Many in the media spent their time yesterday apologizing to Shirley Sherrod. While the media’s mass mea culpa was happening, Ms. Sherrod spoke to Media Matters. Here’s what she said:

She said Fox showed no professionalism in continuing to bother her for an interview, but failing to correct their coverage.

“I think they should but they won’t. They intended exactly what they did. They were looking for the result they got yesterday,” she said of Fox. “I am just a pawn. I was just here. They are after a bigger thing, they would love to take us back to where we were many years ago. 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.”

Clearly, Ms. Sherrod is a bitter partisan. While it’s true that some people owed her an apology, let’s not think that we should nominate Ms. Sherrod for sainthood. There’s still alot of filth and hostility inside her.

During the second panel on Special Report, host Bret Baier addressed Ms. Sherrod’s vitriolic statement:

“We have invited Ms. Sherrod onto Fox News many times. She talked in an interview with Media Matters, and I don’t often quote Media Matters on this show but here’s what she told them:

“They are after a bigger thing, they would love to take us back to where we were many years ago. 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.”

Well, Ms. Sherrod, that is just not true. It’s not true.

Immediately after making that statement, Baier asked Charles Krauthammer for his opinion. Here’s what Charles said:

She was a victim but that doesn’t entitle her to victimize others and to use these kinds of attacks. She’s wrong and even though she is a person who needs restitution on the part of those who wronged her, this is not something that anyone can endorse and again this is part of this cycle which really ought to stop.

Summarizing this, it’s accurate to say that 1) Sherrod was victimized, mostly by the Obama administration and 2) Sherrod is a bitter partisan.

Let’s also set another thing straight, namely FNC’s getting Sherrod fired. This morning, Howard Kurtz looks into that in his media column. Here’s what he’s reporting:

But for all the chatter, some of it from Sherrod herself, that she was done in by Fox News, the network didn’t touch the story until her forced resignation was made public Monday evening, with the exception of brief comments by O’Reilly. After a news meeting Monday afternoon, an e-mail directive was sent to the news staff in which Fox Senior Vice President Michael Clemente said: “Let’s take our time and get the facts straight on this story. Can we get confirmation and comments from Sherrod before going on-air. Let’s make sure we do this right.”

It’s apparent that FNC Sr. VP Clemente got it exactly right. Lost in all of the finger-pointing is this email directive, which mandated getting confirmation before running with the story.

Media Matters’ Eric Boehlert faced off with Andrew Breitbart on ABC’s GMA with Stephanopolous, making this statement:

Eric Boehlert of the liberal advocacy group Media Matters told George Stephanopoulos: “Andrew had no idea what the context of the comments were, but that didn’t stop him from launching the smear campaign.”

Mr. Boehlert wasn’t interested in listening to Mr. Breitbart. Mr. Breitbart said his contention wasn’t with with Sherrod but with the reaction from NAACP members attending a NAACP banquet. Breitbart said that the applause from the audience while Sherrod talked about not doing everything for a white farmer was proof that the NAACP had racists within its own ranks.

This fiasco has lots of spin. It’s wise to ignore anything from Eric Boehlert and/or Media Matters. They have their attack lines down pat and they’re repeating them without hesitation. I wouldn’t trust Mr. Boehlert as far as I could throw him if I had 2 broken arms and a bad back.

His only goal is pushing the progressives’ agenda. His responses don’t change when someone highlights the fact that his agenda is manufactured and totally ideology-based. Rather, he just keeps plowing ahead.

Let’s not annoint Ms. Sherrod for sainthood. Similarly, let’s not think that the spinmeisters from Media Matters are interested in the truth.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Cross-posted at California Conservative

3 Responses to “No Sainthood For Shirley Sherrod?”

  • walter hanson says:


    There are two things I find very interesting in this. The first is that Shirley was a victim because somebody tried to twist something she said shows that she was a racist which she isn’t. Yet the more I’m hearing this woman speak the more that is showing.

    * During the speech (part of that speech not taking out of context) she said that blacks were victims of racism by George Bush for eight years and the people who opposed health care are doing it because of racism.

    * By saying that people want to take blacks to where they were earlier implies that she thinks whites will do that!

    That shows the real racist. Yet the White House wants to apologize to her.

    Walter Hanson
    Minneapolis, MN

  • walter hanson says:

    Opps I forgot the second. If context does matter will these same people who are attacking Andrew apply the same standard to lying Congressman John Lewis. After all with all those cameras how come not one (including the ones held by Democrats) have shown that the N word was said something like 15 times. Andrew (the same person being attacked) offered a $100,000 reward. Coming forward with that tape would embarrassed the tea party (a sure reason to do it immediately), ruin Andrew (something they are trying to do now), and get a cool $100,000.

    Yet they haven’t done that.

    Walter Hanson
    Minneapolis, MN

Leave a Reply