Sue them all Shirley Sherrod! Take down the conservative media
Shirley Sherrod plans on suing Andrew Breitbart. Someone get her a good class action attorney. She should sue them all.
Former Agriculture Department employee Shirley Sherrod plans to sue conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart for posting an edited video clip of Sherrod appearing to say she discriminated against white farmers. The unedited video illustrated she had not discriminated against anyone and was simply telling a story about how people of different races must in the end come together.
Within hours of that video, she was asked to resign from the U.S.D.A.
- Judge's ruling on AZ immigration law won't stop hate groups
- Kill the Bush tax cuts, stop rewarding the rich during the recession
- Good for business: Mary J. Blige teams up with Carol's Daughter
"I will definitely do it," Sherrod said about the lawsuit. Breitbart "had to know that he was targeting me. At this point, he hasn't apologized. I don't want it at this point, and he'll definitely hear from me."
Breitbart claimed, after being criticized about releasing the video, that it had nothing to do with Sherrod. He released it simply to show that when Sherrod made racist statements to the NAACP group, there were people cheering those remarks, he claimed. "This was not about Shirley Sherrod," Breitbart told CNN's John King.
But in looking at the video, no one was cheering. In the original headline he placed on the video it read “NAACP awards racism,” as Sherrod was receiving an achievement award from the group. Neither of these facts were challenged by CNN's John King. He simply let it stand even though they were blatantly and easily proven false statements.
Now, the conservatives are once again, coming after Sherrod.Brent Bozell, head of the conservative Media Research Center, said Thursday Sherrod was the one who needed to apologize.
"Andrew Breitbart is going to be fine. He's done nothing wrong," Bozell said. "I wonder if Ms. Sherrod, who is such a champion of transparency, will publicly disclose who is putting her up to this. And I also hope this champion of honesty will stop lying about Fox News.”
"I'm also waiting for Ms. Sherrod to publicly apologize for accusing anyone opposed to nationalized healthcare of being racist," Bozell said. "Last time I checked, that was more than half the country."
Bozell’s remarks, though CNN didn’t bother to double check them either, are also false. She never said that not supporting health care reform made anyone a racist.
But this is not even the worst of the right-wing Sherrod bashing that is going on. Jeffrey Lord over at the American Spectator has called Sherrod a liar for saying one of her relatives was lynched by a white Sheriff.
“Shirley Sherrod's story in her now famous speech about the lynching of a relative is not true. The veracity and credibility of the onetime Agriculture Department bureaucrat at the center of the explosive controversy between the NAACP and conservative media activist Andrew Breitbart is now directly under challenge,” Lord wrote. “Plain as day, Ms. Sherrod says that Bobby Hall, a Sherrod relative, was lynched. As she puts it, describing the actions of the 1940s-era Sheriff Claude Screws: 'Claude Screws lynched a black man.'"
Sherrod said this: "I should tell you a little about Baker County. In case you don't know where it is, it's located less than 20 miles southwest of Albany. Now, there were two sheriffs from Baker County that -- whose names you probably never heard but I know in the case of one, the thing he did many, many years ago still affects us today. And that sheriff was Claude Screws. Claude Screws lynched a black man. And this was at the beginning of the 40s. And the strange thing back then was an all-white federal jury convicted him not of murder but of depriving Bobby Hall -- and I should say that Bobby Hall was a relative -- depriving him of his civil rights."
After some obviously deep digging to prove Sherrod a liar, Lord came upon the case of Screw vs. the U.S. Government. It made its way, like she said, all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. According to the nine judges who heard the case, back in 1945 (and we all know black folks could expect fair treatment in court in those days) the arrest was made late at night. Hall was taken from his home, supposedly charged with stealing a tire. He was handcuffed and taken by car to the courthouse.
“As Hall alighted from the car at the courthouse square, the three petitioners began beating him with their fists and with a solid-bar blackjack about eight inches long and weighing two pounds. They claimed Hall had reached for a gun and had used insulting language as he alighted from the car.”
No gun, of course, was apprehended from the scene of the crime.
They continued, the judges wrote, beating Hall for 20 or 30 minutes until he was unconscious. They then dragged him feet first through the street, through the courthouse and threw him into a jail cell. Hall laid on the floor of that jail cell dying. Hall was removed, taken to a hospital and pronounced dead within the hour.
This listed as "evidence" that Sherrod was a liar? It sounds like a lynching to me.
But I suppose he means it was not a lynching because Hall was beaten to death and not hung from a tree. Someone should tell this idiot that lynching is not reserved for trees.
Lynching is extrajudicial punishment carried out by a mob, often by hanging, but also by burning at the stake and shooting, in order to punish an alleged transgressor, or to intimidate, control, or otherwise manipulate a population of people, however large or small. It is related to other means of social control that arise in communities, such as charivari, riding the rail, and tarring and feathering. Lynchings were more frequent in times of social and economic tension, and often were means by the politically dominant population to oppress social challengers.
Then, in the midst of co-signing for Fox News newsbusters.org makes this statement:
“The liberal media have gone from largely ignoring the Sherrod story on Monday night and Tuesday morning to embracing it as a case of a woman maligned by an unfairly edited video clip. But if Sherrod is indeed the victim, much of the damage seems to have been caused by the precipitous reaction of the NAACP and the Obama administration — not liberals’ favorite target, Fox News.”
If she is a victim? You mean if she was really forced to resign? If she was really paraded on Fox News all day long as an avid racist? You mean if she was not called every name in the book by conservative media outlets like newsbusters and Fox News, if she was not set as an example of the “black in power” myth that Fox News has been hammering home all day, every day since Barack Obama was elected to office? You mean if those above things were not reality?
Sherrod is a private citizen. Unlike rules against slandering and beligning public figures, private individuals are pretty explicitly protected by law. Sherrod has every right to go after Breitbart. She has every right to go after Newsbusters, Jeffrey Lord and Fox News. I wish she would. Minorities and progressives have tried numerous times to take the wildly popular Fox News down a notch. There have been boycotts, and though they were immediately well received have not in the long-run appeared to have affected Fox News. Perhaps, a legal case will. And there is much evidence and precedence that prove exactly how methodically this “news agency” has tried to malign black people for the sole purpose of stoking racial animosity between White and Black America.
Sue them all Shirley Sherrod.