• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

I find it interesting that NOW the full account of what was said is openly apparent, not one of those who said "fire her ass" has recanted and apologized for getting the wrong end of the stick.
The NAACP says that Fox bamboozled them, whatever that means, Fox proved that on the basis of reporting this story on a particular time line, they were innocent of any attempt at Bamboozing NAACP, the Agricultural Dept concerned are practically standing on their collective heads in attempting to get Mrs. Shirly Sherrod accept their job offer, the White House says that they have no knowledge.
This last is very likely to mean that Obama is as usual clueless.
 
j-mac said:
I can appreciate that, I feel kind of duped now myself...However, your earlier take on it where you said this could have been a set up designed to damage FOX News is interesting, and makes sense.


j-mac
Click to expand...

it does not. geez.
 
jujuman13 said:
The NAACP says that Fox bamboozled them, whatever that means, Fox proved that on the basis of reporting this story on a particular time line, they were innocent of any attempt at Bamboozing NAACP, the Agricultural Dept concerned are practically standing on their collective heads in attempting to get Mrs. Shirly Sherrod accept their job offer, the White House says that they have no knowledge.
This last is very likely to mean that Obama is as usual clueless.
Click to expand...
Yes, it's hard to chalk this up as anything other than "pathetic" for anyone who touched the story - Fox, the NAACP, the Obama Admin, you name it.
 
liblady said:
yeah, for what he said in present time. and he kept his job, yes?
Click to expand...

Political controversy ensued following remarks Lott made on December 5, 2002 at the 100th birthday party of Sen. Strom Thurmond of South Carolina. Thurmond ran for President of the United States in 1948 on the Dixiecrat (or States' Rights) ticket. Lott said: "When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We’re proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over the years, either."[3]
Lott resigned as Senate Republican Leader on December 20, 2002.
Click to expand...
Trent Lott - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Didn't matter what his intentions were, his thoughts, his explanation.
 
Hatuey said:
Seems to me like you're still blaming the Obama administration for something. Hardly honest. Are you also going to now engage in long diatribes about why this woman should be rehired with the same fervor you did when you were convinced she was you know, a racist?
Click to expand...


You've got a lot of nerve here pal, crowing about how FOX News is responsible for furthering this, when Matthews, Olberman, and his nephew Maddow get things wrong, and they do often, you say nothing, then you question someone else's honesty?

That doesn't fly brother.


question your own honesty before you attack others ok?


j-mac
 
Ockham said:
I don't know what you watched but it cannot be the same thing I did. It's arguable that she was racist herself when she was younger but I submit at that time... she had a right to be! If you look at what she could have become given where she lived, the times, her father being killed by a white man and never prosecuted, the lynchings (and yes, I'm taking this woman's word for it that all this happened), she could have become what you think she is... but she changed. THAT was the story. Her religious beliefs helped. This woman probably has some biases still and it would be natural and expected but her message in that whole speech was a positive one, not a negative one. I think the issues are with you, and not her.
Click to expand...

i agree that her confessed declination to use the full force of her position was years back
but she still treats people differently based on race, and now she indicates she is entitled to treat people differently based on their perceived wealth (or lack of it)
she also used her official position to proselytize the worship of God. federal officials cannot do that
so, she treats people in a disparate manner based on their ethnicity and economic condition while preaching on behalf of God. all those things are violations of the standards of conduct for all federal employees
in my opinion she is well intentioned; but also noncompliant with necessary standards of conduct to hold a government position
 
Objective Voice said:
There's absolutely NOTHING in that video to support your position...NOTHING!

Mrs. Sherrod didn't envoke class warefare. She spoke of the politics of the time where people were treated unfairly based on both the color of their skin and their economic status, but nowhere in that video did she give any indication that she treated people in that way before or since her involvement with Mr. & Mrs. Spooner, the white farmer and his wife whom she eventually helped to save their farm.

Anyone who watched that video in its entirety objectively cannot come away thinking the woman was racist or bigotted against Whites. You just can't!!! Because it's just not there. This woman goes out of her way to promote improving race relations in this country. She even advocates that young Black people should re-evaluate their position on race relations and not jump to conclusions. Now, granted it is clear that Mrs. Sherrod grew up in the South at a time when racism and segregation was the norm, and she openly admits that she didn't serve the Spooners well initially, but when they called on her for help one week before their farm was to be foreclosed on, she lite up the phones contacting everyone she could think of until she found the Spooners a lawyer who was willing to file the necessary Chapter 11 bankruptcy paperwork to save their farm. This was all done long before Mrs. Sherrod was employed by the USDA. And the speech she gave before the March 27, 2010 NAACP fundraising event was apparently the same speech she has given at other events around the nation that deal with improving race relations in this country.

So, how anyone who watched the full video can still come away with this same sense of bigotry and hatred is beyond me. As I said earlier, the only way you don't see that Mrs. Sherrod has been wronged here is if you choose not to see it.
Click to expand...

then we have to agree to disagree
her belief that 'his kind' being a white attorney, would be appropriate shows that she makes decisions based on ethnicity
her willingness to not just relate her faith in God but to promote others to follow God's path in her official capacity during that speech violates the standards of conduct. federal officials cannot advocate any particular religious dogma be followed
and she cited that she recognizes the need to assist the poor. good hearted, well intentioned, but also absolutely wrong. a federal nofficial cannot show preference for a client because of their socio-economic condition unless the regulations authorize it. in this instance i doubt the USDA regs say that assistance to the poor should be a priority to aiding the well off
federal officials must be even handed in all things, unless the law, rules or regulations direct otherwise
this woman fails that test
 
justabubba said:
i agree that her confessed declination to use the full force of her position was years back
but she still treats people differently based on race, and now she indicates she is entitled to treat people differently based on their perceived wealth (or lack of it)
she also used her official position to proselytize the worship of God. federal officials cannot do that
so, she treats people in a disparate manner based on their ethnicity and economic condition while preaching on behalf of God. all those things are violations of the standards of conduct for all federal employees
in my opinion she is well intentioned; but also noncompliant with necessary standards of conduct to hold a government position
Click to expand...

justabubba said:
then we have to agree to disagree
her belief that 'his kind' being a white attorney, would be appropriate shows that she makes decisions based on ethnicity
her willingness to not just relate her faith in God but to promote others to follow God's path in her official capacity during that speech violates the standards of conduct. federal officials cannot advocate any particular religious dogma be followed
and she cited that she recognizes the need to assist the poor. good hearted, well intentioned, but also absolutely wrong. a federal nofficial cannot show preference for a client because of their socio-economic condition unless the regulations authorize it. in this instance i doubt the USDA regs say that assistance to the poor should be a priority to aiding the well off
federal officials must be even handed in all things, unless the law, rules or regulations direct otherwise
this woman fails that test
Click to expand...

The religious issue aside because that's merely reaching to continue your dislike for the woman and/or her actions, you're making your commentary based on things Mrs. Sheddon did in the past assuming that is how she treats people now. You, sir, have no proof of that; none whatsoever.

Have you reviewed her performance record as a USDA employee? No.

Have you talked with any of the client's Mrs. Sherrod has served in her capacity as Director of Rural Development for the Georgia state Dept. of Argiculture? No.

Have you personally witnessed this woman conduct herself in a racist or unfair manner in her capacity as Dir., Rural Development? No.

So, how can you make such statements as:

"... she still treats people differently based on race, and now she indicates she is entitled to treat people differently based on their perceived wealth (or lack of it)...

...she treats people in a disparate manner based on their ethnicity and economic condition...

...her belief that 'his kind' being a white attorney, would be appropriate shows that she makes decisions based on ethnicity...
Click to expand...

Granted, at that time 24 years ago Mrs. Sherrod did elude to the fact that she viewed at least one client based on his race and/or economic standing. She openly admitted that she was conflicted between helping a White farmer while seeing disadvantaged Black farmers lose their farmland. This did troubled her and honestly I can't say I would have blamed her had I been acquainted w/her so long ago, but nowhere in the unedited video does she state that's how she treats people now!! Therefore, you, sir, continue to mischaracterize this woman based on your own bigotry. You see only what you want to see and not what's truly before you.

There's no evidence in the full version of the video to support the claim that this woman is racist or that she performed her duties as Dir, Rural Dev in a racist or unfair fashion. So, unless you were a client of hers, reviewed her performance records or witnessed Mrs. Sherrod conduct herself in a racist and unfair fashion, your unfounded claims of her racist behavior is nothing more than a display of your own racist, bigoted and slanderous attitude.
 
Last edited:
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Oh, so in other words (I assume you me "wronged") she was wronged by the obama administration and anyone else besides the obama administration who disagrees with you is racist....


:roll:



edit: unless of course I have completley misunderstood you. :lamo
Click to expand...

First off, I never said that the Obama Administration didn't rush to judgment. Anyone who accused this woman of committing a racist act before seeing the full, unedited version of the video is guilty of doing this woman an injustice, and that includes the Obama Administration.

Second, yeah, buddy. You have misunderstood me - completely. (But I contend you've done so purposely.)

Third, now that the facts of the matter are out anyone who refuses to see that this woman's message was one of racial unity and not racial divisiveness and IS seaking to find any excuse to discredit her, yes, I AM calling them a racist and/or a bigot. There's nothing in the unedited video to characterize Mrs. Sheddon that way.
 
Last edited:
Objective Voice said:
The religious issue aside because that's merely reaching to continue your dislike for the woman and/or her actions, you're making your commentary based on things Mrs. Sheddon did in the past assuming that is how she treats people now. You, sir, have no proof of that; none whatsoever.
Click to expand...
actually, the proof is found within the video of her speech
including her proselytizing for God. what you term as a 'religious' issue is a clear cut violation of the standards of conduct for all federal employees. no federal employee (excepting chaplins) can advocate any particular faith. yet, she did. watch the video

Have you reviewed her performance record as a USDA employee? No.
Click to expand...
yes. her speech, as a USDA official shows us that she uses ethnicity to determine her actions - as in seeking out a WHITE attorney to aid a WHITE farmer. there should have been no reason to need to select an attorney because his ethnicity matched that of the client. but she did. that is disparate treatment. that is not permitted within the federal sector

Have you talked with any of the client's Mrs. Sherrod has served in her capacity as Director of Rural Development for the Georgia state Dept. of Argiculture? No.
Click to expand...
did not need to. the USDA employee's words were enough to incriminate her; for engaging in disparate treatment, for pushing religion in her official capacity and for differentiating between rich and poor as a basis for being willing to offer assistance as a federal employee

Have you personally witnessed this woman conduct herself in a racist or unfair manner in her capacity as Dir., Rural Development? No.
Click to expand...
you are consistent. and wrong
via the video of her speech i have witnessed that woman confessed to engaging in disparate treatment based on race and economic condition. i have also witnessed her proselytizing in her official capacity. each is a violation of the federal standards of conduct

So, how can you make such statements as:
Click to expand...
bubba:
"... she still treats people differently based on race, and now she indicates she is entitled to treat people differently based on their perceived wealth (or lack of it)...

...she treats people in a disparate manner based on their ethnicity and economic condition...

...her belief that 'his kind' being a white attorney, would be appropriate shows that she makes decisions based on ethnicity...
Click to expand...
each instance is found within the video of her speech


Granted, at that time 24 years ago Mrs. Sherrod did elude to the fact that she viewed at least one client based on his race and/or economic standing. She openly admitted that she was conflicted between helping a White farmer while seeing disadvantaged Black farmers lose their farmland. This did troubled her and honestly I can't say I would have blamed her had I been acquainted w/her so long ago, but nowhere in the unedited video does she state that's how she treats people now!!
Click to expand...
you remain consistent - and wrong
her video shows her willingness to treat people differently based on race, otherwise the ethnicity of the farmer's attorney would not have merited mention
her video shows her proselytizing for God
her video shows her expressing a willingness to aid poor people after her revelation about the poor white farmer. that one is rich or poor cannot have a bearing regards a federal employee's fiduciary obligation to assist the public. yet her distinguishing between rich and poor as a basis for offering help will be found in her speech video

Therefore, you, sir, continue to mischaracterize this woman based on your own bigotry. You see only what you want to see and not what's truly before you.
Click to expand...
watch the video
everything i have posited will be found therein
my conclusion is based on fact and a knowledge and understanding of the standards of conduct for federal employees

There's no evidence in the full version of the video to support the claim that this woman is racist ...
Click to expand...
if you refuse to recognize that she specifically sought out a WHITE lawyer for the WHITE farmer, then i see your point. however, that she did make such a determination based on ethnicity renders your conclusion, that she exhibited no racial bias, in error

... or that she performed her duties as Dir, Rural Dev in a racist or unfair fashion.
Click to expand...
why did she seek out a WHITE attorney if she was color blind. color blind people do not make selections based on the ethnicity of the lawyer who is hired
she indicated she would now seek to aid the poor. that is noble, but less than even handed. the rich are also entitled to the help of the USDA. that makes her statement an indication of her unfair evaluation of who should be helped by her federal agency. just as the color of the attorney should not be a factor in her actions, neither should the economic status of her client

So, unless you were a client of hers, reviewed her performance records or witnessed her conduct herself in a racist and unfair fashion, your unfounded claims of her racist behavior is nothing more than racist, bigoted and slanderous!!
Click to expand...
congratulations. you have been found wrong in every statement you have written in this singular post
i did not need to be her client to recognize that she does not follow the standards of conduct required of federal employees
that i have found the incriminating evidence of her disparate treatment within her speech as a federal official is sufficient to prove she violated the standards of conduct she is obligated to follow. there is nothing racist, bigoted or slanderous in offering up the truth
 
For the record, mea culpa. :surrender But I have the luxury of being an ignorant conservative still clinging to his God and guns and not BObama or his Secretary of Agriculture. Liberals are supposed to be smart, collected people who don't watch Fox News or fly off the handle.
 
MrVicchio said:
That's not what I am doing, but please continue to keep thinking that if you wish
Click to expand...

No...you are complaining about the one, then doing the same thing. Certainly not making it right..because it doesnt work...but definitely...no...wait...what?

Yeah...you kinda are. If you are using those kind of arguments in defense of your position you absoLUTEly are...
 
j-mac said:
You've got a lot of nerve here pal, crowing about how FOX News is responsible for furthering this, when Matthews, Olberman, and his nephew Maddow get things wrong, and they do often, you say nothing, then you question someone else's honesty?

That doesn't fly brother.


question your own honesty before you attack others ok?


j-mac
Click to expand...

Nah...he had the opportunity to show a little integrity earlier...chose to wear the crow instead of eat it.

Shocking...I know...so out of character...

:lamo
 
Ahlevah said:
For the record, mea culpa. :surrender But I have the luxury of being an ignorant conservative still clinging to his God and guns and not BObama or his Secretary of Agriculture. Liberals are supposed to be smart, collected people who don't watch Fox News or fly off the handle.
Click to expand...

Oh, and, um, if a black person needs to hire a lawyer, he'd probably be better off if he sticks to his own kind.
 
Justa...

You're being very disingenuous. If you truly watched the video you know full well Mrs. Sheddon did not refuse to provide full and equal service to Mr. Spooner while working for the USDA. If fact, you don't have to watch the video. You just have to read any news article on this matter from today!

From FoxNews.com
Agriculture Secretary Offers to Rehire Ousted Civil Servant
Published July 21, 2010

Sherrod [was] telling a story about how she didn't give a white farmer her "full" help, she later said the incident happened 24 years ago and that the story was meant to show how she learned from her mistakes.

Subsequent news reports in which Sherrod explained the full context of her remarks -- later substantiated by the wife of the white farmer in an interview with FoxNews.com -- sparked growing calls for the administration and Vilsack to reconsider the ouster.

The extended video released by the NAACP on Tuesday night showed Sherrod explaining how she initially didn't help the farmer with "full force," but realized she was wrong and went on to help him save his farm.

Sherrod, who is black and was working at the time for a nonprofit group, said she learned that the plight of poverty goes beyond race.
Click to expand...

The only way you missed that from any of the previous articles on this matter is if you chose to ignore it. The only way you miss it now is if you refuse to accept the truth.

For what it's worth, I'm glad the AgSec has not only offerred to rehire Mrs. Sheddon but has offerred her a new position within the Dept. of Agriculture.
 
Objective Voice said:
Justa...

You're being very disingenuous.
Click to expand...
yes, seems you insist the earth is flat while the facts show that it is round

If you truly watched the video you know full well Mrs. Sheddon did not refuse to provide full and equal service to Mr. Spooner while working for the USDA. If fact, you don't have to watch the video. You just have to read any news article on this matter from today!
Click to expand...
no, she did not refuse to provide him assistance while she was an employee of the USDA
yes, she insisted that the white farmer needed to also have a white attorney
appears she made that decision based entirely on the race of the lawyer and the race of the prospective client
that was a racially motivated decision. when that is found racism is exhibited

From FoxNews.com
Agriculture Secretary Offers to Rehire Ousted Civil Servant
Published July 21, 2010
Click to expand...
i suspect you intended to make a point with that. try again



The only way you missed that from any of the previous articles on this matter is if you chose to ignore it. The only way you miss it now is if you refuse to accept the truth.
Click to expand...
from your posts it is obvious you would not recognize the truth if it bit you on the ass
i have cited for you the three instances in which the woman's speech as a USDA official violated the federal standards of conduct
and you only ignore those violations
it can only be assumed you recognize that those violations of federal standards undermine your very weak argument

For what it's worth, I'm glad the AgSec has not only offerred to rehire Mrs. Sheddon but has offerred her a new position within the Dept. of Agriculture.
Click to expand...
you applaud an individual appointed to a position of authority in the federal government despite the evidence that she has violated the federal standards of conduct
this only underscores the widely held belief among career civil service that Obama's political appointees are as incompetent as dubya bin lyin's
that is a sad commentary on America and her future
but it is one you applaud
 
Groucho said:
Why is that?
Click to expand...

I don't really believe that is universally true, but I'm sure there are at least a few racist lawyers, white and black, who would give better service to their own race. But do you think it's racist for a white person to speak in public using terms like "one of them" or "his own kind" when referring to blacks? :confused:
 
Ahlevah said:
I don't really believe that is universally true, but I'm sure there are at least a few racist lawyers, white and black, who would give better service to their own race. But do you think it's racist for a white person to speak in public using terms like "one of them" or "his own kind" when referring to blacks? :confused:
Click to expand...


Oh Good job! You scared off the Uber Liberal lawyer with a relevant question....how dare you do that! :mrgreen:


j-mac
 
Ahlevah said:
I don't really believe that is universally true, but I'm sure there are at least a few racist lawyers, white and black, who would give better service to their own race. But do you think it's racist for a white person to speak in public using terms like "one of them" or "his own kind" when referring to blacks? :confused:
Click to expand...

So you should advise people to seek out racists?

And yes, to advise someone to "seek out their own kind" is racist. Good thing Sherrod realized her mistake 20 years ago and is now teaching others that such ideas are wrong.
 
j-mac said:
Oh Good job! You scared off the Uber Liberal lawyer with a relevant question....how dare you do that! :mrgreen:


j-mac
Click to expand...

Sorry I'm not sitting by the computer 24 hours a day just to respond quickly. Get a life, wise guy.
 
Groucho said:
Sorry I'm not sitting by the computer 24 hours a day just to respond quickly. Get a life, wise guy.
Click to expand...


Well, gosh darn it....You should be! This is of the greatest importance in today's culture! I mean without your input how would we know what to oppose Groucho? :)

How ya doin' ol pal?


j-mac
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom