on this we agree. She was righteously pissed at those who lied and those who fired her. Any idea who she thinks is worse.
What if I had you on videotape?
All my bosses have been rational people who didn’t make rash decisions. A two minute conversation should have straightened it out.
I understand how quickly high profile events can go viral in the news but there is a standard buffer that has been used effectively for years. “Mr or Mz Smith has been put on temporary leave while we investigate the event”.
Seems like common sense to me.
“Sloppy” would be airing the doctored footage. “Fucking stupid” is airing the doctored footage with an accompanying graphic calling a USDA official a racist.
Yeah I can’t disagree. this was a managerial fuck-up. Read my earlier post about Obama and jesse jackson
This issue has its own Wiki page:
And look at what we missed:
“Commentators, such as those from Fox News, have suggested that the resignation may have been an attempt by the Obama administration to refute accusations of “reverse racism” occurring during his term. They suggest that Sherrod was used by the administration as a “sacrificial lamb”.[22] On July 20, 2010, in an interview with CNN’s Larry King, Andrew Breitbart responded to questions regarding his intentions of releasing the video saying that:[23]
This was not about Shirley Sherrod. It’s about me. This was about the NAACP attacking the Larry King Live show and this [the video of Ms. Sherrod] is showing racism at an NAACP event. I did not ask for Shirley Sherrod to be fired. I did not ask for any repercussions for Shirley Sherrod. They were the ones that took the initiative to get rid of her. I – I do not – I think she should have the right to defend herself. [R]acism is used by the left and the Democratic Party to shut up opposition [a]nd [by releasing the Sherrod video] I am showing you that people who live in glass houses should not be throwing stones.[23]
Breibart also questioned Eloise Spooner’s true identity on CNN: “You tell me as a reporter how CNN put on a person today who purported to be the farmer’s wife? What did you do to find out whether or not that was the actual farmer’s wife? You’re going off of her word that the farmer’s wife is the farmer’s wife?”[24]”
Did Breitbart just accuse CNN of sloppy journalism?
Yep, all in an attempt to distract people from his own racist attacks on the NAACP and Sherrod.
BTW, here is a 2009 articleon Roger Spooner and another piece on Roger and Eloise celebrating their anniversary. Seems Roger is also a WW2 vet. Real classy, Breitbart.
Once again, so that it is clear: Fox News and the other right wing news networks first hyped the story by insisting that the video of Sherrod showed that she was racist–and was just a microcosm of the Obama administration’s supposed “anti-white racism”–while complimenting Breitbart on his investigative prowess. They even brought up Jeremiah Wright again.
Here is O’Reilly succinctly explaning the whole problem:
“That’s why we are a dominant number one. And I submit that we have far more influence than the network news does. Believe me, President Obama, every senator, every congressperson know exactly what we are reporting here.”
Fox News and Breitbart are racist, white supremacist organizations. And because their 24-hour about-face (from accusing Sherrod of racism to attacking the WH for acting prematurely) is so egregious and obvious, I would regard the motives of anyone who believes them with deep suspicion.
She’s excellent
So is her smack down of Bill ORielly when he responds to this with
“Yeah but we have better ratings”
Check out the two Rachel Maddow links above if you haven’t already. She smacks Fox down twice. Somebody needs to.
I don’t give them deep suspicion…I consider them drooling mouth breathers, one step away from a pitchfork wielding crazed mob of lunatics.
Simply not true. You are pretending that, by definition and common usage, a “briefing” only occurs in reference to an event pending or anticipated. That simply isn’t so, a “briefing” may just as easily refer to informing someone of what has already happened, and what the status quo is. Indeed, it may just as easily refer to an informative session about events past, present *and *future.
Did you really think you were going to get away with that? Besides, didn’t you already give up on trying to insinuate that Obama had direct involvement with the firing decision? Seeing as how it was an epic fail, and all.
Somebody in the administration over reacted. It was probably due to the ACORN mess. But, when they saw it was Brietbart ,they should have slowed down. He has shown that he and facts are strangers. He is a right wing loonie and should have been given very little credibility.
I doubt that a Brietbart claim would reach the president and VP level. Someone at a lower level should have done due diligence though. Just the fact that it was Briebart means the claims have to fully investigated.
But the blame for this mess belongs to Brietbart. He made false claims and edited the film to distort the truth. The fiasco is his feet and his alone.
What part of “the President fully supports the decision” do you not understand? It takes something deemed important to make it to his desk. Nothing hits his desk without the express purpose of executive review. It wasn’t a newspaper delivered with his daily muffin. It was a briefing to the President because it was deemed important.
Mz Sherrod did not directly represent the President. She was not appointed by him. The only reason that her dismissal made it to the President’s desk was the high profile racial nature of it. The President failed in his duty to seek verification of something from an unverified video clip. He didn’t learn anything from the last beer-gate rush to judgment. Even an entry-level lawyer knows better than this.
That’s a decent lawyer like interpretatin of circumstantail evidence. It’s not convincing though. I still have reasonable doubt
Your argument that this thing was badly handled by whomsoever is sound. Your argument that “briefed” exclusively means information offered before a proposed action is absurd.
Watergate. Iran-Contragate. Beer-gate.
One of these things is nowhere in hell close to being like the other ones.
One of them isn’t hyphenated?
No, Iran-Contragate doesn’t refer to a beverage.
Makes you wonder how many more government workers he intends to fire.