Is Shirley Sherrod A Black Eye For The Obama Administration?

@plainoldme,

plainoldme wrote:

Juan Williams discussed this matter Sunday, 25 July 2010.

Ms. Sherrod gave this speech 24 years ago.

A person can do a great deal of changing in over two decades.

Maybe in their mouths, but never, ever in the deepest caves of their hearts.

1 Reply

Everybody can change. Even George Wallace eventually abandoned his racism.

0 Replies

@failures art,

Quote:

It matters less that Fox and BB were liars, because their audience simply doesn't give a ****. This wasn't embarrassing at all for them. A true statement on their shameless nature.

I agree that the matter of Fox and BB lying is lost in cries of woe. That's a victory for them.

Which is a shame because an innocent woman who decided to go public with the story of how she matured became the center of a controversy.

But, it is not true that "their audience simply doesn't give a ****."

First of all, I have always felt that the biggest hypocrite of all is the American conservative, particularly the fundamentalist religious edition of the American conservative.

Raised a Roman Catholic, I heard my Protestant neighbors say that Catholics were hypocrites who did what they wanted to do then sought the forgiveness and redemption of the confessional box. What they neglected to say is that many fundamentalist Protestants seek the forgiveness and the redemption of accepting Jesus Christ as a personal savior. (Jesus Christ probably hates both that type of Catholic and that type of Protestant.)

Second, the neo-Cons, students of Leo Strauss, believe that not only is it acceptable for those in power to lie but that there are times when those in power must lie.

Third, think of the posters here who write their ignorant prejudicial crap in red and blue and 18 point type about Obama, liberals, etc. Multiply that by the people on the streets, picketing with signs of Obama with a Hitler mustache or wearing Muslim robes. They come with preconceived notions (not ideas, not philosophies) and if Fox news or Breitbart give them what they want to hear, and they are anxious to hear it to the exclusion of everything and anything else, the do give a ****.

BTW, here is a new blog post that might interest you:

http://www.opednews.com/articles/In-Defense-of-Andrew-Breit-by-earl-ofari-hutchin-100725-536.html

2 Replies

@Miller,

Quote:

Maybe in their mouths, but never, ever in the deepest caves of their hearts.

A statement from a rightie that there is no such thing as human progress. Calvinism is alive and well!

0 Replies

@plainoldme,

plainoldme wrote:

...Raised a Roman Catholic, I heard my Protestant neighbors say that Catholics were hypocrites who did what they wanted to do then sought the forgiveness and redemption of the confessional box. What they neglected to say is that many fundamentalist Protestants seek the forgiveness and the redemption of accepting Jesus Christ as a personal savior. (Jesus Christ probably hates both that type of Catholic and that type of Protestant.)...

The real concern over Catholicism, I believe, is the concern that if it was possible to make this a Catholic country, a la some European countries, that would happen. In other words, in my opinion, Protestantism subscribes to a unique (in Europe) attitude of spiritual diversity (also fair play). If my perception of a Protestant viewpoint is correct, perhaps it reflects the fact that Protestantism had a flock that had to be literate to participate. I believe that makes for people that might not readily accept supposed powers of priests (during rituals). And therefore, chooses to interpret holy Scripture as one chooses (Protestants can always go to another congregation). Not so in Catholicism. It is the Vaticans way, or the highway, so to speak, even though American Catholics may reflect much more free thinking than Latin American Catholics?

Now, since I am just a secular Jew, the above are just my observations, gleaned from what I have perceived over the decades. But, regardless, for this to remain a Protestant nation (I prefer to say "great Protestant nation), there must be a degree of alienation from Roman Catholicism, since otherwise this country would be Catholic!

4 Replies

@Foofie,

I'm not certain where you are going with this, but, the Baptists were formed by people who wanted to interpret the Bible as each individual saw fit, according to his or her conscience, skill and life station. Sounds very liberal, doesn't it?

All I was saying it that while Protestants in the 50s and early 60s criticized Catholics for having a spiritual escape hatch, the fact was Protestants also had a spiritual escape hatch. Both can be hypocritical.

1 Reply

@plainoldme,

plainoldme wrote:

Quote:
It matters less that Fox and BB were liars, because their audience simply doesn't give a ****. This wasn't embarrassing at all for them. A true statement on their shameless nature.

I agree that the matter of Fox and BB lying is lost in cries of woe. That's a victory for them.

Which is a shame because an innocent woman who decided to go public with the story of how she matured became the center of a controversy.

But, it is not true that "their audience simply doesn't give a ****."

First of all, I have always felt that the biggest hypocrite of all is the American conservative, particularly the fundamentalist religious edition of the American conservative.

Raised a Roman Catholic, I heard my Protestant neighbors say that Catholics were hypocrites who did what they wanted to do then sought the forgiveness and redemption of the confessional box. What they neglected to say is that many fundamentalist Protestants seek the forgiveness and the redemption of accepting Jesus Christ as a personal savior. (Jesus Christ probably hates both that type of Catholic and that type of Protestant.)

Second, the neo-Cons, students of Leo Strauss, believe that not only is it acceptable for those in power to lie but that there are times when those in power must lie.

Third, think of the posters here who write their ignorant prejudicial crap in red and blue and 18 point type about Obama, liberals, etc. Multiply that by the people on the streets, picketing with signs of Obama with a Hitler mustache or wearing Muslim robes. They come with preconceived notions (not ideas, not philosophies) and if Fox news or Breitbart give them what they want to hear, and they are anxious to hear it to the exclusion of everything and anything else, the do give a ****.

Right on the money, POM

1 Reply

@Foofie,

Quote:

Now, since I am just a secular Jew, the above are just my observations, gleaned from what I have perceived over the decades. But, regardless, for this to remain a Protestant nation (I prefer to say "great Protestant nation), there must be a degree of alienation from Roman Catholicism, since otherwise this country would be Catholic!

Foofie, you don't know the history of this country very well. It turns out that the groups that formed to keep the country from becoming Catholic... weren't too fond of Jews either.

http://markwadestone.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/kkk2.jpg

EDIT: more interesting picture (can you tell what the message is here?)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2e/Ballot1.jpg/220px-Ballot1.jpg

0 Replies

@failures art,

Quote:

The idea that Obama apologizing affects the chance of us being attacked is one of the stupidest things you've ever said. Top ten, and it's becoming a competitive list.

you misunderstood, I was not saying that Obama made America look weak, I said that it made HIM look weak. He burned up some of his political capital, not a smart move.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
The idea that Obama apologizing affects the chance of us being attacked is one of the stupidest things you've ever said. Top ten, and it's becoming a competitive list.

you misunderstood, I was not saying that Obama made America look weak, I said that it made HIM look weak. He burned up some of his political capital, not a smart move.

In what way does it make him look weak? You should be able to better define this, if it were as obvious as you posit.

I don't think you know what 'weak' means.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

it could be worse, it could be shirley phelps-roper

GOD HATES FARMERS
Twisted Evil

0 Replies

@snood,

Thanks!

0 Replies

Breitbart did this to lash out at the NAACP for criticizing the racial elements in the Tea Party movement. This seems to have been his idea of payback.

The right wing media will use any tactics, the reporting of truth has become almost irrelevant.The goal is simply to stir things up, to agitate against Obama and the Democrats and get the flock riled up. And racial issues, inferring that blacks are biased against whites, does that in one hell of a hurry. And it feeds into the similar things they say about Obama.

Race is such a tinderbox that any spark ignites such emotion it clouds the judgment of otherwise thinking people. This time it affected everyone in a knee jerk manner.

The NAACP reacted too fast, to try to protect themselves and their image
The mainstream media reacted too fast without fully checking out the facts of the story
The Administration reacted too fast in firing Sherrod.

Everyone assumed Sherrod was a bigot without sufficient reason.

The lesson we should learn from this is that we've got to continue to openly discuss the issue of race. It's a potent issue and it cannot be ignored, particularly with a black President in the White House. The right subtly plays the race card all the time, and, for certain elements in the Tea Party movement, it's being played not so subtly, and with definite racist overtones.

This situation is a black eye for many people, but it certainly does nothing to enhance Obama's image of being able to address issues of race, and provide leadership on that score. I don't think he was directly responsible for dumping Sherrod, but the fallout helps to tarnish him. He was right to apologize to her. For that, I admire him.

It is a shame that social issues keep surfacing and eclipsing what the President is trying to accomplish--like financial reform. The issues, like race, have to be addressed, but, I think, in a way that does not directly affect the President, he has enough else to do. But race is the elephant in the room. The only way to disarm the right from using race as a covert political weapon is to bring the issue out in the open and talk about it.

0 Replies

@plainoldme,

plainoldme wrote:

I'm not certain where you are going with this, but, the Baptists were formed by people who wanted to interpret the Bible as each individual saw fit, according to his or her conscience, skill and life station. Sounds very liberal, doesn't it?

All I was saying it that while Protestants in the 50s and early 60s criticized Catholics for having a spiritual escape hatch, the fact was Protestants also had a spiritual escape hatch. Both can be hypocritical.

I was under the belief that only the "born again" Evangelicals start out anew spiritually by their rededication to Jesus. However, main stream Protestants, so to speak, I thought, have to take their sins to the grave. And, "born agains" are not the majority of U.S. Protestants, I thought.

Also, while I have met Protestants that have voiced how they do not agree with different aspects of Catholicism, I have met far fewer Catholics that have voiced their disagreements with Protestantism to me. What does that show? Perhaps, some Protestants may think that my being Jewish might reflect a friendly ear to their thinking? And, some Catholics may think any non-Catholic does not have the proverbial security clearance for such discussions?

And then when Jews marry out, it is often to a person that is Catholic. Go figure?

2 Replies

@Foofie,

When I was in grad school, I went to the caf where my kaffee klatch friends gathered in the morning. Sam, whose religion was unknown to me until that day, greeted me and asked whether I practiced a religion or was raised in one. I said I would go out and come back in but Sam stopped me. I then told him I was raised Roman Catholic. Sam turned to the table and said he rested his point and I tried to leave again.

All of the people I knew were Catholics or Jews. no one knew a Protestant except for Dale, who was raised Lutheran, the original Protestant.

We decided to have invite a Protestant to lunch day and talked about this phenom for months. We decided that since we were raised in religions that were heavily symbolic and outside the social mainstream, it was natural for Catholics and Jews to come together. Thank you, John Lennon.

0 Replies

@Foofie,

Foofie wrote:

And then when Jews marry out, it is often to a person that is Catholic. Go figure?

The only Jews who marry out are Reform and they are not overly observant, to put it mildly. Now as far as the now Jewish partner goes, yes based on the Jewish marriages I've observed , the non-Jewish spouse is often an individual who was baptized a Catholic.

Few Reform Rabbis marry a Jew and a non-Jew. The Rabbi will marry the couple, if and when the non-Jew converts to Judaism. I'm of the opinion that the non-Jewish spouse, who does the converting is usually the male and rarely the female.

A truly Catholic person will never to convert to Judaism, while an observant Jew will certainly never convert to Catholicism.

On the other hand, I've always wondered why a Jew would convert to Islam, as some do.

1 Reply

Quote:

On "Fox News Sunday," former Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean accused Fox News Channel of an "absolutely racist" action by playing the now-famous edited clip of Shirley Sherrod’s remarks. Host Chris Wallace indignantly countered by saying Fox News didn’t play the clip until after officials in the Obama administration forced Sherrod to quit her job.

Wallace was correct, but there’s more to the story.

http://factcheck.org/2010/07/sunday-replay-14/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=facebook

0 Replies

I rec'd an email containing a clip of Breitbart that was highly edited in the manner in which he edited -- or was it distributed the edited tape he rec'd -- the Sherrod tape. I had no inclination to post it but the man has a terrible, mincing, high pitched voice.

0 Replies

I admit that there was blame to go all around from the various networks to the administration. It was also really sad a good woman was put through the wringer through no fault of her own. I see no reason to get into those who brought the story as I have no respect for them in the first place.

But was it really worth spending the few days almost exclusively on the Sherrod debacle? I was laid up after a car wreck and was watching the news a lot during this time period and I finally turned it off and it seemed they were just going round and round 24 sevens with the story.

0 Replies

Schieffer says the "New Media" is to blame

Quote:

On Sunday, CBS’s Face the Nation host Bob Schieffer delivered a commentary about the Sherrod affair.

Saying that he was proud to be a member of the “old media,” he remarked, “Yes, we do operate differently than some in the new media…We still call people involved in a story to get their side, editors fact check, and we never publish or broadcast anything unless we think it’s true.

Last week we saw what can happen when it’s done the other way.”

1 Reply

Is Shirley Sherrod A Black Eye For The Obama Administration?

Quick Links

My Account

able2know