What's the point of going on Sunday-morning TV shows if you're going to be ready to give answers like this on topics such as ACORN?

STEPHANOPOULOS: How about the funding for ACORN?

OBAMA: You know, if -- frankly, it's not really something I've followed closely. I didn't even know that ACORN was getting a whole lot of federal money.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Both the Senate and the House have voted to cut it off.

OBAMA: You know, what I know is, is that what I saw on that video was certainly inappropriate and deserves to be investigated.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So you're not committing to -- to cut off the federal funding?

OBAMA: George, this is not the biggest issue facing the country. It's not something I'm paying a lot of attention to.

Amazing! An organization that he represented a decade ago, worked with, and who endorsed him, and was a big target during is presidential campaign gets involved in an amazing prostitution-human trafficking scandal and it t isn't something he's following closely? He didn't know that ACORN got a whole lot of federal money?

ARE YOU KIDDING ME? This stretches the realm of credibility far beyond its breaking point.

President Obama worked with this organization, received their endorsement during the primary, he spoke to them in some kind of convention where he actually promised them a place in helping shape his administration, the Senate votes 83-7 to cut off funding and the House votes 345-75 (both strong bipartisan votes), and he expects the country to believe he isn't following it closely and didn't even know ACORN got a lot of federal money?

This is the height of arrogant dismissiveness and is certainly not believable. The fact that such strong bipartisan majorities in Congress have voted to cut off funding but President Obama was unwilling to commit to do the same definitely gives rise to some serious questions about his past involvement in ACORN.

Let me try to help Obama here: The correct answer for President Obama was, "Yes, Geroge, I commit to cutting off all funds to ACORN and any other corrupt organization."

It wasn't a tough question and the answer was not complicated. This is an epic fail on the part of the president.

... And on the part of "journalist" George Stephanopolous who let the president get away without answering the question or adequately addressing the topic. In fact, the smooth segue into Afghanistan almost smacks of this having been planned ahead.

Update 9/21/2009: The Washington Post likewise has observed that the president's response is simply not believable.



Given his longstanding ties with Acorn, President Obama's protestations of ignorance or disinterest in the group's latest scandal seem preposterous. Here's hoping White House reporters will press the president to clarify just how much he really knows about Acorn and when he knew it.