The NAACP Was Conned By Andrew Breitbart

US News • Views: 3,486

Yesterday the NAACP posted a denunciation of USDA official Shirley Sherrod, based on the edited, misleading video cooked up by Andrew Breitbart.

Today this page comes up blank.

But Google’s cache still has it: NAACP STATEMENT ON THE RESIGNATION OF SHIRLEY SHERROD | Press Room | NAACP.

(BALTIMORE, MD) NAACP President and CEO Benjamin Todd Jealous issued the following statement today after learning of the resignation of Shirley Sherrod of the United States Department of Agriculture:

“Since our founding in 1909, the NAACP has been a multi-racial, multi-faith organization that— while generally rooted in African American communities— fights to end racial discrimination against all Americans.

We concur with US Agriculture Secretary Vilsack in accepting the resignation of Shirley Sherrod for her remarks at a local NAACP Freedom Fund banquet.

Racism is about the abuse of power. Sherrod had it in her position at USDA. According to her remarks, she mistreated a white farmer in need of assistance because of his race.

We are appalled by her actions, just as we are with abuses of power against farmers of color and female farmers.

Her actions were shameful. While she went on to explain in the story that she ultimately realized her mistake, as well as the common predicament of working people of all races, she gave no indication she had attempted to right the wrong she had done to this man.

The reaction from many in the audience is disturbing. We will be looking into the behavior of NAACP representatives at this local event and take any appropriate action.

The right thing for the NAACP to do at this point would be to issue a sincere apology to Sherrod. They were played by a con man, and it’s clear that they reacted without the proper balance because they wanted to appear completely fair after the “Tea Party racism” resolution.

The NAACP isn’t the truly guilty party here; the one who lied and smeared an innocent person for purposes of race-baiting was Andrew Breitbart. But this should lead to some soul-searching for the NAACP too, because they overreacted without having all the facts, and ended up helping Breitbart do his dirty work.

The sad thing is that the damage is done, and the truth won’t get anywhere near as much coverage as the lie.

Jump to bottom

248 comments
1 Obdicut  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:05:42am

What is interesting to me is the apparent coordination and timing of this; right when the NCAAP is attacking the Tea Parties, Brietbart tries to punch back and they go into ‘zero tolerance’ mode protectively.

The amount of cohesion in the lunatic fringe these days is what’s scary. There’s no, to my knowledge, overt connection between Brietbart and the Tea Party types, but he quite clearly is making common cause with them by doing this atrocious, shitty stunt.

I’m used to the fringe being fractured. It’s attaining scary levels of organization and commonality.

I am very heartened that the wife of the farmer immediately spoke up in Sherrod’s defense, though.

2 theheat  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:06:52am
Racism is about the abuse of power. Sherrod had it in her position at USDA. According to her remarks, she mistreated a white farmer in need of assistance because of his race.

Except that part about her being employed by the USDA when she did it. Fact is, she didn’t have the power she supposedly abused.

3 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:07:28am

ACORN, Part deux.

4 Obdicut  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:07:31am

re: #2 theheat

Everything happens way too fast these days.

/get off my lawn.

5 Cato the Elder  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:07:39am

“A lie goes round the world twice before the truth can get out of bed.”

6 Targetpractice  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:08:37am

re: #1 Obdicut

What is interesting to me is the apparent coordination and timing of this; right when the NCAAP is attacking the Tea Parties, Brietbart tries to punch back and they go into ‘zero tolerance’ mode protectively.

The amount of cohesion in the lunatic fringe these days is what’s scary. There’s no, to my knowledge, overt connection between Brietbart and the Tea Party types, but he quite clearly is making common cause with them by doing this atrocious, shitty stunt.

I’m used to the fringe being fractured. It’s attaining scary levels of organization and commonality.

I am very heartened that the wife of the farmer immediately spoke up in Sherrod’s defense, though.

That was my immediate first conclusion as well, that this wasn’t Breitbart looking to just ruin some random USDA worker’s career, this was an attempt to either shut up and/or shame the NAACP. Sherrod’s had her career, and her reputation, utterly ruined simply being used as a tool in the Right’s attack on those who shine the light upon the darkness that is spreading amongst them.

7 wrenchwench  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:08:39am

Shame on Jealous for not contacting Sherrod before writing that piece.

8 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:08:41am

re: #1 Obdicut

What is interesting to me is the apparent coordination and timing of this; right when the NCAAP is attacking the Tea Parties, Brietbart tries to punch back and they go into ‘zero tolerance’ mode protectively.

The amount of cohesion in the lunatic fringe these days is what’s scary. There’s no, to my knowledge, overt connection between Brietbart and the Tea Party types, but he quite clearly is making common cause with them by doing this atrocious, shitty stunt.

I’m used to the fringe being fractured. It’s attaining scary levels of organization and commonality.

I am very heartened that the wife of the farmer immediately spoke up in Sherrod’s defense, though.

Imagine what they’ll do once they elect a president.

9 Kronocide  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:08:57am

Libel cases are hard to prove, but suing for causing her job to be lost would be much easier… because she did, in fact, lose her job.

I hope she’s talking to counsel.

10 jamesfirecat  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:09:01am

re: #5 Cato the Elder

“A lie goes round the world twice before the truth can get out of bed.”

Where’s William De Worde when you need him?

There was a journalist who knew that it might take a while, but once the truth had its boots on, it would kick some serious ass!

11 HelloDare  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:10:56am

Fox News is going to interview ex USDA official Shirley Sherrod in about 15 minutes. Fox talked to the wife of the man Sherrod referred to in her speech. The man’s wife confirmed that Sherrod did help him and he considers her a friend.

12 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:11:02am

Now FOX will blame Breitbart, and the NAACP and the Obama administration. Basically they’ll blame everyone but themselves for making a calculated move to play into this race baiting lie by omission because they know that their audience will gobble that shit up. It’s called confirmation bias.

13 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:11:27am

re: #7 wrenchwench

Shame on Jealous for not contacting Sherrod before writing that piece.

Fuck AB for putting a lie out there… shame on everyone else for not even spending 24 hours to look into the facts. Hopefully this is a good lesson for everyone about assumptions and jumping the gun.

14 avanti  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:13:16am

Fox will have Shirley on with Magyn Kelly at the bottom of the hour. They also found the wife of the farmer in question and quoted her as saying she and her husband were helped and don’t think Shirley should have been forced out.

15 prairiefire  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:14:07am

The best long term effect to evolve from this is that targeted liberal minded organizations will learn to stop jumping when Breitbart says “Boo!”

16 Obdicut  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:14:13am

re: #14 avanti

That is really damn heartening. Hope-giving.

17 Kronocide  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:15:38am

I hope Megyn Kelley doesn’t go nucking futs on her. I theorize that Kelley will not focus on Breitbart.

18 avanti  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:15:59am

re: #12 goddamnedfrank

Now FOX will blame Breitbart, and the NAACP and the Obama administration. Basically they’ll blame everyone but themselves for making a calculated move to play into this race baiting lie by omission because they know that their audience will gobble that shit up. It’s called confirmation bias.

According to press reports, she was pressured to resign because “You’ll be on the Beck show”

19 jamesfirecat  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:16:24am

re: #17 BigPapa

I hope Megyn Kelley doesn’t go nucking futs on her. I theorize that Kelley will not focus on Breitbart.

Here’s a quick seven degrees of Kevin Bacon question, how deeply connected are Fox and Breitbart?

20 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:17:05am

re: #19 jamesfirecat

Here’s a quick seven degrees of Kevin Bacon question, how deeply connected are Fox and Breitbart?

Conservative.

21 polkadot  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:17:09am

USDA worker in Ga. quits over racism charge, says White House forced her out

snip:

Hours after her resignation, Sherrod accused administration officials of lacking backbone. A USDA spokesman would not comment on whether the White House was involved.
22 prairiefire  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:17:14am

re: #17 BigPapa

I hope Megyn Kelley doesn’t go nucking futs on her. I theorize that Kelley will not focus on Breitbart.

To my mind, she can make interviewees look sympathetic due to her massive snark and sneers.

23 webevintage  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:17:18am

re: #11 HelloDare

Fox News is going to interview ex USDA official Shirley Sherrod in about 15 minutes. Fox talked to the wife of the man Sherrod referred to in her speech. The man’s wife confirmed that Sherrod did help him and he considers her a friend.

I wonder how long before Malkin is sneaking around the Farmer’s house checking to see what kind of counter tops they have?

24 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:17:31am

Kelley is going to focus on how the Administration pushed her out.

I guarantee it. That will be the narrative.

25 Targetpractice  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:17:39am

re: #13 Walter L. Newton

Fuck AB for putting a lie out there… shame on everyone else for not even spending 24 hours to look into the facts. Hopefully this is a good lesson for everyone about assumptions and jumping the gun.

It should be, but it won’t. The MSM may have jumped on this for varying reasons, but the underlying truth is the same: They didn’t want to be “last” to report it. They always reason that there’s time later for analysis and determining the validity of the “scoop,” what’s important first is getting to the airwaves “first” with that scoop.

26 theheat  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:18:33am

re: #12 goddamnedfrank

Think Fox’ll run a quick piece about McCain being endorsed and considered one of the boys by a klukker - since they’re all about getting to the bottom of things?

27 Targetpractice  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:20:45am

re: #24 Fozzie Bear

Kelley is going to focus on how the Administration pushed her out.

I guarantee it. That will be the narrative.

No doubts here about that. The continued use of this woman as a “tool” by the media, first to shame the NAACP, now to attack the Administration on accusations that they canned her. No doubt the hunt is on for an “anonymous source” in the USDA who will (for the right price) assert that the USDA wanted to wait until the evidence was in, but the White House forced them to give her the axe instead.

28 Sol Berdinowitz  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:20:57am

A brilliant ploy: they defend her and keep the story alive all week or they roll over and seem weak, vacillating and/or somehow complicit.

We must give this man some credit as an evil genius, worthy of a Karl Rove.

29 Amory Blaine  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:22:15am

The tre: #28 ralphieboy

A brilliant ploy: they defend her and keep the story alive all week or they roll over and seem weak, vacillating and/or somehow complicit.

We must give this man some credit as an evil genius, worthy of a Karl Rove.

The Turdie!!

30 Charles Johnson  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:22:44am

re: #24 Fozzie Bear

Kelley is going to focus on how the Administration pushed her out.

I guarantee it. That will be the narrative.

I agree. I’ll bet Breitbart’s name doesn’t even get mentioned.

31 Charles Johnson  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:23:13am

re: #28 ralphieboy

A brilliant ploy: they defend her and keep the story alive all week or they roll over and seem weak, vacillating and/or somehow complicit.

We must give this man some credit as an evil genius, worthy of a Karl Rove.

Nah, there’s no genius here, just low cunning.

32 jamesfirecat  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:23:42am

re: #28 ralphieboy

A brilliant ploy: they defend her and keep the story alive all week or they roll over and seem weak, vacillating and/or somehow complicit.

We must give this man some credit as an evil genius, worthy of a Karl Rove.

Please, Karl Rove managed to get the son of a former president elected against a two men who have all the Charisma of cardboard cutouts, Rupert Murdoch was evil enough to have a bond Villain based off of him.

It’s really no comparison.

33 Amory Blaine  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:23:47am

I saw a funny post somewhere that said ” You can’t polish a turd but you can roll it in glitter.

Good stuff.

34 researchok  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:24:02am

re: #12 goddamnedfrank

As an aside, CNN ran the story as well.

35 Targetpractice  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:27:10am

re: #30 Charles

I agree. I’ll bet Breitbart’s name doesn’t even get mentioned.

It might, but only to sound “incredulous” that the White House could by so badly conned by him that they had this woman fired without a second thought. They won’t outright bash him, as that would be friendly fire, but just try to word it to sound shocked that the White House could take the man’s word at face value and drum it up as “proof” that Obama’s staff is too “inexperienced” to recognize a con when they see it.

36 Kronocide  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:27:34am

Breitbart is no genius. Smart, shrewd, cunning, yes.

37 webevintage  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:28:28am

I would not do an interview with “Megan with a Y”….Shep would be the only one at FOX I would be willing to talk to.

38 greygandalf  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:28:45am

re: #30 Charles

I agree. I’ll bet Breitbart’s name doesn’t even get mentioned.

That’s a bet I think you’ll win.

39 researchok  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:31:36am

I just hope the WH backs her now just as quickly as they gave her the boot.

And they ought to make a pointed statement about ‘responsible journalism’.

40 Kronocide  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:32:06am

Amongst this fabricated story, the risk to the Fauxrage industry and Breitbart is much higher than the Obama Admin or the NAACP. They might take a few lumps on this, but they could really turn this around and bludgeon Breitbart. Fox better watch their step too.

41 greygandalf  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:32:56am

re: #39 researchok

I just hope the WH backs her now just as quickly as they gave her the boot.

And they ought to make a pointed statement about ‘responsible journalism’.

That would be an admission that a mistake had been made by them. The WH won’t like to do that.

42 Sol Berdinowitz  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:33:20am

re: #39 researchok

I just hope the WH backs her now just as quickly as they gave her the boot.

And they ought to make a pointed statement about ‘responsible journalism’.

Which would make them appear vacillating and incompetent.

In the end, the only incompetence they would demonstrate would be in dealing with unsubstantiated smear attacks, but it would still look bad.

43 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:34:52am

re: #24 Fozzie Bear

Kelley is going to focus on how the Administration pushed her out.

I guarantee it. That will be the narrative.

I hope that Sherrod flips the script and takes White She-Devil to task for her bizarre obsession with the DOJ / New Black Panthers bullshit story.

44 Sol Berdinowitz  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:35:27am

re: #40 BigPapa

Amongst this fabricated story, the risk to the Fauxrage industry and Breitbart is much higher than the Obama Admin or the NAACP. They might take a few lumps on this, but they could really turn this around and bludgeon Breitbart. Fox better watch their step too.

You misunderestimate the “damage” that could be done to Breitbart and his ilk: when sh*t gets stepped on, it only gets spread around even further, which is just fine for those turds.

45 researchok  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:35:37am

re: #42 ralphieboy

Which would make them appear vacillating and incompetent.

In the end, the only incompetence they would demonstrate would be in dealing with unsubstantiated smear attacks, but it would still look bad.

Not at all. I t would make the WH look responsible and willing to be held accountable. There is great power in saying with conviction, ‘We were wrong and now we’re going to fix it’. Americans will applaud. I believe.

Ignoring this or pretending it didn’t happen is much worse.

46 Sol Berdinowitz  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:37:02am

re: #45 researchok

Not at all. I t would make the WH look responsible and willing to be held accountable. There is great power in saying with conviction, ‘We were wrong and now we’re going to fix it’. Americans will applaud. I believe.

Ignoring this or pretending it didn’t happen is much worse.


I would like to agree with you, and I would like to hope that the only serious incompetence in the White House is dealing with bottom-feeders in journalism.

47 Targetpractice  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:38:56am

I pulled up Yahoo, and this was the story that came up first under “Headlines”:

USDA official resigns amid race controversy

It has the video of the CNN interview and her explaining the reasoning behind the speech, along with the since retracted condemnation from the NAACP. But this line is the one that caught my eye:

Even so, Sherrod resigned after conservative media activist Andrew Breitbart posted video of the story and Fox News picked it up. She told CNN that she tried to explain to USDA officials that the incident was in the past, but said “for some reason, the stuff Fox and the tea party does is scaring the administration.”

That right there, more than anything else, is what the Right’s gonna latch onto now. That the White House is “scared” of them, but at the same time “jumping at shadows.” They’ll revel is feeling that they’ve got the “power” to get the White House to act without thinking, but be “shocked” that the Obama is doing so and play it up as “inexperience” or “guilty conscience.”

48 greygandalf  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:40:28am

re: #45 researchok

Not at all. I t would make the WH look responsible and willing to be held accountable. There is great power in saying with conviction, ‘We were wrong and now we’re going to fix it’. Americans will applaud. I believe.

Ignoring this or pretending it didn’t happen is much worse.

You are right but politics don’t work that way.

The republicans just run a TV add for 2012 with the democratic WH saying they were wrong. And then say “what else are they wrong about?”

49 Ebetty  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:40:37am

re: #45 researchok

I disagree. “The White House” is a building, not a person. Who at the WH? Press Secretary Gibbs? He talks about responsible journalism all the time. Going back to Anita Dunn, Obama Officials have been calling for it.

All Gibbs and other West Wing staff can do is point to the Communications Shop at USDA and express disappointment in their judgment. USDA is a part of the Executive Branch.

Breitbart is the villain. No one in the WW has any obligation to single him out. The only way to get rid of Breitbart is for the establishment GOP & the grassroots conservatives to unite against him. They won’t do that, so the whole thing is just one more episode of bile-spewing BS by Breitbart. It’s disgusting.

50 Sol Berdinowitz  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:41:04am

Fear.

The city is rife with it…

Bring up the Wolf’s Head!!!

51 Ebetty  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:43:06am

Have a great day all. Must go run this business-o-mine. Meet w/attorney and handle other things on the to-do list. :-)

52 Obdicut  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:43:16am

re: #49 Ebetty

I agree with both you and researchok, which shouldn’t be possible.

53 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:44:13am

re: #44 ralphieboy

You misunderestimate the “damage” that could be done to Breitbart and his ilk: when sh*t gets stepped on, it only gets spread around even further, which is just fine for those turds.

IF the WH apologizes for demanding the resignation and immediately reinstates Sherrod to her former position; and IF the NAACP apologizes and withdraws its slanderous rush to judge Sherrod; then and only then will the blame be effectively refocused on Breitbart’s malfeasance.

BTW your use of “misunderestimate” is positively Palinesque.

54 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:44:39am

re: #52 Obdicut

I agree with both you and researchok, which shouldn’t be possible.

Don’t worry… you can still fall back on disagreeing with me.

55 Kragar  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:44:39am

Put God back in public life, Glenn Beck says

Beck’s “American Revival,” a combination of politics and stadium evangelism that promotional materials labeled a “fusion of entertainment and enlightenment,” is mostly about duty to God. And from the EnergySolutions Arena pulpit on Saturday, the TV and radio personality told roughly 5,000 ticketed fans it’s a duty requiring restoration of religion in public life.

On the other side of that argument, he said in shades of last century’s red scares, are Marxists who want social disorder so they can rebuild society to their liking. At various points throughout the six-hour program, though, he assured viewers they were born into this time to save “American exceptionalism,” and that God will help them.

“God is not having us hang by a thread,” he said to open the show, moments after choking up in the first of dozens of emotional pauses. “He has put a rope down for us to hang onto. … I promise you that the Lord is going to reveal himself and Americans are going to stand together again.”

Beck, a Mormon convert who repeatedly alluded to the dominant local faith and at one point called the LDS hymn “All Is Well” his favorite, invited a few regulars on his broadcast shows to share their views on how the nation is failing its founders’ assignment. First, though, he asked the audience to visualize a pyramid illustrating his view of how liberals are attacking America’s foundation.

Originally, he said, America was built on God at its base and personal charity (as opposed to government welfare) at its center, with government occupying only the pointy, narrow top, doing only the things people couldn’t do for themselves. Now, he argued, the U.S. government has reversed the equation, insinuating itself into all aspects of life while pushing God aside.

“There is a perversion of faith right now,” he said, “a wicked, wicked perversion. And it is all about social justice. It is all about collective salvation. It’s actually all about Marxism.”

I think I get this whole religious control of the government thing now. When Muslims do it, its creeping Sharia, when Christians do it, its “returning to our Christian roots”.

56 Charles Johnson  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:45:10am

I put on Fox News to see them interview Sherrod, but they’re doing that stupid runaround thing where they keep promising she’s coming right up, just to keep you hanging on for another hour. What a crappy channel.

Megyn Fox was just snarling and hissing over the latest Journolist silliness.

57 Kragar  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:45:21am

re: #50 ralphieboy

Fear.

The city is rife with it…

Bring up the Wolf’s Head!!!

RIDE FOR RUIN AND THE WORLD’S END!

58 Charles Johnson  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:45:51am

re: #53 Spare O’Lake

IF the WH apologizes for demanding the resignation and immediately reinstates Sherrod to her former position; and IF the NAACP apologizes and withdraws its slanderous rush to judge Sherrod; then and only then will the blame be effectively refocused on Breitbart’s malfeasance.

BTW your use of “misunderestimate” is positively Palinesque.

I know you’d like it to be that way. You’ve been hammering away at this talking point all morning.

59 Obdicut  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:47:19am

re: #53 Spare O’Lake

Would you stop concern-trolling this?

The NCAAP has already taken down their denunciation. I do hope an apology is to follow. I do hope that the White House acts quickly to help out this maligned woman.

But they didn’t do the maligning. They didn’t create the video. The video itself, its existence, its source is going to be part of that story no matter how much some wish it wasn’t.

Maybe not on Fox News.

60 Killgore Trout  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:47:27am

re: #56 Charles

I put on Fox News to see them interview Sherrod, but they’re doing that stupid runaround thing where they keep promising she’s coming right up, just to keep you hanging on for another hour. What a crappy channel.

Megyn Fox was just snarling and hissing over the latest Journolist silliness.

I think that’s going to be the tactic. Britbart just invents a new bogus story as the wheels come off the previous one. Ed Morrisey sez…..

Sherrod and others can complain about Fox News and the editing of the tape, but two points should be remembered. First, Andrew Breitbart made it clear to me last night that this was the entirety of the speech he had in his possession. He also wants to find the whole speech and is trying to get it. Second, this has a lot more substantiation and evidence of racism than what the Journolist attempted to cook up against Fred Barnes and Karl Rove, among others — or for that matter, what the NAACP has to accuse the Tea Party movement as a whole of being racist.


Brietbart claims he doesn’t have the unedited speech and can’t find it. On to the Journolist scandal!

61 avanti  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:47:48am

re: #56 Charles

I put on Fox News to see them interview Sherrod, but they’re doing that stupid runaround thing where they keep promising she’s coming right up, just to keep you hanging on for another hour. What a crappy channel.

Megyn Fox was just snarling and hissing over the latest Journolist silliness.

It looks like Megyn is doing another hit piece about race before the interview.

62 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:47:55am

re: #53 Spare O’Lake

IF the WH apologizes for demanding the resignation and immediately reinstates Sherrod to her former position; and IF the NAACP apologizes and withdraws its slanderous rush to judge Sherrod; then and only then will the blame be effectively refocused on Breitbart’s malfeasance.

BTW your use of “misunderestimate” is positively Palinesque.

You, sir, are one duplicitous fuck.

The NAACP is the slanderous party? Really?

Wow, you aren’t even trying very hard to hide how you feel anymore.

63 Targetpractice  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:49:18am

re: #45 researchok

Not at all. I t would make the WH look responsible and willing to be held accountable. There is great power in saying with conviction, ‘We were wrong and now we’re going to fix it’. Americans will applaud. I believe.

Ignoring this or pretending it didn’t happen is much worse.

The damage is done, there’s no way to simply erase it and act as though nothing happened. If she’s given her job back, the question is gonna be “Why were you so hasty to fire her in the first place?” The Right wing blogs will accuse Obama of condoning racism and Fox will likely run with it. There might even be calls for “investigations,” claiming that the whole Executive Branch has a policy of condoning racism so long as it’s towards whites.

No, whether we agree with it or not, Breitbart’s won this day. The only thing that can be done now is to ensure that he won’t win the next.

64 webevintage  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:49:54am

I’m still wondering why Glenn Beck still has his job after the crap he said yesterday.

65 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:50:04am

re: #58 Charles

I know you’d like it to be that way. You’ve been hammering away at this talking point all morning.

I would like to see Breitbart get put out of business because of this race baiting crap, it’s totally his fault. I wouldn’t mind seeing the WH and NAACP make some sort of supportive statement in Sherrod’s favor.

66 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:50:16am

re: #59 Obdicut

Would you stop concern-trolling this?

The NCAAP has already taken down their denunciation. I do hope an apology is to follow. I do hope that the White House acts quickly to help out this maligned woman.

But they didn’t do the maligning. They didn’t create the video. The video itself, its existence, its source is going to be part of that story no matter how much some wish it wasn’t.

Maybe not on Fox News.

I am not concern-trolling. I’m just calling it the way I see it. However I will now stop rubbing it in. And for the record, I think Breitbart totally sucks the big one!

67 Kronocide  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:50:53am

re: #44 ralphieboy

You misunderestimate the “damage” that could be done to Breitbart and his ilk: when sh*t gets stepped on, it only gets spread around even further, which is just fine for those turds.

Upding for the Bushism.

Breitbart is exposed to some serious damage, but I doubt the advantage will be seized upon. Breitbart will have the most success if this somewhat dies down to a murmur, and he can take credit for the supposed victory. If this stays up cycle and more people look at it, the risk increases to him.

If Obama or Jealous admitted to jumping to the gun and moving too quick, but then reinstating, then going on the attack against Breitbart and the ‘politics of personal distruction,’ I would respect that and think they would come out ahead.

68 webevintage  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:51:16am

re: #63 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

There might even be calls for “investigations,” claiming that the whole Executive Branch has a policy of condoning racism so long as it’s towards whites.

No, whether we agree with it or not, Breitbart’s won this day. The only thing that can be done now is to ensure that he won’t win the next.

If the Republican’s manage to win the House in Nov. there will be more the just “Investigations” going on.

69 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:52:01am

re: #62 Fozzie Bear

You, sir, are one duplicitous fuck.

The NAACP is the slanderous party? Really?

Wow, you aren’t even trying very hard to hide how you feel anymore.

The plain truth is a bugger sometimes. Sorry you can’t see it my way.

70 Targetpractice  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:52:04am

re: #64 webevintage

I’m still wondering why Glenn Beck still has his job after the crap he said yesterday.

Because then Fox would have to downgrade to being only a two-ring circus.

71 Obdicut  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:52:07am

re: #63 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

No, whether we agree with it or not, Breitbart’s won this day. The only thing that can be done now is to ensure that he won’t win the next.

I don’t agree. I think Brietbart has crossed a couple of lines here he’s going to seriously regret.

If you think all Brietbart wanted was to get this woman fired, then yeah, he won. But he didn’t— he wanted to smear the NCAAP as racists. What happened instead was an overreaction on their part, not stepping up to defend her as they should have. So Breitbart ‘won’ a hasty reaction from the NAACP— but it’s one that makes it incredibly hard to frame them as being racists, since it shows them have a zero tolerance policy that’s, if anything, overzealous.

How is it reasonable to claim the NCAAP is racist when they immediately terminated a black woman who appeared to have done something racist, or to paint the White House as soft on racism towards whites when they apparently pressured that firing?

72 jamesfirecat  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:52:22am

re: #68 webevintage

If the Republican’s manage to win the House in Nov. there will be more the just “Investigations” going on.

“Impeach Obama!”

“What for?”

“Since when do we need a reason?”

73 Charles Johnson  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:52:31am

re: #67 BigPapa

Upding for the Bushism.

Breitbart is exposed to some serious damage, but I doubt the advantage will be seized upon. Breitbart will have the most success if this somewhat dies down to a murmur, and he can take credit for the supposed victory. If this stays up cycle and more people look at it, the risk increases to him.

If Obama or Jealous admitted to jumping to the gun and moving too quick, but then reinstating, then going on the attack against Breitbart and the ‘politics of personal distruction,’ I would respect that and think they would come out ahead.

That’s exactly what the White House and the NAACP should do — immediately apologize and then go on the attack against Breitbart for his appalling dishonesty. They were taken in by a fraud, and they should make THAT the issue.

74 Obdicut  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:52:33am

re: #66 Spare O’Lake

I am not concern-trolling. I’m just calling it the way I see it. However I will now stop rubbing it in. And for the record, I think Breitbart totally sucks the big one!

Rubbing it in?

Classless. Totally classless.

75 webevintage  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:52:59am

re: #72 jamesfirecat

“Impeach Obama!”

“What for?”

“Since when do we need a reason?”

so much wasted time and money….

76 researchok  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:53:01am

re: #52 Obdicut

I agree with both you and researchok, which shouldn’t be possible.

You are most wise.

77 Kragar  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:53:14am

re: #64 webevintage

I’m still wondering why Glenn Beck still has his job after the crap he said yesterday.

Money

78 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:53:46am

re: #69 Spare O’Lake

The plain truth is a bugger sometimes. Sorry you can’t see it my way.

So the plain truth is that the big bad NAACP slandered her?

79 webevintage  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:54:12am

re: #77 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Money

But I thought he was no longer generating money for FOX.
There has to be a line somewhere…

80 Obdicut  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:54:34am

re: #78 Fozzie Bear

So the plain truth is that the big bad NAACP slandered her?

I’d like to note that the ignorant repetition of a lie— as in, not knowing that it is, in fact, a lie— is not slander. Or libel.

81 Kragar  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:56:17am

Source of Utah immigration list found

Two Department of Workforce Service employees — who still have not been identified — were placed on administrative leave last week after they were found to have helped assemble the database. On Tuesday, Herbert referred to them as “former government workers.”

On Monday, investigators concluded a series of additional interviews with a handful of additional employees whose access to state data raised red flags.

While Herbert said he won’t receive a final report on the investigation until later Tuesday afternoon, it appears no other workers were directly involved.

“My belief is it’s confined to two employees,” the governor said, “where we once thought it might be four or so others who might have had some peripheral involvement.”

He said others may have known about the activities, but they were not directly tied to the plot.

Once the report is complete, the information will be turned over to Attorney General Mark Shurtleff, who the governor expects will file charges against the two individuals.

“I don’t even know the names sitting here today,” Shurtleff said Tuesday. “I’m waiting for them to bring us their investigation and we’ll begin our [work].”

Shurtleff said Ken Wallentine, his chief of law enforcement, has a team ready to take the case and begin an investigation. If that team finds U.S. laws may have been violated, it will turn that information over to federal law enforcement.

Herbert rejected the notion — advanced by the Utah Minuteman Chairman Eli Cawley — that the employees who compiled the list may have been whistle-blowers and that they should be immune from prosecution.

“They are not blowing the whistle on anything happening in the state that’s illegal,” Herbert said. “That’s one of the great myths here — that these people [on the list] were somehow accessing government programs illegally. The law is clear. They were accessing government assistance that they were entitled to.”

82 researchok  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:56:26am

re: #49 Ebetty

I disagree. “The White House” is a building, not a person. Who at the WH? Press Secretary Gibbs? He talks about responsible journalism all the time. Going back to Anita Dunn, Obama Officials have been calling for it.

All Gibbs and other West Wing staff can do is point to the Communications Shop at USDA and express disappointment in their judgment. USDA is a part of the Executive Branch.

Breitbart is the villain. No one in the WW has any obligation to single him out. The only way to get rid of Breitbart is for the establishment GOP & the grassroots conservatives to unite against him. They won’t do that, so the whole thing is just one more episode of bile-spewing BS by Breitbart. It’s disgusting.

No one said to single Breitbart out.

Every one knows the WH is a building.

Everyday, people in the media refer to ‘statements from the WH’.

Yes, Breitbart is the villain. Pointing out ‘irresponsible journalism’ is a moral statement no one can disagree with. Given the low regard in which journalists are held nowadays, the WH comes out as ethical.

83 researchok  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:58:37am

re: #73 Charles

That’s exactly what the White House and the NAACP should do — immediately apologize and then go on the attack against Breitbart for his appalling dishonesty. They were taken in by a fraud, and they should make THAT the issue.

Absofreakinlutely- and the sooner, the better. No one ever lost points for fingering out the bottom feeders.

Just because Breitbart reports on tsunamis and train wrecks doesn’t make him credible.

84 MandyManners  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:01:25am

Wasn’t it Mark Twain who said, “A lie can run around the world six times while the truth is still trying to put on its pants”?

85 researchok  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:01:55am

re: #63 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

The damage is done, there’s no way to simply erase it and act as though nothing happened. If she’s given her job back, the question is gonna be “Why were you so hasty to fire her in the first place?” The Right wing blogs will accuse Obama of condoning racism and Fox will likely run with it. There might even be calls for “investigations,” claiming that the whole Executive Branch has a policy of condoning racism so long as it’s towards whites.

No, whether we agree with it or not, Breitbart’s won this day. The only thing that can be done now is to ensure that he won’t win the next.

Breitbart will not have won IF he is confronted. HE will have to answer questions. The farmers’ wife referred to Sherrod as a ‘friend’.

He can’t spin that or any of the other manipulation.

86 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:02:02am

re: #84 MandyManners

Wasn’t it Mark Twain who said, “A lie can run around the world six times while the truth is still trying to put on its pants”?

LIAR!!! The truth doesn’t wear pants!!! //

87 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:02:24am

re: #80 Obdicut

I’d like to note that the ignorant repetition of a lie— as in, not knowing that it is, in fact, a lie— is not slander. Or libel.

What if the party repeating the lie was totally derelict in failing to perform even the most basic fact-checking or even speaking to the victim?
Even if they can escape by a technical loophole such as the one you described, the characterization of their rush to judgment as being slanderous is hardly unfair, IMO.

88 Targetpractice  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:03:40am

re: #71 Obdicut

I don’t agree. I think Brietbart has crossed a couple of lines here he’s going to seriously regret.

If you think all Brietbart wanted was to get this woman fired, then yeah, he won. But he didn’t— he wanted to smear the NCAAP as racists. What happened instead was an overreaction on their part, not stepping up to defend her as they should have. So Breitbart ‘won’ a hasty reaction from the NAACP— but it’s one that makes it incredibly hard to frame them as being racists, since it shows them have a zero tolerance policy that’s, if anything, overzealous.

How is it reasonable to claim the NCAAP is racist when they immediately terminated a black woman who appeared to have done something racist, or to paint the White House as soft on racism towards whites when they apparently pressured that firing?

What it’s going to do is make the NAACP, in the future, take the time to look at the evidence before they fire off condemnations. And Breitbart and the Right are going to latch on that “hesitation” and accuse the NAACP of not wanting to condemn “their own.” When the NAACP replies that they’re trying to find out the truth, he’ll fire back “What, it didn’t stop you with Sherrod, so why is it stopping you now?” and claim it proof that the NAACP was more interested in seeming “fair” than it was in actually tackling real racism.

Politics, especially where the Right is concerned, no longer operates on common sense. If there’s a way you can twist a story that makes the Right seem the heroes and any who oppose them the villians, you can bet Fox will find it and the rest of the MSM will follow right along simply to seem “on top of things.”

89 Kronocide  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:03:46am

The best possible outcome is for Jealous to flip it around, cop to a rush to judgment (apologize) and reinstate, then bulldog Brietbart. Jealous flipping fast is the best. Obama can pile on or tag along, but Obama risks validating Breitbart and making him relevant if he spends to much time on the matter. Jealous could go after Breitbart directly, Obama speaking in wider terms about the ‘politics of personal destruction’ and race relations, then move on.

But I doubt it will happen.

90 Summer Seale  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:04:05am

re: #55 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Put God back in public life, Glenn Beck says

I think I get this whole religious control of the government thing now. When Muslims do it, its creeping Sharia, when Christians do it, its “returning to our Christian roots”.

Is it just me, or does Glenn Beck look like a near spitting image of “Biff” from “Back To The Future”?

Bully characteristics, childish antics, lies and all.

91 Killgore Trout  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:04:07am

NAACP Walking It Back

CNN just read on the air from a new NAACP statement saying that the organization will now investigate the Shirley Sherrod case:

“The NAACP is conducting an investigation into the recent revelations about the situation with Ms. Shirley Sherrod including attempting to speak with Ms. Sherrod, the farmer in question and viewing the full video.”

More soon …

Breitbart said he couldn’t find the full video.

92 Obdicut  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:04:52am

re: #87 Spare O’Lake

What if the party repeating the lie was totally derelict in failing to perform even the most basic fact-checking or even speaking to the victim?

Then it’s not libel.

Even if they can escape by a technical loophole such as the one you described, the characterization of their rush to judgment as being slanderous is hardly unfair, IMO.

Well, it would actually technically be slanderous of you to accuse them of being slanderous when they’re not being slanderous. So it’s not only unfair, but it actually is slander, unlike their actions.

I assume you will now apologize, as you said they should for their ‘slander’?

93 polkadot  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:05:32am

So no one has a problem with this statment she made:

So I figured if I take him to one of them, that his own kind would take care of him.”

That is a racist statement.

94 Obdicut  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:06:10am

re: #88 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

I just don’t see that working. To me, this story is going to work against Brietbart and the other race-baiters in a huge way, especially with the woman (bless her heart) that was actually affected by Sherrod defending her.

95 researchok  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:07:48am

re: #89 BigPapa

The best possible outcome is for Jealous to flip it around, cop to a rush to judgment (apologize) and reinstate, then bulldog Brietbart. Jealous flipping fast is the best. Obama can pile on or tag along, but Obama risks validating Breitbart and making him relevant if he spends to much time on the matter. Jealous could go after Breitbart directly, Obama speaking in wider terms about the ‘politics of personal destruction’ and race relations, then move on.

But I doubt it will happen.

Obama can wait a day or so. That way, his response will be perceived as thoughtful and measured.

96 Kronocide  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:07:54am

re: #91 Killgore Trout

re: #91 Killgore Trout

Oh shit! I gotta leave and go work, this is getting good. Guess I’ll be checking Lizard/Tarkloon tweets on my iPhone.

97 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:08:02am

re: #93 polkadot

So no one has a problem with this statment she made:

That is a racist statement.

*facepalm*

Read the entirety of the story up until now, then comment. Please.

98 webevintage  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:08:19am

re: #93 polkadot

So no one has a problem with this statment she made:

That is a racist statement.

Yes it is.
Of course she was only thinking it and it happened 20+ years ago and the farmer in question was being an asshole to her and she did not work for the gov’t at that time and the speech she gave was about how she had been wrong 20+ years ago (and still ended up helping the guy and being friends with him and his wife) and that we should always look past race and only see people in need.
But don’t let that stop you….

99 Skeetghazi  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:08:25am

This whole thing just makes me really sad.

Including the parsing of racist statements here on LGF.

100 Sol Berdinowitz  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:09:43am

re: #93 polkadot

So no one has a problem with this statment she made:

So I figured if I take him to one of them, that his own kind would take care of him.”


That is a racist statement.

taken out of context it could be seen so, but this whole “scandal” is about something knowingly being ripped out of context. Please leave it be.

101 Charles Johnson  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:09:59am

re: #91 Killgore Trout

Breitbart said he couldn’t find the full video.

I definitely do not believe this.

102 ShaunP  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:10:13am

re: #99 Stanley Sea

This whole thing just makes me really sad.

Including the parsing of racist statements here on LGF.

I’m going to be even sadder two years from now when I’m still trying to explain to the misinformed what happened here…

103 polkadot  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:10:28am

re: #97 Fozzie Bear

I have.
It still doesn’t change the fact that this was a racist statement.
As for the farmer being an “asshole” to her, that was her impression but now that the farmers wife is defending her, I seriously doubt that he was.
You don’t usually go hat in hand to ask for help and be an asshole.
That flies in the face of logic.

104 Targetpractice  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:10:37am

re: #94 Obdicut

I just don’t see that working. To me, this story is going to work against Brietbart and the other race-baiters in a huge way, especially with the woman (bless her heart) that was actually affected by Sherrod defending her.

It makes much more sense in my head…which is probably because the weather is wrecking havoc on my sinuses and making it hard for me to concentrate. Either way, I’m trying to look at this from the perspective of a guy who’s spent a lot of time viewing right-wing sites. And the one thing that pops up is that now, with the proverbial blood in the water, any action taken on Obama’s part is going to be viewed through the prism of Sherrod’s being forced to resign.

105 greygandalf  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:11:00am

She actually did act a bit racist. 20 years ago! The important part is she learned from the experience. That is wasn’t so much race as a rich and poor issue.

106 webevintage  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:11:00am

“So I figured if I take him to one of them, that his own kind would take care of him.”

Of course you could read it as “one of his own kind” as being another rude jerk who liked talking down to women….

107 Sol Berdinowitz  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:11:06am

re: #101 Charles

I definitely do not believe this.


maybe he had already used the rest of it for a necktie party…

108 polkadot  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:11:31am

re: #100 ralphieboy

There is no “context” to where saying I “took them to their own kind” is not racist.
None whatsoever.

109 Kragar  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:11:34am

re: #91 Killgore Trout

NAACP Walking It Back


Breitbart said he couldn’t find the full video.

Horseshit.

110 webevintage  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:11:40am

re: #103 polkadot

I have.
It still doesn’t change the fact that this was a racist statement.
As for the farmer being an “asshole” to her, that was her impression but now that the farmers wife is defending her, I seriously doubt that he was.
You don’t usually go hat in hand to ask for help and be an asshole.
That flies in the face of logic.

hahahahahahahahahahahaha
HA
You must not work with the American public….

111 MandyManners  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:11:47am

re: #93 polkadot

So no one has a problem with this statment she made:


That is a racist statement.

Have you read what she said about his condescending attitude toward her at first? Only a saint would not to take umbrage.

112 RogueOne  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:11:48am

Quick question, is the accusation against breitbart that they edited the video in a manner to make the lady look like she was saying something she wasn’t or that it was a snippet taken out of context?

113 Killgore Trout  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:11:58am

re: #101 Charles

I definitely do not believe this.

Yeah, He claimed the same thing with the Acorn videos too.

114 polkadot  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:12:40am

re: #106 webevintage

She specifically said a “white” lawyer.

115 researchok  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:12:49am

re: #105 greygandalf

She actually did act a bit racist. 20 years ago! The important part is she learned from the experience. That is wasn’t so much race as a rich and poor issue.

George Wallace found redemption as well.

116 MandyManners  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:12:57am

re: #103 polkadot

I have.
It still doesn’t change the fact that this was a racist statement.
As for the farmer being an “asshole” to her, that was her impression but now that the farmers wife is defending her, I seriously doubt that he was.
You don’t usually go hat in hand to ask for help and be an asshole.
That flies in the face of logic.

READ THE WHOLE FUCKING STORY! The farmer, his wife and she eventually became friends.

117 RogueOne  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:13:16am

re: #114 polkadot

She specifically said a “white” lawyer.

Which is obviously racist since everyone knows that jews make the best lawyers.//

118 Obdicut  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:13:40am

re: #108 polkadot

What a stupid fucking statement.


Here are two (made up) counterexamples:

“A guy showed up at my company looking for fellow star wars geeks. So I took him to his own kind.”

“He was a poor, hardy farmer who life had kicked around. Proud, Lutheran, and not prone to taking help, he found it difficult to relate to me, a black woman. So I took him to his own kind.”

Acknowledging that race may be an issue is not being racist. Fuck.

119 polkadot  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:13:46am

re: #111 MandyManners

Was he really condescending?
Has anyone asked HIM if her version is correct, or is he just guilty until proven innocent?

120 Targetpractice  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:13:54am

re: #103 polkadot

I have.
It still doesn’t change the fact that this was a racist statement.
As for the farmer being an “asshole” to her, that was her impression but now that the farmers wife is defending her, I seriously doubt that he was.
You don’t usually go hat in hand to ask for help and be an asshole.
That flies in the face of logic.

It was racist for her to think it when she was younger, which was her point. That she had, through years of experience and contact with all kinds of people, realized the error of such thinking.

121 MandyManners  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:14:10am

re: #106 webevintage

“So I figured if I take him to one of them, that his own kind would take care of him.”

Of course you could read it as “one of his own kind” as being another rude jerk who liked talking down to women…

I wouldn’t.

122 Sol Berdinowitz  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:14:11am

The context of her speech was about overcoming race and racism. We all tend to judge people based on their appearance, and when their initial behavior starts to confirm those prejudices, it makes it even harder to overcome.

And the point of the tory was that she did overcome.

Which is all being blithely ignored in favor of finger-pointing and posturing.

123 Killgore Trout  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:14:14am

To get the full video all you have to do is ask….
NAACP Now ‘Conducting Investigation’ Into Sherrod Video

But Sherrod, in interviews today, claims that she was using the anecdote to illustrate how she overcame her own prejudice. She says the full video — which has not been released by Big Government — proves that.

The owner of the video company who shot the video tells TPMmuckraker he has sent the full video to the NAACP.

124 Obdicut  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:14:21am

re: #112 RogueOne

And that he claimed this was while she was an USDA employee, which is false.

125 researchok  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:14:43am

re: #116 MandyManners

READ THE WHOLE FUCKING STORY! The farmer, his wife and she eventually became friends.

I commiserate with you.

Reading before commenting isn’t exactly a hard and fast rule.

126 polkadot  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:14:51am

re: #118 Obdicut

Oh please. If the races were reversed you would consider it a racist statement.

127 MandyManners  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:14:55am

re: #119 polkadot

Was he really condescending?
Has anyone asked HIM if her version is correct, or is he just guilty until proven innocent?

Oh, my stars. Keep reaching.

128 Obdicut  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:15:20am

re: #123 Killgore Trout

Nice. Brietbart is now caught in a cover-up lie.

129 MandyManners  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:15:50am

re: #119 polkadot

Was he really condescending?
Has anyone asked HIM if her version is correct, or is he just guilty until proven innocent?

Guilty of *what*? Of being a condescending jerk? BFD. Many are every day.

Equating that with racism is ludicrous.

130 Targetpractice  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:16:08am

re: #126 polkadot

Oh please. If the races were reversed you would consider it a racist statement.

And you’d probably be there, claiming it wasn’t and that the “outrage” was over nothing.

GAZE

131 Charles Johnson  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:16:13am

re: #105 greygandalf

She actually did act a bit racist. 20 years ago! The important part is she learned from the experience. That is wasn’t so much race as a rich and poor issue.

I haven’t seen any evidence at all that she actually ACTED racist. By all accounts she DID provide a lot of help to this farmer.

The speech was about her internal dialog, what she was thinking in the situation — and it concluded with her saying that the experience taught her a valuable lesson.

It was a positive story — not a tale of racism, but a tale of overcoming unconscious racism. And it’s been warped beyond recognition by a race-baiting con artist.

132 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:16:24am

re: #92 Obdicut

Surely an organization like the NAACP is not entitled to hide behind its own shoddy practices and its own failure to afford Sherrod even the courtesy of a telephone call. At some point it could be fairly said that they knew or ought to have known that it was unfair to repeat the statement…especially where the source was not exactly what one would call mainstream and reliable.
No offense, Obdi, but are you an attorney or have you obtained a legal opinion from one? I’m curious as to how solid your characterization of the legal issue really is.

133 Killgore Trout  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:16:29am

re: #128 Obdicut

Nice. Brietbart is now caught in a cover-up lie.

Yup. We’ll probably have the full video by the end of the day. It’s probably not going to show what Brietbart wants.

134 MandyManners  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:16:38am

re: #125 researchok

I commiserate with you.

Reading before commenting isn’t exactly a hard and fast rule.

That’s like swallowing before chewing.

135 polkadot  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:16:39am

re: #130 Targetpractice, Worst of Both Worlds

Incorrect.
I abhor racism of any kind.

136 Kronocide  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:16:50am

re: #123 Killgore Trout

It’s on like Donkey Kong. I don’t think it will matter for some, sadly, but the record and facts still matter to many of us.

137 elizajane  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:16:58am

re: #94 Obdicut

I just don’t see that working. To me, this story is going to work against Brietbart and the other race-baiters in a huge way, especially with the woman (bless her heart) that was actually affected by Sherrod defending her.

I wish I had your optimism, but I just read a few pages of recent (post-CNN-interview) comments under the Fox news story, and I’m afraid you’re wrong. She’s “racist scumbag Sherrod” now, and the NAACP is an organization dedicated to the hatred of whitey and should be banned. If they could paint Sotomayor as an ignorant racist for being positive about Latinas, they can do it to almost any non-white person.

138 webevintage  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:17:11am

re: #119 polkadot

Was he really condescending?
Has anyone asked HIM if her version is correct, or is he just guilty until proven innocent?

who cares?
The fact of the matter is she was willing, in public, the repudiate something she thought 20 years ago as a way of suggesting that no matter what are personal feelings are that those who are there to help others should only ever see a person in need before them.

139 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:17:20am

re: #103 polkadot

I have.
It still doesn’t change the fact that this was a racist statement.
As for the farmer being an “asshole” to her, that was her impression but now that the farmers wife is defending her, I seriously doubt that he was.
You don’t usually go hat in hand to ask for help and be an asshole.
That flies in the face of logic.

Because the farmer’s wife is defending Sherrod, that means her husband was never an asshole? Do you even think about what you are saying, or do you just spew out a pile of word salad?

Humans fly in the face of logic. This post exemplifies that.

Of course, you are completely failing to address that:

A: The incident described happened before her employment at USDA
B: The incident described happened decades ago
C: She was describing the incident in order to explain how institutionalized racism can cut in any direction, and it is important for people to be aware of their own biases in order to combat them.

The woman was talking about how she overcame racism, decades earlier.

140 Obdicut  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:17:44am

re: #126 polkadot

Oh please. If the races were reversed you would consider it a racist statement.

You are not, no matter what you believe, racist.

I’ve actually been in the position where I felt a black guy I was trying to help (father of an autistic child) would be more comfortable with a black guy helping him rather than me, so I took him to one of his own. Or, to put it in even blunter English, I felt he was worried that I wasn’t giving him the best service I could because I was white and he was black, so I alleviated that worry by letting him be served by a black person instead of me, since the important thing was helping him, not ending racism right there and then.

Am I a racist, according to you?

141 MandyManners  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:18:01am

re: #137 elizajane

I wish I had your optimism, but I just read a few pages of recent (post-CNN-interview) comments under the Fox news story, and I’m afraid you’re wrong. She’s “racist scumbag Sherrod” now, and the NAACP is an organization dedicated to the hatred of whitey and should be banned. If they could paint Sotomayor as an ignorant racist for being positive about Latinas, they can do it to almost any non-white person.

Hey! Let’s found a new organization.

The National Association for the Advancement of White People.

Oh, wait.

142 ShaunP  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:18:14am

re: #132 Spare O’Lake

Surely an organization like the NAACP is not entitled to hide behind its own shoddy practices and its own failure to afford Sherrod even the courtesy of a telephone call. At some point it could be fairly said that they knew or ought to have known that it was unfair to repeat the statement…especially where the source was not exactly what one would call mainstream and reliable.
No offense, Obdi, but are you an attorney or have you obtained a legal opinion from one? I’m curious as to how solid your characterization of the legal issue really is.

Wasn’t your argument one thread down that Brietbart couldn’t be charged with libel? Now you are saying that the NAACP should be? Just correct me if I’m reading this wrong…

143 Obdicut  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:18:39am

re: #132 Spare O’Lake

So you’re comfortable with accusing the NAACP of having committed ‘slander’.

Can you prove that allegation is true?

144 MandyManners  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:18:53am

You condescendist!

145 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:19:02am

re: #119 polkadot

Was he really condescending?
Has anyone asked HIM if her version is correct, or is he just guilty until proven innocent?

Actually, the story wasn’t about the farmer. He’s deceased. Nobody cares.

The story is about Sherrod, and the deceased farmer’s wife, who is a fan of Sherrod.

146 Kronocide  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:19:21am

re: #135 polkadot

Incorrect.
I abhor racism of any kind.

Do you abhor seriously out of context stories, and most importantly, the resignation of Sherrod? Should she have resigned?

147 avanti  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:19:35am

re: #93 polkadot

So no one has a problem with this statment she made:

That is a racist statement.

She said that after he appeared unfordable dealing with her as a black person.

148 Targetpractice  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:19:36am

re: #135 polkadot

Incorrect.
I abhor racism of any kind.

Then mind perhaps proving it by reading the entirety of the facts behind this story rather than latching onto the one line that the rest of the Right has and understanding that the point of this woman’s speech was that she’d realized how racist such beliefs were, rather than continuing to ascribe to them?

Think before you ask these questions. Twenty points higher than me, thinks he can divine the entirety of a woman’s message from a single line. *rolls his eyes*

149 Obdicut  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:19:42am

re: #140 Obdicut

You are notI would not., no matter what you believe, consider that racist.


PIMF. Fucked that one all the hell up.

150 researchok  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:19:56am

re: #132 Spare O’Lake

Surely an organization like the NAACP is not entitled to hide behind its own shoddy practices and its own failure to afford Sherrod even the courtesy of a telephone call. At some point it could be fairly said that they knew or ought to have known that it was unfair to repeat the statement…especially where the source was not exactly what one would call mainstream and reliable.
No offense, Obdi, but are you an attorney or have you obtained a legal opinion from one? I’m curious as to how solid your characterization of the legal issue really is.

The bigger story is what is happening now. The NAACP has already noted they were in err. By wor s and actions hey have issued their mea culpa.

Perfection is not a human condition, thankfully.

They are taking responsibility for their actions and will respond accordingly.

151 MandyManners  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:19:59am

I wonder if people who are ripping the NAACP to shreds have any idea what life was like when it was founded.

152 RogueOne  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:20:36am

re: #124 Obdicut

And that he claimed this was while she was an USDA employee, which is false.

re: #124 Obdicut

And that he claimed this was while she was an USDA employee, which is false.

Ok but was the video edited or just taken out of context?

153 Sol Berdinowitz  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:20:43am

re: #137 elizajane

I wish I had your optimism, but I just read a few pages of recent (post-CNN-interview) comments under the Fox news story, and I’m afraid you’re wrong. She’s “racist scumbag Sherrod” now, and the NAACP is an organization dedicated to the hatred of whitey and should be banned. If they could paint Sotomayor as an ignorant racist for being positive about Latinas, they can do it to almost any non-white person.

You summed up the major TP talking points of the day, and the point of their journalism is to pick out those stories (substantiated or not) that support these claims.

Any other information is irrelevant and counterproductive.

We really endanger ourselves by speaking in nuances, and uttering a single phrase that can be possibly twisted out of context and flung back in our faces might ruin our career.

I guess that’s why there is so much shouting going on out there.

154 MandyManners  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:21:17am

Sitting in the back of the bus.

Not allowed to sit at a lunch counter.

Being forced to pay a poll tax.

Having to take literacy tests in order to vote.

155 webevintage  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:21:42am

re: #152 RogueOne

Ok but was the video edited or just taken out of context?

Does it matter?

156 jamesfirecat  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:21:43am

re: #103 polkadot

I have.
It still doesn’t change the fact that this was a racist statement.
As for the farmer being an “asshole” to her, that was her impression but now that the farmers wife is defending her, I seriously doubt that he was.
You don’t usually go hat in hand to ask for help and be an asshole.
That flies in the face of logic.

She spent a long time helping them and working with them.

It’s not just in movies where people meet each other are assholes to each other, are forced to work together and become friends….

157 wrenchwench  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:22:19am

Next step: white people who attack Breitbart will be called “racist lovers”.

158 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:22:25am

re: #142 ShaunP

Wasn’t your argument one thread down that Brietbart couldn’t be charged with libel? Now you are saying that the NAACP should be? Just correct me if I’m reading this wrong…

No it wasn’t. You must be confusing me with someone else. I have not and will not defend Breitbart’s indefensible conduct.

159 MandyManners  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:22:34am

Bull Connor.

Water cannons.

Jewish and black men slain.

160 Sol Berdinowitz  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:22:35am

re: #151 MandyManners

I wonder if people who are ripping the NAACP to shreds have any idea what life was like when it was founded.


They most certainly do, and they want to get back to those days…

161 researchok  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:22:56am

Time to do some work.

Later, all.

162 webevintage  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:23:01am

re: #154 MandyManners

Sitting in the back of the bus.

Not allowed to sit at a lunch counter.

Being forced to pay a poll tax.

Having to take literacy tests in order to vote.

It was founded in 1909 so things were way worse then even in the 60’s when the civil rights movement really gained speed.

163 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:23:06am

re: #150 researchok

The bigger story is what is happening now. The NAACP has already noted they were in err. By wor s and actions hey have issued their mea culpa.

Perfection is not a human condition, thankfully.

They are taking responsibility for their actions and will respond accordingly.

Excellent. This is exactly what they should do.

164 MandyManners  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:23:28am

re: #160 ralphieboy

They most certainly do, and they want to get back to those days…

Bullshit. Bullshit. Bullshit.

Do you really believe those who are attacking them now really want to see Jim Crow reintroduced?

Again, bullshit.

165 wee fury  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:23:29am

It would be nice if there were an organization like …
NAAOP aka/National Association for the Advancement of People.

166 jamesfirecat  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:23:37am

re: #126 polkadot

Oh please. If the races were reversed you would consider it a racist statement.

Yes and if it was a white man/woman telling the story of how they overcame their racist thoughts/desires to see beyond the minimal importance of skin color I wouldn’t think less of them for it either….

167 RogueOne  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:23:43am

re: #155 webevintage

Does it matter?

It does if there is a suggestion that it’s libel/slander. Personally I take all video snippets, regardless of the source, with a massive grain of salt. Taking a short snippet of video/audio and posting it as the whole story while completely ignoring the context is its own little cottage industry.

168 MandyManners  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:24:05am

re: #162 webevintage

It was founded in 1909 so things were way worse then even in the 60’s when the civil rights movement really gained speed.

I was thinking of the things most prominent in my memory.

169 Targetpractice  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:24:09am

re: #157 wrenchwench

Next step: white people who attack Breitbart will be called “racist lovers”.

Nah, they’ll be accused of believing the “propaganda,” that Breitbart showed the “reality” of this woman’s speech and any attempts to “whitewash” it is being done at the order of the shadowy Obama Cabal and their “Chicago-style politics.”

170 jamesfirecat  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:24:28am

re: #154 MandyManners

Sitting in the back of the bus.

Not allowed to sit at a lunch counter.

Being forced to pay a poll tax.

Having to take literacy tests in order to vote.

Don’t forget being strung up to a tree by a mob.

171 Summer Seale  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:24:50am

re: #93 polkadot

Wow man. 11 commments, -41 karma. Troll here much? =)

172 jamesfirecat  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:25:05am

re: #165 wee fury

It would be nice if there were an organization like …
NAAOP aka/National Association for the Advancement of People.

Which would do what exactly?

173 Reginald Perrin  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:25:23am

re: #158 Spare O’Lake

No it wasn’t. You must be confusing me with someone else. I have not and will not defend Breitbart’s indefensible conduct.

Are you going to denounce Breitbart?

Don’t you have any concern about his behavior?

174 MandyManners  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:25:46am

Lighten up, Elizajane. It was tongue-in-cheek.

175 MandyManners  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:26:01am

re: #170 jamesfirecat

Don’t forget being strung up to a tree by a mob.

*cringe*

176 Sol Berdinowitz  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:26:03am

re: #164 MandyManners

Bullshit. Bullshit. Bullshit.

Do you really believe those who are attacking them now really want to see Jim Crow reintroduced?

Again, bullshit.


We have guys like Rand Paul who has said that he would have no problem with legislation allowing segregated lunch counters

177 Kronocide  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:26:24am

TPM is really on this.

Just wanted to scoop KT!

178 MandyManners  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:26:27am

re: #172 jamesfirecat

Which would do what exactly?

Up with People!

179 MandyManners  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:26:49am

re: #176 ralphieboy

We have guys like Rand Paul who has said that he would have no problem with legislation allowing segregated lunch counters

Well, he’s a fucking idiot.

180 avanti  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:27:23am

re: #131 Charles

I haven’t seen any evidence at all that she actually ACTED racist. By all accounts she DID provide a lot of help to this farmer.

The speech was about her internal dialog, what she was thinking in the situation — and it concluded with her saying that the experience taught her a valuable lesson.

It was a positive story — not a tale of racism, but a tale of overcoming unconscious racism. And it’s been warped beyond recognition by a race-baiting con artist.

Many of us suffer from unconscious racism, I’ve felt it myself. One instance comes to mind after loosing a radiator hose on a old Studebaker late one evening. A young,black male and two of his friends stopped to help. They drove me to a few service stations until I found a hose that would work, then waited until I was safety on my way.
I tell the story only because of my fear of their help, based only on their race.

181 ShaunP  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:27:58am

re: #163 Spare O’Lake

Excellent. This is exactly what they should do.

Apparently I did. Sorry about that…

182 webevintage  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:28:08am

re: #178 MandyManners

Up with People!

I saw Up With People when I was a kid….

183 Sol Berdinowitz  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:28:19am

re: #179 MandyManners

Well, he’s a fucking idiot.


Yes, he tried to dampen it by saying tht he does not support it personally, but that is not the point here.

184 wee fury  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:28:35am

re: #172 jamesfirecat

Advance People.

185 Interesting Times  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:28:38am

re: #135 polkadot

I abhor racism of any kind.

Rand Paul, is that you?

186 RogueOne  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:28:54am

re: #176 ralphieboy

We have guys like Rand Paul who has said that he would have no problem with legislation allowing segregated lunch counters

That isn’t even close to what he said, you’re pulling the same stunt you’re accusing Breitbart of. Rand said it was bad law and even though he wouldn’t vote to overturn it decisions about how we treat each other are best left to us. If you want to bash his stance then knock yourself out but at least keep it within the realm of reality.

187 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:28:55am

re: #173 Reginald Perrin

Are you going to denounce Breitbart?

Don’t you have any concern about his behavior?

Please read my posts on this and the preceding thread, which I am positive will fully answer your challenge if you show even a shred of fairness. And then come back to me with YOUR apology.

188 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:29:26am

re: #152 RogueOne

Ok but was the video edited or just taken out of context?

It was cut short, that’s called editing.

re: #167 RogueOne

re: #155 webevintage

Does it matter?

It does if there is a suggestion that it’s libel/slander. Personally I take all video snippets, regardless of the source, with a massive grain of salt. Taking a short snippet of video/audio and posting it as the whole story while completely ignoring the context is its own little cottage industry.

Ah, I see your dodge, if it’s ubiquitous then it can’t be criminal.

189 Killgore Trout  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:29:47am

re: #177 BigPapa

TPM is really on this.

Just wanted to scoop KT!

;)

190 MandyManners  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:29:48am

Got the grave dug now it’s time to have the funeral services for Petey. The Kid has prepared a nice coffin with a bed of fresh shavings and has picked a bunch of tiger lillies and roses.

bbl

191 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:30:04am

People forget why we have the NAACP. A little reminder.

Strange Fruit

Southern trees bear strange fruit,
Blood on the leaves and blood at the root,
Black body swinging in the Southern breeze,
Strange fruit hanging from the poplar trees.

Pastoral scene of the gallant South,
The bulging eyes and the twisted mouth,
Scent of magnolia sweet and fresh,
Then the sudden smell of burning flesh!

Here is fruit for the crows to pluck,
For the rain to gather, for the wind to suck,
For the sun to rot, for the trees to drop,
Here is a strange and bitter crop.

From 1882 - 1998, 4743 murders by lynching occurred in the US
3446 were African-American (72.7%)

192 jamesfirecat  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:30:08am

re: #185 publicityStunted

Rand Paul, is that you?

Huh.

Well then allow me to waste 3-5 hours of your day.

[Link: tvtropes.org…]

193 webevintage  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:30:15am

re: #190 MandyManners

Got the grave dug now it’s time to have the funeral services for Petey. The Kid has prepared a nice coffin with a bed of fresh shavings and has picked a bunch of tiger lillies and roses.

bbl

That is so sweet….

194 RogueOne  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:30:15am

re: #188 goddamnedfrank

Ah, I see your dodge, if it’s ubiquitous then it can’t be criminal.

That isn’t a dodge, it’s reality. Libel/Slander law in this country is very, very difficult to prove.

195 Sol Berdinowitz  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:31:02am

re: #186 RogueOne

That isn’t even close to what he said, you’re pulling the same stunt you’re accusing Breitbart of. Rand said it was bad law and even though he wouldn’t vote to overturn it decisions about how we treat each other are best left to us. If you want to bash his stance then knock yourself out but at least keep it within the realm of reality.

Check the video in the post preceeding mine, he says he does not like it but would be for allowing it.

196 RogueOne  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:31:07am

re: #188 goddamnedfrank

Ah, I see your dodge, if it’s ubiquitous then it can’t be criminal.

One more thing, libel/slander isn’t a criminal offense but a civil one.

197 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:31:45am

re: #186 RogueOne

That isn’t even close to what he said, you’re pulling the same stunt you’re accusing Breitbart of. Rand said it was bad law and even though he wouldn’t vote to overturn it decisions about how we treat each other are best left to us. If you want to bash his stance then knock yourself out but at least keep it within the realm of reality.

Actually, that’s exactly what he said. Rand said that the prohibition on private business discriminating is something he would have voted against.

So when Raplh said “We have guys like Rand Paul who has said that he would have no problem with legislation allowing segregated lunch counters”, that is exactly factually accurate.

198 Kragar  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:32:09am

re: #182 webevintage

I saw Up With People when I was a kid…

Scarred for life as well, eh?

199 webevintage  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:32:11am

@SarahPalinUSA
Media Bias? What Media Bias? BOMBSHELL! [Link: fb.me…]


Well, looks like President Grizzly Mama is all over the ebil that is journolist….

(shock, journalists have a bias!)

200 avanti  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:32:18am

re: #154 MandyManners

Sitting in the back of the bus.

Not allowed to sit at a lunch counter.

Being forced to pay a poll tax.

Having to take literacy tests in order to vote.

I’ve told the story before, but it was a game changer for me. Early in my Navy career I was traveling in uniform with a black NCO, Korean war vet when we encountered a black/white lunch counter at a bus stop in the south.
I wanted to join him the black counter, but he cautioned against me so doing, so we ate together outside. I was more pissed off than he was, but he had seen it before.

201 Obdicut  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:33:32am

re: #187 Spare O’Lake


Are you going to apologize for accusing the NCAAP for engaging in slander any time soon?

202 avanti  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:34:06am

re: #186 RogueOne

That isn’t even close to what he said, you’re pulling the same stunt you’re accusing Breitbart of. Rand said it was bad law and even though he wouldn’t vote to overturn it decisions about how we treat each other are best left to us. If you want to bash his stance then knock yourself out but at least keep it within the realm of reality.

He did say it was not the governments job to tell private businesses who they could serve or not serve. To me, that’s the same thing.

203 greygandalf  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:34:07am

re: #197 Fozzie Bear

Actually, that’s exactly what he said. Rand said that the prohibition on private business discriminating is something he would have voted against.

As far as I recall he said he would have voted for the Civil Rights Act.

204 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:34:18am

re: #191 Fozzie Bear

People forget why we have the NAACP. A little reminder.

From 1882 - 1998, 4743 murders by lynching occurred in the US
3446 were African-American (72.7%)

Rock on Fozzie. There is a certain evil brilliance in accusing the very organizations that have fought racism for decades of being racist themselves. Blame the victim has always had a perverse appeal with certain low brow assholes.

SPLC, NAACP, La Raza, all are bete noirs of the right in a pre-emptive strike. The right knows they are racist swine, and they are taking out the first groups who would denounce them systematically with an organized campaign of lies and smears.

And it is organized and disseminated by Fox, Rush, Beck, Malkin and the wing nut blogosphere - all giving disproportionate air time to heinous lies and savage slanders designed to stoke baseless hatred and irrational fear.

205 Reginald Perrin  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:34:49am

re: #187 Spare O’Lake

Please read my posts on this and the preceding thread, which I am positive will fully answer your challenge if you show even a shred of fairness. And then come back to me with YOUR apology.

Are you talking about all the comments you made today that have negative karma, including the ones that Charles voted down?

Don’t hold your breath waiting for an apology, it’s not going to happen. I am more than willing to apologize when I am in the wrong, but this is not the case today.

206 Sol Berdinowitz  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:34:55am

I don’t want to get on this hobby horse again, but any time the word “racism” or “racist” comes up, the thread starts to go to hell in a handbasket.

We all have racist tendencies: it is part of the human condition. We all judge people based on their appearance. And when our first impression of their behavior corresponds with our preconceived notions, it tends to reinforce those prejudices.

The lady’s speech at the NAACP was about overcoming this very tendency, which is a very inspiring thing, she described her own shortcomings and how she made an´effort not to let them get in the way of doing the right thing.

Until the day that the entire human race blends into one homogenous blob, there will be race, and racism and people making judgements based on appearance.

As long as we keep striving to overcome it, it will not drag us down.

207 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:35:00am

re: #196 RogueOne

One more thing, libel/slander isn’t a criminal offense but a civil one.

True. Cutting is the definition of editing. There is no difference between editing and taking part of a video out of context. It is a meaningless distinction.

208 Kronocide  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:35:14am

I thought businesses should be able segregate/discriminate based on anything they want.

When I was 22.

I’ll cut Sherrod some slack for her alleged malfeasance, especially to admit it in front of an audience of peers. It’s a great story.

209 Obdicut  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:35:17am

re: #200 avanti

My second-cousin once removed was part of the ’60s civil rights protest. White guy. Got his ass beaten (by some white thugs) for sitting at the black counter to show solidarity.

Separate but equal turned out to just be separate at all costs.

And our country still is full of the same poison. I’d hoped Obama would be cathartic.

210 RogueOne  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:36:00am

re: #202 avanti

He did say it was not the governments job to tell private businesses who they could serve or not serve. To me, that’s the same thing.

That’s exactly what he said but I disagree that it is the same thing.

211 Killgore Trout  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:36:53am

re: #190 MandyManners

Got the grave dug now it’s time to have the funeral services for Petey. The Kid has prepared a nice coffin with a bed of fresh shavings and has picked a bunch of tiger lillies and roses.

bbl

Aw, sorry to hear that.

212 HelloDare  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:37:14am

Fox News just said Shirley Sherrod changed her mind and will not appear. They said the door remains open.

213 wrenchwench  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:37:17am

re: #208 BigPapa

I thought businesses should be able segregate/discriminate based on anything they want.

When I was 22.

I’ll cut Sherrod some slack for her alleged malfeasance, especially to admit it in front of an audience of peers. It’s a great story.

It is a great story. I hope it gets told in its entirety soon.

214 RogueOne  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:37:23am

re: #207 goddamnedfrank

True. Cutting is the definition of editing. There is no difference between editing and taking part of a video out of context. It is a meaningless distinction.

Maybe that’s why I take these things with a major grain of salt like I mentioned earlier. I didn’t even watch the video until just a bit ago and only to try to see if it was edited beyond the initial and ending cut.

215 webevintage  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:37:24am

re: #209 Obdicut

And our country still is full of the same poison. I’d hoped Obama would be cathartic.

I think in the end he will be if we can all keep our shit together.
This was an infected wound that needed to be lanced….

216 Charles Johnson  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:37:51am

re: #212 HelloDare

Fox News just said Shirley Sherrod changed her mind and will not appear. They said the door remains open.

Good for her. She realized that they were planning to use her.

217 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:38:02am

re: #143 Obdicut

Hmmm…I thought your dodge would be better than that.

In any case it’s over now, since to their credit the NAACP has apparently admitted their wrongdoing and will now perform the investigation they should have done before embarking on their rush to judgment.
It is nice to see that they have the integrity to move quickly to rectify the wrong.

218 Ericus58  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:38:33am

re: #212 HelloDare

Fox News just said Shirley Sherrod changed her mind and will not appear. They said the door remains open.

She’ll give that interview probably to CNN…. and leave FOX holding the bag.

219 jamesfirecat  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:39:08am

re: #212 HelloDare

Fox News just said Shirley Sherrod changed her mind and will not appear. They said the door remains open.

Just like I’m sure the door remains open to having Rush Limbaugh or Sarah Palin, or Glenn Beck on the Daily Show….

Never, gonna, happen.

220 webevintage  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:39:41am

re: #212 HelloDare

Fox News just said Shirley Sherrod changed her mind and will not appear. They said the door remains open.

Smart gal.
Megan “with a Y” would have turned the story into a story about Obama and how the blacks are out to get whitey and “do you know anyone in the Black Panthers!!!!!?” and Ms. Sherrod would have never gotten a chance to make her case.

221 avanti  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:40:03am

re: #210 RogueOne

That’s exactly what he said but I disagree that it is the same thing.

That statement simply supported the segregationist policies in place before the civil rights act. You can’t say on one hand you oppose segregation in public businesses, and on the other say it should be legal to segregate.

222 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:41:42am

re: #201 Obdicut

Are you going to apologize for accusing the NCAAP for engaging in slander any time soon?

I would consider it as soon as you answer my queries concerning your unsubstantiated legal pronouncement in their favour.
And see my #217.

223 Sol Berdinowitz  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:42:50am

re: #221 avanti

That statement simply supported the segregationist policies in place before the civil rights act. You can’t say on one hand you oppose segregation in public businesses, and on the other say it should be legal to segregate.

He tries to walk the fine line of opposing it “in principle” but not in practice.

But to me it is like supporting the “principle” of Separate but Equal, knowing full well what the practice was.

224 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:42:53am

re: #216 Charles

Good for her. She realized that they were planning to use her.

Or someone got to her.

225 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:43:12am

I can’t think of any reason why anyone would be vehemently criticizing the NAACP in the midst of all this, in preference to other targets, apart from racism.

226 jamesfirecat  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:43:27am

re: #224 Spare O’Lake

Or someone got to her.

I think you forgot your sarc tag, you can borrow a few of mine.

/// /// /// /// /// ///

227 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:43:42am

re: #224 Spare O’Lake

Or someone got to her.

Are you fucking serious?

228 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:43:48am

re: #209 Obdicut

My second-cousin once removed was part of the ’60s civil rights protest. White guy. Got his ass beaten (by some white thugs) for sitting at the black counter to show solidarity.

Separate but equal turned out to just be separate at all costs.

And our country still is full of the same poison. I’d hoped Obama would be cathartic.

For many it has been. And it could have been even more so, if the GOP and Fox had not done everything in their power to paint a black president as a tragedy rather than a catharsis.

I started writing a year ago that the GOP and Fox were to blame for unleashing and legitimatizing the worst threads in the American psyche. Rather than a golden historical opportunity to heal wounds - to treat our first black president as just another president and praise or criticize him like any other - they turned it into a race war with images of angry blacks hunting white people and destroying Christianity.

The GOP deserves - in a just world - to be forever cast out of American politics for this.

229 Sol Berdinowitz  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:44:25am

re: #225 Fozzie Bear

I can’t think of any reason why anyone would be vehemently criticizing the NAACP in the midst of all this, in preference to other targets, apart from racism.

Retribution. For calling out the Tea party for not refudiating its racist elements.

They knew it was coming, I think it is one of the reasons they overreacted.

230 greygandalf  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:44:44am

re: #224 Spare O’Lake

Or someone got to her.

Ya probably Tupac.

231 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:46:13am

Spare, the nicest thing I can say is that you seem to be delusional and paranoid.

232 CuriousLurker  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:47:18am

re: #209 Obdicut

My second-cousin once removed was part of the ’60s civil rights protest. White guy. Got his ass beaten (by some white thugs) for sitting at the black counter to show solidarity.

Separate but equal turned out to just be separate at all costs.

And our country still is full of the same poison. I’d hoped Obama would be cathartic.

His election might still be cathartic. What we’re is very reminiscent to me of the demonic possession of little girl Reagan in The Exorcist… the way her condition got progressively worse before the final exorcism.

Somebody call a Jesuit priest, stat!

233 Sol Berdinowitz  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:48:03am

re: #232 CuriousLurker

His election might still be cathartic. What we’re is very reminiscent to me of the demonic possession of little girl Reagan in The Exorcist… the way her condition got progressively worse before the final exorcism.

Somebody call a Jesuit priest, stat!


Call a Judas Priest!

234 webevintage  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:48:43am

re: #224 Spare O’Lake

Or someone got to her.

I bet.
I bet a friend probably called and said “Are you NUTS! Megan “with a Y” is a bit of a FOX crazy lady and right now she has her panties in a bind over the “new black panthers” so you might want to avoid the crazy lady who is just planning to use you.”
If Shirley was my friend I would have “got to her” for sure.

oh, wait you mean in like a evil sekrit mooslim WH operatives Jack Bauer kind of “got to her”…
heh.
snort.

235 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:50:12am

re: #205 Reginald Perrin

I really don’t care if you apologize. I disapproved of AB’s conduct from the get-go, but what pissed folks off was my pointing out that the Obama administration’s reaction (and then the NCAAP’s reaction) was also very wrong. Prove otherwise if you can, but citing negative karma doesn’t cut it.

236 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:52:08am

re: #227 Fozzie Bear

Are you fucking serious?

I wouldn’t be surprised if another network made her a better offer or warned her off of Fox.

237 elizajane  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:54:57am

re: #218 Ericus58

She’ll give that interview probably to CNN… and leave FOX holding the bag.

I think she already gave the interview to CNN. As it’s now being reported on Fox and on Politico, she completely blames Obama for forcing her out of her job.
Honestly. I couldn’t make this up.

238 webevintage  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:55:09am

re: #235 Spare O’Lake

I really don’t care if you apologize. I disapproved of AB’s conduct from the get-go, but what pissed folks off was my pointing out that the Obama administration’s reaction (and then the NCAAP’s reaction) was also very wrong. Prove otherwise if you can, but citing negative karma doesn’t cut it.

No, I think what pissed people off was the way you seemed to negate AB role in all this and went right after the NAACP and the WH, both of which deserve to be called on the carpet for their giving into AB and FOX, but who are not the instigators nor the push behind this story.

239 Ericus58  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 11:56:43am

re: #237 elizajane

I think she already gave the interview to CNN. As it’s now being reported on Fox and on Politico, she completely blames Obama for forcing her out of her job.
Honestly. I couldn’t make this up.

She came out and said it was directly from Obama to resign?

240 webevintage  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 12:02:24pm

re: #239 Ericus58

She came out and said it was directly from Obama to resign?

I don’t think so.
I think she said that the person from the USDA who was forcing her to resign (why not just tell them to fuck off?) said that the “white house” wanted her gone.
Not that means anything….

241 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 12:02:34pm

re: #238 webevintage

No, I think what pissed people off was the way you seemed to negate AB role in all this and went right after the NAACP and the WH, both of which deserve to be called on the carpet for their giving into AB and FOX, but who are not the instigators nor the push behind this story.

OK, I’ll take your word that this was indeed the spin on my having had the temerity to criticize the reactions of the Obama administration or the NAACP. But really, how could I have in good conscience NOT raised those other matters…was I too harsh?

242 Stormageddon, Dark Lord of All  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 12:05:57pm

re: #179 MandyManners

Well, he’s a fucking idiot.

Unfortunately, there are more fucking idiots out there than we’d like to believe.

Even worse, they’re starting to feel more comfortable coming out into the light. instead of whispered in the dark, now you’re seeing more xenophobia and nativism coming out in public discourse. I think it’s a direct effect of the frenzy being whipped up against illegal immigrants. It’s churning up a lot of other ugly stuff as people think that it’s open season on anything they define as ‘not’ american. Which in their fucking idiotic mindset is anyone who’s not white enough or christian enough to fit in what they think America is.

I think they’ve always been out there, particularly in the 35+ crowd, they’re just more willing to come out from the darkness.

243 Obdicut  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 12:06:14pm

re: #241 Spare O’Lake

Accusing the NAACP of slander was too harsh by a large measure, yes.

And you know it.

244 Ericus58  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 12:08:45pm

re: #240 webevintage

I don’t think so.
I think she said that the person from the USDA who was forcing her to resign (why not just tell them to fuck off?) said that the “white house” wanted her gone.
Not that means anything…

I’m finding reports of her being pressured by a “deputy undersecretary”… I’d have blown that clown off. But she does say the NAACP rush to judgment was the catalyst and the follow-up by the USDA.

There needs to be some good soul-searching by the parties involved as to why the rush to act without having the decency to gather the facts.

But the REAL ass-clown is Breitbart.

245 Targetpractice  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 12:09:35pm

re: #240 webevintage

I don’t think so.
I think she said that the person from the USDA who was forcing her to resign (why not just tell them to fuck off?) said that the “white house” wanted her gone.
Not that means anything…

Way I understand it, she says that the USDA wanted to wait on the evidence, but got repeated “requests” from the White House for her resignation. She’s attributed that to “fear” on their part over the things Fox and the Tea Party crowd are doing. Make of that what you will, but I’m of the opinion that the White House was trying to stay ahead of the news cycle and avoid adding more charges of “condoning racism” to their plate on top of the Right’s “outrage” over Holder and the New Black Panthers.

246 Spare O'Lake  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 12:15:11pm

re: #243 Obdicut

Could your confusion stem from the fact that the test for slander of a private citizen is “negligence”, whereas the test for slander of a public figure is “actual malice”?

247 Ebetty  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 12:23:32pm

re: #82 researchok

yes, people refer to “statements from the WH” but it’s lazy journalism or political-speak. The WH didn’t do anything. Accountability comes with attribution. Lesson number one in Political Survival 101. Once someone has to take responsibility, openly, it’s amazing how civilized everyone becomes.

248 Obdicut  Tue, Jul 20, 2010 12:34:59pm

re: #246 Spare O’Lake

Nope. I’m not at all confused by your concern-trolling.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
3 weeks ago
Views: 364 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1