Okay, I give up. When this kind of thing shows up, it means the culture is dead and about to be overthrown. That is the very definition of decadence. It happened to the Romans. Near the end of their run their columns and monuments became nearly indecipherable. Type became ornament. As in all of it became ornament. Same with the Greeks, Asyrians, Egyptians, Mayans, Aztecs, etc. It's a symptom of cultural decay.
So, is Breitbart next up for the "We don't know who you're talking about" (aka Mark Williams) treatment? Probably not. Seriously, you didn't see this happening when you posted the (admittedly) edited video? Sorry, just not buying it, but I guess it's a good story. Much better than Williams response. Well, I guess you could say that when you have the world view Andrew does. "Woe, poor is us because they're all against us and nobody else has to meet these standards, we are put upon," it can make sense. Strange how the world isn't exactly they way he thinks it is. Note to Breitbart, it's called a bubble, and you're living in one.
And given the kerfluffle over the 2007 Onion piece on internment camps, sometimes I don't think live in the same reality as some people.
11 comments:
I feel sorry for Sherrod too. The NAACP had the full video and threw her under the bus. She believed that the White House pressured her into resignation and all without looking at the whole tape.
Who really did the damage here? Wasn't Breitbart. He didn't fire anyone. All he did was show a video that proved that if the NAACP is going to make demands of the Tea Party, it had better clean up itself.
You can say he's the one who threw Sherrod to the wolves - but who were the wolves? Shouldn't they have taken the time to look at the whole story?
Even Glen Beck said that the full video should have been watched before they fired her.
Anonymous Cassie, sick of the whole thing
Cassie, naw, Breitbart knows exactly what he was getting into. He knows exactly what he was doing. And this isn't his first time. You may remember him from the ACORN video (of which, in case you missed it, after much investigation it was found that the tape had been heavily edited, and that no wrong doing had actually happened).
And yes, people should have taken the time to view the whole video. That the president of the NAACP, asked for his opinion before he could see the video gives his opinion that what appears at first blush to be racism shouldn't be tolerated, instead of saying "We need a full investigation" is gotcha reporting. You know, the time to be reasonable as the news organizations, lead by Fox, continued to ring the bell calling for her outster and how this all proves that "their the racists." (which Breitbart started with full knowledge of what he was doing and creating)
It's a more direct call than people talking about "Lone Wolves" in the Pro-Life movement.
This NPR report does a pretty good dissection of it (Hopefully they'll post a transcript soon).
And I almost did link to Beck's saying she was treated unfairly. And then I saw this and thought, "Nah, he still isn't within shouting distance of sane." Well, actually I thought he was just being opportunistic to criticize the administration. Any port in a storm so to speak.
But in the end, hopefully this will show that the administration is not tolerant of racism within it's ranks.
Your sources have failed you, young Jedi. The raw ACORN videos were released and no editing was done. They're posted on the net. I've watched most of them.
I've listened to Mrs. Sherrod's entire speech. I admire her willingness to commit to her home and her realization of the "true battle" isn't race. She's lived a life I can't conceive of and risen because of it, and sees contemporary issues because of the persecution she's survived. I disagree with her politics and I think her public speaking skills need sharpening, but for the most part, her speech was interesting and educational. (I paused the video and actually looked up indentured servitude.)
Butwho fired her?
Breitbart published the edited clip that he was given. As near as I can tell, the story she told was not edited beyond where it was cut off. There's no difference between the audience reactions in one or the other. I think that it was a bad decision to publish it when it was clear that there was more to the speech. But he published it with intent to show that the NAACP audience made approving noises as she was telling her story about being a racist.
Had the NAACP bothered to watch their own videos... had the Obama White House bothered to read what Breitbart wrote about audience, not about Sherrod - had she not been forced out, then you'd have some ground to complain about the egregious sin committed against her. Which was worse?
Your reasoning for not linking the Beck POV on the Sherrod case fails for me: nothing on your link is about this case.
As for the Obama administration being intolerant of racism... If that's the example of how they intend to handle such cases, it's pretty sad that she was fired without due process nor an opportunity to defend herself. That's a good thing? If you think that ACORN was unfairly accused by those two journalists, then what do you think of the legislative response that defunded them? You can't think that this is a good thing either.
So what this actually shows us about the Obama administration is that it over-reacts and doesn't bother to look at the "facts."
Sherrod has said she holds the NAACP responsible for her firing. How sad that an organization that she's supported all her life did this to her. I hope their rescinding of their call for her resignation/firing makes her feel better about the bus tracks on her back. I know I wouldn't.
AC
Your sources have failed you, young Jedi. The raw ACORN videos were released and no editing was done. They're posted on the net. I've watched most of them.
I've listened to Mrs. Sherrod's entire speech. I admire her willingness to commit to her home and her realization of the "true battle" isn't race. She's lived a life I can't conceive of and risen because of it, and sees contemporary issues because of the persecution she's survived. I disagree with her politics and I think her public speaking skills need sharpening, but for the most part, her speech was interesting and educational. (I paused the video and actually looked up indentured servitude.)
Butwho fired her?
Breitbart published the edited clip that he was given. As near as I can tell, the story she told was not edited beyond where it was cut off. There's no difference between the audience reactions in one or the other. I think that it was a bad decision to publish it when it was clear that there was more to the speech. But he published it with intent to show that the NAACP audience made approving noises as she was telling her story about being a racist.
Had the NAACP bothered to watch their own videos... had the Obama White House bothered to read what Breitbart wrote about audience, not about Sherrod - had she not been forced out, then you'd have some ground to complain about the egregious sin committed against her. Which was worse?
Your reasoning for not linking the Beck POV on the Sherrod case fails for me: nothing on your link is about this case.
As for the Obama administration being intolerant of racism... If that's the example of how they intend to handle such cases, it's pretty sad that she was fired without due process nor an opportunity to defend herself. That's a good thing? If you think that ACORN was unfairly accused by those two journalists, then what do you think of the legislative response that defunded them? You can't think that this is a good thing either.
So what this actually shows us about the Obama administration is that it over-reacts and doesn't bother to look at the "facts."
Sherrod has said she holds the NAACP responsible for her firing. How sad that an organization that she's supported all her life did this to her. I hope their rescinding of their call for her resignation/firing makes her feel better about the bus tracks on her back. I know I wouldn't.
AC (who had to split this due to some length error message.)
Sorry, they lied when they said my post was too long. Go ahead and delete the duplicates if you want.
AC
Cassie, the ACORN video was edited for effect. The story surrounding it was fabricated. And yes, the move to defund ACORN was a shame, and shame was being used to force the hand of congress. The legislation also violates the Constitution, for which I'm surprise to not hear that listed among the charges about how the current administration goes against the Constitution. Which, no I'm not really surprised because much of the "I'm for actual Constitutional Government" is the same as "Real Bible Churches", in neither case do they mean what it seems they're advocating and it's just code words to each other.
The positive reaction from the crowd was because they knew it was a redemption story. And yes, Sherrod is a racist. She is, however, a reformed racist. Her story was about getting beyond her racism, and it's a story that echoes loudly for those that fight against racism (because many, many people have been there, see my earlier posts about racism and prejudice). So that appreciative and supportive sounds can be heard from the crowd is understandable.
That Breitbart didn't do the firing is immaterial. He knew exactly what the fall out would be; Sherrod would be fired precipitously, or he could use this to rail against "reverse racism" and show how the Obama Administration and the NAACP tolerates racists (that second half is his avowed purpose, it's what he was overtly trying to do). To say he didn't consider the other effects (including the inevitable backlash against him, which he had prepared his responses) is to call him an idiot, and he isn't one. To say that I can't see that he did all the political calculations is to call me an idiot, and I won't tolerate that (unless your wrapping it around a good enough joke).
The action was created to specifically not give either the NAACP or the Administration time to react. It's the kind of actions Breitbart is known for. He is a political hatchet man. That the NAACP president isn't fully up on all the fine points of every single meeting of the organization in all the different states so that when he is asked within 24 hours to give his impression he gives the impression everybody else had, the one the tape was specifically edited to give, and you think that's a fault. I'm sorry, but the whole paniopticon (and tyrannical leanings of the left) perception you have of leadership has never been true.
Breitbart published it knowing what the results would be, and that he, and the Tea Party by extension, could benefit from them.
Or, Breitbart is an idiot, a fool, and someone easily lead astray and I'm crediting him with way too much intelligence. Not the qualities you really want in the position he holds within the conservative community.
And since it started with his posting the video, a video he knew was edited (and he's been called on those before, and thrown the videographer under the bus before), a video he promoted, then yes, he bears at least some of the responsibility.
My reason for not linking to Beck is the same for not praising a broken watch when it's right. Beck is using this as an opportunity to bash the administration, and not for any other reason. And that he continues in his paranoidal delusions, which are getting back to the point where he was asked to take 2 weeks off of Fox and think about things, I certainly don't want to give him the link love.
And since you've slightly changed you comment structure between the two, unless you want me to delete the second one, I'll leave it there. Just let me know.
That the NAACP president isn't fully up on all the fine points of every single meeting of the organization in all the different states so that when he is asked within 24 hours to give his impression he gives the impression everybody else had, the one the tape was specifically edited to give,
Sorry - HE WAS THERE at this speech. No pass for Jealous.
Have you seen her entire speech?
Combined with the Journolist leaks, this whole summer is one long brouhaha about racism. That can be good. Eric Holder said "Though race related issues continue to occupy a significant portion of our political discussion, and though there remain many unresolved racial issues in this nation, we, average Americans, simply do not talk enough with each other about race.
There was a great paragraph in the Rush Limbaugh bio that I must paraphrase:
Limbaugh's talk about the accusations of his being a racist were answered with a monologue about his family's black housekeeper when he was growing up. It was cringe worthy [sic] to hear him talk about it like that. Americans don't talk like that about race. We use euphemisms and don't talk about it directly.
Maybe that's the issue. We don't talk about it honestly. The only honest thing I've heard about racism (other than Sherrod's speech) in the past five years was Obama's speech about Rev. Wright. Instead of dealing with the issues, we fling around the accusation of racism as a deflector. What has been the undoubtedly worst sin an American can do has now become a political tool.
That's the saddest part of all.
(It's certainly your right in your blog to link/not link Beck. I just didn't understand why you used that link to justify not posting Beck's stand.)
AC
Um, no, he wasn't in attendance. You may want to start to question the validity of your sources.
Sorry for the mistake. It was widely reported that he was the president referred to in the speech, and I didn't research it further.
Post a Comment