Sherrod says she will sue Andrew Breitbart
posted at 12:55 pm on July 29, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
Via Ben Smith at Politico, the utterly predictable next step in the swamp that has become the Sherrod story has taken place:
Ousted Agriculture Department employee Shirley Sherrod said Thursday she will sue a conservative blogger who posted an edited video of her making racially tinged remarks last week.
The edited video posted by Andrew Breitbart led Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack to ask Sherrod to resign, a decision he reconsidered after seeing the entire video of her March speech to a local NAACP group. In the full speech, Sherrod spoke of racial reconciliation and lessons she learned after initially hesitating to help a white farmer save his home.
She said she doesn’t want an apology from Breitbart for posting the video that took her comments out of context, but told a crowd at the National Association of Black Journalists annual convention that she would “definitely sue.”
Sue Breitbart for what, though? Defamation? Sherrod is a public official, which makes that kind of lawsuit darned near impossible. Breitbart used the clip to criticize the NAACP, not Sherrod directly, although she certainly came into the line of fire. People are allowed to criticize public officials in harsh and even unfair terms, especially when they make public remarks.
A court is not likely to look favorably on this for another reason — Sherrod’s public statements about Breitbart. She accused him of being pro-slavery, which is a ridiculous and demagogic attack. Even if a court somehow found that Breitbart acted with malice specifically towards Sherrod to a level that overcomes the right to criticize public officials and that he lied about Sherrod specifically in doing so, under those same terms Breitbart would have a countercase against Sherrod. Otherwise, Breitbart has become enough of a public figure that Sherrod’s statements about him would probably not be actionable, either.
This lawsuit will make a big splash and keep the story alive for a while, but its value is strictly limited to PR. I somehow doubt that the Obama administration will see that as beneficial to its own objectives, either, as they seem as anxious to bury the story as anyone involved.
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: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
She thinks she can shake down Breitbart for a settlement, like she helped shake down the USDA. Breitbart won’t settle, if only because it would establish the precedent that he will buy people off.
And besides, he can afford the lawyers, and the discovery phase would be so much fun.
Since the NAACP denounced her, I think Breitbart should join them in as an additional defendant.
Wethal on July 29, 2010 at 1:27 PM
will breitbart spill the beans on who sent him the tape?
cmsinaz on July 29, 2010 at 1:27 PM
Breitbart tried to argue that the audience reaction was the story, not what Sherrod had said.
YYZ on July 29, 2010 at 1:27 PM
Yes, do you see the original post I believe Weight of Glory posted?
MeatHeadinCA on July 29, 2010 at 1:28 PM
Why doesn’t Andy countersue her for claiming he is in favor of slavery?
DaMav on July 29, 2010 at 1:28 PM
“Discovery” and “Depositions” and the NAACP, that’s where she made the speech, Sherrod is a public servant.
This is one of the best things that could happen for the Republicans going into the Mid Terms.
Obama is not turning into a unifier but a divider. You can’t win elections by alienating the majority of voters.
Sherrod’s hubris won’t allow her to exit the stage, she has erected for herself at what looks to be the Obama Administrations’ expense.
Dr Evil on July 29, 2010 at 1:28 PM
She didn’t help herself at all with all the mouthing off about Republicans, anyone who opposes health care, etc. She showed her butt big time. BO probably couldn’t reach her on the phone because she was busy finding a lawyer.
She was offered another job, and I fail to see how she can claim damages. Slander? She made an ass out of herself.
Cody1991 on July 29, 2010 at 1:29 PM
Other page…
MeatHeadinCA on July 29, 2010 at 1:29 PM
I wonder if this is what Michelle Obama had in mind when she spoke to the NAACP…
Dr Evil on July 29, 2010 at 1:29 PM
If she wins the suite then can’t Palin sue whatever network it is that Gibson works for? AFter all, they edited the crap out of it to make it look like she was giving an answer for one question when she was actually answering another question.
DethMetalCookieMonst on July 29, 2010 at 1:30 PM
BO couldn’t find her b/c she was caged up at CNN for days. Yet it is Faux News that spun this, remember. *rolls eyes*
Shirley is more pathetic that John Edwards chasing an ambulance.
MeatHeadinCA on July 29, 2010 at 1:31 PM
If she wins, what does this mean for JournoList?
MeatHeadinCA on July 29, 2010 at 1:31 PM
Sherrod wants to milk her 15 minutes into a full hour.
I say BRING IT.
Kuffar on July 29, 2010 at 1:32 PM
Oh please. She’s not going to sue unless she can find an attorney desperate or crazy enough to take on this loser case.
I’d love to be Breitbart’s attorney. The depositions and discovery requests from the WH, the USDA, the NAACP and anyone else I could think of would be well worth the price of admission.
RadClown on July 29, 2010 at 1:32 PM
This is still really early. My guess is it never makes it to trial, and there is no settlement.
Patrick Ishmael on July 29, 2010 at 1:33 PM
Sherrod must think she’s this decade’s Rosa Parks.
SHE AIN’T IT.
She’s just another Gummint-cheese-eating chair-moistener drone from Sector 7G.
CatchAll on July 29, 2010 at 1:33 PM
Breitbart should hire Mark Levin to defend him. He’s been salivating for a chance to get some libs under oath.
Iblis on July 29, 2010 at 1:34 PM
Like I said when this story first broke… Sherrod is cut from the same cloth as Rev. Wright. Now I hear she wants to teach Obama about growing up black in the South .. since he evidently doesn’t have the experiences of real ‘african-americans’. And if Vilsack had some black folks working closer to the top for him, he might have had some better advice.
I bet you it was Axelrod who put the call in to fire her.
Keep talking girl! Keep talking right up to Nov!
Texas Gal on July 29, 2010 at 1:34 PM
She thinks it’s easy money like the Pigford case probably was. This isn’t the government. The last thing they ever want is a noisy discrimination suit. This is different. She’s not bright enough to know the difference.
Cody1991 on July 29, 2010 at 1:34 PM
I don’t know…. the DOJ’s lawsuit against the state of Arizona was also a PR stunt, and look how that’s panning out.
UltimateBob on July 29, 2010 at 1:34 PM
I’ve seen people teasing this crr6 person and their legal reasoning… perhaps a love match?
MeatHeadinCA on July 29, 2010 at 1:34 PM
+1
MeatHeadinCA on July 29, 2010 at 1:35 PM
Oddly enough I don’t think finding a desperate and/or crazy lawyer will be that hard to do.
Cindy Munford on July 29, 2010 at 1:35 PM
Lie! Racist! Sue! /s
MeatHeadinCA on July 29, 2010 at 1:35 PM
“Predictable?” How about Breitbart willingly and deliberately slandered the woman costing her her job. Why wouldn’t she sue him? What kind of snarky statement is that? This was race-baiting at its worst. Have Conservatives taken to condoning this kind of behavior for political gain? If so, Conservatives ought to be ashamed. Disgusting!
~ Halli Casser-Jayne
http://www.thecjpoliticalreport.com
The CJ Political Report on July 29, 2010 at 1:36 PM
OT Obama Book Club recommendation: Mongrel Nation The America Begotten by Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings
faraway on July 29, 2010 at 1:36 PM
I’m sorry…I’m missing something. Who called someone a “mongrel” and in what context?
Bee on July 29, 2010 at 1:37 PM
crr was pretty funny yesterday, trying to make us believe that the term “activist Judge” is “meaningless”.
Del Dolemonte on July 29, 2010 at 1:37 PM
cmsinaz on July 29, 2010 at 1:38 PM
Maybe she can get Lynne Stewart to be her counselor
Kini on July 29, 2010 at 1:38 PM
I believe Dear Leader used the term…
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/111611-obama-calls-african-americans-a-mongrel-people-?sms_ss=twitter
MeatHeadinCA on July 29, 2010 at 1:38 PM
Could Breitbart demand PBHO appear as a witness to explain the details of Sherrod’s firing? I would give crr6′s left arm for the opportunity to watch that on C-SPAN.
Bishop on July 29, 2010 at 1:38 PM
She doesn’t have a case and all it will do is make Breitbart more publicity and make her (and the administration) look worse.
Connie on July 29, 2010 at 1:38 PM
Hey, the reasoning skillz of that one are always a joke!
MeatHeadinCA on July 29, 2010 at 1:39 PM
D-I-S-C-O-V-E-R-Y
The Obama administration will beg her to drop the suit…
Theworldisnotenough on July 29, 2010 at 1:39 PM
Who the getalife is “Halli Casser-Jayne”?
Del Dolemonte on July 29, 2010 at 1:39 PM
Jinx
MeatHeadinCA on July 29, 2010 at 1:40 PM
:)
cmsinaz on July 29, 2010 at 1:41 PM
oops…give, not make
OT Is there a way to make the “you are not logged in” happen before you comment instead of after? It’s very annoying.
Connie on July 29, 2010 at 1:41 PM
First off, people are allowed to make harsh or unfair criticism of public officials — like Sherrod saying Brietbart wants to go back to the days of slavery. That’s fine. She was giving her opinion and that’s pretty well protected when speaking of public figures.
What Breitbart did was not give his opinion. He flat out said he had PROOF that Sherrod was racist and the proof he gave was incredibly misleading. For Sherrod to win, she must prove actual malice OR that Breitbart acted with reckless disregard for the truth.
The latter point is where she really has a case. All the jury would have to do is believe that Breitbart should have known that the edited clip he received very well could misrepresent what Sherrod actual views today. They could also show that he did not do any number of things to find out the context of the clip — contact the NAACP or Sherrod herself, for example.
I don’t think it’s a far stretch for someone to think that context would be very important to get to the truth of what Sherrod was saying in that clip. I think there’s a pretty strong case for saying Breitbart acted with reckless disregard for the truth by using this edited clip as “proof” that Sherrod was racist.
Tom_Shipley on July 29, 2010 at 1:41 PM
Del Dolemonte on July 29, 2010 at 1:39 PM
Precisely.
kingsjester on July 29, 2010 at 1:41 PM
Well, crap. I miss the best stuff when I’m doing laundry and giving myself a manicure. ;)
Bee on July 29, 2010 at 1:43 PM
Good. I can hardly wait to see what havoc on the left AB will wreak with discovery. I imagine he sees it like a gift from heaven.
I’m stockpiling popcorn.
petefrt on July 29, 2010 at 1:43 PM
Thanks!
Bee on July 29, 2010 at 1:44 PM
The author of Mongrel Nation, Clarence E. Walker, Professor of History at the University of California, Davis, is also the coauthor of The Preacher and the Politician: Jeremiah Wright, Barack Obama, and Race in America (Virginia) and the author of We Can’t Go Home Again: An Argument about Afrocentrism.
faraway on July 29, 2010 at 1:44 PM
Maybe Beck should sue Sherrod, the NAACP and the Admin. And Fox can sue Sherrod and Howard Dean. Or maybe Obama could just resign. /
Connie on July 29, 2010 at 1:45 PM
Well, just think. It could have been more entertaining had Biden said it… think he would have been forced to resign or would Obama just send him a strongly worded e-mail?
MeatHeadinCA on July 29, 2010 at 1:45 PM
The author of Mongrel Nation, Clarence E. Walker, Professor of History at the University of California, Davis, is also the coauthor of The Preacher and the Politician: Jeremiah Wright, Barack Obama, and Race in America (Virginia) and the author of We Can’t Go Home Again: An Argument about Afrocentrism.
faraway on July 29, 2010 at 1:44 PM
The psot-racial President…yeah, right.
kingsjester on July 29, 2010 at 1:46 PM
Next thing we’ll find out is that Saint Shirley was part of JournoList…
MeatHeadinCA on July 29, 2010 at 1:46 PM
Since when did he edit the tape? Or are they calling subtitles an edit?
Saying it’s an edited tape makes the average person think something spliced together from bits and pieces to twist their words. When that is clearly not the case with the clip he played.
ButterflyDragon on July 29, 2010 at 1:46 PM
Breitbart did make factual errors when he described the video. For one, I believe he said Sherrod described what she had done as an employee of the USDA. She was a USDA employee when she gave the speech, but not when the incident happened. IMO, Breitbart should have apologized for any factual error he made, but no apology is necessary for airing the video.
huckleberryfriend on July 29, 2010 at 1:47 PM
Oh goody, can I be the first to read the deposition?
tarpon on July 29, 2010 at 1:47 PM
Tom, in the whole thing she did say “it is about black and white, but it’s also about poverty” (I’m not directly quoting, don’t have the actual quote but it’s right along those lines. I don’t have time to look it up as I’m off to the Dr.). She does view things through the prism of race. And has no case.
rbj on July 29, 2010 at 1:48 PM
I should have added “and willing to take it on contingency.” You know she’s not going to want to shell out the dough.
It doesn’t even have PR value any longer and is actually a net negative for the left. Which is why the Obamunists will…um…discourage her from bringing suit anyway.
RadClown on July 29, 2010 at 1:48 PM
Did Breitbart say he had proof Sherrod was racist or that the NAACP was racist?
huckleberryfriend on July 29, 2010 at 1:49 PM
Slandered? What part of her own words did she slander herself?
How is replaying a video of someone’s own words slanderous? Breitbart’s original post even said she seemed to be leading up to a story of redemption, but that what he played was all the video he was given.
Far from slanderous.
ButterflyDragon on July 29, 2010 at 1:50 PM
He did. He provided a correction at the top of the page of the original post.
Weight of Glory on July 29, 2010 at 1:52 PM
Shirley Sherrod: Public Figure gave speech in Public Forum. Didn’t like edit job. Tough Luck. Just ask Rush, O’Reilly, Beck, Palin…
MediaMatters and MSNBC do it all the time!
SalHansen on July 29, 2010 at 1:53 PM
First she said it isn’t about black and white, then she said that it is about black and white, but it’s also about haves and have-nots. Regardless, the comments she made after the brouhaha made it clear that she does think it’s about race.
Connie on July 29, 2010 at 1:53 PM
.
Actually, she didn’t say it was her opinion. Her statement, as a matter of syntax and semtics, is a statement of fact, which is not so well-protected.
.
.
.
Do you have a link to Breitbart saying or posting that “he had PROOF that Sherrod was racist”
.
Note my emphasis on Sherrod, You need to show that Breitbart, NOT someone else, said, specifically, Sherrod.
.
.
.
No. read your next comment:
.
.
.
You use the word “think” a lot. I think that the word “think” does not mean what you think it means. Your paragraph reasonably undermines your previous claim “The latter point is where she really has a case.“
Arbalest on July 29, 2010 at 1:53 PM
Boy, I hope you’re not a defense lawyer.
So you’re saying that if someone views the world through a prism of race, then that means they are a racist? That’s simply not true. Race can tint how you see things without you believing that one race is deserving of less respect or is inferior in anyway.
Tom_Shipley on July 29, 2010 at 1:54 PM
LOL at this woman. Howard Dean would probably recommend she sue Glenn Beck too, since he’s the Boogeyman who they were afraid of so the White House forced her out. So what he didn’t say a word before she was forced out -
Marcus on July 29, 2010 at 1:54 PM
Milking it for everything she can get. Everyone moves on except for her, what a surprise. Doesn’t solve any problems, just keeps her on the front pages.
scalleywag on July 29, 2010 at 1:54 PM
Proof? Or are you being misleading? Go to Fox and read the transcript that Breitbart had with Hannity. Not once did he call Sherrod a racist. The “proof” he had was about the audience (NAACP memebers).
In fact, here’s a quote from it.
“And what this video shows and what the NAACP affirms in their initial rebuke is not just that Shirley Sherrod, what she said was wrong, but that the audience was laughing and applauding as she described how she maltreated the white farmer.”
moonsbreath on July 29, 2010 at 1:55 PM
Besides, I thought the tape was an example of racism by the NAACP, not just her.
scalleywag on July 29, 2010 at 1:55 PM
True. Maybe the black guy bearing arms at a rally should sue MSNBC for implying he was white. /
Connie on July 29, 2010 at 1:55 PM
The author of Mongrel Nation explores Marxism
faraway on July 29, 2010 at 1:57 PM
Video Proof: The NAACP Awards Racism–2010
by Andrew Breitbart
Correction: While Ms. Sherrod made the remarks captured in the first video featured in this post while she held a federally appointed position, the story she tells refers to actions she took before she held that federal position.
***
Context is everything.
In this piece you will see video evidence of racism coming from a federal appointee and NAACP award recipient and in another clip from the same event a perfect rationalization for why the Tea Party needs to exist.
http://biggovernment.com/abreitbart/2010/07/19/video-proof-the-naacp-awards-racism2010/
He doesn’t say: “Here’s video proof that Sherrod is a racist.” The combination of the headline and the lede together say that.
Tom_Shipley on July 29, 2010 at 1:59 PM
He had a clip – she has no proof that he edited the clip to make her own words seem worse. Since he clearly made the point that the NAACP audience seemed to approve of her remarks BEFORE she added the comment about her realization that it wasn’t about black & white, it’s hard to see how that is DELIBERATELY slandering her. Seems like he was drawing attention to the NAACP reaction. I don’t recall – did he call for her to be fired or was that the kneejerk reaction of the Administration?
Day in and day out anyone who opposes Obama’s agenda is called a racist, both in writing and on the airwaves – why so huffy about someone on the Left being called that? No shame on my part.
katiejane on July 29, 2010 at 2:01 PM
Wait! CNN said it was FoxNews.com That got her fired. So that lets breitbart off the hook.
BruceB on July 29, 2010 at 2:02 PM
The truth is an absolute defense.
Keep on flappin’ those gum, girl!
turfmann on July 29, 2010 at 2:03 PM
Are you referring to the $13 million Obama/Holder payout to her group “New Communities” and then making her a “political appointee”?
Note: There are no actual cases of discrimination.
The Obama/Holder “deemed” discrimination must have occurred because Reagan abolished the USDA Office of Civil Rights when he became President in 1981.
Kinda sorta like Obama’s claim that spending “X dollars” of stimulus money “created” X number of jobs, regardless of the facts that no one can find these jobs created.
DSchoen on July 29, 2010 at 2:10 PM
Couldn’t agree more. Go for it Shirley. Let’s have further conversations across the 24 hr news channels – what Shirley and her husband have said, Pigford, and that there are twice as many claims as there are AA farmers.
humdinger on July 29, 2010 at 2:13 PM
Another case for why I support a “Loser Pays” civil justice system.
And, just thinking out loud, what about lawyers on losing side not being eligible for compensation? I wonder if that would work.
dts-01 on July 29, 2010 at 2:14 PM
First Rangel and now this!
Methinks Pinnochio has a “mongrel” problem!
Besides Sherrodd should be suing the Whitehoos, they fired her not Breibart he just supplied the tape he had when the NAARCP refused him the entire thing!
Keep it in the news please and fight, fight, fight Cholly fight like McCain in an Amnasty battle or Grahamnasty in an unqualified SCOTUS appointment!
Fight you two fight its yer right and its for power for the people !
Dat!
dhunter on July 29, 2010 at 2:15 PM
She may be a public official, but she can successfully sue if there was malice (meaning reckless disregard in investigating, among other things).
Jimbo3 on July 29, 2010 at 2:16 PM
So?
There WAS “racism coming from a federal appointee”. The story she told was of her own blatant racism. Furthermore, at the end of the clip Breitbart posted, she says (paraphrasing) it’s not about black and white but rich and poor (the supposed exculpatory statement – which WAS INCLUDED IN THE LIMITED CLIP BREITBART WAS GIVEN AND PUBLISHED)…but goes on to say yeah, it’s about black and white too.
That is bigotry.
And she was offered a promotion within a day or so of this dustup, as well as being made into a mainstream media darling. She has to prove damages. SHOW ME THE DAMAGES.
It all seems an okay deal for an admitted bigot, to me.
Yeah, I still think she’s a bigot. Because, you know, “it’s about black and white too”. If it’s wrong for a white person to believe that, it’s wrong for her as well.
Mr$. $herrod just smells money. I hope she gets her a$$ kicked in court.
capitalist piglet on July 29, 2010 at 2:17 PM
Was he set up?
johnnyU on July 29, 2010 at 2:17 PM
yeah this is the ‘stampede at Walmart’ tactic.
johnnyU on July 29, 2010 at 2:18 PM
Brietbart did say she was racist, if you go back and read his original blog. He also didn’t say on the blog that he may have only had a partial tape. Brietbart’s statements that he was concerned he didn’t have the full tape will be used against him in showing he was reckless.
Jimbo3 on July 29, 2010 at 2:19 PM
How dare you show what I said! There’s gotta be a law against that!
Alana on July 29, 2010 at 2:20 PM
Video Proof: The NAACP Awards Racism–2010by Andrew Breitbart
Correction: While Ms. Sherrod made the remarks captured in the first video featured in this post while she held a federally appointed position, the story she tells refers to actions she took before she held that federal position.
***
Context is everything.
In this piece you will see video evidence of racism coming from a federal appointee and NAACP award recipient
Jimbo3 on July 29, 2010 at 2:21 PM
Dat!
Pinnochio started this with his dividng by race and class, new mantel for Pinnochio Barrack Hussein Armstrong Custer Pinnochio Obama!
dhunter on July 29, 2010 at 2:23 PM
Tom_Shipley on July 29, 2010 at 1:59 PM
.
Have you read Breitbart’s original article?
.
Breitbart mentions Sherrod’s name 4 times.
.
1 – Where Breitbart identifies Sherrod and mentions the video.
2 – The next paragraph, where Breitbart summarizes Sherrod’s tale.
3 – The next paragraph after that, where Breitbart notes the audience’s nodding approval, etc., of Sherrodd’s racist tale.
4 – Where Breitbart notes that Sherrod nearly begs black people to take jobs at USDA (why?).
.
It looks like #3 is the only chance you have.
.
Had Sherrod kept her mouth shut, the ~43minute video could probably have been spun to really make Sherrod look like an on-going victim.
.
Unfortunately, Sherrod started talking …
.
Context is everything.
Arbalest on July 29, 2010 at 2:23 PM
The audience WAS THE STORY. God, people, stop being distracted by the noise. FOCUS.
Not one person listening to this racist jerk stood up and called her out or scolded her. No, they didn’t, because they are a group of racists who approve of what she did.
Any person in a position of authority over others and admitting to racist acts should be BARRED from any public office FOR LIFE. One can never be certain such a person will not do it again, or how many times they acted in similar fashion.
dogsoldier on July 29, 2010 at 2:26 PM
Or becomes one.
TexasDan on July 29, 2010 at 2:27 PM
Didn’t racist ACORN invent the rule books for doing a shakedown?
seven on July 29, 2010 at 2:28 PM
Only a Susan Bolton type judge would find any merit with Sherrod’s lawsuit, but Breitbart’s defense could get quite expensive. Time to start a legal defense fund and I will contribute. Maybe Rush Limbaugh can provide some generous seed money.
Terrie on July 29, 2010 at 2:29 PM
I am quite certain that Andrew Brietbart is clever enough to not lie and also to have all his “i”s dotted and “t”s crossed legally speaking. He knows what he is up against.
Just ask ACORN.
Queen0fCups on July 29, 2010 at 2:31 PM
I hope Breitbart sues Sherrod.
You can’t fire Andrew Breitbart.
maverick muse on July 29, 2010 at 2:33 PM
Without first catching which HotAir editor, it was obviously Ed for failing to note that Breitbart took the measure to complete the “meaning” of Sherrod’s own presentation video segment with the final context included intact with what he distributed.
NO ONE besides Breitbart and Michael Savage have publicized the fact that Sherrod’s final conclusion tolerant message for poor people WAS intact; and that the MSM deleted it themselves in order to paint Breitbart as they have, and EVEN AS HANNITY slurs Breitbart. What a dumb@ss Hannity is when he plays self righteous and stupid like that; which goes to show that it was only Hannity’s STAFF that researched to come up with the Rev.Wright story during the ’08 campaign.
THIS INSTANCE provides the rightwing media a prime opportunity to “refudiate” Obama for bribing Sharrod to change her story after her two day rant that exonerated Breitbart and directed all of her hurt at Obama’s White House for “harassing” her with three phone calls while she was driving home after being raked over the coals by them.
Tit for tat. Maybe Breitbart will sue Sharrod before she even files suit against him, since it is SHE who is defaming his character.
And all the pussy neoconservatives could not care less for either Breitbart or Michael Savage under siege. Cowards playing “too smart” to get involved with upholding the truth. Idiot dhimmiwits.
maverick muse on July 29, 2010 at 2:34 PM
Without first catching which HotAir editor, it was obviously Ed for failing to note that Breitbart took the measure to complete the “meaning” of Sherrod’s own presentation video segment with the final context included intact with what he distributed.
NO ONE besides Breitbart and Michael Savage have publicized the fact that Sherrod’s final conclusion tolerant message for poor people WAS intact; and that the MSM deleted it themselves in order to paint Breitbart as they have, and EVEN AS HANNITY slurs Breitbart. What a dumb@ss Hannity is when he plays self righteous and stupid like that; which goes to show that it was only Hannity’s STAFF that researched to come up with the Rev.Wright story during the ’08 campaign.
THIS INSTANCE provides the rightwing media a prime opportunity to “refudiate” Obama for bribing Sharrod to change her story after her two day rant that exonerated Breitbart and directed all of her hurt at Obama’s White House for “harassing” her with three phone calls while she was driving home after being raked over the coals by them.
maverick muse on July 29, 2010 at 2:35 PM
Clearly the title “NAACP Awards Racism” indicates the Video was about the NAACP
Ah you forgot the part where Sherrod was worried that this white farmer would go back to the USDA and report what she had done for him.
To most people, that sounds a lot like she was worried that this white farmer would go back to her boss and report what she had done for him.
That’s how the NAACP and Obama saw it.
BTW are you claiming Racism 25 years ago would not be considered Racism today?
So what do we have here.
Is/was she a federal/political appointee at the time this video was made? Yes
Was she ID’ed as a federal/political appointee at the time this video was made? Yes
Did this video take place at the NAACP? Yes
There is nothing “incorrect” in the title as to what this video was.
No one can be held accountable for what YOU interpret something to be.
As the saying goes you can have your own opinion, but you can’t have your own facts.
Also in the video Sherrod states this took place weeks after Chapter 12 bankruptcy was passed.
If your to stupid or lazy to look that up, finding that Chapter 12 bankruptcy was passed in 1986 who’s fault is that? Breitbart or your own stupid self?
Facts are everything.
DSchoen on July 29, 2010 at 2:36 PM
LOL, you have obviously never lived in Hawai’i.
Try doing so for a few years and get back to us.
Del Dolemonte on July 29, 2010 at 2:39 PM
To quote Bill Cosby, riiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
YYZ on July 29, 2010 at 2:44 PM
Sue Breitbart? Shirley, you jest.
Extrafishy on July 29, 2010 at 2:46 PM
If Sherrod tries to use the same sleight-of-hand that you and Tom Shipley are attempting, this case is going to be laughed out of court.
From Sherrod’s own lips:
She is admitting that her behavior towards this man was based on an animus towards the fact that he was white. By any reasonable interpretation, her behavior represents racism. The fact that she is caught on video making this statement is therefore “video evidence of racism coming from a federal appointee and NAACP award recipient”.
Note that the word “current” doesn’t appear in front of the word “racism” in your quote.
You and Shipley are trying your slippery best to parse Breitbart’s language in order to float an argument that since Sherrod isn’t caught on camera actively involved in a racist action at that very moment, then there is no evidence of racism. A patently absurd argument that will be thrown out of court.
rvastar on July 29, 2010 at 2:50 PM
*shudder*
cmsinaz on July 29, 2010 at 2:51 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »