USDA Official Saying She Didn't Give 'Full Force' of Help to White Farmer resigns

The entire video hasn't been released by the NAACP. Yet.......the White House forced her to resign. Odd.

pbrauer said:

Hmmm. Who produced the highly edited video. Andrew Breitbart. Joseph Goebbels, the minister of propaganda, would be proud if he were alive today.

Click to expand...

This white house is no slouch either. Oh, nice Godwin award too. Good one.

pbrauer said:

Hmmm. Who produced the highly edited video. Andrew Breitbart. Joseph Goebbels, the minister of propaganda, would be proud if he were alive today.

Click to expand...

Breitbart denies editing the tape, and says he received it in its current briefer form.

Ockham said:

Post the entire speech. I'd like to see it - apparently you have and there's some moral equivelency to the rest of the speech that weighs heavily on the part deemed racist.

Click to expand...

2 points...

1-even in that 00:01:20 worth of clip there is redemption
2-you admittedly pass judgement based on THAT???

I guess I could throw in the third point...the farmers wife who has come to her defense or the 4th...that comparing the judgement of and condemnation of this woman to the NAACPs incorrect declaration of 'the Tea Party' doesnt exactly cast you in the most positive of lights. but really...whats the use...

Mellie said:

Just so you all know....Glenn Beck doesn't think she should've been fired either.

Click to expand...

She wasnt fired...she was coerced by the Obama White House to resign.

(yes...thats worse...)

VanceMack said:

2 points...

1-even in that 00:01:20 worth of clip there is redemption
2-you admittedly pass judgement based on THAT???

I guess I could throw in the third point...the farmers wife who has come to her defense or the 4th...that comparing the judgement of and condemnation of this woman to the NAACPs incorrect declaration of 'the Tea Party' doesnt exactly cast you in the most positive of lights. but really...whats the use...

Click to expand...

So why would the White House demand she resign immediately?

Mellie said:

So why would the White House demand she resign immediately?

Click to expand...

Because they dont THINK...they kneejerk react and worry about politics. Its really hard to scream and point fingers at people and call them racist if its your side being racist.

VanceMack said:

Because they dont THINK...they kneejerk react and worry about politics. Its really hard to scream and point fingers at people and call them racist if its your side being racist.

Click to expand...

I tend to agree with you. They reacted without thinking because they wanted the story to go away very quickly. However, I think what they did just made it worse.

Mellie said:

So why would the White House demand she resign immediately?

Click to expand...

I think their is a lot more to this story.
I found an opinion piece very interesting. Here are just a few questions about Ms. Sherrod that deserve answers:

Was Ms. Sherrod's USDA appointment an unspoken condition of her organization's settlement?
How much "debt forgiveness" is involved in USDA's settlement with New Communities?
Why were the Sherrods so deserving of a combined $300,000 in "pain and suffering" payments -- amounts that far exceed the average payout thus far to everyone else? ($1.15 billion divided by 16,000 is about $72,000)?
Given that New Communities wound down its operations so long ago (it appears that this occurred sometime during the late 1980s), what is really being done with that $13 million in settlement money?


Here are a few bigger-picture questions:

Did Shirley Sherrod resign so quickly because the circumstances of her hiring and the lawsuit settlement with her organization that preceded it might expose some unpleasant truths about her possible and possibly sanctioned conflicts of interest?
Is USDA worried about the exposure of possible waste, fraud, and abuse in its handling of Pigford?
Did USDA also dispatch Sherrod hastily because her continued presence, even for another day, might have gotten in the way of settling Pigford matters quickly?




Read more at the Washington Examiner: Shirley Sherrod's Disappearing Act: Not So Fast | Washington Examiner

Mellie said:

I tend to agree with you. They reacted without thinking because they wanted the story to go away very quickly. However, I think what they did just made it worse.

Click to expand...

yaaaaa think?

not to worry...I expect Barry will be inviting people over to the back yard and share a Red Stripe and say that they had talked and after careful consideration, everyone else was wrong and lets just go back to business as usual...

VanceMack said:

2 points...

1-even in that 00:01:20 worth of clip there is redemption
2-you admittedly pass judgement based on THAT???

Click to expand...

As I said, if this were a white person and the farmer black and the group was some White advocacy group and the story came out - the exact same result would have happened. So in that, I think whether it was an knee jerk reaction or not - the result would have been the same.

VanceMack said:

I guess I could throw in the third point...the farmers wife who has come to her defense or the 4th...that comparing the judgement of and condemnation of this woman to the NAACPs incorrect declaration of 'the Tea Party' doesnt exactly cast you in the most positive of lights. but really...whats the use...

Click to expand...

Point 3 is irrelevant ... point 4 may be the main motive behind this... which makes my view entirely suspect... but I really can't change anything until I get new information and the only information that will suffice is the full video of the speech at the NAACP.

Ockham said:

As I said, if this were a white person and the farmer black and the group was some White advocacy group and the story came out - the exact same result would have happened. So in that, I think whether it was an knee jerk reaction or not - the result would have been the same.

Point 3 is irrelevant ... point 4 may be the main motive behind this... which makes my view entirely suspect... but I really can't change anything until I get new information and the only information that will suffice is the full video of the speech at the NAACP.

Click to expand...

IF this were a white person...how would YOU respond? The same way you are now? I somehow doubt it.

BTW...the video is out. Its about 43 minutes long. The part in question starts at about the 20 minute mark.

VanceMack said:

IF this were a white person...how would YOU respond? The same way you are now? I somehow doubt it.

Click to expand...

That's your problem not mine. Racist is racist - given the same amount of information - as I've said I don't know... half a dozen times in this thread since the beginning... the same thing should have happened. :roll:

VanceMack said:

BTW...the video is out. Its about 43 minutes long. The part in question starts at about the 20 minute mark.

Click to expand...

Thanks for not posting it.

Ockham said:

That's your problem not mine. Racist is racist - given the same amount of information - as I've said I don't know... half a dozen times in this thread since the beginning... the same thing should have happened. :roll:

Thanks for not posting it.

Click to expand...

Kinda relevant actually...
Farmer's wife says fired USDA official helped save their land; USDA will not rehire  | ajc.com

and good lord...let me teach you how to use this cool thing called "Google"...it will blow your mind...

Video: Watch the Shirley Sherrod Speech in Full | NAACP

After hearing her side and watching the full video, the N.A.A.C.P. said Tuesday that it had been “snookered” into believing Ms. Sherrod had acted with bias.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/21/us/21sherrod.html

Click to expand...

I'm confused. Since Ms. Sherrod spoke at an NAACP banquet, how was it "snookered"? If they presumed she acted with bias, should they not have concluded that when she made her speech? Likewise, if she didn't act with bias, then why did they belatedly ask for her removal?

Ahlevah said:

I'm confused. Since Ms. Sherrod spoke at an NAACP banquet, how was it "snookered"? If they presumed she acted with bias, should they not have concluded that when she made her speech? Likewise, if she didn't act with bias, then why did they belatedly ask for her removal?

Click to expand...

That's why I'm confused about. She said she received 3 calls as she was driving telling her she needed to resign. The last call said the White House demanded she pull over immediately and issue a resignation.

Ahlevah said:

I'm confused. Since Ms. Sherrod spoke at an NAACP banquet, how was it "snookered"? If they presumed she acted with bias, should they not have concluded that when she made her speech? Likewise, if she didn't act with bias, then why did they belatedly ask for her removal?

Click to expand...

The racist component in the video is the audience. That will get lost. Ben Jealous said they saw the behaviors of the audience and were disturbed...and rightfully so. The audience was right along with her. SHE knew were she was going with the accounting...they did not.

:lamo

Mellie said:

That's why I'm confused about. She said she received 3 calls as she was driving telling her she needed to resign. The last call said the White House demanded she pull over immediately and issue a resignation.

Click to expand...

Maybe......the whole thing was set-up to discredit Fox news. You know how Obama hates them.

The NAACP probably had the full tape all along. It was their banquet after all. They thought they would use it to their advantage on the heals of all the hooplah from the tea party, NBBP, NAACP and the WH in the news. I mean the NAACP refused to condemn the NBP but threw this woman immediately under the bus?
Anyway, suppose they sent an edited version of the tape to Brietbart, knowing it would make it to fox and talk radio. Then they (WH) hurriedly forced her to resign, then immediately (USDA and NAACP) come out and say they have zero tolerance for racism.
Now it's all over the MSM about how fox has been lieing and showing an edited tape of this poor woman who is now best friends with this farmer and his wife. It all does make FOX look kind of bad.
I know, I have too much time on my hands.:lamo:2wave:

Barbbtx said:

:lamo

Maybe......the whole thing was set-up to discredit Fox news. You know how Obama hates them.

The NAACP probably had the full tape all along. It was their banquet after all. They thought they would use it to their advantage on the heals of all the hooplah from the tea party, NBBP, NAACP and the WH in the news. I mean the NAACP refused to condemn the NBP but threw this woman immediately under the bus?
Anyway, suppose they sent an edited version of the tape to Brietbart, knowing it would make it to fox and talk radio. Then they (WH) hurriedly forced her to resign, then immediately (USDA and NAACP) come out and say they have zero tolerance for racism.
Now it's all over the MSM about how fox has been lieing and showing an edited tape of this poor woman who is now best friends with this farmer and his wife. It all does make FOX look kind of bad.
I know, I have too much time on my hands.:lamo:2wave:

Click to expand...

Maybe. But I know you've really been trying to figure this one out. Especially when the story seems to keep changing every hour. So hang in there. We'll probably hear another angle by tomorrow morning.

Objective Voice said:

I heard about this incident on the Laura Ingram show of all places. I just happened to be listening to the radio on my way to work when the segment started; had no idea who was speaking at the time.

Anyway, as I listened (gritting my teeth 'cuz the segment started out w/Obama bashing then conveniently slipped into the GA-NAACP meeting concerning this woman's actions) I couldn't help feeling angry about this. My first thought was, "What if this had been some white person who did this to a black farmer?" But now that I've read other people's commentary where it's clear that the woman was actually telling on herself and speaking of how she conducted herself unprofessionally, well, the reaction from the audience as described by Laura Ingram makes sense. I haven't reviewed the video, but based solely on what Laura Ingram said and the reaction from those who have reviewed the video along with that portion of the transcript Aunt Spiker presented herein, it would appear that the audience wasn't applauding this woman's poor conduct. They weren't agreeing with her mistreatment of the white farmer. They were applauding her admission for doing wrong and the corrective actions she took. Still, I'd have to review the video (from home since it's restricted from where I work) to confirm this, but like those who are claiming that the "liberal media" is bias, I'd say that until you show the video in it's entirety those who support right-wing media are also just as bias because they didn't tell the whole sotry - only that portion which supports their bias agenda.

Nonetheless, what the woman did was wrong. She did the right thing by resigning otherwise, she deserved to be fired.

Click to expand...

After watching the entire video posted on NAACP.org, I must state that I was wrong. Mrs. Sherrod did not deserve to be fired. She started off giving a brief history of how racism was prevalent in the South as she grew up sighting personal events of racism she had witnessed or things that had happened either to herself or to members of her family. When it came to her conduct with the white farmer, Mrs. Sherrod openly admitted that the event changed her perception of race relations and found the farmer an attorney to file the necessary Chapter 11 bankruptcy paperwork so that he would keep his farm.

Starting at the 26:00 mark, Mrs. Sherrod discusses the importance of racial unity which is the theme of her speech. Not once does she talk negatively about White people, not even as she gives her overview of the racism she witnessed as a child or young adult.

It's very apparent to me that a grave wrong has been committed against Mrs. Sherrod all for the sake of politics and saving face. Her attitude throughout the speech was one of supporting racial unity, not divisiveness. Considering that the event in question which she openly admits to wasn't committed in her capacity as Georgie State Director, USDA Rural Development, but instead took place 24 years ago while employed by the nonprofit group Federation of Southern Cooperatives, I believe it was wrong to force this woman out of her job which she promotes during the NAACP fundraiser event.

This woman was fired for the wrong reason - POLITICS AND FACE SAVING!!! She shouldn't have been fired.

EVERYONE allowed their personal prejudicies to get in the way. Many of us, including myself, relied on bits and pieces of "her story" and passed judgment before getting the full story. We jumped to conclusions while in the midst of a racial and political firestorm. And as a result, a woman who spoke of racial unity and shared information about certain government programs that could help people instead gets fired for speaking positively about improving race relations.

This is a sad day, folks.

VanceMack said:

The racist component in the video is the audience. That will get lost. Ben Jealous said they saw the behaviors of the audience and were disturbed...and rightfully so. The audience was right along with her. SHE knew were she was going with the accounting...they did not.

Click to expand...

That was how it looked to me, with just the short clip I saw this morning. The whole thing left me scratching my head, wondering why she would be told to resign, if what she now says is true. Maybe the O' administration is just trying to make it appear that they are fair and balanced (like Fox:mrgreen to placate the people who are pretty pissed off about all the race crap in the news lately. I dunno- it's just the best guess I have right now.

Objective Voice said:

It's very apparent to me that a grave wrong has been committed against Mrs. Sherrod all for the sake of politics and saving face. Her attitude throughout the speech was one of supporting racial unity, not divisiveness.


This woman was fired for the wrong reason - POLITICS AND FACE SAVING!!! She shouldn't have been fired.

Click to expand...

You and I don't seem to agree on much, but on this, we certainly do.

lizzie said:

… Maybe the O' administration is just trying to make it appear that they are fair and balanced (like Fox:mrgreen to placate the people who are pretty pissed off about all the race crap in the news lately. I dunno- it's just the best guess I have right now.

Click to expand...

Could it be that “O' administration” got snookered, too? Yes, I rather think so.

The real story will be how this ends what little credibility Breitbart still retained after his ACORN tapes turned out to be profoundly misleading and false. This is the second time he has been caught misleading his audience. He is now properly recognized as a liar and a cheat. Nothing more.

Catz Part Deux said:

You have the facts incorrect, bubba. She worked for a private advocacy group back in the 1980s, when this happened. She was talking about a personal learning experience she had in 1986 when she realized that SHE HERSELF was being a racist, and that because of this experience, she came to understnd that poverty had no color, that it affects blacks and whites alike.

There is NO EVIDENCE that she has acted inappropriately in her appointment to USDA.

Click to expand...

yes, she worked for a federally funded nonprofit which was compensated for providing advice to farmers subject to federal foreclosure
and her remarks made it obvious that she believes she is entitled to treat people differently. she went from providing assistance based on their race to providing it based on their degree of wealth
she took that white farmer to be helped by his 'own kind', intimating a white attorney would be more helpful than a black lawyer
yes, the videotape was edited to emphasize the stupidity of her words, but her foolish admissions, revealing her bigotry, were adequate to recognize this recent federal appointee was not up to the job for which she was appointed
and don't even get me posting about her 'praise God' references earlier in the speech. yet another indication that she is tone deaf to standards of conduct requirements imposed on the civil service personnel

Video: Watch the Shirley Sherrod Speech in Full | NAACP

justa,

You mean to tell me you can watch the entire video and still come away with the notion that this woman was a racist? C'mon!

Sure, she experienced racism first had. Her father died as a result of racial hatred, but nowhere in that video is the woman who existed 24 years ago and mistreated a man based solely on the color of his skin. In fact, despite the fact that she initially did not perform her job in a non-bias fashion, she still did the right thing in the end and helped save this man's farm!

I just can't see how anyone who watches the entire video can bring themselves to believe Mrs. Sherrod is racist. She goes on and on speaking of the importance of everyone setting aside their racial bias and helping each other. The only way you miss that is if you choose to. Moreover, the incident happened 24 years ago! Not yesterday. Not last week. Not last month. Not last quarter. Not last year. But over 2 DECADES AGO! She may have at that time initially treated the man unfairly despite his racial biasness against her, but in the end she set her own prejudicies aside and did the right thing for him. And since then has apparently gone about her professional life speaking out against racism and how it is important for all of us to live out Rodney King's words, "Can't we all just get along?"

The only way you miss the message is if you chose to ignore it.