The situation with ACORN has really got me thinking. Okay, I’ll have to admit that I think there should be some penalty for the group which, at the very least, was caught doing something stupid in re, offering tax advice to a pimp. What has me intrigued, however, is the amount of effort and energy and scrutiny that has been heaped on ACORN in the last few years. This is a group that has been under the glass for a while. That some embarrassing information has surfaced may indicate some larger, more significant issues with the organization, or could be seen as just a matter of time.
I can’t help but wonder if I were placed under such scrutiny what kind of embarrassing details might come to surface? I shudder to think. Now multiply that effect by placing an institution, not an individual, but a collective of flawed individuals, under such a magnifying glass. Is it any wonder that, eventually, some shortcomings might be dug up.
Granted, it could be said that offering tax advice and legitimacy to a pimp and prostitute who were planning an under-aged sex ring could be considered significantly more than a “shortcoming.” It’s not my place to minimize the significance here. I just wonder what would be dug up if we subjected James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles to such scrutiny how would they fare after a few years.
The Mad Sociologist Blog 
Leave a comment