Good for Acorn. It's past time that American's stood up to their oppressive government.

"oppressive government", obviously you like the current "government" and this is exactly what the meatballs will continue to do; just get bigger and bigger and deeper into your personal life/affairs.

ACORN is government (your oxymoron).
Why would anyone not pay their mortgage or at least try to pay it, then do this stupidity and ACORN to arrange and encourage the stupidity and get mad that they are loosing their house by not leaving, being arrested, creating a civil disturbance, etc. I'm sorry for anyone to loose their house, but if I loose mine I would not carry on in this manner. Doing this is crazy, it appears they are looking for govt assistance and then biting the hand that feeds them. This country is in an uproar simply because a left wing liberal was elected and it's getting worse everyday.

People think this is the age of "entitlement".Well, it's not.It is the age of "opportunity"-go get it, do not wait for someone to hand it to you. That should have stopped when your mom put you down out of your highchair at 2 yrs.

This continues a long and proud tradition.

I recall that during the farm foreclosure crisis of the 1980s, people would show up at sheriff's auctions of a neighbor's property wearing red arm bands. They'd repeatedly bid one dollar, regardless of where the official bidding stood, just to gum up the works in solidarity. Those who came expecting to pick up bargains would be taken aside and shown the error of their ways. It was pretty effective, like the young man who made a shambles of a gov't oil-lease giveaway.

Kudos to all involved, and may ACORN's actions inspire many more.

Sheriffs are elected officials. In many states, they are subject to recall.

I hope ACORN has the sense to file recall petitions against any sheriff who does arrest their resisters.

Does anyone else remember the beginnings of the Free Speech Movement? When the cops tried to arrest a demonstrator, the rest closed in around the squad car in such numbers that they couldn't be arrested or moved.

I hope they can get that kind of turnout, lock down the entire neighborhood. Granted, these days it would turn really ugly; which takes me back to my first point.

Oregoncharles

92% of Americans pay their mortgages on time.

Many of these foreclosures are on homes that the people buying them put nothing down and could never have qualified to buy a home except for dishonest lenders.

Then we have people that put 40% down and were defrauded into a subprime loan whio is rightfully advised by her congress woman to stay in residence and seek good legal council.

This is a mess and I don't know how I feel exactly, but I'm sure I don't care for Acorn's method, but if they don't mind being arrested go ahead. As for the suggestion of recalling a Sheriff for doing his job, shame on anyone that would suggest that. Threatening a law enforcement officer for enforcing the law is criminal and cowardly.

Better advise would be that the Bank or lending institution foreclosing must have (MUST) the original motgage in their physical possesion and produce it. That would do a lot more than Acorn theatrics.

Anyone who works for a cause has the responsibility of considering the effects of his or her actions.

ACORN, therefore, is acting irresponsibly. These evictions are a tragedy, but civil disobedience toward those performing the evictions misses the point. Regardless of your beliefs concerning lenders' culpability, foreclosure evictions are not something which are wrong on their own. The implication is that remaining in your house is a civil right. By equating the desire not to be evicted with the RIGHT not to be singled out and mistreated because of race, etc., ACORN undermines many things.

They undermine their own point by exaggerating a tragedy for many people into a fundamental principle. They undermine the strength of civil rights claims and make light of necessary civil disobedience by claiming equal moral high ground. And they undermine their credibility in general, and that of everyone NOT on the banks' side in this issue, by calling for action which is both disproportionate and nonsensical.

If you truly care about an issue, and you don't just want to hear yourself speaking angrily, demand that those sticking up for that issue make some damn sense.

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of
patriots and tyrants. ....Thomas Jefferson

Good work, ACORN...keep it up. There are definitely times when civil disobedience is necessary and in this country, we need more. Many of these folks were defrauded into mortgages they could not afford. If a person gives candy to a child whose teeth are obviously rotting away, who is at fault? The banks/fraudsters have unlimited means by which to entice folks into these mortgages....far above the means of the average mortgagee to not be tempted....not unlike the credit card companies who suck citizens into their webs. In the case of hard drugs, who is to blame...the pusher or the addicted?? The banks get bailouts and We the People sleep in our cars.

If my neighbor needs me to help occupy his home I'll be there.

"Jackson and others with the group met with reporters outside a Watts house with comedian Roseanne Barr to demonstrate how the campaign would work"

I guess one could just wedge Roseanne in the main door. That way noone goes in, noone comes out :)

It's really too bad when things get messy, and embarrassing, and people have to break the law and put elected officials on the spot. When people use legal means to steal from others, it's often not so messy. That includes taking away land deeded to hispanics here in southern Arizona, it includes putting the elderly and confused out of their homes, it includes breaking land treaties with Amerinds, it even includes defrauding the taxpayer out of trillions of dollars. The history of the United States is rife with legal theft. It's the American way.

Another way seems to be for evictees to ask to see the original note - a lega requirement in most states. The evictors have not been able to find the original loan document. It seems that the corporation doing the evicting in many cases cannot identify the original lender due to all the bundling, etc. the loans went through.

ACORN is the first of many very legitimate groups to call for disobediance.

Just wait until the corporations bypass the law as they used to do with the Pinkertons in the 1800's. They will call on their partners in crime Blackw...., er I mean Xe, to use their famed tactics to round up the miscreants and store them in the KBR-built detent...er concentration camps already located conveniently in a town near you.

"Cygnus-X1-isaHole February 20th, 2009 8:11 pm

You must be newly assigned to troll Commondreams in particular and progressive websites in general.

Corporatocracy is a word we use often.

It's highly accurate.

If you need help with any other big words don't be afraid to ask."

That's WEIRD for post, for it states that someone posted as if disagreeing with corporatocracy, aka corporocracy, or, iow, corporatism, is involved, but the only two other posts I find the word in are the following.

"blah February 20th, 2009 4:33 pm

"Corporatocracy"? Seriously?

Yes, very effective to blame it on the "system", and really helpful for implementation of a response. Nice tie-in with the CIA. Also a meaningful addition."

That post doesn't question whether or not corporatocracy is involved, only stating or inferring to be a little surprised about the term being used, but then indicating to understand and agree. As for the CIA also being involved, now this is a different matter, for while the CIA, minimally the operations part, works for Big Corp., the CIA may possibly have nothing to do with evicting people from their homes because of the banking foreclosures, or the foreclosures to begin with, at all. Seeing to overthrowing govts that work for the populations in sane and democratic terms, and when that fails to see to assassinations of leaders of such govts, now this is something the operations CIA historically does ... plenty, but the foreclosures on homes in the U.S.? I don't know.

The other post that mentioned corporatocracy is the next one.

"O February 20th, 2009 2:30 pm

...

This is a protest of the system, not just the banks. ... Truth is, the banks already got their money when these mortgages were re-packaged and sold. Just as it's the system that ALLOWS drugs to be so easily smuggled into this country via the complicity of many organizations, including the CIA. AND, I would suspect one purpose behind this civil disobediance is to keep the plight of these people in the forefront of the news .... Why take away a means of defence against an out of control corporatocracy?"

That post indicates understanding of the term corporatocracy and agreeing that it's definitely involved. As for the rest of the quoted part of the post:

*) The banks much define the system, so if the system is at fault, then look for the banks involved behind this corruption. They may well be among other guilty parties, but are nonetheless involved.

*) I haven't read or learned that banks have managed to re-package and re-sell all of the mortgages of homes that have foreclosures against the owners or "former" owners, and I doubt that this has happened in all cases. There may be a large number that this re-packaging and re-selling has not happened for. If the person who wrote otherwise has proof that all foreclosures have re-packaged and re-sold mortgages, then the links to the supporting information sources are definitely lacking.

*) Yes, the CIA, the operations part anyway, evidently is and has long been involved in the international drug-trafficking business and apparently in terms of protecting the racket for criminal allies of the U.S. elite for whom honest and innocent people wouldn't work in criminal ways; and criminal ways are needed for the destructive parasites that the elites constitute or are.

*) There's never a good reason to take away means of [defence].

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTW0y6kazWM&feature=related

great video and tune "we cant make it here anymore".

Fine piece of news the article provides; some real human [life].

It also reminds me of the information about Viva Palestina, the large civilian aid convoy that started out from London, England, on Feb. 14th, for Gaza, with over 110 vehicles (vans, buses, around 20 ambulances, and a fire engine) of aid, driving all the way, around 8,000 km, and which has now been joined by a Scottish-based convoy of aid, but while they're evidently taking different routes and the latter convoy plans to meet up with VP in Rafah, Egypt. All of that information is available at www.vivapalestina.org , and organisation driven by MP George Galloway, that [lively] individual of the [Respect] Party; a fitting name for a party the respectful man founded or co-founded.

It's all about [life] ... and [respect] for each others' lives.

It interesting to note the ebb and flow of people here.

Whats with the sudden rush of Libertarians?

Google "first national bank of montgomery vs. daly".
From the book Web of Debt:

***************************************************************************
Alcyon's note: The following should be considered for educational or entertainment purposes only.
***************************************************************************

First National Bank of Montgomery vs. Daly was a courtroom drama worthy of a movie script. Defendant Jerome Daly opposed the bank's foreclosure on his $14,000 home mortgage loan on the ground that there was no consideration for the loan. "Consideration" ("the thing exchanged") is an essential element of a contract. Daly, an attorney representing himself, argued that the bank had put up no real money for his loan.

The courtroom proceedings were recorded by Associate Justice Bill Drexler, whose chief role, he said, was to keep order in a highly charged courtroom where the attorneys were threatening a fist fight. Drexler hadn't given much credence to the theory of the defense, until Mr. Morgan, the bank's president, took the stand. To everyone's surprise, Morgan admitted that the bank routinely created money "out of thin air" for its loans, and that this was standard banking practice.

"It sounds like fraud to me," intoned Presiding Justice Martin Mahoney amid nods from the jurors. In his court memorandum, Justice Mahoney stated:

Plaintiff admitted that it, in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, . . . did create the entire $14,000.00 in money and credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry. That this was the consideration used to support the Note dated May 8, 1964 and the Mortgage of the same date. The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this. A lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the Note.

The court rejected the bank's claim for foreclosure, and the defendant kept his house. To Daly, the implications were enormous. If bankers were indeed extending credit without consideration – without backing their loans with money they actually had in their vaults and were entitled to lend – a decision declaring their loans void could topple the power base of the world. He wrote in a local news article:

This decision, which is legally sound, has the effect of declaring all private mortgages on real and personal property, and all U.S. and State bonds held by the Federal Reserve, National and State banks to be null and void. This amounts to an emancipation of this Nation from personal, national and state debt purportedly owed to this banking system. Every American owes it to himself . . . to study this decision very carefully . . . for upon it hangs the question of freedom or slavery.

Needless to say, the decision failed to change prevailing practice, although it was never overruled. As for Justice Mahoney, he took the rash step of threatening to prosecute and expose the bank. He died less than six months after the Daly trial, in a mysterious accident that appeared to involve poisoning. Since that time, a number of defendants have attempted to avoid loan defaults using the defense Daly raised; but they have met with only limited success.
******************************************************************************

"GwNorth February 20th, 2009 9:45 pm

It interesting to note the ebb and flow of people here.

Whats with the sudden rush of Libertarians?"

I don't know who the Libertarians or likes are in this page, but I'm certainly not one, for the Libertarian Party is definitely not one I'd support; they're corrupt, corporatist, ..., just that it's ... a little differently, in some respects anyway. Otoh, I could be considered libertarian with the little 'l', according to the dictionary definition.

"lib·er·tar·i·an
(lbr-târ-n)
n.
1. One who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state.
2. One who believes in free will."

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Libertarian

In this sense, I could be considered libertarian, but with some conditions that first need to be met. With respect to believing in "free will", I do, but only when it's with the application of a sanely developed [conscience]. After all, and like with "free trade", "free will" can be very corrupt, perverted, abusively and destructively exploitative, etcetera; that's to the point at which the "free" qualitative is a false one and there's plenty of evidence of this with the so-called concept of "free trade". Psychopaths act according to their free wills and of course can't be tolerated; their acts, which are of their choosings, must be stopped and the perpetrators ... incarcerated ... for a long time.

The Lib. Party is one that, f.e., was strongly pro-replacement of U.S. professionals in the high tech. industry(ies) with foreign workers imported when there provably was no real lack of qualified and adequately qualified U.S. citizens and residents, as well as foreign students who enrolled in and paid for years of higher educ. in U.S. schools. The Lib. Party freely felt that all of us didn't count or matter, that we had no rights, like those of the U.S. Constitutional and Bill of Rights, as well as those of sane morality when not specifically covered in the Const. and BoR.

As for promoting individual rights, there's definitely nothing wrong with this at all; and as for minimizing the role of state, well, I also believe in MYOB being a good principle to live by, except when doing so is to basically make oneself silently complicit in crimes or injustices committed against innocent people or simply others. The state must also learn to sanely apply the MYOB principle and if it did so, then it would, f.e., stop criminalising people for matters that definitely and clearly are not criminal at all. If the state applied the principle well, then it would not pander to the interests of the chiefs and shareholders of Big Corp., the govt would cease being a corporatist-fascist organisation that oppressively enforces the corp.-fascist agenda. If the U.S. govt learned to sanely apply the principle, then it would stop seeing to overthrowing govts led by fair leaders and when this fails, trying to assassinate them, while if that additionally fails, then waging wars (of aggression) against them. F.e.

Anyone who's not for the "state" abiding by MYOB in sane and therefore just terms is only another warmonger, corporatism and fascism promoter, etcetera, a little dictator sh*t.

Speak not of Libertarianism; instead, speak of human rights and legitimate liberties, and therefore [respect].

In the end we will all be better off just to give the homes to the people. Once things get tied up into the system the lawyers and banks will keep the homes tied up as they expect to make a killing off the foreclosures.
The homes will sit for years and will need expensive repairs to be liveable-they will turn into drug dens and homes for the rats-real ones not the corporations who ripped people.
In the usa they give businesses to Indian people for 3 years. Certainly we can afford to give away a few homes also.
The working person is accused of buying more than they could afford but they lived in the homes for many years obviously paying for them.
Who made the homes unaffordable? The banks and corporations and governments with their excessive fees and bills.
A contract is for the benefit of both parties-when it only benefits one person the contract is void.
It is the governments fault that allows unregulated loan sharking, poor quality of jobs without benefits and skrocketing essential services.
They do not have a problem giving things to other countries and ceos-give to the people who actually earn it!

Here's a use of civil disobedience targeted at a real "person with the power to decide," (not just to passers by) with a real demand (not just a "demonstration."

Hey, ACORN knows how to do real organizing! Pay attention!