Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Will Sykes Apologize To Shirley Sherrod?

From the Brawler:

This morning Charlie Sykes joined the rightwing smear effort against Shirley Sherrod. He did it relatively late in his show, at a point when there were questions about the veracity of the video in question. Didn't let that stop him. Now that the full video is out, and it's unequivocally clear that Sherrod was telling a story of overcoming racial prejudice.

Charlie feels that the mainstream media owes Sarah Palin an apology for reporting on remarks made by her once and current future son in law, remarks he has recanted. So clearly Sykes should feel the need to apologize for reporting on a video fragment pushed by an outfit with a record of misleading the public.

Or is he going to double down?

Hypocrisy? From Sykes? Well, color me surprised.

23 comments:

  1. Acting racist was the story...learning from it was great, she still did it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Will Obama do the same? Will the USDA head do the same?
    Time for a milk summit.

    ReplyDelete
  3. he's backtracked, and somewhat admitted that he was wrong, although he has to mention all the other parties that were wrong, also.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous 9:55, acting racist was only part of the story. Keep it in context.

    Dan, yes, Obama and the USDA guy should come clean and give her her job back.

    ReplyDelete
  5. No cap the fact she did a racist act was the context...making excuses for it is another story.

    ReplyDelete
  6. So, by helping the farmer, she was being racist? You really are a desperate, angry little man, aren't you?

    ReplyDelete
  7. If you mean by help, saying to herself he needs to get help from his own people, you mean that racist help? Why is it that facts are hard for you to understand. Interestingly when shown the fallacy of your arguments you resort to schoolyard level retorts, shame you can't act like an adult.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Taking one little part out of context is what got Breitbart labeled as a racist. Why are you doing the same thing?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Capper you don't get it...that is the context. She is a racist, self admitted. Take some time out of your day and watch the whole long version released by the NAACP, after they threw her under the bus, it is not flattering at all.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Actually, it is. It shows someone that had, I repeat had, a problem, but overcame it.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Had? Are you declaring she is healed? Her words, she is/did a racist action at lease once...that was the point of the story to begin with. Seeing that active racism while performing a government job is a crime it is interesting you sidestep this based on party affiliation alone.

    ReplyDelete
  12. And she learned from her near mistake. Now she and the white couple are on very good terms.

    Will you learn from the error of your ways?

    ReplyDelete
  13. I learn something everyday capper. I learned again today that you will never admit your party is racist even when there is video tape proof.

    Your side-stepping on the issue of a government worker acting in a racist manner while performing official duties says much of your integrity as a government worker.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Logic, considering that you don't even have the common decency to keep your moniker on different sites, your opinion is of little value.

    ReplyDelete
  15. If you don't like anonymous posts change your blog to not accept them, or, stop complaining of people posting comments that your posting rules allow.

    Either way, your continued side-stepping when pushed into a corner and proven false is tiresome.

    For someone that has three separate blogs and posts continually one would think you could handle a straight debate without the side-steps and childish behavior.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I have no problem with anonymous posts. I, like most people, don't like sock puppets. But one cannot expect a Walker supporter to have morals, can we? After all, if they had morals, they wouldn't be supporting Walker in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
  17. "I have no problem with anonymous posts.", really then why did you complain?

    Since when is using a name immoral? Capper is not you name yet you use it, is that also immoral?

    Or are you back to the side stepping the issue template again?

    ReplyDelete
  18. Being anonymous is fine. Using a nickname is fine. But switching around names on a whim is just being a sockpuppet and makes you lose any credential.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Hardly a whim. My choice of using anonymous, always the first choice, is driven based on rules of the site I post on. Since this one does not require a user name, none is provided.

    Credibility is something you would never recognize, as it is nothing you ever present. Your school yard retorts of names is sticking with a pattern you do posses, yet this is nothing close to credibility...just a pattern.

    ReplyDelete
  20. If your concern is the name spot at MCF, you could have simply typed the word "Anonymous."

    Or, if you'd rather, you could just use the moniker "Logic" at this site or Cog Dis.

    That is what a person concerned with credibility would have done.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I would rather have the option of anon all the time, as I said. Your other site asks specifically for a name and an e-mail address; I did provide it. This site leaves the SPECIFIC option to declare anonymous in the drop down box.

    I am following the naming rules set by your own site. If you don't like the anon option then remove it. Until then stop your whining.

    If you were really worried about credibility you would not consistently side step issues of debate...that is lack of credibility, but as we all know you have no idea what that means. Like failing to admit how racist this lady acted and how the left wing protected her racist action, including you.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Again, Mr. Sockpuppet, you could have simply typed "anonymous" for your name. After all, you use a fake email address (well, most of the time you do). Just be glad I don't use your real name that you kindly supplied to me.

    And only a racist would pick out the segment that looked bad to try to prove the point, while ignoring the big picture which contradicts your cries of racism.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Wrong on the racist label, as you being wrong is a big surprise. She acted in a racist manner and admitted it, me pointing out the fact to you is hardly a racist position. But I suppose if you think pointing out her act of racism is itself racist you would then also think the late Sen Byrd was never in the Klan.

    ReplyDelete