caught on tape giving advice to a "pimp" on how to claim underage, smuggled girls as dependents.

And it's a serious issue because it happened. And it's also serious because many Democrats showed no outrage over it, which is almost worse than the fact it was said to begin with. Turning a blind eye to criminal behavior, esp. involving children, is unbelieavable.

And the reason ACORN has been brought up here is because the ACORN person heard about the trafficking and yet gave advise rather than reporting it. And the Democrats said little, or nothing, in response to finding out about it. Or they defended it.

That is why the back-and-forth here re: ACORN is really not quite as "appalling" as you think.

by: KentuckyBlue

11-24-2009 @ 5:37am

I believe that the reason it has become a "back and forth" about ACORN is because ACORN employees were caught on tape giving advice to a "pimp" on how to claim underage, smuggled girls as dependents.

And it's a serious issue because it happened. And it's also serious because many Democrats showed no outrage over it, which is almost worse than the fact it was said to begin with. Turning a blind eye to criminal behavior, esp. involving children, is unbelieavable.

And the reason ACORN has been brought up here is because the ACORN person heard about the trafficking and yet gave advise rather than reporting it. And the Democrats said little, or nothing, in response to finding out about it. Or they defended it.

That is why the back-and-forth here re: ACORN is really not quite as "appalling" as you think.

by: KentuckyBlue

11-24-2009 @ 6:06am

It's also been reported today that a San Diego ACORN employee was caught dumping confidential records only 8 days after the state attorney general announced an inquiry into ACORN.

Tens of thousands of records, including things like credit reports and other documents with people's sensitive information (bank account numbers, SS numbers, drivers license numbers, etc.), were literally tossed into a dumpster as a private investigator sat unnoticed in his car.

You probably wouldn't have heard about this illegal, reckless, and unethical action if you listen to or watch liberal news media. I know I haven't heard it there. Big surprise.

As always, it was reported by Fox News, and hopefully has been picked up by other news sources by now. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,576466,00.html

You can read more about it at that link. There's a lot more information than what I'm sharing here, like about how the investigation into ACORN has revealed connections to the CA Teacher's Union and Citibank.

As the White House would say... "fishy."

by: KentuckyBlue

11-24-2009 @ 6:06am

It's also been reported today that a San Diego ACORN employee was caught dumping confidential records only 8 days after the state attorney general announced an inquiry into ACORN.

Tens of thousands of records, including things like credit reports and other documents with people's sensitive information (bank account numbers, SS numbers, drivers license numbers, etc.), were literally tossed into a dumpster as a private investigator sat unnoticed in his car.

You probably wouldn't have heard about this illegal, reckless, and unethical action if you listen to or watch liberal news media. I know I haven't heard it there. Big surprise.

As always, it was reported by Fox News, and hopefully has been picked up by other news sources by now. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,576466,00.html

You can read more about it at that link. There's a lot more information than what I'm sharing here, like about how the investigation into ACORN has revealed connections to the CA Teacher's Union and Citibank.

As the White House would say... "fishy."