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

[The T]

She's not really a LAMB. From her history, she appears to be a petty race hustler who has profited from suing the USDA for discrimination on behalf of black farmers. She and her husband each received $150K for "pain and suffering" from the government in that case. And now she has a bigger hustle to play. Watch for some big settlement in the future.

I know that...you know that...but as to the 'Firing'? It was a ploy for her to be fired...that subsequently backfired on Obama, and the USDA, NAALCP...but the more she speaks?

Think they'll FIRE her again ?

What a proverbial corner Obama and the Statists have painted themselves into...again...Whom is MANIPULATING whom?

 

[Foxfyre]

She's not really a LAMB. From her history, she appears to be a petty race hustler who has profited from suing the USDA for discrimination on behalf of black farmers. She and her husband each received $150K for "pain and suffering" from the government in that case. And now she has a bigger hustle to play. Watch for some big settlement in the future.

I know that...you know that...but as to the 'Firing'? It was a ploy for her to be fired...that subsequently backfired on Obama, and the USDA, NAALCP...but the more she speaks?

Think they'll FIRE her again ?

What a proverbial corner Obama and the Statists have painted themselves into...again...Whom is MANIPULATING whom?

LOL. I hadn't thought about it quite like that.

Not only was the Administration extremely inept in carrying out what is looking more and more like a setup deal to smear Breitbart and Fox News, but they may have seriously misjudged the competence of their sacxrificial goat in the scheme.

 

[DiveCon]

She's not really a LAMB. From her history, she appears to be a petty race hustler who has profited from suing the USDA for discrimination on behalf of black farmers. She and her husband each received $150K for "pain and suffering" from the government in that case. And now she has a bigger hustle to play. Watch for some big settlement in the future.

I know that...you know that...but as to the 'Firing'? It was a ploy for her to be fired...that subsequently backfired on Obama, and the USDA, NAALCP...but the more she speaks?

Think they'll FIRE her again ?

What a proverbial corner Obama and the Statists have painted themselves into...again...Whom is MANIPULATING whom?

LOL. I hadn't thought about it quite like that.

Not only was the Administration extremely inept in carrying out what is looking more and more like a setup deal to smear Breitbart and Fox News, but they may have seriously misjudged the competence of their sacxrificial goat in the scheme.

naw, i doubt they are capable enough to pull anything like that off


besides, the only ones smearing Fox News are the leftwingers
and then a few that really dont know all the facts are taking the bullshit fed to them by leftwingers as the truth
and they would do that to FNC even if the wind blows

 

[edthecynic]

Wrong.

I said "Deep Throat, anyone?"

And you responded by citing Dan Rather.

What a moron.

you can milk the dumb act, but I will call you on it.

Here is the whole exchange with the key words highlighted:

Uhhhh...Journalists do protect their sources.

Deep Throat, anyone?

Not dishonest sources!

We know Rather's source, Lt. Col. Bill Burkett.

Deep Throat was not a dishonest source, all his info was confirmed and he was rightly protected.

Rather's source was dishonest and was not protected and was rightly outed BEFORE the election.

Bigotbart not revealing his dishonest source makes him WORSE than Rather. You know it which is why you are playing dumb.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

yes, his SOURCE was the one that edited the video

PROVE IT!

Bigotbart's word is not credible.

Why won't he name the "source?" Why doesn't FOX Gossip Channel demand he name the "source?" Why doesn't the "source" come forward?

I say there was no source and Bigotbart is the editor, and FOX knows he is the editor, as long as the source remains unnamed!!!!

what makes you look the fool is that you buy into their argument and on their grounds.

I said the thing was edited. Who or why is only important for their deflection which you -- yes you help to keep active.

The motivation behind the airing of the video was anger at being called out by the NAACP, which later congratulates the tea party for agreeing there were racist elements within.

The point here is the conservatives posing as watchdogs of racism --- they are actually trying to make every criticism of white racism into a case of reverse discrimination.

pay attention and stop buying into their game plan.

 

[daveman]

i don't know if fox running with the story on the 19th before she was fired influenced Vilsak's decision on sherrod's firing/resigning or not....

i don't know if foxnews.com contacting the naacp on this made the naacp aware of the situation and coming out with their statement requesting her to resign or not....

What i do know is that foxnews.com did run with their article on the 19th BEFORE she was fired and that foxnews.com DID contact both the naacp and the usda for a response on the video they and breitbart were showing on the net.

And if foxnews.com's running with the story online on feb 19th and requesting responses did influence the decisions and statements made by the naacp and the usda, then SHAME on the usda and the naacp.

that's my stance.

We're agreed. Everyone is responsible for their own actions...including the White House.

 

[The T]

She's not really a LAMB. From her history, she appears to be a petty race hustler who has profited from suing the USDA for discrimination on behalf of black farmers. She and her husband each received $150K for "pain and suffering" from the government in that case. And now she has a bigger hustle to play. Watch for some big settlement in the future.

I know that...you know that...but as to the 'Firing'? It was a ploy for her to be fired...that subsequently backfired on Obama, and the USDA, NAALCP...but the more she speaks?

Think they'll FIRE her again ?

What a proverbial corner Obama and the Statists have painted themselves into...again...Whom is MANIPULATING whom?

LOL. I hadn't thought about it quite like that.

Not only was the Administration extremely inept in carrying out what is looking more and more like a setup deal to smear Breitbart and Fox News, but they may have seriously misjudged the competence of their sacxrificial goat in the scheme.

The banter has gone back and forth...from the outset? The NAALCP Decired her after the USDA Fired her for it...I called her a sacrificial LAMB...

Based on the fact that the NAALCP had the entire Vid...Brietbart only had PART of it...But still she gets fired. She was going to be on 'BECK'...(Albeit Beck didn't KNOW it either)?

The NAALCP releases the entire VID...Obama Calls her...The USDA Chief Makes a postition for her to come back...she's been all over the Media with appearances...

And the More she speaks? The more I think they were correct in her firing?

So Backtrack? Mea Culpa? What's this rascist Regime to do now?

Damned wet paint! And yet they blame Conservatives for not voting them a door to give them an easy OUT.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Uhhhh...Journalists do protect their sources.

Deep Throat, anyone?

and some are dupes being manipulated by their sources: Judith Miller?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Wrong.

I said "Deep Throat, anyone?"

And you responded by citing Dan Rather.

What a moron.

you can milk the dumb act, but I will call you on it.

Here is the whole exchange with the key words highlighted:

Uhhhh...Journalists do protect their sources.

Deep Throat, anyone?

Not dishonest sources!

We know Rather's source, Lt. Col. Bill Burkett.

Deep Throat was not a dishonest source, all his info was confirmed and he was rightly protected.

Rather's source was dishonest and was not protected and was rightly outed BEFORE the election.

Bigotbart not revealing his dishonest source makes him WORSE than Rather. You know it which is why you are playing dumb.

Wingnut Noise Machine & Racists Elements in Tea Party Exposed!

This is mainly a media story.

It is a story about how these days, instead of acting outright racist, racist elements within the conservative movement have gone into the media, where they now dedicate huge resources to exposing reverse racism under every rock, bed, and statement that is critical of white racism. With these conservative media types, to point out that any racism on the part of whites exists, exposes others to charges of being the 'real' racists, with accusations of reverse racism.

Context is everything here. The racists on the right (and their dupes), have based all their arguments on a contextual framework that demands ignoring the reality of how this all came about.

The initial motivation for the airing of the edited and deceptive video was a response to perceived racism by the NAACP. The NAACP's supposed racism? It was their charge that the tea party had not denounced the racist elements within the tea party. The irony here is that the NAACP later congratulated the tea party for getting rid of a racist element within, but this was not good enough for the wingnut noise machine. The anger and warped motivations on the part of conservative racists keeps them focused on the bogeyman under the bed, rather than the reality on the ground.

---

In an interview Wednesday, Breitbart said he first learned of Sherrod's speech in April, when a source he declined to name sent him a DVD copy of it. But the DVD did not work. He said he forgot about the speech until last week, when the NAACP denounced what it called "racist elements" of the "tea party" movement.

Angry at the NAACP's move, Breitbart said he contacted the source again asking for copies of the speech and obtained two edited clips over the weekend.

Read more: Who Tipped Off Shirley Sherrod Last Week? – UPDATE - Swampland - TIME.com

---


FoxNews.com's first report on Sherrod reported her statements made in the clip, but gave no indication that it might have been taken out of context. It reported that Fox was "seeking a response from both the NAACP and the USDA," but not that they had attempted to find the full version of the tape or contact Sherrod herself.

Hannity called Sherrod's remarks "just the latest in a series of racial incidents," called for the NAACP to be "held to account" to repudiate Sherrod

 

[DiveCon]

Uhhhh...Journalists do protect their sources.

Deep Throat, anyone?

and some are dupes being manipulated by their sources: Judith Miller?

and whos to say Breitbart wasnt as well?

 

[daveman]

Uhhhh...Journalists do protect their sources.

Deep Throat, anyone?

Not dishonest sources!

We know Rather's source, Lt. Col. Bill Burkett.

Sponsored by Kinko's, Killian, TX, and Microsoft Office Suite.

 

[DiveCon]

Uhhhh...Journalists do protect their sources.

Deep Throat, anyone?

Not dishonest sources!

We know Rather's source, Lt. Col. Bill Burkett.

Sponsored by Kinko's, Killian, TX, and Microsoft Office Suite.

but he wasnt "dishonest"

 

[edthecynic]

yes, his SOURCE was the one that edited the video

PROVE IT!

Bigotbart's word is not credible.

Why won't he name the "source?" Why doesn't FOX Gossip Channel demand he name the "source?" Why doesn't the "source" come forward?

I say there was no source and Bigotbart is the editor, and FOX knows he is the editor, as long as the source remains unnamed!!!!

what makes you look the fool is that you buy into their argument and on their grounds.

I said the thing was edited. Who or why is only important for their deflection which you -- yes you help to keep active.

The motivation behind the airing of the video was anger at being called out by the NAACP, which later congratulates the tea party for agreeing there were racist elements within.

The point here is the conservatives posing as watchdogs of racism --- they are actually trying to make every criticism of white racism into a case of reverse discrimination.

pay attention and stop buying into their game plan.

I see your point, but I'm not buying into anything.

To what you say I would add that they are trying to protect Bigotbart, the editor, so they can preserve him as a watchdog of racism.

 

[The T]

I know that...you know that...but as to the 'Firing'? It was a ploy for her to be fired...that subsequently backfired on Obama, and the USDA, NAALCP...but the more she speaks?

Think they'll FIRE her again ?

What a proverbial corner Obama and the Statists have painted themselves into...again...Whom is MANIPULATING whom?

LOL. I hadn't thought about it quite like that.

Not only was the Administration extremely inept in carrying out what is looking more and more like a setup deal to smear Breitbart and Fox News, but they may have seriously misjudged the competence of their sacxrificial goat in the scheme.

naw, i doubt they are capable enough to pull anything like that off


besides, the only ones smearing Fox News are the leftwingers
and then a few that really dont know all the facts are taking the bullshit fed to them by leftwingers as the truth
and they would do that to FNC even if the wind blows

Dive my friend? That IS the point. This issue is so damned convoluted that even Obama, The NAALCP, And the USDA fell for it...especially after her subsequent appearences in the Media. Are they going to fire her AGAIN since she appears to be a rascist? SHE is calling the shots.

 

[edthecynic]

Not dishonest sources!

We know Rather's source, Lt. Col. Bill Burkett.

Sponsored by Kinko's, Killian, TX, and Microsoft Office Suite.

but he wasnt "dishonest"

Dang you are going overboard with the dumb act.
I gave Burkett as an example of a dishonest source that WAS revealed precisely because he was dishonest!!!!
Geeez Louise.

 

[DiveCon]

Sponsored by Kinko's, Killian, TX, and Microsoft Office Suite.

but he wasnt "dishonest"

Dang you are going overboard with the dumb act.
I gave Burkett as an example of a dishonest source that WAS revealed precisely because he was dishonest!!!!
Geeez Louise.

no you said "not dishonest"
unless you actually meant to say "dishonest" and made an error

 

[DiveCon]

PROVE IT!

Bigotbart's word is not credible.

Why won't he name the "source?" Why doesn't FOX Gossip Channel demand he name the "source?" Why doesn't the "source" come forward?

I say there was no source and Bigotbart is the editor, and FOX knows he is the editor, as long as the source remains unnamed!!!!

what makes you look the fool is that you buy into their argument and on their grounds.

I said the thing was edited. Who or why is only important for their deflection which you -- yes you help to keep active.

The motivation behind the airing of the video was anger at being called out by the NAACP, which later congratulates the tea party for agreeing there were racist elements within.

The point here is the conservatives posing as watchdogs of racism --- they are actually trying to make every criticism of white racism into a case of reverse discrimination.

pay attention and stop buying into their game plan.

I see your point, but I'm not buying into anything.

To what you say I would add that they are trying to protect Bigotbart, the editor, so they can preserve him as a watchdog of racism.

again, where is your PROOF Breitbart edited the video


and btw, i already told you, i leave the dumb act to you, you do it so much better than i EVER could

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

what makes you look the fool is that you buy into their argument and on their grounds.

I said the thing was edited. Who or why is only important for their deflection which you -- yes you help to keep active.

The motivation behind the airing of the video was anger at being called out by the NAACP, which later congratulates the tea party for agreeing there were racist elements within.

The point here is the conservatives posing as watchdogs of racism --- they are actually trying to make every criticism of white racism into a case of reverse discrimination.

pay attention and stop buying into their game plan.

I see your point, but I'm not buying into anything.

To what you say I would add that they are trying to protect Bigotbart, the editor, so they can preserve him as a watchdog of racism.

again, where is your PROOF Breitbart edited the video

are you another in a long line of complete fools at USMB?


i never said BBart edited the video, he used an edited video. arguing over who edited it is a loser's game.

the deception was not that the video was edited you fool, it was that it was not made clear the video was decades old. The use of the video implied much, but what is at issue is why bbart used the video, why he sought it out, what message was he trying to send?

bbart and people here are looking to make every criticism of white racism a case of reverse racism.

 

[edthecynic]

but he wasnt "dishonest"

Dang you are going overboard with the dumb act.
I gave Burkett as an example of a dishonest source that WAS revealed precisely because he was dishonest!!!!
Geeez Louise.

no you said "not dishonest"
unless you actually meant to say "dishonest" and made an error

Read it again, s l o w l y this time.

Uhhhh...Journalists do protect their sources.

Deep Throat, anyone?

Not dishonest sources!

We know Rather's source, Lt. Col. Bill Burkett.

Clearly I'm saying that dishonest sources like Burkett are not protected and that is why we know Burkett was Rather's source.

No wonder you think all my LimpTard quotes are out of context, you can't follow even the simplest context.

 

[edthecynic]

what makes you look the fool is that you buy into their argument and on their grounds.

I said the thing was edited. Who or why is only important for their deflection which you -- yes you help to keep active.

The motivation behind the airing of the video was anger at being called out by the NAACP, which later congratulates the tea party for agreeing there were racist elements within.

The point here is the conservatives posing as watchdogs of racism --- they are actually trying to make every criticism of white racism into a case of reverse discrimination.

pay attention and stop buying into their game plan.

I see your point, but I'm not buying into anything.

To what you say I would add that they are trying to protect Bigotbart, the editor, so they can preserve him as a watchdog of racism.

again, where is your PROOF Breitbart edited the video


and btw, i already told you, i leave the dumb act to you, you do it so much better than i EVER could

As I said, until the editor is named BigotBart is the editor, just as CON$ assumed Rather forged the documents until Burkett was outed.
Get it?

Some CON$ still say Rather forged the documents even after Burkett was named.