White House Uses Misleading Breitbart Video As Basis To Hastily Demand USDA Official’

IRHari

IRHari

CAGiversary!
Feedback
3 (100%)
Yesterday, right-wing media tycoon Andrew Breitbart posted a video of Department of Agriculture official Shirley Sherrod, who is African-American, telling an NAACP gathering that she withheld help from a white farmer, in part because of his race. “Video Proof: The NAACP Awards Racism,” Breitbart declared on his BigGovernment.com website. “[H]er federal duties are managed through the prism of race and class distinctions,” Breitbart wrote, just days after the NAACP condemned “racist elements” within the tea party movement, of which Breitbart is a key supporter. Right-wing blogs and Fox News quickly picked up the video and demanded blood.
Within less than a day, Sherrod resigned from her USDA post under heavy pressure from the White House, saying she received “at least three” frantic phone calls from superiors demanding her resignation. At first glance, the forced resignation seemed fair — even the NAACP endorsed it, calling her comments “shameful.”
However, new evidence suggests that BigGovernment selectively edited the video to grossly distort what actually happened. “Context is everything,”
Click to expand...

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/07/20/shirley-sherrod-video/
 
They really need to rehire her or at least apologize to her. The video even says that she stopped viewing things in black/white because of the incident 24 years ago.
 
They won't, I don't think I've ever heard of an instance like this where someone was rehired.
 
Andrew Breitbart is a lying sack of shit who has made a career of exploiting the 'post-photoshop' era.

See also his whoring of James O'Keefe and wholly lie-based dessication of ACORN.

We can't even believe what we see in front of our eyes, especially when Breitbart is behind it.
 
How many years have to pass before it's okay to forgive someone who abused their government position to discriminate against someone based on race?
 
Isnt the point in the video that because the farmer was white she withheld all the help she should have given him in the beginning? Who cares if she helped him later, she should have been fired when she was first making those type decisions. Sorry, our government offices shouldnt be a learning experience on how to not be racist.
 
She discriminated against the family? They sure love to be discriminated against in that case:

ROGER SPOONER: No way in the world. No way. No way. I don’t even want to talk about it. It don’t make sense. She was just so nice to us as — she didn’t — there wasn’t no — there wasn’t no racism attitude at all in it. Heck no. … They don’t know what they’re talking about. Let me say. They don’t know what they’re talking about, if you want to know my opinion.
ELOISE SPOONER: She always treated us really good. She was nice mannered, thoughtful, friendly. Good person.
Click to expand...

they must be old libtards, methinks.

The group she worked for was a nonprofit that was dedicated to helping out black farmers.
 
[quote name='Knoell']Isnt the point in the video that because the farmer was white she withheld all the help she should have given him in the beginning? Who cares if she helped him later, she should have been fired when she was first making those type decisions. Sorry, our government offices shouldnt be a learning experience on how to not be racist.[/QUOTE]

THIS is a government office since when?
 
[quote name='IRHari']She discriminated against the family? They sure love to be discriminated against in that case:[/quote]

She clearly stated that she treated these people differently - giving them lesser treatment - because of their race. Is this not discrimination?

The group she worked for was a nonprofit that was dedicated to helping out black farmers.
Click to expand...

Yay for groups that dedicate themselves to helping people with skin color as one of the criteria as to who they decide to help?

[quote name='IRHari']who really believes that knoell/unclebob read the article?[/QUOTE]

ThinkProgress? That'd be like linking to FoxNews or GlennBeck.com and wondering why half this forum didn't read it.
 
ok... I'm confused here... are people upset because a right wing media website took something out of context (which if I remember correctly is what media websites on both sides of the fence do almost daily)

or that people in the current administration stupidly followed up on what was posted on an opposing sides media website without doing any investigation into the matter on their own? (which if I remember correctly has been happening in politics on both sides of the fence for many years almost daily)
 
Title is misleading. White house is under the Dem's control, but this is all due to a right wing nutjob with Windows Movie Maker...

:/
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Yay for groups that dedicate themselves to helping people with skin color as one of the criteria as to who they decide to help?[/QUOTE]

That's racist!
 
[quote name='dorino']Title is misleading. White house is under the Dem's control, but this is all due to a right wing nutjob with Windows Movie Maker...

:/[/QUOTE]

No, it's Bush's fault. Duh.
 
I should note something that isn't really going to change anyone's mind, but is interesting nonetheless.

Charles Krauthammer and Eric 'goat fucking child molestor' Erickson both think that Sherrod isn't a racist and should be given an apology and her job back.

So just know that UncleBob and Knoell are further to the right then Krauthammer and goat fucking child molestor on this issue.
 
Ignore him. He posts something mildly resembling relevance maybe once every two weeks. Wait for it.

EDIT: Krauthammer and Erikson? Gonna need a source for that. Them advocating for a black woman being reinstated is either bizarro world or christmas in july.
 
Glenn Greenwald tweeted: Even Erick Erickson thinks Shirley Sherrod has been unfairly disparaged and shouldn't be fired - http://$$$$$$/dzXa8

I don't have a video for Krauthammer, but on Special Report's panel tonight he said that.

[quote name='Clak']
I thought Bob advocated for private organizations to be able to discriminate.[/QUOTE]

Damn, I forgot about that. Yay free market!
 
[quote name='Clak']I thought Bob advocated for private organizations to be able to discriminate.[/QUOTE]

nonprofit groups that get funding from the government you mean?
 
You're no good at deflecting. Any opportunity to turn an issue into one where white people nobly defend their dumb-as-fuck idea of a "color-blind society."

Watching the news this morning is sickening. The scum-of-the-fucking-earth strategies from the right have worked, as Obama looks like a fool for the WH demanding her resignation, and the news isn't trying to assassinate Andrew Breitbart's credibility at all.

One of the most pathetic things I've ever seen.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']You're no good at deflecting. Any opportunity to turn an issue into one where white people nobly defend their dumb-as-fuck idea of a "color-blind society."

Watching the news this morning is sickening. The scum-of-the-fucking-earth strategies from the right have worked, as Obama looks like a fool for the WH demanding her resignation, and the news isn't trying to assassinate Andrew Breitbart's credibility at all.

One of the most pathetic things I've ever seen.[/QUOTE]

I may have jumped the gun on saying she should have been fired, I did read the article, but was on my way to work when I posted that, but I still cant help but wonder, if a white public official came forward and admitted to being a racist 15 years ago, but said not to worry because they learned from it, would you all be so lenient?

I also cannot help but wonder how many white farmers she didnt entirely help that she isn't mentioning aside from her story? When did she start there? Was it the first white farmer case that made her stop being racist or was it the 5th? or was it the 400th?

I think its Obamas own fault for attempting to be so politically correct, he or his secretaries jumped the gun. They fired someone for their own political gain, and this time it bit them in the ass. Both sides will always put media bs out there like this, I think it is up to our elected officials to differentiate and make just decisions not based entirely on poll numbers.
 
[quote name='Clak']I thought Bob advocated for private organizations to be able to discriminate.[/QUOTE]

Should be able to discriminate.

Doesn't mean we should support such groups. Those in charge of the groups should be publically ridiculed.
 
[quote name='Knoell']I may have jumped the gun on saying she should have been fired, I did read the article, but was on my way to work when I posted that, but I still cant help but wonder, if a white public official came forward and admitted to being a racist 15 years ago, but said not to worry because they learned from it, would you all be so lenient?[/quote]

Robert Byrd. If memory serves, he left the Klan nearly half a century ago and has left a legacy of policies in his wake that would make any advocate for racial equality jealous. But some people never hesitated to remind the public, at every mention of his name, that he grew up and spent time as a member of the Ku Klux Klan. Who was it that reminded us of that?

I also cannot help but wonder how many white farmers she didnt entirely help that she isn't mentioning aside from her story? When did she start there? Was it the first white farmer case that made her stop being racist or was it the 5th? or was it the 400th?
Click to expand...

conjecture. irrelevant. and also based on an incomplete understanding of the story she told.

I think its Obamas own fault for attempting to be so politically correct, he or his secretaries jumped the gun. They fired someone for their own political gain, and this time it bit them in the ass. Both sides will always put media bs out there like this, I think it is up to our elected officials to differentiate and make just decisions not based entirely on poll numbers.
Click to expand...

So the score for this past week:
Obama does nothing about phony "New Black Panther Party" scandal - he's a homer for his race, why can't he be politically correct and hold racists of both sides accountable?
Obama overreacts to a phony scandal trumped up by a criminally reckless libeler who should at least face a civil suit from Sherrod and demands her resignation - he's too politically correct for his own good.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']She clearly stated that she treated these people differently - giving them lesser treatment - because of their race. Is this not discrimination?[/quote]
And then fixed her mistake, which was the point of the story.
Yay for groups that dedicate themselves to helping people with skin color as one of the criteria as to who they decide to help?
Click to expand...
I don't think you're foolish enough to believe that the government in Georgia 25 years ago was accommodating to black farmers. When the government does not act in its citizens best interests, naturally groups are going to spring up to fill the void. It's why gay rights groups are so prevalent now.

You know that though. You're not dumb. Children understand that, surely you do too.
 
[quote name='speedracer']You know that though. You're not dumb. Children understand that, surely you do too.[/QUOTE]

Are you sure?

UncleBob puts his personal information into his signature. Why? We can "discuss" something in private if needed, but really it is so his employer knows he's got their back.

I guess I answered my question. Bob knows better, but he is bought and paid to act like the contrarian.
 
Yes. Walmart lurks the CAG politics forum. They also search for my name personally. Which, I'm sure, comes up often as I go by my middle name, where all my personnel records are recorded under my first name. I bet they have a whole team of people dedicated to following me around online.

One sales floor associate in one of the smallest stores in the company is that important to them
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Yay for groups that dedicate themselves to helping people with skin color as one of the criteria as to who they help.[/QUOTE]

Like the GOP?
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Robert Byrd. If memory serves, he left the Klan nearly half a century ago and has left a legacy of policies in his wake that would make any advocate for racial equality jealous. But some people never hesitated to remind the public, at every mention of his name, that he grew up and spent time as a member of the Ku Klux Klan. Who was it that reminded us of that?[/Quote]

Two wrongs make a right? is that what you are trying to get across? Im trying to figure out when the last time a white politician got a free pass with publicly admitting at one point in their life that they were racist.

[quote name='mykevermin']

conjecture. irrelevant. and also based on an incomplete understanding of the story she told.
[/QUOTE]

How so? It may be off topic but you wouldnt like to know? This is why I asked the first question...

[quote name='mykevermin']

So the score for this past week:
Obama does nothing about phony "New Black Panther Party" scandal - he's a homer for his race, why can't he be politically correct and hold racists of both sides accountable?
Obama overreacts to a phony scandal trumped up by a criminally reckless libeler who should at least face a civil suit from Sherrod and demands her resignation - he's too politically correct for his own good.
[/QUOTE]
:roll: You are comparing the new black panther party to a black lady who admitted she was racist so obama fired her? I know these are such unclear decisions on what to do can he? :cry:
The score for this week is if Obama wants to play the politics game and fire someone based on the mood of America that day, then I would think that would be a determining factor of his charactor. And please don't disgrace him anymore by saying the video "fooled" him.....
 
[quote name='Knoell']Two wrongs make a right? is that what you are trying to get across? Im trying to figure out when the last time a white politician got a free pass with publicly admitting at one point in their life that they were racist.[/quote]

How many times was Strom Thurmond re-elected?
 
[quote name='Knoell']Two wrongs make a right? is that what you are trying to get across? Im trying to figure out when the last time a white politician got a free pass with publicly admitting at one point in their life that they were racist.
[/QUOTE]

Oh shit. Thanks. We are about to get the famous "Hegemony justifies double standards" speech again.....
 
:lol: You guys sound like my father when he says "When did it become a crime to be a white man in America?". None of you guys have ever taken a single sociology class have you? Or even history for that matter.
 
[quote name='Clak']:lol: You guys sound like my father when he says "When did it become a crime to be a white man in America?". None of you guys have ever taken a single sociology class have you? Or even history for that matter.[/QUOTE]

I have.

Funny related story this week, that was more real-world educational than the sociology class:

I have been toying with the idea of trying to report my company to the Dept of Labor. I emailed the Dept of Labor with my complaint. For brevity's sake I will paraphrase:

Me:
My department put up a job posting on the company website for a lead position. I was way overqualified according to the listing, so I sent my boss my resume and asked to apply.

My boss told me that Job requires a Degree, so I can't apply, they just forgot to add it to the job posting. The next day HR had changed the job posting to require a degree.

Two Months later we are told that they found an internal person to fill that position ( a friend of my boss). This guy has no degree.
Click to expand...

Dept. of Labor:
I'm sorry, unless you are non-white, female, or old, and want to claim you were discriminated against for those reasons, you don't have a case.
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']UncleBob puts his personal information into his signature. Why?[/QUOTE]

Anonymity online has become the best and worst thing about the internet. People can say things without being persecuted for their beliefs, but on the other hand, they can also reveal the cruelest intentions of their humanity since they never have to stand behind their comments.
Click to expand...

I stand behind my comments.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Guess who is coming to her defense?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEkd8YGlGe0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOSI8M71B0Q

It's interesting that in her own words (first part of second video), she says the White House told her to resign "because she will be on Glenn Beck tonight" (she wasn't).

I wont be surprised if she ends up on Beck's show.[/QUOTE]

Lets be honest. Beck is simply using this to bash Obama and the NAACP.

"is this political assassination from the White House or the NAACP?" - No you fucking moron, it is from Breitbart.
 
Breitbart didn't fire her, Obama/White House/NAACP did.

I am not defending Breitbart, but as I follow this story it seems to be their claim that they didn't edit the video and posted it as they got it. I think we'll find out if that's true soon.

What's really interesting about this is that if there is more to the video to exonerate this lady, why hasn't anyone shown it? Why hasn't the NAACP shown it?
 
Right, no shit. This political storm is 100% on Andrew Breitbart, a name that Beck does not mention once.

Now, I know only 6 people watch MSNBC at any given time, but here's why Rachel Maddow is vastly superior to the screaming, crying, emotionally driven hypocritical nonsense of Glenn Beck:

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/node/38491

EDIT: The full video is all over the interbutt, numbskull. Stop asking questions like you want to investigate the fucking details, Inspector Clousseau, when the answers are fucking literally everywhere and you're simply too motherfucking lazy to look. Even motherfucking Breitbart's Big Government website has the full fucking video.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top