July 26, 2010

A question about the Shirley Sherrod incident and taking things out of context.

Don't we constantly extract quotes and clips from larger contexts? I do blog posts by that method all the time. I find the juiciest line and quote it often deliberately out of context or with intent to misdirect for humorous or shocking effect. It's the reader's responsibility to figure out what to do with it. I'm not ashamed to operate that way. For one thing, I give links, so you have a path to the larger context. And, more important, by depriving you of a pat, self-contained package, I'm forcing you to read critically and keep going.

There's always more to the story. When we purport to put something "in context," it's never the whole context. We're choosing the frame of information that serves our interests, interests that may include but are rarely limited to the pure understanding of the truth. Traditional newspapers may have led their readers to think that they'd processed all the information and digested it into a simple-to-read article, and they often abused their readers' trust. The web doesn't work like that. The web activates its readers, and I think that's for the good.

With that in mind, let's look at the Andrew Breitbart post — "Video Proof: The NAACP Awards Racism–2010" — that started the sequence of events around Shirley Sherrod.
Ironically, the post began: "Context is everything." The context Breitbart chose was the NAACP's impugning of some of the people in the Tea Party movement as racists.
The constant calls to “repudiate the racists from your ranks” have not only been insulting, but have also served to force a false standard upon America’s fastest-growing and most vibrant political movement that no other group could ever live up to nor would ever be asked to live up to.
Breitbart reminds us of the claims that Tea Party people spit on black congressmen:
Congressional Black Caucus members staged a walk through the Tea Party crowd in front of the capitol the day before the health care vote.  They claimed they were threatened by a violent mob and were subjected to the vile N word slur fifteen times. With the unpopularity of the toxic health care bill that the majority of Americans did not want, the Democrats needed a November strategy. Neutralizing the growing Tea Party movement with charges of racism was clearly its post-health care reform vote priority.
Breitbart details his own efforts to prove that story was phony and the failure of mainstream media to follow up.

That was the important context to Breitbart as he offered up the video clip. He identifies Sherrod as USDA Georgia Director of Rural Development, speaking a the NAACP Freedom Fund dinner in Georgia, giving a "meandering speech to what appears to be an all-black audience." He misstates (and later corrects) that she's talking about how she treats white people today, in her current job. That's an atrocious, blatant error, which, as we all found out, is easily refuted by watching the video of the full speech. (I should say, more accurately, the speech minus the gap that "an NAACP spokesman" said occurred "when the tape was switched in the recording." Really? They use tapes to record? Tapes that are inadequate to hold a speech of less than an hour? My pocket digital cameras have better video capacity that than. I'm skeptical.)

Back to Breitbart:
Sherrod’s racist tale is received by the NAACP audience with nodding approval and murmurs of recognition and agreement. Hardly the behavior of the group now holding itself up as the supreme judge of another groups’ racial tolerance.
So part of the context to Breitbart is about the present-day audience, responding positively to Sherrod's account of feeling conflicted about helping a white man who wasn't giving her the deference warranted by her power. The speaker and the audience shared a feeling of understanding a sort of stereotypical white attitude.

Breitbart features a second quote from the speech in which Sherrod "nearly begs black men and women into taking government jobs at USDA — because they won’t get fired." He concludes that the Democratic Party and the NAACP are "scared." And then, it seems, they really were scared, because the NAACP immediately denounced Sherrod and the Obama Administration fired her. They impulsively did what seemed like the most obvious thing to avert the bad press they saw coming. Then, they acted ashamed of doing that, apologized, and seemed to hope that — with the aid of a willing mainstream press — we'd all want to concentrate our attention on bad Mr. Breitbart.

We learned much more about Shirley Sherrod, but we don't know everything. The context frame was widened, to her full speech, her life story as she chose to tell it. But there are gaps even in that (even aside from the tape-switch gap). I want to know more, and I don't think we know the whole story about why she was fired. The official story is pretty embarrassing for the administration, and I don't quite believe it. They jumped because of the Breitbart post? What are they hiding? I suspect that they don't want us delving into the inner workings of the USDA, and they don't want us listening to all the various things Shirley Sherrod has said and will say. Why wasn't she on any of the Sunday talk shows?

***

Context is important, but we can and do speak before we have the whole context. We are in the middle of a conversation. At any given point in a conversation, somebody may be happy with the state of development of the context, and it may be clear that the narrower context was deceptive. But that doesn't mean the context can't be opened up even further. I'm skeptical. I want to keep reading and thinking, and I hope you do too.

UPDATE: The link to Breitbart's "Video Proof" post no longer works. Here's a link to Memeorandum, linking to may commentators who, like me, wrote about it.

277 comments:

1 – 200 of 277   Newer›   Newest»
alan markus said...

This Shirley Sherrod incident has taken a new twist:

VIDEO-Shirley Sherrod's Husband Says We Must Stop the White Man and his Uncle Toms from Stealing Our Elections

Michael said...

What has astonished me is that everyone, or nearly everyone, ignored the last 30 seconds or so of the clip in which the speaker made clear her conversion to the belief that poverty and not race prevailed in causing down-trodeness.

Jim said...

Seems to me there is a whole lot more there, that this woman is a loose cannon politically for Obama, and that is why they dumped her at first blush.

danielle said...

fine for bloggers; not fine for 'news' organizations that proclaim that they are 'fair and balanced'; and not fine for a boss making a firing decision, or for an administration representing the Pres to comment on ..

Bill Harshaw said...

A couple points: William Saletan at Slate has an analysis (http://www.slate.com/id/2261552/) of the audience reaction to the speech which seems convincing to a liberal like me.
It would be interesting to know who supplied the lead-in text to the video excerpt, which wrongly framed the story.
The context to the second excerpt: the sentence before she talks about all the layoffs in the economy, so she's contrasting the security of government employment with the insecurity of private. And she's doing her job as a USDA person to try to encourage more job applicants from the black community.

Bruce Hayden said...

Keep in mind that Brietbart was never going after Sherrod, but rather, the audience's reaction to her making what appeared to be racist statements. This was the NAACP that had just claimed that the tea party had racist elements that they wouldn't disavow, or something like that.

The point was that a group whose national leadership would act so racist was calling an organization that had not central leadership and tens of millions of members racist because there were, allegedly, supposedly, a couple of racists in the group.

kathleen said...

Her racist tone and language, apparent in the Breitbart excerpt, has borne itself out in subsequent comments, wherein essentially she accuses anyone who doesn't like Obama policies of racism. Any unfairness on Breitbart's pales in comparison to the offensive, questionable language she uses in the original excerpt, as well as the sweeping racial judgments she has made since. In this context, it's a sorry sight watching conservatives bend over backwards to apologize for Breitbart.

Original Mike said...

"Traditional newspapers may have led their readers to think that they'd processed all the information and digested it into a simple-to-read article, and they often abused their readers' trust. The web doesn't work like that."

It is exactly that feature of the web, the ability to link to the source material, that makes it so much better than traditional media. And that's even assuming that the media is an honest broker, which we have learned is not even close to true.

bagoh20 said...

The Sherrod story context kept expanding and still is. Every time it does the perception of her reverses. A good example of how there is always more to the story, no matter what side your on.

Rialby said...

Sherrod doesn't hate all white people. Just rich white people. Oh, and non-leftist white people.

So, she likes poor or leftist white people. That's good, right?

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Context seems to be rather subjective nowadays.

CJinPA said...

"...fine for bloggers; not fine for 'news' organizations that proclaim that they are 'fair and balanced';"

FOX News didn't air the footage, or mention her name, until after the White House forced her to resign.

I'm not a big fan of FOX, but even us blog commenters have to get the facts right.

AlphaLiberal said...

Let's not. Andrew Breitbart has lost all credibility among people with decency.

Now, the right wing is trying to continue attacking Shirley Sherrod, claiming a person who was beaten to death on the courthouse steps was not lynched.

Sick fuckers!

dbp said...

AlphaLiberal said...

Let's not. Andrew Breitbart has lost all credibility among people with decency.

Let's put that into honest language:

Andrew Breitbart has lost all credibility among people [who never believed he had any credibility or decency to begin with].

Freeman Hunt said...

AL, I'm sure the hard left wishes we would all write off Breitbart.

"Pay no attention to him! Ignore him for all time! Please! I beg of you!"

Fat chance.

kathleen said...

"Breitbart has lost all credibility among people with decency"

Don't forget to include the White House, too, since they had Sherrod fired without watching the whole tape. Oh, and the NAACP condemned her without watching the whole tape *which they owned*.

Let's be consistent Alpha Male, I mean Liberal.

Lincolntf said...

alan markus said...

Yup. Birds of a feather flock together. Kinda explains why the two Sherrod children are named after the Commie motherland (Russia) and a Third World dictator (Kenyatta).
These loons wear their ignorance and bile on their sleeves.

Rialby said...

AL.. did you really throw us to Adam Serwer's blog? How do we know those are his thoughts and not those of one of his 400 closest friends?

AlphaLiberal said...

Ahh, Krugman does a great job of nailing the skeezy lying fucks of the right wing:

"right-wingers are accusing Shirley Sherrod of lying when she said that Bobby Hall was lynched, when in fact all that happened was that he was beaten to death."

Rialby said...

Again, Krugman's words? Or did he borrow them from a Nation writer?

AlphaLiberal said...

And, for the record, a lynching need not involve rope. A lawless mob beating with fists and rod still counts as a lynching.

Skeezy lying fucks.

Fred4Pres said...

Breitbart's only sin was not providing the whole video clip in his link. Taking out of context in that manner is misleading.

Shirley Sherrod had a tough life. Her father was killed by a white farmer in 1965 (a dispute over some cows) and the grand jury declined to bring charges. Sherrod then shortly after named her first child "Russia" (this was 1967) and then her second child Kenyatta. Her politics were somewhat radical (although for the late 60s not that unusual).

But it appears Sherrod has not transcended that anger. Not completely anyway. She and her husband still use racial language that is arguably racist. She has gone off on how Obama is half white and does not understand racial realities. In a lot of ways Sherrod is a lot like Jeremiah Wright.

Breitbart's biggest sin may be not picking the right clip of Sherrod to run.

CJinPA said...

"right-wingers are accusing Shirley Sherrod of lying when she said that Bobby Hall was lynched, when in fact all that happened was that he was beaten to death."

Odd you would use that to make a point, given that I don't think that was ever brought up on this blog, that I noticed. You understand that "right-wingers" are not the ones who discuss group responses, right?

Rich said...

You know I am pretty unhappy with many of Ms. Sharrod's statements to the media since this thing came to light. And I would not adopt the tone of the Saletin piece Bill Harshaw mentions above. But can anyone here read that piece and refute it factually in terms of what the original video depicted about the audience response, which was supposedly the entire point?

Michael said...

Alpha: Good on you for quoting Clarence Thomas on the matter of lynching without a rope. You have been paying a little attention.

Rialby said...

Speaking of sleazy dbag...

Since context is everything now, it's horribly unfair to Lyons to quote him out of context. As much as you might not like his point, for fuck's sake, the man wrote at least 1500 words on the topic. Please quote the whole post next time so that we all understand the complete context. No drawing quick conclusions so that Central Thinking can boil it down to a bumpersticker!

traditionalguy said...

I see Sherrod like a Medal of Honor winner from a fierce battle in Viet Nam circa 1965-1967 who has finally come to terms with the youthful tramatic battle stress, visited Viet Nam to tour the old battlefields and made peace with the old NVA Officers. Yes he is still bitter about his enemy, but he can now focus on a better future for both sides. Racial wars are unnecessary. I for one refuse to participate in another one and will to leave Mrs Sherrod alone .

Trooper York said...

My brother in law is named Thomas. I just love calling him Uncle Tom.

For Christmas two years ago I gave him a gallon of maple surup that came from Maine.

The bottle was in the shape of a cabin.

Sweet.

Rialby said...

Traditionalguy...

That would be well and fine if this woman and her husband hadn't already extracted $2B from the US government already. How much more will they get from you?

garage mahal said...

This story was always about Charles Sherrod!

Big Mike said...

kathleen: 1 danielle: 0

AlphaLiberal said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Paul Sand said...

For the record, Jeffrey Lord's weird article at American Spectator is getting a lot of pushback even at the
magazine's blog.

holdfast said...

Ok - I am a fan of Andrew Breitbart - he practices the kind of guerrilla journalism that liberals claim to enjoy, but really only like as a weapon against their enemies. I happen to think that Breitbart screwed up here - he should have tried to find the rest of the tape, and if he couldn't, he should have made it crystal clear that the tape was truncated. I think that the tape still works for its original purpose - to show an NAACP audience that is comfortable with a tale of discriminating against crackers, BUT without a longer tape, it's hard to know what they were told prior to when Sherrod began speaking.

All that said - what kind of an amateur hour, keystone cops administration cans someone on a truncated vid clip from a blogger and paranoid fantasies about what Glen Back might say?

AlphaLiberal said...

CJin PA"

"Odd you would use that to make a point, given that I don't think that was ever brought up on this blog, that I noticed. You understand that "right-wingers" are not the ones who discuss group responses, right? "

1) Althouse will never highlight such falsehoods from the right wing.

2) Most right wingers here, which are the vast majority of Althouse commenters, will NEVER (fixed) know that article is flat out wrong. They don't listen to anyone outside their echo chamber.

3) Therefore, I choose to post mention of it in the outside chance there is some conservative somewhere in America with some vestigal integrity or shame left. Granted, the odds are low. just read these comments!

Big Mike said...

@kathleen. AlphaLiberal is not an alpha male.

AlphaLiberal said...

Just like the fallacious Lord attack on Shirley Sherrod we see here all manner of attack on the Sherrods from the right wing.

Shirley Sherrod and her husband can look forward to many years of right wing attacks on them.

Modern conservatives are an embarrassment.

Trooper York said...

garage mahal said...
This story was always about Charles Sherrod!

Not true!

I told you days ago that it was all about Edmund Sherod.

(he changed the spelling of his name because his grandmother wanted to name him Cuba)

Hoosier Daddy said...

All that said - what kind of an amateur hour, keystone cops administration cans someone on a truncated vid clip from a blogger and paranoid fantasies about what Glen Back might say?

I think this bears repeating.

A lot.

I mean AlphaLib, garage, hdhouse and company all knew AB was a liar, a hack and a poopyhead a long time ago. It begs the question why the smartestest administration evah could fall for such an obvious dupe.

Lincolntf said...

I wonder what's better for a child's upbringing? Being named after a bloodthirsty despot or being dragged to Reverend Wright's hate camp every Sunday? Maybe Shirley and Michelle can go on Oprah and sort it out.


wv: decat

De only friend I have...

Flexo said...

Don't we constantly extract quotes and clips from larger contexts?

Of course.

The law requires it.

Copyright law DEMANDS that only a portion of a given work be used, that is, only extracts will constitute "fair use," anything more constitutes copyright infringment.

AllenS said...

Wankers! Sick fucks!

c3 said...

-Brietbart swung and missed mightily on this one. If he were to have "done it right" he would have picked a less sympathetic character and had both the clip and the full speech from the get go. ironically his openly line was dead on "context is everything". But to have hit the home run he would have had the entire clip FOR CONTEXT. Now he's the message
-Having heard some of her other statements since I have no doubt Mrs. Sherrod has some troubling beliefs. She will get a pass on much of that. I don't agree with her on many things (particularly her equating Republicans with racists) but given what she has lived through I'll give her a wide berth
-There are a lot of "right talking points" going on here. Lets be honest. With such a short initial clip the story would be Mrs. Sherrod. The right sides "point" has quickly switched to the audience response and then to the administration response. Mr. Breitbart's a smart guy. If you say this women's words aren't really the issue but uses visual evidence of your "point" that's primarily the women, folks will assume she's the issue.
-I haven't heard anyone write on why did she need to give an audience (black or white) IN 2010 a message of how we're not supposed to judge or act based on skin color Don't we know that by now. Imagine a leading banker speaking to a primarily white audience of mortgage lenders relating a similar story from 20 years ago about how he almost didn't help a prospective black homeowner with his mortgage because of his color. We would be outraged at the admission and the implied message that mortgage lenders still discriminate based on color.

Hoosier Daddy said...

Shirley Sherrod and her husband can look forward to many years of right wing attacks on them.

I'm sure you were outraged when Harry Belafonte referred to Colin Powell and Condi Rice as 'house slaves'.

Or when Joe Leiberman was portrayed with blackface.

Get off your high horse Alpha until you start acknowledging and denouncing the worst on your side of the fence. Unless of course you agree with those representations, which would not shock me in the least.

Trooper York said...

You see Edmund lucked out because his mom went to the same church as the Goodings and when it came time they decided that were against two Cuba's at the same christening. So Jr got the Cuba and Edmund got his name after Sir Edmund Hillary.

Just like another famous lib.

Henry said...

Another context is the personal context of one's own mind. Do you take things at face value? Or just some things? Do you question consensus judgments? Do you question your own?

I'm not sanguine about the power of the web to activate its readers -- activation still comes down to the personal context.

It's not just about detecting bullshit -- though that is some of it. It's also about treating all information as incomplete.

In a way this leads to the same place as the recognition of human fallibility. Believing that people are innately flawed can make one more sympathetic to their plight and less tolerant of grandiose schemes for their improvement. Knowing that people make mistakes in what they notice and how they report things leads to a more open mind.

It does NOT make one less skeptical. But it does allow one to weigh facts and ideas from many different sources. It is a kind of thinking that avoids categorical rejections, whether political, religious, or social. It is also a kind of thinking that rejects the petty controversalizing that makes up most of the news. When all sides of a story blunder as badly as they do, you don't get to the truth by scoring points.

I read Instapundit and Althouse because of their eclecticism. But despite both of them following the Sherrod story, I haven't found it at all interesting. From the get go it was about point-scoring. Everyone involved ended up looking small. But that is nothing we didn't already know.

From Inwood said...

We were always at war with Breitbart & FOX News.

edutcher said...

As with a great many other things, context seems to be in the eye of the beholder. As I've said before, Shirley Sherrod's magic epiphany is more sound than substance. She still hates The Man, she just says it's now the rich.

Look at the tape. She never attempts to correct or scold the people tittering at how she did the farmer wrong. And her subsequent statements, along with those of her husband (see Alan Markus' comment at the top), show her views of white people aren't exactly beatific.

AlphaLiberal said...

And, for the record, a lynching need not involve rope. A lawless mob beating with fists and rod still counts as a lynching.

Not in this country, pilgrim.

Trooper York said...

My brother in law is named Thomas. I just love calling him Uncle Tom.

For Christmas two years ago I gave him a gallon of maple surup that came from Maine.

The bottle was in the shape of a cabin.

Sweet.


God will get you, sir :O

David said...

You want context. I give you context.

The Democratic party is out of business without monolithic black support. They can count on 90-95% of the black vote in every election. Since blacks are about 12% of the electorate, democrats begin with about 11% to zero advantage on a national basis.

There are many issues on which Republicans might be as appealing (or more) to black voters than democrats. Blacks are in general more socially conservative than white Democrats. They are much more likely to be victims of crime. They are far more hurt by the union lock on public schools than whites. Black males, especially young black males, are far more likely to be unemployed. Finally, a large and growing percentage of blacks are in income brackets considered "rich" by liberals.

Contrary to myth, blacks vote in percentages approaching that of white voters. Black women vote as often as whites overall.

Why must successful black conservatives like Clarence Thomas and Condi Rice be branded as inauthentic or worse? Why must people who point out the downside of grievance agendas be called racists? Why must Democrats rush to be liberal media, and shun and isolate news and opinion sources that threaten the monolith?

It's the context--the utter necessity to the Democrats of maintaining monolithic black support.

James said...

"He misstates (and later corrects)" He was on CNN a few hours before the full tape was released, saying "How do we know she was talking about an old story, how do we know these farmers that came forward are really them?" The kicker though, is that he chides the CNN host "Whet type of extra reporting have you done here?" Huh, Mr. Breitbart? Maybe if you had done a little bit of extra reporting, you wouldn't have rushed to put up a heavily edited video to try to smear Sherrod.

One thing, even in the edited video, that makes it clear she wasn't talking about a recent event, is where she talks about how Chapter 12 bankruptcy had just been passed to help out struggling farmers like the one in the story. Chapter 12 was enacted in 1986. Doesn't take a whole lot of "extra reporting" to see that something doesn't add up there, but that is assuming Breitbart gave a damn about the truth in the first place.

Did the administration make an absolutely idiotic decision to force her resignation before learning all the facts? Absolutely. Yet, it seems like people like Althouse want to sweep Breitbart's actions under the rug here. Her first post on this fiasco, before the facts were known - "Breitbart got results." After his video was shown to be heavily edited and completely misleading, the focus turns away from Breitbart and to the stupid actions of the administration. Why can't you simply condemn the acts of both Breitbart and the administration, rather than trying to make excuses for Breitbart?

Yeah, he corrected his completely false statement - after it had been proven completely false beyond a shadow of a doubt, and after it had already had its intended effect.

c3 said...

PS Going after Mrs Sherrod's husband is a foolish move. Besides, I thought the NAACP was the issue.

And as I've mentioned before, engaging in an argument as to which "side" is more racist is a losing endeavor.

Skyler said...

I've said it before, the election of Obama proves that white Americans by and large are not racists, but black Americans are.

The NAACP reaction to Sherrod's story is just evidence of that obvious bit of truth.

Big Mike said...

@Alpha, many people mentally equate lynchings with death by hanging. For a change the American Prospect has published an article that makes a valid point. Too bad they had to take what could be settled with a single fact or two and blow it up into a lengthy column. I guess there's not much else you can do when you're a left-wing writer and the tide of history is running against you.

The fact I'm alluding to is this: Goodman, Schwerner, and Chaney were lynched, but not hanged. They were shot to death when the KKK murdered them in 1964 outside Philadelphia, Mississippi.

Puh-leeze do not try to pretend that you would have had the courage it took the three of them to drive into Mississippi in the early 1960's. You would have been back in your dorm room talking big, but actually doing nothing whatsoever.

You're a parasite, Alpha. Why don't you just admit it and slither back under some slime-covered stone?

c3 said...

Fred;
I like your details and comment. I'd only ask,

But it appears Sherrod has not transcended that anger.

Given the facts of her life you detailed, who would be able to transcend that anger?

( Not an excuse but an uncomfortable question we should all ask ourselves.)

AJ Lynch said...

I get it now. Fox News left out the context in those Rev. Jeremiah Wright tapes.

I bet he was constantly exhorting his congregants to reduce out-of-wedlock births and increase the number of marriages. And stay in school too.

David said...

Drudge is trumpting Michelle O's deluxe separate from Barack vacation in Spain (after the Maine trip, after a planed Gulf Coast outing and before "The Vinyard"). The photo implies a marital rift.

Who can possibly know that? I'm inclined to think that she is cashing in some chips for her (crucial) support of her husband, even though she was not thrilled with politics as a regular diet. These chips include her fabulous wardrobe, not having to do much politicking, not too onerous "first lady" duties, date nights (he better not forget) and whatever travel she wants.

O "earned" $5 million last year on his books. It ain't going to charity. It's going to Michelle.

Would you like to mess with Michelle Obama? Barack sure doesn't want to.

CJinPA said...

"I choose to post mention of it in the outside chance there is some conservative somewhere in America with some vestigal integrity or shame left."

You can't really feel that way about 'conservatives.' I just won't accept that.

And since you're shifting the spotlight and using it to test "integrity," how many libs will try to defend "We Must Stop The White Man And His Uncle Toms ..." from Sherrod's hubby?

David said...

"Given the facts of her life you detailed, who would be able to transcend that anger?"

Condi Rice? Clarence Thomas? Millions of people you've never heard of?

Lincolntf said...

Breitbart played a clip of Sherrod's remarks. It was a brief snippet from a longer speech, but nothing that he showed had been altered in any way. Not great journalism, but nothing out of the ordinary either. (How often have you heard from the old media that Bush or Rove or Limbaugh or Beck said something crazy, and then been given the entire context in which the statement was made? Never.)

What the White House did caused real, material harm to a person and was completely extraordinary. I have never, ever heard of any political appointee being fired over a clip posted on the Internet. No follow-up, no questions, no research, just an immediate demand that the woman step down. Obama and his crew of fools are making a mockery of any notion of standards in our Gov't. Expect more panicked stupidity in the next 99 days. By the time Nov. 2 gets here these people will be seeing Breitbart under their beds.

El Pollo Real said...

Fred4Pres said: Sherrod then shortly after named her first child "Russia" (this was 1967) and then her second child Kenyatta.

I thought you were kidding until I looked it up myself.

As R. Crumb once said: "You can't make this shit up"

John Stodder said...

Keep in mind that Brietbart was never going after Sherrod, but rather, the audience's reaction to her making what appeared to be racist statements.

Or so he says now.

I don't know if Breitbart is "discredited." But conservatives should be wary of jumping on something he posts before examining it very carefully...and examining his motives. The Sherrod incident was motivated by his anger at the NAACP for seeming to call the tea parties racists. The NAACP was wrong, but you don't use character assassination to get even and call it journalism.

CJinPA said...

*And as I've mentioned before, engaging in an argument as to which "side" is more racist is a losing endeavor.*

Not when the goal is to simply demonstrate that "both" sides can be racist.

If the debate ever got to "which side is more racist" society wins. Because now we're having a more realistic debate. And we'll eventually conclude that, despite decades of conventional wisdeom, people from all groups and backgrounds can succumb to such thinking.

HDHouse said...

Ann wrote:
"Do we constantly extract quotes and clips? I do all the time. I find the juiciest line to misdirect. I'm ashamed to operate that way .. depriving you of
Context and it may be clear that the context was deceptive. I'm skeptical .. you too?"

Nicely said Ann. hey no harm there. Hope you didn't mind that I took your writing and shortened it a bit to get the point across.

El Pollo Real said...

Sherrod then shortly after named her first child "Russia" (this was 1967)

I'm sorry but that was a slap in the face to every soldier of every color who served in the Cold War.

Shame on her.

Hagar said...

The context of Shirley Sherrod is that she lives in "In the Heat of the Night" country; it is her home and it is real, not an intellectual construct. It has evolved, and things are better, but no way is it "post-racial."

The context of Andrew Breitbart is that he is a conservative - or rather anti-"progressive" - activist pushing back on the leftist activists. An entirely different world from Shirley Sherrod and the local Georgia NAACP chapter.

But what is the context of the White House-USDA reaction? And what happened to Cheryl Cook?

HDHouse said...

Freeman Hunt said...
I wish we would all write off Breitbart. Pay no attention to him! Ignore him for all time!"


Well Freeman, we agree on something.

HDHouse said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lincolntf said...

"But what is the context of the White House-USDA reaction? "

This question is the reason you'll see all the media outlets lying about what transpired. Even ex-Dem. Presidential candidate got busted lying about the sequence of events that led to Sherrod being vilified by the NAACP and canned by the Obama Admin.
The minute we stop talking about Breitbart/Fox/blogs, etc. we can start talking about the bizarre response from the White House. Time enough to make all those bitchy phone calls to Shirley, but no time to watch the whole video? What kind of knee-jerk assholes are these people?

David said...

Russia and Kenyetta are so 1960's.

Also facts that don't mean crap to me. That was a long time ago.

Nor does the "reaction" of the NAACP crowd bother me that much. It's an old black trope, particularly southern black. You get a chuckle when the white man has to come to a black person who has power over them. If you expect absolute purity of spirit, you might insist that a black audience remain poker faced at such moments. But the gentle affirmation at this moment is human, commonplace and harmless in itself.

The real issues here are hardball grievance politics (like Pigford), and the atrocious, cowardly reaction of the Obama administration and NAACP in attacking and firing Shirley Sherrod.

Shirley Sherrod was completely expendable to these people, until it turned out that she wasn't. What does that tell you about Obama, Vilsack and the NAACP leadership?

HT said...

Bill Harshaw said...

A couple points: William Saletan at Slate has an analysis (http://www.slate.com/id/2261552/) of the audience reaction to the speech which seems convincing to a liberal like me.


Bill, exactly. I grew tired of thinking of the effort it would take to put forth the notion that she was responding to someone she had JUST characterized as trying to be superior to her, that I just didn't. I'm glad someone did.

From the article:

"The audience seems sympathetic to Sherrod's resentment of the farmer's arrogance, as she perceived it. How should we interpret the laughter? Is it laughter at her power to withhold help from a white man? Or is it laughter at her power to withhold help from a guy with an attitude? The evidence so far suggests the latter: The audience has embraced an appeal for "poor people," shunned an appeal for "black people only," and given Sherrod her only Amen when she noted that despite the farmer's attitude, "he had come to me for help." But let's keep listening."

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Quoted by HDHouse

Freeman Hunt said...
I wish we would all write off Breitbart. Pay no attention to him! Ignore him for all time!"


Well Freeman, we agree on something


And here we have it folks. A prime example of the disingenuousness (nice word for fucking liars) of the left.

This was not at all what Freeman said. Scroll up in the comments and see how HD distorts and takes out of CONTEXT Freeman's words.

Typical.

El Pollo Real said...

Russia and Kenyetta are so 1960's.

Is the past really over David?

Those who say that only wish it for one side.

LarsPorsena said...

"...This was not at all what Freeman said. Scroll up in the comments and see how HD distorts and takes out of CONTEXT Freeman's words.

Typical."

Context for me,but not for thee.

HT said...

And this also rings true:

Blogger David said...



Nor does the "reaction" of the NAACP crowd bother me that much. It's an old black trope, particularly southern black. You get a chuckle when the white man has to come to a black person who has power over them. If you expect absolute purity of spirit, you might insist that a black audience remain poker faced at such moments. But the gentle affirmation at this moment is human, commonplace and harmless in itself.

AJ Lynch said...

Bill Harshaw;

If you send me a million dollars, I will promise to read the far left liberal poo at Slate.

Freeman Hunt said...

Since we're all so concerned with context, how come Reid taking his opponent completely out of context isn't the big story right now? Especially considering that a Senator has a lot more power than Shirley Sherrod.

Hagar said...

Those of us who have been commenting on "the NAACP reaction" have been referring to the national NAACP leadership; an entirely different crowd than Shirley Sherrod's audience at this rural Georgia chapter.
But we should have made the distinction specific. Context does indeed matter!

HDHouse said...

Dust Bunny Queen said...
"This was not at all what Freeman said. Scroll up in the comments and see how HD distorts and takes out of CONTEXT Freeman's words."

I USED WORDS THAT FREEMAN HUNT WROTE. I JUST CUT OUT SOME WORDS TO GET TO THE POINT.

OH, AND BY THE WAY, DUST BUNNY QUEEN. GOTCHA! I guess you missed the point but perhaps it will dawn on you...I quoted Ann farther up the page too...miss that one?

DADvocate said...

...who wasn't giving her the deference warranted by her power.

What kind of deference should a citizen give a public servant? We should treat each other civilly until given reason not to, but who should be the person with the power here? The citizen or the public servant?

David said...

HT: I live in the south. You learn the difference between race consciousness and racism. In the north, I generally lived in places that were overwhelmingly white. The only day to day personal contact I had with black people was in professional settings, where the people you met were your professional peers, and the professional problem, not race, was always the focus.

In the small town south where I live now, I see and talk to black people all the time, casually, professionally, in social settings, etc. Often it's involving some public issue, as that's my focus these days.

Race consciousness is a given. Some wariness is inevitable. But racism, black and white, is dying out. People have had enough of it.

This will happen at the national level some day, to the detriment of those who cry "racism" to protect their own interests.

Rich said...

Hagar said:

"Those of us who have been commenting on "the NAACP reaction" have been referring to the national NAACP leadership; an entirely different crowd than Shirley Sherrod's audience at this rural Georgia chapter."

I have no doubt that's what you personally were referring to, but that's not true for all or even most of the commentary. To quote (in context!) from this post:

"Back to Breitbart:
Sherrod’s racist tale is received by the NAACP audience with nodding approval and murmurs of recognition and agreement. Hardly the behavior of the group now holding itself up as the supreme judge of another groups’ racial tolerance.

So part of the context to Breitbart is about the present-day audience, responding positively to Sherrod's account of feeling conflicted about helping a white man who wasn't giving her the deference warranted by her power. The speaker and the audience shared a feeling of understanding a sort of stereotypical white attitude."

That's not just Ann Althouse; it's exemplary of a great many comments since last week. I believe comments to this effect are inaccurate.

traditionalguy said...

There is a local man that I have had some contact with and who is on evening talk Radio here. He came down with a serious cancer 3 years ago, and we talked him into going out to the M D Anderson Cancer clinic in Houston, Texas where he beat it. This guy could be the antedote to todays rumors of race war. We told him he should run as Palin's Vice President. His name is Herman Cain. That is what we need to be doing. Re-fighting the old days is really playing into Obama's hands, even if Breitbart seems to be winning a few battles.

Matt said...

Basically, everyone is overreacting. The NAACP was wrong to say the Tea Party was racist. But because they did Breitbart decided to show the NAACP was racist. Only he chose a clip that didn't show that. If you watch the whole clip the crowd applauds when Sherrod says it is about the Have's and the Have Nots and it is not about race. Had Breitbart only showed that part of the speech then he would have had no argument to make. But he figured it was better to take a chance on a half clip [which he claims was the way it was sent to him]. Michael Moore does the same b.s.

The key here is very partisan individuals and groups have an agenda. And so if they present something as 'truth' then you need to step back and scrutinize.

Freeman Hunt said...

HDHouse, I defended Sherrod from the beginning as far as the racism charge went. (Though I condemned her rich/poor thing and her offering encouragement for people to join the unaccountable government workforce.)

So you played your joke on the wrong person. Turns out that you and I agree on two things. Surprise!

El Pollo Real said...

Freeman wrote: ...how come Reid taking his opponent completely out of context isn't the big story right now?

Harry Reid is too big to flail.

Chase said...

Shirley Sherrod last Friday on Anderson Cooper/CNN:

(describing Andrew Breitbart):

"I think he'd like to get us stuck back in the times of slavery.
That's where I think he'd like to see all black people end up again.

I think he's so viscious.

Anderson Cooper: You think he's racist?

Sherrod: Yes I do. That's why he's so viscious against a black president.



Those sound like the words of an unrepentant racist to me.

What say you AlphaLiberal?

Lincolntf said...

David...

I moved to the South a few years ago after three decades in Massachusetts. Definitely a different racial vibe down here. For one thing, virtually every City official down here is black, while up there they were all my fellow Micks.
Anyway, I'd like to think that out-and-out racism is on the wane, but I'm not convinced. Ever since the Left decided to commodify racial hatred there's been a concerted effort to keep racism alive and well. Will the Dems ever willingly let go of their hole card? Not any time soon.

Freeman Hunt said...

That slavery comment was very stupid. I would say that it should disqualify one from high positions in the government bureaucracy, but then, there's never been a stupidity level too high for that in practice.

HDHouse said...

Freeman -

I've been doing this here and there for a week. The joke wasn't on you or toward you. You just had content that I could take out of context. The joke is on, in this case, Dust Bunny who took the bait.

What I have found most interesting is that I'd run some pretty blatant "out of context" stuff in the past little bit and no one has tumbled to it. That is the larger of the two points I intended to make.

You put a quote on something and people just believe it. (ps Fen and Pogo are NOT, I repeat, NOT living together as man and wife - to the best of my knowledge anyway and Trooper York isn't part of the communist party as some have claimed).

Chase said...

Stupid me.

Why did I even ask AlphaLiberal or any liberal for that matter - their opinion on black racism? We already know the answer:

Why Shirley Sherrod is a wronged woman! And, being black, she can't stand up to such things! Everyone knows black people need more sympathy, a lower bar - we can't expect them to stand completely on their own character! (Liberals frantically looking around for a black person to pat on the head.)


Sigh . . . I guess liberals are just too good for the rest of us regular folk.

Freeman Hunt said...

Oh, and HDHouse, since the first thing we agreed on was fake, I guess the other thing we agree on is that it's fun to talk to kids at the dinner table. So, still two things.

Trooper York said...

Thanks hd. But you have to understand everyone realizes that you are senile and so we know that pretty much everything you say is to ignored. That is what we all do old timer.

But your posts about music are very nice. They recall the days of your youth. Around 1826.

Graham Powell said...

FYI, at the time Breitbart posted the clip from Sherrod's speech he stated that this was the *only* clip in his possession. Now obviously I can't vouch for that, and those who claim he's a liar won't be convinced, but he never said he'd seen the entire tape.

And why would he lie, if he knew or even suspected that the whole tape would come out?

Michael said...

HD House: I have had occasion to visit your blog which appears to be both well written and sane. Your taste in music approximates mine. But on this blog your comments frequently are incoherent or bordering on insane/frothing at the mouth and entirely predictable. Is someone pretending to be you either here or on the blog? Please advise which or who is which.

Rich said...

Graham Powell said:

"FYI, at the time Breitbart posted the clip from Sherrod's speech he stated that this was the *only* clip in his possession. Now obviously I can't vouch for that, and those who claim he's a liar won't be convinced, but he never said he'd seen the entire tape."

Well I would not call him a liar but I would say he was mistaken and did not perform his due diligence, even with regard to the original short clip he had. Within that clip, as mentioned above, Ms. Sherrod says the incident she was talking about happened just after Chapter 12 bankruptcy provisions were enacted, which occurred in 1986. So the timing of the incident in question was evident before the full tape was made available.

bagoh20 said...

"The joke is on, in this case, Dust Bunny who took the bait.
"



If such dishonesty is a joke, you're the hardest working guy in comedy.

HDHouse said...

Chase said...
"Those sound like the words of an unrepentant racist to me. "

If a fellow like Breitbart is a racist and you call him a racist and own up to it, aren't you just telling the truth? Seems ok to me.

HDHouse said...

@bagho20.

Well I might have taken Freeman's words out of context but I apologized to him. The rest of you just have to read more carefully and think more critically so you won't fall into the DustBunny trap of "bam pow..right over my head".

You do get the idea of irony don't you bag?

bagoh20 said...

"If a fellow like Breitbart is a racist and you call him a racist and own up to it, aren't you just telling the truth? Seems ok to me."

And if it's not true, what is that person?

Chase said...

HD,

Do you think Andrew Brietbart is a racist?
Why?


ps awesome personal blog you have there, dude.

Famous Original Mike said...

There is simply no way for the POTUS or the NAACP to come out of this looking good. Breitbart doesn't look all that good either, but I'm guessing that even Breitbart thinks that the collateral damage to his reputation is worth it given how much the incident discredits the racists at the NAACP and in the Obama administration.

What is it that the Leftists said about Rathergate? Oh yeah - "false but accurate".

bagoh20 said...

HD, are you so far along that you are actually in your second childhood? You can't really think such crap is cleaver. Do you think a burning bag of crap on the door step is irony too?

Mark O said...

Why would you ever want to ignore a source of information. There was nothing fradulent about the video. Has no one ever reserved judgment on an issue while appreciating the information received. Are we too dull witted to take what we have an assess it.
Are we to be angry that we have to use our own judgment and brains. No wonder the MSM has lasted so long.

Lazy. Lazy.

Trooper York said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
AlphaLiberal said...

Big Mike:

Let's see what we have here: right wing magazine goes on fallacious attack against Breitbart's victim and further drags here through the mud. They do so in ignorance of what "lynching" means and they trivialize a bound man being beaten to death on the steps of a courthouse.

Naturally, you think this shows how bad liberals are! It doesn't matter how offensive the original piece was, or that the American Spectator continues to feature the piece on their home page, or that the AS didn't bother with the easiest of fact-checking.

No, in your twisted mind, the American Spectator is free of responsibility for their actions. And, it's okay that they attacked Shirley Sherrod again, after the discredited Breitbart attacks.

Man, conservatives suck ass!

Lincolntf said...

"But what is the context of the White House-USDA reaction? "

This question is the reason you'll see all the media outlets lying about what transpired. Even ex-Dem. Presidential candidate got busted lying about the sequence of events that led to Sherrod being vilified by the NAACP and canned by the Obama Admin.
The minute we stop talking about Breitbart/Fox/blogs, etc. we can start talking about the bizarre response from the White House. Time enough to make all those bitchy phone calls to Shirley, but no time to watch the whole video? What kind of knee-jerk assholes are these people?

Trooper York said...

HDHouse said...
@bagho20.

Well I might have taken Freeman's words out of context but I apologized to him."

Freeman and I have had our differences but I have to say she is all woman and then some.

Just another example of your senile dotage on parade my good man. Why not go back to posting about Bach? It's safer for you oldtimer.

AlphaLiberal said...

Chase, egocentrically demands I wait around here in the Althouse sewer until he asks me a question:

"Why did I even ask AlphaLiberal or any liberal for that matter - their opinion on black racism?"

I never saw your question. Now I have.

No, I do not think it was a racist statement. No, I do not think Shirley Sherrod is a racist.

It is now a well-established fact that Andrew Breitbart is a liar and a racist.

AlphaLiberal said...

Now I'm leaving. Try not to take it personally, Chase. You're not the center of the universe.

Seven Machos said...

Times when context didn't matter:

1. George H.W. Bush remarks about a new grocery scanner.

2. Sarah Palin says she can see Russia "from her house."

3. John McCain says "bomb Iran."

You want me to go on?

Alex said...

What I want to know from the lefties is this - will the constant screaming of RACIST RACIST RACIST somehow convince swing voters to pull the (D) level this November?

Chase said...

No personal offense taken, AL.

Why can't you defend your statement that Sherrod is not a racist - despite making a racist statement - but Breitbart is?


Evidence?

AlphaLiberal said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
HDHouse said...

bagoh20 said...
"Do you think a burning bag of crap on the door step is irony too?"

Your door? Kewl.

Seven Machos said...

Alpha -- Why do you keep deleting your inanity? Keep it up for the world to see.

Trooper York said...

hd if your crap is buring you should have the home care attendant check your Depends.

I'm worried about you big fella. Your crap shouldn't burn. It should be soft and easy because of all the Jamie Lee Curtis yogurt they make you eat.

AC245 said...

Well, it looks like I was wrong yesterday when I said that Shirley Sherrod only spoke for herself and it didn't reflect on her husband when she spouted her craziness.

It turns out her husband's just as willing to race-bait and raise the spectre of the evil white man as she is.

What sad, paranoid little racists the pair of these "civil rights heroes" turned out to be. It's no wonder the leftists are running away from the content of the Sherrods' speeches as fast as they can, trying to shift the focus off of the message and onto the messengers. They've got another pair of Cindy Sheehans on their hands.

(Related:
Shirley Sherrod: "I don't think [Breitbart]'s interested in seeing anyone get past it because I think he'd like to get us stuck back in the times of slavery."
Shirley Sherrod: "[Fox] would love to take us back to where we were many years ago. Back to where black people were looking down, not looking white folks in the face, not being able to compete for a job out there and not be a whole person."
Charles Sherrod: "We must stop the white man and his Uncle Toms from stealing our election. We must not be afraid to vote black. We must not be afraid to turn a black out who votes against our interests")

HDHouse said...

@trooper y

need to read more carefully trooper. and i agree that freeman is a very good writer and i told her so. we might not agree on much but i do respect her talent.

AlphaLiberal said...

I posted in the wrong thread by accident, Seven. That's why.

Chase,

a) regarding Ms Sherrod, I refer you to her comments in the the full video that was released, where she advocated people overcome differences of race.

b) Regarding Breitbart, I give you his doctored video release on Ms Sherrod, his attacks on the NAACP and his attacks on the minority-led ACORN (you know, the whole pimp thing). He is a race baiter and propagandist trying to stir up more white racial resentment.

c3 said...

David;

Condi Rice? Clarence Thomas? Millions of people you've never heard of?

Fair point. The little I've heard Clarence Thomas speak, I think there's still some anger there. And of course, now compounded by the disdain he receives from the left.

Condi Rice is an excellent counter point to Shirley Sherrod.


The Democratic party is out of business without monolithic black support. They can count on 90-95% of the black vote in every election. Since blacks are about 12% of the electorate, democrats begin with about 11% to zero advantage on a national basis.

Sad to say, this whole sordid affair will not change that reality. its going to take a lot more folks like Condi Rice and Colin Powell to speak about black folk prejudices about Republicans and conservatives for this to change. Its NOT going to change with Andrew Breitbart.

The optimist in me says this is all good in a perverse way because it will confirm the uselessness of fighting the "racist" wars. The coincidental timing of the Shirley Sherrod episode with the Jornolist revelation of liberal journalists considering falsely accusing a random conservative (such as Fred Barnes) of being a racist may help nudge us forward.

Trooper York said...

hd you called Freeman a him not a her. Don't you read your own posts?
A small point but a simple one to show that you are out of your mind.

It's actually typical of your posts. You said something that is totally wrong, then you post a dishonest post where you lie about what you said.

I want to be generous. I feel you are simply senile and not a total liar.

And I do think that your home care attendant should check your Depends. Just sayn'

Pogo said...

The cool thing about all this is that the 'racism' charge has been flung so often and so indiscriminately that it has lost much of power.

Like 'fascism', it's become the go-to epithet for all things the left dislikes.

As such, it's meaningless as an actual word; it merely connotes dismissive hatred by the speaker, who could be addressing standardized tests or a Hallmark card, believing it trumps all arguments and shuts down all discussion.

That is, it's bullshit.

Seven Machos said...

Is Freeman Hunt's sexuality now in question?

Obviously, I am going to have to make a decisive determination of this vital issue -- preferably after a delicious dinner and at a five-star hotel with rose petals all around.

HDHouse said...

@trooper -

i readily admit my him/her mistake and that is what it was.

as to the other... I DIDN'T say anything except quote what was written..and intentionally left out some words - OUT OF CONTEXT is the thought of the day...

mainly because the right wing on here is giving Breitbart a free pass for doing the same thing and is bending over backward to make the entire thing sound like just a little mixup...an inadvertant mistake...

So I thought I would do the same thing. out of context is indeed putting words in people's mouth. The stuff that I wrote today and for the past 4-5 days has been full of this "editing" and no one caught it. (the larger point)... until Dust Bunny fell for it hook line and sinker.

I know you are smarter than that TY. ... please let it be so.

Old Dad said...

Alpha,

Olly wrote in refernce to Prof. Althouse:

"To listen to the conservative media, the Daily Caller has exposed the discussion listserv Journolist as some sort of hotbed of liberal message coordination."

Read it slowly. Say the words outloud. Try to sound out the words you don't understand. Note what Olly thinks that conservatives are talking about--that's right, liberal media coordination.

Now what was the topic of the Caller's article on the 25th. That's right, Dave Weigel. Do you see how those two things are not the same. Dave Weigel is a human being. Liberal media coordination is an idea that was discussed by lot's of people after it was exposed by the Caller on June 27. Two entirely different topics on two entirely different days. For example, today is Monday. Yesterday was Sunday. Now practice on making distictions. What will tomorrow be? Why will that be a different day. Repeat until you understand.

Comrade X said...

Pogo,

It's losing its meaning on the internet. I don't know if someone could get away with getting in someone's face and saying it. I've never seen that happen in real life which is odd considering how many brave race warriors there are on the web.

AlphaLiberal said...

Old Dad:

Are you daft? just because Weigel is in the story does not mean it is not an expose.

The June 25th Daily Caller story about Weigel was founded upon an "expose" of Journolist emails.

I know that because they published parts of several Journolist emails in the story. And I read the story.

It was an expose that got David Weigel fired.

You seem pretty thick and slow and I've already explained this to you once, so you are, no doubt, being deliberately obtuse instead of being honest.

Pogo said...

HDHouse said " The stuff that I wrote today and for the past 4-5 days has been full of this "editing" and no one caught it. (the larger point)...

You think people actually read all that?
Hilarious.
Or frightening.

Seven Machos said...

Alpha -- The reason you are getting criticized here is because your non-argument is utterly laughable. It's embarrassing, even by the low standards you set for yourself.

Trooper York said...

hd you should realize that any changes you made to what other people have posted is chalked up to your senility and lack of graspe of simple facts which you demonstrate over and over again with such idoicy as thinking General Betrayus was a Republican/conservative meme or that Freeman is a boy and not a girl. Trust me, nobody reads your posts that closely and we assume any mistatements are simply the effects of the Alzheimers that your posts so often reek.

Come on big fella. Take care of that burning crap and leave the politics to people who still have two brain cells to rub together.

Ritmo Brasileiro said...

I think I really see you guys going somewhere with this race obsession...

Perhaps the coming minority of white whiners will build a winning political platform off it.

Seven Machos said...

Hey, it's Ritmo Urban Meadowlark Dribbler! Dribbling some drivel.

AC245 said...

The stuff that I wrote today and for the past 4-5 days has been full of this "editing" and no one caught it.

Demented Grandpa Harold, the stuff you've written for the past 4-5 years has been full of lies and deceptions. No one takes your bullshit seriously anymore, you senile old fool.

Tell us all about your nine medical patents, Demented Grandpa Harold.

Or explain again how Althouse got fooled by the "fake" bprepublicans.com site that you immediately spotted as a hoax.

Or, Demented Grandpa Harold, you could just recount everyone's favorite tale: how the right wing smeared General Betrayus.

Trooper York said...

Seven Machos said...
Is Freeman Hunt's sexuality now in question?

Well only in hd's mind. Do you really want to do that Fantastic Voyage thing where they shrink you down and stuff? I wouldn't want to go there. Hd's mind is a very scary place. Just sayn'

Pogo said...

I see Ritmo has come to bat clean-up for the non sequitur racist colluding Journolisting obfuscating left.

Let loose thy lips, oh Ritmo. The steaming pile to come has been well worth the wait.

Pogo said...

"Hd's mind is a very scary place. Just sayn'"

Absolutely; all those plaques and tangles.

Seven Machos said...

Ritmo Urban Dribbler has the bright idea of hurling the racist epitaph at conservatives in response to stories showing that a government hack and her husband and an entire audience at the NAACP are clearly racists.

Brilliant, Meadowlark! Truly a great mind at work there.

AlphaLiberal said...

Seven Brain Cells demonstrates some trademark dishonesty:

"Is Freeman Hunt's sexuality now in question?"

No. Freeman's sexuality was not even raised by HD House. HDH made a typo and wrote "him" instead of "her." that does not address sexuality.

You are really not very bright, but you are "shamefully dishonest."

HDHouse said...

now now trooper...easy there lad.

you're getting all wound up like a 7 day clock. as to writing, i write for my own enjoyment as many of you write for my enjoyment...but then again shooting fish in a barrel isn't all its cracked up to be sometimes and i'd appreciate some of your cohorts showing a little game.

Seven Machos said...

Jesus.

Ritmo Brasileiro said...

You guys are really worked up on this, as I can see. Machos with his typical, juvenile non-response and Pogo, well, just being Pogo.

Let's get down to brass tacks, gentlemen. I propose you change the name of the Republican party to: The Oppressed White People's Party. Nothing gets you riled up like these non-issues. But one would think you'd at least have done the marketing research to see that the sinking sense of privilege of the coming minority is not much of a winning cause. Yes, it gets you riled up. No, not many other people care.

But I do love watching your blood boil as topics you could care less about, despite their importance to a functional country, such as financial regulatory reform, actually get the attention they deserve under the Democrats.

But, yes. I hear you loud and clear: Waaahhhhhhhhh!

The commies had a hammer and sickle. The Republicans need a rattle and pacifier.

John Stodder said...

Jeez, HD, that was the dumbest "gotcha" I've ever seen.

It's nothing like what happened to Shirley Sherrod. Not even close.

But we have seen Maureen Dowd do what you did, for reals, only using elipses to eliminate the words that would undercut her case. So you might want to set off your little firecracker in her comment thread.

HDHouse said...

Seven Machos said...
"Obviously, I am going to have to make a decisive determination of this vital issue -- preferably after a delicious dinner and at a five-star hotel with rose petals all around."

I don't think she dates outside her species.

Ritmo Brasileiro said...

Machos: Define oppression.

Six more comments every time I check in. This racism thing is really getting the coming minority fired up!

White people of America: Unite!

HDHouse said...

John Stodder said...
Jeez, HD, that was the dumbest "gotcha" I've ever seen."

well John, the previous 15-20 posts like that seemed to go right over the rightwing so to speak so I dumbed it down enough and bingo.

AJ Lynch said...

Meadowlark Dribbler heh that was a good one.

Seven Machos said...

Ritmo Urban Dribbler -- The post is about Sherrod. Why, Meadowlark, would we speak about financial reform in the thread?

Incidentally, I spend the better part of my days dealing with this financial reform right now. What part of it would you like to discuss?

Jim said...

Here's what is making the Ritmos, Alphabits and Houseboy so angry:

This whole Breitbart/Sherrod episode combined with the Journolist archives have exposed the utter emptiness of charges of racism by those on the Left.

Whether it's the willingness to smear random conservatives with unfounded racism charges, or the knee-jerk firing of Sherrod and condemnation by the NAACP, it doesn't even matter any more.

They sense the coming end of their ultimate trump card - accusing their opponents of racism. These episodes come on top of being proven liars about black congressmen claiming that they were called racial epithets, Obama dropping the suit against the NBPP, and the obviously false charges of racism at ANY opposition to Obama's policies.

It's all falling apart in a way they couldn't have anticipated just 18 months ago when they were crowing about the "permanent majority." It makes them angry, and desperate.

And it's showing....

Seven Machos said...

I have not mentioned oppression, Curly.

Ritmo Brasileiro said...

Dude, it's all about debate framing and attention grabbing - as you know. If you want to quit posting trivia about Oprah on your own blog, I'd love to drop by and see what you care to say about financial regulatory reform or other real issues.

But just like how Machos has his Oprah, Althouse has her Shirley Sherrod. I'm just responding to the matter of topic choice. Obviously certain people wouldn't have a problem trying to drive the news cycle with nothing other than this sort of bullshit. And that's the extent of what I have to say on that.

Fred4Pres said...

Thank you c3, that is an interesting question you pose. Given my father was not murdered in that manner, I really don't know. I would hope I could separate invidiaual actions

While I am sympathic to Ms. Sherrod, I would also suggest that if she has not transcended such feelings she is not fit to work in any official goverment capacity (let alone as a senior official). I am not judging her. I am just saying you cannot act objectively under such circumstances.

Fred4Pres said...

Thank you c3, that is an interesting question you pose. Given my father was not murdered in that manner, I really don't know. I would hope I could separate invidiaual actions

While I am sympathic to Ms. Sherrod, I would also suggest that if she has not transcended such feelings she is not fit to work in any official goverment capacity (let alone as a senior official). I am not judging her. I am just saying you cannot act objectively under such circumstances.

Fred4Pres said...

President O'Carter?

Seven Machos said...

And that's the extent of what I have to say on that.

I find that hard to believe, Goose. I bet you are just getting your dribbling started here. Froth forth! Change the subject again and again.

Ritmo Brasileiro said...

It's a simple thing, really. At some point, l'Affaire Sherrod would have to become less than newsworthy or even blogworthy. I'm just wondering when you think that's likely to happen, in yours and Althouse's and Reynold's and Beck's and Breitbart's estimation.

I really don't think as many people care as some would like to believe at this point.

Ritmo Brasileiro said...

Assuming they ever really did in the first place.

HT said...

Thanks David. I too live, born, raised in the south.

Ritmo Brasileiro said...

What makes you think I feel desperate, Jim? Where's your evidence? And while you're at it, tell me how the Republicans plan to cut the deficit while preserving Social Security, Defense, Medicare, etc.

You can't. The point is that they can't govern. They're all about rallying cries and have no actual ideas when it comes to effective implementation. I find I like seeing that exposed. It shouldn't make any thinking person who cares about the country and governing it according to reality-based principles desperate. It doesn't to me.

You're projecting.

Big Mike said...

@Jim, I'm afraid you're right. I suggested that we'd see a lot of mud thrown up from the left, and they haven't disappointed me.

Take Alpha, for instance. He's trying to make the case that the entire right wing doesn't understand lynching based on a single article. And I'm absolutely certain that he himself would have conflated lynching with hanging had he not been pointed to the American Prospect article by whoever hands him his talking points. So he talks it to death like he's discovered the Theory of Everything. Sad. Really, really sad.

Big Mike said...

Yes, Ritmo, you're desperate. Now go slither back under your stone.

Seven Machos said...

I really don't think as many people care as some would like to believe at this point.

A person who thinks that would not come here demanding that people stop caring. Such a person would be off on their merry way. Yet you are not. Why is that, Meadowlark? If you don't not care, why should anyone else not care?

Ritmo Brasileiro said...

Big (BM) Mike,

Your disease is showing. You are not correctly identifying how I feel.

I feel bad that you can't realize that. But I don't feel bad about the current state of politics outside the right-wing bubble.

traditionalguy said...

@ Jim...I have noticed the same last 18 months, or at least the last 12 months, since a push back against Obama's Wonderful Wonkie Policies started. While the nerd herd of GOP "leaders" was still in hiding, Sarah Palin's Facebook struck. Then the Tea Party's popular anger tsunami at being lied to 24/7 by both parties swept thru town and even reached Massachusetts. Now the real issues are what Lame Duck poison pills Reid and Pelosi can leave in our laws that Obama will protect from repeal with a veto. Race meems are not working anymore either...unless we fall for their bait and attack the usual suspects and make the Indies ashamed to vote GOP. So let's change the subject. Ritmo is instinctively helping us.

c3 said...

This thread has dramatically degenerated.

HD arguing about dates and times. Huh? And Ritmo coming in and sure enough engaging in the fight over who is more racist

Ritmo,
Since the NAACP, Mrs Sherrod, Howard Dean and host of others have essentially stated that the right is racist who is obsessed with race.

So the argument has gone from "who is racist" to "who called whom a racist" and now to "who is obsessed with race and racism"?

Lets just call everyone a racist, and start from scratch.

Ritmo Brasileiro said...

A person who thinks that would not come here demanding that people stop caring.

Where was any such demand made? I satirized how obsessed you are about this, as I satirize your inability to come to terms with many of the issues behind the right-wing Wambulance-driving headlines. It's really your choice. If you think it's that important a thing to focus on, it would be nice to hear why, and why you assume it would resonate beyond your bubble.

Your short-sightedness is something I respond to more out of pity than out of any moral, let alone political demand. Half the time I feel like an anthropologist observing a long-lost, primitive culture poisoning itself. If you think reverse-racism is the cri du coeur of the day, cry on. I don't see why other grown-ups would respond. But hey, it's your choice, as I said. Save yourselves only if you care to.

El Pollo Real said...

Fred4Pres

President O'Carter?

LOL I voted for Carter in '80, my first ever Presidential vote. Luckily, cooler & smarter heads prevailed in that one.

Let's hope history repeats (or at leasts rhymes).

Brian said...

@Ritmo:
And while you're at it, tell me how the Republicans plan to cut the deficit while preserving Social Security, Defense, Medicare, etc.

I agree, I haven't seen a Republican plan either.

What's the Democrat's plan?

Fred4Pres said...

And the Wind cries Obama

As opposed to Mary.

Ritmo Brasileiro said...

c3,

If you want to have a mature discussion about race and racism in America, you have to first accept that the predominant issue is one of numbers, power and privilege. A minority can oppress a majority, I suppose. A majority is much more capable of oppressing a minority, and that's what the right never gets. It's a relative thing but you never see what is relative to what.

Once you come to terms with the right's "Southern Strategy" and exorcise the other demons lurking from a blind denial of white privilege, I think the left would have a much easier time getting rid of affirmative action. What's so hard about understanding simple quid pro quo? At some point it's not even clear what you're fighting about, let alone whom you're fighting.

traditionalguy said...

Ritmo...The drilling for gas and oil is still the lever of success or failure when the USA attempts to re-start significant manufacturing in North America. That means Obama/Soros's Cap and Tax blocking law will freeze us into unemployment while global cooling freezes our food supply. The Finance Freeze was already passed last week. Does all of this mean that we will need to look to Alaska for leadership that understands how to deal with freezes?

Ritmo Brasileiro said...

I agree, I haven't seen a Republican plan either.

What's the Democrat's plan?


Probably just to expose that the Republicans lack one and that blind opposition is their modus operandi.

The left can say, in effect, hey - this is all complicated. Until the financial picture starts on a corrected trajectory - which many of us don't feel will happen until reform is enacted - then they can blame the right for being in charge during all this while being too simple-minded to have an answer to any economic problem that didn't involve tax cuts as some sort of golden lamp to rub. They can say that the right didn't understand the difference between politics and economics.

I'm also a firm believer in reform. Economies can't function, let alone grow without transparency and a way to accurately value things. If things get worse once reform is implemented, then the right has a stronger claim to bolster their plan to, well, I guess do even less than that.

Also, recent technological advances have put us in a huge state of economic transition right now. The discussion goes way beyond right-left politics. I don't think many people are realizing that and this fact is just starting to catch up with our perception.

Pogo said...

El Pollo Real said...
"LOL I voted for Carter in '80, my first ever Presidential vote."

Hell's bells, man, me too.
Mebbe we is brothers after all!

Do you call it "pop", "soda", or "Coke"?

El Pollo Real said...

@pogo Pop!

Ritmo Brasileiro said...

TG always obsesses about oil as if becoming the next Russia, Iran, or Saudi Arabia is somehow our salvation. Interesting that China and India don't see things that way. Why is it that for every issue of national significance the rightie bangs on with a simple slogan that can be reduced to a bumper sticker and proposes that's the answer, right there in front of our very eyes? Why the aversion to responding to every challenge with an answer that involves more than a single variable?

I think it's questions like this that are causing the right to feel retreat, and go into decline. It's ok. History gives us an age of discovery and exploration, and then an era to consolidate what we know. The liberal wants to learn and respond to new challenges. This is not your father's Chevrolet. Don't worry. You guys had your time. Once the information age has matured, the cons can come back around and remind us of how all the answers to everything under the sun were so simple all along. If only we'd realized.

Right. Thanks.

Pogo said...

" If things get worse once reform is implemented, then the right has a stronger claim ..."

Oh, you mean if we have 10-20 years of recession, like say Japan, only then you'll admit you were wrong?

Does the fact that businesses aren't hiring or making capital investments because of the Democratic Party-induced uncertainty and the Biggest Tax Increase In The History Of The World (BTIITHOTW) right now as we speak mean nothing to you?

No, it does not.
And neither will 20 years of economic purgatory, because you're a lefty, and facts do not matter.

Pogo said...

Pop?!

Man, this is scary.
I have 12 siblings, so we coulda lost one real easy on the way. My Dad used to claim there were more of us but he let some of us go when money got tight or they misbehaved, but I was pretty sure he was joking at the time.

Now i wonder......

El Pollo Real said...

Getting back on topic, I'd just like to note that the more we learn about Sherrod and her leftist kin, the better. This whole thing has made we want to know even more about her from both points of view.

Ritmo Brasileiro said...

Oh, you mean if we have 10-20 years of recession, like say Japan, only then you'll admit you were wrong?

You get your economists who claim that the way to avoid the Japan scenario was by spending less and responding with less stimulus and then I'll compare them to the host of others who make the opposite claim.

Does the fact that businesses aren't hiring or making capital investments because of the Democratic Party-induced uncertainty and the Biggest Tax Increase In The History Of The World (BTIITHOTW) right now as we speak mean nothing to you?

Businesses will always complain and make taxes the only issue that matters. But our economy involves more than just this business owner or that. I understand though, that since they're the constituency that matters to your party, you can't see it any other way.

No, it does not.
And neither will 20 years of economic purgatory, because you're a lefty, and facts do not matter.


Well, 20 years sounds like a prediction, and one that you've made off a craptastic counter-intuitive claim to what economists believe about Japan, at that. But the dismal science is still in its infancy, anyway. You get back to me with facts, rather than predictions and assumptions, and then we'll talk. Hell, you can even take on Krugman, if you're feeling up to it (which it feels like you are).

Jim said...

Ritmo -

There is so much ignorance and projection involved in your post that it's hard to know where to start.

The right is the one who wants to reduce everything to a simplistic bumper sticker? Really "Hope N'Change" "General Betrayus", "Uncle Tom," etc.

Should I go on. The Left has a simplistic reducitionist tendency which goes along with the ideology: when all else fails, call them racists.

That, of course, follows on the brilliantly nuanced Leftist strategy of: when all else fails, call them fascists.

Which follows the genius strategy of: when all else fails, blame the vast right-wing conspiracy.

Do I really need to keep pointing out just how UNnuanced the Left is, or are you sufficiently embarrassed yet?

Are you still ringing that "permanent majority" bell? You know that even the DNC has abandoned that whole "your time has passed, conservatives" line of argumentation. It turns out it was over-simple, bumper sticker logic that had no bearing on reality.

Kind of like your whole post.

I can smell your flop-sweat from here. Take a bath.

Ritmo Brasileiro said...

Right, Poollo. Sherrod is Just a Leftist TM. No reason to think we might consider how race affects her perception. And that's because whites have treated every black in this country with infinite kindness and respect - at least after 1965 at any rate.

Since when did conservatives think that societies change as radically and suddenly as they would have us believe LBJ's legislation changed things?

Not making sense. A basic flaw is coming between your philosophy and your political posturing.

El Pollo Real said...

Right, Poollo. Sherrod is Just a Leftist TM. No reason to think we might consider how race affects her perception.

I formed that opinion watching the full vid. Don't know her in person of course.

AJ Lynch said...

This blog may be a rehab center for recovering Carter voters! I am one.

El Pollo Real said...

But her wiki bio is not very charming, especially the people she surrounds herself with.

I mean, even Jane Fonda felt bad and apologized- but that may have been to help sell work-out videos.

Ritmo Brasileiro said...

Ritmo -

There is so much ignorance and projection involved in your post that it's hard to know where to start.


Then let's see how much better you fare.

The right is the one who wants to reduce everything to a simplistic bumper sticker? Really "Hope N'Change" "General Betrayus", "Uncle Tom," etc.

The first one is a sentiment, not a policy proposal. The second gets more mileage out of you than is warranted, and the third just speaks to your interest in making a caricature out of the left based on an exaggerated instance of hyperbole that you don't even source or place into context.

Should I go on.

Why not? You're not doing very well so far.

The Left has a simplistic reducitionist tendency which goes along with the ideology: when all else fails, call them racists.

The reductionist tendency is of the right to deny that racism was a pernicious element in U.S. society that only a simpleton would deny lacked relevancy after 1965. Your whole "Southern Strategy" relied on it, in fact. Chase admits this.

That, of course, follows on the brilliantly nuanced Leftist strategy of: when all else fails, call them fascists.

Your side references communists. Who cares?

Oh, I know. The people that want reform and are done with letting your contributors play the same game.

Which follows the genius strategy of: when all else fails, blame the vast right-wing conspiracy.

Well, you have a point. Just because a certain segment exhibits group-think doesn't mean they're behind a conspiracy. A conspiracy would involve something more intelligent and seeing the goal beyond the tactics.

Do I really need to keep pointing out just how UNnuanced the Left is, or are you sufficiently embarrassed yet?

I think you're just stupid and stupidly partisan. You haven't made a good objective point about anything, really.

Are you still ringing that "permanent majority" bell? You know that even the DNC has abandoned that whole "your time has passed, conservatives" line of argumentation. It turns out it was over-simple, bumper sticker logic that had no bearing on reality.

The left may yet understand the difference between short-term and long-term. You obviously don't.

I won't respond to the rest of your schoolyard trash-talking piffle. You are clearly beyond making anything resembling a disinterested point. But back up the talking points with taunts. I guess that seems to fit.

Freeman Hunt said...

LOL I voted for Carter in '80, my first ever Presidential vote.

Ha ha. My first Presidential vote was Gore in '00.

Freeman Hunt said...

I have to admit that HD's joke was a bit funny. Anyone could have fallen for it; this time it happened to be one of my favorite fellow commenters, DBQ.

Somebody needs to pull it on the current king of this sort of thing, Harry Reid.

AC245 said...

Right, Poollo. Sherrod is Just a Leftist TM. No reason to think we might consider how race affects her perception. And that's because whites have treated every black in this country with infinite kindness and respect - at least after 1965 at any rate.

Old talking point: Sherrod is not a racist! And you're a racist for saying she is!

New talking point: Of course Sherrod is a racist! And you're a racist for saying she shouldn't be!

El Pollo Real said...

Ha ha. My first Presidential vote was Gore in '00.

I made that mistake too and several others in the intervening years.
I am not alone

edutcher said...

Seven Machos said...

Times when context didn't matter:

...

2. Sarah Palin says she can see Russia "from her house."

Tina Fey said it, not Miss Sarah.

Freeman Hunt said...

New talking point: Of course Sherrod is a racist! And you're a racist for saying she shouldn't be!

Yes, and it's lame. If some white official were racist, would he be excused if he'd suffered at the hands of black people? I should think not. If anything people would likely argue that if he were traumatized to that degree, he wouldn't be fit for office.

Ritmo Brasileiro said...

I'm sure Sherrod has heaped a whole lot o' oppression on you, AC. A ton of it. In fact, she is single-handedly holding back the betterment of any and all white people. As are all blacks.

I mean, that is the point you were trying to make. Isn't it?

Ritmo Brasileiro said...

If some white official were racist, would he be excused if he'd suffered at the hands of black people? I should think not. If anything people would likely argue that if he were traumatized to that degree, he wouldn't be fit for office.

That's why Obama can only hire the blacks who were protected by the saintly Hunt Clan, who took them in and prevented every last one of them from being lynched back in the day. At least in Missouri anyway.

Mark Twain would be satirizing the hell out of y'alls if he were alive today.

El Pollo Real said...

I'm sure Sherrod has heaped a whole lot o' oppression on you, AC. A ton of it. In fact, she is single-handedly holding back the betterment of any and all white people. As are all blacks.

Well monolithic voting blocks along racial lines may have heaped a fair amount of present and future federal oppression on us all in the last election.

I'd start with planned oselescence of high deductable health insurance, but I know that would be sounding a bit like a broken record not to mention being off topic. so I'll drop it.

traditionalguy said...

Ritmo...You are correct as always in your response that the world is a complex place that has more variables than any theory will encompass "on a bumper sticker"( That is excatly why Socialism is a dead end). But to get leadership for a Democratically elected representative Republic some one has to give out a passionate message that is simple enough to arouse followers in support. The USA has often been blessed with that leadership style. As smart as he says he is, Obama is not leading us. He has turned over legislation to Pelosi and international politics to "anyone except a traditional American".

jr565 said...

Ritmo said:
Six more comments every time I check in. This racism thing is really getting the coming minority fired up!

Very good! Ackerman said that the left should star throwing random race cards and accuse repubs of racism, it'll drive them crazy. And here comes Ritmo, like the good little leftist doing exactly what Ackerman suggested. Ritmo is so original.

One thing though Ritmo, once the whites become the minority you and you kind can no longer throw the race card at them and they can be as racist as they want, with impunity. So they can say stuff like "White is Right" and "White Power" and the fact that they are a minority would protect them from any charges of racism, Just as, according to the left only whites can be racists (because they are in positions of power over minorities who are not). So, while it sucks to lose the minority white racists can take hear knowing that one day Ritmo will find such racism as non racist as black racism is now.
So a white racist can say "We must stop the Latino man and his race traitors from stealing our elections. We must not be afraid to vote white and we must not be afraid to turn a white out who votes against our interest" and it will be ok. It will simply be the Latino man (who I'm assuming will be the new minority) who can be racist and in fact the former white racist can throw race cards with impunity at the new majority. The KKK and the Aryan brotherhood who now are excoriated by most polite society could then peddle their white pride rhetoric and it would be as insignificant as La Raza, or the Nation of Islam's or the Ten Percenters racism.

If you think I'm pointing out your, and the libs in general, hypocricy on race you'd be right.

Another question. Even if you think it was wrong of Breitbart to not play the whole tape how does that make Breitbart a racist? What racist motivations are you trying to infer from his slight of Sharrod?

Freeman Hunt said...

That's why Obama can only hire the blacks who were protected by the saintly Hunt Clan, who took them in and prevented every last one of them from being lynched back in the day. At least in Missouri anyway.

Ritmo, are you implying that most black people are racist or that all black people who have suffered are racists? What low expectations you have! My whole point is that we shouldn't accept racist officials, no matter the color.

Freeman Hunt said...

I should have written more clearly though. I did not mean that if someone suffered, it would be assumed that he was traumatized. I meant that if someone argued that it was okay for him to be racist because he'd been traumatized, he'd be unfit for office.

Freeman Hunt said...

Oh hell, and not even that that would be true, but that it would be argued. Bah.

I guess I shouldn't have made mud if I didn't want to have to run it through the cheesecloth.

c3 said...

Fred;
President O'Carter?

That sounded intentional

Freeman Hunt said...

As to my not being a man, this is the Internet. For all you people know, I'm a 600 pound man who uses snapshots of his sister for his avatars.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 277   Newer› Newest»