teapartysamurai
Gold Member
- Mar 27, 2010
- 20,056
- 2,563
- 290
- Thread starter
- #201
No...I agree with you. I'm just dealing with someone in another thread who insists she committed a racist act. I think what you've posted makes perfect sense and pretty much follows my line of thinking.Kind of, yes. She admitted having harbored racist thoughts, but ultimately (even back in those long-ago days) she seems to have not allowed her racial bitterness impede her from delivering on behalf of that white farmer.
Plus, as I noted before, I saw that white farmer himself express gratitude to the service he received from Ms. Sherrod, and he specifically denied that she was a racist. I figure if HE doesn't see what she did as having been anything racist, maybe I'm not justified in reaching any different conclusion.
If you are suggesting that maybe she did provide lesser effort to him (it is a bit unclear to me whether that ever happened), then all can say is, "Maybe. I don't know." Perhaps I'm missing something, though. Can you tell me what she did that she shouldn't have done or what she didn't do that she ought to have done?
As for the speech she gave, it seems to me that what she was saying was that it would be wrong to permit personal feelings of racial disaffection to interfere with her responsibilities. And that certainly seems like a truthful and noble sentiment.
![]()
I understand that finding that you and I agree on something can be jarring. "Ah feel your pain."
But, hell, some things really do turn out to be uncomplicated. I confess it. I was right on the verge of rushing to judgment regarding Ms. Sherrod's speech. But then I saw a piece on NBC (I believe it was on the Today show). Ms. Sherrod was given a pretty full chance to speak her mind. The piece also provided a video clip of the very white farmer about whom she had spoken. HE, himself, defended her and credited her with having saved his farm. In that light, I went back to hear her speech again. It was at that point that I realized that she appears to have been the victim of being quoted very much out of context.
I'll go one step further. Anybody, like her, who may have harbored some racist sentiments in the past but who chose NOT to ACT on that sordid sentiment deserves some congratulations. The improper sentiments are not a good thing, but making a conscious choice to not permit those sentiments to dictate one's behavior is a very good thing. I think it takes a fair amount of personal insight to recognize a huge negative like that and then something even rarer to accept the burden of publicly admitting it. It takes guts, honesty and integrity.
And I'm still at a loss to see what she did OTHER THAN refuse to permit her racist feelings to dictate her actions.
Why are you buying this pap?
I have two words to say to this: Macaca and niggardly?
How many apologies were given for that, and were they given any "chances?" Were they given more context? Would anyone even HEAR their side?
Was the "full transcript" heard?
And the truth is she did say she discriminated against the white farmer.
No one made her say that. But now we are supposed to be oh so sorry, when the left has no such conscience when it comes to the people they try to destroy for a whole lot LESS.
You want the double standards to end, then the left are going to have to get bloodied by their own double standards.
As long as we have to prove we are "better" people, then we will always lose that battle.