Edited video costs USDA worker her job.

[waggy]

I heard on ABC(or was it NBC?) yesterday night that she was forced to write a resignation letter over her Blackberry that evening.

Obama administration officials have been played like fools by the right-wing media.
I still want to know who was responsible for her getting fired...Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack? Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel?

I doubt Obama himself was directly involved in the issue, so I won't put any blame or responsibility on him.

IF anyone from the white house was in on it then blame goes right to Obama.

right now she is claiming people from the white house called her boss and told her that she needed to resign right then. so she pulled over and did it (she was driving at the time).

 

[Ldir]

I find it laughable that people continue to slam FNC for reporting a story (which those people call lies) when the President of the United State perpetrated the largest lie on the American people in the last 70 years using "edited data", presenting half of the facts, and telling bold faced lies.

Get over it. Bush isn't president any more.

You meant attacking Iraq right?

 

[Athena]

Don't minimize what she did. She treated someone diffrently based on race which is exactly what racism is. She said "Oh, he's white, so I will treat him differently than a black person."

Let's look at this in another way: High school counselor assumes that because a student is Asian, his family is academically minded and the student doesn't need the extra incentive of some sort of after school, college-prep program. He decides to give the one remaining slot to a poor white child who is in foster care and counsels the Asian student to go to some other, program given at a later time. Later on, it turns out that the other program was crap and the counselor ends up helping the Asian student fill out his college application forms. Do the counselor's racially motivated assumptions mean that he should never work anywhere as a counselor again

No one is minimizing way in which race colored Sherrod's decision making at that time. When she saw the results or her racist assumption --that the farmer didn't get what he deserved -- she realized how mistaken that thinking was. The whole point of her story was that early in her working career she learned that it's not always about race and that since then she has focused on who people are, not "what" they are.

 

[Apple Of Sodom]

Let's look at this in another way: High school counselor assumes that because a student is Asian, his family is academically minded and the student doesn't need the extra incentive of some sort of after school, college-prep program. He decides to give the one remaining slot to a poor white child who is in foster care and counsels the Asian student to go to some other, program given at a later time. Later on, it turns out that the other program was crap and the counselor ends up helping the Asian student fill out his college application forms. Do the counselor's racially motivated assumptions mean that he should never work anywhere as a counselor again

No one is minimizing way in which race colored Sherrod's decision making at that time. When she saw the results or her racist assumption --that the farmer didn't get what he deserved -- she realized how mistaken that thinking was. The whole point of her story was that early in her working career she learned that it's not always about race and that since then she has focused on who people are, not "what" they are.

Assumptions based on race have no place in America. Period. This is a terrible counselor. However, this counselor may have learned his lesson about doing things of that nature and that is fine. But we are talking about a single counselor at a single high school, not the director of agricultural development for an entire state.

Further, in this case, she did have the ability to help him and simply didn't based on race. If the high school counselor had two slots and would rather leave one empty than help the asian kid, then yes, he should have been fired.

 

[waggy]

Assumptions based on race have no place in America. Period. This is a terrible counselor. However, this counselor may have learned his lesson about doing things of that nature and that is fine. But we are talking about a single counselor at a single high school, not the director of agricultural development for an entire state.

Further, in this case, she did have the ability to help him and simply didn't based on race. If the high school counselor had two slots and would rather leave one empty than help the asian kid, then yes, he should have been fired.

she was not a director at the time. she was a lower worker. this happened 25 years ago.

she did help him. granted after nto doing it based on race. but she DID help him and saved his farm. she is even good friends with the farmer.

 

[Patranus]

Get over it. Bush isn't president any more.

You meant attacking Iraq right?

Is BOOOSH the President?

 

[her209]

I find it laughable that people continue to slam FNC for reporting a story (which those people call lies) when the President of the United State perpetrated the largest lie on the American people in the last 70 years using "edited data", presenting half of the facts, and telling bold faced lies.

Deflect! Deflect! Deflect!

 

[CitizenKain]

Assumptions based on race have no place in America. Period. This is a terrible counselor. However, this counselor may have learned his lesson about doing things of that nature and that is fine. But we are talking about a single counselor at a single high school, not the director of agricultural development for an entire state.

Further, in this case, she did have the ability to help him and simply didn't based on race. If the high school counselor had two slots and would rather leave one empty than help the asian kid, then yes, he should have been fired.

Except she did. Pay attention.

 

[thraashman]

Second - someone who was in a position of authority who let their bias affect professional judgement, no matter how long ago, should not be in those positions. She has lost credibility. Would you allow a reformed bank robber to guard your vault?

So what you're saying is that you support gay marriage and you feel that any politician who doesn't support it for reasons of religion should be kicked out of their post?

 

[thraashman]

I find it laughable that people continue to slam FNC for reporting a story (which those people call lies) when the President of the United State perpetrated the largest lie on the American people in the last 70 years using "edited data", presenting half of the facts, and telling bold faced lies.

I know, and most of us agree that the then President George W. Bush should have been impeached for his lies that got us into Iraq. Good to see you coming around finally Patranus.

 

[Linflas]

Nice to see that the left finally decided that context matters. We will see how long this conversion lasts.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Amused I see you changed the title, today you are alright with me

Just today though :biggrin:

Yup. :thumbsup:

Gotta give him credit for doing the right thing in this thread ---- after an exceptional Anus-level troll title.




--

 

[Zedtom]

This episode is going to drag out because there are cheerleaders from every political faction ready to chime in. The lesson to be learned is when speaking to a group that you consider "your peers", you better be aware that not everyone in the room is your friend.

 

[Perknose]

Yup. :thumbsup:

Gotta give him credit for doing the right thing in this thread
--

+1 :thumbsup:

 

[Athena]

Assumptions based on race have no place in America. Period. This is a terrible counselor. However, this counselor may have learned his lesson about doing things of that nature and that is fine.

Which is exactly what Sherrod did --learned a lesson.

But we are talking about a single counselor at a single high school, not the director of agricultural development for an entire state.

She wasn't director of anything at the time -- she wasn't even a federal employee -- and it was the experience with that single farmer that taught her a lesson that has stayed with her through the years.

Further, in this case, she did have the ability to help him and simply didn't based on race.

Not true. She did help; she sent him to white lawyer assuming that that because he was white, the lawyer would give him all the help he needed and that no further involvement from her was necessary. That was her mistake...assuming that because they were both white, that farmer would automatically be helped to keep his land. When she saw that the lawyer didn't do anything but take his money; her view of what was actually going on changed and she got them someone who would.

For those who don't know, 24 years ago, Ms. Sherrod had good reason to believe that the white farmer would be better taken care of by a white lawyer: her own family was fighting against USDA policies that systematically excluded black farmers from programs. The incident with this white family opened her eyes to the fact that the problem was bigger than race.

 

[jhbball]

Edited clip without full context. Next.

 

[jhbball]

Which is exactly what Sherrod did --learned a lesson.She wasn't director of anything at the time -- she wasn't even a federal employee -- and it was the experience with that single farmer that taught her a lesson that has stayed with her through the years.
Not true. She did help; she sent him to white lawyer assuming that that because he was white, the lawyer would give him all the help he needed and that no further involvement from her was necessary. That was her mistake...assuming that because they were both white, that farmer would automatically be helped to keep his land. When she saw that the lawyer do anything but take his money; her view of what was actually going on changed and she got them someone who would.

For those who don't know, 24 years ago, Ms. Sherrod had good reason to believe that the white farmer would be better taken care of by a white lawyer: her own family was fighting against USDA policies that systematically excluded black farmers from programs. The incident with this white family opened her eyes to the fact that the problem was bigger than race.

She later went on in the speech to talk about how she OVERCAME this kind of behavior to help this white farmer. He has even attested that she helped him save his family's farm.

 

[CallMeJoe]

nm

 

[nobodyknows]

http://countercultureconservative.w...od-was-fired-before-fox-ever-aired-the-story/

Well, I guess we’re not talking about alleged Tea Party racism anymore! Now we’re talking about those evil reichwingers, Fox News and Andrew Breitbart. As long as we’re not talking about the Dem’s squandered mandate everything is going as planned for November, right Libs?

But what is being ignored in this entire episode is the timing of these rapidly unfolding events. Andrew Breitbart posted the video on his site Monday at 8:18 a.m.; By mid-afternoon Shirely Sherrod had been fired. Fox News didn’t report the story until later that evening. Who’s to blame for her firing? Fox News? Breitbart? That is absurd.

By mid afternoon of the same day, Cheryl Cook called Sherrod on her cell phone and fired her because “you’re going to be on Glenn Beck tonight”. In fact, she did not appear on Beck that night. He made no mention of her whatsoever. She did appear on Beck the following night though, and he was DEFENDING her. The first mention of the Shirley Sherrod tape on Fox News was on Bill O’Reilly’s show which aired at 8 p.m. That’s almost five hours AFTER Sherrod was fired.

The edited video posted by Andrew Breitbart on his website, BigGovernment.com, wasn’t edited to exclude Sherrod’s racial “redemption”. The video that appeared on his site actually INCLUDED Sherrod saying “That’s when it was revealed to me that it’s about poor versus those who have. And not so much about white….it is about white and black… but it’s not…you know… it opened my eyes because I took him to one of his own.” On his website, Breitbart says:

In the first video, Sherrod describes how she racially discriminates against a white farmer. She describes how she is torn over how much she will choose to help him. And, she admits that she doesn’t do everything she can for him, because he is white. Eventually, her basic humanity informs that this white man is poor and needs help. But she decides that he should get help from “one of his own kind”. She refers him to a white lawyer.

Sherrod’s racist tale is received by the NAACP audience with nodding approval and murmurs of recognition and agreement. Hardly the behavior of the group now holding itself up as the supreme judge of another groups’ racial tolerance.

He has not concealed anything that could exculpate Shirley Sherrod on the longer unedited tape which, by the way, the NAACP is in possession of. When Breitbart appeared on Sean Hannity that same night, he insisted that this video was NOT supposed to be about Sherrod; it was about the people in the NAACP audience applauding and agreeing with her story when she talked about her racist feelings towards him, and giving him less than her full support (the pre-”redemption” part of the story). Breitbart said, “The NAACP members in the audience did not know at that point that this was a transformative story about overcoming her racism. And yet they were laughing and clapping when she talked about not wanting to help that white farmer.”

Now the NAACP is whining about being “snookered”, and Fox News is being blamed for getting Shirley Sherrod fired when they didn’t even air the tape until many hours AFTER Ms. Sherrod was fired; and when in fact the NAACP always had the full unedited tape in their possession but couldn’t be bothered to check it. Why didn’t the NAACP or the White House check the tape? Why did they overreact by firing her? It’s not because they were snookered, but because they are immoral and unprincipled cowards who use race as a political weapon against conservatives, and firing Shirley Sherrod was just their reflexive “return shot” in this filthy blood sport.

The fact that Breitbart did not immediately post the full video does concern me just from a journalistic standpoint. You always cite the source. He would respond that Ms. Sherrod wasn’t the issue, and it’s not his job to defend her anyway because the video does in fact show racial insensitivity in the crowd and also a little from the speaker, even if today she disavows her past racism. His larger point, however, is that the NAACP should be more careful about throwing racist stones at the Tea Party when they obviously live in their own racial glass houses.

 

[EagleKeeper]

naacp has a long history of racism and separatism. All this is nothing new. Fanning the flames of hate and discontent assures their survival.

Are you serious? NAACP didn't just materialize out of thin air for no reason.

The problem is that they now require what they fought against.
They require / promote racism to justify their existance

 

[Carmen813]

That isn't completely true. We use reformed criminals to help us out, tell us about vulnerabilities, and seek guidance. We use them as resources because we need people who can think like criminals to tell us what a criminal would do. We generally do not place them in positions where they have any type of control or authority of protected resources. You may hire an ex bank robber to give you an analyses of your security system, but you certainly would not give him the access code to the vault and security systems.

Professionals make mistakes. It isn't her story of overcoming racism that bothers me so much as how she told the story: gloating, and with a smirk, like a man telling a story about how he once outran the police when he was in high school.

Can you give me a link the the full video?

I would say that a smirk or gloating presentation wouldn't necessarily mean anything, she may have just been nervous. Happens all the time.

 

[Throckmorton]

OP, why didn't you include some kind of explanation in your original post along with your retraction?


I don't want to wade through this whole god damned thread to find an explanation of what really happened. SOMEONE POST A LINK

 

[xj0hnx]

http://countercultureconservative.w...od-was-fired-before-fox-ever-aired-the-story/

Well, I guess we’re not talking about alleged Tea Party racism anymore! Now we’re talking about those evil reichwingers, Fox News and Andrew Breitbart. As long as we’re not talking about the Dem’s squandered mandate everything is going as planned for November, right Libs?

But what is being ignored in this entire episode is the timing of these rapidly unfolding events. Andrew Breitbart posted the video on his site Monday at 8:18 a.m.; By mid-afternoon Shirely Sherrod had been fired. Fox News didn’t report the story until later that evening. Who’s to blame for her firing? Fox News? Breitbart? That is absurd.

By mid afternoon of the same day, Cheryl Cook called Sherrod on her cell phone and fired her because “you’re going to be on Glenn Beck tonight”. In fact, she did not appear on Beck that night. He made no mention of her whatsoever. She did appear on Beck the following night though, and he was DEFENDING her. The first mention of the Shirley Sherrod tape on Fox News was on Bill O’Reilly’s show which aired at 8 p.m. That’s almost five hours AFTER Sherrod was fired.

The edited video posted by Andrew Breitbart on his website, BigGovernment.com, wasn’t edited to exclude Sherrod’s racial “redemption”. The video that appeared on his site actually INCLUDED Sherrod saying “That’s when it was revealed to me that it’s about poor versus those who have. And not so much about white….it is about white and black… but it’s not…you know… it opened my eyes because I took him to one of his own.” On his website, Breitbart says:

In the first video, Sherrod describes how she racially discriminates against a white farmer. She describes how she is torn over how much she will choose to help him. And, she admits that she doesn’t do everything she can for him, because he is white. Eventually, her basic humanity informs that this white man is poor and needs help. But she decides that he should get help from “one of his own kind”. She refers him to a white lawyer.

Sherrod’s racist tale is received by the NAACP audience with nodding approval and murmurs of recognition and agreement. Hardly the behavior of the group now holding itself up as the supreme judge of another groups’ racial tolerance.

He has not concealed anything that could exculpate Shirley Sherrod on the longer unedited tape which, by the way, the NAACP is in possession of. When Breitbart appeared on Sean Hannity that same night, he insisted that this video was NOT supposed to be about Sherrod; it was about the people in the NAACP audience applauding and agreeing with her story when she talked about her racist feelings towards him, and giving him less than her full support (the pre-”redemption” part of the story). Breitbart said, “The NAACP members in the audience did not know at that point that this was a transformative story about overcoming her racism. And yet they were laughing and clapping when she talked about not wanting to help that white farmer.”

Now the NAACP is whining about being “snookered”, and Fox News is being blamed for getting Shirley Sherrod fired when they didn’t even air the tape until many hours AFTER Ms. Sherrod was fired; and when in fact the NAACP always had the full unedited tape in their possession but couldn’t be bothered to check it. Why didn’t the NAACP or the White House check the tape? Why did they overreact by firing her? It’s not because they were snookered, but because they are immoral and unprincipled cowards who use race as a political weapon against conservatives, and firing Shirley Sherrod was just their reflexive “return shot” in this filthy blood sport.

The fact that Breitbart did not immediately post the full video does concern me just from a journalistic standpoint. You always cite the source. He would respond that Ms. Sherrod wasn’t the issue, and it’s not his job to defend her anyway because the video does in fact show racial insensitivity in the crowd and also a little from the speaker, even if today she disavows her past racism. His larger point, however, is that the NAACP should be more careful about throwing racist stones at the Tea Party when they obviously live in their own racial glass houses.

/thread

 

[xj0hnx]

OP, why didn't you include some kind of explanation in your original post along with your retraction?


I don't want to wade through this whole god damned thread to find an explanation of what really happened. SOMEONE POST A LINK

If you want to read what REALLY happened, read the link in Nobodyknows post.

 

[Throckmorton]

Found some explanation in this thread http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2010/07/the-full-unedited-shirley-sherrod-speech/60135/