July 20, 2010


Regarding one of the items on this post from earlier today, it appears Ms. Sherrod's comments were not allowed a full context hearing. The video snippet obtained by Andrew Breitbart apparently is only just that -- a snippet -- of a long talk. Here is the WaPo's report. It seems Ms. Sherrod and the farmer in question became friends, and Ms. Sherrod's recounting of the tale -- the full tale -- is actually a lesson against racism.

Ms. Sherrod claims she's been harassed by the White House, of all places, and that her firing (or, "forced ouster") from the USDA (her current employer) is totally unjustified.

Since I strive to be fair, I think she has a pretty good case.

UPDATE: Fox News' "Special Report" has just noted that the NAACP regrets its statements about Ms. Sherrod and blames ... Fox News (??). It says it was "snookered." LOL ... well, maybe you ought to research an issue before acting rashly -- y'know, sort of like your over-the-top complaints of racism from the Tea Party.

Speaking of which, black progressive Earl Ofari Hutchinson denounces the treatment of Sherrod (rightly), but then loses it:

Sherrod's action was indefensible, and she was the first to admit it. But it was the regrettable act of one person, one place, one time. This hardly rises to the level of an institutional racial high crime and misdemeanor. Sherrod paid a dear price for her intemperate act. Unfortunately the same can't be said that the GOP and the tea party have paid the same price for their bigotry. They've done everything possible to see to that that won't happen.

But Mr. Hutchinson, you're doing just what led to Ms. Sherrod getting into hot water in the first place -- ascribing racism where it doesn't belong. The NAACP most likely acted hastily in the Sherrod case because it knew it was on tenuous ground with its silly Tea Party resolution. They tried to play "gotcha," and were played in return. Just as Ms. Sherrod's tale appears to be one of anti-racism, so too are the vast majority of Tea Partiers (and GOP) anti-racists. Racists in their midst are rare extremists, seen in any large movement.

The NAACP has catered to people of MUCH more questionable "racist" character than Ms. Sherrod. If folks like Andrew Breitbart want to give the organization a taste of its own medicine, go after them.

UPDATE 2: Stephen Spruiell reacts to the full video being posted by the NAACP. I essentially agree with his statement.

Posted by Hube at July 20, 2010 01:40 PM | TrackBack

Comments  (We reserve the right to edit and/or delete any comments. If your comment is blocked or won't post, e-mail us and we'll post it for you.)

Thumbs down to Breitbart. He knows better and should do better. Thumbs down to the White House for not checking it out first. Thumbs down to Sherrod for quitting instead of trying to exonerate herself (to be fair she was probably given the "quit or we'll fire you and take you pension" offer).

Perfect example of how awful politics has become.

Posted by: Duffy at July 20, 2010 02:33 PM

Rhymes -- everything you say about the standards being applied to conservatives is 100% correct. However, either Breitbart is a genius by knowing how the WH and NAACP would react (doubtful), or he is guilty of being deliberately misleading (likely) and thus assisting in ruining a woman's life.

For those of us who rightly chide the MSM for just the behavior you note in your comment, we should expect the new media to be better -- a lot better.

Posted by: Hube at July 20, 2010 05:48 PM

True, true, and true...but, the comments about purposely not giving her full support/using her full power to help a white farmer, and the 'intended' reaction of laughter and her own smugness at such comments is the real accusation of racism. I know in the greater scheme it was an anti racist story, but the above setting/comments would have gotten anyone from any persuassion in trouble...

Posted by: cardinals fan at July 21, 2010 08:27 AM

I watched other parts of the speech and she talks about "their own kind" etc. That is not acceptable for someone who works for govt or who works for a non-profit that is funded by the govt.

As to her "transformation", would you agree it's like a guy bragging he no longer beats his wife?

Posted by: AJ Lynch at July 22, 2010 09:06 AM

All good points, AJ. As I mentioned about Rhymes' comment, too, I understand about the need to battle the lefty MSM and not give in to the temptation of asymmetrical warfare. Point(s) well taken. I just don't think "our side" should be in the business of ruining a person based on something out of context.

Now, I've read elsewhere that Breitbart's accompanying text with his original posting of the video specifically stated that he was focusing on the reaction of the crowd in attendance to Sherrod's words and not Sherrod herself. That makes me somewhat as guilty as many others (in the MSM) who've attacked Breitbart for being "unfair." Still, full context is VERY important.

Posted by: Hube at July 23, 2010 03:45 PM

The point of the posted clip was to show the laughter and applause from the NAACP audience to her story of mistreating a white person.

Yes, she goes on to say she learned the error of her ways and helped the man, but the crowd aplauded when she sent the man away, not knowing what came next in the speach.

Posted by: anonni at July 25, 2010 10:14 AM

Indeed, anonni. I, like many others, missed Breitbart's accompanying text with the original posting.

Posted by: Hube at July 25, 2010 10:17 AM

Post a comment

Remember personal info?