Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Is my request unreasonable? All I am asking for is some evidence that Fox was playing this video before her resignation. What show did it break on? Did it break on the website? If so what time?
Is there any evidence that Fox or Breitbart editted the video? Any at all. I don't care about anything they've said or done in the past. I want to know if there is any evidence that they editted the tape. Not assumptions, evidence.
I don't think this is unreasonable. Perhaps I am wrong. But wouldn't it be prudent to wait until we have some sort of evidence for or against before we start going off on Fox and Brietbart? Wouldn't it be wiser to not make the same mistakes the NAACP and Administratioan made Monday afternoon?
Or am I just completely off base here?
I think it was FoxNews.com where they posted the edited tape....
but I did just find this clip from O'reilly that appears to have been aired BEFORE Sherrod was asked to resign....I don't know how to post a video, but there on this left wing media matters, there is the Bill o'Reilly segment where he is asking for her resignation....go there and view the different videos....I only watched the Bill oreilly one, but it could be it was aired before the news hit that she had resigned?
Fox smears Sherrod as racist, Sherrod cancels Fox interview | Media Matters for America
STOP with the lies that FOX did not report on this until after Sherrod was asked to resign by the Dept of Agriculture head...
FOX news says themselves that they REPORTED IT FIRST.
FOXNews.com - Video Shows USDA Official Saying She Didn't Give 'Full Force' of Help to White Farmer
I can't find a reliable timeline here, Care, but the Fox piece in your link is dated July 20, yesterday. Sherrod resigned July 19 according to your emboldened headline.
Is your concern that Fox reported it first? Or that the Fox report led to her being asked to resign? If the latter, I can't find any verification.
The main concern is to deflect Obama Administration Moronic Decisions.
How come no one is bitching about the racism from the audience? You know, the part where they are "amening" her treatment of whitey?
How come no one is bitching about the racism from the audience? You know, the part where they are "amening" her treatment of whitey?
How come no one is bitching about the racism from the audience? You know, the part where they are "amening" her treatment of whitey?
What I don't get is why she dwelled almost the entire speech on the period of 40 to 60 years ago and the bad treatment of blacks? What is the purpose on dwelling on it, why do they feel the need to keep all of that alive and carry the chips? It's like it defines them and who they are somehow. It's not like that today, we've come a long way, yet they still can't quit beating the dead horse.
How come no one is bitching about the racism from the audience? You know, the part where they are "amening" her treatment of whitey?
What I don't get is why she dwelled almost the entire speech on the period of 40 to 60 years ago and the bad treatment of blacks? What is the purpose on dwelling on it, why do they feel the need to keep all of that alive and carry the chips? It's like it defines them and who they are somehow. It's not like that today, we've come a long way, yet they still can't quit beating the dead horse.
In the snippet I saw, she was telling the story of when she first started out and her perception of it being about white vs. black. What she came to realize is that it's not about that at all. It's about poor is poor, regardless of color and helping the poor is what matters, not what color someone's skin is.
How come no one is bitching about the racism from the audience? You know, the part where they are "amening" her treatment of whitey?
What I don't get is why she dwelled almost the entire speech on the period of 40 to 60 years ago and the bad treatment of blacks? What is the purpose on dwelling on it, why do they feel the need to keep all of that alive and carry the chips? It's like it defines them and who they are somehow. It's not like that today, we've come a long way, yet they still can't quit beating the dead horse.
In the snippet I saw, she was telling the story of when she first started out and her perception of it being about white vs. black. What she came to realize is that it's not about that at all. It's about poor is poor, regardless of color and helping the poor is what matters, not what color someone's skin is.
How come no one is bitching about the racism from the audience? You know, the part where they are "amening" her treatment of whitey?
What I don't get is why she dwelled almost the entire speech on the period of 40 to 60 years ago and the bad treatment of blacks? What is the purpose on dwelling on it, why do they feel the need to keep all of that alive and carry the chips? It's like it defines them and who they are somehow. It's not like that today, we've come a long way, yet they still can't quit beating the dead horse.
In the snippet I saw, she was telling the story of when she first started out and her perception of it being about white vs. black. What she came to realize is that it's not about that at all. It's about poor is poor, regardless of color and helping the poor is what matters, not what color someone's skin is.
How come no one is bitching about the racism from the audience? You know, the part where they are "amening" her treatment of whitey?
What I don't get is why she dwelled almost the entire speech on the period of 40 to 60 years ago and the bad treatment of blacks? What is the purpose on dwelling on it, why do they feel the need to keep all of that alive and carry the chips? It's like it defines them and who they are somehow. It's not like that today, we've come a long way, yet they still can't quit beating the dead horse.
In the snippet I saw, she was telling the story of when she first started out and her perception of it being about white vs. black. What she came to realize is that it's not about that at all. It's about poor is poor, regardless of color and helping the poor is what matters, not what color someone's skin is.
What I don't get is why she dwelled almost the entire speech on the period of 40 to 60 years ago and the bad treatment of blacks? What is the purpose on dwelling on it, why do they feel the need to keep all of that alive and carry the chips? It's like it defines them and who they are somehow. It's not like that today, we've come a long way, yet they still can't quit beating the dead horse.
In the snippet I saw, she was telling the story of when she first started out and her perception of it being about white vs. black. What she came to realize is that it's not about that at all. It's about poor is poor, regardless of color and helping the poor is what matters, not what color someone's skin is.
Agree!
What I don't get is why she dwelled almost the entire speech on the period of 40 to 60 years ago and the bad treatment of blacks? What is the purpose on dwelling on it, why do they feel the need to keep all of that alive and carry the chips? It's like it defines them and who they are somehow. It's not like that today, we've come a long way, yet they still can't quit beating the dead horse.
In the snippet I saw, she was telling the story of when she first started out and her perception of it being about white vs. black. What she came to realize is that it's not about that at all. It's about poor is poor, regardless of color and helping the poor is what matters, not what color someone's skin is.
At 18:37 she stops herself and adds, "well it is about black and white...but..." I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt since she probably remembered who she was talking to - an organization dedicated to making sure it is and remains about black and white.
So you people claim there is no racism in the country and that she was lying about there being racism?
So you people claim there is no racism in the country and that she was lying about there being racism?
oh brother
I listened to the breitbart cut version and understood exactly what she meant.
It amazes me people could not get the true context from the Doctored tape.
I listened to the breitbart cut version and understood exactly what she meant.
It amazes me people could not get the true context from the Doctored tape.
It's amazing how people misuse the word "doctored"
In the snippet I saw, she was telling the story of when she first started out and her perception of it being about white vs. black. What she came to realize is that it's not about that at all. It's about poor is poor, regardless of color and helping the poor is what matters, not what color someone's skin is.
Agree!
She didn't go on at length about her father's murder? About how black men were murdered by white men and nothing was done about it all the way to the Supreme Court? She didn't talk about how white men could build their houses out of brick, but a black man couldn't? She didn't talk about how the white men back in the 17th and 18th centuries came up with a way to make themselves superior to black men in order to keep them down? And that wasn't even all of it. The majority of her speech was bringing up all of the injustices of the past. She couldn't come right out and say that it wasn't about black and white to that audience, she had to pay dues first and make them realize that she understands how the black man is kept down, like it's still happening today. What was the point in bringing all of that history up?
