Should Shirley Sherrod get her job back?

posted at 11:30 am on July 21, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

It certainly looks as though the White House is having second thoughts about pushing Shirley Sherrod out of the USDA after Andrew Breitbart’s video clip of her speech at an NAACP banquet last year.  Multiple media outlets are reporting that Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack is “reconsidering” her resignation after the full video showed a different context for her remarks:

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said Wednesday that he will reconsider the abrupt firing of Shirley Sherrod, a Georgia-based Agriculture Department official who was the victim of a media frenzy over comments that turned out to have been distorted by video editing.

“I am of course willing and will conduct a thorough review and consider additional facts to ensure to the American people we are providing services in a fair and equitable manner,” Vilsack said in a statement e-mailed by USDA at 2:07 a.m.

A White House official said: “Not sure what the ultimate result will be, but it’s clear that with new information through the full speech, a longer look needed to be taken. The White House contacted the Department last night about the case and agreed, based on new evidence, that it should be reviewed.”

Not that Sherrod is anxious to return:

The woman at the center of a racially tinged firestorm involving the Obama administration and the NAACP said Wednesday she doesn’t know if she’d return to her job at the Agriculture Department, even if asked.

“I am just not sure how I would be treated there,” Shirley Sherrod said in a nationally broadcast interview. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said Wednesday he would reconsider the department’s decision to oust Sherrod over her comments that she didn’t give a white farmer as much help as she could have 24 years ago.

She said later in a broadcast interview that she might consider returning if she had the chance, saying she’s received encouraging calls, including one from the NAACP.

Sherrod increasingly looks like the person caught in the middle as everyone, well, acted stupidly.  The NAACP started this rockfight by loudly proclaiming its intent to declare the Tea Party movement racist on the basis of fringe elements that have been repeatedly and loudly repudiated by Tea Party activists.  They eventually retreated somewhat from that position, but set into motion the natural rebuttals that flow from such inflammatory accusations.

Andrew Breitbart then posted the entirety of two clips he had acquired from Sherrod’s speech, not so much to note Sherrod’s claims of having initially discriminated against a farmer on the basis of his race, but to point to the positive reaction this generated at the NAACP dinner at which she appeared.  Breitbart told me on the Hugh Hewitt show that he had posted everything he had and wanted to get the entire speech video, but wasn’t sure it existed.  Even Ben Jealous, president of the NAACP, acknowledged Breitbart’s argument as reasonable in his initial statement:

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.

Interestingly, the audience apparently included Jealous himself, who later claimed to have been “snookered” by Breitbart.  Sherrod acknowledges the presence of “the president” in the beginning of the speech.  It seems that Jealous, in his haste to distance himself from a situation his organization created in the first place, either didn’t recall the speech or didn’t bother to check for himself whether the NAACP had the full speech in its archives.  That pressure to act quickly wouldn’t have existed, either, had the NAACP refrained from attacking the Tea Party’s motivations rather than its arguments.

The White House, in its haste to get out of a rapidly-expanding rockfight over racism, did the politically expedient thing: it demanded Sherrod’s resignation.  Conservatives looking to play hardball with the NAACP leapt into the fight and made Sherrod the target — and I include myself in that group — without waiting for further context (with some notable exceptions, including my coblogger).  As it turns out, the context shows that Sherrod got treated unfairly by just about everyone involved, as her anecdote actually did have a message of redemption from focus on racial identity … ironically enough.

I owe Shirley Sherrod an apology, and I do apologize for leaping to my conclusion from the edited clip.  I believe that Sherrod should at least be offered her job back, and not because I support her politics (I don’t) or think she should have been appointed to the position in the first place (that’s the prerogative of the White House).  She lost her job because of a controversy in which she had no role to begin with and didn’t participate in, and regardless of any other considerations, that’s just not right.

What do you think?  Take the poll:


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 5 6 7

cane_loader on July 21, 2010 at 6:55 PM

Hope Ed/AP can post some of your footage.

There was just too much bad news for the WH today to give everything all the attention it deserved.

Glad the rally was a huge success. Hopefully it will be spotlighted tomorrow.

petefrt on July 21, 2010 at 7:02 PM

OK, if it wasn’t at the USDA, does it make it any less of a civil rights violation?

James on July 21, 2010 at 6:42 PM

I think it does. Bring her up on civil rights charges, let her be tried. If found guilty she pays the penalty. Due process.

DarkCurrent on July 21, 2010 at 7:05 PM

It’s being posted first at http://www.theblogmocracy.com because they are the ones who agreed to post it and Ed said he would only consider posting it if someone else posted it first.

I hope HotAir will decide to post it, but otherwise, links to videos and the many photos will be posted over there.

cane_loader on July 21, 2010 at 7:05 PM

I’d like to see it here but have seen almost no interest from the management. That’s their news-judgment call.

I offered them an exclusive but they want to see it posted elsewhere first.

cane_loader on July 21, 2010 at 7:08 PM

Emaxelrod: Hey, Vilsack, you gotta take the fall for the president on this one, okay?. We can’t, you know, we just can’t let him have another “They acted stupidly” moment. It would be just too damaging. So you take the fall for firing her, and keep him out of it.

petefrt on July 21, 2010 at 7:09 PM

cane_loader on July 21, 2010 at 7:08 PM

Today may have been a little overwhelming with all the incoming news, especially Sherrod and Journolist. I’d give it a little time.

But I hope meanwhile you get it out on the blogosphere as widely as you can. It’s an important story. In a normal day, it would be the center attraction.

petefrt on July 21, 2010 at 7:14 PM

Needling her about sex that isn’t strict missionary is even more fun. Do you know how old she is? Might explain even more things.

MadisonConservative on July 21, 2010 at 6:27 PM

She claims to have been married about twenty years.

Jimbo3 on July 21, 2010 at 7:19 PM

Especially since their footnote #4 says:

^ Ross, Brian and Howard Rosenberg (September 14, 2004). “”Document Analysts: CBS News Ignored Doubts.””. ABC News.
It’s also relevant to note that the majority of Wiki’s footnotes cite the Washington Post, NY Times, and other Leftist “news sources”. Sure, there is a Fox News cite in there, and a WND one, but the bulk of them come from the legacy media-the same folks who later rewarded Dan’s dishonesty by giving him an award.

Keep trying, though!

Del Dolemonte on July 21, 2010 at 6:22 PM

Doubts is different than proof the documents were forged. The concerns were about the axe that the source had to grind against Bush.

Keep trying, though.

Jimbo3 on July 21, 2010 at 7:20 PM

Doubts is different than proof the documents were forged. The concerns were about the axe that the source had to grind against Bush.

Keep trying, though.

Jimbo3 on July 21, 2010 at 7:20 PM

Umm, Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs definitively proved the documents were forged. Whatever else one might say about LGF as it is now, I will always be grateful to him for that.

Mary in LA on July 21, 2010 at 7:32 PM

“To have people say that I was such a racist was unbelievable,” she( Sherrod) said of the fallout from the video and Fox coverage.

“When you look at their reporting, this is just another way of seeing that they are (racist),” Sherrod told me about Fox in a lengthy interview Tuesday night

Source Media Matters

PrezHussein on July 21, 2010 at 7:46 PM

You guys DO understand, don’t you, that Obama & Co. pushed these racist buttons specifically to bury the 11,000-strong rally that happened today, don’t you??

Seriously – the timing is too perfect – and Hannity, and ALL of the conservatives have taken the bait.

Bobby Jindal just led 11,000 angry Cajuns and we cannot get ANY coverage because this Bull$$$t about one employee has sucked ALL of the air out of the blogosphere, INCLUDING HotAir.

I mean, haven’t ANY of you, Ed and Allah included, ever discussed Jindal’s presidential prospects on HotAir?

Why is this story being buried?

This deflection by Obama was intentionally timed to ace out the 7/21 rally, and I think the conservative media fell for it.

Gulf Moratorium Protest.

The REAL hard news today!!

CNN at 7p.m.

http://www.rallyforeconomicsurvival.com

Filmed Jindal’s whole speech from 15 ft away and heading to a buddy’s house now to edit it down.

Would anyone care to respond?

cane_loader on July 21, 2010 at 6:55 PM

Michelle Malkin (the former Boss Emeritus) picked up the story here

SgtSVJones on July 21, 2010 at 7:49 PM

Time for a “Chardonnay Summit!”

Khun Joe on July 21, 2010 at 7:52 PM

Time for a “Chardonnay Summit!”

Khun Joe on July 21, 2010 at 7:52 PM

Stop right there! Chardonnay is a white wine, therefore you are racist. Report for re-education immediately.

/do I hafta?

Mary in LA on July 21, 2010 at 7:53 PM

The woman is a racist and a scam artist to boot.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/07/forty_acres_a_mule_sherrod_sty.html

Morrisey has now earned his John McCain stripes.

Here’s to ya, brand new private in the Ruling Class

notagool on July 21, 2010 at 8:03 PM

Doubts is different than proof the documents were forged. The concerns were about the axe that the source had to grind against Bush.

Keep trying, though.

Jimbo3 on July 21, 2010 at 7:20 PM

Still living in a fantasy world, I see. The so-called attempts to validate the documents were done by handwriting experts, but the documents were not handwritten. They were printed on a computer that did not yet exist.

There’s really no doubt left. There is no way a typewriter of the era could have produced the documents they claimed. The very best you could claim is that it was an innocent mistake rather than intentional. And even that is not plausible.

tom on July 21, 2010 at 8:10 PM

She is a racist Marxist, I’m surprised Obama hasn’t made her a czar of something yet.

Inanemergencydial on July 21, 2010 at 8:18 PM

Jimbo3 on July 21, 2010 at 7:20 PM

Still living in a fantasy world, I see. The so-called attempts to validate the documents were done by handwriting experts, but the documents were not handwritten. They were printed on a computer that did not yet exist.

There’s really no doubt left. There is no way a typewriter of the era could have produced the documents they claimed. The very best you could claim is that it was an innocent mistake rather than intentional. And even that is not plausible.

tom on July 21, 2010 at 8:10 PM

Jimbo the faux attorney is laughable.

CWforFreedom on July 21, 2010 at 8:24 PM

She lost her job because of a controversy in which she had no role to begin with and didn’t participate in

She lost her job because she said she refused to help a farmer because he was white.

SoulGlo on July 21, 2010 at 8:33 PM

She is a racist Marxist, I’m surprised Obama hasn’t made her a czar of something yet.

Inanemergencydial on July 21, 2010 at 8:18 PM

I can’t imangine why anyone would think she should be re-hired. Well, I guess she did want to get the farmer a lawyer of his own kind. Can you imagine if a white goverment employee had said this about a black customer. Listen to the entire speach she is a blatent racist.

whbates on July 21, 2010 at 8:42 PM

1. He total comments are even more damnable then the Breibart peice. Go listen to it @ http://www.naacp.org/content/main

2. She also violtes the Hatch act, and should be disqulified for employment within the federal govt.

paulsur on July 21, 2010 at 8:59 PM

Since all you fence straddling a$sholes can’t meet me with a decent rebuttal, I will assume that since the sale of this site, they just threw the doors open and the dregs are finally the majority.

As for getting paid the big bucks, DarkA$swipe >>> as much as it may eat your a$s >>>> it is PRECISELY BECAUSE I HOLD STRONG OPINIONS that I, indeed, get paid the big monster bucks.

Ed will gladly vouch.

So all you nut-sucking magpies can go back to your mommy’s basement and tell Esthier I said for him (it?) to wash his stinkin’ Underoos and to stop stealing the Cheetos from MadisonConservative. And tell her to stop being such a harping “yes” b*tch. She is SO unoriginal.

seejanemom on July 21, 2010 at 9:01 PM

I hope that when she resumes her job, Breitbart releases video number 2, making a hire/fire cha-cha-cha become necessary.

James on July 21, 2010 at 9:06 PM

Coulter said Breitbart got punked and needs to out his source… I agree

LurkerDood on July 21, 2010 at 9:10 PM

Obama’s post-racial performance to date–Reverend Wright and Shirley wronged!

chickasaw42 on July 21, 2010 at 9:14 PM

Too soon to tell. I can’t find the exact quote. Perhaps somebody has posted it, but she has said, now, something to the effect that Fox is like white people who want to make black people keep their eyes down and not have jobs. It doesn’t look good.

Star20 on July 21, 2010 at 9:39 PM

SHe’s black. Give her a million dollars, free car, free new appliances. She’ll be fine.

johnnyU on July 21, 2010 at 9:46 PM

SO ED>>>>

MARK FUHRMAN admitted that he used the “N” word ONCE….ONCE in the past, and his WHOLE TESTIMONY IN THE O.J. TRAIL WAS STRICKEN????

Tell me she doesn’t deserve to have her fat, entrenched ass kicked to the curb.

seejanemom on July 21, 2010 at 9:47 PM

Doubts is different than proof the documents were forged. The concerns were about the axe that the source had to grind against Bush.

Keep trying, though.

Jimbo3 on July 21, 2010 at 7:20

So when are you taking on crr6 as your law partner?

If you can provide any documentation from multiple credible sources that the documents were not forged, I will stop laughing at you.

And as I said, Wiki doesn’t count.

Del Dolemonte on July 21, 2010 at 9:53 PM

No, and we don’t need at least 2 million more of those federal government do nothing parasites who hate us rather than serve us. Stop stealing our money.

ray on July 21, 2010 at 10:33 PM

Us whites could be the bigger people and say frig it but this is a look into NAACP talking among themselves. Whites are the enemy. This is the 21st Century and we still have to put up with this crap. Reverse the situation and there would be riots and politicians hiding.

johnnyU on July 21, 2010 at 11:05 PM

I really love how ED and others promoting this idea that NAACP President Ben Jealous was in attendance OBVIOUSLY HAVENT LEARNED from this whole mess! When Sherrod addresses the “president” in the clip she is addressing the president of the NAACP CHAPTER THAT HOSTED THE EVENT not the whole organization.

But don’t let FACTS stop you…..

TruUSA on July 21, 2010 at 11:22 PM

Star20 on July 21, 2010 at 9:39 PM

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.”
mediaite.com

White House to Sherodd: You’re re-Fired?

TN Mom on July 21, 2010 at 11:27 PM

White House to Sherodd: You’re re-Fired?

TN Mom on July 21, 2010 at 11:27 PM

White House to Sherodd: Your just our sort of person?

sharrukin on July 21, 2010 at 11:37 PM

TruUSA on July 21, 2010 at 11:22 PM

Regardless, the NAACP had the tape of the entire speech, no one made them shoot their mouths off before watching it or even talking to Mrs. Sherrod. Lots of facts that could have been attained by a lot of different people. You’re sweating the small stuff.

Cindy Munford on July 22, 2010 at 12:10 AM

johnnyU on July 21, 2010 at 11:05 PM

stfu and gtfo.

alwaysfiredup on July 22, 2010 at 1:38 AM

Ed Morrissey, you need to be called out on this.

This woman admitted to criminal wrong doing.

Maybe she feels bad about it, she still committed a crime.

The Farmer’s wife has the equivalent of Stockholm syndrome, do we pardon kidnappers when the victim gets that?

Perhaps she should just be fired, but the state of Georgia could prosecute this woman for admitting to a crime.

The only TV pundit I’ve witnessed that have seen through this charade so far has been Hannity (Just barely too). People need to remember this to know in the future who has discernment and who doesn’t.

scotash on July 22, 2010 at 2:37 AM

Now she’s being offered a promotion! Was there an existing job opening? or are they just making up another government job?

mhrepub on July 22, 2010 at 7:16 AM

Suprise

BallisticBob on July 22, 2010 at 8:14 AM

I am sure that “her own kind” will take care of her.

workingforpigs on July 22, 2010 at 8:30 AM

You are kidding, right?

BrideOfRove on July 22, 2010 at 8:34 AM

Not you workingforpigs. I’m talking to Ed.

BrideOfRove on July 22, 2010 at 8:35 AM

She got her job as a result of the Pigford lawsuit. Her husband has a very interesting past, also. And now, she wants Scooter to apologize to her. Nope. She can work for the people of Georgia.

kingsjester on July 22, 2010 at 9:04 AM

She seems like a very nice woman and no pushover, either. She’s not accepting the “new and improved” job.

Very smart of her, I think.

AnninCA on July 22, 2010 at 9:08 AM

She got her job as a result of the Pigford lawsuit. Her husband has a very interesting past, also. And now, she wants Scooter to apologize to her. Nope. She can work for the people of Georgia.

kingsjester on July 22, 2010 at 9:04 AM

Is this an opinion or something you read as a fact?

Bradky on July 22, 2010 at 9:14 AM

RDLN Graduate and Board Vice Chair Shirley Sherrod was appointed Georgia Director for Rural Development by Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack on July 25. Only days earlier, she learned that New Communities, a group she founded with her husband and other families (see below) has won a thirteen million dollar settlement in the minority farmers law suit Pigford vs Vilsack.
In announcing the appointment of Shirley and other new officials, Secretary Vilsack said that “These individuals will be important advocates on behalf of rural communities in states throughout the country and help administer the valuable programs and services provided by the USDA that can enhance their economic success.”

Thanks for playing.

kingsjester on July 22, 2010 at 10:12 AM

So when are you taking on crr6 as your law partner?

If you can provide any documentation from multiple credible sources that the documents were not forged, I will stop laughing at you.

And as I said, Wiki doesn’t count.

Del Dolemonte on July 21, 2010 at 9:53 PM

Focus on what they knew and when they knew it. When they went to broadcast, they believed the documents were correct but had taken some steps to try to authenticate them. Obviously, they were wrong.

Jimbo3 on July 22, 2010 at 10:20 AM

She ought to be treated just like Trent Lott was even if if innocent of racism(which she is not) It’s time to respond to these racist organizations and false accusations with a dose of their own medicine! Since practically everyone is being accused of racism by the racist Obama administration, the sting of the charge is gone and people are free to have their opinions expressed again. It is obvious that not everyone in the U.S.is racist since they elected Obama! Remember in November!

Marco on July 22, 2010 at 10:33 AM

Andy McCarthy disagrees with you, Ed.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YjVmMjg3MDZlNDBmOGY1ZmQyOWNmNmM4MGNiZDdjZDM

JKahn913 on July 22, 2010 at 11:03 AM

If a white person made a statement about telling some black person to go to a black lawyer “their own kind” reinstatement would not be discussed and the government would likely file charges to boot. Funny how those things work.

workingforpigs on July 22, 2010 at 11:13 AM

Thanks for playing.

kingsjester on July 22, 2010 at 10:12 AM

Indeed. Didn’t see any statement that “as a result of the Pigford lawsuit she is being appointed”
You are interpreting facts not there to fit your narrative.

Bradky on July 22, 2010 at 11:17 AM

Indeed. Didn’t see any statement that “as a result of the Pigford lawsuit she is being appointed”
You are interpreting facts not there to fit your narrative.

Bradky on July 22, 2010 at 11:17 AM

Only days earlier, she learned that New Communities, a group she founded with her husband and other families (see below) has won a thirteen million dollar settlement in the minority farmers law suit Pigford vs Vilsack.

Yep. Nothing to see here. Just a coincidence.

kingsjester on July 22, 2010 at 11:24 AM

While you’re at it, Skippy, argue with American Thinker also:

Shirley Sherrod’s quick dismissal from the Obama administration may have had less to do with her comments on race before the NAACP than her long involvement in the aptly named Pigford case, a class action against the US government on behalf of black farmers alleging that the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) had discriminated against black farmers during the period from 1983 through 1997.

kingsjester on July 22, 2010 at 11:30 AM

kingsjester on July 22, 2010 at 11:30 AM

The rule of law sided with the ones filing the suit. What is wrong with that?

And btw coincidence does not equal fact. Even if you say it does.

Bradky on July 22, 2010 at 11:44 AM

Rep. Steve King wants an investigation on the hiring.

I can pull up others that support this “opinion”. Quit and spare yourself the pain.

kingsjester on July 22, 2010 at 11:57 AM

Quit and spare yourself the pain.

kingsjester on July 22, 2010 at 11:57 AM

Then be intellectually honest – don’t claim something as a fact when it is only an opinion, even if several people you selectively pick share it.

Bradky on July 22, 2010 at 12:05 PM

Bradky on July 22, 2010 at 12:05 PM

You’re call me intellectually dishonest? You’ve been trolling the threads of a Conservative website for the last 2 days trying to disrupt threads anyway you can in the same manner you trolled Facebook so you could harrass Hot Air posters. I am very intellectually honest. Her hiring is as much of a coincidence as the sun rising every morning.

kingsjester on July 22, 2010 at 12:12 PM

When they went to broadcast, they wanted to believed the documents were correct but had taken some steps to try to authenticate them by going to a source who would tell them what they wanted to hear. Obviously, they were wrong.

Jimbo3 on July 22, 2010 at 10:20 AM

FIFY.

Mary in LA on July 22, 2010 at 12:16 PM

Tag fail!

When they went to broadcast, they wanted to believed the documents were correct but had taken some steps to try to authenticate them by going to a source who would tell them what they wanted to hear. Obviously, they were wrong.

Jimbo3 on July 22, 2010 at 10:20 AM

FIFY x2.

Mary in LA on July 22, 2010 at 12:17 PM

#2. I find it hard to believe that a person (regardless of color) is going to cop an attitude with a person that they came to for help in saving their farm.

donabernathy on July 21, 2010 at 3:50 PM

That’s what I want to know, and it’s the question no media talking head has asked yet: Just what did this farmer do to make Ms Sherrod feel that he was “acting superior”?

Mary in LA on July 22, 2010 at 12:28 PM

When they went to broadcast, they wanted to believed the documents were correct but had taken some steps to try to authenticate them by going to a source who would tell them what they wanted to hear. Obviously, they were wrong.

Jimbo3 on July 22, 2010 at 10:20 AM
FIFY.

Mary in LA on July 22, 2010 at 12:16 PM

Whatever. What effort did Breitbart make to get the whole tape or to do any sort of verification? I went back to his original post (see below). He didn’t even mention that the video may have been incomplete. And his original post makes no mention of him making any attempt to obtain the complete video. [He may have mentioned these points somewhere other than his website.] I gave him more credit yesterday than he apparently deserves.

http://biggovernment.com/abreitbart/2010/07/19/video-proof-the-naacp-awards-racism2010/

Jimbo3 on July 22, 2010 at 1:20 PM

It doesn’t made a dimes difference about the rest of the tape. I listened to the whole thing and still, maybe even more now, agree with her being fired.

hawkdriver on July 22, 2010 at 2:14 PM

I still do not get it. Yes I believe in context, yes i believe in rational minds and forgiveness… But since when has the left ever given that to any conservative, much less a black person to any white person. The words “did not use the full extent of my powers to help him cause he is white ” (yes that’s summarized not verbatim). Or “I sent him to a white lawyer, you know, His own kind. ” Just replace white with black, and you can see what i mean. What she said was VERY racist, and “what do you mean YOU people or YOUR kind” It does not matter if she redeemed herself, or later saw the error in her ways, she used race as the determining factor in her decision and could of cost a white person their farm only because of his skin color. Now, the media and conservatives and this site are all treating her like we would want to be treated, such as in Trent Lott, Don Imus, Dogg The Bounty hunter hell even Mel Gipson, But that’s now how any of those were treated. calling a group of girls Nappy Headed Hoe’s is not in the same ball park as “i did not help him because he is white.” She should not get her job back, even if it was 24 year ago, Government can not be racist, Private business can be racist all they want, but not government. Private Business does not the the monopoly of force like government does.

Donut on July 22, 2010 at 4:24 PM

Here is a scenerio . I run a Government Soup Kitchen, next door is a private soup kitchen ran by a black man. (I am white) A black man walks into my soup kitchen with no money, and is going to starve if he does not get food. Well , I give him a slice of toast, but because he is black i did not give him the full tray of food. I then sent him to the black person next door to be with his “own” people and they can take care of their “own”. Well 2 days later, i see the black person outside, did not get food from the black guy next door… he is about to die. Only then do I take him inside, and feed him food because.. hey we are all the same when we are poor!” Even though the black man almost died for 2 days without food due to his skin color alone, I SHOULD BE CELEBRATED CAUSE I LEARNED TO TREAT ALL RACES THE SAME….. EVEN THOUGHT EVERYBODY ELSE ALREADY KNEW THIS DAMN LESSON, I CAN BRAG ABOUT IT LATER HAHHA LOOK AT ME, I DIDN’T HELP A BLACK PERSON BUT NOW I DON’T MIND HELPING THEM AFTER I LET THEM SUFFER FOR AWHILE JUST SO THEY KNOW NOT TO TALK TO ME LIKE EQUALS.

Donut on July 22, 2010 at 4:29 PM

What effort did Breitbart make to get the whole tape or to do any sort of verification? I went back to his original post (see below). He didn’t even mention that the video may have been incomplete. And his original post makes no mention of him making any attempt to obtain the complete video. [He may have mentioned these points somewhere other than his website.] I gave him more credit yesterday than he apparently deserves.

Jimbo3 on July 22, 2010 at 1:20 PM

Well, until someone asks Breitbart that question directly, all I have is an opinion, so here it is: I think that he used the tape he was given because it was all he had, and he used it to flush the entire video from cover, so to speak. If the excerpt Breitbart aired had never surfaced, there is no way the NAACP would ever have released the full video.

Mary in LA on July 22, 2010 at 8:53 PM

Fox News and especially Glen Beck should get an apology.

What is that called? You know, when you falsely accuse someone based on preconceived notions about what you believe they might do?

What is that again?

Oh yeah! PREJUDICE!!!

Ugly thing prejudice, it can lead to treating people unfairly.

And one way to tell true prejudice is that you think that it is beneath you to apologize to such a person.

petunia on July 23, 2010 at 12:27 AM

kingsjester on July 22, 2010 at 12:12 PM

Oh KJ quit blubbering. You know that I didn’t stalk anyone. If you wish to put your identity on the FB site you shouldn’t be surprised someone clicks on your mug. What constitutes “harassment” seems to have a pretty low bar for you. But if it makes you feel better to play the victim go for it.
We can comment in any thread we like as long as we adhere to the roe’s of the site. One person’s troll is another person’s Shakespeare.

Bradky on July 23, 2010 at 9:56 AM

I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that’s a storybook, man.

Inanemergencydial on July 23, 2010 at 10:55 AM

Ed:

You have been suckered by Obama and the MSM. The “full context” of this speech is actually WORSE than the original clip. It shows prejudice wide and deep in this woman and in the government: not only against whites, but against business and anyone the government considers “well off” or “not disadvantaged”.

Either we have “Government of the People,” meaning ALL people, or we have tyranny.

The excuserati (aka Democrats, MSM, etc.) are coming down on the side of Tyranny.

Don’t be so quick to apologize when no apology is called for.

landlines on July 23, 2010 at 11:51 AM

Why should Shirley Sherrod get her job back when she blames Breitbart for her entire fiasco, calling him a LIAR?

Who wants to reinstate THAT kind of vindictive bureaucrat? If she truly owned up to her own past, then this is part of her own legacy. Buck up, and get over being shown, even if only in part, a blast from the past.

Selective memory and revisionism. I see it at The University of Texas at Austin renaming a dormitory, allowing the termination of its own history white washed with vindictive PC malice towards its original law school. Fair play? Then why the glowing reputation still enjoyed by the late Sen.Byrd amongst the very critics of Simkins?

maverick muse on July 23, 2010 at 1:35 PM

Comment pages: 1 5 6 7