Posted on 07/21/2010 4:03:43 AM PDT by SonOfDarkSkies
Breitbart reiterates the first video released on Breitbart.tv features Sherrod telling a racist tale that is received by the NAACP audience with laughter and cheers. The audience wasn’t cheering redemption; they were cheering discrimination.
Breitbart clarifies he released the video to target not Sherrod, but the NAACP who had condemned the Tea Party's alleged racism. Though Sherrod became the scapegoat, it was the delight the NAACP audience took in the racist part of Sherrod's speech that was truly damning. Breitbart noted he’s agnostic to her firing.
Later on the Breitbart.tv Publisher argued bogus racism charges flung at the Tea Party are meant to distract the public from staggering unemployment figures and other hot-button political topics unfavorable to the Democrats and the left.
NOTE RE: VIDEO...THE NEW STUFF STARTS AT THE 3:40 POINT OF THE TAPE...
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.tv ...
The interesting thing about this whole affair is that it is revealing the true tyrant in the White House. Who is he to call for firing this woman in the first place?
“Operation Chaos”, Breitbart verson.
With youtube.com and a camera/phone in every hand, Breitbart can beat the NAACP and Obama and the MSM silly with all these tapes.
Breitbart (and Beck, Rush, Fox, et al) are indeed THE MAN!
Rahm probably made the decision and the call while Barry was practicing his "putting" with Reggie Love in the WH steam room.
He gets to the point of the matter. The reaction by NAACP members when she’s talking about using power to discriminate against a white farmer. Something a generation ago, they would have been appalled at. Now that audience laughs at it. Those are dues paying members of the NAACP who were happy at the initial story of getting back at “whitey”. Not some fringe person who comes to a tea party event with a supposed racist sign that no one has a picture of.
HOORAY Andrew Breitbart!
Breitbart had better hurry up and release another tape.
He’s not looking good this morning. This really is looking like a hatchet job (and I say that as a big fan of Breitbart).
This morning, I saw part of Anderson Cooper’s show.
He had on as a guest Ben Jealous (NAASCP Chairman). Jealous made the point that the audience was doing a “call and response” with the lecturer. He stated that call and response was part of “our culture.”
Funny, I recall seeing on either Herr Olbermann’s show or Rachel Madcow’s show cellphone video of a Tea Party event where the speaker was alluding to a movie scene in which a character was either hung or shot (can’t remember which). The audience at the event was doing the same “call and response”. The comments *were* incendiary - I think they referred to Barry.
So, here’s my question: Why is it okay for a black audience to validate racist comments through “call and response” and why is it not okay for Tea Partiers to use the same method at their events?
Can someone please point me to a Cliff’s Notes or a Miss Manners version of how a Typical White Person is supposed to act? I’m obviously confused.
The woman deserves her job back. This was a pretty slimy attack by Breitbart.
Perhaps. That’s all I saw yesterday also. I thought she was a racist yesterday. I no longer think so. She initially withheld help from the farmer and his wife, but then went out of her way to help them. The worst thing she has done recently is play the class warfare card and, in addition, smear Fox News for doing something they had not done. That’s typical ‘Rat MO.
I heard on the radio this morning - on the date she gave her speech, it was the 45th anniversary of her father being murdered by a white man. I also have been trying to catch other snippets of the tape as played on the various news outlets.
Regardless, with what is now known - Breitbart needs to either have other video or other evidence that calls into question this woman’s “ephiphany” or his credibility is gravely damaged.
This does *not* look good for him.
The pooch got screwed here and it’s not totally Andy’s fault, but he’s going to be damaged.I believe him when he says Sherrod wasn’t the target, he had the whole tape and knew its direction. But he released the most incendiary part, the woman lost her job and was humiliated. Now Breitbart is on the defensive because the blogs, not having the whole tape, focused on the woman and not the audience.Breitbart can’t control the blogs, we’re not Journolist, but he should have realized what would happen and released the whole taep with his comments about the crowd. Now he has nothing and he’s overshadowed Tucker’s scoop about Journolist. All in all a bad day for Breitbart.
Breitbart didn't attack the woman...he attacked the NAACP.
There was absolutely nothing slimy about his effort.
Breitbart didn't call for or comment on her firing. Those who fired her did so hastily...that's not Breitbart's fault.
Watch the tape starting at the 3:40 point.
1) I read some where the she and her group had won a discrimination lawsuit before she got her job
2) I read some where about a time line prior to PIGolsie walk to the healthcare vote that the “N” word story had to be thought up before the walk because there was no way it could of been in print after the walk...media had to get the printing wheels in motion before the walk.
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.