I don't think 75 has seen the whole video and still thinks she didn't help the "white" farmer. He is still falling prey to that "worthless excuse" of a television channel and its agenda.

 

I've seen it.

"They would love to take us 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.”

 

or

 

"He wants to take black people back to slavery", "he's racist, that's why he's so vicious against a black president".

 

Sounds suspiciously like race baiting.

Could be, but I don't see that it necessarily makes her a bigot.

Criticizing someone for their actions doesn't make a person a bigot ...

 

No it doesn't but that has nothing to do with why she's a bigot. Think it's coincidence why she reems Fox and Breitbart and gives a pass to the White House and NAACP?

Except I reference sources from the middle and sometimes even the left. I even remember you recently expressing discord about me doing that as well.

That depends on what you consider to be the middle and left ... nevertheless, I will stand by my statement. The vast majority of your links and comments reflect right-wing thinking, as does the site that provided the video you just linked.

Edited July 28, 201016 yr by westsider

No it doesn't but that has nothing to do with why she's a bigot. Think it's coincidence why she reems Fox and Breitbart and gives a pass to the White House and NAACP?

It's not a coincidence at all, given the perception held among some that Breitbart and Fox News have a tendency to play on racial fears in some of their reporting.

No it doesn't but that has nothing to do with why she's a bigot. Think it's coincidence why she reems Fox and Breitbart and gives a pass to the White House and NAACP?

 

While the White House and the NAACP acted poorly and she did want more than an apology from the President, and she got a conversation, they are not the ones that progated the edited video. They responded to the biased soundbite, produced to make the NAACP look racist. Both sides were wrong, but what they did were different. Had she remained fired and no one apologized, then perhaps Breitbart and Fox would have started down the path to accomplish what she says their goal was.

 

Either way, none of it makes her racist or bigoted. She is angry and is lashing out at the cause of her anger - justifiably so. "But for" the actions of Breitbart and history of Fox, Shirley Sherrod does not get fired.

That depends on what you consider to be the middle and left ... nevertheless, I will stand by my statement. The vast majority of your links and comments reflect right-wing thinking, as does the site that provided the video you just linked.

You mean depends on what you consider to be left or middle.

 

And when you reference something or provide a link it reflects left-wing thinking. So what?

 

YouTube? :lol: That's where I found it.

You mean depends on what you consider to be left or middle.

Please ... show me a left or moderate site you've referenced that represented a position to which you have agreed.

And when you reference something or provide a link it reflects left-wing thinking.

I rarely link anything here ... still, I will take a New York Times column more seriously than a right-wing blog.

YouTube? :lol: That's where I found it.

The site that made the video is obviously a right-wing site ... you know that, and don't pretend that it isn't.

Please ... show me a left or moderate site you've referenced that represented a position to which you have agreed.

Do your own work for your silly personal arguments. I never said anything more than I reference sources from the middle and sometimes even the left, I said nothing about the position leaning left or right. The big question here is what business is it of yours what I post or how I post it? It's none of your business and if you don't like it, don't read it. Just that simple. Instead of playing Gladys Kravitz on every thread I create or post in, try sticking to the topic or at the very least make an attempt to somewhat discuss the subject instead of being so obsessed with me. :lol:

I rarely link anything here ... still, I will take a New York Times column more seriously than a right-wing blog.

Good, I really don't care one way or the other, but I'm happy for you. Doesn't change the fact that you only reference or link the left-wing side or viewpoint. Again, I don't care though, that's why you don't see me following you into every thread and whining about it. BTW, the New York Times is the source I referenced and it wasn't good enough for you.

The site that made the video is obviously a right-wing site ... you know that, and don't pretend that it isn't.

So? Still didn't find it on their site, nor have I even been to that site. So why should I care?

 

Now, are you through trying to make everything about me or are you ready to get back to the thread?

While the White House and the NAACP acted poorly and she did want more than an apology from the President, and she got a conversation, they are not the ones that progated the edited video. They responded to the biased soundbite, produced to make the NAACP look racist. Both sides were wrong, but what they did were different. Had she remained fired and no one apologized, then perhaps Breitbart and Fox would have started down the path to accomplish what she says their goal was.

 

Either way, none of it makes her racist or bigoted. She is angry and is lashing out at the cause of her anger - justifiably so. "But for" the actions of Breitbart and history of Fox, Shirley Sherrod does not get fired.

 

See it how you want, I still think her words and actions indicate she is a bigot. What the WH did was worse than FOX. I don't know about Breitbart, has it been proven he saw the entire tape? If not, he and Fox both jumped to conclusions the same as the WH and NAACP. Only Fox and Breitbart didn't fire her, did they? And yet, who does she blast? The white guys or the black guys? Hmmmmmm?

See it how you want, I still think her words and actions indicate she is a bigot. What the WH did was worse than FOX. I don't know about Breitbart, has it been proven he saw the entire tape? If not, he and Fox both jumped to conclusions the same as the WH and NAACP. Only Fox and Breitbart didn't fire her, did they? And yet, who does she blast? The white guys or the black guys? Hmmmmmm?

 

Fox doesn't have any "black guys"?

The White House doesn't have any "white guys"?

Do your own work for your silly personal arguments. I never said anything more than I reference sources from the middle and sometimes even the left, I said nothing about the position leaning left or right. The big question here is what business is it of yours what I post or how I post it?

You made a comment about your posting history, one I asked you to back up.

Now, are you through trying to make everything about me or are you ready to get back to the thread?

If you are going to chastise others about referencing a "biased" site, as you did to acemona, you need to be prepared to face the same questioning.

 

Frankly, it smacks of hypocrisy.

 

Those in glass houses ...

See it how you want, I still think her words and actions indicate she is a bigot. What the WH did was worse than FOX. I don't know about Breitbart, has it been proven he saw the entire tape? If not, he and Fox both jumped to conclusions the same as the WH and NAACP. Only Fox and Breitbart didn't fire her, did they? And yet, who does she blast? The white guys or the black guys? Hmmmmmm?

She blasted the guys that she felt came after her ...

You made a comment about your posting history, one I asked you to back up.

If you are going to lecture others about referencing a left-wing site, as you did to acemona, you need to be prepared to face the same questioning.

 

Those in glass houses ...

What's to back up? Are you saying I've never referenced the NY Times or sources like them? If so, you're sadly mistaken. How about CNN, are they right-wing? I've referenced them numerous times. You've stepped over into the absurd. :lol:

 

Which is why I did exactly that to ace. He didn't like some of my sources, just like you. The difference is, he at least contributes something to the threads instead of stalking me. :lol:

What's to back up? Are you saying I've never referenced the NY Times or sources like them? If so, you're sadly mistaken. How about CNN, are they right-wing? I've referenced them numerous times. You've stepped over into the absurd. :lol:

 

Which is why I did exactly that to ace. He didn't like some of my sources, just like you. The difference is, he at least contributes something to the threads instead of stalking me. :lol:

Don't flatter yourself ... I'm simply pointing out the hypocrisy.