Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Shirley Sharrod - The ENTIRE Speech

Yesterday, Constructive Feedback posted that he supported Shirley Sharrod and thought that she had been wrongfully terminated from the USDA. I thought he had completely lost his mind before I watched the entire video. She talks about how God changed her heart after she had purposed in her mind to help Black people only. It is most unfortunate that Andrew Brietbart's editing job cost Mrs. Sharrod her job. Before you form an opinion about how wretched this woman is--watch the video:


"Life is a grind stone, but whether it grinds us down or polishes us up depends on us" - Shirley Sharrod

Although I don't agree with her "take" on the Healthcare Reform Bill or her posit that those in opposition to it are just racist who are angry about having a "Black President". Well, I'm sure she doesn't have much love for her "Black President" or the NAACP anymore since she was thrown under the bus due to damage control efforts. At least the NAACP recanted it's initial position on her termination but the same can't be said for the Obama Administration.

82 comments:

uptownsteve said...

Yeah CBW,

Obama punked out and the NAACP jumped the gun but Andrew Breitbart and Fox TV were the ones who created the fiasco in the first with what is very possibly a crminal act in selectively editing and utlimately misrepresenting the words of a citizen on a purported news program.

Are you going to condemn them?

Malcolm Kirkpatrick said...

Aloha. I did not watch the whole speech. Even from the fragment that first circulated, in her speech Shirley Sherrod appeared to reflect on her own attitudes. She says that she sensed that the white farmer disrespected her (talking...very...slowly), gave him minimal help, and covered her rear. She then says that she later regretted her action. There is a moral in her tale, which the NAACP audience obviously does not get, as they can be heard approving her plan to screw the farmer out of his due.

Steve: Selective editing cannot be criminal or hundreds of journalists would be in jail. First of all, the only complete story is the universe itself. Second, political journalists routinely snip sound bites from longer speeches, with effects that vary with the political orientation of the journalist and the politician. Last, although a video that presented more of her speech would have put Sherrod in a better light, it was already positive. She regretted her initial response to the farmer. If she can, why cannot others regret a system that lets government bureaucrats use their power as their prejudices dictate?

Are you going to condemn the numerous fabricated stories that depict the Tea Party as racist? That was the inspiration for the Sherrod story: the NAACP used fabricated tales of racism to condemn the Tea Party, and Breitbart makes their racism evident. Unlike US Reps Lewis and Cleaver, Breitbart did not have to fabricate anything to do it.

Conservative Black Woman said...

UTS~You write: "Are you going to condemn them?"

I wouldn't have posted this if I didn't have a problem with the misrepresentation.

uptownsteve said...

Malcolm Kirkpatrick

"Steve: Selective editing cannot be criminal or hundreds of journalists would be in jail"

However misrepresentation, which goes beyond the political sphere to impacting the lives and livelihoods of non-public persona is a direct violation of the Telecommunications Act of 1937.

And I for one am tweeting today to get everone I know to contact the FCC and the DOJ to go after Fox for this gross offense.

"Are you going to condemn the numerous fabricated stories that depict the Tea Party as racist."

Identify ONE.

It's obvious from Mark Williams, Rand Paul, the racist signs and placards and the presence of white supremacists operatives at Tea Party gatherings that there is a strong ractist presence in the Tea Part.

"Unlike US Reps Lewis and Cleaver, Breitbart did not have to fabricate anything to"

Still peddling this crap, huh?

There were witness and videos showing Cleaver getting spat upon and the n-word hurled promiscuously at black lawmakers by the tea-partiers.

http://dekerivers.wordpress.com/2010/03/20/teabaggers-at-capitol-chant-n-word-spit-on-black-congressman-hurl-anti-gay-slurs-at-another/

uptownsteve said...

"I wouldn't have posted this if I didn't have a problem with the misrepresentation."

I guess this is as close as you're going to come to a condemnation.

Lawd have mercy.

MiaZagora said...

Word is, she's getting her job back.

MiaZagora said...

The tea party isn't racist. I have been to several and there were no racist signs, AND there were African Americans present, AND I live in the South.

"Are you going to condemn the numerous fabricated stories that depict the Tea Party as racist."

Identify ONE.

1. The black caucus bogus claims that the "N" word was yelled numerous times and that they were spat upon. There were video cameras/cell phones going from all different angle and there is NO proof. In this country, people innocent until PROVEN guilty. This was just a made up story.

2. MSNBC showed a protester with a gun, claiming him to be a racist white person and a threat to Obama, who was making a speech somewhere near where they were. The video footage never showed his face. The full video showed him to be a black man. Of course, it WAS just MSNBC, so, probably, not many people saw it anyway.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Jwg-f3dqN4&feature=related

3. The alleged web site "Think Progress" took a video of a racist that infiltrated a TEA party and cut out the part where he was chased away by the TEA party patriots.

4. 'Former Democratic State Chairman Kathy Sullivan was forced to retract her demand that Republican candidates in New Hampshire denounce “tea party white pride activities” in Concord (in May). Sullivan retracted her statement because the tea party movement was found to have had nothing to do with the “white pride” rally in question.'

I could go on...

uptownsteve said...

Sorry there were witnesses, Majority Whip Jim Clyburn among them who saw the spitting and heard the racial eptithets.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/20/tea-party-protests-nier-f_n_507116.html

"MSNBC showed a protester with a gun, claiming him to be a racist white person and a threat to Obama, who was making a speech somewhere near where they were."

WHO made the claim that the gunman was a racist white??

You made this up.

Like a typical rightwinger.

Council of Conservative Citizens sponsor Mississippi Tea Party

http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/mississippi-tea-party-rally-sponsored-by-white-supremacist-organization/blog-221035/

White Supremacists attend Oakland Tea Party

http://ipsnorthamerica.net/news.php?idnews=2753

The link between the Tea Party and White Supremacists

http://movementvision.org/rants-polemics/brewing-racial-resentment/

I could go on. AND ON.

Denying the obvious makes one look silly.

Kathy said...

Steve,

Andrew Breitbart has offered $100,000 for anyone who has a video of that incident, showing anyone spitting on the Congressmen or using "the N-word". I guess you can collect, if you know where such a video is?

As far as the "selective editing" and being played up by Fox News, this video of an interview with Sean Hannity & Andrew Breitbart should answer some of those questions/ accusations. For example, Fox News didn't even play the video prior to Sherrod's firing/resignation, so I'm not sure how they caused it? Secondly, Breitbart says he played it as he received it, and is more concerned with the audience's obviously favorable reaction to "the white man getting screwed" even though they didn't know the end of the story.

I watched the video yesterday or the day before (whenever it broke), and I thought at the end that they cut it off before what was going to be a "but since then I've had a change of heart" (which appears to be what happened), but it still doesn't change the obvious racism among the audience members who cheered at the thought of the white guy getting screwed.

uptownsteve said...

Kathy,

Here's the video.

Where do I pick up the $100,000?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/20/tea-party-protests-nier-f_n_507116.html

uptownsteve said...

Kathy stop it.

You're just guzzling the rightwing Kool-Aid.

"I watched the video yesterday or the day before (whenever it broke), and I thought at the end that they cut it off before what was going to be a "but since then I've had a change of heart""

It was Monday when it broke and she was fired Monday night.

BTW

Submit your complaint about Fox News' libelous editing of the Shirley Sherrod video to the FCC

FCC Consumer Complaints‎ - fcc.gov

MrsGrapevine said...

I am so glad you posted this because it was an incident where the race baiting from the right went too far, and where the left failed to investigate the truth.

I'm actually glad it back-fired, it reveals what many of us "ignorant liberal race-baiting blacks" have been witnessing from the beginning.

MrsGrapevine said...

@ Kathy

So now the audience is racist, too?

Is that the message you got from the video?

Kathy said...

Steve,

Call me blind, but I looked at the link you provided and saw no video, only text of the alleged incident.

Kathy said...

@ Kathy

So now the audience is racist, too?

Is that the message you got from the video?


If a white woman had gotten up in front of a gathering of white people and told a story about a time when she had determined to give less than full care to help a black man save his property simply because he was black, and guided him to a black lawyer (or "one of his own kind") for the help that she should have given, implying that the black man had lost his property due to her deliberate withholding of help (based partly on his color and partly on her perception of his attitude of superiority towards her), and the white audience members clapped and cheered because the black man got screwed, would you call that racist?

Kathy said...

It was Monday when it broke and she was fired Monday night.
Ok, maybe I didn't see it until Tuesday; I certainly didn't see it on Fox News -- I don't have a TV so I get all my info from the internet.

I subscribe to a few conservative blogs, like this one, Black & Right, The Black Sphere, as well as journalist and libertarian John Stossel's blog, (but he's a bit too libertarian for me a lot of the time). I also am subscribed to a few other conservatives' blogs, but they almost never post so I forgot that I was even subscribed to them; plus I have The Drudge Report on my iGoogle homepage. I don't remember for sure where I first saw it, but it was probably B&R because Bob blogs so much. Of course, I have some politically-active conservative friends on facebook, so they may have posted it.

The timing of when I first heard of it is unimportant; if you know that the Fox News Channel did in fact air it prior to her resignation (in other words, that Sean Hannity lied), you should be able to find proof of that with ease.

Anonymous said...

See what happens when you are loyal to color or party? Just sayin!!

I had already viewed the clip and I knew she felt wrong for what she did. Rather we agree with her views or not, it was wrong to fire her.
Socialism= Racism

MrsGrapevine said...

@Kathy:

First of all no one clapped or cheered when Shirley Sharrod told the story about the white farmer. I'm not sure what video you saw, but it must have been another "edited" version on Fox News, or some biased Conservative blog that you read.


Secondly, it wasn't about his race, it was about his arrogance, and even Shirley Sharrod got over that fact to help this man. She helped him because he was simply a hard working man, affected by poverty.

Lastly, her message is that we're all equal, and it's up to each individual to uplift their community. Black people need to be accountable for their future. Her message was work hard and excel, and that's when the people clapped and cheered.

MrsGrapevine said...

@Anonymous:

"Socialism = Racism" that's a revision of history. There are plenty of historical signs in museums and online that proves how ignorant that statement is.

Socialism and communist were code words used to describe the very people who opposed racism, and who believed in civil rights and de-segregation. The real freedom fighters.

The racist and true socialist were the ones trying to prevent blacks from having civil rights. The ones who spat on black kids trying to integrate Little Rock High.

As seen here:
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://godhatesprotesters.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/slideshow_556419_white_protest_554421.jpg&imgrefurl=http://godhatesprotesters.wordpress.com/tag/segregation/&usg=__SporDh8aZ0hbwzS9EEfDHuFwm6o=&h=355&w=500&sz=72&hl=en&start=0&sig2=3UTVxYI4oMdL4ovqndtufw&tbnid=b9Y2kSNalhftCM:&tbnh=151&tbnw=191&ei=m4VHTOyvJcOAlAe2zLDsAw&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dsegregation%2Bis%2Bcommunism%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26biw%3D1280%26bih%3D444%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=668&vpy=88&dur=122&hovh=189&hovw=267&tx=150&ty=101&page=1&ndsp=13&ved=1t:429,r:4,s:0

MrsGrapevine said...

As seen here:

http://godhatesprotesters.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/slideshow_556419_white_protest_554421.jpg?w=500&h=355

Conservative Black Woman said...

MsGrapevine: You write:"First of all no one clapped or cheered when Shirley Sharrod told the story about the white farmer. I'm not sure what video you saw, but it must have been another "edited" version on Fox News, or some biased Conservative blog that you read"

No they didn't clap and cheer but they snickered and such-- in this unedited version at 17:29 - 17:31 (check it out). But that's not the point because we all know that ignorant race-baiting blacks behave that way, right? Isn't that how YOU put it earlier?

Constructive Feedback said...

Let me add a few new facts CBW:

1) Andrew Brietbart DID NOT edit the video. The clip was sent to him by some other operative.

2) Andrew Brietbart had the clip for a few months but only chose to expose it when the NAACP started attacking the Tea Party with claims of racism in its ranks

3) SHIRLEY SHERROD said on Media Matters today that FOX NEWS DESIRES TO RETURN TO THE DAY WHERE BLACKS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO LOOK WHITES IN THE EYES AND CAN'T COMPETE FOR JOBS.

I am empathetic to Ms Sherrod with this context of this crossfire HOWEVER I believe that she is a full fledged NAACP operative who, like them, are more interested in fighting Republicans than MANAGING the Black community.

Constructive Feedback said...

[quote]
The racist and true socialist were the ones trying to prevent blacks from having civil rights. The ones who spat on black kids trying to integrate Little Rock High.
[/quote]

Ms Grapevine:

What say you about the people TODAY
who are violating the CIVIL RIGHTS of Black people BUT because they are BLACK they are not called CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS?

Later I will post a video of a Black man getting KICKED IN THE HEAD while being robbed.

Did you now that TODAY "Little Rock's Central High School" is just a struggling inner city school?

MrsGrapevine said...

@CBW

You and I both know a snicker is not equal to cheers by a "racist" audience. So I appreciate you coming to her defense, but concede @Kathy was flat out wrong.

Secondly, they didn't "snicker" when the farmer failed, they snicker at her saying she didn't know how much help you wanted to give him because of his attitude. She presented it in a joking manner. In case you didn't see that it was 17:28 on my video.

When the farmer look like he was going to fail, no one clapped, cheered, or snickered for his failure. NO ONE!!! On my video that happens around 7:47.

So what did you say about race-baiting?

MrsGrapevine said...

@Constructive Feedback:

I'm not sure what you're asking, but I would be on your side.

As far as Little Rock High being a poor inner city school, that's a long conversation that will take us off topic. If you address it, send me the link and I will go to your site and post my comments.

Malcolm Kirkpatrick said...

(Steve):"...misrepresentation, which goes beyond the political sphere to impacting the lives and livelihoods of non-public persona is a direct violation of the Telecommunications Act of 1937. And I for one am tweeting today to get everone I know to contact the FCC and the DOJ to go after Fox for this gross offense."

Rotsa ruck. There was abbreviation, but no misrepresentation in the video Fox played. I saw the short version (evidently Breitbart's) of Shirley Sherrod's speech and thought Sherrod deliberately and courageously told a story against herself. The NAACP audience, however, approved the part of the story that she repented (racially-motivated underperformance). As it later developed, that was exactly the point of her speech and she comes out looking pretty good (for someone who believes that the government is the source of all that's wonderful. Wonder if she still believes that?). The reaction of the NAACP was the point of Breitbart's presentation, since the NAACP has been accusing the Tea Party of racism.

(Steve): "Identify ONE."
Okay. Here.

(Steve): "There were witness and videos showing Cleaver getting spat upon and the n-word hurled promiscuously at black lawmakers by the tea-partiers."
(link).

I looked. The MSNBC video showed Nancy Pelosi and a bunch of Democrats indoors, no protestors anywhere near. Other than that, talking heads --saying-- it happened. The internal Kansas City link did not work and the internal Washington Post was print.

MrsGrapevine said...

@ Malcolm Kirkpatrick said...

"Rotsa ruck. There was abbreviation, but no misrepresentation in the video Fox played."

If the abbreviation is used to convey a message outside it's original context, then it's misrepresentation. Simple fact-checking or just a tad bit of journalism would have proven the accusations weren't fair. Fox News posted a video from a blog, with an intentional slant. If the news isn't fact-checking who is.

Everyone was wrong, and no one bothered to check the facts until it was too late. USDA & Obama (wrong), NAACP (wrong), Fox News (wrong), MSNBC (wrong), and Breitbart (I'm not even going there, but WRONG).



Definition of misrepresentation:

Fraudulent, negligent, or innocent misstatement, or an incomplete statement, of a material fact.

MrsGrapevine said...

@Malcolm Kirkpatrick said...

Here try this video out, I know it works:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/29/trash-talking-mounts-in-t_n_517275.html

The chant was loud, so we don't know what those men were yelling, but they're mouths certainly weren't moving with the rest of crowd. Whatever was said or done it was reported to the police at that moment, and it offended Rep. Emanuel Cleaver. This video supports his claim.

Annie said...

Robin, i was one who jumped to conclusions, and i am grateful that you posted this. it is more important to be truthful than right. i assumed from the source that it was another example of race baiting until i watched the entire video. i really see nothing terribly wrong with it. i actually enjoyed listening to it, and it really didn't seem all that earthshaking to me, just a woman giving a speech, telling real stories from her past, and being honest above all. seems to me if she was going to pander she could have really poured on the drama. i am from the south, and her delivery sounded perfectly plausible to me, even the part about helping/not helping the farmer. i asked myself what i would do in her shoes, and the answer is probably the exact same thing. i applaud her for admitting it even. now i am one to always look for the hand of God moving amongst his people, and i think that speech NEEDED to be heard by more people, it was reasonable and made pretty much sense to me. while getting fired was incredibly painful i am sure, if i could say one thing to her, it would be that now her speech is being heard by thousands and thousands all across the country, and her desire to 'make a difference' may be furthered. i am not saying i agree with her 100%, especially where it was bordering on the propagation of class differences (poor=good, rich=evil), but this woman in no way deserved to be fired. I am so glad she has been offered her job back, and i have learned another lesson in not believing everything you hear or even see the first time thru. as far as the audience response is concerned, this cracka was giggling right along with them, what the hell else do people expect? the old farmer probably WAS speaking in such a way to make her feel inferior, thats what old men do, they talk down. especially to women, younger women to boot, and in the south of GA in the late 80's the old coot was probably aghast at having to come to a younger black woman, hat in hand, with the thought of losing his entire livelihood hanging over him. men don't handle stress that well anyway, makes them all control freaky and crazy, from my experience. not defending him, just saying i completely understand the context of her story. She could have easily embellished this tale in order to evoke more outrage from her audience but chose not to. She stayed calm and matter of fact about difficult subjects. She stayed honest. I am not sure what Andrew will do with this, but i would hope by now he has gone thru this entire video and is realizing what has occurred. i do hold him responsible, whether he was provided with pre-edited clips or not. he should have been more careful.
(please forgive me my blinketyblank shift key is missing, lol.)

Kathy said...

First of all no one clapped or cheered when Shirley Sharrod told the story about the white farmer. I'm not sure what video you saw, but it must have been another "edited" version on Fox News, or some biased Conservative blog that you read.

I watched again what I had watched previously and stand corrected. No, it wasn't a "doctored" version, but the audience did snicker [not sure why I remembered it incorrectly; it was not intentional]. Taken in context, it's not as bad as it appeared without the context. I've now watched the first three parts (as linked on Breitbart.com, so I could get it in chunks, in between doing other things... and now it's past bedtime, but I plan on watching the last two parts tomorrow), and my opinion and attitude has changed. Though the snickering seems to confirm that at least some in the audience had a measure of glee about the white man losing his farm, or at least, that the white man had to come with hat in hand to the black woman with power, it's possible that my inference is wrong on that, too.

I can't say I agree with everything Mrs. Sherrod said (for instance, I might agree with her that it's about power, but not necessarily about rich vs. poor; and she seems to act as if the Democratic party doesn't care about power and it's just the eeeevil Republicans who do, which I disagree with [I think both parties are too much about power, and not enough about representation]), but she has a message of reconciliation that should be acted on to a much larger degree in this country. A lot of what she says about race relations has been what I've thought and said for years.

Anonymous said...

Socialism= racism. If I am against socialism or socialist like policies made by those in government does that make me a racist?

Nick Rowe said...

I watched the whole speech and it changes nothing.

Ms. Sherrod spent the first 15 minutes talking about being victims of racial oppression. Then she entertained the audience with a tale of retribution to their great delight.

Her subsequent statements don't change the revelation of her racism imprinted all over her face. Her story is a tragic one, but it tells me of a public servant who sees the entire world (oh, and her duty) through the prism of race.

She stereotypes black lawyers as "nickel and diming" black people. She jokes with the crowd about closing the Chicken House.

Can anyone possibly be more race conscious? Can anyone believe she does her job without prejudice?

Nobody took anything out of context. The story of her crime stands alone. The response of the audience stands alone. She was not contrite and neither was the audience. She was patting herself on the back with feigned acquisition of newfound post-racial tolerance and reconciliation.

Keep this in mind: she referred this white farmer to his "own kind" in 1986-1987. Reagan was president, Tip O'Neill was the Speaker, and Thurgood Marshall was on the Supreme Court.

1987. This wasn't the days of Jim Crow or segregation. Her father hadn't been murdered the previous year nor was a cross burned on her momma's lawn the previous month.

Imagine what would be said of a public official who, in 1987, sent people to their "own kind" for public assistance.

She laments why there aren't more white faces in the crowd. Maybe it has something to do with the C in NAACP.

She begins her speech by saying how wonderful it is to work with the Obama Administration, a casual statement which was met with thunderous applause. Later she decries suffering under the Bush Administration as if all funding for the USDA had been cut by that heartless thug.

At best, Ms. Sherrod is a power-drunk petty bureaucrat. At worst, she is a flaming racist.

If this were a white bureaucrat telling an all-white audience about providing less than his best effort to a black citizen and referring him to his "own kind," do you think any subsequent contrition in the same speech would be accepted by the NAACP?

There is no statute of limitations on faithless public service.

Malcolm Kirkpatrick said...

(Nick): "There is no statute of limitations on faithless public service."
There has to be. People grow. I have not watched the whole speech, just the short video that first irritated the Headmistress over at the Common Room (Breitbart's, I suppose). Even from that you could see that Shirley Sharrod was telling a story against herself.

She and I probably are far apart on the political continuumm, but I recognize and applaud courage. We can't punish decades-old faithless public service which comes to light by the path of confession and moral instruction, without punishing confesssion and moral instruction.

Anonymous said...

Andrew Breitbart didn't edit this video, it was sent to him, in two clips. He has since contacted the sender, who refused to send him the full section. I don't doubt him, because he's never lied yet.

What is apparent to me, is that whomever sent that video, was an NAACP member. It's from the official NAACP video, from the same angle shot, and has the same text of her speech at the top. I'm curious to find out who it was that sent that video, to learn thier intentions, because they were the person who edited the clips.

You do see a bit of the beginning of her saying this should be about poor people towards the end of the first clip Breitbart posted.

What isn't being addressed is the fact that the NAACP audience, of which Ben Jealous was a member, was shouting their approval of what they thought was a story boasting about discriminating against a white farmer, something that shouldn't be ignored.

Conservative Black Woman said...

NickRowe~People work their entire lives to reconcile abuse and trauma experienced at a young age. This is no easy task. Yes, Mrs. Sharrod recounted her experience with racism and her intent to exact retribution. However, what is more important is her testimony that the God intervened and changed her heart. Too bad this is lost on you. Are you any better than those in the audience who snickered in delight? I think not. The buck has to stop somewhere. Finger pointing and racism chasing is ugly no matter who exercising it Blacks or Whites.

No, I don't agree with Mrs. Sharrod's politics -- she is an Obama supporter so that says it all. But, the woman's testimony was not lost on me. I know the God she is talking about when He moves it means something.

Merit Matters said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
JMK said...

The issue pointed out in that first video WASN’T Shirley Sherrod’s speech, in fact, that first 2:38 video had Ms Sherrod saying, “I came to realize this was not about black and white but helping the poor.”

THAT however was NOT what Andy Breitbard focused on. He rightly pointed out the NAACP crowd cheering and applauding her initial tale of discrimination.

As Breitbart notes, “the first video released on BigGovernment.com features Sherrod telling a tale of racism that is received by the NAACP audience with laughter and cheers. They weren’t cheering redemption; they were cheering discrimination..."

This is actually similar to an earlier video released showing a man addressing an NAACP in St. Louis excoriating black Conservatives, “In the old days we called the Uncle Toms...” to wild cheering and applause from the crowd.

The speaker’s words are secondary, the reaction of the NAACP is the proof of what is fostered in that organization’s member’s
Hearts.

And the fact is not only did FoxNews WRONGLY focus on Shirley Sherrod, so did the rest of the media and the NAACP and the White House who had her called in her car and ordered to submit her resignation via Blackberry from the road.

THAT’S how THIS White House responded to all this, NOT by vetting the story and analyzing the facts, but by throwing an employee overboard to make themselves look “good.” THAT too...is on the White House.

Did the Breitbart videos showing NAACP crowd's cheering on a bigot in St Louis and Ms Sherrod's initial tale of bigotry proof that "racism is endemic in the ranks of the NAACP?"

Sadly and yet undeniably, they do.

uptownsteve said...

"This is actually similar to an earlier video released showing a man addressing an NAACP in St. Louis excoriating black Conservatives, “In the old days we called the Uncle Toms...” to wild cheering and applause from the crowd."

And what's wrong with that?

Black people who align themselves with white racists should be called out and ridiculed at every juncture.

You've said far worse about the black community ON THIS BOARD (ie...anti-academic, hate light-skinned blacks, want something for nothing, more racist than whites)...ad nauseam.

But of course in your twisted mind you've convinced yourself that your just telling the truth.

Amazing.

Anonymous said...

UptownSteve, Andrew Breitbart had been sent this video by a member of the NAACP who had access to the video. Like a lot of other people, I at first assumed it was an NAACP member who had shot the video we saw, but it was the video the NAACP as an organization its self. It's from the same angle, has the same text from her speech over the top of the footage. I can't help but feel that the person who sent it in, should identify themself and speak to their intent.

Fox News hadn't aired the footage or even reported on it, until AFTER Sherrod had been fired. What has me doubting the intent of the person who edited and sent it to Breitbart is the fact that this all seems too convenient. We also know that Mrs. Sherrod's husband Charles M. Sherrod is an associate of Bill Ayers.

In fact, Glenn Beck, who didn't mention the incident, until the day after her firing, sided with Mrs. Sherrod. What I see smacks of an attempt to use this situation to basically distract from the hypocrsiy of the NAACP's attack against the tea party to cover it's own behind. This is the same NAACP who attacked Kenneth Gladney, as not being "black enough", and an uncle Tom, for selling "don't tread on me" flags outside a town hall meeting last year, and alleging that he deserved to be beaten up by those 2 SEIU thugs. Apparently, Mr. Gladney's level of "blackness" is to be determined by whether he tows the democrat party line. Gladney had to fight to get the police to investigate the crime, then had to fight to get the district attorney to file a suit against them. The town is run by democrat politicians, and those same democrat politicians fired Gladney's brother, a city worker, to punish the family for demanding his civil rights protections. Do you detect a pattern here? NO? Well, let's talk about the president of Cleveland's NAACP, who drew a demeaning cartoon to attack Nina Turner, a black state senator in Ohio, for daring not to vote according to how he wanted her to vote. He depicted her as an aunt Jemima and it was published in a black newspaper. Or let's address the complete indifference the NAACP shows to the ethnic cleansing of black Americans from neighborhoods and communities by racist Hispanics all over the country. Google to read about 21 year old Anthony Prudhomme, who was shot to death in 2000, for daring to move in to a neighborhood in Highland Park in Los Angeles, because he was black. Prudhomme wasn't a gang member, he wasn't a criminal, he hadn't even had a run in with this gang, the Avenues (a Hispanic gang). He'd just moved in, was a quiet young man, a musician, was laying on a futon in his living room watching tv, and they broke in and killed because they wanted the neighborhood to remain Hispanic in majority. Or 14 year old Cheryl Green, her crime? Her skin was black. Cheryl was an average 14 year old girl, she loved music, hanging out with her friends, she loved poetry. A few days before she was shot, she wrote a poem titled, "I'm black and beautiful" She was outside talking outside a friend's house, and was shot to death by a Hispanic gang member, because he was looking for someone black to kill, he and his fellow 204th St gang members had been terrorizing the black community in the neighborhood to push them out. They also killed another 14 year old black teenager, Vernon Matthew Eddins. Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa attempted to infer it was because of black gangs, but the black gang in the area, the crips had faded away more than 10 years before. Some black Los Angeles residents attempted to shame Villaraigosa, and the Hispanic state reps and senators to speak up against the ethnic cleansing of blacks, telling them that their silence was helping this to be perpetuated, but they ignored them. Neither the NAACP at the city/state level an national refused to speak out.

Anonymous said...

UptownSteve, Andrew Breitbart had been sent this video by a member of the NAACP who had access to the video. Like a lot of other people, I at first assumed it was an NAACP member who had shot the video we saw, but it was the video the NAACP as an organization its self. It's from the same angle, has the same text from her speech over the top of the footage. I can't help but feel that the person who sent it in, should identify themself and speak to their intent.

Fox News hadn't aired the footage or even reported on it, until AFTER Sherrod had been fired. What has me doubting the intent of the person who edited and sent it to Breitbart is the fact that this all seems too convenient. We also know that Mrs. Sherrod's husband Charles M. Sherrod is an associate of Bill Ayers.

In fact, Glenn Beck, who didn't mention the incident, until the day after her firing, sided with Mrs. Sherrod. What I see smacks of an attempt to use this situation to basically distract from the hypocrsiy of the NAACP's attack against the tea party to cover it's own behind. This is the same NAACP who attacked Kenneth Gladney, as not being "black enough", and an uncle Tom, for selling "don't tread on me" flags outside a town hall meeting last year, and alleging that he deserved to be beaten up by those 2 SEIU thugs. Apparently, Mr. Gladney's level of "blackness" is to be determined by whether he tows the democrat party line. Gladney had to fight to get the police to investigate the crime, then had to fight to get the district attorney to file a suit against them. The town is run by democrat politicians, and those same democrat politicians fired Gladney's brother, a city worker, to punish the family for demanding his civil rights protections. Do you detect a pattern here? NO? Well, let's talk about the president of Cleveland's NAACP, who drew a demeaning cartoon to attack Nina Turner, a black state senator in Ohio, for daring not to vote according to how he wanted her to vote. He depicted her as an aunt Jemima and it was published in a black newspaper. Or let's address the complete indifference the NAACP shows to the ethnic cleansing of black Americans from neighborhoods and communities by racist Hispanics all over the country. Google to read about 21 year old Anthony Prudhomme, who was shot to death in 2000, for daring to move in to a neighborhood in Highland Park in Los Angeles, because he was black. Prudhomme wasn't a gang member, he wasn't a criminal, he hadn't even had a run in with this gang, the Avenues (a Hispanic gang). He'd just moved in, was a quiet young man, a musician, was laying on a futon in his living room watching tv, and they broke in and killed because they wanted the neighborhood to remain Hispanic in majority. Or 14 year old Cheryl Green, her crime? Her skin was black. Cheryl was an average 14 year old girl, she loved music, hanging out with her friends, she loved poetry. A few days before she was shot, she wrote a poem titled, "I'm black and beautiful" She was outside talking outside a friend's house, and was shot to death by a Hispanic gang member, because he was looking for someone black to kill, he and his fellow 204th St gang members had been terrorizing the black community in the neighborhood to push them out. They also killed another 14 year old black teenager, Vernon Matthew Eddins. Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa attempted to infer it was because of black gangs, but the black gang in the area, the crips had faded away more than 10 years before. Some black Los Angeles residents attempted to shame Villaraigosa, and the Hispanic state reps and senators to speak up against the ethnic cleansing of blacks, telling them that their silence was helping this to be perpetuated, but they ignored them. Neither the NAACP at the city/state level an national refused to speak out.

Anonymous said...

In 2008, 17 year old Jamiel Shaw Jr. was shot to death by a member of the Hispanic 18th St gang, an illegal alien who had just been released from jail the day before. He had a violent crime rap sheet, yet only received taps on the hand as punishment each time he broke the law. Jamiel was a great student, a football star, he was being scouted by Rutgers and Stamford Universities. He was a wonderful big brother and son. His mom was serving her second tour in Iraq. The gang member saw Jamiel walking down the sidewalk, pulled over said something to him, and then shot him in the head, this was just three houses down from Jamiel's home. He died just after his father reached him. When the Shaw family attempted to get the city council to amend the sanctuary city law, merely to check immigration status when a criminal is arrested, they were harassed. The assistant district attorney attempted to blackmail thte Shaws, saying that they would blame Jamiel in his own murder, as being a gang member, because he had the color "red" on his backpack (there was a spiderman logo on the backpack) and that a photograph of him on myspace showed him making a gang type hand sign. Jamiel was never in any gang, he was studious, polite, he was working hard in his classes and at football, and had plans for college, he helped his dad take care of his little brother. This kid was no gang member. When the Shaw family was collecting signatures in MacArthur Park to get Jamiel's Law on the LA ballot, Mayor Villaraigosa sent 2 fully armed SWAT teams to harass them, demanding they show ID, and other documents to prove they were legally in the US. Can you believe that? Asking them to prove something they didn't want illegal aliens to have to comply with, to punish this family, who were doing nothing wrong, merely for doing what their civil rights afforded them the right to do. Again, the NAACP, black local and US members of congress refused to address this. The LA Times didn't care, the Shaw family were even betrayed by black clergy members who were demanding their congregations support another amnesty. Neither Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton gave a darn. Of course, they didn't bother to care after the shootings, rapes, machete attacks against those 4 black college students in Newark, NJ either. Were it not for the fact that one of the young women survived and was able to be a witness about the attacks against her, and her 3 friends who died, the illegal alien gang who targeted them, would have gotten away with it. No NAACP speaking out.

Anonymous said...

Face it, you don't see the NAACP or anyone addressing the fact that the NAACP audience cheered what they thought was boasting about the discrimination against a white farmer, but using this as another attempt to attack anyone who criticizes Obama, or the NAACP for their exploiting the concept of racism, to attack the tea party.

The NAACP's latest conference held votes on a number of issues, one being whether to support native Americans, but that failed because one member objected, claiming native Americans owned slaves. Now, I don't know about whether native Americans owned slaves or not, but I do know from history books that freed black people owned slaves, and that the trans-Atlantic slave trade, wasn't started by English or Dutch people, but by the Spanish, after they committed genocide against most of the native people in Mexico, Central and South America. They brought more than 8 million African slaves to Latin America more than 200 years before the English arrived in North America and worked virtually all to death. We know Latin America is very racist, that it didn't outlaw slavery for more than 50 years after it was outlawed here. We also know that Africans sold Africans into slavery, and that they sold them to Arabs for thousands of years. Apparently there's no NAACP member saying don't support Hispanics because they created the African slave trade across the Atlantic.

There's something sick and twisted in the NAACP today. The organization was started to ensure that no American's civil rights were violated, but they don't seem to stand for that any more.

uptownsteve said...

"This is the same NAACP who attacked Kenneth Gladney, as not being "black enough", and an uncle Tom, for selling "don't tread on me" flags outside a town hall meeting last year."

AN OUTRIGHT LIE.

Produce evidence that the NAACP said Gladney wasn't "black enough or worth protecting" or admit to your lie.

You righties are just so used to lying, manipulating and selective editing that you really believe its reality.

Unreal.

uptownsteve said...

"Face it, you don't see the NAACP or anyone addressing the fact that the NAACP audience cheered what they thought was boasting about the discrimination against a white farmer,"

Nobody cheered.

Still ANOTHER lie.

Pathetic.

Jonathan said...

The video in it's entirity shows me that Mrs. Sherrod hasn't changed at all. She's still prejudiced against white people.

This incident was most likely fabricated by the administration. Mrs. Sherrod was probably an unwitting victim of their political cynicism.

The fabrication started with the edited video sent to Breitbart, and ended with the feigned firing and then the sudden reversal. It was meant to entrap conservative media in a manufactured falsehood, to help dilute the avalanche of negative race-related debacles suffered by Obama's WH.

The infamous Professor and the Policeman was also a fabricated event, and I think the professor was an accomplice.

Jonathan said...

I also believe the WH engineered this incident in order to add strength to their calls for a "Fairness Doctrine."

Malcolm Kirkpatrick said...

(JMK): "This is actually similar to an earlier video released showing a man addressing an NAACP in St. Louis excoriating black Conservatives, 'In the old days we called the Uncle Toms...' to wild cheering and applause from the crowd."
(Steve): "And what's wrong with that? Black people who align themselves with white racists should be called out and ridiculed at every juncture."

The views called "conservative" in the US include market orientation (opposed to command economics), sexual self-restraint, love of country, and a cautious attitude toward changing long-standing tradition. These views do not always abide together comfortably (markets undermine traditional morality). Across the Earth, these views appear independent of race, and arguments between "conservatives" and those of opposing views, and within the "conservative" community between, say, free marketeers and social conservatives, will occur in lily white Iceland and solid black Malawi.

What would you call it if someone said: "If your skin color is ___, you are not allowed to believe ___?"

Notice that free marketeers have no race-related label for white socialists or white free marketeers, for black socialists or black free marketeers, for Asian socialists or Asian free marketeers. Free matketeers have the term "watermelon" (green on the outside, red on the inside) that does not depend on race. It's socialists, in their preoccupation to bully people into agreement, who use terms like "oreo" (black on the outside, white on the inside), or "banana" (yellow on the outside, white on the inside).

Calling (e.g.) Thomas Sowell, George Ayittey, or Walter Williams "Uncle Tom", or Dambisa Moyo "Aunt Jemima" is ad hominem which does not deal with the merits of the argument. That's what's wrong with it.

Ziv Zulander said...

This whole mess is a distraction from the Finance Reform Legislation signed by Obama yesterday. 2300 pages. That's longer than the Healthcare Reform bill, and you can bet nobody knows what says.

Conservative Black Woman said...

AMEN Ziv!!!!! I'm researching the bill right now. That White House Puppet just did the bidding of his Masters and brought us all closer to serfdom -- hell, slavery and we are still talking about Shirley Sharrod. Good grief.

Anonymous said...

Youre right. the tea parties dont concern race BUT if you give a reward for 'pin the tail on the racist' people could fabricate this behavior to get money. i hope they wont fall for it though. The teaparties need to clean out the republican party as well DID YOU KNOW GRAHAM VOTED FOR ELENA KAGAN FOR SUPREME COURT? She has never BEEN A JUDGE far as I know

uptownsteve said...

"What would you call it if someone said: "If your skin color is ___, you are not allowed to believe ___?"


STRAWMAN ARGUMENT.

Black conservatives are not criticized by the larger black community because of their supposed beliefs in certain political ideology or conservative positions.

I hold many so-called "conservative" positions myself.

The black conservative is criticized because they gleefully carry water for white bigots.

They NEVER stand up for black people.

White conservatives are all about white supremacy which is why they are waging this virulent media race war against Obama and by extension black folks.

If black conservatives are memerly about issues and policy why don't they challenge the race baiters which dominate their party to STOP IT?

NO, what they do is reflexively deflect to ruses and bullsquat about "black racism" in a sad attempt to mitigate what is so obvious about the people they align themselves with.

The NAACP and the Obama Administration jumped on the bandwagon to attack Shirley Sherrod without viweing the entire videotape of her speech to prove their commitment to anti-racism.

Why haven't any black conservatives (we know the white righties aren't going to do it) come out unequivocally and condemned Breitbart, Fox TV and their association with Republican party????

Because they are SLAVE-CATCHERS.

Paid and rewarded by white bigots to carry their message in blackface.

It's downright disgusting.

JMK said...

"The views called "conservative" in the US include market orientation (opposed to command economics), sexual self-restraint, love of country, and a cautious attitude toward changing long-standing tradition. These views do not always abide together comfortably (markets undermine traditional morality)." (Malcolm Kirkpatrick)


I'm not sure about "markets undermining morality,"....they CAN "undermine morality, but don't "have to."


Moreover, the "political economy" or "Corporatism," the economy of fascist Italy and Nazi Germany DOES "work" far better than the "Command Economy" lauded by Keynesians like Krugman and many in the Obama administration, BUT what we're seeing TODAY is "the failure of the political economy."

We spend over $300 MILLION?year on regulating ocean drilling alone....$over $12 BILLION regulating the Energy industry overall....and THIS (the BP spill, the BP Texas City refinery disasters and BP's paying enviro activists and academics to push for "Green Energy" because they OWN the two biggest makers of solar panels, the biggest producer of wind-generated electricity, etc., etc.).

The "political economy" (the highly government-regulated economy) ALWAYS results in a hideous partnership between dumb, hopelessly corrupt bureaucrats and nefarious businessmen who seek to kill competition through regulation.

JMK said...

"Black people who align themselves with white racists should be called out and ridiculed at every juncture." (UTS)


I don't mean to be unkind here, but just when I think you can't get any more twisted, any more misinformed....you surprise me!

Fact is the real bigots support things like race-based preferences/segregated standards.

The "test score gap" has actually INCREASED since those preferences were initiated. They're akin to a crutch or cast, that instead of atrophying one's leg muscles, atrophies the competitive spirit instead.

As usual, you are so wrapped in your own warped hatred despite having NO legitimate grievances yourself, that you'd be happier if blacks sunk deeper into poverty, so long as white got hurt too.

Now THAT is what's really PATHETIC.

Kathy said...

@Mrs. Grapevine
The chant was loud, so we don't know what those men were yelling,
Exactly -- we don't know, yet some have said that "we" *do* know, and it was bad. Which is it? Do we know, or don't we?

... but they're mouths certainly weren't moving with the rest of crowd.
They weren't mindlessly chanting "kill the bill" so that's proof that they were yelling racial slurs? Have you ever been at a loud sports event or concert, and somebody next to you says something to you or someone near you? Have you ever had trouble hearing exactly what it was that was said? Have you ever thought you heard something, and it turns out later that what you heard wasn't actually what was said at all? Stuff like that happens to me a lot (well, I don't go to loud concerts or sports events much these days, but other than that...).

Whatever was said or done it was reported to the police at that moment, and it offended Rep. Emanuel Cleaver.
I agree that the Congressman was offended; but there's not enough evidence that shows that that one man did actually call him names. For all we know, he may have been yelling, "Down with socialism," or "read the Constitution, idiot" or "big government sucks" or "Obama is a fascist." Some of those things may have been in poor taste without being racist.

Where is the media when liberals use racial slurs against conservatives?

JudyBright said...

Nice to see the old gang back together. lol

Jonathan said...

uptownsteve said...

"White conservatives are all about white supremacy which is why they are waging this virulent media race war against Obama and by extension black folks."

Can we stop dancing around with definitions and meanings? Let me decode this paragraph you just wrote, into what conservatives need to understand is what you REALLY mean"

"Free-market, limited government oriented "whites" are all about capitalism and free market economics, which is why they are waging this reactionary war against the progressive Marxist ideals of the Left, and thus by extension, all beneficiaries of the revolutionary agenda, who are best represented by the mainstream Democrat constituency"

The race discussion MUST NOT be seperated from the ideological divide. The Left seeks to develop conflicts between Western, Judeo Christian whites with traditional American values, and all other groups, as a RACIAL CONFLICT primarily.

We best not forget this.

Don't engage the Left on the Race Debate. It's subterfuge and secondary to the ideology argument. Even if a great many people on both sides don't understand it. Reference what Mrs. Sherrod said about "her epiphany."

Your statement, uptownSteve, is an insult that you continue to levy against those who have done you no wrong, and it hinders any chances for reconciliation. You are the one who is a blinded bigot.

uptownsteve said...

JMKKK


"Fact is the real bigots support things like race-based preferences/segregated standards."

Please produce examples of where race-based preferences and segregated standards exist today.

And provide evidence.

Yet anti-black racism is rampant.

More of your strawman nonsense.

uptownsteve said...

Jonathan

"Your statement, uptownSteve, is an insult that you continue to levy against those who have done you no wrong, and it hinders any chances for reconciliation. You are the one who is a blinded bigot."

yawn.

Jonathan you are just another white racist who can only tolerate blacks who grin in your face and tell you what you want to hear.

"Free-market, limited government oriented "whites" are all about capitalism and free market economics, which is why they are waging this reactionary war against the progressive Marxist ideals of the Left"

Horse$hit.

Where were people like you when George Bush increased the deficit more than all of his predecessors COMBINED and got us into two unnecessary wars to the tune of $5 billion a month?

You didn't open your hypocritical mouths.

Nah buddy, this rightwing insurrection is all about getting that nigger out of the White House and making sure another one never gets in.


I'll ASK ONCE AGAIN.

Why won't the rightwing apologize to Shirley Sherrod for their gross offense to her????

You and I both know why.

ar said...

"Lumptology", uptown. And what and imagination you have. You love the communist manifesto, embrace socialism, comrad. So what. It's been tried before. It didn't work then and it certainly will not work here in this country. Too many people came from depotism to this land to shed those garments that waxed old.

These bastards are infiltrated into every nook of our society and government - to take it apart piece by piece. It means race-baiting and promoting programs that do nothing BUT piss me off. I don't hate blacks because of the president. The opposite affect has occurred, in fact. And, it is ringing true through out the rest of the country. This president is trying to bait a civil war. He is not the instigator of it, either.

The UN and it's minions are responsible for this, through all the conspiracies brought to light recently. I know you said you didn't believe any of it but I can't do anything about that. I can only tell you what I have found out and we are being fucked with pal, in a big way.

The only ones interested in you and I fighting and destroying anything good and wholesome in this land of ours are the commie foreigners in washington. They are communist fascist pigs and by american standards should (will) be brought to justice.

In the meantime, the race-baiting will continue unless it's affect is wearing off, at which time the next prod lifted out of the fire will be placed on us.

Let's watch for it and put it in it's proper place when it arrives; to point to it's origins - Agenda 21, Sustainable Developement is population reduction.

Anonymous said...

Shirley Sherrod said it was not about race, yet she goes on different television shows sharing her dislike of the Bush administration handling the poor and praises The Obama administration who publically and privately humilated her. Hmmm.. so this isn't about race Mrs. Sherrod.?

Malcolm Kirkpatrick said...

(Steve): "Where were people like you when George Bush increased the deficit more than all of his predecessors COMBINED..."

If you suggest that this is bad for the US, we argee. If you suggest it's only bad when Republicans do it, we disagree.

(Steve): "...and got us into two unnecessary wars to the tune of $5 billion a month? You didn't open your hypocritical mouths."

Ummmm, remember Porkbusters? Cato and other pro-market web sites (Instapundit, Ace of Spades, Malkin) complained about Bush's failure to exercise his veto over spending. The Wall Street Journal editorialized against Trent Lott's porkbarrel projects and Bush's entitlement expansion through the prescription benefit.

Malcolm Kirkpatrick said...

"Why won't the rightwing apologize to Shirley Sherrod for their gross offense to her? You and I both know why."
a) Use of the terms "left" and "right" to designate political orientation indicates a one-dimensional view of the political continuum to which I do not subscribe.
b) Other people's motives are a matter of inference.
c) Breitbart aimed his criticism at the NAACP. Even in the abbreviated clip, Sherrod comes across as telling a story against herself (which is good on her). In the expanded version, it's clear she views the world through colored class warfare lenses.

Context makes her look worse. It's not libel or slander to call a socialist+racist a racist. Sorry.

Malcolm Kirkpatrick said...

(Steve): "Please produce examples of where race-based preferences and segregated standards exist today."
College admissions. Minority set-asides in government contracting.

Kathy said...

@UptownSteve
Please produce examples of where race-based preferences and segregated standards exist today.

The Tucson School District 'the board is insisting that its schools reduce its suspensions and/or expulsions of minority students to the point that the data reflect “no ethnic/racial disparities.”'

And don't you remember that story from just a couple of years ago, in which a group of white firefighters (and maybe one Hispanic or Asian) sued because their test scores were kicked out, but they were thrown out because no black firefighter had gotten high enough grades?

I'm sure there are others, but that one popped into my head.

WHO made the claim that the gunman was a racist white??
In the clip previously linked, starting about 30 seconds, she says:
"And the reason we're talking about this -- a lot of talk here, John -- is that people feel like, 'Yes, there are 2nd Amendment rights, for sure,' but also there are questions about whether this has a racial overtone. I mean, here you have a man of color in the Presidency, and white people showing up with guns strapped to their waists."
So, yeah, she didn't outright say, "this was a racist white gunman," but that was the obvious implication. She **did** say that there were "white people... with guns." Were there? If so, why didn't they have any footage of white people with guns, and only had footage of a black man with a gun -- footage which they conveniently edited to hide his real skin color, so they could claim he was white.

Anonymous said...

"It is most unfortunate that Andrew Brietbart's editing job cost Mrs. Sharrod her job."

Brietbart said he received the video in its edited form as played on his site. The NAACP had the entire video. He didn't cost her the job, her boss did. They were running scared since their ideological playmates the NAACP threw the massive race bomb. They decided to act hastily for political expediency.

JMK said...

"Please produce examples of where race-based preferences and segregated standards exist today." (UTS)


Race and gender-based preferences are rampant in College admissions, even post-graduate studies. Ironically enough Robin documented that a few posts down; http://right-mind.us/blogs/blog_0/archive/2010/06/25/74170.aspx

Professor Perry found that of those with the lowest GPA (3.00 to 3.19) and MCAT scores (24 to 26) accepted, only 4.96% of all whites and Asians were accepted with those scores, while 46.3% of blacks, Hispanics and Native Americans were admitted with those scores.....that is 10X as many black, Hispanic and Native Americans got in with those lowest acceptable parameters - THAT'S A blatant preference. What's more it's NOT a preference for basic entry-level students, but among students who all graduated from College and were applying for advanced studies.

Such preferences are so ubiquitous you just take them for granted.

You probably perceive that "anti-black racism is rampant" based on how most people probably react to you....BUT it's NOT "racism" when people dislike an obnoxious, belligerent, misinformed guy who exudes negativity.

Malcolm Kirkpatrick said...

(JMK): "BUT it's NOT 'racism' when people dislike an obnoxious, belligerent, misinformed guy who exudes negativity."
Some Asian-American visitor to Hawaii once wrote that he found it refreshing to visit a place where, when you got bad service, you didn't have to decide whether it was racism or just bad service.

Anonymous said...

Shirley Sherrod on CNN:

Sherrod also said on today that she’d like to have a meeting with President Obama.


“I can’t say that the president is fully behind me, I would hope that he is,” she said on Good Morning America. “I would love to talk to him.”

“He is not someone who has experienced what I have experienced through life, being a person of color. He might need to hear some of what I could say to him,” she told me. “I don’t know if that would guide him in a way that he deals with others like me, but I at least would like to have the opportunity to talk to him about it.”

What!? Uptownsteve and MrsGrapevine please help me with this one.

Just a conservative girl said...

I am wondering if you still feel the same way know that she has kept on talking? She has exposed herself and her views and they are not pretty. I, like you, felt the same way initially. But, she has lost all sympathy at this point. Breitbart wants blacks back into slavery, indeed.

JMK said...

"Some Asian-American visitor to Hawaii once wrote that he found it refreshing to visit a place where, when you got bad service, you didn't have to decide whether it was racism or just bad service." (Malcolm Kirkpatrick)


Yes, THAT is the dilemma of perception. Because most of us feel that "everything happens for a reason," it's always tempting to blame everything on some grander and more global than merely "bad service" (inefficiency) or "someone else having a bad day."

Anonymous said...

She just needs to give the white farmer an apology and 'shake on it' Yes, blacks are racist. yes this is more of a class thing than a race thing today. Lastly, Obama is really not the same as a black american, i think he sorta uses us for political reasons. He hasnt been raised in the black american community. Hes been around whites, indonesians, and africans. The only black hes been with for a long period of time is his wife. I for one, would like to know where his white cousins are. I think there are about as invisible as his african cousins--you never hear about them. Although, I believe he is a citizen though. He was born in Hawaii--there probably is a good reason he doesnt show his birth certificate

JMK said...

"...Yes, blacks are racist. yes this is more of a class thing than a race thing today. Lastly, Obama is really not the same as a black american, i think he sorta uses us for political reasons. He hasnt been raised in the black american community...." (anonymous)


I think there's a qualifier that needs to be placed in there..."SOME" blacks are bigots, just as some whites are bigots too."

Mere days after the NAACP made their politically motivated resolution about the Tea Party, Mark Williams (the head of "the Tea Party Express") penned "An open letter to Abraham Lincoln," which was incredibly bigoted, not to mention tremendously counterproductive. There are people of all backgrounds in the Tea Party, things like that only serve to alienate people who generally agree with you ideologically.

I don't like most of this administration's policies at all, but I've said from the start that I see Barack Obama pretty much the same way I saw G W Bush - both seem like affable, ostensibly "nice guys," who are incredibly misguided in their thinking.

I can't comment on Barack Obama's "authenticity," I have no standing to do that. Saying that, I think Barack Obama, like Tiger Woods is generally seen as "a black man," regardless of how they might classify themselves.

They both have every right to classify THEMSELVES any way they want, but I'm certain that most people see them as "black men."

For eight years Conservatives rightly reviled the incredibly hateful and mean-spirited characterizations of G W Bush, from "Chimp-in-Chief," to "McHitler," etc., for some Conservatives to now engage in the same kind of hideous personal characterizations (from Obama as the Joker, to "made in Kenya") is incredibly disingenuous.

Worse still, I think it's extremely polarizing at a time when increasing an already heightened racial/ethnic polarization is reckless and irresponsible.

Conservatism is an ideology that transcends race, class, religious affiliation, etc. I hate to see some Conservatives alienating others who'd under normal situations agree with them ideologically.

CoffeeMuse said...

I just saw an absolutely fascinating talk on C-SPAN's Book TV about a new book called "Colorblind" by Tim Wise. I have copied and pasted the link to this hour long discussion and would love for you to watch it when you have time. If you wouldn't mind, would you please email me and tell me what you think?? :)

http://www.c-spanarchives.org/program/ID/227960

My email: pasithea7-facebook@yahoo.com

Conservative Black Woman said...

Coffeemuse~Tim Wise? Are you seriously asking me to torture myself for 90mins listening to this guy? While my first inclination is the scream "HELL NO!!! I know enough about this Progress liberal SOB of the highest order".... I'll listen objectively and hit you up at the email address you provided.

See how reasonable I am....

Anonymous said...

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=38254

Conservative Black Woman said...

CoffeeMuse~

I watched the Tim Wise video and I wasn't surprised by his lecture. I think he is racist to the core -- not maliciously but racist none the less. He is no diffferent than Rev. Jeremiah Wright who also believes that Black people have different needs as it pertains to learning. Listen, I was a black child and I have a black child and I assure you we do not have different needs nor do we need to be "handled" differently.

He blames the disparity in education, income, class and caste on systemic racism... I know that there is a certain segment of the black community who SELF segregate. They choose to live in neighborhoods with awful school systems and complain about them rather the moving away. Black people who choose actions and lifestyles that lead to success find there way out. Black folks who allow Tim Wise and (other well-intention liberals who believe that they are genetically superior to the "poor negroes" ) to speak for and advocate for them will remain the pet project of racist liberals for generations to come. It's very sad.

Conservative Black Woman said...

oops, I meant to say "...find their way out"

Malcolm Kirkpatrick said...

(Robin): "(Tim Wise) blames the disparity in education, income, class and caste on systemic racism... I know that there is a certain segment of the black community who SELF segregate. They choose to live in neighborhoods with awful school systems and complain about them rather the moving away."

"Culture" is a rather vague word that seldom explains anything, but in the case of school performance the difference between the culture of curiculum planners and the culture of ordinary working people explains most of the race-related test score gap and the income-related test score gap.

The race-related test score gap and the income-related test score gap vary directly with school district size (smaller is better). The gaps shrink when children attend parochial schools. The gaps shrink when parents homeschool. Political control of school harms most the children of the least politically adept parents.

It does not take 12 years at $10,000 per pupil-year to teach a normal child to read and compute. Most vocational training occurs more effectively on the job than in a classroom.

Conventional schools give to many children no reason to do what schools require. Training an artistically or mechanically inclined child for an academic career using the transcript as the incentive is like teaching a cat to swim using carrots as the reward.

Motivation is key. Your children will work their hearts out for the love of mom. Homeschool.

Attorneymom said...

Hugs. Remember me?

Malcolm Kirkpatrick said...

Attorneymom: "Favorite movies: __Imitation of Life__ ."
Second the motion.
Youtube has Mahalia Jackson's memorial service performance of "Trouble of the World" from the movie.

Constructive Feedback said...

CBW:

This segment of Shirley Sherrod's speech were far more offensive to my sensibilities than the other clip:

http://withintheblackcommunity.blogspot.com/2010/07/more-important-segment-of-shirley.html

Joe Clyde said...

@JMK

"Worse still, I think it's extremely polarizing at a time when increasing an already heightened racial/ethnic polarization is reckless and irresponsible.

Conservatism is an ideology that transcends race, class, religious affiliation, etc. I hate to see some Conservatives alienating others who'd under normal situations agree with them ideologically."


It is truly sad that it takes a White Male to admit what Black conservatives refuse to do.

I'll give you credit for being your own person.