Comments on: Entertainers Who Spread Racism Rewarded By NAACP

By: EdSki

EdSki — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 13:51:28 +0000

Watch the video again. Pay attention to the audience. She talks about distaste of having to deal with a white farmer. The audience nods, agrees, some applaud.

This is the same group that blatantly offered a declaration that every single person involved in tea parties are racists. Later amended to say there were some racist elements.

The purpose of the video was to show these same people are more than willing to agree with racism.

Hence they are hypocrites, which is exactly why the MSM is avoiding talking about that aspect. Show me one member of the MSM who is talking about that, just one. I've been listening to the story on the radio during work for days now. They are falling all over themselves to keep the NAACP out of the discussion.

That's the MSM's goal in this mess, to protect the NAACP.

By: EdSki

EdSki — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 13:42:54 +0000

Breitbart is not a journalist, he's a political activist. And by your definition, I find it difficult to identify any so called reputable "journalist."

Is Dan Rather a journalist? How about all those talking heads happily repeating lies about Rush Limbaugh when he was trying to by a share of the Rams? Where they journalists? How about the ones using illegally obtained tax data on Joe the Plumber, where they journalists?

You are viewing this story the exact way the MSM is spinning it, to avoid the real story. The real story is not what Sherrod said, but the reaction of the NAACP audience, applauding, agreeing, clapping when she talks about discriminating against white people.

And that's exactly why the MSM is focusing on Sherrod, so they can avoid that. That is the story.

By: AKGuest

AKGuest — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 07:41:20 +0000

Excellent research–really sheds light on the NAACP. Well done. Wish your information would get more attention than it probably will.

By: Jake_Was_Here

Jake_Was_Here — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 06:45:19 +0000

You can always edit your post to include a /sarc tag.

Not once somebody replies to it. That's the problem — once someone sticks a reply on, your comment is set in stone, or might as well be. I imagine it's Intense Debate's preferred method for preventing people from falsely claiming they were misquoted.

By: ezradulis

ezradulis — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 04:23:00 +0000

That settles it. April 26th, 2015. I'll PM you my address and reimburse you for the postage via PayPal.

By: wwjdwsyd

wwjdwsyd — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 02:51:03 +0000

I'm sorry that my ability to express myself is inadequate to get my central point across. I'm not a bounty hunter of racist people or actions, nor do I collect racist code words to ferret out people's intentions. I'm much more interested in acts that heal divisions rather than inflame them. Ms. Sherrod demonstrates a sensibility of moving beyond racial boundaries, with an intent to move her audience to do the same. That's a person and an action acting to overcome racism and racial divisions.
What of someone who willfully misrepresented her, portraying her as the opposite of what she stood for, presenting her as a characature to millions of people, with no regard or feeling of responsibility for the personal repercussions to her. Commendation and respect? Not so much.

By: wwjdwsyd

wwjdwsyd — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 02:41:22 +0000

If you watched the entire tape, and still think that she's a racist, then we must have different definitions of racism. Meriem Webster says: Racism is the belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race. Ms. Sherrod grew up in a racist culture by that standard – one that constantly and sometimes brutally enforced the idea that she was an inferior person and had fewer righs because of her race. She spent her young adulthood in reaction to that environment, seeking to help black people living in that discriminatory culture prosper and reach a position of equality. This speech tells of her awakening to a calling beyond racial boundaries, that of helping people of any race who needed the assistance of her office to avoid being trodden under by more powerful people and institutions. Did she discriminate against a person of another race? Every instinct of her childhood and young adulthood tempted her to do just that – but she found that she couldn't follow through, that her compassion for people overcame her understandable proclivity to devote herself just to helping her own race. She deserves commendation and respect for that act.

By: wwjdwsyd

wwjdwsyd — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 02:13:52 +0000

Taviteh, your second two paragraphs show that you are a person who IS interested in moving past racism, recognizing that it's a human problem – we're all susceptible to pre-judgements and acting out of fear. And the key to moveing past it is indeed forgiveness – on a person to person basis – whites forgiving blacks and blacks forgiving whites and blacks forgiving blacks and whites forgiving whites. There's a very inspiring movie recently, Invictus', that shows a Nelson Mandella in South Africa, leading his black followers away from a path of revenge and retribution towards whites, and toward a path of reconciliation and forgiveness. That attitude moved South Africa from an international pariah to the host of the soccer World Cup this year.
You are clearly not a person who seeks, invents, or celebrates evidence of grievances against another race. People who do that may have complex motivations, but one of them is not overcoming racism.

By: Beth

Beth — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 01:50:52 +0000

Morrisminor,

Whatever Breitbart's intentions were (i disagree with your assumptions)…..one thing became clear in all of this:

obama, his administration and the naacp are in derision (they bring it upon themselves).

By: palmtree1echo

palmtree1echo — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 01:09:39 +0000

This reminds me of the old joke about "who are you going to believe , me or your lying eyes" . As I said above , it's a video of her. There is no way that the story will not be about her. What is the next step for any news person when they see the tape? Interview Shirley Sherrod. Why? She is at the heart of the story. The ones shifting are you and breitbart because it turns out she was not such a good target.