Sherrod's going to Sue Breitbart...

[MaggieMae]

LOL what planet do you live on. The One I live on. THAT NEVER happens to Democrats.

I live on the planet "New York City" and I can tell you that no-one is liking Rangel 'round these parts.

If he's not removed from congress, he will lose the next election.

you mean NYC would vote for a REPUBLICAN?

Charlie Rangel represents a black district that I'm quite sure Charlie Main doesn't reside in. So of course he doesn't know what he's talking about. Rangel's constituents still love him and will probably vote for him again.

 

[ConHog]

Can anyone even prove that it was Breibert who edited the video? I haven't kept up in the last few days.

 

[manifold]

If she sues him and wins, then watch out...

Jon Stewart
Stephen Colbert
Michael Moore
Joel McHale

They do this shit all the time.

 

[MaggieMae]

I think I might agree with you here.

It would be nice to see the NAACP get bitch slapped for their baseless accusations about the TEA Party.

In the aftermath of that, certain tea party members have come forth and said that last summer's ugly displays did indeed fuel the flames. It's hard to get past those images, you know. Those same [higher profile] tea party people would love to see the radicals take a hike. If they can accomplish that, they will be seen as credible, but not until.

Interesting spin.

Still no proof of NAACP's baseless accusations. And which "certain tea party members" have come forth? How have they been vetted? After PMSNBC's creative editing of video and linking open carry with racism (while editing out the part where the guy with the rifle was black), I don't think I believe too much.

?? Vetted??

This exchange took place last Sunday.
Tea Party Leader: NAACP Is Playing the Race Card - Face The Nation - CBS News

Webb said self-policing is the right and responsibility of any movement or organization and added, "That is what we do." He said Williams has been expelled from the National Tea Party Federation, "because of the letter that he wrote which he, I guess, may have considered satire but which was clearly offensive."

In the letter posted on marktalk.com but since removed, Williams wrote a letter to Abraham Lincoln in the voice of blacks decrying emancipation, saying that slavery was "a good gig. Three squares, room and board, all our decisions made by the massa in the house."

"I denounce any acts that I see many leaders do," said Webb, but suggested that for Jealous to say such acts were representative of millions of Tea Party members is "blatantly false."
...
Jealous thanked Webb for talking publicly against such racist comments by organization members. "You are the only national Tea Party leader who I've seen come out and publicly state the things that you stated, and taking on Mark Williams was much appreciated.

 

[MaggieMae]

Was he? Can this be proven? Is he still working?

Perhaps he just transferred himself out of CBS due to political pressure. I'm unaware of any statement by CBS that he was forced to resign...

...Ah.

How'd that work out? If I sue you for defamation does that indicate anything? I think I'm starting to understand the law according to you now.

Maybe I can sue Obama for lying. He said that nobody who makes less than $250,000 would pay more in taxes - "not one dime."

Strange. Rather gets to take his severance and go work for Current TV, CBS gets to keep the BS in CBS. You however have the preference of shutting down a media outlet.


Yeah, I think we can see the bias here.

Of course. It appears to me that this isn't about any sort of fairness, it's about taking someone down you don't like.

Ah.

Is that a proven fact or just your opinion?

Evidence.

"He posted an edited video. GET HIM!"

"Um, so did you."

Breitbart OWNS and RUNS the media outlet in question. Therefore, to punish him in the same way Rather was punished, he would have to have his outlet shut down.

And personally, I don't care if it's Breitbart or not. I believe that ALL the media has got to start taking some responsibility for their blatant spin and falsehoods.

I think MSNBC, FoxNews, and several other stations need to either fire some people for their lies or be held responsible legally also.

But hey, that's just my opinion.

It's mine too. And you know what? If and when Republicans win a majority, they'll be demanding the same thing because they will not like the ugly crap that liberals will immediately begin throwing out as gospel truth.

Frankly, I've given up trying to rationally reason with the party-first-fuck-you class of people determining the future of this country. It won't change, so why bother. They can beat each other up until they blow each other up for all I care. By the time the dust settles, I'll be long gone anyway.

 

[MaggieMae]

Maybe...but I knew it wasn't true simply from watching the video...it's pretty clear at the end she was telling a story about how she overcame her thoughts.

And what isn't true is that she was being a racist in her USDA job.

That is'nt what the originally airing of the vid was about to begin with.
It was to show the response of the NAACP members to her comments. They clearly were showing their approval to not helping the "white" farmer.... the rest is history.

So, as I've said elsewhere, the fact that Breitbart USED Sherrod as an example to lambaste the NAACP is even more proof of malice. He's in big trouble, no doubt. But then so what...some other bigoted asshole will just come along and take his place.

 

[Shogun]

All of sudden THE left is demanding that all videos not be edited to show segments of it.

Sheesh, where in the hell is that going to leave all of LAMESTREAM MEDIA.

this crap is just that, CRAPPOLA

but it won't stop the lefties from running with it.

way friggen FUNNY

The implication of a racist statement was CRAFTED, you goofy bitch. end of story.





say crap one more time as you fester in the stupidity of your toddler-like tantrum!

 

[Shogun]

What a Tool...

Shirley Sherrod to sue Andrew Breitbart - Beth Frerking and Abby Phillip - POLITICO.com



peace...

She does realize she is a PUBLIC OFFICIAL and open to critizm. She is still the member of a racist group in the NAACP, so what is she bitching about.

I love how she blames FOX, yet they picked up the story after MSNBC! Maybe FOX should sue her for her slander!

Beitbart stated from the beginning that it was about the racist applaud and approval of the NAACP audience cheering her saying I could of helped ******, but I choose not to!

Maybe if they don't want to be labeled incorrectly then they shouldn't always scream racism towards other!

^Simply NOT Disputable...

The Left is being Patently Dishonest on this Issue... And doing so Willfully.



peace...

Tell us more about who is dishonest as you continue to defend breitbart's CRAFTED expose...

 

[frazzledgear]

What a Tool...

Shirley Sherrod to sue Andrew Breitbart - Beth Frerking and Abby Phillip - POLITICO.com



peace...

This entire story shows what a true sleight of hand was done by the media even after Breitbart pointed out where he believed the real story was here. Even after he went public to make sure others knew what his point was here -the media all ignored it in order to pretend Breitbart had been targeting this woman when he was not and publicly said it was not about this woman. Breitbart put a huge chunk of this video on his site and it DID include the part where she finally talks about her "redeeming" epiphany that it isn't "so much" about black and white and was more about "have and have not". The part of the clip showing her talking about her "epiphany moment" that was shown on TV came right off Breitbart's website so she cannot claim he edited it out in order to make her look bad. It just required people to watch more of it and the people guilty of leaping to conclusions failed to do that until after Sherrod had been fired. He showed enough of the video to show where she was really going with this story and he did so in order to highlight something else entirely and where he believed the real story was all along.

But the media totally missed what he was trying to show with this clip, which was NOT the racial animus one guest speaker had because she was just a guest there. It was to show how the AUDIENCE was responding to her comments when she admitted she had allowed her racial hatred of whites to decide to shortchange a white farmer and not do everything she could to help him. The audience was NAACP members -these are the people who make up the NAACP which had claimed the Tea Party members were all racists and without any evidence to support racism has anything to do with a movement about limiting the size and power of government. (Yeah like that has never been an idea heard of in this country.)

That NAACP audience APPROVED of her shortchanging the white farmer -you can see heads nodding, you can hear people chuckling, you can hear people saying "alright" and "yeah" and other approving things in response to it. The videotape proves exactly what Breitbart had been trying to prove in the first place. And it was not about a guest speaker, it was about NAACP members openly revealing their BLATANT racism and hatred of whites by approving of the racist words of a guest speaker before she got around to telling them the point of her story. Personally I think its shocking that everyone else missed the boat on this one -it proves the NAACP, which accused all Tea Party members of being racists without any evidence of that -are in fact the blatant and proud racists themselves and caught on camera approving of racial discrimination. As long as it is black people doing it.

If a guest speaker had said this kind of thing at a Tea Party about mistreating blacks in this same way -even if the speaker intended to finally get around to let them know they realized they got it wrong -the audience would have responded with GASPS, not approval. And that is the way the NAACP members should have been responding at this point in the woman's story. But instead the audience is responding with approval -which should have been the real story here all along. How dare the NAACP insist the people in the Tea Parties are all racists when their unifying theme is a conservative/quasi-libertarian one of small government with limited powers which is not race-based whatsoever. And then remain silent about the fact there is a video showing an audience of no one but NAACP members who are blatantly responding in a racist manner in full approval of hearing that a black person deliberately mistreated a poor white farmer for no reason but the fact he was white. Oh yeah, the NAACP really has the creds to declare others to be the racists, don't they?

I hope Sherrod does sue Breitbart because that means he gets to take the stand and not only point out he had included enough of the video that viewers could see where she was finally going with her story -but what the real point he had been trying to make all along was because Sherrod cannot defend the audience and the video showing their response will be highlighted in the trial and it speaks for itself.

 

[Stephanie]

All of sudden THE left is demanding that all videos not be edited to show segments of it.

Sheesh, where in the hell is that going to leave all of LAMESTREAM MEDIA.

this crap is just that, CRAPPOLA

but it won't stop the lefties from running with it.

way friggen FUNNY

The implication of a racist statement was CRAFTED, you goofy bitch. end of story.





say crap one more time as you fester in the stupidity of your toddler-like tantrum!

You would know about toddler-like.
just look at your postings.

 

[Shogun]

yeah, he slandered her with her own video footage.

Sure the guy is a douche, but she has no case.

video footage that was butchered into suggesting the very slander that will pin him to the wall.


Mani, if I collect video footage of you and splice it to say that you wack off to child porn in order to discredit you and whatever organizations you are affiliated with then it's slander.

That's not what he did (unless there is new evidence I've not seen).

He simply cherry-picked which portions of the footage he aired, but he didn't string anything together to alter what she actually said.

Perhaps the difference is more subtle than I thought. But I would've expected it to be obvious to you.

HE cherry picked a video that HE assumed conveyed fact despite that it was, very much so, butchered into saying exactly what gave him a hardon and waved it around as fact. You talk of subtle, but it seams you don't know what the word means or how it applies.

 

[Shogun]

If she sues him and wins, then watch out...

Jon Stewart
Stephen Colbert
Michael Moore
Joel McHale

They do this shit all the time.

Do you find a difference between comedic satire and full blown accusation, Mani?


Maybe you should start a thread about subtle differences.

 

[manifold]

If she sues him and wins, then watch out...

Jon Stewart
Stephen Colbert
Michael Moore
Joel McHale

They do this shit all the time.

Do you find a difference between comedic satire and full blown accusation, Mani?


Maybe you should start a thread about subtle differences.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see won't we.

But of course, even after she loses, you'll probably still think you were right somehow.

 

[DiveCon]

SHE WAS NOT A GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE AT THE TIME!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Do you idiots actually ENJOY being dumbed down?

at the time of her speech she was

No, she was not. She worked for a private advocacy group. Geezus, look it up yourself. She has a Wikipedia page, in addition to every news story about her also includes her background.

she was at her USDA post at the time of her speech in march of this year
so stop lying

 

[DiveCon]

I live on the planet "New York City" and I can tell you that no-one is liking Rangel 'round these parts.

If he's not removed from congress, he will lose the next election.

you mean NYC would vote for a REPUBLICAN?

Charlie Rangel represents a black district that I'm quite sure Charlie Main doesn't reside in. So of course he doesn't know what he's talking about. Rangel's constituents still love him and will probably vote for him again.

that would be fine and dandy had i been responding to Charlie Main
but it was Vast i was responding to

 

[Vast LWC]

Your last sentence is the classic liberal agenda. You admit it would be wrong but it would make you satisfied. That pretty much sums up the liberal agenda.

Visceral satisfaction has little or nothing to do with logical evaluation of the law.

In the case of a proven child molester, for instance, I would find it satisfying if his balls were removed and then he was shot, but logically I know that is not the best route to follow to retain the rule of law.

Get it? It's like wishing for the Death Penalty in a state where it's illegal.

 

[MaggieMae]

LOL what planet do you live on. The One I live on. THAT NEVER happens to Democrats.

I believe William Jefferson, a former Louisiana congressman, is serving time on graft and corruption charges. There obviously have been others, so your statement is an overreach at best.

Yes, and the Media Covered that ACTUAL CRIME how as compared with say... A Certain Florida Rep?...

What was Mark Foley (R) Convicted of again?...

I Assure you that the "Free Press" Covered that Non-Crime MORE than they will Cover Rangel and CERTAINLY More than they did William Jefferson.

And it's Obvious why.



peace...

Huh? I followed the Jefferson investigation. If you didn't, that's your problem. As for Foley, well, his biggest mistake (as was a few others that same year) was that he was such a vociferous proponent for protecting the very perversions he wound up perpetrating himself. Sex always sells better than boring stories of payola.

 

[MaggieMae]

at the time of her speech she was

No, she was not. She worked for a private advocacy group. Geezus, look it up yourself. She has a Wikipedia page, in addition to every news story about her also includes her background.

she was at her USDA post at the time of her speech in march of this year
so stop lying

What "speech" are YOU talking about?

 

[DiveCon]

No, she was not. She worked for a private advocacy group. Geezus, look it up yourself. She has a Wikipedia page, in addition to every news story about her also includes her background.

she was at her USDA post at the time of her speech in march of this year
so stop lying

What "speech" are YOU talking about?

the one the breitbart used excerpts of
it was done in march of THIS year
she was in her USDA post at that time

 

[MaggieMae]

she was at her USDA post at the time of her speech in march of this year
so stop lying

What "speech" are YOU talking about?

the one the breitbart used excerpts of
it was done in march of THIS year
she was in her USDA post at that time

I was under the impression you were talking about making racial accusations AT the March 29th speech, as though those were her positions at the time. She was reiterating her prejudices and actions some 24 years ago when she worked with the Georgia field office for the Federation of Southern Cooperative/Land Assistance Fund -- before she began working for the Agriculture Department. I still think there is confusion there that those statements weren't brand new, voiced on March 29th, but I apologize to you, if you weren't confused.