Shirley Sherrod Story...

[Nevada_Ballin]

A perfect example of how knee jerk reactions dominate and lower our society. She should have never been forced to resign.


.

[McMadden]

A perfect example of how knee jerk reactions dominate and lower our society. She should have never been forced to resign.


.Glen Beck has got this administration on pins and needles. "Y?" :confused:

[Nevada_Ballin]

Glen Beck has got this administration on pins and needles. "Y?" :confused:

Couldn't tell ya. I certainly don't give a crap what he has to say.


.

[McMadden]

Couldn't tell ya. I certainly don't give a crap what he has to say.


.Shirley Sherrod said that she was told while driving her car (supervisor called her) that the White House called, and that you need to resign right now because you (Shirley) are going to be on Glen Beck! They blew this one big time! Oh, I've stopped watching him ever since he moved over to False Noise.

[Nevada_Ballin]

Shirley Sherrod said that she was told while driving her car (supervisor called her) that the White House called, and that you need to resign right now because you (Shirley) are going to be on Glen Beck! They blew this one big time! Oh, I've stopped watching him ever since he moved over to False Noise.

And it turns out the WH had nothing to do with it. That supervisor lied to her. lol


.

[sanantonio]

Is anybody surprised by all this?

[Nevada_Ballin]

Is anybody surprised by all this?

I'm just glad CNN took a day to get it right instead jumping on it without knowing the whole story like everyone else yesterday.


.

[sanantonio]

I'm just glad CNN took a day to get it right instead jumping on it without knowing the whole story like everyone else yesterday.


.

Faux ran with this like it was the last loaf of bread in town lol. And the White House has been spayed and neutered by the right to such an extent that Barack needs to change his name to Michelle.

Edit: Just checked Hannity for a second to see where he was at on the story and he's ratcheted it up by dragging up Rev. Wright again to attack Obama. Absolutely incredible lips moving bullshyt saying nothing of substance. Anything to divide.

[Nevada_Ballin]

Faux ran with this like it was the last loaf of bread in town lol. And the White House has been spayed and neutered by the right to such an extent that Barack needs to change his name to Michelle.

Edit: Just checked Hannity for a second to see where he was at on the story and he's ratcheted it up by dragging up Rev. Wright again to attack Obama. Absolutely incredible lips moving bullshyt saying nothing of substance. Anything to divide.

**Looks around for Jon Stewart**


.

[sanantonio]

**Looks around for Jon Stewart**


.

He will be all over this nailing mofo's to the wall both left and right.

[resnor]

So, seems a bit misconstrued in here...

1. Neither Fox News nor Glenn Beck broke this story. Andrew Breitbart broke the story on his site (biggovernmemt.com). Beck did not have her on his show that night, nor had he planned on having her story on his show that night. I don't believe Fox even had the story on until AFTER she had resigned.

2. Breitbart posted the video up to show the hypocrisy of the NAACP. The vid was of Sherrod recounting her story at an event sponsored and attended by NAACP members. They were clapping and laughing throughout her story of how she wouldn't help a white farmer, and how she told him to go to "one of his own" for help. Breitbart was trying to show how ridiculous it is for the NAACP to try to paint the Tea Parties as racist when they have racism within their own organization.

3. Andrew Breitbart has said he could care less about Sherrod...his breaking of vid had nothing to do with her.

4. Jon Stewart is not a news anchor. He's a COMEDIAN. And you guys say that Fox is a bad place to get news? You're watching a COMEDIAN on COMEDY CENTRAL!!

[sideoutshu]

It's a shame what happened to her, no way she should have had to resign. It doesn however show how the admistration puts politics and appearances over substance at evey turn.

What I found hilarious about the situation though was the hipocrisy of EVERYONE doing the news reporting. Rachel Maddow devoted her entire show to this last night (despite its complete non-importance in the grand scheme) in an effort to attack Fox News. I mean really......her show was a 60 minute diatribe on "me good, Fox News bad". It was clear she didn't care about this woman at all and was simply using her loss to advance her own agenda.

The best part was her repeatedly saying things like "but Fox News doesn't care as long as they are doing their job of pushing the right wing agenda" all the while presiding over a program that was simply 60 minutes of left wing talking points.

[sanantonio]

So, seems a bit misconstrued in here...

1. Neither Fox News nor Glenn Beck broke this story. Andrew Breitbart broke the story on his site (biggovernmemt.com). Beck did not have her on his show that night, nor had he planned on having her story on his show that night. I don't believe Fox even had the story on until AFTER she had resigned.

2. Breitbart posted the video up to show the hypocrisy of the NAACP. The vid was of Sherrod recounting her story at an event sponsored and attended by NAACP members. They were clapping and laughing throughout her story of how she wouldn't help a white farmer, and how she told him to go to "one of his own" for help. Breitbart was trying to show how ridiculous it is for the NAACP to try to paint the Tea Parties as racist when they have racism within their own organization.

3. Andrew Breitbart has said he could care less about Sherrod...his breaking of vid had nothing to do with her.

4. Jon Stewart is not a news anchor. He's a COMEDIAN. And you guys say that Fox is a bad place to get news? You're watching a COMEDIAN on COMEDY CENTRAL!!

So let me get this straight you are trying to defend Faux and Brietfart?

Stewart is more news anchor then anything on Faux lol.

[sanantonio]

It's a shame what happened to her, no way she should have had to resign. It doesn however show how the admistration puts politics and appearances over substance at evey turn.

What I found hilarious about the situation though was the hipocrasy of EVERYONE doing the news reporting. Rachel Maddow devoted her entire show to this last night (despite its complete non-importance in the grand scheme) in an effort to attack Fox News. I mean really......her show was a 60 minute diatribe on "me good, Fox News bad". It was clear she didn't care about this woman at all and was simply using her loss to advance her own agenda.

The best part was her repeatedly saying things like "but Fox News doesn't care as long as they are doing their job of pushing the right wing agenda" all the while presiding over a program that was simply 60 minutes of left wing talking points.

In the grand scheme it's probably pretty important to Ms. Sherrod.

In Rachel's diatribe did she present any falsehoods or lies?

[Nevada_Ballin]

So, seems a bit misconstrued in here...

1. Neither Fox News nor Glenn Beck broke this story. Andrew Breitbart broke the story on his site (biggovernmemt.com). Beck did not have her on his show that night, nor had he planned on having her story on his show that night. I don't believe Fox even had the story on until AFTER she had resigned.

2. Breitbart posted the video up to show the hypocrisy of the NAACP. The vid was of Sherrod recounting her story at an event sponsored and attended by NAACP members. They were clapping and laughing throughout her story of how she wouldn't help a white farmer, and how she told him to go to "one of his own" for help. Breitbart was trying to show how ridiculous it is for the NAACP to try to paint the Tea Parties as racist when they have racism within their own organization.

3. Andrew Breitbart has said he could care less about Sherrod...his breaking of vid had nothing to do with her.

4. Jon Stewart is not a news anchor. He's a COMEDIAN. And you guys say that Fox is a bad place to get news? You're watching a COMEDIAN on COMEDY CENTRAL!!

The "you're going to be on Glenn Beck" comment wasn't in the physical sense, it was in a storyline sense per the video.

And Jon Stewart is more credible than Fox. Regardless if he's a comedian or not. The sht that is most funny is the real sht we subject ourselves to. It's the truths of our world that make us shake our heads at times. The fact that he puts it out there in a comedic delivery does not make it any less real.

Jon Stewart FTW!

.

.

[Nevada_Ballin]

It's a shame what happened to her, no way she should have had to resign. It doesn however show how the admistration puts politics and appearances over substance at evey turn.

What I found hilarious about the situation though was the hipocrasy of EVERYONE doing the news reporting. Rachel Maddow devoted her entire show to this last night (despite its complete non-importance in the grand scheme) in an effort to attack Fox News. I mean really......her show was a 60 minute diatribe on "me good, Fox News bad". It was clear she didn't care about this woman at all and was simply using her loss to advance her own agenda.

The best part was her repeatedly saying things like "but Fox News doesn't care as long as they are doing their job of pushing the right wing agenda" all the while presiding over a program that was simply 60 minutes of left wing talking points.

CNN has had Sherrod on-air since yesterday. I think she slept on Wolf Blitzer's desk. She just said she's accepted all apologies and wants this thing to move on.


.

[sideoutshu]

In the grand scheme it's probably pretty important to Ms. Sherrod.

In Rachel's diatribe did she present any falsehoods or lies?

With all of the injustice in the world, what is so special about this story? What is it about Sherrod that dictates an entire hour be spent on her? Other than the Fox-bashing agenda of course.

[sanantonio]

With all of the injustice in the world, what is so special about this story? What is it about Sherrod that dictates an entire hour be spent on her? Other than the Fox-bashing agenda of course.

It was made into a national spectacle by first Brietfart and then Faux when there appeared to be racism against whites. This in turn caused a knee jerk reaction from those that are afraid of thier own shadows let alone those on the right. Ms. Sherrod was fired and it was repoted on by Faux as if they had found the holy grail lol. So now that it has been found that a few people (left and right) jumped the gun, and that she should be reinstated you think the other side of the story should just tone it down?

[resnor]

sanan...I'm not defending anybody. Just putting the facts put there.

Nevada...how do you know they didn't mean she was gonna be on Beck? That doesn't even make sense.

[sanantonio]

sanan...I'm not defending anybody. Just putting the facts put there.

Nevada...how do you know they didn't mean she was gonna be on Beck? That doesn't even make sense.

What facts? In the context of the full speech facts or the piece of crap hit video Brietfart posted? The audience reaction to one small segment of her speech or the audience reaction to the full measure of the speech?

Brietfart is an idiot and a propagandist plain and simple and there is no fact that he won't take out of context when it serves his purpose.

[resnor]

What facts? In the context of the full speech facts or the piece of crap hit video Brietfart posted? The audience reaction to one small segment of her speech or the audience reaction to the full measure of the speech?

Brietfart is an idiot and a propagandist plain and simple and there is no fact that he won't take out of context when it serves his purpose.

The facts:

1. Fox News had ZERO to do her being fired/resigning.

2. Breitbart didn't lost the video up to get rid of Sherrod. He posted it up to make a point about the NAACP. He also sat on the video for quite some time.

3. The video shows people at the event applauding and laughing about, generally being IN COMPLETE AGREEMENT with her not helping the white guy, simply because he was white. They especially liked the part telling him to get "one of his own" to help him out. They didn't know how the story ended...they didn't know that she ended up fighting for that farmer and his property. They knew that she was sticking it to the man in the story, and they LIKED it. THAT is the point of the video. You can attack Fox news, and you can attack Andrew Breitbart all you want. Doesn't change the fact that NAACP members were in complete agreement with the white farmer being screwed by Sherrod.

[Nevada_Ballin]

sanan...I'm not defending anybody. Just putting the facts put there.

Nevada...how do you know they didn't mean she was gonna be on Beck? That doesn't even make sense.

You'll have to ask Ms. Crow that one. Pretty obvious that Sherrod wasn't on Beck and wasn't going to be on Beck (otherwise I'm sure HE would have mentioned). That only leaves one thing left to be deduced from that comment - that chopped up video.


.

[resnor]

You'll have to ask Ms. Crow that one. Pretty obvious that Sherrod wasn't on Beck and wasn't going to be on Beck (otherwise I'm sure HE would have mentioned). That only leaves one thing left to be deduced from that comment - that chopped up video.


.

That's what I'm saying. I don't believe the video was on, or plannd to be on, Beck's show.

For the record, Beck isn't really a fan of Breitbart...

[Nevada_Ballin]

That's what I'm saying. I don't believe the video was on, or plannd to be on, Beck's show.

For the record, Beck isn't really a fan of Breitbart...

I don't know if the video was on his show or not, I don't watch it. And notice I'm not doing any Fox bashing here. I'm just commenting on how she got screwed over. Seems like it's gonna work out though. I hope she tells them to take that job and shove it if they offer it back.... lol


.

[sanantonio]

The facts:

1. Fox News had ZERO to do her being fired/resigning.

2. Breitbart didn't lost the video up to get rid of Sherrod. He posted it up to make a point about the NAACP. He also sat on the video for quite some time.

3. The video shows people at the event applauding and laughing about, generally being IN COMPLETE AGREEMENT with her not helping the white guy, simply because he was white. They especially liked the part telling him to get "one of his own" to help him out. They didn't know how the story ended...they didn't know that she ended up fighting for that farmer and his property. They knew that she was sticking it to the man in the story, and they LIKED it. THAT is the point of the video. You can attack Fox news, and you can attack Andrew Breitbart all you want. Doesn't change the fact that NAACP members were in complete agreement with the white farmer being screwed by Sherrod.

What is it people like Brietfart can just spoon feed you any old bullshyt and you take it like it's the gospel? It's that very same inspection of the facts or non-inspection that got Ms. Sherrod fired in the first place. Start at 16:34 and tell me what your eyes and ears tell you as opposed to what you've been told.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9NcCa_KjXk

And yes Faux needs to be hammered on this for posting the edited video on thier site. And allowing that lying shyt on thier entertainment show to try and cover his azz with the applause lie. Faux's motto should be "We race bait every chance we get and you can kiss our azzes if you don't like it."

[resnor]

So you're denying that the people laughed and showed approval during her story about not helping the white guy cause he was white PRIOR to her telling them about her epiphany?

Look, I'm not trying to defend Breitbart, or Fox, I'm just talking facts. It's funny to me that you act like I'm spoonfed stuff, and that I don't think on my own, all while you simply parrot the left-wing talking points.

[sanantonio]

So you're denying that the people laughed and showed approval during her story about not helping the white guy cause he was white PRIOR to her telling them about her epiphany?

Look, I'm not trying to defend Breitbart, or Fox, I'm just talking facts. It's funny to me that you act like I'm spoonfed stuff, and that I don't think on my own, all while you simply parrot the left-wing talking points.

So now you've gone from applause to laughter :rolleyes:. Looking at the story in it's full context which means prior to her talking about denying help to the white farmer, they were laughing at the irony of the situation. Of course you won't be able to see that. You came on here defending Brietfart with so called facts and once those are proven to be false you dial back to something else. Somebody needs to look in the mirror before they accuse another of parroting. There are no left wing talking points here only facts that are as visible as the nose on your face if you have a nose.

Even Sheppard Smith (my guy on Faux) imo the most credible journalist on Faux was like WTF!

[sideoutshu]

It was made into a national spectacle by first Brietfart and then Faux when there appeared to be racism against whites. This in turn caused a knee jerk reaction from those that are afraid of thier own shadows let alone those on the right. Ms. Sherrod was fired and it was repoted on by Faux as if they had found the holy grail lol. So now that it has been found that a few people (left and right) jumped the gun, and that she should be reinstated you think the other side of the story should just tone it down?

So of all the injustice in the world, why is Maddow taking up her cause? ... Other than to push a left wing agenda.

And make no mistake, there WAS racism in that video, it just wasn't coming from Sherrod, it was coming from the idiots in the crowd cheering and applauding when they thought the story was about not helping a white guy.

[sideoutshu]

So now you've gone from applause to laughter :rolleyes:. Looking at the story in it's full context which means prior to her talking about denying help to the white farmer, they were laughing at the irony of the situation. Of course you won't be able to see that. You came on here defending Brietfart with so called facts and once those are proven to be false you dial back to something else. Somebody needs to look in the mirror before they accuse another of parroting. There are no left wing talking points here only facts that are as visible as the nose on your face if you have a nose.

Even Sheppard Smith (my guy on Faux) imo the most credible journalist on Faux was like WTF!

So how do you become qualified to distinguish between the sound of regular laughter and "ironic" laughter?

[sanantonio]

So of all the injustice in the world, why is Maddow taking up her cause? ... Other than to push a left wing agenda.

And make no mistake, there WAS racism in that video, it just wasn't coming from Sherrod, it was coming from the idiots in the crowd cheering and applauding when they thought the story was about not helping a white guy.

You will have to ask Maddow that but I would say because of the unfair way in which Sherrod was treated.

No one applauded get off of that already.



So how do you become qualified to distinguish between the sound of regular laughter and "ironic" laughter?

You wouldn't see the difference if I nailed it to your butt.

[sideoutshu]

You wouldn't see the difference if I nailed it to your butt.

But you DO know the difference right? Just explain it to me. It is really impressive that you are able to discern between "ironic" laughter and regular laughter simply by hearing a recording.

[resnor]

So now you've gone from applause to laughter :rolleyes:. Looking at the story in it's full context which means prior to her talking about denying help to the white farmer, they were laughing at the irony of the situation. Of course you won't be able to see that. You came on here defending Brietfart with so called facts and once those are proven to be false you dial back to something else. Somebody needs to look in the mirror before they accuse another of parroting. There are no left wing talking points here only facts that are as visible as the nose on your face if you have a nose.

Even Sheppard Smith (my guy on Faux) imo the most credible journalist on Faux was like WTF!

If you read my posts, you'll see I'm staying consistent: I said applause/laughter/generally in agreement in my other post, and in the second post I said laughing and showing approval. THAT is the key: showing approval or agreement.

I'm not defending Fox or Breitbart...just pointing out facts. And why aren't you all over every network who ran with the story?

[Nevada_Ballin]

If you read my posts, you'll see I'm staying consistent: I said applause/laughter/generally in agreement in my other post, and in the second post I said laughing and showing approval. THAT is the key: showing approval or agreement.

I'm not defending Fox or Breitbart...just pointing out facts. And why aren't you all over every network who ran with the story?

Just for kicks and running with Sideout's other comment about laughter - how do you tell the difference between "approval" laughter and regular laughter?

lol


.

[sanantonio]

If you read my posts, you'll see I'm staying consistent: I said applause/laughter/generally in agreement in my other post, and in the second post I said laughing and showing approval. THAT is the key: showing approval or agreement.

I'm not defending Fox or Breitbart...just pointing out facts. And why aren't you all over every network who ran with the story?

No your not applauding is putting your hands together and clapping thats why you dropped that all together when it was shown there was no applause :rolleyes:. But I'm tired of rehashing this in the context of her story the laughter was appropriate and there was nothing wrong with it.

You have yet to point out any facts and you are unabashedly defending Brietfart as if "maybe they won't notice."

You are so busy defending this azzwipe that you've missed my posts jumping on the right and left as well as spayed and neutered Obama. However I make no apologize's for my hatred of Faux news with the exception of Sheppard Smith.

[resnor]

No your not applauding is putting your hands together and clapping thats why you dropped that all together when it was shown there was no applause :rolleyes:. But I'm tired of rehashing this in the context of her story the laughter was appropriate and there was nothing wrong with it.

You have yet to point out any facts and you are unabashedly defending Brietfart as if "maybe they won't notice."

You are so busy defending this azzwipe that you've missed my posts jumping on the right and left as well as spayed and neutered Obama. However I make no apologize's for my hatred of Faux news with the exception of Sheppard Smith.

You're crazy. I didn't intentionally drop anything. Both of those posts clearly say thaty point was that the group seemed to be in agreement with the racist tones she was using.

I'm not defending Breitbart. I'm just not interested in trying to crucify him like you are.

[bk1998]

This thread is full of stupid.

[Iamczar]

You know at some point we have to get to a place where we can respect our differences and make compromises that will help unite this country rather than divide it. I'm so sick of these guys pointing the finger here and there and not doing a damn thing to help the situation. At the end of the day both left-wing and right-wingers are f**king up. It's not about doing the right thing it's about playing who should'a, who did, who didn't and all this other non-sense. And this Birehart clown or whatever his name....he's an a**hole. This garbage has stirred up people and hurt this seemingly nice woman for what?? To say the NAACP is also racist???? Thats what this was about. All because the NAACP basically asked the TEA Party to have those who represent racism and division to be removed. Whats wrong with that? This clown is again playing politics so this stupid, retarded, useless charade can continue. I have no issues with what the TEA PARTY at least on paper represents. I do have issue when there are signs with President Obama and the N-word on it or signs with him being portrayed as a monkey. Thats not right. So for the NAACP to call them on it is not a bad thing although there could have been a little or "Tact" in their message. That said, at some point for this country to be its best it will have to come together across racial, sexist, religious and even financial lines to be what she was meant to be....the best damned placed in the world.

[sanantonio]

You're crazy. I didn't intentionally drop anything. Both of those posts clearly say thaty point was that the group seemed to be in agreement with the racist tones she was using.

I'm not defending Breitbart. I'm just not interested in trying to crucify him like you are.

I'm done talking with you about this because you either have not watched the video in the lead up to the audience laughing or you just can't understand it period.

Here is your your synopsis of the facts-


Snippet from your first post
They were clapping and laughing throughout her story of how she wouldn't help a white farmer
Didn't happen totally false there was no clapping or applauding.


Snippet from your third post titled The Facts lol
The video shows people at the event applauding and laughing about, generally being IN COMPLETE AGREEMENT with her not helping the white guy, simply because he was white.
Totally false they had already heard the lead up to the story and there was no laughing and applauding about. Which video did you watch if you indeed did watch it?


Snippet from another post
So you're denying that the people laughed and showed approval during her story about not helping the white guy cause he was white PRIOR to her telling them about her epiphany?
I would explain to you why they laughed but it's obvious niether you or Sides is capable of getting it. Here is where in your statement of facts applause has magically disappeared from the facts lol. Consistency is not your strong suit.

[temag]

Now O'Reily is accusing her of violating the Hatch Act. As a broadcast journalist, shouldn't he know what that is in and out. I bet he does, but most Americans who don't follow politics really don't know what it means. Fox will be researching to find something else to charge her with. You FOXnews lovers should be ashamed. Take the blindfolds off, and get it right. Vilsack jumped the gun, then had the nerve to throw our great President under the bus with a boldface lie, yet the a$$holes on FOXnews believe it and found another excuse to bash the president. PROPAGANDA!!!!

[resnor]

I'm done talking with you about this because you either have not watched the video in the lead up to the audience laughing or you just can't understand it period.

Here is your your synopsis of the facts-


Didn't happen totally false there was no clapping or applauding.


Totally false they had already heard the lead up to the story and there was no laughing and applauding about. Which video did you watch if you indeed did watch it?


I would explain to you why they laughed but it's obvious niether you or Sides is capable of getting it. Here is where in your statement of facts applause has magically disappeared from the facts lol. Consistency is not your strong suit.

You're trying to discredit my overall point, which was they seemed to be in agreement with her not helping the white guy, by continually referencing the clapping. They WERE laughing throughout...and they DIDN'T know that the story was about her having a revelation about helping the white man. They were laughing and seeming to enjoy her sticking it to the white man.

Sanan...if this were a WHITE MAN, speaking to a Tea Party, and he said the SAME STORY, but it was a black man he wasn't going to help, YOU would be crucifying the white guy, the Tea Party, and anyone else associated with it.

Finally, I haven't said anything about Breitbart being reputable, or the video being reputable. All I've said is that HE claims that the vid was about the NAACP, not Sherrod. You can interpret the laughing however you want, but so can I...and what I see when I watch the vid is a group from the NAACP who like hearing a story about a black woman sticking it to a white man, and enjoying it immensely.

For what it's worth, I think she got shafted. I think it's great that she realized that she shouldn't have been judging the man based on race.

[Gtrght77]

It's funny how all of a sudden the GOP is jumping on the "You're a Racist" bandwagon. :rolleyes:

[resnor]

The Dems have had racists in positions of power for decades.

[Gtrght77]

The Dems have had racists in positions of power for decades.

Probably, rich white men are that way no matter what party they are from. Though the GOP has made racists a large part of their base since Nixon was in office.

[McMadden]

Sanan...if this were a WHITE MAN, speaking to a Tea Party, and he said the SAME STORY, but it was a black man (Obama) he wasn't going to help YOU would be crucifying the white guy, the Tea Party, and anyone else associated with it.
Does NE1 C the irony here? :eek: Isn't this what the NAACP wants the leadership of the numerous Tea Parties to take a stand against? Sorry Resnor, I couldn't pass that quote up. :p

[resnor]

Does NE1 C the irony here? :eek: Isn't this what the NAACP wants the leadership of the numerous Tea Parties to take a stand against? Sorry Resnor, I couldn't pass that quote up. :p

I'm not sure what your point is...are you saying that the Tea Parties are racist? Or are you saying that the NAACP o's being hypocritical?

[resnor]

Probably, rich white men are that way no matter what party they are from. Though the GOP has made racists a large part of their base since Nixon was in office.

I disagree slightly with you. I don't think the Republican party has "made" racists a part of the party. Racists many times are small government people...think white supremacists. So, obviously, thy are going to identify more with Republican ideals Han Democrat. Doesn't mean Republicans want them to agree with them.

[sanantonio]

You're trying to discredit my overall point, which was they seemed to be in agreement with her not helping the white guy, by continually referencing the clapping. They WERE laughing throughout...and they DIDN'T know that the story was about her having a revelation about helping the white man. They were laughing and seeming to enjoy her sticking it to the white man.

Sanan...if this were a WHITE MAN, speaking to a Tea Party, and he said the SAME STORY, but it was a black man he wasn't going to help, YOU would be crucifying the white guy, the Tea Party, and anyone else associated with it.

Finally, I haven't said anything about Breitbart being reputable, or the video being reputable. All I've said is that HE claims that the vid was about the NAACP, not Sherrod. You can interpret the laughing however you want, but so can I...and what I see when I watch the vid is a group from the NAACP who like hearing a story about a black woman sticking it to a white man, and enjoying it immensely.

For what it's worth, I think she got shafted. I think it's great that she realized that she shouldn't have been judging the man based on race.

They were not laughing through out stop saying that. They only laughed at one point in the story and then it was due to the irony of the story and had absolutely nothing to do with being in agreement with her. That is the point you, sides, and a few others can't see. So cut the crap about them laughing and clapping and enjoying immensely Ms. Sherrod sticking it to a white man. It is absolutely not true and has nothing to do with interpretation and everything to do with following the context of the entire speech.

[sideoutshu]

They were not laughing through out stop saying that. They only laughed at one point in the story and then it was due to the irony of the story and had absolutely nothing to do with being in agreement with her. That is the point you, sides, and a few others can't see. So cut the crap about them laughing and clapping and enjoying immensely Ms. Sherrod sticking it to a white man. It is absolutely not true and has nothing to do with interpretation and everything to do with following the context of the entire speech.

You stil haven't told us the difference between regular laughter and "ironic" laughter.

[resnor]

They were not laughing through out stop saying that. They only laughed at one point in the story and then it was due to the irony of the story and had absolutely nothing to do with being in agreement with her. That is the point you, sides, and a few others can't see. So cut the crap about them laughing and clapping and enjoying immensely Ms. Sherrod sticking it to a white man. It is absolutely not true and has nothing to do with interpretation and everything to do with following the context of the entire speech.

Ok...so they found the irony to be funny. I don't laugh at things that I find abhorrent. Why does laughing at her not helping a white man equal them not supporting that? They thought it was funny. What is funny about not helping a white man save his farm?!!

[sanantonio]

Ok...so they found the irony to be funny. I don't laugh at things that I find abhorrent. Why does laughing at her not helping a white man equal them not supporting that? They thought it was funny. What is funny about not helping a white man save his farm?!!

As I said they knew from the lead up that she would help this man that was not in question. What they found amusing as did I that here was an individual needing help and yet still trying to impose or show his superiority to the very individual he needed help from. Juxtaposed against her deciding whether she should help this strutting peacock or not. That's what they were laughing at the absolute absurdity of it all.

[sanantonio]

You stil haven't told us the difference between regular laughter and "ironic" laughter.

Doesn't matter you wouldn't get it anyway can't waste anymore time on you.

[sideoutshu]

Doesn't matter you wouldn't get it anyway can't waste anymore time on you.

Just indulge us. Cmon man, give us a hint.

[resnor]

As I said they knew from the lead up that she would help this man that was not in question. What they found amusing as did I that here was an individual needing help and yet still trying to impose or show his superiority to the very individual he needed help from. Juxtaposed against her deciding whether she should help this strutting peacock or not. That's what they were laughing at the absolute absurdity of it all.

The leadup certainly did not give away that she would help the man. It implied that she had some sort of epiphany. Also, I found it odd that she said he was acting "superior." how was he acting superior? Perhaps SHE interpreted his actions as him acting superior, but maybe he wasn't. Having to beg someone to help save your home and livelihood will make someone act strange.

[sanantonio]

The leadup certainly did not give away that she would help the man. It implied that she had some sort of epiphany. Also, I found it odd that she said he was acting "superior." how was he acting superior? Perhaps SHE interpreted his actions as him acting superior, but maybe he wasn't. Having to beg someone to help save your home and livelihood will make someone act strange.

That's why I said you don't or can't get it. Her lead up told me and I'm sure most in that room that she would help this individual. There was really no need to explain how he was acting superior those of color in the audience got it.

It's amazing how you try to explain the most basic and obvious things away. The farmer was being a "I'm better then you azzhole." Bottom line is he got his help and considers Ms. Sherrod a good friend to this day.

[sanantonio]

Just indulge us. Cmon man, give us a hint.

Sorry you no get it anyway.

[resnor]

That's why I said you don't or can't get it. Her lead up told me and I'm sure most in that room that she would help this individual. There was really no need to explain how he was acting superior those of color in the audience got it.

It's amazing how you try to explain the most basic and obvious things away. The farmer was being a "I'm better then you azzhole." Bottom line is he got his help and considers Ms. Sherrod a good friend to this day.

How did the lead up tell you that she would help him? The leadup merely said that she had some sort of revelation. The revelation could have come after she refused to help him, you had no way of knowing.

As to how he was acting...I am just curious what he was doing that gave her the impression that he was acting superior. It's nice that you assume that the white guy is acting superior...I was just giving annidea that perhaps the guy was acting strangely because of the situation he was in.

[Iamczar]

Well as a African-American male growing up in south I've had to deal with the "I'm Superior to you B.S." virtually all my life. It's a tone and a manner of how your spoken to by this person that gives off that I'm better than you attitude. It's not blatant like saying "I'm superior to you". Although it can be, more times than not it's just in their speech, tone, physical stance, facial expressions etc. The reason I giggled when I saw it was because like those in the audience I knew exactly what she felt. I'm assuming your not AA and I think the reason you don't get it is because you've never dealt with it, (For the record I've had white friends of mines deal with it too but thats a whole other conversation) and if you had you probably assumed it was nothing or that person was just being a jerk. The difference is, when your a person of color you automatically feel this attitude is because of the color of your skin not because of you as a person. Thats why the audience laughed or whatever....they all could identify and also thought the whole irony of this man acting this way with the person he needed help from was crazy. It all goes back to divisions based on race, sex, income and religion. When I mentioned my white friends has gotten the same type of attitude.....it was because this person/people considered them to be "white trash" and actually told them that. I heard it loud and clear and as a AA I was shocked but thats how it goes. They're considered that until it's time to vote and then after the votes are in it's back to the "white trash" thing again. (Like the saying "the enemy of my enemy is my friend") Again that politics, and this whole video was put out there to unite those people who would believe that "Obama the black man" is the enemy and anything somebody on fox news or Rush would lead them to believe. For the record I'm not saying all of the listeners/watchers of FOX or Rush are like that but I do think they(fox/rush) cater to that kind of audience.

[sanantonio]

How did the lead up tell you that she would help him? The leadup merely said that she had some sort of revelation. The revelation could have come after she refused to help him, you had no way of knowing.

As to how he was acting...I am just curious what he was doing that gave her the impression that he was acting superior. It's nice that you assume that the white guy is acting superior...I was just giving annidea that perhaps the guy was acting strangely because of the situation he was in.

Like I said you refuse or just can't get it. When she say's "God is good and will put things in your path to make you realize that the struggle is not (I'm paraphrasing here and it's a shame I have to explain this) about color but about poor people." It is then that she goes into the story about the white farmer. If it's not understood that she is going to help this man by then than more then likely that individual is a dullard or just chooses not to see it.

In so far as the farmer acting superior it's not up to us to dissect every little nuance of her story. To her he was acting superior and thats all we need to know. Growing up black in America you learn and see first hand at some point in your life that air of superiority from whites. It's just a fact of life that at some point you will run across an azzhole that acts like they won the color lottery and you didn't. So I don't understand how or why you would question her on that part of her story it's really irrelevant because that was her perception.

So now I'm not sure what you are doing now. You've gone from defending Brietfart :rolleyes:, you've gone away from the audience laughing, clapping, and applauding thier approval, you've gone away from it being about the NAACP, as well as your interpretation as to why there was (in retrospect small scattered chuckles as opposed to outright laughter) laughter to begin with during her farmer story.

Every argument you made was made first by Brietfart therefore making you his parrot and if that isn't defending this lieing sack of excrement I don't know what is.

[resnor]

*confused*

I'm not going away from anything. I am simply responding to your posts. You continue to focus on the applauding part...for the record, to applause someone doesn't ONLY mean to clap. You could say "I applaude you for your decision," and no clapping be involved. However, my point was, as I said several times, the crowd was in agreement with her.

As to her leadup...there was nothing to day she would help that man. It revealed that at some point she had a change of heart...but you didn't know WHEN that change of heart would be. For all you knew, it could have been after the man lost his home and committed suicide. You just didn't know. Perhaps you ASSUMED what the outcome would be, but that would be what it was: an assumption.

Also, you can call Breitbart whatever you want...and, no kidding I'm telling you what Breitbart said...I TOLD YOU THAT IN MY FIRST POST!!! I love how you will ASSUME the best about Sherrod, but immediately jump to the Breitbart is a racist mentality...cause Breitbart is white, and Sherrod is black.

[Iamczar]

Breitbart is a clown. The reason he's a clown is because the b.s. he's pulled has nothing to do with race. For him it's about politics, and the best way to stir up that extreme right base is to put this garbage out so those people and folks over at Fox get going in a "We hate the Liberal Dems and President Obama" frenzy.

There was no truth to his story but it caused this big ruckus and got this seemingly nice woman fired for nothing. Even after the family came out to support her they we're drowned out by the cry to have her job taken away.The NAACP even scorned this woman so that makes them clowns too.

I don't think S.A. assumed anything but I know the family has come to her defense which says a lot about Mrs. Sherrod and the fact that they're still friends says even more. Breitbart has proven himself to be a clown and a man with his own agenda which is to play politics using peoples lives as the monkeys paw.

While I'll admit thats it's clever and takes balls to do, it also shows he has no respect or class. I can't for the life of me see why anybody would defend this guy.

[sanantonio]

*confused*

I'm not going away from anything. I am simply responding to your posts. You continue to focus on the applauding part...for the record, to applause someone doesn't ONLY mean to clap. You could say "I applaude you for your decision," and no clapping be involved. However, my point was, as I said several times, the crowd was in agreement with her.

As to her leadup...there was nothing to day she would help that man. It revealed that at some point she had a change of heart...but you didn't know WHEN that change of heart would be. For all you knew, it could have been after the man lost his home and committed suicide. You just didn't know. Perhaps you ASSUMED what the outcome would be, but that would be what it was: an assumption.

Also, you can call Breitbart whatever you want...and, no kidding I'm telling you what Breitbart said...I TOLD YOU THAT IN MY FIRST POST!!! I love how you will ASSUME the best about Sherrod, but immediately jump to the Breitbart is a racist mentality...cause Breitbart is white, and Sherrod is black.

You're hopeless and I'm done with you and your circular arguments.