What a bureaucrat: she does "enough" for him so he can't complain to her superiors. Did I say "superiors"? (slaps wrist).

Because "fuck whitey". That's why.

My coffee table is cracked. That's how hard my jaw hit it when I saw this.

Disgusting.
Yet somehow I think that she isn't going to have any problems finding another job elsewhere. With the NAACP perhaps? Or the New Black Panthers?

Further proof, if any were needed, that there's no such thing as an off-the-record comment, or a friendly audience. You say it, and somebody somewhere has a record of it.

Further proof that a government that is big enough to grant what you want is big enough to take everything you've got.

I'm sure this will be investigated, right after the New Black Panthers are prosecuted.

Yet another case of this crap getting a pass, and a cop rightly arresting someone being called misguided. Oh yeah, and us teapartiers are bigots. Right.

Just saw this on yahoo. I especially like that she has become friends with the white farmer and his wife. Reminds me of the "some of my best friends are [fill in the blank]" line that some peoples are fond of using.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20100720/pl_yblog_upshot/usda-official-resigns-amidst-race-controversy

She is racist, but to put things in perspective, it has been established that the Dept. of Agriculture systematically discriminated against black farmers for decades. They are still wrangling over how much money those farmers will receive in compensation.

Full context is helpful here:

http://www.ajc.com/news/resigned-usda-official-says-574027.html

"I was struggling with the fact that so many black people had lost their farmland, and here I was faced with having to help a white person save their land. So I didn't give him the full force of what I could do. I did enough."

But Tuesday morning, Sherrod said what online viewers weren't told in reports posted throughout the day Monday was that the tale she told at the banquet happened 24 years ago -- before she got the USDA job -- when she worked with the Georgia field office for the Federation of Southern Cooperative/Land Assistance Fund.

Sherrod said the short video clip excluded the breadth of the story about how she eventually worked with the man over a two-year period to help ward off foreclosure of his farm, and how she eventually became friends with him and his wife.

"And I went on to work with many more white farmers," she said. "The story helped me realize that race is not the issue, it's about the people who have and the people who don't. When I speak to groups, I try to speak about getting beyond the issue of race."

I would be interested in hearing from her perspective how she determined that this "white farmer" was acting superior to her...

Amy, why are you letting yourself be part of a witch hunt? I just read on Yahoo that Sherrod has been fired for this incident, even though it happened 24 years ago. And it's clear to me from watching the video that she was not "bragging," but admitting a past mistake. I would be just as outraged if a white person lost his/her job for a reason like this.

By the way, here's a lovely sample from the comments in the Yahoo story: "The problem is, blacks don't know their place anymore. They should get down on their knees and thank white people that we allowed them to have a better education the get these jobs where they have a little bit of power."

See Balko.

(I hate ring-around-the-collar.)

"Sherrod said the short video clip excluded the breadth of the story about how she eventually worked with the man over a two-year period to help ward off foreclosure of his farm, and how she eventually became friends with him and his wife.

'And I went on to work with many more white farmers," she said. "The story helped me realize that race is not the issue, it's about the people who have and the people who don't. When I speak to groups, I try to speak about getting beyond the issue of race.'"

Sounds to me like she started out a racist and changed to be a better person. The farmer's wife supports her and calls her a lifelong friend.

The travesty is that she was forced to resign for political reasons.

Problem is it's the net, and you can't trust even videos.

FWIW, by watching the clip to the end, I did get the impression this story was about a learning event for Sherrod, where she discovered her actions were wrong.

She wasn't fired, she resigned. But either way, she needed to go.
I don't care if she has changed. The point is, she was a racist and at the time it affected her ability to do her job properly. I am all for forgiveness and do think people can change, but that doesn't mean that they still don't get to pay the price for their past mistakes. Like Amy said, what if this was a serious crime? What if 24 years ago, she had robbed a bank or murdered someone and it wasn't discovered until years later? What if since that time she had become a productive citizen and truly felt remourse? Does that mean she still shouldn't have to serve her time in prison? Of course she should. She was never actually held accountable for her crime in the eyes of the law. The same principle applies here.

Plus, who knows how many other cases she worked on before she changed that did not have good outcomes for the white farmer? I am more than willing to bet that there were other white farmers preceeding this one who she "did enough for" who lost their farms, thus their livlihood. We are only hearing about ONE story. We are not hearing about the cases where the white farmer lost everything because of her blantant racsicim. She must answer for her past actions (read: inactions) and losing her job and gov't status is a pretty good punishment in my opnion. That is part of being in politics. Your skelotons will come back and bite you. And you have to answer for them. Even 24 years later.

To Sabrina and Amy:

As a matter of fact (or law), 24 years is enough time to mitigate most mistakes. It is a straw man argument to even compare this to murder. It is not a serious crime, so it is silly to make that comparison.

Most crimes (and civil causes of action) have a statute of limitations. The longest limitation period is usually around 15 to 21 years.

So, yeah, she should NOT have to serve her time.
My initial reaction, though, was, yeah, if she abuses her authority, she should be canned. The facts that: 1) it was 24 years ago; 2) she did not appear to be gloating about it in the way some of the out-of-context clips made it seem; and 3)she was not working for the USDA at the time all seem to be legitimate mitigating factors.

-Jut

There is also another video about her talking about never getting fired from a Government job... Some people don't wear positions of power well.

Her arrogance is offensive, regardless of her possible change of heart AFTER getting to know them (no duh). It is pretty obvious this woman has a chip on her shoulder - I would suspect the delivery of her message would have carried some humility with it (because although this may have taken place years and years ago - this video was made last week) if she indeed was making an admission she was wrong. Instead this came off like some grandiose stance about how benevolent she was to these white farmers despite having her history. And THAT is the dig for me. I have less of a problem that she held these opinions and more of one that she was abusing her power while acting upon it.

I mean, why is she still talking about this now - this isn't a support group for reformed racists - it's a damn government conference. It's as if she thought her shit smelled like roses and she just wanted to fan it around and receive adulation.

(And yes, it is noted that black farmers were heavily discriminated against and had their land taken away disproportionately to those of whites - but what interest does it serve to correct the by doing that all over again?)

Jut-
Fair enough. I'll concede that the murder comparison was a stretch but I was trying to make a point.

However, I do feel that she should still be canned regardless of how long ago it was. She abused her power. Period. No matter how long ago, she broke her oath and should be punished for it. She made decisions about other peoples livliehood based on racisim that likely effected them for life. Perhaps she has changed, and I commend that, but she still needs to be held accountable to her past actions. Especially considering she did it on the govt's, therefore OUR, dime. If she was white, and her story was about how she screwed a black farmer over 24 years ago for no other reason than "he was black and talking down to me", everyone would be demanding her head on a platter. Why is it forgivable because she is black and the farmer was white?

I still believe we are still only getting one side of the story. I don't buy for one second that this case was the ONLY case in which she did that. I believe other people were effected because of her racism prior to this. I think that this is just the only one that she is owning up too and the only one that has had a good story come out of it. Racists don't change overnight. It doesn't happen nearly as cleanly as this story would like us all to believe. What about the white farmers that she interacted with prior to this case? What is their story? Surely this wasn't the ONLY white farmer she EVER worked with in her entire career up to that point.
If I had the power, I would demand a full audit of every case she ever worked. After all, black farmers from over decades ago are being compensated for the actions of white employees of the DoA in those days...why should white victims not get the same courtesy now?

She needs to be required to watch, about 5,000 times in a row, Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "I Have A Dream " speech, and then write an essay about the content of a person's character vs. the color of the person's skin.

According to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, the farmer's wife says Sherrod worked tirelessly and helped save their farm. She considers her a friend.

http://www.ajc.com/news/farmers-wife-says-fired-574027.html

@Conana:

So what? I say that because:

1) As an agent of the USDA she had access to the kill-switch on how many other white farmers until she woke up to her ignorance - or maybe others she didn't connect so well with? Ones maybe that refused to kiss her ass? Who would be proud to tell a story like this? (Tell me she didn't look the slightest bit pleased with herself?)

2) She damaged her own credibility with her narcissistic need to (24 years later) rehash this and leave a lasting and indelible impression as some benevolent saint in a room full of people.

3) She is boasting and joking with the audience about how you don't loose your job working for the government on the second clip (not posted). Not racist, but a disturbing insight into her own character and personal work ethic.

I don't care what that couple says, this woman should be held accountable for this misstep in good judgement.

Der..I meant to say Conan not Conana (huh?) - sorry buddy.

You want to know what I noticed about the video...which was shot recently... Not one person in the audience appeared horrified by her intial confession....in fact, you can clearly hear snickering on the tape.... If this was reversed and a group of whites acted like this they would be hunted down in their homes and ALL of their jobs would be forfeit.

Feebie,

I'm not justifying her actions. I just posted the link to the AJC article as an interesting addition to the debate.

I haven't seen the video yet (I'm at work). I'll watch it when I get home tonight. I have read several articles (news and opinion) about it.

If she had been telling the story, as she claims she was, to illustrate a lesson she learned in life, that's one thing. But, based on the comments of those who have seen the video, that does not appear to be the case.

Added to this, the subsequent video of her urging to minorities to get a job in the USDA for job security (and not for, oh let's say, the ability to benefit agriculture in the US) seems to indicate that she approaches her job with a frightening lack of seriousness.

People like this woman make you wonder if that idiot that used to post here every other day with an off-topic rant about the need to abolish the USDA might have been right.

@sheep mommy

That part of the video was disturbing, though not Sherrod's fault.

It did remind me of Jim Morrison saying he was a sagittarius, the most philosophical of all the signs. And we all remember the lulz that followed that.

I'm with Amy--any white psrson saying this would be crucified.

I can only speak from my experiences, but, this is not suprising at all. It is ALL about race in the black communities I have lived in both upper middle class and poorer than dirt. And KateC yeah and.......? Same way "black people cannot be racist" and a black person using the word "nigga". Your point is?

"People like this woman make you wonder if that idiot that used to post here every other day with an off-topic rant about the need to abolish the USDA might have been right."

Ha. That idiot is on the loose upstairs (Amy's first post of the day).

1) The original condemnation by the NAACP drew attention to the disturbing non-reaction of the audience, and they pledged to look into how local NAACP staff handle this and similar cases.

Now that Sherrod is fighting back, that statement has unfortunately been withdrawn since various political cards are still in play. That is the sick part of all this - the use of race as a political lever.

Which leads to:

2) Whether or not this happened long ago, and whether or not it misreads Sherrod's actual personal development - publication of the video is useful for cutting through a lot of the self-righteous, politicized grandstanding on race.

And for pointing out the PC double-standard that shuts up open discussion.

Whether or not Sherrod herself moved on from her error, the video provides a much-needed glimpse of the PC victimhood/entitlement mentality that nurtures and supports such attitudes.

I don't think comparing snide comments to murder is appropriate.

So she didn't do her best for clients over two decades ago based on race. Meh...getting all upset about that is not dramatically different from people still getting their rocks off yapping about how blacks had trouble buying houses in certaian neighborhoods in the 50s.

I don't know that she is a racist bitch now, 24 years is a long time though, hell, you can rob somebody and not be charged after that much time has passed.

I don't like what she did, but I'm more concerned with her performance now.

If it was a white person saying it about a black farmer, yeah he would have had to resign.

She did too. SO...where is the issue now?

It appears Amy Alkon has been duped. This was a confession of a wrong attitude, and then the confessor went on to help the white farmers, thus fulfilling her professional obligations.

NYT--

"Ms. Sherrod said she was pressed to resign after the video whipped around the Web. But she said the clip was misleading. According to Ms. Sherrod and people who have seen the full video, she went on to say in her speech that she had learned from working with the farmer that all people must overcome their prejudices."

Ms Sherrod is not responsible for (in this case mild) audience reactions, anymore than a good Tea Party candidate is responsible if a racist element shows up at his/her rally.

Really, Sherrod strikes me as a nice woman who initially resented a white farmer behavior, but then became the white's farmer's champion (this is revealed by the full video).

How is this racism? The NAACP has admitted it was snookered by this video. Amy Alkon should admit as much too. Alkon looks small and divisive at this point.

That said, imagine the USDA larding more than $1 billion onto Georgia farmers. I ran (and still do sometimes) a "family" (my own) furniture-making business, and I never got a dime of help from anybody, ever. Indeed, I paid taxes and penalties on taxes--so that Georgia farmers could snuffle at the federal lard plate.

That is the true outrage of this tape--and no one seems concerned about it.

> That is the true outrage of this tape--and no
> one seems concerned about it.

BOTU, while inherently loathsome and irredeemably scrambled, is correct.

...But only about this one thing, OK? And in this one context. A broken clock, while correct twice a day, is nonetheless useless.

Crud-
The $1 billion figure (who knows where that came from) is but a small portion of the federal lard wasted annually on rural "development", infrastructure, military bases, farms, and more.

A state like Kentucky gets back $1.51 for every dollar they send to DC, or about (r.u. ready for this) more than $4,000 net per capita, annually). Imagine Tea Party Man Rand Paul if and when he gets to DC and finds out his state's economy is dependent on federal slop. I suspect he will ramp up his rhetoric, wrap himslef in the flag, fool suckers like you, and keep the gravy train coming to Kentucky, and the other rural states in the Red Bloc.

A parasitic and coprolitic rural economy and military is what is preventing the USA form competing with the new real dynamo, China.

Now, we all learned in the George Allen "macaca" incident that when it comes to charges of racism, context doesn't matter. That was the lesson we were taught, and it's been reinforced numerous times. Sherrod appears to be openly bragging about it in the video, and the audience voices its approval. QED.

And the question is being asked about Sherrod's dual identity as a USDA official and a founder of an organization apparently defrauding the USDA of millions of taxpayer dollars. It certainly appears from the timeline (if I've understood it right) that, in fact, Sherrod's hiring at USDA was a quid pro quo for the lawsuit settlement. Why was the USDA so anxious to be rid of her, and why is it now reconsidering? Did the USDA think that Sherrod's massive conflicts of interest could be shoved under the table by firing her? Who else in the USDA has benefited from the Sherrod foundation's lawsuits? How much tax money has been directed down this rathole? Inquiring minds want to find out. (But, if our Journolist media has there way, probably won't. Which reminds me of another question: To what extent is today's media meme about "context" being coordinated by leftist journalists across the MSM sphere? What mailing list or Web site are they now using as Journolist's replacment, who are the members, and what are they saying? What information do they possibly have about the story that they are not revealing?)

> A parasitic and coprolitic rural economy and
> military is what is preventing the USA form
> competing with the new real dynamo, China.

Buttercup, MOVE THERE.

[q]To what extent is today's media meme about "context" being coordinated by leftist journalists across the MSM sphere? [/q]

Well, I saw a bit longer of the video on fds.fr and it did seem like she was ready to teach a profound lesson from the pure heart.

As for the media, check out which comments were "highlighted" on the nytimes "A mosque maligned". Could they be more biased?

http://tinyurl.com/2f7fzeb

...the federal lard wasted annually on rural "development", infrastructure, military bases, farms, and more.

Yeah, we need to stop wasting money on military bases. Just have the soldiers live in people's houses. Oh wait, we fought a war over that. And it would probably be problematic to assemble the troops in the event of an emergency if they're spread out over half the city. That, and my garage isn't big enough to store an M1-A1 Abrams.

And roads? Rural people don't need roads or telephones or electricity. Oh wait. How will they get the food, coal, and other resources for which urbanites depend on them to the cities?

====================

While I agree that agricultural subsidies (and other government pork) need to be cut back significantly or even eliminated, implementing BOTU's delusional rants would have us defended by musket-wielding mobs and paying the equivalent of a month's car payment for a week's groceries.

====================

Statistics like taxes paid versus "lard" received are misleading. Some of the "federal lard" is due to pork barrell projects. Some is due to legitimate federal operations, with benefits (if any) that accrue to the whole population (military, govt agencies, Indian reservations, etc.).

Another reason rural states get so much "federal lard" is because the government owns so much land there and must maintain it.

The federal government alone owns 650 million acres (30% of the land area of the US). In fact, the federal government owns 85% of Nevada, almost 70% of Alaska, and almost 60% of Utah.

http://strangemaps.wordpress.com/2008/06/17/291-federal-lands-in-the-us/

====================

I don't that this correlates with the "taxes paid vs monies received" rankings.

Alaska is #1 in total monies received per capita, 18th in per capita taxes paid, and 3rd in received vs paid - $1.84). And second in percent of land owned by the federal government (first in actual acreage owned).

Nevada, on the other hand, is close to last in monies received (overall and per capita) and sixth in taxes paid per capita. And first in percentage of land owned by the federal government.

A parasitic and coprolitic rural economy and military is what is preventing the USA form competing with the new real dynamo, China.

Not quite, buttercup.

According to the CIA Fact Book, the US spends roughly 4.1% of its GDP on military spending.

That's lower than with the spending of that "new real dynamo, China" which spends 4.3% of its GDP on military expeditures.

In fact, the US ranks 25th in percent of GDP spent on military expenditures.

Context is the key. I'm sure taken out of context anyone can be made into a sinner or a saint... a racist or a MLK Jr. believer.

http://tinyurl.com/23zgzj6

Paula:

Check out Ms. Sherrod's conflict of interest with USDA settlements and a trust for black farm owners, herself included - and her and her husband being benefactors of MORE than any of the other claimants.

Conan-

The US is up to 4.9 percent now. And that does not include black ops, the giant homeland security lardbutts-r-us culture, and the VA.

Our military is coprolitic and parasitic, in economic terms. And federal agency that is not sunsetted every ten years--that is what you are going to get. The USDA, the VA, HUD--all the same.

As for military bases, they are mostly patronage.

I do plan to move to the Far East--the future is better there, especially for children. Anyone who visits almost any classroom in Asia vs, the USA knows that.

It just seems that the Sherrod clip posted on BigGovernment.com was a retaliatory tactic because the NAACP accused the Tea Party of being racist a few days prior to the release of the Sherrod clip.

So a blogger (not a journalist) took it upon themselves to point the finger at the NAACP through creative editing of Sherrod's video. As a result, Sherrod lost her job due to faulty fact checking in the ensuing media coverage.

My complaint is that the media took her edited video statement of being racist out of context and plenty of others were willing to jump on the bandwagon of news blips that are adulterated to inflame the public and create a buzz (or just get more money through advertising).

"So a blogger (not a journalist) took it upon themselves to point the finger at the NAACP through creative editing of Sherrod's video."

Considering how biased journalists have become (JournoList) I am more comfortable believing a reputable blogger - shit, any blogger, over anyone in the MSM.

They rightfully pointed the finger at the NAACP, since even before that NAACP audience knew Sherrod was to transition into her lessoned learned moral of the story - they were chuckling and laughing - nodding in agreement. That was no edit (I still think her delivery was awkward and condescending - although after listening to the full tape, I can see it didn't do her message complete justice).

Aside from all that, there is the video of her encouraging blacks to sign up for employment at the USDA since they'll have job security working for the government (hinting: no one gets fired or laid off there) - AND that nasty lil' business with her conflict of interest and the settlement she received.

"Though the video clip showed Sherrod telling a story about how she didn't give a white farmer her "full" help, she later said the incident happened 24 years ago and that the story was meant to show how she learned from her mistakes. The full video, released Tuesday night, appeared to bolster her account."

Jeez, this is from Fox News. Even Fox News admits to being duped, and is eating crow.

Amy Alkon: You were used like new country girl in a big-city brothel. Admit it! You posted an edited video. Like Fox, you were easily used.

> You posted an edited video. Like Fox, you
> were easily used.

Not at all. Even if it's the first half of an anecdote, it shows things about our government puts wretched things in motion that are good to know, and must be seen to be believed.

I'm no fan of video-as-truth, but... I guess I'm even less a fan of aging, bitter, isolationist lefties from Kentucky.

"I am more comfortable believing a reputable blogger - shit, any blogger, over anyone in the MSM."

And Wikipedia is the *best* source for reference information. I cite Wikipedia frequently in my research papers. It is absolutely reliable, factual information that holds up to scholarly standards.

Notice, my criticism is over the handling of an edited video posted on a blog by the mainstream media. Over reliance on absurd, edited "stories" to "create" news rather than actual implementation of journalistic fact-checking is what created this "headline."

> I cite Wikipedia frequently in my
> research papers.

For what institution?

> The full video, released Tuesday night

Reynolds links another guy: “Contrary to lefty spin, this context adds little and excuses less...."

So Crid, it does look like the "context" argument was a coordinated MSM talking point. I wonder who the source was?

And Feebie: I noticed that about the Sherrod lawsuit settlement too... I was under the impression that it was illegal to structure a class action settlement so that some members of the class get more than others. I wonder how they pulled that off, and who the judge was that agreed to it.

"And Wikipedia is the *best* source for reference information. I cite Wikipedia frequently in my research papers. It is absolutely reliable, factual information that holds up to scholarly standards."

You mean you are no longer required to actually do the research for research papers anymore?

Cousin Dave - Amy posted the Examiner article with the settlement lawsuit (giving credit where credit is due).

Playing of the entire video put only ONE issue I had with her statement into partial perspective, however, it did nothing to help her out for the totality of circumstances. Generally, this woman is a bigoted-elite-power-mongering ass.

All videos in all contexts including the settlement, how she got employed at the USDA and her accusing Fox News and the Tea Partiers gives us a pretty good idea of where this woman's heart lies.

I agree with Amy on this one.

> it does look like the "context" argument
> was a coordinated MSM talking point. I
> wonder who the source was?

What argument? What co-ordination? Which MSM? Source for what? Who are the illuminati?

> this woman is a bigoted-elite-power-
> mongering ass.

Yeah.

Also, I need to know... Was this Paula person for real? Is there an accredited school on the surface of the globe that accepts citations from Wikipedia?

I love Wikipedia. Sometimes use it five times in a day. But not for research!

Re: Wikipedia

See sarcasm, sorry I know I shouldn't use sarcasm on the internet. My fault.

Crid, I went back and forth on the question for years about whether there was a left-wing conspiracy to rig media coverage of political stories in the U.S. For the past two decades, there's been all kinds of rumors, but it was always of the "my friend's friends's cousin's uncle said..." variety. Sometimes it would seem like there had to be something going on, and sometimes I'd conclude that I was just being paranoid -- the MSM outlets were only covering stories the same way because of groupthink (and because the reporters were too lazy to all write their own material instead of just regurgitating press releases).

Thus, the JournoList stuff being revealed by the Daily Caller now has shocked me. It's Exhibit A. There is now absolutely no doubt that a conspiracy did exist -- we have the smoking gun. No one who was on the list is disputing the accuracy of anything DC has reported about it. The only substantial question remaining is how effective the conspiracy actually was. Once the DC has released all the material they have, someone needs to match up names and dates and do a correlation of how stories were covered by MSM outlets immediately after being discussed on JournoList. DC has already come up with one example, of the list members laying out a strategy for for how Sarah Palin would be covered immediately after her nomination as McCain's running mate. Joe Klein published an article based on the list suggestions that we now see set the tone for how the MSM covered Palin during the campaign, and then went back to the list to give them a hat tip. This all happened the day of the nomination.

Heh Heh. Breitbart got you all!

Fred Barnes on media bias:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704684604575381083191313448.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

We need a sarcasm html edit.

Maybe something that makes the words inside the edit a different color.

I have used Wikipedia in an academic paper. Granted it was something like "many options are available as Wikipedia's page on the topic has links to over 50."

I have also found Wikipedia to be a good place to find topics for papers and a source of materials (I follow their references back - if they cite Smith 2005 "Great Results" I go look up that paper).

> I went back and forth on the question for years
> about whether there was a left-wing conspiracy
> to rig media coverage of political stories

People exhibiting similarly extreme expressions of the weaknesses of human nature (lefties and journalists) will of course find commonality in the folklore they choose to share as they move through the world. To call it "conspiracy" is grandiose: They're just assholes.

completely got paula's sarcasm

showoff