Posted on 07/21/2010 1:16:56 AM PDT by lbryce
In 2009 Agricultural Secretary Tom Vilsack appointed Shirley Sherrod as Georgia Director of Rural Development overseeing over a billion dollars in fderal aid. This public servant was speaker at the NAACP 20th Aniversary Frreedom Fund Banquet, and as demonstrated in the video regales her audience in delight how she discriminates against a white farmer part of which as she says because he acted superior to her.
I stand absolutely, emphatically corrected!!
And you accepted that this is the same white farmer? Why?
For all we know Sherrod has substituted some white farmer for which she actually did a half-decent job. This is pure damage control on her part.
I trust that every white farmer whom she has had dealings with and who didn't get a decision in his favor will sue. They are her victims.
Yeah, watch her whole talk. Watch how the audience chuckles at her racist comments. Watch how no one objects. Watch a racist in action. Watch a racist audience. Racists.
This was a hate crime and Shirley Sherrod should be so charged. It was purely a racially motivated action, by her on admission.
No it doesn’t.
I still believe that if a white person was standing there and had given that speech verbatim, they would be excoriated and the would be calling for their head on a stick.
I really did not want to to watch the entire speech, but I did and I am glad I did.
I still wont give the NAACP one iota of credibility, but this women showed and explained a very human trait of having made a mistake, self correcting and making amends, at least in this instance that the spotlight has been pointed at.
I am willing to allow that she was attempting to use an instance of her own personal bigotry as an example of how racist ideas blind people to the real issue (on the clip she tries to point out that it was economics, not race that was at the heart of the matter), and how she had some sort of epiphany over this point. However, this is not really the point of the video. While her presentation, her word choices, her failure to couch them carefully enough, given the volatile nature of the topic do indicate an insensitivity to that volatility it is the audicence’s reaction that is the real problem.
Beginning with her “redemption story”. If I were to start telling about how I overcame my racist attitudes with a story of how “this N&#@ger did this to me, so I did that, but then I realized...” I would likely not be given much slack given the use of the N-word in my story. Even after getting to the point of my own personal redemption and how I now donate regularly to the United Negro College Fund, etc. a black person sitting in the audience would likely be tempted to walk away and say, “Okay.....(hmmm, used the word ‘n&#@ga’....better watch him). That’s just human nature. We would wonder why “redemption” didn’t include more sensitivity when it comes to word choices. I might argue with, “No, no. I do understand how upsetting that word is, but in order for you to understand just how far I’ve come, I thought I needed to show you just how far I had sunk.” As one who has misspoken on many occasions, I can give her a pass for her lack of erudition. Sadly (honestly), in my heart I will be watching her. This is the nature of race in America—and the nature of the human heart.
But, according to Breitbart, this video is not about Sherrod, it is about the audience’s reaction to her comments, their snickering, their “Amen-ing”, their inappropriate clapping that is HIS REASON FOR POSTING THE VIDEO. I am willing to given him the benefit of the doubt, as well, and say that, yes, he knows what point he was trying to make by posting this video. In light of the NAACP convention, where the Tea Partiers were excoriated for needing to clean out their racist closets, I believe his point is well-taken. As the term “racism” is currently being defined as some systemic/institutional reality that can only be practiced by those in control of the systems/institutions, certain Black leaders have made this issue seem like a one-way street. This is both wrong-minded and self-serving. It is why blacks cannot “hear” the racial component of comments such as Sherrod’s and laugh and “Amen”. It is why comedians like Chris Rock can make a living off of race-centered jokes. It is why blacks take some strange pride in calling each other a “nigga”, saying this is how they wrest power of this word away from whites (or some such nonsense). Racially-motivated bigotry is about not knowing (and not knowing that you are not knowing). This is not relegated to a given race. Ignorance is a condition bound up in the human heart.
And there you have it.
Who are you quoting?
Excellent synopsis of events and the players.
You picked a good handle for yourself.
Welcome back to the light, brother! lol ;^)
Oh, it certainly did.
Yes, we must wipe out Politically Incorrect speech!
She wasn't a government employee at that time.
No, we must wipe out political correctness. Wiping out politically incorrect speech alone does not go far enough as it allows for politically correct denigration but frowns upon certain other forms. Political correctness legitimizes one type of bigotry and condemns another type.
You really have me confused with that.
Obviously you have never been in management. Get some experience with these issues.
Yeah, it’s got me confused, too. What I meant to say in response to your comment about wiping out politically incorrect speech. That would mean that only politically correct speech was left—and therein is the problem. It is political correctness that labels one man’s bias abhorrent and another bias legitimate.
Sorry for confusing...the...both of us?!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.