I do think it is kind of reckless but then so is most of what goes on in the political arena. Breitbart didn't send this to her employer; he released it to the media. Sherrod was not fired; she quit without a fight. Apparently, the WH pressured the Ag to have her get rid of herself (how gutless is that?) immediately (stop driving the car and resign?). Lost in all of this is her confession that she didn't do as much as she could and she attributed it to the race of the couple seeking help. Fortunately, for them, it came out okay and, ironically, they credit Sherrod for it whether she deserves it or not. To her everlasting credit, Sherrod recognized the shortcomings of her response and claims to have grown beyond that. We can only believe her or not believe her since no one is evaluating the rest of her career. I'm inclined to believe her. Racism is probably organic as well as institutional. We all have to fight it in ourselves.
um, not sure you understood her story. and funny how you take the word of breitbart, but you question the farmer's wife who said sherrod worked her ass off for them.
I listened to Sherrod's full story. Did she or did she not say that she didn't do as much as she could for them? I didn't take the word of Breitbart, I just reported it here. Neither do I take the word of the attackdogs who are more concerned with Breitbart than Rangel. :grin: Mrs. Sherrod's own story is about the Farmer not the Farmer's Wife. I'm not sure what the wife knows or experienced. As I said, Sherrod saw it through but somewhere along the way she admitted to dropping the ball on them... and on purpose. Is that not what she said?
Groogrux/RM95 - for other equally fun options aside from letting this weird old geezer get his kicks, I suggest flaming vodka eyeballing or self-immolation while punching one's self in the groin. Or you can just keep playing the charlie brown to his lucy racism-football.
she said at first she wasn't going to do as much, but then decided that was wrong and did. are you saying the farmer's wife is lying or misrepresenting the story: why are you so eager to dismiss the work she did for this family and others? this is a woman who nearly immediately recognized the error of her thoughts and 24 years later was sharing those thoughts to a group to combat racism, yet you're so eager to side with the guy who edited her words to smear her to prove a point. if the situation was reversed and it was rush limbaugh's quotes edited and manipulated, you'd defend him until you were blue in the face. oh wait, you already that when rush hasn't even lost his job for his unedited and manipulated racist quotes. yet here's a black woman, preaching against racism by using her own personal anecdote (that she could've kept private and no one would've been the wiser), and you still refuse to give her the benefit of the doubt and side with breitbart. and no one on this bbs is surprised with the side you're taking.
These are distinctions without meaning. If he released it to the media its going to get back to her employers. Being forced to resign is no different than being fired. I agree with you though it was a bad move on the part of the USDA and they deserve a lot of blame but this is tortured logic to excuse Breitbart. If I recall she said she thought about not doing as much as she could but changed her mind once she found out more about the situation.
I said that she was closer to glory than evil which means that I recognize and acknowledge the good she did for these people in the end, but it was a bumpy road in some ways. What more does one need to say? In her own words she admits: 1) her initial failings and 2) her re-commitment to doing the right thing. It's not a fairy tale. She ultimately did the right thing. She's not Jesus being crucified here. She herself stated her failing. I'm not focused on that but I'm not skipping it either.
Being asked to resign is very different from being fired. It has ramifications both practical and philosophical. No doubt Breitbart was seeking publicity but my point was the he didn't send it to her employers which is what all the analogies assert. Where did I "excuse" Breitbart? I said he was reckless. He was trying to prove a point and it spun out of control with an unintended consequence. This does not make him evil as most here seem to promote. As I recall, she made it seem like her conscience got to her and prompted her to correct her actions. Her words were something about realizing that she was helping POOR people not BLACK or WHITE people....
We pretty much know where those guys are coming from and I don't expect to change their minds. Engaging with them is primarily entertainment.
Funny, I don't expect to change your mind either! My main motivation is to balance out the argument by countering the relentless attacks and foilling what I see as a lot of politically correct foolishness.
her words smeared herself. i have yet to hear her disavow her comments that she thinks republicans are racists for opposing obamacare.
Not when you are forced to do so. In politics you almost never see someone getting fired. For instance Gen. McChrystal wasn't technically fired. He submitted a resignation but no one considers him leaving his post as voluntary. Again a distinction without meaning. And again a distinction with no meaning. I mean if I were to release to the media a highly edited footage of you that gave the impression that you were doing drugs while on the job do you think that wouldn't get back to your boss? In fact its worse for Sherrod that he publically released the footage rather than just send it to the USDA as it forces the USDA to react to it due to the public outcry and drags Sherrod's reputation in the mud for the public to see rather than quietly handling it outside of public view. Why are then going to such lengths to argue for Breitbart's case regarding what happened to Sherrod? This doesn't make him evil, he hasn't killed anyone as far as I know, but it does make him a callous asshat. I find it interesting that you use terms like "she made it seem like" in regard to Sherrod which implies doubt on your part, yet you fully accept Breitbart's word on face value.
Except that in this case you are engaging in essentially the same thing as political correctness. You continue to imply that somehow Sherrod is harboring racist thoughts .
