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 ...
If her “lie” is only to call the murder a lynching, we should let it rest. Lynching itself is a term which came from an actual Mr. Lynch who presided over kangaroo courts. Isn’t it cool how English lets nouns be verbed?
Maybe I’m wrong, but I think being killed by “petitioners” while hand-cuffed and in police custody is worse than being lynched by a mindless, unruly mob.
You can expect no protection from a mob bent on murder. If handcuffed and in the hands of the law, you can. Or should.
Sheriff Screws had a duty to protect his suspect, lawfully apprehended and without incident, and he failed.
You might read the article before spouting. It goes way beyond the semantics of murder vs lynching. It scratches old Democrat scabs and teases out a couple of American maggots, Hugo Black and Richard Brevard Russell. It raises the question of why Sherrod and her ilk still genuflect before their party.
Oh, it is important that this not go down the memory hole.
Yup! Worst I have ever seen from them and I used to read the Spectator as far back as 1988
Oh, there is no reason to miss the irony. But getting all bent out of shape over a broad sense of “lynching” is, to me, beyond the pale.
In light of the spotlight on racism that is occurring in the press, to call this woman a liar based on a questionable difference between the definition of “lynching” and “beating to death” is wildly misguided. It really makes it sound like beating a man to death is way better than a lynching. Utterly indefensible.
I agree with whoever said they should get rid of this article now.
Reread the article.
“And that sheriff was Claude Screws. Claude Screws lynched a black man.” - Ms. Sherrod
Are you saying that the truth doesn’t matter? Are you saying that a public official doesn’t have to be accurate in discussing historical incidents involving murder?
Well, I guess our law enforcement officers shouldn’t worry about whether or not a person was murder by way of drowning, or stabbing, or being thrown off of a cliff, or shot. All we need to know is that the victim was murdered. After all, who needs the facts? /s
It was more of a beaten to death by the legal authorities, than merely being “beaten”.
I’ve had it with this women. She’s had her 15 minutes. Let it go.
Agree. That memory hole is already crowded with killed, ignored, undercovered, slanted and forgotten stories.
Thanks to the internet, we now have a way to see and save information. God bless Al Gore for inventing it. NOT!
Freepers are getting that this article is awful and a detriment to the conservative cause. Media Matters will be jumping on it tomorrow
This article helps 0bama and the Democrats
Yes, the story is wonderfully convolute. Hall was lynched. The lynchers were convicted — and eventually freed by a Progressive high mucky-muck in the KKK, abetted by a Progressive white supremacist. With friends like the Progressives, blacks need no enemies.
In the broad sense inspired by the great Mr. Lynch, this is close enough. Deadly “street justice” enabled for the sake of racist ideals. You can quibble and even sub-quibble (did they simply want to make the victim miserable and not actually kill him) but it’s pretty darn unseemly and obscures much larger points.
What I believe is that conservatives on this thread are worried that liberals will use this incident as fuel for the fire, but as I have said a few posts ago, do excuse such a statement, or at the very least, sweep it under the carpet is irresponsible journalism.
The comments on this thread also reveal how far reaching PCspeak has affected our public discourse.
What I find to be utterly indefensible is, at the very least, Sherrod didn’t bother to get her facts straight (if given the benefit of a doubt).
Don’t forget why Sherrod made headline news in the first place.
Couldn’t Sherrod’s use of the term ‘lynch’ be considered a colloquial usage?>>>>>>>>
Today it definitely fits within colloquial usage. Not so in the 1930s, but we are living today and the elections are in three months
Obama and his race agitators are tyring to mobilize the base
bttt -
This is a caution worth great consideration. Like worms, rats turn. It is only a convenient happenstance that Progressives seem to be the friends of black people today. Progressives are not married to any particularly noble ideals and black people could find themselves under the bus, as well as in the back of it again, tomorrow if Progressives get their way.
I read it. The story should be pulled and re written, or at least re titled. Sherrod is not a liar because she said someone was lynched when all that happened was that they were beaten to death. Hugo Black was a Democrat racist on the Supreme Court, does that really have anything to do with the title of the article?
The weirdo-led Media Matters would jump into a pile of steaming dogshit if they thought it would help them attack conservatives, Republicans, Independents, and anyone else who is pro-America.
The Media Research Center and Breitbart can handle them.
The truth doesn’t matter to Media Matters so, like any psychopathic liar, bitchslap them with the truth.
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.