Posted on 07/26/2010 10:17:09 PM PDT by This Just In
Sherrod Story False
By Jeffrey Lord
It isn't true.
Shirley Sherrod's story in her now famous speech about the lynching of a relative is not true. The veracity and credibility of the onetime Agriculture Department bureaucrat at the center of the explosive controversy between the NAACP and conservative media activist Andrew Breitbart is now directly under challenge. By nine Justices of the United States Supreme Court. All of them dead.
But first, it's important to say this.
After Shirley Sherrod's firing I wrote a column congratulating Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack for removing her -- based on a viewing of the now infamous edited Breitbart clip. I was wrong. I should have waited to see the entire video or read the transcript before writing a word. So my apologies to Ms. Sherrod.
The problem?
I have now done exactly what I should have done originally. So there's no mistake about "selective editing" of videos or speech transcripts, here is a link to the website of the NAACP, where they have made a point of posting the full video of Shirley Sherrod's speech. I have seen the entire speech as supplied by the NAACP. The now-famous speech runs just over 40 minutes. If you don't have the time, here is a link to the printed transcript of her speech supplied by a site called American Rhetoric Online Speech Bank. The transcript is taken in full from the video version of her speech, which American rhetoric also supplies. I have read the transcript as well.
Let's get to this.
In her speech, Ms. Sherrod says this:
I should tell you a little about Baker County. In case you don't know where it is, it's located less than 20 miles southwest of Albany.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
So true! Though I must admit that was the first time I saw no rope in a lynching. But word lynching resonated and helped Israel. The two poor men were clawed and torn apart while alive by the Palestinian beasts who danced around holding up their heart, liver, intestines....etc
The rest of your post -- well said!
No one eluded to or suggested that “murderers who beat someone to death are somehow less outside of the law than those who hang someone...”
There may have been a misunderstanding here.
I am not saying that Bobby Hall was lynched. The article clearly documents this fact. I am saying that Sherrod used the term, “lynched”, as an inflammatory word. Some here are giving her the benefit of the doubt, and suggest Ms. Sherrod is using “lynched” in a figurative manner, or as a colloquial. Considering her political position, I am not inclined to be so generous.
Consensus? What are you, a Progressive?
Either you failed to read the article in it’s entirety, or you’ve missed the point completely.
Jeffrey Lords makes some great points in this story. It’s ironic that you accuse American Spectator of mean spirited and race-baiting comments when it was Shirley Sherrod who made headlines for such actions/statements.
That being the fact any semantic nit-picking is an exercise in absurdity.
Would you say that Lord is being nit-picky?
Worse. He’s way off the mark. He has an excellent point about the white supremacy racist origins of the Progressive movement and how absurd it is that blacks now just fall right in line with them now that they use black nationalist racism as their cudgel. That’s gets lost in his unsupportable accusation that Sherrod is lying when she uses the word “lynched.” This thread is excellent proof of that.
“He has an excellent point about the white supremacy racist origins of the Progressive movement and how absurd it is that blacks now just fall right in line with them now that they use black nationalist racism as their cudgel.”
I wholehearted agree.
“...That’s gets lost in his unsupportable accusation...”
Actually, Lord doesn’t flat-out accuse Sherrod of lying.
Jeffrey Lord said:
“So why in the world would Ms. Sherrod say something like this?
No idea...”
“Again, I have no idea.”
If anything, this thread reveals how PCspeak has affected the way in which conservatives and Republicans engage in public discourse. And how emotional reactions cause individuals to make snap judgments. In so doing, we play the Progressives game because they dictate from the court, if you will, what subject of discussion is acceptable and what is not.
You yourself admitted that Jeffery Lord “...has an excellent point...”, and yet, you go on to say that he makes an “unsupportable accusation” when he in fact did not.
Since Obama’s inauguration, there has been countless topics of discussion concerning truth and accuracy involving our political leaders and public figures. And yet, amongst conservatives and Republicans, there is a double standard when the topic addresses such volatile issues as “lynching”, etc.
At the very least, this thread certainly is an example of the fact.
"Sherrod Story False""It isn't true."
"Shirley Sherrod's story in her now famous speech about the lynching of a relative is not true. The veracity..."
"There is also a third possibility for what appears to be a straight-out fabrication."
"Facts that make Sherrod appear, to put it mildly, prone to exaggeration if not worse."
"Will Anderson Cooper of CNN, who angrily snapped of Breitbart that "we think the truth matters," be investigating this untruth of Sherrod's?"
"Again, I have no idea what Sherrod's motivation in saying something so factually untrue could be."
If you want to hang your hat on the paper thin sophistry that he isn't calling her a liar because he couched it nine ways from Sunday then knock yourself out.
If anything, this thread reveals how PCspeak has affected the way in which conservatives and Republicans engage in public discourse.
What horse crap! There's not a PC bone in my body.
And how emotional reactions cause individuals to make snap judgments.
I can't speak for anyone else but I didn't make a snap judgment.
Ah, I see. You are referring to the dual nature of the article. Thanks for explaining.
Lord’s lead-off point was one of semantics - “Bobbie Hall was not ‘lynched,’ because he was not strung up by a large mob.” This line of attack on Sherrod is, to me, both ignorant (as it doesn’t reflect the full meaning of the word “lynched”) as well as base (the man was murdered extrajudicially while helpless). It is also a line of attack that seems certain to fail, as well as make Sherrod’s critics seem to be seizing on petty reasons in order to attack her.
Lord should have written two articles, and left the first one in the drawer.
“...because he couched it nine ways from Sunday then knock yourself out.”
(((chuckling)))
Well, I won’t knock myself out, but I appreciate your point.
“There’s not a PC bone in my body”
“a snap judgment.”
You’ll note that in my response I was generalizing, and was not accusing you specifically of being PC. Your post in one of the few which actually said something substantial concerning the entire article.
Ah, NOW you take a phrase literally. lol
FWIW I don't think the article should be pulled as suggested. No point in that.
Eff 'em if the libs can't put it in context.
every black race hustler has to have this story
just like all crackers had kin on the Mayflower or an ancestor at Gettysburg
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.