Well there goes any sympathy I had…

Posted: July 23, 2010 by datechguy in internet/free speech
Tags: , , ,

It’s one thing to be angry over a situation, it’s another to decide to demagogue:

SHERROD: 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.

COOPER: You think — you think he’s racist?

SHERROD: … I think he’s so vicious. Yes, I do.

And I think that’s why he’s so vicious against a black president, you know. He would go after me. I don’t think it was even the NAACP he was totally after. I think he was after a black president.

So. I’ve gotten by black and white but the person I don’t like is a racist who wants to return us to slavery and hates the administration because Obama is black. As opposed to the actual administration that fired her which by her interpetation did so due to an attack by a racist, or the NAACP that backed said firing even though they had full context of the videos available.

It’s one thing to be angry for a day but once you decide you are going to be part of the national debate then you are a legitimate target for comment, and if she thinks Breitbart wants to bring back slavery then yup she has lost any credibility she had and deserves any ridicule she gets from it.

As Hotair puts it:

One of the lessons of this week, supposedly, is that we should beware of caricatures in racial matters, not only because people are more complicated in practice but because the fallout from misjudgment is culturally poisonous. See, e.g., the initial clip of Sherrod versus her full NAACP speech. But here she is pushing a caricature of her own — with no evidence to support a charge this incendiary — and Cooper the journalist lets it slide, presumably because he’s squeamish about siding with Breitbart against someone who, to his audience, is a sympathetic victim..

Some people handle attention different ways. I think she is in real danger of letting this stuff go to her head. Quite a shame really.

Of course this might be the media trying to bait the right too, keeping the story alive to take copy space from Journolist. We’ll see.

Memeorandum thread here.

Update: Ed Driscoll puts it much better than I did complete with Airplane Gag.

  1. Andy totally misrepresented the thrust of Ms. Sherrod’s speech by heavily edited a video of her to make it look like she was admitting to having deliberately screwed a white farmer because he was white. If Breitbart had a shred of integrity, Mr. Spooner (-the white farmer in question) would have back up Breitbart’s take on this story.
    But Breitbart fabricated a story to present a false narrative meant to deflect the charge of racism that exists among some members of the Tea Party. Didn’t work did it? Breitbart is making a name for himself, and it ain’t the name he’d hope for.

  2. […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Sissy Willis, Peter Ingemi. Peter Ingemi said: #Sherrod claims @andrewbreitbart wants slavery back. I guess she had a deck of race cards in her pocket after all. http://wp.me/pnQZ0-4vW […]

  3. Moving on Up says:

    So, let’s review the Breitbart gang’s allegations:

    When … she expresses a discriminatory attitude towards white people, the audience responds with applause. False.
    The NAACP … is cheering on a person describing a white person as the other. False.
    The NAACP audience seemed to have approved of her actions when she talked about not helping the white farmer. False.
    They weren’t cheering redemption; they were cheering discrimination. False.
    As Ms. Sherrod recounted the first part of her parable, how she declined to do everything she could for the farmer because of his race, the audience responded in approval. False.

    ***Addition by DaTechGuy*** There was a duplicate comment with the same text, but with a different e-mail. I presume the writer has a 2nd blog or that it is a blast comment from a group, (I’m not in front of my e-mail to check IP at the moment so I don’t know for sure.) So I am approving this comment and holding the other while adding this link to the other blog the sideshow so readers wanting to respond can see both sites.

  4. Andrew Breitbart, had he been a journalist, would have interviewed the principals in this story BEFORE he released the edited tape. By researching, he’d have noticed a discrepancy in the story that actually was compared to the edited tape he foisted on Fox News.
    No, he intended a hit piece from the beginning. The truth was ignored. His desire was to use this edited tape to “prove” reverse racism, thereby deflecting the charge of racism against SOME at these tea parties. This racism charges seem to have hit a raw nerve to elicit this kind or hateful response.
    I have read Andrew Breitbarts 23 paragraph post. “Context is everything.” Context shows he tried to make up a narrative that was calculated to cover the charges of racism that he is so sensitive about. But the unintended consequence of his hateful screed of lies is that America has heard a different story. The real narrative Ms. Sherrod was telling is the narrative of someone whos father was killed by the Ku Klux Klan, who developed prejudices and yet found a way to be a true advocate for this white farm family. Thanks Andrew Breitbart for giving this story to America…..

  5. “I think the screed of lies bit just isn’t supported by the evidence.”

    -Hopefully Ms. Sherrod will sue his ass, and then it will come out in a court of law. This event ends what little credibility Breitbart may have had. He is an unhinged individual, and may need help.