Shep Smith on Sherrod: Obama sure does pay close attention to Fox News, huh?

posted at 8:40 pm on July 21, 2010 by Allahpundit

Indeed, and if there’s any one point from l’affaire Sherrod being hammered today by both left and right, media and non-media alike, it’s that one. (Beck himself mentioned it on tonight’s show and Sherrod has started emphasizing it in her interviews.) Shep’s not crowing, though: This is a lament, not only that the trap door would have been pulled on Sherrod sight unseen to avoid taking fire from GB but that Fox News would have ever touted a clip being pushed by Breitbart, whose site Smith dismisses as discredited. Except … how much did Fox really tout it? Steve Doocy claimed this morning that the first airing of the clip on FNC didn’t come until after Sherrod had already resigned, which, from what I can tell, appears to be true. We noted the resignation at 8:21 p.m. on Monday night and the first mention of her on FNC appears to have been this short segment near the end of O’Reilly’s 8 p.m. show, when he demanded that she resign. (The show is taped a few hours earlier and she hadn’t resigned by the time of the taping.) Fox News’s website had, I thought, also posted an article about the vid sometime on Monday, but the earliest story I can find in the archive is this one from Tuesday. Unless I’ve missed something, there was no Fox-driven furor that forced Vilsack’s hand — which, ironically, only buttresses Shep’s point about how paranoid the White House is about FNC. Merely the prospect of them airing something politically damaging is enough to send the administration into crisis mode, firing people in order to put out the fire before it gets started. No wonder Jim Messina was congratulating people on Tuesday morning.

Sherrod herself told Media Matters last night that she won’t do interviews with Fox because they’re both biased and racist, which is a fittingly incendiary note on which to end this appalling, mammoth clusterfark. To cleanse the palate — and we really do need some cleansing — I recommend Mary Katharine Ham’s thoughtful take on the left/right “racism arms race.” She’s got the only “teachable moment” here that’s worth teaching.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Looks like the left’s chickens are coming home to roost! O’Barry’s White House is in complete hyper mode. Their last best hope is that the stupid MSM fed American public doesn’t catch on as to what’s going down.

wepeople on July 21, 2010 at 10:18 PM

Great… here we go again with media naval-gazers complaining how “the internet is a cesspool”, blah blah blah.

Glass houses, a-holes.

The Ugly American on July 21, 2010 at 10:18 PM

its didn’t take sherrod long to overplay her hand.

rob verdi on July 21, 2010 at 9:56 PM
She’s basically been offered a promotion.

I think she is doing her best to make the White House Squirm, how dare they not come to her aid, and how dare they insist that she resign, don’t they know who she is LOL!

Dr Evil on July 21, 2010 at 10:12 PM

I don’t see how they can offer her a job after the “FNC is racist” comments she has been spewing today… Another self inflicted wound for the Administration…

Khun Joe on July 21, 2010 at 10:19 PM

How this admin. is not ashamed of Gobbs is miraculous. Please, please keep him in place for the duration of the term.

Schadenfreude on July 21, 2010 at 10:03 PM

I believe that the Bamster and his insiders understand Gibbs perfectly. They know that he is a complete idiot, and they want the WH Press Corpse to know that they know. Gibbs is an in-your-face signal to the WHPC of the complete contempt that they have for them.

slickwillie2001 on July 21, 2010 at 10:19 PM

Fox News’s lefty buffoon Juan Williams said a few minutes ago that Breitbart’s initial video of Sherrod was spliced and cut up and things like that (not a quote). He said something was removed from the middle of it. I guess he’s a video expert now.

Williams is a likeable guy, but he’s not too bright.

slickwillie2001 on July 21, 2010 at 10:00 PM

Juan Williams = Haverford College where he graduated with a B.A. in philosophy in 1976.

During college, Williams worked for three years as a reporter intern for the Philadelphia Bulletin. He also won a Dow-Jones Newspaper Fund Award for outstanding young journalists and worked for a summer as an editor at the Providence Journal before returning to finish college. After graduation, he won an internship at The Washington Post.

Never heard of any news organization mentoring a philosophy major before. And I went to 2 institutes of higher learning who actually had journalism schools. Can we see his grades?

Del Dolemonte on July 21, 2010 at 10:21 PM

Looks like Breitbart is really good at hooking suckers. His intent was to bait the NAACP and caught a lot more than he bargained for. Hah!

LarryG on July 21, 2010 at 10:23 PM

Sherrod herself told Media Matters last night that she won’t do interviews with Fox because they’re both biased and racist, which is a fittingly incendiary note on which to end this appalling, mammoth clusterfark.

As far as I’m concerned, her comments completely vindicate Breitbart.

[Connie on July 21, 2010 at 8:55 PM]

I’d hate to be accused of not letting the clusterfark end, but I have to agree with you.

I had some doubts about the point Beitbart tried to make because it was apparent the vid was only a snippet, though he explanation appeared true to what he had to provide.

I did believe it proved his point satisfactorily about the NAACP audience — they didn’t know how the story would end — but I also thought Sherrod, by default, if not by intention, was unfairly portrayed. Not that she didn’t harbor racist feelings, she did, but I felt that was understandable in the context of what she had to deal with growing up and she also overcame those feelings in doing the work she did.

I watch the full vid almost to the end, and there was one piece that irked me a little but I let it go, feeling she had vindicated herself both in the story she told and how she conducted herself in interviews yesterday.

But with how she is now conducting herself, tossing around the race card indiscriminately I revisited her talk in front of the NAACP. Here’s a transcript I made. It starts at 23:31 and she’s just ended urging the idea there’s no difference between us and we should be united:

The only difference is that the folks with money, want to stay in power. And whether it is healthcare or whatever it is, they’ll do whatever they need to do to keep that power.

It’s always about money, ya’ll. You know, I haven’t seen such a mean-spirited people as I’ve seen lately, over this issue of healthcare. Some of the racism we thought was buried, didn’t it surface. Now we endured eight years of the Bushes and we didn’t do the stuff these Republicans are doing because you have a black President.

Seems she can turn her racism on and off in an instant if she can couch it in terms of rich vs poor, with the proviso that the we be further divided into those with money who support our black president’s policies and those who oppose our black president’s policies. The latter, it is obvious to her, are the ones motivated solely by the fact that our president is black, when it should be just as damned obvious to her, she’s old enough for sure, that it was the same opposition with the same arguments the last time there was a Democrat President.

Dusty on July 21, 2010 at 10:25 PM

Dr Evil on July 21, 2010 at 10:12 PM

From the way Vilsack/WH are acting, you’d think Sherrod has a hold on them by the short hairs. She’s radioactive, they know it, and she knows that they know it. Perfect negotiating position.

If she weren’t a Marxist, she might make a good Secretary of State.

petefrt on July 21, 2010 at 10:26 PM

She was wronged; but that doesn’t change who she is, She has learned to transcend her racism only partially, and she has adopted a fundamentally Marxist class warfare ideology to supplement.

novaculus on July 21, 2010 at 10:27 PM

A widely discredited website Shep?

You’re speaking about basically a website technology pioneer.

Drudge, Huffington Post which he helped to create gets more eyeballs in a minute than your show does all month my friend. Widely discredited huh? Chink in the armor I think Mr. Smith.

Tangerinesong on July 21, 2010 at 10:30 PM

If she weren’t a Marxist, she might make a good Secretary of State.

petefrt on July 21, 2010 at 10:26 PM

Rude.

♥ Hillary ♥

lansing quaker on July 21, 2010 at 10:32 PM

She was wronged; but that doesn’t change who she is, She has learned to transcend her racism only partially, and she has adopted a fundamentally Marxist class warfare ideology to supplement.

novaculus on July 21, 2010 at 10:27 PM

How exactly was she wronged?

sharrukin on July 21, 2010 at 10:33 PM

Shep seems to have a stiffy for Breitbart. Personally, I find Sheppie a little too smug.

No surprise he takes it upon himself to determine that Breitbart is “discredited”. What is that supposed to mean? That Breitbart now has the same credibility as MSNBC, i.e., zero? Sure, Breitbart let the NAACP race card flippers goad him into a serious misjudgment. He screwed up. It happens. His credibility is damaged, but hardly destroyed by one FU.

Of course, Sheppie never makes mistakes.

novaculus on July 21, 2010 at 10:34 PM

So. The whole time Obama was deriding the country to “turn off cable news”, he was actually a closet Glenn Beck viewer! Bahahahahaha!

ATTN: Avertisors/Sponsors. The White House watches Fox news, 24/7. Contact FNC ad department to reserve your spot today. Hurry!!!

TN Mom on July 21, 2010 at 10:36 PM

I recommend Mary Katharine Ham’s thoughtful take on the left/right “racism arms race.” She’s got the only “teachable moment” here that’s worth teaching.

This might be a small stretch, but how about recommending someones “thoughtful take” on the Muslim/Christan “killing each other race”?

Moral equivalence = morally bereft.

Luka on July 21, 2010 at 10:39 PM

From one of the articles up in ‘headlines’: “The real problem with JournoList is that much of it consisted of exchanges among people who worked for institutions about how to best hijack their employers for the cause of Progressivism.”

http://blog.american.com/?p=17115

slickwillie2001 on July 21, 2010 at 10:41 PM

Understand that it’s the USDA and the use of it that’s being attempted to be kept out of public review/discussion.

Obama doesn’t want that linked back to him, which it is by way of Obama’s shared associations and goals. It’s a big wad of mutual Marxism reliant on racism and agitating racial issues for economic “redistribution” of taxpayer money.

Lourdes on July 21, 2010 at 9:02 PM

You nail it. Bullseye. As Dick Morris said tonight on the Factor, Øbama owns her now. He bought into her and he can’t get rid of her. He owns her background and everything she has said. Deep doo-doo ahead for WH.

petefrt on July 21, 2010 at 10:42 PM

That her husband has a Bill Ayers connection…Wow!

d1carter on July 21, 2010 at 10:08 PM

Maybe that the reason Obama and his minions panicked !
They thought that Glenn Beck will bring out his blackboard and magnetic pictures and show the world how she is intertwined in the Crime Inc.
They are paranoid bunch at WH and MM and CAP and USDA and WU and NAACP and…..

macncheez on July 21, 2010 at 10:44 PM

I don’t see how they can offer her a job after the “FNC is racist” comments she has been spewing today… Another self inflicted wound for the Administration…

Khun Joe on July 21, 2010 at 10:19 PM

Team Obama will very quietly ask Sherrod to resign (again!) and help her sue the USDA for wrongful termination. She’ll win millions of taxpayer $$, while Team Obama doesn’t take the political heat of (re)hiring a racist.

TN Mom on July 21, 2010 at 10:51 PM

It just shows once again……

…..INCOMPETENCE!!!! ON THE PART OF THE DOTUS.

PappyD61 on July 21, 2010 at 11:00 PM

Shep Smith belongs on MSNBC or CNN.

PappyD61 on July 21, 2010 at 11:03 PM

How exactly was she wronged?

sharrukin on July 21, 2010 at 10:33 PM

She was wronged when the partial clip was erred and created a false impression. She was wronged by everyone who jumped to false conclusions as a result. She was wronged when she was fired before all the evidence was in.

Doesn’t make her right about anything.

novaculus on July 21, 2010 at 11:08 PM

She was wronged when the partial clip was erred and created a false impression. She was wronged by everyone who jumped to false conclusions as a result. She was wronged when she was fired before all the evidence was in.

Doesn’t make her right about anything.

novaculus on July 21, 2010 at 11:08 PM

What false impression?

The partial clip made her out to be a class warfare bigot in a roomful of NAACP racists. That is in fact exactly what she has turned out to be, despite the navel-gazing conservatives who were oh so desperate to believe fairy tales of redemption and courage.

sharrukin on July 21, 2010 at 11:18 PM

The common thread here with the Bamster is denial of due process. From the screwing of Chrysler bondholders, taking away bonuses here and there, dumping our money on the UAW, throwing his little snit fits until CEOs quit, threatening banks re pitchforks, shutting down dealerships for no reason, wanting to kill US citizens overseas, etc, etc. Now Sherrod has grounds for a suit for unwarranted dismissal because he acted stupidly, again.

I hear rumors that he is a lawyer, but have seen no evidence.

slickwillie2001 on July 21, 2010 at 11:21 PM

She was wronged when the partial clip was erred and created a false impression.
novaculus on July 21, 2010 at 11:08 PM

My dearest novaculus,
What was false about what was shown on the video? Did or did she not admit that she withheld help to a white farmer due to race? Did or did she not then admit that this was an issue of black and white? Did or did she not say that she only helped him b/c the Dept. of Agriculture would follow up on the meeting? Did or did she not say that he could be helped by his own kind?

Some kind of mea culpa doesn’t wipe out the past and change history. So, again, I ask what was the false impression?

mcg0125 on July 21, 2010 at 11:29 PM

sharrukin on July 21, 2010 at 11:18 PM

The original clip made it look like she gave the poor white farmer the shaft. Turns out she thought better of it, and went to bat for him and his family. So ultimately she wasn’t derelict in her duty; she did do her job in the end. And apparently she was able to transcend her racist tendencies sufficiently to make friends with the white farmer and his family.

The full video, supplemented by what she has said since, suggests that she is a class-warfare Marxist who continues to have race issues. That is not the same thing as dereliction of duty out of racism.

novaculus on July 21, 2010 at 11:30 PM

novaculus on July 21, 2010 at 11:30 PM

So her marxist side overcame her racist side? Wow! My heart is just beating a mile-a-minute at the moral heights that she is ascending to. Clearly we were all too hasty in thinking badly of her! /s

sharrukin on July 21, 2010 at 11:36 PM

Shepard Smith.

Why is this powdered boob still on television???

dissent555 on July 21, 2010 at 11:41 PM

So she goes to Media Matters to bust on Fox. This is not some small town lady who got caught in the crossfire, this is a seasoned political partisan who has all the talking point down pat.

I am sick of all of this, I flat out do not give a flying flip if anyone calls me a racist or insinuates that I am a racist. It just doesn’t mean anything anymore. Just a word given more power then it deserves.

Cindy Munford on July 21, 2010 at 11:44 PM

sharrukin on July 21, 2010 at 11:36 PM

Look, I wasn’t sticking up for her or her beliefs. I just said she was wronged, and she was. You don’t have to approve of her in any way to recognize that she wasn’t dealt with fairly. It is a stinking rotten mess, and no one comes out of this looking good.

novaculus on July 21, 2010 at 11:49 PM

That is in fact exactly what she has turned out to be, despite the navel-gazing conservatives who were oh so desperate to believe fairy tales of redemption and courage.

sharrukin on July 21, 2010 at 11:18 PM

Makes me think of Huckabee pardoning all those criminals, most of whom latter committed more crimes. It made him feel pretty good about himself, but others latter paid the price, in some cases a very big one. It can be a very self serving emotion.

Luka on July 21, 2010 at 11:51 PM

Steve Doocy claimed this morning that the first airing of the clip on FNC didn’t come until after Sherrod had already resigned

Wow, you mean another case where someone the dems liked got fired before the thing that got them fired happened? (You know, like Shinseki who was fired a year before his testimony that got him fired.) Wow, that Republican time machine gets alot of use.

Dave_d on July 21, 2010 at 11:55 PM

Breitbart let the NAACP race card flippers goad him into a serious misjudgment. He screwed up. It happens. His credibility is damaged, but hardly destroyed by one FU.

Of course, Sheppie never makes mistakes.

novaculus on July 21, 2010 at 10:34 PM

Uh, how did Breitbart screw up here? And in whose eyes that are important is his credibility damaged?

He released what he had after requesting more of the tape from the NAACP, which they refused to give him. Sure, he could have done more, like try to talk to Sherrod, but he didn’t. That doesn’t mean he was wrong to release it before trying to talk to her.

Too bad Andrew isn’t perfect like his detractors are, huh?

Bizarro No. 1 on July 21, 2010 at 11:55 PM

Just a word given more power then it deserves.

Cindy Munford on July 21, 2010 at 11:44 PM

It is a crutch under which weak minds are severely crouched.

Luka on July 21, 2010 at 11:58 PM

Look, I wasn’t sticking up for her or her beliefs. I just said she was wronged, and she was. You don’t have to approve of her in any way to recognize that she wasn’t dealt with fairly. It is a stinking rotten mess, and no one comes out of this looking good.

novaculus on July 21, 2010 at 11:49 PM

I do not have to give known thieves the benefit of a doubt. They are the ones who should have to prove they are not going to steal from folks. I will check my wallet before they are out of the house assuming I even invite them in.

This lady is no different. She showed herself to be a racist, a marxist, and someone who scams the government through lawsuits and grievance whining.

Why should I look at her in a charitable light given what is known about her? You want me to act like I am some naive twelve year as regards to what sort of person she is. She turned out to be just the sort of nasty bit of news I cynically thought her to be.

I am not impressed that she eventually didn’t screw over the white farmer, because it was her job to help him. Why should I give her a lollypop for doing her job? That is what is called the soft bigotry of low expectations.

Worse is the fact that she helped the farmer because of her ideas of class warfare, and I can only wonder who else she screwed over when she thought them too wealthy, or not the right sort.

She was dealt far too fairly and given the benefit of a doubt when any honest look at her past and present conduct would suggest caution.

sharrukin on July 22, 2010 at 12:05 AM

It is a crutch under which weak minds are severely crouched.

Luka on July 21, 2010 at 11:58 PM

It’s being used as a weapon and a tactic.

Cindy Munford on July 22, 2010 at 12:06 AM

Makes me think of Huckabee pardoning all those criminals, most of whom latter committed more crimes. It made him feel pretty good about himself, but others latter paid the price, in some cases a very big one. It can be a very self serving emotion.

Luka on July 21, 2010 at 11:51 PM

It is frequently about making themselves feel better. They are told they should forgive and think somehow that translates into giving others another chance. The question they don’t often seem to ask themselves, is a chance to do what? Well too often it turns out to be a chance to rape, or murder, or steal from others.

You can forgive a criminal for what he did to you, but you have no right to forgive him for what he did to others, or what he might do in the future.

sharrukin on July 22, 2010 at 12:10 AM

sharrukin on July 22, 2010 at 12:05 AM

Sorry, but I have reached the conclusion that you are intentionally misconstruing my remarks. I’m going to call it an evening. Good night.

novaculus on July 22, 2010 at 12:14 AM

Where does he get off with “We decided not to cover it…” “We didn’t believe the authenticity….” “We were suspicious…..”

I believe this air headed boob doesn’t do one ounce of “investigative journalism” and if they knew about the story initially to begin with , he wanted to ignore it simply for the fact he is a liberal.

Marcus on July 22, 2010 at 12:27 AM

I do not have to give known thieves the benefit of a doubt. They are the ones who should have to prove they are not going to steal from folks. I will check my wallet before they are out of the house assuming I even invite them in.

This lady is no different. She showed herself to be a racist, a marxist, and someone who scams the government through lawsuits and grievance whining.

Why should I look at her in a charitable light given what is known about her? You want me to act like I am some naive twelve year as regards to what sort of person she is. She turned out to be just the sort of nasty bit of news I cynically thought her to be.

I am not impressed that she eventually didn’t screw over the white farmer, because it was her job to help him. Why should I give her a lollypop for doing her job? That is what is called the soft bigotry of low expectations.

Worse is the fact that she helped the farmer because of her ideas of class warfare, and I can only wonder who else she screwed over when she thought them too wealthy, or not the right sort.

She was dealt far too fairly and given the benefit of a doubt when any honest look at her past and present conduct would suggest caution.

sharrukin on July 22, 2010 at 12:05 AM

Great post.

Excuse me while I cry an ocean for the turds who never care about “context” when Righties are being slammed, and who have immeasurably more animosity towards people like Reagan and Rush than they do Castro and Chavez.

These turds are not good people, and don’t deserve the benefit of the doubt until they demonstrate they are willing to give it to those on the Right who disagree with them. We all know when we’ll see that happen…

Bizarro No. 1 on July 22, 2010 at 12:27 AM

The original clip made it look like she gave the poor white farmer the shaft. Turns out she thought better of it, and went to bat for him and his family. So ultimately she wasn’t derelict in her duty; she did do her job in the end.
novaculus on July 21, 2010 at 11:30 PM

The original clip was very clear that she never denied service to the white farmer. The fact was that she withheld help to the white farmer. She specifically stated that she didn’t do all she could have done for him because he was white. That right there was a dereliction of her duty.

She then followed up that she had a vision that this was all about the poor and black and white. “…then it was revealed to me, ya’ll, that it’s about poor versus those who have, and not so much about white. It is about white and black, but, it opened my eyes.”
In her own words she stated that it was still an issue of black and white.
Now, the million dollar question I have is if Sherrod would have done everything she could have done when the man originally approached her, would he have ended up in the position he was in when he was facing foreclosure?

mcg0125 on July 22, 2010 at 12:59 AM

I’d love Shep to have Andrew on and say that his site is nothing, I’m guessing Shep would be pulling an Olbermann soon after.

Rbastid on July 22, 2010 at 1:36 AM

Why is it always the habit of liberal blacks to blame all of their problems on racism? I hardly ever see black conservatives blaming racism when they screw up.

By the way, can someone explain to me how in fuller context Sherrod isn’t racist? Watching the full video, she’s still a racist…but she seems just a teeny tiny bit LESS racist. Good for her, I guess?

TheBlueSite on July 22, 2010 at 1:53 AM

Wait this video wasn’t “edited” was it? It was merely a short segment from a much longer video, right? Shep sounds like a hysterical sissy most of the time, and this clip is no different. Breitbart has been discredited and often posts videos that are edited to twist the true meaning of things?

I’m still not seeing where the video was edited in any manner. I’m still not seeing how she’s NOT racist after watching the complete video. She clearly admitted to being racist, and she clearly says it IS a black and white issue but also a rich/poor issue. She says she learned from it, but she still seems racist from her comments. (??)

TheBlueSite on July 22, 2010 at 2:05 AM

As far as I’m concerned, her comments completely vindicate Breitbart.

Connie on July 21, 2010 at 8:55 PM

Somebody needs to teach a course on how not to come off like a bigot. My consultancy fee is moderately high but I will do a one-off freebie.

The circular logic you’re employed was the exact type of BS that justified lynchings, whippings, beatings, rapings and brutality of all sorts. It’s in the same class as she wanted it because she wore a skirt.

One technique you might try is to avoid using the exact wording, reasoning and tactics of avowed racists and other bigots.

Technique number two requires one to really bend the bounds of introspection and resolve. One must never again reply to an accusation of bigotry with a perceived equal or greater social-offense alleged to have been committed by said accuser.

That’s a lot there for you. Remember, you did not become racially-resentful of liberals overnight. You cannot expect to achieve full-fairness without persistent diligence.

The Race Card on July 22, 2010 at 6:48 AM

If we could see inside the White House we would see how thin-skinned Obama, Rahm, Bite-Me, and the others are. I would guess a good 2-3 hours of every Obama day is getting a review of what Fox news and the conservative blogs, plus Rush are saying about Obama. Then Obama rants and screams around about it.
Obama probably has a small army of people scouring the web gathering information about what is being said about him and he is briefed in the morning and evening.

That being said, this is a major weakness of Obama. He can not take criticism. So the Republicans and others opposed to Obama should ratchet up the criticism.
I would suggest it in the form of humor.
Humor, jokes and making fun of Obama would send him into dither.
So we need more jokes and satire on Obama.
Hot Air, like your “Obamateurism of the Day”, can you devote a daily section showing humor satirizing Obama and the Democrats??? We need a central internet location that solicits and collects humor and satire pointed at Obama and the Democrats.

albill on July 22, 2010 at 7:04 AM

Breitbart may have gone fishing for minnows, but he ended up catching the whale. In that sense, his mission has been wildly successful, successful beyond anyone’s dreams. Even so, there seems to be some lingering doubt about whether he should have released the clip that was sent him before he saw the entire film, before he saw the context. (The entire film was in possession of the NAALCP. I understand that he asked the NAALCP to let him see it, but was refused.)

This morning on F&F, I hear Juan Williams saying in one breath it’s okay to blame Booosh for Obama’s problems with the economy “as long as the Ameriucan people are buying it”, and in the next breath blaming Breitbart for releasing the NAALCP tape because it didn’t accurately portray the entire story.

Now I happen to think Juan is one of the more measured, responsible Dems on the scene nowadays, but I ask you, why should we take seriously this ostensible gnashing of teeth over Breitbart’s judgment in releasing that tape when it represents such a preposterous double standard on the part of his critics?

Besides, where was the NAALCP’s sense of fairness, balance and veracity in attacking the Tea Party Movement as racist in the first place?

I’m sorry, but I just can’t get very exercised about Brietbart’s judgment in this matter. Not very concerned at all.

petefrt on July 22, 2010 at 7:58 AM

The left blames FOX for everything, EVERYthing. It doesn’t matter that they picked up the story after the fact, they picked it up so they get the blame, and therefore they are a racist news organization. God I wish the country would stop with these character assaults and start worrying about things that are real. If we put half the energy we put into mud slinging into solving problems we’d be a whole lot better off. These people are acting like children and ought to be stuck in a corner and not allowed out until they can behave themselves.

scalleywag on July 22, 2010 at 8:42 AM

TRC,

You really should lay off the sanctimonious crap if you want to influence the people to whom you seem so bent on changing.

Your opening statement was completely eye-roll-inducing considering the fact that (justly or not), nearly everyone here seems to think you come across as a bigot….and, I can’t speak for everyone, but this poster’s impression of you has now changed to qualify that impression with “…and a smug one at that”

Somebody needs to teach a course on how not to come off like a bigot. My consultancy fee is moderately high but I will do a one-off freebie.

I’m curious what it was that made you think Connie came across as a bigot? I’m led to believe, from your statement, that it was her one statement you quoted. Is that correct?

As another question: I’m curious if you think that Sherrod comes off as a bigot per some of her statements?

As a follow-up to that, here’s something to consider: If your answer to #2 is yes, then I’d like to know how Connie’s statement was unfair or incorrect?

If the answer to #2 is no, then I’d like to know how you can consistently say that Connie’s statement made her come across as a bigot, but Sherrod’s various statements do not have the same effect? Personally, Connie’s statement seemed fairly innocuous and racially-agnostic, whereas Sherrod’s seemed loaded with racial pretense; I’d like to get your take on that, though.

On another note, as far as I can tell, you’ve yet to engage me on some very direct questions these past few days, so I’m on the brink of just chalking you up as another ignorable voice. I am genuinely curious, though, to make sense of some of your statements, and I would like to hear what you have to say.

BlueCollarAstronaut on July 22, 2010 at 9:28 AM

Shepard Smith.

Why is this powdered boob still on television???

dissent555 on July 21, 2010 at 11:41 PM

He’s too damn pretty.

Phil-351 on July 22, 2010 at 9:31 AM

The jury was still out for me where this lady was concerned until I heard her spout the poor little black people meme. Get over it.

jeanie on July 22, 2010 at 9:45 AM

On another note, as far as I can tell, you’ve yet to engage me on some very direct questions these past few days, so I’m on the brink of just chalking you up as another ignorable voice. I am genuinely curious, though, to make sense of some of your statements, and I would like to hear what you have to say.

BlueCollarAstronaut on July 22, 2010 at 9:28 AM

From what I’ve seen from TRC, I predict that he won’t directly address your points – I’ve rarely seen him show legitimate interest in debating here with people who disagree with him.

He is one of those blindly angry, self-appointed ‘experts’ on racism because he’s a minority, who considers his opinions on the matter to be more meaningful and valuable than those of non-minorities because he’s experienced racism ‘in a way that you couldn’t ever understand.’ Either that, or he’s an actor brilliantly impeccable at playing the part.

Bizarro No. 1 on July 22, 2010 at 10:04 AM

From the posted link above:

She also accused Fox News of racism, telling Strupp that “they are after a bigger thing, they would love to take us back to… where black people were looking down, not looking white folks in the face, not being able to compete for a job out there and not be a whole person.”

And– surprise, surprise– she wants to sue, but isn’t sure who to attack legally yet: “I don’t know enough to know. I wish I did. I would love to sue. I am going to talk about it.”

You know who should sue?…. Fox News. They need to start taking people like this Sherrod person, who make baseless accusations of racism, and shove it down their throats. It’s slander.

She doesn’t need her job back. She doesn’t deserve her job back. She’s obviously nothing but a political hack who’ll say anything, no matter how vile, to further the Democrat agenda.

Why should U.S. taxpayers continue to pay the DNC’s operating costs? Let them pay their own operatives.

Murf76 on July 22, 2010 at 11:05 AM

Good job Ed.

You snuck in your obligatory RINO disclaimer at the end of your post by linking to MKH. That should cover your tracks this time for anybody not paying attention.

notagool on July 22, 2010 at 1:39 PM

Hey Shep, let me help you out with a simple lesson in mathematics anyone who isn’t still fawning over this Socialist POS.

Obama + lips moving = liar

Is it clear now?

TrickyDick on July 22, 2010 at 1:55 PM

Comment pages: 1 2