You are correct ... in the story she told she described her racist behavior and then described realizing that it was a "poor" thing not a black or white thing ... the second half was left off and should have been shown ...

she should be reinstated ...

I am perfectly fine with administration officials calling the GOP and Tea Partiers racists as she did later in the same video ...

I did see a Breitbart response in which it appeared that he said that as far as he knew this was the complete tape and he asked the NAACP for the complete tape so that he can see it and correct any errors that he made. It is interesting that the NAACP who had the complete tape fired her without bothering to look at it.

Breibart does not get off that easy, Sabba. He chose to post the video, and that takes on responsibility for it. He might have been misled, but Breitbart has the responsibility to check out his source and decide if he's willing to put his name on the story. His site, his cred, his responsibility.

DJ, it would be appropriate for you to acknowledge what Breitbart has stated concerning the video: That he was interested in showing the reaction of the NAACP members in attendance to the clear statement of racist behavior towards a white person by Ms Sherrod.

Further, it would also be appropriate to point out what Breitbart has pointed out: that when Ms Sherrod described her inappropriate actions regarding the white farmer, the NAACP crowd, who DID NOT YET KNOW that a "road to Damascus" moment was coming from Ms Sherrod, did in fact express quite clear approval.

Thus, the intent of Breitbart, assuming you take him at his word, to illustrate the racism present in NAACP members was appropriate.

If you then want to say that what he (Breitbart) showed via video should have been provided more context so as not to unfairly caricature Ms Sherrod, that would make some sense.

By not including, in your comment, Breitbarts intention with the showing of the video, you are guilty of what you assert against Breitbart: that insufficient context was provided for a complete picture.

Of course, I offer this rejoinder to you with affection.

jeff - "I am perfectly fine with administration officials calling the GOP and Tea Partiers racists as she did later in the same video ..."

And your proof of that assertion is what?

Lemme guess you're taking your cue from the NAACP CEO who said in a speech "10's of thousands" in the Tea Party are racists.

Isn't it "interesting" that at the very same time Gibbs (Minister of Information) was saying the admin had been trying to reach Sherrod by phone all day she was at that very instant on CNN holding her phone saying she hadn't gotten any calls.

Breibart should apologize for not waiting until he had the complete tape before deciding to publish and explaining if he would still have published the story in another form given what the complete tape shows.
He can try and apologize for lighting the fuze that led to her firing but I'm not sure he can apologize for the admin and the NAACP ...

Drago, the issue is not Mr. Breibart's intent, it is the effect. Andrew Breibart is an acknowledged media expert, and as such he had a number of ways to go after the NAACP. The method he chose, in this case, had the unfortunate and sadly predictable effect of dumping a lot of undeserved scorn and malice on Ms. Sherrod. I did not mention his intent because Mr. Breitbart is not the victim, nor the focus.

Marc ...

from the same video that "clears" her by showing the correct context of her story, she later went on to accuse the GOP and Tea Partiers of racism ...

is the NAACP CEO an admin official ?

Agreed Jeff, Ms. Sherrod does not seem to be an unbiased individual. The question for us, however, is not what we want someone else to say or do, but the standards to which we ourselves commit.

Whether speaking tactically or morally, it would be both right and smart for Mr. Breitbart to apologize to Ms. Sherrod. Especially since I really do not expect anyone on the Left to have the guts to admit they were wrong or judgmental.

I'll support an apology to her......when the left decides to stop the Ackerman Method "just pick someone and call them a racist to shut them down"

Until then....consider it a teachable moment.

DJ, it is not Breitbarts responsibility that the USDA and Obama admin acted so precipitiously

The tape clearly displays the racist behavior of the NAACP, with it's members nodding and laughing approvingly at Sherrod's racist statements. But MOST revealing was the speed with which the NAACP and the Agriculture Dept--at the DEMANDS OF THE WHITE HOUSE--threw Sherrod under the bus. WHY? Why did the NAACP and the White House not want to investigate the story, not want to question Sherrod, not want the media to look into it? Because the NAACP, Obama AND the MSM viewed Sherrod as a typical, leftist, black racist. What she said reflected the beliefs and views of the majority of the members of each group, so they figured she was simply "one of their own" who opened her mouth once too often and got caught. Were this NOT the case, their first reaction to the tape would have been...gee, there MUST be more to the story!! Let's get her side of things! Instead, knowing how THEY feel as leftists, Sherrod became little more than their own reflection in a mirror. And having been FOUND OUT, she had to be destroyed in order to preserve their own credibility.

Never said it was, Drago. Mr. B needs to apologize for his actions. If he does not, it's his image that suffers while if he does, it's his image that heals.

By the way, I see that Press Sec Gibbs has apologized to Ms. Sherrod on CNN. That's a 'Twilight Zone' moment - Gibbs never mentioned President Obama and insists the White House was not involved in her dismissal, so who exactly is he apologizing for?

Heh.

President Zero can't even manage a mea culpa properly, not that he's ever tried that before.

Well I apologize here for assuming she was more racist than she is.

After listening to the "entire" tape that ends before she does, and acknowledging her message was "we have to help poor people, not black people" there is still an undertone of racism in her speech, repeated references to white or black (even references to a few good "white" lawyers) in a manner that still bespeaks a prejudice that she does not acknowledge in the speech.

I also agree the audience did not react negatively to her story at the parts where she was describing the white man trying "to act superior" to her and her internal dialogue at that time. I didn't hear any loud AMENS to her half-heartedly helping the white farmer, either. Again, if you just switch the colors around, this condescending attitude would not wash with the NAACP if it were a white person telling the story to other whites about a black man, even considering the end of the story. But its no New Black Panther rally either.

This subtler racism is still evil, and it can not be tolerated.

I still don't quite understand how she got hired. She certainly was fired inappropriately, but she isn't the first nor the last to be inappropriately fired from a government job due to negligent and career-wary management. Its one of the hazards of "doing government" employment which she surprisingly and so ironically was promoting in her speech.

Karma is a bitch, isn't it?

Dj ...

agreed, Breibart needs to apologize, and not the usual "I'm sorry if some folks misunderstood the video" nonsense ...

the complete video would still have damned the NAACP audience and he could have completely left Sherrod out of the story ... and thus most likely have kept her from this nightmare ...

'Gee, we apologize for thinking you're a racist when really you just used to be a racist...well, more racist than you are now, anyway and we should have been more clear that you just used to be really racist until you learned to hide it better.'

Something along those lines?

Drago is right. Sherrod is a bystander who got hit by the NAACP and obama admin trying to duck and cover.

The point of the video was not to trash some unknown Ag official. It was to demonstrate the racism inherent in the NAACP by showing them approving of racist sentiments. It did exactly that. It was the NAACP and obama admin that tried to shift the blame to her and make it look as though she were the sole racist person in this story. They are the ones who have really hurt her.

What this whole episode makes clear is that the NAACP and obama admin are not interested in the truth. They are interested in their own power and they will lay the blame anywhere they find convenient no matter who gets hurt or how bad. They want to be able to use the charge of racism as a weapon against their enemies and throwing her under the bus was an attempt to preserve that ability.

It is unfortunate that she has been injured by this. He owes her an apology but not nearly as much as the NAACP and obama admin for their attempts to make her the scapegoat for their own mistakes.

Brietbart sad many times the day of the release of the tape that he wanted to show how the NAACP audience approved and cheered the racist action of Sherrod. He could have cared less about Sherrod but wanted to challenge the NAACP on their hypocrisy of racism. He did just that. The NAACP did overreact as did the Obama team. Now the NAACP is criticizing the audiences reaction. Who is to blame for this first and foremost? The NAACP. They called us out and Breitbart showed how racist their audience is. I do not think he needs to apologize.

Sherrod had repented for her racist act, but she did clearly state her class warfare stance. ww

I disagree with the idea of giving her a 'better job' as compensation for being fired. Presumably, she occupied the level for which she was appropriately qualified, promoting her to a level she wasn't qualified for would only perpetuate the wrong. For one thing, it would take the job from someone who was qualified. I know you feel bad but don't ask others to pay so you can feel better.

jeff - "from the same video that "clears" her by showing the correct context of her story, she later went on to accuse the GOP and Tea Partiers of racism "

Ah but there's a problem with your defense, that being you claimed to be "perfectly fine with administration officials calling the GOP and Tea Partiers racists" so I'll restate my question where's YOUR proof?

No worries, I won't alter my respiration rate in the slightest waitiing for a response.

you see Marc ... when she gave the speech she WAS and admin official ...
and if she is re-hired she will again be an admin official ...

see how that works ...

right now she is a "former" admin offcial ...

so my point was, if she is re-hired she will again be an admin offcial who has accused the GOP and the Tea Partiers of being racist ...

just like Pelosi has ... but see, Pelosi is NOT and admin official ...

again, see how that works ?

Jeff,

You are a jerk and an ass and as bigoted as yesterday so many in error thought Ms. Sherrod was.

As for Mr. Breitbart. I have an immense respect for the man and confess to some shock to my senses when the full circumstances of this tape were made public. I think that I will wait for his comments on the matter before making any demands on him, and given my respect for the man, I fully expect that he will be forthcoming in addressing the issue.

Perhaps I am not paying attention as well as I might, but this is the first occasion upon which I've seen such an onerous misstep by the man. Very much out of character in my opinion.

I will be awaiting his public comments concerning the matter as it now stands.

really MichaelC ... I'm bigoted, really ...

I thought Ms. Sherrod was a racist 24 years ago based on her own words ... I also believe she found it in herself to realize it and try to correct her racism in that case ... again based on her own words and verified actions ...

thanks for using the term bigot ... I had forgotten you can be called a racist with other labels ...

This "bigot" lived for 4 years in the center of Harlem ... its amazing what a real racist can put up with to live in a 400 sq foot first floor brownstone apartment ...

I still believe Mr. B should apologize as she was obviously not his intended target ...

jeff... you're only "point" is to obfuscate and avoid answering a direct question.

Whenever the left gets caught in something that could harm them they make the issue about something or someone else.

When Obama made the remark about distributing the wealth liberals made it all about the plumber.

This is their standard operating procedur.

Here the issue it how the NAACP audience approved of racism against white farmers, but they have made it all about Sherrod and Brietbart.

They have achieved their objective. The focus is now off the NAACP s audience and their response to racism against someone else.

Breitbart did not call for her firing.......the NAACP and the Obama Admin did that all by themselves.

We need to put the focus on where it belongs....the racism the NAACP showed and the fact that only the Obama admin with the help of the NAACP (remember they had the whole film....she spoke at their organization) fired her.

Was it unjust? Yes. But Breitbart did not ask or demand she be fired. Blame the Obama admin. for that.

I find it beyond coincidence that she was fired just as the jurnolist (sp?) came out.

Dilute the news.

There are apologie's needed alright. From Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton for year's of race baiting and stirring up racial strife.

I'm not so sure she needs to be apologized to. Though the real focus was the racist reaction of the crowd, Sherrod still couldn't help but say it was still a black vs white thing in the same breathe where she talked about her revelation that it was more about poor vs 'those that have'. I also found the hard time edits rather interesting. Could there be more to the story?

via ABC News/Jake Tapper (17:30)....

"Just a few minutes ago I had the opportunity and the privilege to talk to Shirley Sherrod on the phone," Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack told reporters late this afternoon. "I wanted to offer my personal and profound apologies for the pain and discomfort that's been caused to her and her family over the last several days."

Vilsack said he caught Sherrod in the airport on her way up to New York City from Atlanta and "she was extraordinarily gracious." He said he told her that he "regretted the circumstances" that led to her resignation and he "took full responsibility for them."

"I did not think before I acted," Vilsack said, explaining that he was on the road Monday and had only read a partial transcript of her remarks.

The former governor of Iowa said he asked Sherrod "if she would be interested in figuring out a way forward," indicating he offered her a job having to do with various legal claims against the Agriculture Department by women and minority farmers who claim that they've been discriminated against through the USDA loan program. Noting that Sherrod has been a claimant against the Agriculture Department, Vilsack said she "has a unique set of skills trying to turn the page on our civil rights chapter which has been difficult."

"'Gee, we apologize for thinking you're a racist when really you just used to be a racist...well, more racist than you are now, anyway and we should have been more clear that you just used to be really racist until you learned to hide it better.'

Something along those lines?"

Well said, Falze! This is what most everyone else seems to be overlooking.

"Why did the NAACP and the White House not want to investigate the story, not want to question Sherrod, not want the media to look into it? Because the NAACP, Obama AND the MSM viewed Sherrod as a typical, leftist, black racist. What she said reflected the beliefs and views of the majority of the members of each group, so they figured she was simply "one of their own" who opened her mouth once too often and got caught."

BTW he also said....

"Vilsack said the decision was his and his alone to seek her resignation, that there wasn't any White House pressure regardless of what Sherrod says undersecretary of Agriculture Cheryl Cook told her."

Put in other undisguised words.

We fuckered up, you can have your job back but hey... you lied your ass off about anyone from the WH calling and demanding your resignation.

So... will some enterprising cub reporter track down the under secratary that called her 3 times?

DJ, I've made a lot of fun of you in the past, and I hope to do so again in the future. I just want to take a time out from all that to let you know that this was a stand-up thing to say. You may take a few hits for it from some in your audience, but it's never a bad idea to take the side of honesty and fair play.

Honesty and fair play? Hardly. Dj writes

Ms. Sherrod never said things the way that she was alleged to have done, nor was her spirit or intent as portrayed in that video.

Drago's comment in #4 expresses my thoughts much more eloquently than I could, Thanks Drago.

DJ and JayTea are joining the left side of the blogosphere in trying to change the subject.


Why are they so afraid to discuss the racism supported by the NAACP?

before you shed too many tears for Ms Sherrod...

lookie here

Guess what? White farmer-hater Shirley Sherrod is linked to Bill Ayers.
This must-read story at Illinois Review and The Washington Examiner also reveals that Ms. Sherrod's husband is a former honcho in the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee back in the 1960's. You can read more about it in Bill Ayers book "Fugitive Days." Yes, that Bill Ayers. He was involved in SNCC as well.

http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisreview/2010/07/shirley-sherrod-another-community-organizer-enjoying-her-welldeserved-reparations-.html

http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/Examiner-Opinion-Zone/Shirley-Sherrods-Disappearing-Act-Not-So-Fast-98846149.html

damn, I love the internet

Kenny, you are correct. DJ, you need to listen to Brietbart's explaination of what he wanted to demonstrate. Sharrod was just collateral damage. ww

I tend to disagree.

The story she told was plainly an example of racism. She admits that she did just enough of her job so that white farmer couldn't complain, but not the full weight of her position.

The fact that at the end of her story she claims to have learned a moral lesson doesn't change anything. The fact that the farmer in question didn't loose his farm makes no difference.

A govt official still denied help to a citizen based on the color of that citizens skin. How many other white people did she 1/2 way help?

Would Jesse Jackson accept the No harm No Foul defense if the colors were reversed? I don't think so.

By the way -

The room full of NAACP members who were encouraging her confession didn't look too good either.

She's still a racist.

'We help poor people, not black people" (but we help poor black people more than poor white people because I have the power to do so).

Looks like a duck, quacks like a duck.

Racist like Lee Ward.

I agree with Drummond, no one comes off looking good. Brietbart who made his reputation as a Drudge contributor, at least, was pretty much acting true to type, rather shamelessly and stupidly even last night, on CNN was questioning whether or not, the farmer's wife, Eloise Spooner "You're going off of her word that the farmer's wife is the farmer's wife?" was a real person, and not a plant in tv interviews, even in one promoted on his own TV website. What a fool!

As for Agriculture Secretary, Tom Vilsack, he is just as embarrassing, more so in fact, because he should know better as a former Governor, in demanding that Sherrod step down, without administration leave, before he had made even a superficial investigation. I spend more time researching background for a comment. He should either be `sacked` by Obama or consider resigning himself (Vilsack), for acting so cowardly and cravenly.

I just got done watching the full video. She was the victim of some pretty horrible racism in her past. I think it's obligatory that I acknowledge that right of the bat, what with me being white and all.

Her entire speech was framed as "us" and "we" (blacks) vs. "they" and "they" and "them" (whites). It was never about the lawyer or the farmer it was about the "white lawyer" or the "black lawyer" or the "white farmer" or the "black farmer". A couple times, she talked about how as "we" (blacks) become equal "we" integrate into society as if it's a bad thing--in her own words: "the more free we are the more divided we become". There was a time when she talked about how "less than 20 of us" work for her agency. Well, that less then 20 of "us" (blacks) make up about 11% of the staff. "We" (her words not mine) make up about 13% of the population of the state so that doesn't really sound too far off to me but she seems to think so. Those are just some examples but reflect the tone of her entire speech. On tap of that, there's the missing clip around the 21:00 mark. Wonder what that was. Maybe someone stepped on the cord and it came out of the wall...Yeah, that must've been it.

Was the speech racist? Clearly, in my opinion. However that is the very essence, the core of the NAACP. I'd bet if I watched more of the speeches at their conventions, I'd see the same "we/us"--"they/them" theme repeated over and over again. That was the supreme audacious irony of the NAACP resolution regarding the alleged racism of the Tea Parties.

Were many of the people who were at that speech victims of racism? Probably. Some as horrible as what Ms. Sharrod personally experienced? Probably. Does that excuse their own racism? Does that make it good racism? How different is the NAACP from the Black Panthers if you take away the violence and extremism? The message is the same "we/us" vs. "they/them" (Ms. Sharrod's words, not mine).

Apologies are required?

NAACP: Well to condemn her without condemning likely most speakers at their conventions is hypocritical, so yeah, they should apologize for being hypocrites.

Obama: Well a white guy who gave a speech from that same perspective clearly would have gotten the axe, but this is "reverse racism" which really isn't racism at all so yeah Obama should apologize for not recognizing that reverse racism is a good thing and give her her job back.

Brietbart: He could have been given a video clip of likely any of a several (most?) of the speakers at any NAACP convention and made the same point, so even though he did not make the post about her, but rather about an example of the racism inherent in the NAACP, and even though he didn't choose those clips one was slightly misleading ('cause she did after all, eventually help the "poor white man") so he should apologize for randomly making an example of her in a slightly misleading way.

In a "post-racial America" there would be no KKK, but there would also be no NAACP or Black Panthers (or La Raza for that matter). I feel sorry about what happed to Ms. Sharrod, but I don't feel guilty about it. I think we do a disservice to and move further and further from a post-racial America when we excuse any racism even the simple "us" vs. "them" mentality.

Finally, Ms. Sharrod talked about the mentality that developed in the 1800's that led to the racial divide, yet ironically she doesn't see that she is of a very similar mindset to the very mindset she is condemning. Her mentality is part of the problem with the "poor vs. rich" predicament she talks about-- it is not part of the solution.

One things become clear to me from the reactions of many to this story--when it comes to race, we are a nation of cowards.

PB keep being eloquent, but I don't think everyone is listening. Its so interesting that she comes up with the manufactured story of the elitists creating black vs white racism to divide the poor (How Bill Ayers can you get?) while missing the point that she and the NAACP have to keep "racism" alive to keep their politics powerful.

Something else I'd like to bring up - not that it's terribly important or anything - but I'd like to point out the Obama administration's reaction to this, how quick it was - how unwilling they were to wait for the actual facts to come out before leaping to any conclusion - and how the reaction was totally out of proportion to the actual event.

You'd think it was a middle school clique looking to oust a kid that was cool but now isn't.

And this is NOTHING compared to, say, 9/11. Or the Korean War. Or Pearl Harbor, the Cole Bombing, or any of a hundred disasters which could befall our country.

And ask yourself - is THIS incompetent, stumbling, in-over-his-head perq-addicted poser the BEST the Democratic Party had to offer?

If he's the BEST - then WTF are the REST of the clowns trying to guide us through the worst economy in decades, through interesting times in global situation, and through the self-generated energy crisis going to do to us NEXT?

Drago....have you actually read Breitbart's original blog post, his subsequent posts or any of his tweets? Have you watched the entire video? Breitbart's now claiming that Sherrod was not his target is absolutely laughable. In his initial post on July 19, Breitbart claimed that the video is "evidence of racism coming from a federal appointee" and that Sherrod discriminated against a white farmer in her "federal duties" as the USDA Georgia Director of Rural Development. The video itself also included text that said. "Ms. Sherrod admits that in her federally appointed position, overseeing over a billion dollars she discriminates against people due to their race." Breitbart then posted a tweet asking, "Will Eric Holder's DOJ hold accountable fed appointee Shirley Sherrod for admitting practicing racial discrimination?" After the USDA forced Sherrod out of her position in response to the deceptive video, Big Government celebrated with a post titled: "Racist Govt Official/NAACP Award Recipient Resigns after Big Government Expose." Once Breitbart realized that he was wrong about Sherrod he changed his tune and says it was about the NAACP all along.

I give DJ a lot of credit for calling for apologies. You earned my respect with this post. Good job DJ.

I have no sympathy for Sherrod et al.

I seem to recall the Rush Limbaugh/McNabb "controversy"...Rush rightly accused sports media of favourtism towards McNabb, and yet he was dismissed as well.

And then there was the time when Rush was bidding on a sports team, and whole swaths of untrue statements attributed to him cost him a chance at the bidding.

If this is the rules the media have set up for playing, well, I guess this is a "teachable" moment.

Wouldn't be the first time a government official got sacked for saying stupid things, won't be the last. Tough luck.

Brietbart sad many times the day of the release of the tape that he wanted to show how the NAACP audience approved and cheered the racist action of Sherrod. He could have cared less about Sherrod but wanted to challenge the NAACP on their hypocrisy of racism. He did just that. The NAACP did overreact as did the Obama team. Now the NAACP is criticizing the audiences reaction. Who is to blame for this first and foremost? The NAACP. They called us out and Breitbart showed how racist their audience is. I do not think he needs to apologize.

Sherrod had repented for her racist act, but she did clearly state her class warfare stance. ww

The audience reaction? Have you watched the video? Do you hear any applause when she was talking about her treatment of the white farmer? No you didn't because there was no applause then.

I think someone owe's me an apology, too, as I have been personally affected by this incident. I TiVo'ed Glen Beck and started watching it shortly after I posted my comment earlier and I had to fast forward though 9 minutes of piles of bull feces flying out of Vilacks mouth. Now I'm not gonna be able to watch the last 9 minutes of Glen until tomorrow morning! (Tivo re-records it at 2 am so they better not have another press conference then!)

This whole thing has become quite convoluted --I mean what with today being the day Obama smilingly signed himself the power to take over most of the businesses in the country and yet NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT IT! It's all about the Sharrod saga today-- so I'm not sure exactly who owes me an apology, but someone does-- damn it!

liberalnightmare........"A govt official still denied help to a citizen based on the color of that citizens skin. How many other white people did she 1/2 way help?"

She did help that white farmer. The farmer and his wife have been quoted as saying that she did all she could to help them and they credit her with saving their farm. The farmer's wife called in to CNN and said exactly that.

The reaction of the audience IS the story.

Sharrod had a "pivot point" in her life...good for her.

But as she was describing her "pivot point" she was getting CHEERED for her bigotry.

Hell, when she finally described helping the White farmer a lot of the NAACP people in the audience probably called her an "Oreo".

Bigotry is alive and well in the NAACP

Every which way everyone jumping to conclusions. I don't think Brietbart should apologize just yet (if ever). I think everyone should wait to see how this plays out and only then react. You know, it's like 'think before you act.'
P.S. And if you're going to apologize, apologize.

Scream for your mommy DJ, she has a dry diaper and you'll feel much better.

She did help that white farmer. The farmer and his wife have been quoted as saying that she did all she could to help them and they credit her with saving their farm. The farmer's wife called in to CNN and said exactly that.

49. Posted by Jeff L | July 21, 2010 10:18 PM

Shirly Sherrod admits in her speech to doing 'less' than she could have because the farmer was white. Thats racism.Racism from a govt official no less.

The fact that they didn't lose the farm over it changes nothing.

I ain't buy n her story...

First she admitted not giving the man her full force because he was white. Second I find it hard to believe that anyone that was looking for help to save his farm was going to cop an attitude of superiority. So she isn't only a bigot but a liar to boot.

roflmao

Service a la Shirley Sherrod

Black folks.... Full force

Poor white folks.... Here's a Bankruptcy lawyer for ya

Rich white folks.... Hit da road jack..

Sure hope she don't become my health care advisor in her new position

roflmao

I think DJ is correct here. Even if Breitbart's only intent was to demonstrate the reaction of the NAACP cadres to admitted racial prejudice against a white person, he was scammed. His source sent him a tape which is an edit that gives an entirely different impression of the speaker.

Sherrod cannot be considered collateral damage, because collateral damage is only moral where accidental and/or unavoidable. This was NOT the case here. Whoever sent Breitbart the video KNEW what it would do to Sherrod's reputation. They played him. By doing so, they lose any pretense to privilege.

Breitbart must out his source, the one most responsible for the damage to Sherrod's reputation. Only in this way can he hope to retain credibility.

Were the Obama Administration's actions stupid? Sure, they are all stupid people, what the heck do you expect? But I expect more from conservative journalists - some basic ethics would be nice, and earnest contrition and taking action to set things right.

I watched the entire video. I conclude she is indeed a blatant racist, and those in the audience laughing at her blatant racism are also racists, period. We're in a political cold war with the left, and if we intend to win it we need to start fighting the same way they do.

The left has this problem of ignoring the fight against Islam and putting its head in the sand... the right has the identical problem when it comes to fighting the left in our country. While the left seems content to not fight Islam, put its head on the chopping block and voluntarily be beheaded, the right seems just as willing to not fight the left, put its hands out, and allow them put the shackles of slavery on their wrists.

The woman is a racist and a socialist and everyone that is liberty loving needs to do everything they can to destroy every person like her using any means at our disposal... we're in a war for our freedom. I guess most of us aren't ready to fight this kind of war yet.... they don't mind setting our side back just to ya know "be better" or "fight fair" or whatever other looser explanation they have that does nothing more than hasten the demise of our liberty. You all let me know when you're ready to fight this thing for real.... once you all are serious about this thing called liberty. Hopefully you'll actually start fighting with the ferocity necessary to win before we're all sitting in some soviet style re-education camp or worse.

I know most of us conservatives don't like to play the liberal game but I see this as the left getting a taste of their own tactics. Remember this was in response to a totally irresponsible charge that the tea party is full of racists. The left has flung this crap over and over, if you sneeze incorrectly they accuse you of being a racist and demnand you be fired. I think it's past time some of the crap they fling has stuck to them.
Having said that I don't thing the woman deserved this treatment, but stop and think about how many others have had the same thing happen because someone went to great lenghs to to twist something they said to look racists.

The only people that need to apologize to Ms Sherrod are the President, the boss that fired, her and the NAACP. Breitbart owes NO apology. None. Read his original post. It shows that his main point was the racism displayed by the audience when she told the story. Also, Sherrod's subsequent "Road to Damascus" moment does not excuse her behavior. Otherwise someone who threw a brick at a gay - for being gay - would be excused because afterwards he said, "you know, what I did was really wrong." Nu-huh. Doesn't cut it.

All that Breitbart needs to apologize for is to apologize that those who go to his page apparently have reading comprehension problem.

I'm still trying to understand her point when she said Fox News and the Tea Party were "scaring" this administration. How are they being scared? Are they scared of being caught doing something wrong? Are they scared of being held accountable? Are they scared they won't get re-elected?

I don't remember one single instance where someone whined that Democrats or the NYT, no matter how vile they got, were "scaring" the Bush Administration.

Help me out here. I dont' get it.

The author DJ of this article is being completely dishonest when he says Mr. Breitbart knew the context of its portrayal.

Breitbart has made clear that he only ever saw the video he released, and did not edit it in any way. He knew nothing more than what he had.

So where is DJ's integrity and retraction here for this ugly smear on Breitbart?

Motion does not carry, analysis precipitous and ill-informed.

PC squish.