Shirley Sherrod: An interesting Timeline of events (wow its not fox new's fault)

[ConHog]

The originations of the incident came from the NAACP organizing an anti-Tea Party stance, with M. Obama making an appearance the very next day, thus giving the impression that the White House was complicit in this attempt to smear the Tea Party as racist.

Breitbart then posts a video showing members of the NAACP seemingly approving of a racist story being shared by Sherrod. The video becomes part of the ongoing story of the NAACP's anti-Tea Party stance, making charges of racism while seemingly supporting racism when it is applied to whites.

Then that story becomes greatly elevated by the Obama administration's cartoonish rush to judgement against Sherrod, and her firing/resignation, followed up by the White House apologizing and the NAACP's laughable claim of having been "snookered" - even though they were present at the very presentation by Sherrod just months earlier.

Fox News did nothing wrong - it simply reported the still developing story regarding the NAACP and its anti-Tea Party positions, and included both the initial edited video and the later full video as part of that story.

It is still uncertain if Breitbart edited the video, or was simply given the edited version. Hopefully that will come out soon, for if Breitbart did in fact do the editing, much blame will deservedly come his way.

The greatest fault for the entire story lies with the Obama White House - a clear case of bereft leadership, showing just how weak, thin skinned, and reactionary it has become...

Here's what Breitbart himself said about it early on:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kMfCAoVPx0]YouTube - Andrew Breitbart Defends Shirley Sherrod Story[/ame]

You're right that if HE edited the tape in a prejudicial way, he should be condemned for that. So far there is no evidence that he did.

All the Fox News commentators later stated that the information they got that somebody in the White House had commented was incorrect but rather it came from the department office itself. And so they have confirmed that there is no clear evidence that Obama himself knew about it before the firing occurred.

There is only the word of someone with no credibility that he didn't. He has not named anyone and no one has come forward.

As I said, I have nothing invested in this guy, if he purposely put an edited video out there , shame on him. I just don't know that he did, and so I won't jump to conclusions. I am appalled that you didn't learn that lesson from this episode. I mean come on.............

And Breibert =/= FoxNews, so admit that even if Breibert did do it, FN did not.

 

[paperview]

I call Shenanigans.

Every news outlet on the planet shows clips without a disclaimer that the actual event was of a much longer duration.

Well, when they are making a virulent charge of racism about a woman who's job could be lost, it's you know, kind asorta, just a weeeee
FUCKING IMPORTANT

to get the clip in context, and not have it turn out the story was a whoooooooooooooooooole lot different than what you portrayed.

What the hell do you think all this wild shit is about???

 

[paperview]

...........

And Breibert =/= FoxNews, so admit that even if Breibert did do it, FN did not.

But Foxnews.com did.

 

[The Infidel]

Thank you for that video - Breitbart makes the excellent point that I too believe to be a very important one - the NAACP members were openly supportive of the racism being shared within the context of Sherrod's story, and THAT is likely the more important aspect of the clip. The story should not be about Sherrod, but rather the NAACP members approving of racism against white people.

That was why he posted it in the 1st place.... the story took on a life of its own after that.

The NAACP was in the process of trying to prove that The Teapartiers are racists and he (Brietbart) figured he would show their hypocracy with the video of them being supportive Sherrods racist ways.


Fox was merely reporting on how the WH fired her so quickly.

 

[paperview]

And yes, Brietbart and Fox news are thick as thieves.

Literally.

 

[The Infidel]

Well, when they are making a virulent charge of racism about a woman who's job could be lost, it's you know, kind asorta, just a weeeee
FUCKING IMPORTANT

to get the clip in context, and not have it turn out the story was a whoooooooooooooooooole lot different than what you portrayed.

What the hell do you think all this wild shit is about???

The Fox news story was about how The White House fired her and why they did it.

Fox news didnt get her fired.... that was already done before the story aired.

 

[Ravi]

And yes, Brietbart and Fox news are thick as thieves.

Literally.

I was wondering about that...who posted the story on Fox Nation that Fox Nation tweeted about? Brietbart himself, probably.

 

[The Infidel]

And yes, Brietbart and Fox news are thick as thieves.

Literally.

Just admit it.... your an Obama-zombie.

 

[The Infidel]

I was wondering about that...who posted the story on Fox Nation that Fox Nation tweeted about? Brietbart himself, probably.

Got any proof?

 

[Ravi]

I was wondering about that...who posted the story on Fox Nation that Fox Nation tweeted about? Brietbart himself, probably.

Got any proof?

Nope, pure speculation on my part. I'm just hanging out here waiting for PP to admit he was wrong.

 

[paperview]

Well, when they are making a virulent charge of racism about a woman who's job could be lost, it's you know, kind asorta, just a weeeee
FUCKING IMPORTANT

to get the clip in context, and not have it turn out the story was a whoooooooooooooooooole lot different than what you portrayed.

What the hell do you think all this wild shit is about???

The Fox news story was about how The White House fired her and why they did it.

Fox news didnt get her fired.... that was already done before the story aired.

Now HOW IN THE HELL can a FoxNation Twitter at 10:36AM be twittering -- and link to -- a Fox News.com story at--

Again: LISTEN & LOOK CLOSELY: 10:36AM <<<-----When she wasn't fired till that evening?

 

[edthecynic]

Your link is to a story about the firing that did not happen until around 5 p.m. EST. So your version isn't stacking up either.

Yep, because Fox not only changed the date, they also changed the story.

The original article was posted last night. It said nothing about her being a racist, nor did it call for her to be fired. It simply said that the entire video wasn't shown BUT the part that was did appear to show the woman as being a racist.

You are the biggest liar on the planet. You would lie about anything, no matter how much proof was presented to you, and you wouldn't recognize the truth if it punched you in the nose.

You got caught telling that lie earlier in this thread, why are you still telling it.

Here is the entire article as it appeared at least by 6:15 PM when it was reposted on another site that FOX can't change. Please highlight where it says the entire video is not shown.
Thank you in advance.

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

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

Published July 19, 2010
FoxNews.com

Shown here is USDA Georgia official Shirley Sherrod. (YouTube)

Days after the NAACP clashed with Tea Party members over allegations of racism, a video has surfaced showing an Agriculture Department official regaling an NAACP audience with a story about how she withheld help to a white farmer facing bankruptcy.

Shirley Sherrod, the department's Georgia director of Rural Development, is shown in the clip describing "the first time I was faced with having to help a white farmer save his farm." Sherrod, who is black, claimed the farmer took a long time trying to show he was "superior" to her. The audience laughed as she described how she determined his fate.

"He had to come to me for help. What he didn't know while he was taking all that time trying to show me he was superior to me was I was trying to decide just how much help I was going to give him," she said. "I was struggling with the fact that so many black people have lost their farmland and here I was faced with having to help a white person save their land -- so I didn't give him the full force of what I could do. I did enough."

Sherrod explained that at the time, she assumed the state or national Department of Agriculture referred him to her. In order to ensure that the farmer could report back that she was indeed helpful, she said she took him to see "one of his own" -- a white lawyer.

"I figured that if I take him to one of them, that his own kind would take care of him," she said.

The video clip was first posted by BigGovernment.com. The clip is dated March 27 from an NAACP Freedom Fund banquet.

FoxNews.com is seeking a response from both the NAACP and the USDA. The clip adds to the firestorm of debate over the NAACP's decision to approve a resolution at its convention last week accusing some Tea Party activists of racism -- a charge Tea Party leaders deny.

In a second clip from the same event posted online, Sherrod appeared to urge black job seekers to find work at the Department of Agriculture because the federal government won't lay people off.

"There are jobs at USDA and many times there are no people of color to fill those jobs because we shy away from agriculture. We hear the word agriculture and think, why are we working in the fields?" she said. "You've heard of a lot of layoffs. Have you heard of anybody in the federal government losing their job? That's all I need to say."

 

[Sherry]

i am on record, in this very thread i believe, that i think what the agriculture secretary and administration did was very wrong, and the agri secretary should be fired for firing her, because in THIS COUNTRY, we are presumed innocent, until PROVEN guilty....

Barney Frank didn't resign when he was accused and neither did jefferson(i think that was his name....the guy with the money in the freezer) until he was convicted....and these were actual accusations of crimes vs prejudice....

yet with this woman, they used their power to intimidate her in to resigning without hearing her out? that ain;t kosher in my book!

____

Good - and do you admit that the Obama administration's very odd and post-haste demand for her firing/resignation is the most important aspect of this story? For if not, you engaging in passive deflection and not embracing the harsh reality of just how inept the Obama White was in this particular case...

Well, I don't think that is the most important part of this story, I do think Breitbart using an edited tape that smeared this woman is the ROOT of this mess and it should be the first thing we focus on, and how it whipped across the net like fire....with everyone believing this woman was a racist from it....including myself for a nano second....

How could we all be duped so easily, is secondary to WHO EDITED THE TAPE that slandered this woman and duped us.

Then I would move onward to what lead the Agri secretary and administration to be duped so easily and to cower?

Except this story isn't about the general public being duped, it's about the administration being duped. I don't know about you, but I hold the leadership in our government to a significantly higher standard than any media organization. There will always be people attempting to "dupe" others, but we should be able to depend on those in power to think rationally and clearly. They have failed, big time. Attempting to excuse, or minimize, their actions by pointing fingers elsewhere, is just avoiding the fact that we have a "fire first and ask questions later" administration. Strong leaders do not jump the gun. They should always be on their guard and prepared, but their behavior leaves many feeling little confidence in their ability to lead.

 

[paperview]

I was wondering about that...who posted the story on Fox Nation that Fox Nation tweeted about? Brietbart himself, probably.

Got any proof?

Nope, pure speculation on my part. I'm just hanging out here waiting for PP to admit he was wrong.

I'm not wrong.

Click it again, little child. --->http://twitter.com/myfoxnation/status/18932307766

What time does it say? What headline does it read?

What place does it link to????

 

[DiveCon]

I was wondering about that...who posted the story on Fox Nation that Fox Nation tweeted about? Brietbart himself, probably.

Got any proof?

actually, its looking like that could be the case
as in there is a news crawler program that takes blog and news posts from a set list of sites and posts them to FoxNation automatically
so if that is the case, the fact the Breitbart posted it to HIS blog and his blog is in the list, it got posted to FoxNation on the next chronjob of the program

 

[ConHog]

...........

And Breibert =/= FoxNews, so admit that even if Breibert did do it, FN did not.

But Foxnews.com did.

foxnews.com edited the tape? PROVE it bitch


fucking liar. I'm sick of the fucking liars on this site

 

[The Infidel]

Now HOW IN THE HELL can a FoxNation Twitter at 10:36AM be twittering -- and link to -- a Fox News.com story at--

Again: LISTEN & LOOK CLOSELY: 10:36AM <<<-----When she wasn't fired till that evening?

She was asked to pull over and resign.... what time was that?

 

[paperview]

...........

And Breibert =/= FoxNews, so admit that even if Breibert did do it, FN did not.

But Foxnews.com did.

foxnews.com edited the tape? PROVE it bitch


fucking liar. I'm sick of the fucking liars on this site

I never said Foxnews.com edited the tape.

I reread the post. I was simply referring to Foxnews.com posting about it, not editing.

Kay?

 

[The Infidel]

foxnews.com edited the tape? PROVE it bitch


fucking liar. I'm sick of the fucking liars on this site

Me too....

right from "rules for radicals"

"If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside... every positive has its negative."

 

[boedicca]

But Foxnews.com did.

foxnews.com edited the tape? PROVE it bitch


fucking liar. I'm sick of the fucking liars on this site

I never said Foxnews.com edited the tape.

I reread the post. I was simply referring to Foxnews.com posting about it, not editing.

Kay?

When foxnews.com posted it, they included a note that it was just a portion of a video, and that they didn't know what the point of Breitbart's story was.