Posted on 07/20/2010 7:59:45 PM PDT by kristinn
The NAACP has released a 43 minute long video of the controversial speech given by fired USDA official Shirley Sherrod. Excerpts of the speech showing her using racist language with the support of those attending an NAACP dinner in March were released yesterday by Big Government. Sherrod was forced to resign from her position last night.
The video can be viewed at the NAACP website or go directly to the YouTube video.
After pulling their initial statement denouncing Sherrod, the NAACP released a new statement today claiming the group was "snookered" by Fox News and Andrew Breitbart.
Earlier today, a bitter Sherrod complained of being betrayed by black people in an interview given to Georgia TV stationWALB:
She feels like no one's been willing to fight for her. "It hurts especially when the NAACP is doing it and Roland Martin is doing it. These are black people, they never asked me what happened, these are people who haven't been on the front line like I have for 45 years..."
The new statement by the NAACP:
July 20, 2010
(BALTIMORE, MD) - NAACP President and CEO Benjamin Todd Jealous issued the following statement today after a careful investigation into the presentation of former USDA Official Shirley Sherrod.
"The NAACP has a zero tolerance policy against racial discrimination, whether practiced by blacks, whites, or any other group.
The NAACP also has long championed and embraced transformation by people who have moved beyond racial bias. Most notably, we have done so for late Alabama Governor George Wallace and late US Senator Robert Byrd -- each a man who had associated with and supported white supremacists and their cause before embracing civil rights for all.
With regard to the initial media coverage of the resignation of USDA Official Shirley Sherrod, we have come to the conclusion we were snookered by Fox News and Tea Party Activist Andrew Breitbart into believing she had harmed white farmers because of racial bias.
Having reviewed the full tape, spoken to Ms. Sherrod, and most importantly heard the testimony of the white farmers mentioned in this story, we now believe the organization that edited the documents did so with the intention of deceiving millions of Americans.
The fact is Ms. Sherrod did help the white farmers mentioned in her speech. They personally credit her with helping to save their family farm.
Moreover, this incident and the lesson it prompted occurred more that 20 years before she went to work for USDA.
Finally, she was sharing this account as part of a story of transformation and redemption. In the full video, Ms.Sherrod says she realized that the dislocation of farmers is about “haves and have nots.” "It’s not just about black people, it’s about poor people," says Sherrod in the speech. “We have to get to the point where race exists but it doesn’t matter.”
This is a teachable moment, for activists and for journalists.
Most Americans agree that racism has no place in American Society. We also believe that civil and human rights have to be measured by a single yardstick.
The NAACP has demonstrated its commitment to live by that standard.
The Tea Party Federation took a step in that direction when it expelled the Tea Party Express over the weekend. Unfortunately, we have yet to hear from other leaders in the Tea Party movement like Dick Armey and Sarah Palin, who have been virtually silent on the “internal bigotry” issue.
Next time we are confronted by a racial controversy broken by Fox News or their allies in the Tea Party like Mr. Breitbart, we will consider the source and be more deliberate in responding. The tape of Ms. Sherrod’s speech at an NAACP banquet was deliberately edited to create a false impression of racial bias, and to create a controversy where none existed. This just shows the lengths to which extremist elements will go to discredit legitimate opposition.
According to the USDA, Sherrod’s statements prompted her dismissal. While we understand why Secretary Vilsack believes this false controversy will impede her ability to function in the role, we urge him to reconsider.
Finally, we hope this incident will heighten Congress’s urgency in dealing with the well documented findings of discrimination toward black, Latino, Asian American and Native American farmers, as well as female farmers of all races."
###
Founded in 1909, the NAACP is the nation's oldest and largest civil rights organization. Its members throughout the United States and the world are the premier advocates for civil rights in their communities, conducting voter mobilization and monitoring equal opportunity in the public and private sectors.
Can you quote my defending the NAACP?
Oh, I don’t know. Maybe just like FNC, Beck and Brietbart I probably took it out of context.
So...”no”?
Is it that time of the month, or what?
Actually my ADHD kicked in, just forgot all about ya. With BOR and nobama and Vilsack’ocrap and everyone apologizing and all, it glazed me over.
You have a real nice evening Blue.
Please excuse yourself long enough to watch the whole speech, not just the 2:36 minute excerpted portion that has been posted all over the Internet.
She used that language describing something that happened 24 years ago to illustrate a potentially racist mindset lingering from her very sorrowful youth many long years ago. She was able to overcome it at a second thought when it was revealed to her that the situation with a White farmer losing his land was not about race.
The whole point of her speech was to caution others at the NAACP event to avoid the pitfall of viewing situations as Black versus White when they really are not about that.
The White Farmer Mr. Spooner and his wife stated today that they consider Mrs. Sherrod a good friend and are very thankful that she was able to help them keep their farm.
Also, as a Southern man born here by the Grace of God, I can attest that many Southern men above a certain age did tend to speak to Black people, and especially Black women, with condescension.
You can apply any standard for 'racism' you wish. I am not required to follow that standard.
In fact, after reading several of these threads, I'm convinced my standard is quite different, and undoubtedly more robust, than yours.
I guess we don't see eye to eye on that.
Note...she did not say, "I sent him to a white lawyer."
If there's some kind of coherent point behind that statement, you have hidden it well.
The only true non-racist is that person who is truly colorblind. That person does not add value or subtract it based upon skin color...and does not speak(or think) in terms of "my kind" or "his kind" in reference to other's skin color.
The rest is just blah, blah, blah.
That is the standard to which I hold myself, and the standard by which I judge others.
Having listened to her, I find her 'conversion' less than full and sincere. It rings strangely of "some of my best friends are blacks," and "why, Bessie (house slave) is just like one of the family!"
The fact that she is speaking before the NAACP tells me all I need to know about her views on race.
She's a racist. Many here want to give her credit for being a 'kinder, gentler racist,' but she's a racist nonetheless.
Funny thing...some assume I haven't watched the uncut version because, I guess, I couldn't think she was a racist if I had. You have to put it in context, they insist.
Why is it essential to provide more context by watching the rest of the tape?
And...if context is so important, why do they criticise me for putting her words in the larger context of...her life, the fact she claims to be a lifelong worker for civil rights, and that she's speaking to the NAACP?
I said she was a racist before I saw the edited version. I said she was a racist after I saw the uncut version, and today, after all she's had to say about the episode, there's no doubt she's a racist.
I haven't changed my opinion at all.
I'm a lifelong conservative, raised in a liberal family. That means I had to define my own terms and meanings in a hostile world...including the meaning and implications of the word, "Racist." It's why having it thrown at me by race pimps has no effect whatsoever...and why I first look to see how the person talking about racism defines the word.
As I get older I find less use for nonsense and the fools who try to waste my time with it.
I won't waste my time explaining or defending myself to those I find insufficiently conservative...and I won't defend my views on 'racism' to someone who has shown no evidence of a coherent definition of the word.
If there's anything we need right now, it's coherence...and well defined terms.
And...I won't take seriously the posting name "Blue Collar Christian" held by someone who uses the phrase "I'll pray for you," to tweak soneone's nose.
As for being a troll...would you feel better if I called you a useful idiot?
If one can't tell, does it make any difference?
Really? The events of the last 24 hours, her statements, her words, underline the fact that she's a racist.
Yet all I hear is Breitbart this, Breitbart that. Why is that?
You should have taken my advice. Oh well. lol
In fact, after reading several of these threads, I'm convinced my standard is quite different, and undoubtedly more robust, than yours.
I guess we don't see eye to eye on that.
But words have meaning and you don't get to change that, and applying another standard on a whim. The question is; does she feel that one race is superior to another? The answer is clearly no. Does she hate or is she intolerant of another race? The answer is clearly no. Did she once have reason to hate anyone of another race? I think at the age of 17 if my father had been murdered by a person of another race and the grand jury, all members of that same race, did not bring any charges against the killer, I would be tempted to harbor hatred. I feel that her story shows great character that she was able to overcome that and go on to help the White Farmer. Her story is a noble example of the best ideals of Humanity and Christian Compassion.
noun
1.
Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2010.
Your name calling from a keyboard would not be tolerated vocally in public company. I was never uncivil with you, you just disagree with my take on this thread and use that to justify your toxic ranting. I am sincere in my every word in this thread. I am not trying to tweak your nose. I could have as easily attacked you in my passion, and it has happened on other threads, so I empathize with you. And yes, I can see why your opinion is as it is on this thread. We just disagree.
I like to say, especially of married couples; “When two people agree on everything, one of ‘em’s lyin’, and it ain’t gonna be ME.” Isn’t it great to be in America where, at least for now, we can freely express our disagreements?
We’re on the same team. I believe she is racist too. I am totally convinced the NAACP is absurdly racist. My take, along with some others on this thread, was that this was less than ideal material to turn the tables on the NAACP, and the original edited presentation of the tape SEEMED TO ME to be slanted. Though this problem is enough that independents and liberals (along with some of us “wrong” because we disagree with YOU conservatives) agree with the MSM’s take where they are putting the whole enchilada out there to see, I will NEVER defend the NAACP for their decades of race baiting, finger pointing and outright lies, right up to and including their “decision” to declare the Tea Party Movement as racist.
All the rest of the points you make, and your own conservative testimony, I share with you almost verbatim.
Your name calling from a keyboard would not be tolerated vocally in public company. I was never uncivil with you, you just disagree with my take on this thread and use that to justify your toxic ranting. I am sincere in my every word in this thread. I am not trying to tweak your nose. I could have as easily attacked you in my passion, and it has happened on other threads, so I empathize with you. And yes, I can see why your opinion is as it is on this thread. We just disagree.
I like to say, especially of married couples; “When two people agree on everything, one of ‘em’s lyin’, and it ain’t gonna be ME.” Isn’t it great to be in America where, at least for now, we can freely express our disagreements?
We’re on the same team. I believe she is racist too. Most people are to some extent. How they deal with their prejudies is going to be a matter of maturity. I am totally convinced the NAACP is absurdly racist, and their collective lack of maturity is criminal. My take, along with some others on this thread, was that this was less than ideal material to turn the tables on the NAACP, and the original edited presentation of the tape SEEMED TO ME to be slanted. Though this problem is enough that independents and liberals (along with some of us “wrong”, because we disagree with YOU, conservatives) agree with the MSM’s take where they are putting the whole enchilada out there to see, I will NEVER defend the NAACP for their decades of race baiting, finger pointing and outright lies, right up to and including their “decision” to declare the Tea Party Movement as racist.
All the rest of the points you make, and your own conservative testimony, I share with you almost verbatim.
Good evening to you.
Oops, kinda double posted in error while editing. DOH!
Oh man...sit through a meeting with a facilitator on "racial affairs," then lecture me about "the set meaning of the word, 'racism'." Fact is that if you looked at a dictionary from 1980 it would define the word differently...and a dictionary 20 years from now will define it differently still.
The question is; does she feel that one race is superior to another? The answer is clearly no.
You are in denial...the question is not whether she views one as being better than the other, but does she view them as being different, based upon skin color. The answer is obvious.
Does she hate or is she intolerant of another race? The answer is clearly no.
Odd standard there...you describe a virulent form of racism and conclude that she doesn't meet that standard, therefore she is not racist.
Your definition of racist is insufficient...it does not recognize that we are dealing with values. Your definition is merely a starting point. It is the lowest common denominator.
I'm applying a standard that may seem odd, but should be familiar..."I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
Given that she is a self-professed 'civil rights leader' speaking to the NAACP, she will be held to a higher standard...and she is fail, fail, FAIL.
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.