personally, i'm very glad that the right-wing was able to bring acorn down

because it shows how easy it is to bring down an entity we oppose.

don't like wal-mart? just walk in with young, legal age, female cohort and tell them you're a pimp and a hooker and you need to dress the part to drum up business. film them pointing to the clothes aisles. before and after, film more damning dialog without the wal-mart employees present outside the building and edit mercilessly.

don't like exxonmobil? just get on the pimp & prostitute gear you just bought at wal-mart, drive up the pimpmobile to the full service pumps and ask for assistance. ask the gas station attendant for directions to a neighboring state and tell them that you're transporting a minor across the state line for prostitution.

don't like the republican party? just go to a strip club, throw a party for a bunch of friends, charge it up and send an expense report to the republican party. oh, wait, that one's already been done.


now send the mercilessly edited tapes to our many liberal media outlets (they're everywhere, they're everywhere, foxnews assures us) and voila! wal-mart and exxon and the republican party all brought down, rocked by scandal, completely doomed. how could they POSSIBLY come back from such a blow!


thank you, foxnews and you anti-acorn hit people for showing us the way!

Acorn didn't have that kind of access and when the Dems joined Repukes in Congress to strip Acorn of Federal money, but not military contractors who kill our troops, Acorn's fate was sealed. Corporate America, Walmart include, are happier.

I kicked $15 a month over to ACORN out of my checking account, and when they went moribund, I contacted my bank to stop the automatic withdrawal. The bank (let's call it "Chase," just for the purpose of identification) said they couldn't just stop the automatic deduction. I had to contact ACORN and get them to stop it. :wtf:

So, I called the ACORN national office. Disconnected. I called the local office. Not accepting any new voice mails. I sent them an e-mail. Bounced. Chase said they could stop the automatic withdrawal from my account, but it could take up to six months. Oh, and they'd charge me $32 for the "service." I trundled my bundle down to the local branch and told the account representative that I knew a faster, cheaper way to stop this automatic withdrawal from my Chase checking account.

The credit union was delighted with the deposit.

:applause:

You did good.

Its like the account is closed but its not really closed. I am afraid the bank will just start charging you for overdraft fees even on the closed account when the automatic withdrawal request comes in each month. They react the same as if you were still writing checks on the account I think?

I am not positive about this but I have heard some real nightmare stories about this same situation from friends and relatives who have had it happen to them.

Good luck.

Don

According to the helpful folks at Chase, there was nothing they could do about the automatic debits, it was solely a matter between ACORN and me, and if they interfered, it would be breaking some provision of the Code of the Bankers or something. If the automatic debit keeps tapping Chase, and they honor it without verifying the funds or the account exist, I will cheerfully and helpfully point out to them that this is solely a matter between them and ACORN; I'm out of it, since I'm no longer a Chase account holder.

I've made shadier outfits than Chase back down. I'll do it again.

As soon as the account is hit with a withrawal (some entity trying to take money out of it) the account automatically reopens. Since there's no money in the "closed" account, you get hit with an overdraft fee as well, AND the account remains open until those fees are paid. These entities also include the bank itself! If the bank charges a fee for not having a certain amount of money in the account, it jumps in and charges the fee the moment it is automatically reopened. The only way to permanently close the account is to fill out a form from the bank per entity that you want to stop hitting your "closed" account for money (mine charged $40 per entity) and it even takes time to go into affect (I think my bank took one month)... meanwhile those entities are still hitting your account and the bank is still hitting you with overdraft fees.

This happened to me with a large well known bank I will not name, and it took two YEARS for the bank to stop charging the monthly fee for having no money in that account thereby generating yet another overdraft fee. EVERY major bank does this.

All any bank needs for someone to take money out of your account whenever they want is the name on the account, the account number and the bank routing number (all of which are promanently displayed on most peoples' checks. NO signature or other authorization from the account holder is required and even when the account holder verifies that the money is in fact being stolen from them the only way for the bank to stop it is to fill out their form and pay their fee.

It's damned robbery by the BANK, and I have no idea why they are allowed to do this, but they all do.

You can close the account but if a new charge comes in the following month they reopen it. I have seen that happen too.

Don

How did "Chase" react when you closed your account?

They clearly left you no other choice.

Small depositors are not on their radar screen. The persons I talked to on the phone and in person were slightly dismayed, but this isn't going to affect Chase at all. They count on inertia to keep small account holders, because it's such a pain to open a new account anymore.

Fortunately for me, when Washington Mutual was tottering toward insolvency, I skedaddled over to the credit union to open another account and park some money there. Chase eated Washington Mutual, so my money stayed safe and available. But the first time I asked for a little customer service, Chase couldn't do it. So long.

nice!

..nobody should be banking with Chase, or BoA or Citi anyway.

no organization really can be brought down so easily by a clearly framed quasi-scandal of a low level employee. heck, outright criminal convictions of top dogs often don't bring down the organization itself. in any reasonable background setting, acorn would be able to fire the one guy or issue a policy statement saying we don't help people engaging in criminal activity and that would be the end of it.

but obviously, there were forces at work (dems included, clearly) who wanted to get rid of it but needed an excuse, however feeble, so they manufactured one.


that's the thing about most scandals. the real scandal is not the one in the foreground.

i appreciate the sarcasm.