Why Was Shirley Sherrod Ousted?

[Revmitchell]

SHERROD: Why am I out? They asked me to resign. And, in fact, they harassed me as I was driving back to the state office from West Point, Georgia, yesterday. I had at least three calls telling me the White House wanted me to resign.

TONY HARRIS, CNN: So the pressure came from the White House?

SHERROD: And the last one asked me to pull over to the side of the road and do it.

She said, "Well, Shirley, they want you to pull over to the side of the road and do it because you're going to be on Glenn Beck tonight."



More Here

 

[HankD]

SHERROD: Why am I out? They asked me to resign. And, in fact, they harassed me as I was driving back to the state office from West Point, Georgia, yesterday. I had at least three calls telling me the White House wanted me to resign.

TONY HARRIS, CNN: So the pressure came from the White House?

SHERROD: And the last one asked me to pull over to the side of the road and do it.

She said, "Well, Shirley, they want you to pull over to the side of the road and do it because you're going to be on Glenn Beck tonight."

More Here

Perhaps they are hoping to send Glenn on a guilt trip and are also sending the following message:

Talk to Glenn and you get thrown under the proverbial bus if we have the power to do so.

But that pesky Fox News won't be quiet about it.


HankD

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Perhaps they are hoping to send Glenn on a guilt trip and are also sending the following message:

Talk to Glenn and you get thrown under the proverbial bus if we have the power to do so.

But that pesky Fox News won't be quiet about it.


HankD

Oh well! Thats politics.

 

[targus]

She was fired because the NAACP is feeling heat for their unfounded accusations about the Tea Party being racist.

So in order to create the illusion that the NAACP is not racist they threw her under the bus without looking into the details of the matter first.

Now they are retracting their call for her resignation/firing and want her reinstated.

 

[Revmitchell]

She was fired because the NAACP is feeling heat for their unfounded accusations about the Tea Party being racist.

So in order to create the illusion that the NAACP is not racist they threw her under the bus without looking into the details of the matter first.

Now they are retracting their call for her resignation/firing and want her reinstated.

She is fired because the President wanted her fired according to Sherrod.

 

[Martin]

She was fired because the White House jumped before investigating the matter carefully. Kind of like they are doing concerning the Arizona immigration law.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

She was fired because the White House jumped before investigating the matter carefully. Kind of like they are doing concerning the Arizona immigration law.

He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him... Proverbs 18:13

 

[targus]

She is fired because the President wanted her fired according to Sherrod.

Yes. And I believe that he wanted her gone due to the demands of the NAACP.

 

[Revmitchell]

Yes. And I believe that he wanted her gone due to the demands of the NAACP.

I don't know...they have a habit of circling the wagons. And this admin has a habit of mishandling things.

 

[Bob Alkire]

There could be more coming, like putting her back in her job.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100721/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_usda_racism_resignation

 

[targus]

I don't know...they have a habit of circling the wagons. And this admin has a habit of mishandling things.

True and true.

Add to that the lack of transpency and we really never know the true intentions of this administration before, during or after any given event.

 

[billwald]

She should have been fired for having a big mouth!

Didn't she know her speech would be posted on the web? She should have been fired for stupidity.

 

[sag38]

However, the speech was edited to make her look stupid. This is one of the rare cases where context actually vindicates the speaker. She's not the one who looks stupid now. The stupid are the ones who showed only part of the speech without checking out the rest of it and the ones who threw her under the bus based solely on an edited version of her speech.

Does she have a basis for a law suit against those who edited the tape to make her look bad and against the ones who fired her before checking the veracity of the tape?

 

[billwald]

The context was that 35 years ago she sinned but now she has reformed? The admission was pragmatically a firing offense because she should have known it would stir the pot.

 

[sag38]

According to your standard most folks would be fired or will be fired at some point in his or her career.

 

[targus]

Does she have a basis for a law suit against those who edited the tape to make her look bad and against the ones who fired her before checking the veracity of the tape?

She has no basis for suing the people putting out the cut from the tape.

Truth is always a defense.

What they put out was part of what she said.

Besides there is always freedom of the press.

Whether she has a cause of action against those who fired her is another question.

 

[rbell]

If I were a smart-aleck, I could comment that Obama "acted stupidly" in this process.


But, I would NEVER do such a thing.


Seriously...lesson learned: I made comments as well...without listening to the whole speech in context. I made a snap judgment on 7 seconds of video. Who knows if my impression was right? I sure don't! She may be a racist to the nth degree. Or, she may be the victim of selective editing. Fact is, I jumped too quickly to know...and apparently, so did a LOT of other folks (including the White House!)

That kind of thing can get one in trouble. Obviously, it already has.

Now, I don't know if she deserved the firing or not. But there's no doubt that the firing was knee-jerk. And now...well, there's no good way to clean this up.

 

[Jason Garrett]

Reform, you crack me up with your heareths and sayeths and what nots. Haven't read the old KVJ in years and years. Hard to read a manuscript that is so vastly different than the manner in which one speaks.

Just sayin man.