Obama: Sherrod ‘Deserves Better’ for ‘Bogus Controversy’

LMAO… listen to this blamer in chief talk, HE is the one that needs race relations seminars.. This racebaiting, racist FIRED her before he even knew the story and the NAACP was SITTING on the whole story all along, while condeming her….just a bunch of left wing radical extremist.. bent on destroying and dividing races in the US
OBAMA VERSES AMERICA

A “teachable moment” with the teacher ABSENT and playing Division politics
Obama VS America

Listen and watch the full tape and you will hear what a Black Racist Shirley Sherrod really is. She states that if you disagree with Obama, then you are racist because he is black. How stuppid is that? Plus watch the nodding and clapping of the NAACP audience when Shirley Sherood mentions treating the white farmer bad because he was white. Obama is stupid to defend her.

austin, they had it posted on the fox website almost as soon as breitbart finished editing it

“In the wake of the controversy last week – which the administration dubbed a “teachable moment” many have called on the president to lead a national conversation on race.”
Indeed. And what did that moment teach Miss Sherrod, well let’s let her speak for herself, via CNN about Mr. Andrew Breitbart:
“I know I’ve gotten past black versus white. He’s probably the person who’s never gotten past it and never attempted to get past it. I think he would like to get us stuck back in the times of slavery. That’s where I think he would like to see all black people end up again.”
Yeah, that’s the discussion we should be having. This woman is not a poster child for race relations in America. No matter what she said in that speech.

What Vilsack and the White House have said is contradicted by what Shirley Sherrod has said.
Vilsack said that HE ousted her and that it was because of what he saw at Fox News website.
Sherrod said that the White House forced her to resign and that she was called 3 times over this affair and that when called by the USDA’s Cheryl Cook, Sherrod said that Cook told her that she needed to pull over and resign because she was going to be on Glenn Beck’s show later that day (Beck was supposed to air a pseech that she gave to the NAACP, yet didn’t). Beck actually defended her later on down the road and said that her ouster was unjustifiable, regardless of her political views.
Vilsack has said one thing, and it is contradicted by what Sherrod has said.
Sherrod also contradicts the White House. The White House says that they were “snookered” by Fox News.
Problem is, is that Beck airs at 5 PM.
Fox News had a story put on their website about her entitled “Video Shows USDA Official Saying She Didn’t Give Full Force of Help To White Farmer” at 5:58 PM. Sherrods resignation was announced an hour latr. Politico reported on this.
Sherrod was apparently canned sometime before Beck aired, and she said that it was because of BECK, not Fox News website, so the White House was not “snookered” by Fox News. As well, the NAACP had the full video of Sherrod’s speech at their disposal to listen to, so how were they and the White House “snookered” by Fox News?
The White House threw Sherrod under the bus, yet Obama and the media are trying to spin this to Fox News in an attempt to direct attention away from how the White House handled this whole sordid affair.

“Why the silence about Breitbarts past operations? Like the ACORN tapes. Those weren’t slightly misleading, they were totally fabricated. ”
Huh? Explain totally fabricated because I don’t think you actually know what it means.
And this tape showed exactly what Breitbart wanted it to show, the NAACP members cheering a story about treating a white farmer differently because he was white. There was nothing fabricated about it.

The President says that Ms. Sherrod’s full story about overcoming bias is one that needs to be told in American. In his next statement, he pulls himself out of the discussion and talks about how it needs to be discussed around kitchens, water coolers and basements. That is a cop out. The President has often said that race is an issue to important to ignore– but it seems like that is exactly what he is doing by basically telling us: “talk amongst yourselves.” Nobody wants commissions, panels or academic papers, we just want the President to talk openly and candidly about the issue. To discuss important but sensitive issues is not political posturing– refusing to participate in the conversation is.

“[....]NAACP members cheering a story about treating a white farmer differently because he was white. There was nothing fabricated about it.”
//
Except it didn’t show that, and its only Breitbarts’ followers who are spreading the misinformation, continuing on a heartless and dishonest path, and making themselves part of the problem. Watch the tape, the whole tape and then think about the thoughts at “Breitbart lied about Shirley Sherrod. Now he’s lying about the NAACP, by William Saletan”.
A single staccato noise is not clapping.
I also disagree with you when it comes to fighting back against smear artists. The problem is a “conservative” movement that continues to celebrate Breitbart and Fox News despite their history of fabrication and inaccuracy and race-baiting (h/t Yglesias who gets that right.) People who are smeared by these unethical jerks ought to fight back, and fight back hard and tough. Its the only way to handle bullies.
That you would defend Breitbart at every opportunity, even when it comes to the ACORN tapes, and claim the “only” problem was the rush to force a resignation followed by private and public apologies and a job offer says quite a lot about your ethics and sense of right and wrong, or lack thereof.
In the end, that’s your problem and not anyone else’s unless you make it our problem, too. For now, what is important is pointing out why right wingers have so little credibility.

Cara, you obviously have not read Breitbart’s original post about this video and what he was attempting to show. It’s also obvious that instead of doing some independent thinking on this incident, you have bought into the talking points the left is using to try and make this about Fox and Breitbart instead of about the NAACP and the Obama administration.

j you hit the nail on the head. who fired who? its unfortunate for ms sherod but the big mistake was made by th white house and their rush to judgement. your the president and a harvard lawyer..you should have pounded the facts bfore you pounded the table.

Has Obama forgotten when made an off the cuff comment that lead to the famous “Beer Summit” in the Rose garden?

“Cara, you obviously have not read Breitbart’s original post about this video”
I responded to this earlier, but no matter (apologies to the mods if I broke rules, I was unaware of it), the truth is that its not obvious at all. I read it. What actually is obvious is that you bought it, and didn’t question it, and that you’re still buying it without question, and defending it– and pretending the tape shows what Breitbart claims it did. It didn’t. Tell me at what point in the tape it does, and we can discuss specifics.
I don’t think you can. Why?
Because the blogger in question is a liar, and is known for being a liar. And now he’s whining about Obama trying to destroy his “reputation.” Ah, no… people are just trying to make sure others understand Breitbart’s reputation, and don’t get as snookered as the admin and USDA so nobody gets sherroded by the usual suspects again.
Ryan C is correct: “So he put out an edited out of context in order to smear the organization, smearing one woman quite egregiously.
Much like the heavily edited ACORN tapes. ”
The guy is a smear merchant, and his followers are no better.
I do not let the admin off the hook for actually worrying about Breitbart, Fox News or Glenn Beck, or not knowing how often they distort and fabricate, but the fact remains that Breitbart lied, and you are repeating his lies and defending him, without being able to back it up with anything credible, except references back to Breitbart.
As for Breitbart being upset about the NAACP’s accusations, I find it odd that he hasn’t called out white pride group, CCC, who also thinks the Tea Party is racist. Hmmmmm… wonder why he doesn’t try to do a sherrod on them? Any ideas?

“Sherrod had been forced to resign before Fox News put out the story about her on their website. Fact. Deal with it.”/
Fact (deal with it): Fox News Senior Vice President Michael Clemente has *finally* admitted that a “breakdown” allowed Foxnews to run a story about Shirley Sherrod’s comments before she resigned. Look it up. I realize that the Fox News you believe in was denying it vehemently but there you go.
And its not like Fox News doesn’t work hand in hand with smear merchants on a regular basis. They sure ran with the heavily edited ACORN tapes in an unethical manner.
And again, as for Breitbart being upset about the NAACP’s accusations, I find it odd that he hasn’t called out white pride group, CCC, who also thinks the Tea Party is racist. Hmmmmm… wonder why he doesn’t try to do a sherrod on them? Any ideas?
p.s. attorneys experienced in defamation and libel say Sherrod’s case would have merit… you can look that up, too, if you’re interested in sounding somewhat informed on the law and the situation.

“pretending the tape shows what Breitbart claims it did. It didn’t.”
so you’re saying you can’t hear the crowd noise (indicating agreement) when sherrod first tells her tale of her own bias?

so you’re saying you can’t hear the crowd noise (indicating agreement) when sherrod first tells her tale of her own bias?
Posted by: J.R. | Jul 29, 2010 6:51:41 PM
Correct. Where do you hear it? What part of the tape? Here’s what I heard (an embrace of poor people, and agreement in regards to God putting things in your path that you’ll struggle with):
“When I made that commitment, I was making that commitment to black people, and to black people only. [Silence.] But, you know, God will show you things, and He’ll put things in your path so that—that you realize that the struggle [Audience: Alright] is really about poor people. [Audience: Alright, alright.]“

“Correct. Where do you hear it? What part of the tape?”
Following her statement about she thought he was acting superior to her and she was deciding how much help she was going to give him. The place clearly gives approving applause and indications that what she was doing was justified.
Now her tale weaves around and eventually she realizes that the real issue is poor vs. rich. That doesn’t make her initial response any more inflammatory though.

“that its okay to be a liar and smear merchant in the first place”
So what would you call miss sherrod when she says that Breitbart once to return to the time when blacks were slaves or when she says that FoxNews would rather we live in a time when blacks are unable to look at whites and need to keep their heads down?? What would she be?

Following her statement about she thought he was acting superior to her and she was deciding how much help she was going to give him. The place clearly gives approving applause and indications that what she was doing was justified.”//
I’ve watched it four times, and I didn’t hear any applause. At one point there was laughter, but the biggest applause lines and approval came at the parts regarding redemption, not racism or bias. I think it takes a warped mind to see it the other way— as if someone was trying very, very, very hard to see it in a way that would fit a preconceived agenda. As if someone was seeking retaliation and working pretty hard to get it, ethics be darned.
And I don’t think that’s cool, or worthy, or good, or worth defending or protecting or supporting or celebrating. I think it is worth calling out and exposing and naming it as what it is. Wrong.

One last thing,
Sherrod had a good thing going until she appeared on AC360 and said the following:
Sherrod: “I think that he [Breitbart] would like to get us stuck back in the times of slavery. That’s where I think he would like to see all black people end up again.”
Anderson Cooper: “You think he’s racist.”
Sherrod: “I do.”
Sherrod’s lawsuit against Breitbart would almost certainly be negated by Breitbart countersuing over this clip, if both lawsuits weren’t actually thrown out, which could be quite possible, given that they are both considered to be public officials, that it is nearly impossible for public officials to effectively sue, loss of reputation is required, and Sherrod had her reputation quickly restored.
I don’ like the way that Breitbart handled things, but Sherrod was no better in that clip, and Vilsack and the White House both screwed up.

I meant to say public figure, not public official, in that last post.

“probably because you both came across as defending right wing outfits that distort and smear.”
You mean outlets that don’t fit your narrow world view.
///
If you consider it a narrow world view to rule out taking at face value any news from right wing outfits or any outfit that has been busted lying, fabricating and distorting by multiple fact checkers and in rather big ways over a long period of time, then, sure. Absolutely. I don’t like liars, and, ha, I don’t consider them credible.
I am pursuit in the truth.

J.R’s clip out of context, showing right wing spin: Or the Obama admin for that matter with the acted stupidly comment about the cambridge pd?
What Obama actually said: “”I think it’s fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry. Number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home. And number three – what I think we know separate and apart from this incident – is that there is a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately, and that’s just a fact.”
I’d prefer he’d used a different word than stupidly but nobody’s perfect and in context I understood what he was getting at and agreed, and would still agree, though I understand the pressure police are under and cut Crowley slack. I’d be very angry if I was arrested while in my own home after traveling.

Ryan C wrote: “The party of personal responsibility strikes again!”
.
Wait till you hear about the probable fraud, waste, and abuse in the USDA handling of the settlement for the Pigford vs. Glickman (and then Vilsack). Looks like some of oBama’s “spreading the wealth” going on. Question is… will the worthless news media look into the details of this case and Shirley “SUE” Sherrod, or will they continue their current narrative that “wascally” Breitbart and Fox News snookered the SMARTEST administration ever to walk the face of the earth.

Cara wrote:”Interesting that Republicans like Grassley introduced legislation to reopen the Pigford case “to allow more black farmers to join and to provide more funding to settle claims”
.
So how many more of these black farmers are going to get settlements. There has already been more settlements than there are black farmers. Who is feeding at this trough?
.
“and that fact checkers reference this whole thing as “another bogus Sherrod smear.”
.
Since when did oBama useful idiots qualify as fact checkers.
.
“Right wing smear merchants are still walking around with their blow torches, obviously. ”
.
While you lefties are desperate to change the subject from jobless recovery, record unemployment, Democrat Corruption (Rangel is only the latest), oBama sinking in the polls, most incompetent and radical administration in history, etc. Sure don’t want anyone focusing on that stuff, do you.

Great, now what is Obama going to do??? Shut down the internet to promote “fairness”, Oh wait, Lieberman already is trying to do that…
America, your hopelessly lost and are being led to Third World status…
Had enough yet? Guess not! So, why are you all complaining AGAIN! You asked for it, you GOT it! Congratulations, now SHUT UP and take your medicine, you FOOLS!

“Sure don’t want anyone focusing on that stuff, do you.”
Don’t we? When it comes to recovery, Republicans in Congress oppose any and all stimulus efforts, and won’t let Democrats vote on any additional recovery initiatives. They’re economically illiterate. On top of that, they obstructed a healthcare bill for 9/11 heroes. In regards to corruption, I think focus should be on Rangel, but I wouldn’t leave out Ensign or the Wyley brothers. Pelosi is pointing to Rangel’s travails as proof that Dems are succeeding in delivering on their promise to “drain the swamp.” You disagree? Got specifics? And if you want to talk polling numbers, what do you think of Charlie Cook’s suggestion that it appears the Republican wave has subsided? I think that is as it should be as the Republicans don’t stand for anything worthwhile, have a terrible record and have no agenda. What are they for? Certainly not America or American principles.
As for the rest of the rant, I’m absolutely willing to talk about the most incompetent and radical admin in history– but the righties whine quite a bit when anyone mentions the epic failures of the Bush-Cheney admin. You can almost see their heads exploding.

“Wait till you hear about the probable fraud, waste, and abuse in the USDA handling of the settlement for the Pigford vs. Glickman”
Oh I am sure that’s the next “expose” by the right wing media.
They’ve already started to cast discrimination settlements as reparations.
Why? Because the right wing depends on stoking racial fears.
They don’t have any other ideas.

Leave it to the right wing American Thinker to take a straight forward article by Agri-Pulse (apparently a vertical new site that focuses on Ag issues natch)
“The number of total claims filed in the settlement of the Pigford case not only exceeded the original estimate by almost 40 to 50 times, it is close to four times the USDA’s estimate of 26,785 total black owned farms in 1977!…”
From the actual article
“Already, the number of people who have been paid and are still seeking payment will likely exceed the 26,785 black farmers who were considered to even be operating back in 1997, according to USDA.”
The Pigford case dealt with racial discrimination between 1983 and 1997.
Gee a right wing media outlet distorting article and outright lying!
” looks like everybody has a Cousin Pookie who has come to feed at the taxpayer trough even though they were not a farmer. Come on in!”
The easiest way to bait a racist who believes in white privilege into outrage is to tell him a minority is getting something he is not eligible for….the right wing media plays their audience like a fiddle on this measure.
They have no ethics, no morals, no standards. Who is your counsel on these things, Charlie Rangel?”
As opposed to Sen Vitter, Sen Ensign, or the head of the FL GOP?
ROFLMAO!
Both parties have had, have and will have corrupt politicians.
Its just seems that the GOP has many more and they are just left alone.

Posted by: Ryan C | Jul 30, 2010 5:20:18 PM
———–
Personally, I can’t get enough of Ms. Sherrod… she so faithfully represents the position of the “aggrieved black” in America… so often found on the public payroll… or as in the case of Rev. Jackson, on top of the “go to” list of the media…
It’s time for a real discussion of race in America… sure, let’s talk about white racism, as Mr. Obama does in his books… but let’s also talk about black crime, over-dependence on the state, failure to thrive… etc… The secret to black success must be found in the black community…, not in defeating whites, but in defeating the very challenges that whites face and defeat everyday…

Well, at least Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are always out in force fighting for the rights of people.