The facts are clear in the Shirley Sherrod case. Breitbart receives a edited video of a speech given to the NAACP by the USDA officical. In it she admits to racially discriminating against a white farmer (but blacks can’t be racist remember) and even going so far as to refer the white dude to “one of his own kind.” While she is admitting all this the NAACP crowd is reacting quite approvingly to the racism.
Then the whole supposedly unedited video is released and we see that she did in fact admit to the doing the above racist acts but she has seen the light and now is trying to redeming herself.
Good for her.
But the fact still remains that she was a racist then, she committed a racist act, and the NAACP members loved her for it. Even the President of the NAACP was appalled at the reaction of his members to her racism:
We are appalled by her actions, just as we are with abuses of power against farmers of color and female farmers.
Her actions were shameful. While she went on to explain in the story that she ultimately realized her mistake, as well as the common predicament of working people of all races, she gave no indication she had attempted to right the wrong she had done to this man.
The reaction from many in the audience is disturbing. We will be looking into the behavior of NAACP representatives at this local event and take any appropriate action.
The President, Ben Jealous, leaves out the fact that he was IN the audience that night. So he should look into his own behavior first.
And now there is talk about hiring this lady back, which is ludicrous, but hardly suprising coming from this White House. She admits to abusing her powers against farmers of color. If a Bush official had admitted this what would the outcome of been? Would ANYONE be considering hiring this Bush official back because they had seen the light?
No way, no how.
In both the full video and a 3 minute excerpt I produced, Sherrod labels the entire Republican Party racist, claiming they simply can’t stand to see a black man in the White House. She also characterizes totally legitimate political opposition to ObamaCare from average citizens as mean and ultimately racist in the end. Had some previous Bush appointee called the Democrat Party a bunch of race-baiting hucksters, or poverty pimps – putting black citizens in that camp, too – there is no way said official would be able to keep their position. Yet, that is precisely what Sherrod did, only it was Republicans and her political opponents she so openly smeared.
The standards are ugliness, ignorance and divisiveness. There should be absolutely no doubt that those are the standards to which a Bush appointee would be held. I see no valid reason to not hold Sherrod to the very same standards, as well.
Meanwhile Sherrod goes on CNN and says this is all because the NAACP “got into a fight with the Tea Party.” This conveniently distorts the truth.
The NAACP picked the fight. They chose to label the Tea Party as a bunch of racists to begin with. All Andrew did was point that mirror at them. Here he is this morning debating that lefty wackjob Eric Boehlert of the Soros funded Media Matters about the MSM racist smears against the Tea Party. (h/t Gateway Pundit)
Some in the blogosphere are offering apologies to Sherrod. I think none should be offered. She admitted to the racism. Those are the facts. She smears the Republican party as racists and any opposition to ObamaCare as racist.
The fact is she was a racist that used her power to hurt those of color.
She should stay unemployed.
More here.
See author page
The leftists, and specifically, the NAACP, NBPP, and the WH have been fomenting on racism as the number one reason why people are opposed to the bigger government, statist ideology of Obama and his admin for a long while now. Is racism how they see the world, or is it just a convenient scapegoat to avoid intelligent thought and discussion on the direction of the country?
Recent racism charges by the left have blown away the once imposing threat of the label itself, and is encapsulated in that protester’s sign stating, “It doesn’t matter what the sign says, you’ll call it racism anyway”. True racism, meanwhile, gets a figurative pass by the MSM in the actions and words(or more perfectly, the complete lack of them) about the DOJ dismissing voter intimidation charges against the NBPP and the actions of the NAACP at their annual meeting.
Any thinking person who steps away from the fray and contemplates honestly on the video(s), can see clearly that Ms. Sherrod did in fact practice discrimination based on race while in the process of her official duties. That Ms. Sherrod later in her speech claims an enlightenment and claims to have reformed, her words later of the racism in the GOP and TEA Party contradict her own implied state of fairness in the realm of race. She is, nothing more, nothing less, than a part of the massive machine that continues to pit race against race in the quest for power over all.
As for blaming FOX or Mr. Breitbart for the firing, that is insanely hilarious considering the knee-jerk reactions to the initial video posting by the NAACP and the WH. Once again the leftists introduce a ‘victim’ of racial politics, all the while whitewashing the fact that they, themselves, are the accountable party in the race-driven events of the past couple of days.
She is a bigot and has no business dealing with public money. She should lose her job, she shouldn’t be offered it back and should not get ANYWHERE with any lawsuit for wrongful termination that she will no doubt file. Actions have consequences. She acted like a bigot 24 years ago, and tends to act like one now. The TEA Party has NOTHING to do with this case, and the NAACP just acted and Obama acted because they got CAUGHT airing their true feelings.
What’s good for the right is good for the left, and it’s about time they actually had to feel what it’s like to be our side for a little bit.
🙄
I worked for a major technology company for 32+ years prior to my retirement. Let us say that just before my retirement I spoke at a company sponsored event. My talk was relating to my long service and experiences. During the talk I recalled when I first started with the company. I had the choice of hiring one of two people. The one I choose was just like me. I sent the other one to be interviewed by one of his own kind. How many milliseconds would lapse before I was out the door without my retirement?
Is it odd or a coincidence that this story is bigger than the Daily Caller story?????
I have been a bit *taken aback* by the so-called Conservative blogs that are apologizing to Sherrod… I suppose they don’t want to be seen as politically incorrect racists…
Call it like it is, Sherrod IS a racist, that was plain…
Conservative blogs telling the HARD truth are the last best hope this nation has… Dear God, don’t let the Conservatives go all PC and wussie, having a GOP that’s already nothing more than Dem Lite is too much to tolerate!
@TexasFred
I am with you in that I do not want to see the true conservative blogs go soft on this or any other scandal involving the hypocrisy and dishonesty of the left. In reality, one has to wonder just what they are apologizing for anyway. For Ms. Sherrod being a one-time racist who repented only to move onto class-warfare as her guiding light? For allowing Ms. Sherrod to become sacrificial in the larger case of the racism war between the dishonest NAACP and their docile cattle and the wrongly maligned TEA Party members? Maybe it’s for the soon to be brought to light case of Ms. Sherrod’s own employment within the USDA preceding her ‘not-for-profit’s’ litigation against said USDA? Is it for the underlying tone of preaching to the NAACP in GA to “come get some” government money, courtesy of the USDA, federal government, and taxpayers everywhere?
The woman is hardly an innocent bystander in all this.
I feel like Flopping-aces would be better named Ignoram-aces right now. Are you all really so shallow that you think it is reasonable to fire someone from their CURRENT JOB for speaking about a learning process they went through to grow personally AT AN EARLIER AND COMPLETELY DIFFERENT JOB OVER 20 YEARS AGO? The NAACP apologized for jumping to conclusions here. The Administration apologized for jumping to conclusions here. Even some conservatives like myself feel that she deserves an apology. It is at best disingenuus and at worst libelous/slanderous to misrepresent someone as badly as this video edit initially did.
The only folks who haven’t apologized are the ones who initiated the attack.
Get a grip folks. The woman’s father was killed by a white man so she started life with some racist tendencies. She then spent a lifetime helping folks keep or save their farms. White and Black alike. She should be held up as the gold standard for changing ones attitudes not attacked for her upbringing.
All quiet on the Leftist front….
Wonder why?
The issue is the laughter by the members of the NAACP as the story unfolded… when she was describing her bigotry… before the revelation that she no longer sees it as a black vs white issue.
@Mr. Bly
But she does see it as a black and white issue. She started down the path of relating to it not, but then backtracked and stated that it was ‘not only’ about black and white, but one of class as well.
You are right though. The laughter, applause and outright approval of her racism towards the white farmer, heard clearly on the video by the members of the NAACP there, including their national president Jealous, is the bigger issue. And coming on the heels of the NAACP themselves denouncing wrongly the TEA Party as being racist shows the hypocrisy as well as the MSM’s silence on the truth about racial relations in the country.
@A Reasonable Person:
Well, that would be a question for the White House and Sec’y Vilsac. Give them a call and see what they have to say since they’re the ones who requested her resignation.
Of course the NAACP has never once, not ever been involved in jumping to conclusions or making false accusations based on partial information before, eh?
Would you say that the Administration acted stupidly?
The “attack” as you term it was not aimed at Sherrod rather, the tape clearly demonstrates the blatant racism of the NAACP and the people who sat in that room in 2010 approving of, and even applauding, Sherrods’ racist tale certainly don’t deserve an apology.
Those people deserve nothing but disdain.
@A Reasonable Person
Number one, no one here ever called for her firing prior to it happening. While she is, in a sense, an unfortunate victim of the reactionary leadership of the Obama WH and the NAACP, she is not innocent either. Her later comments in her speech against the GOP and TEA Party and her belief of racism present in both is incriminating in the sense that she sees racism as the NAACP does, and that is inherently inequitable for society. How can one reasonably expect there to be true fairness of disposition of duties in regard to Ms. Sherrod when she wrongly believes that the TEA Party is a racist organization?
The bigger picture, as advocated by Mr. Breitbart himself(the one you want to really apologize), is the blatant racism within the NAACP, an organization founded by a white man, whose original mission was to promote racial fairness and equity for all races under the auspices of goodwill. The proof is self-evident that a group who espouses racial equality cheers on racial injustice when a white farmer is discriminated against. Timelines, Mr. ARP make it obvious to all but the blind that the group gathered before Ms. Sherrod, including Mr. Jealous himself, collectively approved the discrimination PRIOR to her admission of reformation.
The short piece of video released by Breitbart has shown quite conclusively that both the NAACP and the Hussein regime are racist organizations. And Sherrod wants to be celebrated because she graciously decided to “allow” an evil whitey to keep his property.
Note: In 1986 Sherrod was working for an organization that was dispensing Federal funds.
Breitbart had this video back in April and only released it after the NAACP made a false charge of racism. The real story is the reaction of the audience as she tells her tale of racially discriminating: they thought it was great stuff and at that point she most certainly not gone on to the insincere boilerplate about having (sort of) moved beyond such things.
She spoke up today to remove any doubt about whether she’s moved beyond black and white:
I wonder what Mr. Lloyd Marcus thinks of Ms. Sherrod’s assertion that they(not really sure who she means exactly) intend to “take us back to where we were many years ago”.
Who is Lloyd Marcus you ask? Example:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/07/race_roils_tea_party_movement.html
His takes on race relations are interesting and informative, particularly being that he is a black man himself and eschews the established racial equality groups like the NAACP and Rainbow/Push.
I watched the entire clip and never saw her as racist, however, the comments from the audience were racist.
I see her as a pretty smart, astute, sensitive, and wise lady.
Just another person smushed by the Obama White House.
My guess is that the Obama underlings thought it was acceptable to fire her, so the underlings did.
It’s amazing how teflon this president is. Everything just bounces off of him.
What a lot of people miss, is that as president and leader, he could put a stop to a lot of bad behavior (foul language from Biden, Emmanuel, Bush bashing, etc.) by telling his top staff that he finds this unacceptable and wants it stopped. Hey, he’s in charge, and we can only hope that he will tell his supporters to change.
Even a Teflon finish wears out eventually. The scrambled eggs aren’t coming off the pan as easily as they used to.
One-term president.
I await his inevitable public melt-down — the tantrum of the thwarted narcissist.
After he’s out, he’ll be the worst ex-President ever. I hope he hangs around a long time, as a warning to future generations. A young, strong, and loud failed ex-president.
Before you decide that she should have her USDA job back, read this:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/07/forty_acres_a_mule_sherrod_sty.html
By the way, this (below) quote says to me that she isn’t quite over the racism yet. What’s more…according to Fox, they didn’t air any reports about the video until after she was fired. According to Breitbart, his airing the video wasn’t about Sherrod, it was about the NAACP – all those people agreeing with her while she was describing her racist attitudes _before_ she had her “conversion” to understanding that it wasn’t about skin color. _They_ didn’t know how the story was going to turn out…
>>”They are after a bigger thing, they would love to take us back to where we were many years ago. Back to where black people were looking down, not looking white folks in the face, not being able to compete for a job out there and not be a whole person.”>>
@OLDPUPPYMAX: I think you should wake up to reality! You’ve been CON’d by right wing nut jobs again. The video you saw was edited so you only saw certain parts of it. It was edited to show something totally different than what she was saying in the first place! It’s called TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT! WAKE UP! You’ve been had by your own kind… again
Helene: “I watched the entire clip and never saw her as racist, however, the comments from the audience were racist.
I see her as a pretty smart, astute, sensitive, and wise lady.”
Thank you for actually seeing reality.
A Reasonable Person: thank you too.. you are spot on
If she was innocent, she would not have resigned. She would not have accepted a resignation.
But let’s talk about the $13 million she pulled down from suing the government.
“But let’s talk about the $13 million she pulled down from suing the government.”
We might start with the fact that it wasn’t a personal settlement:
http://www.ruraldevelopment.org/shirleydirector.html
@DrJohn #20: Since her lawsuit against the government proved to be so successful, I rather think we’ll be seeing her file more of them — against Vilsack, the NAACP, the WH, Breitbart, etc.
>>We might start with the fact that it wasn’t a personal settlement: >>
Perhaps not…but it looks like she raked a bit off the top. Both she and her husband…
@Greg: She and her husband received $150k each…for what I don’t know…maybe they were farmers who were discriminated against…??
She had an opportunity to correct the message from the first phone call. She knew the tape they referenced had only part of her talk. She might have set them straight and not let it go viral. However, she knew before anyone else that she’d have an unlawful firing case if she followed the direction it was going. So she resigned and now she’s in the catbird seat. She has a promotion if she wants it; a lawsuit (she’s shown to be adept in this in the past); and no matter which choice, she owns Vilsack. I’m going to be surprised if she actually did “graciously” accept Vilsack’s apology.
No matter what, she does have a black/white mentality along with a have and have-not view.
@Toothfairy: I believe you are right. I will be the most surprised person in this world if she does not.
“She and her husband received $150k each…for what I don’t know…maybe they were farmers who were discriminated against…??”
Apparently they were part of the group who’d been discriminated against. They lost their personal family farm, which a number of other black families worked with them collectively.
There’s some interesting personal history about the woman, if anyone is curious. Her father shot and killed, a cross-burning on her yard, etc. Difficult times, back in the days when there was little debate about the existence of institutionalized racism:
http://www.ajc.com/news/getting-to-shirley-sherrods-575702.html
I guess we’re all the products of our personal histories.
@CRAP
Talk about taking things out of context. Let’s talk about the entire speech, as can be seen at several sites.
Regardless of her story and self-described change in view, her comments towards the GOP and TEA Party contradict her previous assertion. If she believes the Republicans and TEA Party are racist in general, then she hasn’t moved past the issue and it still lingers. The bigger issue, as was originally intended to be focused on, is the blatant racist tendencies of a group supposedly all about fairness and equity.
It’s not about being ‘had’ by anyone. The media, NAACP, and WH itself are the ones focused on Ms. Sherrod. Mr. Breitbart was focused on the obvious racism by the NAACP and has maintained being agnostic towards Ms. Sherrod’s speech itself and her subsequent firing.
Nice try to maintain the focus on the one issue the man who released the video never intended. Do you even try to look objectively at things, or is it so ingrained in your head that you immediately look for the ‘evil’ deeds of the opposition?
@Greg
Is it ok to ask the question of why and how she received her job with the USDA immediately prior to the settlement of her group with that same USDA?
“Is it ok to ask the question of why and how she received her job with the USDA immediately prior to the settlement of her group with that same USDA?”
There’s no reason why it shouldn’t be asked, though I don’t know the answer. I could speculate.
I suppose someone might have considered her especially qualified owing to her education, history of civil rights advocacy, and her personal experiences. The USDA was likely trying to respond to some of it’s own institutional issues revolving around discrimination at the time.
@Greg
You could be right but it could also be more nefarious as well. She is owed the benefit of the doubt on it, but the public is also owed the truth based on it being a government position. I will be interested to find out the truth on the matter.
Shall we invoke the teaching moment here? I would have said much in allign with others opinion but, I feel it necessary to proclaim, those without SIN, go for it, tell it like it is. Shall we? Un fricken believable. I noticed after all the whoop-tee-do was formented by the usual suspects, We the Conservative movement, and like wise individuals, are left once again to pick up all the broken pieces of this sherade and point the finger in the correct direction. Everyone of us has made mistakes in our lives, but this is unimportent in the grand scheme. The question is and was, what do we do to make right our wrongs? Apologize, amend our ways or stick to our story and just kill the messenger. Come on people. Tell me please all of you who have never made a mistake in your entire adult life and had not the conclussion to mend it right then and there.
I say she did the correct thing in coming out with her sins and even tried to set the example in front of a lot of persons of a certain victim class of people, the folks of the negro , ooh, there’s that racist word again, african American’s decent. But to no suprise to anyone with a conscience this totally went past their victim mentality, and in fact, no one who witnessed this teaching moment in person raised any objection as to the entire story. Witness once again the proclaimation of negro’s who are without sin, typical racist, victim class chicken-little shits with a grudge with whitey for having the nerve to understand their plantation mentality. It is not enough that no-one, absolutely no one in these modern times has ever owned a person of color as a slave in bondage to their every whim, let alone any person in the slave movement, no that rehelm belongs to the other victim class of the muslim decent. But, hey why let a victim class of asses go unnoticed for the precieved notion that it is only whitey who, well aling with those of us who object to the direction or policies of a half black and half whitey usurper-n-theif, oblablabla, are the total reason for hte racism in this Country. Yeah right, that one will do just as any other excuss for the shift from freedom to enslavement. I am begining to believe the african American’s are just a bit jealous because once We the People have been rendeered to the slavemasters of the elite class, there will be too much compition for their once highly paid grievence industry. Man I am sick of this shit and those of you who prefere to stcik you heads up your backsides and paint me with the other broad bruch. Piss-off. You are unworthy of calling yourself an American of any hypenated decent.
Like I said in the other post, she proves herself to still be a racist who has learned NOTHING.
The left has huddled together to decide how to respond and as CRAP and an UNreasonable “person” march in lockstep, it goes to show the left doesn’t think so much as do what they are told.
No apology or defense of her was needed. This is a case of Conservatives backing down for fear as being seen as mean.
I’ve listened to the whole tape and I’ve concluded that she should be fired again and again. Bigtime racist, bigot, and baiter. Breitbart posted what he had and now the whole poisoned speech is out there. The context is there and Ms. Brown destroyed herself. You should listen to Julien Bond of the NAACP, who has race baited for years. All Repubs and Conservatives are locusts and racist. These crap spewers, including Louis Ferrakhan, have looked into the mirror and have seen themselves. The Tea Partiers have also been baited by Think Progress, a Podesta non profit foundation(lol), which leads to the White House. The Precedent gets whatever he wants.
It is likely that she will be reinstated. I know it all happened 24 years ago, but I can’t help wondering if she still has those amazing Jedi like mind powers that revealed the farmer’s belief in his own superiority.
It is interesting to note that Breitbert said he didn’t edit the tape. He had recieved the edited tape from an insider at the local NAACP. So the question is who edited the tape, leaked it to Breitbert and why? Did the NAACP do it to bait and trap the opposition to create a furor? Or was it a personal attack against Ms. Sherrod? Maybe someone within who didn’t like her? Or maybe both?
I would recommend that if they do decide to hire her back that the administration completely vet her. If they don’t, then anything that she has said or did in the past will come back and bite them. If I were her, I would not want to come back. I would just stay at home because from here on out, she will have bullets gunning for her. Someone was gunning for her to leak the edited tape in the first place. She has a bulleyes on her forehead.
She will become someone’s albatross. Not pretty.
And you’ve never done anything about which your not proud, or maybe even illegal, I supposed.
The party line follows Breitbart of this story. Breitbart claims that the purpose of his display of the Sherrod video was to show that a group like the NAACP, who claimed the Tea Party had racist elements, was themselves racist. He claims that the Sherrod video acts as evidence of this fact, due to their applause and laughter (or at least a lack of “boos and hisses”) during her discription of ‘discrimination against the farmer’. I suggest it serves as no such evidence because Breitbart makes certain assumptions about what they’re laughing at, and it certainly does not exhibit pandemonium. I could just as easily say they were actually laughing at themselves because they could relate her story to their own thoughts at the time–and that could be just as correct an interpretation, probably more so, as Breitbart’s.
I think that most of you probably have never experience a profound change of attitude on anything, that’s why you cannot accept the dignity of her story.
@tadcf:
So, basically, you’re saying that the NAACP audience was laughing, applauding, and approving of Sherrod’s story because…well, because they could “relate” to her racist story and the racist attitudes she displayed toward the white farmer.
Thank you for agreeing with Mr. Breitbart.
I’m sure he would appreciate your concurrence with his conclusion.
Exit question: Dayum Dood! Did you even realize that you were arguing Mr. Breitbart’s position or are you a dullard?
In fact, she said some pretty bad stuff in the full tape.
By the way, several people have pointed out that the “full tape” released by the NAACP has a break around 21:20. It has been edited. Why?
@tadcf
Figures. That is exactly what the NAACP is saying today. The problem is, there is a timeline of events that makes that very hard to believe. Remember how the NAACP berated Ms. Sherrod on monday, a few hours after the video was released? Remember how the president of the national NAACP, Mr. Jealous, was present at that meeting during Ms. Sherrod’s speech?
Now why would the NAACP publicly denounce Ms. Sherrod’s speech, knowing the full story, if they were really innocently approving of her ‘change’ in attitude on race? Face it, tadcf. The facts do not fit your perception, and in my opinion, you just read that statement on one of your liberal rag sites and decided to take it as your own.
@tadcf: Are you not making the same assumptions about our motives as we are making about their motives? We are looking at the evidence of the tape at head. I would like your perspective as to who the insider was at the NAACP who leaked the edited tape of Ms. Sherrod in the first place. Maybe they didn’t like her message and conversion. Just a thought. I think that is more of the story as to why they would edit and leak a story to the opposition.
I notice the lefties aren’t mentioning the OTHER racist comments she made on the tape and the ones since.
She has proven one of the elements of the story–she is a racist.
It is amusing to watch you try to spin the obvious racism on the part of the NAACP and Sherrod.
The more people tune in to see the whole video the better and your attempts to attack FOX and BB with this only helps our side. Thank you so very much.
@tadcf:
What in the world are you trying to say?
“He claims”….he doesn’t have to claim, it’s evident in the video that members of Sherrod’s audience, NAACP members, were quite pleased with her racist attitude toward the “white farmer” before she even got to admitting that she treated the “poor” white farmer in a rather shabby, racist fashion before her ‘ahem’ epiphany…..”applause and laughter” was evident.
“lack of boos and hisses”….good grief, where did this come from?
He, we, anyone possessing one brain cell does not have to assume, the video clearly shows laughter and applause as she spoke about sticking it to the “white” farmer. Perhaps they had cue cards that night that said…laugh….applaud. Yeah, let’s just go with that. 🙄
BTW, why would you expect that Shirley Sherrod’s speech would generate pandemonium at a NAACP event? It obviously did not.
Gateway Pundit has more interesting information on Sherrod in a July 22 post titled “Rep. King [Iowa]: ‘Shirley Sherrod’s Initial Hiring Should Be Investigated.'” According to King “more than 20,000 [reparations] claims were paid out [to black farmers in the Pickford Farms case] when even the President [sic] of the black farmers [sic] association admitted there were only 18,000 black farmers in America. One of the recipients of the largest payout in the Pickford case was none other than Shirley Sherrod.” People involved in the case estimate that 75-99% of the payouts were fraudulent. Sherrod’s commune, which never turned a profit, received $13 million. Sherrod and her husband received $150,000 each plus another “undisclosed amount.”
The post includes a video of an interview of King on Ben Shapiro’s radio show.
@Missy
tadcf seems to be nothing more than a parrot of the left-wing net rags that propound to their readers a sense of superiority to all things conservative. One gets the sense that the mental midgets running those garbage bins are more concerned with imposing a faulty feeling of intelligence in their readers for taking the time to read their garbage than actually learn anything worthy of being considered factual.
Simply put, he repeats what he reads over at the Daily Kos and HuffPo. Unfortunately for Mr. tadcf, we here at FA are clearly better informed and better prepared when discussing current events.
The Youtube link to the Rep. King interview on Ben Shapiro’s radio show does not work. That’s why I did not include it in my previous post. But you can still access the video clip by typing in “Rep. Steve King on Ben Shapiro Show” in the Youtube search box.
The judge included in the class all black farmers who had filed discrimination complaints against the USDA for the period from 1983 to 1997. The total of black farmers remaining by 1997 was was not the relevant number, as Rep. King should have known. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume this didn’t occur to him. As of 1982, there were 33,250 black American farmers; by 1997 that number had dropped to 18,451.
14,799 black farmers lost their livelihoods during the period from 1982 to 1997. The percentage of the drop was far greater for black farmers than for for white farmers. Apparently the judge was convinced that the difference could be attributed to discriminatory practices on the part of the USDA. Many of the remaining 18,451 who managed to keep their farms were economically damaged by the same practices during the same period.
22,505 members of the class were awarded standard $50,000 settlements. 200 more declined the standard settlment, which meant they were required to submit evidence establishing that their actual economic damages had been greater than that amount.
You can find the numbers of American farmers each year in the Appendix of this document, in Table 3: http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/pub/rr194.pdf
http://www.therightscoop.com/red-meat-from-macho-sauce-productions-on-shirley-charade-sherrod
First of all, I think you’re being way too hard on her. You can’t say that a prejudice against someone (whether for race, gender, social status, etc.) hasn’t at some point influenced your actions, made you do something a little differently, have you? She didn’t completely refuse to help him or leave him for ruin. Just let a prejudice influence her level of motivation to go out of her way for someone. If he was being rude to her like she said he was, isn’t that a good enough reason? I definitely would do less for that person than someone else who was humble and polite.
Secondly, I’d like to correct a minor grammar mistake in your sentence: “If a Bush official had admitted this what would the outcome of been?” This sentence should end like this: “what would the outcome HAVE been?” I really don’t want to sound like a jerk, but I just want to make sure you know how important careful proofreading is. I can tell you right now that it’s very hard for me to take anyone seriously when there’s a pretty glaring mistake in grammar like that. Especially when you’re discussing political topics, you need to keep as much legitimacy as possible.
@Madalaine:
Madalaine: “What would the outcome have been,” hopefully, this is some sort of joke; unfortunately, those who try to impress others with superior airs, often appear to be nothing more than a fool. Please analyze your correction once again, this is an absurdity that approaches the sublime. You have offered it as a critical and aesthetic phrase of correction; yet, you expect us to apply the rhetoricians’ concepts of grammar styles: of high grammar, middle grammar, and low grammar. Originally, this was published in Greek as Peri Hypsos, or On The Sublime, and attributed to Longinus, it was a treatise that explains the concept of hypos ‘height’ or ‘elevation’ of language. You assume to teach us the correct forms of low English. A crafty trick if you can get away with it; although, there are those who will challenge you on your lack of class and erudition.
If you want to pretend to be an English professor, I presume you are ready to be skewered and crucified; otherwise, forget the pretensions and state your case. We tolerate grammatical errors from everyone, except those who attempt to baffle us with bull shit.
From my favorite author, The Bard, Sir William
What’s in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet.
Romeo and Juliette II:2
The passage is a pun on the bordello that was located behind the Globe Theater, (no pun intended), it was called, The Rose. The actors and patrons often met there after performances for even more earthy performances and pleasures, at least one actor’s wife was gainfully employed at the Rose. Your performance has been entertaining, but you really don’t measure up to the available talent. Oh! now for the double entante, in early 17th century England, Rose was also a metaphor for the most intimate anatomical feature of a woman. Thus a ribald double pun was presented and caused great laughter among the lusty audience, in a similar manner to the laughter your feeble efforts have produced. The intellect of Shakespeare’s audience is generally underestimated, because people fail to understand the complexity of the wit and humor of the 17th Century, just as you have underestimated this audience.
Come back again after you have flushed your superior attitude away and we will meet in the arena of wit and ideas: there are many here who appreciate a formidable opponent; unfortunately, you don’t seem to offer much of a challenge. There is always hope, in your case it is probably a forlorn hope, but I will watch for you, you and your superior intellect.
@Madalaine: I hope you realize pompous how this is sounds.