USDA Official Resigns After ‘White Farmer’ Video
**Written by Doug Powers
We interrupt this “Tea Partiers are so incredibly racially biased” broadcast for the following update:
Days after the NAACP clashed with Tea Party members over allegations of racism, a video has surfaced showing an Agriculture Department official regaling an NAACP audience with a story about how she withheld help to a white farmer facing bankruptcy — video that now has forced the official to resign.
The video posted at BigGovernment that started it all is here if you haven’t seen/heard it yet.
Breitbart claims more video is on the way.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled “Tea Partiers are so incredibly racially biased” broadcast.
Update: Sherrod tries to put the video in context — also blames Fox News. No blame for Bush?
(h/t Allahpundit at Hot Air)
**Written by Doug Powers
Twitter @ThePowersThatBe
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Biden: Tea Party stopped us from growing the economy
May 23, 2012 01:55 PM by Doug Powers
44 Comments
Palin officially endorses desperate, clingy Orrin Hatch; time to rally around Dan Liljenquist
May 22, 2012 11:32 PM by Michelle Malkin
83 Comments1997 Fordham Law Review article: Elizabeth Warren was Harvard’s ‘first woman of color’
May 15, 2012 11:38 PM by Doug Powers
83 Comments
Kiss of death: Specter endorses Beltway barnacle Orrin Hatch, trashes Tea Party “cannibals”
May 14, 2012 06:15 AM by Michelle Malkin
112 Comments
Harry Reid worried ‘Tea Party zealots’ tossed out Lugar just for cooperating with Dems
May 10, 2012 09:39 PM by Doug Powers
147 Comments
Eye on Indiana and Wisconsin; Update: Lugar defeated; Barrett to face Walker
May 8, 2012 06:04 PM by Michelle Malkin
129 CommentsIndiana Senate primary poll shows Mourdock extending lead on Lugar; Santorum endorses
May 4, 2012 10:10 PM by Doug Powers
110 Comments
If you’re gonna call Tea Party activists RAAAACISTS…
May 3, 2012 12:33 AM by Michelle Malkin
162 Comments
MSM: Occupiers Anarchists arrested for bridge bomb plot
May 2, 2012 11:45 AM by Doug Powers
79 Comments
Categories: Race relations,Tea Party
Villainous Company
» Must Read Post of the Day. Possibly, the YearJustOneMinute
» Mama Also Said There Be Days Like This
And shouldn’t there be an investigation into every case where this woman “helped” a white person? She could have been doing this all along.
Except, as happyscrapper pointed out, she later on in the story specifically refudiates (in honor of our new bard) her way of thinking in this matter and uses it as an example of what NOT to do.
I believe this is the person in question. I think it’s fair to say she got caught up in the Obama Delusion.
Great point! What a great opportunity for an attorney.
On July 20th, 2010 at 10:41 am, chapoutier said:
What about her makes you “strongly suspect” this?
—————————————-
When you say that you “never have to worry” about something again, that tends, to me anyway, to mean you expect it to be taken care of by someone else.
The Democrat party tends to be the party of big government/handouts before self-sufficiency.
Yup, as I said she’s a walking lawsuit waiting to happen – and we will be the ones who pick up the tab for her racism since it’ll be the deep pockets of the Dept Of Ag that gets picked.
On July 20th, 2010 at 9:36 am, Trollman said:
Democrat[ic Socialist]s are notorious for PROJECTION.
That of which they accuse you,
is the very thing of which they themselves are guilty.
Just watched that You Tube vid agian; hard to take what she’s saying any other way. To believe that Obama or any other President is going to come in and make all your financial/life concerns go away – which is basically what this woman is saying – is a bit much. We depend too much on our government and expect too much from them.
not sure if it’s been brought up(haven’t read all the comments) but I wonder if this woman got her job through affirmative action? Just a thought.
I agree it was over the top. But that does not mean that we need to take it to its most absurd conclusion.
On July 20th, 2010 at 9:36 am, Trollman said:
Actually, just like with Shirley Sherrod’s speech, Obama’s speech was actually more about Socialism than about Racism.
For those interested, I analyzed Obama’s speech and wrote this post the day after he delivered that speech. The speech wasn’t about racism. It was about using racism in order to form a more Socialist Union.
Yup.
NAACP response:
On July 20th, 2010 at 10:14 am, PatriotRider said:
Word.
On July 20th, 2010 at 11:01 am, chapoutier said:
NAACP response:
—————————————-
Score one for the NAACP; they got it right this time.
“Have you heard of anybody in the Federal government losing their job?”
Yes, madam–you just did.
On July 20th, 2010 at 10:28 am, chapoutier said:
Sorry, Chap, that doesn’t fly. She didn’t say anything about making more money working. She said:
Not, “I’m going to be able to help myself”.
Nope. It’s, “he’s gonna help me”.
Obama Money (a.k.a reparations)
I can’t believe nobody has said this yet:
Kid glove treatment will not work against this group. Ask John Mclaim.
Time to take off the gloves, happyscrap
She also didn’t say anything about the government paying for those things directly, did she?
And if you “help” someone with a chore, doesn’t that imply that person is carrying some of the weight too? Otherwise you are just doing it for them, not helping.
Anyway…whatever.
On July 20th, 2010 at 11:22 am, chapoutier said:
Yes, she did. She directly said,
It’s quite clear that she believed that if she helped him get elected President, then he, as President, was going to help her financially.
And that expectation is repeated by the multiple people in the “Obama money” clip.
It’s quite clear to those with eyes to see. (I.e., those who don’t have scales on their eyes)
It’s all about redistribution of wealth. Take from those who have earned it, and give to those who have not.
Which is quite clearly NOT saying that the government was going to pay her mortgage or for her gas. That would be like claiming the government is paying for some millionaire’s yacht because he will benefit financially from the next Republican president’s tax cut.
On July 20th, 2010 at 11:19 am, plymouthacclaim said:
Indeed.
Alternatively, Shirley Sherrod says
… At least until she gets her new job at the Center for American “Progress”.
On July 20th, 2010 at 11:34 am, chapoutier said:
It is quite clear that many black voters expected cash money from Obama.
And the Bush tax cuts INCREASED, not decreased, the percentage of the tax burden that is paid by the wealthy. I’m tired of liberals claiming that the Bush tax cuts were “tax cuts for the rich!”. That is Socialistic Bovine Excrement.
Read The Parable of 10 Men in a Bar
I’ll be pissed at Breitbart if he posted this video out of context.
And I’ll be pissed at the Dept. of Ag if they forced this woman to resign simply because they were worried that this video looked bad.
No racism here the victim was white.
On July 20th, 2010 at 9:17 am, jamesgreenidge said:
Here’s a sample from the archives…
By many, many measurements, it certainly was and disproportionately benefitted the upper wage earners.
I think this is a bigger conversation than we want to have right now, though. We’ll agree to disagree.
The DOJ will not prosecute the case as department policy is to ignore cases where the plantiff is white.
And just because the NAACP makes a statement we are to believe they had no idea what was going on? I don’t think so!
Whatever else she went on to say in that speech, it doesn’t change the fact that the audience was laughing with her & shouting “Right on!” as she told a story about how she stuck it to Whitey. And she didn’t bother to stop & tell the crowd their behavior was unacceptable as they did so. Which is consistent with the impression I had from watching the video, that she relished telling this story.
People on the left do not resign when they are actually innocent. In fact, they almost never resign even when they have been demonstrated to be guilty.
If I was her boss, I would have told her, “Oh no, you’re not resigning; you’re fired!”
Interesting comments here but the most important thing I got out of it came from PatriotRider:
Snort….
Maybe this will put an end to all this:
It is clear that Breitbart took this wildly out of context, and purposefully so. The full video will be coming soon, according to many sources.
Are they also appalled by abuses of power against male famers?
In my opinion, it appears that in today’s world it is white males who are the most likely to be victims of abuses of power by government employees. Reverse discrimination is alive and well, as clearly revealed in the video of Sherrod.
Workers of the world unite!
The NAACP is repeating Shirley Sherrod’s main emphasis… i.e., that
Again, while her comments certainly were racist, the main emphasis of her comments is that it was “revealed” to her that class struggle and redistribution of wealth are even more important than race struggle.
Indeed.
her racism,
But while the NAACP “refudiates”
they implicitly endorse her socialism.
Wait a minute! That’s what you lawyers do do! (and the colored girls sing do, do do, do do)
Chap,
I posted my last comment before seeing yours.
In the clip we saw, Shirley Sherrod admitted she “did enough” to keep Eloise Spooner and her husband out of bankruptcy, but that she didn’t give them the “full force” of what she could do. Perhaps the rest of the video will show her saying that she changed her mind and did eventually give them the “full force” of what she could do. However, the NAACP themselves have said,
She also has yet to explain what exactly the man said when supposedly “he was taking all that time trying to show me he was superior to me”.
Doesn’t Eloise Spooner take any offense to Sherrod slandering her husband as a racist?
Sure, Sherrod eventually helped the Spooners avoid bankruptcy. If I were in the Spooners’ shoes, I would appreciate the financial help, but I would not consider someone a “friend for life” after they had smeared me as a racist.
Maybe they both acheived some racial understanding through that incident.
Well, you see…it matters not the ‘whole story’ isn’t included. The above is all the story you need.
She admits that she was not going to do ‘everything she could’ for him, and that she can read minds. I mean, how else did she know he was feeling ‘superior’ to her?
I’m more a Little Joe.
People here accuse me of it all the time. How do they know?
She should get a new job:
Mind-Reading Czar for color-based superiority welfare claims.
She can see your soul!
oh, definitely Little Joe.
Well, nothing like being able to call a real racist a racist. Nothing like hearing how supportive the NAACP audience is upon hearing that a white farmer got turned over to his own people. Too bad that a group founded to fight racism seems to fight for racism for some. How many more gov employees have racist policies?
rambler:
all of them
I think that once again, we’re being drawn into a parsing labrynth and when we come out, we won’t even know what the meaning of “is”, is. This is the way it usually works.
What happened to a simple, unequivocal condemnation of this woman’s mentality and actions, not wondering when she did it and under what “auspices”?
She obviously encountered the white farmer while employed by the taxpayer on some level and here she is being given a RECEPTIVE forum to showcase her racism. How hard is it to simply condemn it–PERIOD–without having to introduce “extenuating” (I call them extraneous) details?
This is the kind of stuff my parents would hear as young people from WHITE racists and back then, they had those who would try to talk around the periphery of the issue, too.
She.is.a.racist. PERIOD. And obviously a diehard Leftist who thinks gov’t jobs == inviolable security. And, to the point of the post, the NAACP crowd is apparently OK with that.
Correction: I said she worked for the taxpayer but I misunderstood the nature of her employment.
I don’t know. What happened to actually being able to hear the whole story before you make a judgement?
Real moral to this story: Breitbart thinks you are a sucker that is willing to lap up his interpretation of events.
What more would I need to hear beyond what she said unless she said,
“Just kidding!!” after saying all that?
Why didn’t the White House just insist everyone calm down and hear the “whole story” before “insisting” (her words) that she resign?
Egads. You don’t mean…..
like the Rodney King beating?!
Kind of like Bush and the National Guard story, huh? We saw how the national media and the Left waited to “hear the whole story” on that before they made any conclusions.
Further, again–the post is not so much about when she said what she said, but a spotlight on the NAACP’s reaction to what she said.
As always, we turn on the messenger, question his motives to death with NO PROOF (how do you know what Breitbart is wrong or right since the “whole story” hasn’t come out, supposedly? How do you know what he thinks about those of us who accept the video’s obvious implications?) while extenuating the proof right in front of our eyes.
purplepeep referred to the following back in a comment on page 1, but here is Ed Morrissey’s post…
But it wasn’t just “conservatives” who were smeared as racists… back then, it was the Hillary supporters who were smeared… the smearing didn’t come to conservatives until after the Democratic primary was over. There are a fair number of people who had been lifelong Democrats up to that point, but saw the Obama machine for what it is, and voted for McCain/Palin. Their eyes have been opened, and they will never be the same. They may have been lifelong Democrats, but they are not Democratic Socialist Communists, and they are doing everything in their power now to ensure that the Democratic Socialist Communists currently in power are no longer in control of Congress come Jan 2011, and no longer in control of the Executive Branch come Jan 2013.
As long as we have honest elections, the Democratic Socialist Communists will be removed from office.
Ummm…where she pointed out that she realized she was wrong, went on to help the farmer out immensely and became a life long friend?
Because they were pandering to reactionists like you.
where did she say it was wrong? she said she realized it wasn’t ONLY about race and went on to include economic status. how is that an admission of wrong?
The group that has the full tape confirmed Sherrod’s version. They just haven’t released it yet.
t is also par for the course with Breitbart, who selectively chose and heavily edited his ACORN expose tapes. Did you know that O’Keefe actually went in to those meetings dressed perfectly normal, and not like a pimp caracature as he was shown in the videos? No…I’ll bet you didn’t.
No. We’re only suckers when it we accept evidence from someone on the Right. If it’s from the Left, it is nothing short of the Dead Sea Scrolls.
You have every right to pass judgment on what you’ve heard.
However, if that bit is so damning, then Breitbart shouldn’t have a reason to exclude other portions of the video.
On July 20th, 2010 at 12:51 pm, chapoutier said:
On July 20th, 2010 at 1:51 pm, chapoutier said:
Heh. Chap goes from complaining about people assuming they know what he thinks, to an hour later posting a comment where he assumes he knows what Breitbart thinks.
That’s comedy gold right there.
Actually, I wasn’t complaining about people passing judgement on me. I was simply pointing out that you have ways of determining someone’s feelings without being a “mind reader”, as spacey put it.
Yep. She was giving a speech on advancing a white farmers’ rights at a NAACP rally!
On July 20th, 2010 at 2:08 pm, Major O said:
Exactly. She never said, “I was wrong. It’s not about black vs. white.”
What she did say was:
She is a racist, who admits “it IS about white and black”, but she is even more of a socialist/communist than she is a racist.
She decided, in this case, to help the white man because he was poor.
Not because everyone should be treated equally, but because he was poor, and therefore a co-victim of “the man”. If he had not been poor, would she have helped him?
The culture of the NAACR (National Association for the Advancement of Colored Racists) is that of attacking “the man” (i.e., the upper and middle class white man) and advancing the power and status of racist socialists.
I saw a longer video clip. The broader point that I saw her making is that she first received the man and treated him as a white person, but later considered that it was not a “black/white issue”; instead it was a “rich/poor” problem; that he treated her as though he was “superior” because he was rich; not because he was white and she was black.
I still think she exhibited bigotry, referring the man to a white lawyer…”one of his own”, and again as she maintained her position, but I don’t think the whole thing was as egregious as represented in some of the more abbreviated video clips.
exactly.
Not buying that. Now they’re both mind readers–the ‘farmer’ and Sherrod? She knew he was feeling ‘superior’ and the farmer knew he was ‘richer’ than she was?
No. She’s a fascist.
Like when Duh Wun pronounced the Boston “cop acted suptidly”?
Once again, for anyone that missed it. The crowd didn’t need to hear the whole speech before they started laughing, cheering her with “Right on!”
And she didn’t bother to stop them, nor did she seem to have a problem with that. So unless and until you can show me the part of the speech where she forcefully rebukes the crowd for laughing and cheering about racism towards whites, I’m gonna take any claims that she isn’t a racist with a “wink & a nudge.”
I mean, it isn’t like the name “NAACP” itself is racist or anything…
Eric Holder Gets His Wish
Careful…
Bullspit!
This is that same crap we get from “oppressed” groups, pretending that their hate and racial malice isn’t what it is.
Racism does not require power. Hatred does not require power. Envy does not require power. Evil can lie solely in the hearts of those who cherish it.
Maybe you should write a blog post about the subject and then link to it here a half dozen times.
‘K…
hahahahahahaha
The farmers wifes reply about his acting superior was “thats just his way”. What does that mean?
It did sound like this women did help the white farmer. She just didn’t like it much because he was white. It was also 20 years ago and she was not with the USDA. It also sounds like in the process she realized he wasn’t a bad guy and that she was wrong to prejudge him. The rest of the video probably shows her explaining her epiphany.
I wonder if the crowd will support that conclusion as much as they appeared to support the stick it to whitey part of the story.
But I will just use that idiot Ellis Henican’s (sp)? m.o. of reply about the tea party.
You know theres racism there.
Now he’s said it so it must be true. Same with the NAACP.
I also dispute the racism is about power. I think its about race. The power word is used to excuse racism of the have nots and only pin racism on the haves.
You mean the NAACP, Chap? As Patterico points out the NAACP version has also been edited.
Also, it seems some commenters there have done a bit of sleuthing, helping to add some missing interesting bits and pieces of the puzzle.
That’s an uncalled for remark, Chappy!
But why am I laughing?
At HotAir…
A slight variation on what I said earlier…
She’s both a Marxist and a racist.
She’s just more of a Marxist than she is a racist.
I hate to say this, folks, but we have been caught doing the exact same thing that drives us so crazy when the left does it!! It is called “jumping to conclusions”. This is a perfect example of what the left does to us every chance they get. They take our situations out of context all the time and run with it. I get so frustrated when I see that!! The last straw was that fool at a Tea Party rally with the nazi jacket on and spewing the most hateful comments. Then the video cuts off. If it had continued, it would have shown the Tea Party members not only chastizing him, but telling him to leave. This cuts both ways. If you understand the FULL story here, you will see how her comments were totally an ILLUSTRATION of how she USED to be and how she has evolved. We owe this woman an apology and maybe can take a lesson from it…DON’T BE LIKE THEM (THE ENEMY). We are better than that.
Happyscrapper, I respectfully disagree.
The full story here is yes, Sherrod helped the Spooners decades ago, and yes, Mrs. Spooner still appreciates the help that she received, but Sherrod still made racist comments in her much more recent talk at the NAACP function, and the crowd responded positively, not negatively, to those racist comments.
The full story here is Sherrod helped the Spooners becuase they were poor, and it was “revealed” to her that the struggle is not “so much” about white versus black (even while saying “it IS about white and black”) but that it’s more about “the poor versus those who have”.
She is both a Marxist and a racist. Even though she helped the Spooners for Marxist reasons, she, IN THE CURRENT DAY, still makes racist comments and talks about “their kind”.
We do NOT owe this woman an apology.
The left is using Alinsky tactics to turn this around and attack Breitbart and Fox News.
Breitbart did NOT edit the video… he shared exactly what was given to him.
And the larger video does not exonerate Sherrod. Yes, she helped the Spooners decades ago, but yes, she still made racist (and Marxist) comments recently, and she deserved to lose her job.
I am seeing this completely differently than you are. First of all, what makes her a Marxist? The fact that she wanted to help him because he was poor? I see a woman who is acting out her previous racism and going into that mode to illustrate how she has evolved. What she was saying was her attitude THEN and how she felt this farmer considered himself superior, etc. While it is true that the audience may have agreed with her attitude THEN, she was illustrating an attitude that she no longer had. That is how I see it after seeing the rest of the video.
I very seldom disagree with the majority on these threads. But I do respectfully disagree on this one!! We will never know what is really in her heart. But she has said she uses this illustration a lot in her speeches. Maybe someone else will come forward and exonerate her.
I want to caution everyone not to go all extremist here! We are playing right into their hands!! We have bigger issues to deal with and if we go off half-cocked over everything before even getting the whole story, we are sunk!! And calling someone a marxist because she believes in helping the poor is just wrong.
Sorry, RedPill, but we definitely part company on this one. I still love ya!!
I’m not going ‘all extremist’. But she’s a racist and a fascist.
Me? I go on with my daily life: working to pay taxes to support a low-life like her and everyone she panders to.
RedPill,
Tow points:
1) It is not racist to point out that there remains a divide between white and black in this country, however smaller it may be. This whole thread is a testament to that fact. I know the party line around here is that the white right has been purged of all its race issues and that the only people making racial trouble are liberals and blacks. Even if that were completeley true–it’s not, but even if it were– it STILL means that, to some extent, it is still about white and black. No matter how much the right wants to bury its head over the issue.
2) Re: marxism. Even accepting your no doubt strenuous definition, she worked for a nonprofit agency, not a govenment agency. What is it to you if a nonprofit decides to help people on an income basis?
Pandering? It is pandering to go into the NAACP and say “Get over race. I did.”?
Spacey…with all due respect, you need to step back a bit. The use of the words racist and fascist in the case of this woman IS extreme, and if you can’t see that, you are becoming part of the problem. We know who our enemies are. We.must.focus.
Since I have Chaps’ permission…
http://hindenblog1.blogspot.com/2010/07/burn-other-sherrod-video-nails-her.html
Sherrod individually is not the issue that Breitbart was highlighting.
It was and is the racism of the NAACP.
Of course, Sherrod is a racist, as well as other kinds of bigot.
Listen to her. She tells you who and what she is.
My point is…Is she currently a racist, or was she acting the part of who she used to be to illustrate the point of her redemption?
I don’t know for sure, as I am not a psychic. But if you look at the video with that in mind, you might see it differently. What she said in that small clip WAS racist. But she claims it was an illustration of who she USED to be. I want to see the whole tape…from the beginning. Personally, I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt and move on. We have bigger fish to fry!
http://www.breitbart.tv/shirley-sherrod-full-speech-before-the-naacp-freedom-fund-dinner-part-1/
There you go, Scrappy. The whole long, incoherent mess.
Note that she acknowledges Ben Jealous, NAACP head duck, present in the crowd.
This sorta undercuts his “out of context” flip-flop…
don’t it?
Acknowledging someone in the audience, the president of the organization sponsoring her, in fact, undercuts what exactly?
Like I said, Rags…
yup.
by the way, she’s fascist.
Oh, I’m all the way back. You must understand; I’m not throbbing-vein-in- the-forehead, spittle-flying-from-the-lips raving here.
Sorry, I thought you were informed.
BJ (Ben Jealous) accused Fox of snookering the NAACP with their terribly “out of context” story. He was sitting in the big fat middle of the context.
He also had the tape.
So, undercut. See?
Just as with Sheila Jackson-Lee’s racist rants…and others, including his own, the approval of the audience is the tell.
I get no audio on the Breitbart site.
http://www.google.com/search?q=sherrod+full+speech+video&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
Lots to choose from, spacey…
Rags,
Go look at a picture of Ben Jealous, then go look at the beginning of the tape, when they pan the table. Do you see him anywhere?
I’ll save you the trouble. No, you don’t.
He acted hastily in condemning her(and has actually apologized for doing so) but it is insane to think that he would have actually sat through the whole speech, knew its full context, and still released that statement, knowing the full video would EVENTUALLY come out and he would be forced into an embarrasing situation.
Anyone using a bit of logic, so I understand why this eluded you, would realize that Sherrod probably expected him there, had prewritten her intro and simply read it. Notice how she was kind of looking around when she said “To the President of the NAACP…”
PLEASE UPDATE:
The USDA, NAACP, and Sherrod have all retracted their condemnations and apologies.
And there is no indication that Jealous or the NAACP national office had access to the full tape when he released his statement. The speech was filmed by someone at the local chapter that hosted her.
Again, they were certainly hasty in their judgment and condemnation (as was I). But to state that he purposely made a false statement when he knew the content of the entire speech is an absurd assumption.
Mr. Jealous could be anywhere in that room.
Is it rational to think Ms. Sherrod, aware of her surroundings, and who was present, spoke to a phantom? You like the idea, which is typical. You find it “logical”, which is typical.
Let’s pretend your speculation is well-founded…which I am not…
Did he have the full tape? Why, yes, he did.
Is Ms. Sherrod a racist, NOW, as revealed in her comments throughout the speech? Why, yes, she is.
Were the people in the audience warmly approving of her EXPRESSED racism…now and in the past…YES THEY WERE!
So…
Of course I know that, Spacey! You are an intelligent conservative and I agree with you 99 1/2% of the time. But I think sometimes people go a bit overboard and I am only saying that over-use of the word “fascist” might be a big mistake. That is a powerful accusation to make against a woman who was helping a poor farmer so he wouldn’t lose his farm. Is that fascism? As for the rest of it, I plan to watch the entire video that Rags referenced and make my own conclusion. I’ll then revise my opinion if I find I am wrong. Can everyone else promise the same?
I love you all! Even Chaps, who is right sometimes!
Don’t be ridiculous. Surely you have been to speeches like this. Where do the most important people ALWAYS sit?
At the head table, next to the podium, or maybe a seat or two in.
Again, this is pure speculation that is not supported by any of the facts.
Not that that has stopped you before.
So, from where did Breitbart get the segment he posted? Someone stated that it was pre-edited before given to him. Any source for that?
You stop being ridiculous.
I’ve been in many venues where leadership people were moving from presentation to presentation, and took seats anywhere in the room that suited them.
But I note you avoid the issues…
I mean the real ones, not the frog-fur you like to use to distract people.
The real issue is the racism DEMONSTRATED in the NAACP.
Ohhhh…so now he could have been moving from presentation to presentation! Okay, sure.
Way to kill your own argument there, champ.
Funny. Doug’s post doesn’t mention the audience at all does it? It does mention a USDA official being forced to resign. So take your pronunciations of what is and is not the proper topic and stuff it. Considering how many times of late you have pimped your blog (with 2 whole followers last I counted!) over here, I know the line between that one and this must be getting a little blurry for you. But do try to keep them straight and leave your admin duties at the door.
Hmmm…
musta struck a nerve…
You might want to put some ice on that…