Obama blamed Vilsack for firing Sherrod....

[Green_Lantern]

After telling Sherrod he regretted her forced resignation over racial remarks she made to an NAACP audience, Obama said in a nationally broadcast network interview he believes Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack "jumped the gun" in sacking the veteran Georgian federal worker.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/23/obama-reflects-on-race-af_n_656897.html

[VMI Dem]

1. Thats what fall guys are for.

[opihimoimoi]

3. Fall guy? Guilty guy? it was Vils call...he takes the Fall...Sale going on at SWORDS R US

[Green_Lantern]

4. I'm sure Vilsack didn't just fire her without the WH pressuring him..

To do it.

[NJmaverick]

5. How did you come to that conclusion?

[Green_Lantern]

11. Sherodd said it herself

Mrs Sherrod was phoned not once but three times as she drove home - and she says the official who phoned her at the prompting of the White House was so desperate to get her to quit that she ended up pulling over to the side of the road and resigning by e-mail.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-10722121

[VMI Dem]

17. Centrists think she is a liar.

[Green_Lantern]

22. well she is a communist..

Or so Michelle Malkin said lol.

[bvar22]

85. "Centrists think she is a liar."

Well, thats the sensible, pragmatic thing to do!

[phleshdef]

27. The "White House" does not always imply Presidential involvement nor did she actually KNOW...

...the details one way or the other.

You have a pretty ignorant view of the way the bureacracy of the federal government works, especially if you think the President would typically be involved in the management of a low level state official.

[bobbolink]

31. The president takes responsiblity for what "comes out of the White House".

See this sign?:

[phleshdef]

40. Yea, and people like you have turned it into nothing more than a corny cliche...

...that you think you can use to beat a President over the head with anytime something goes wrong, regardless of how ridiculous your assertions are. Thus, the phrase and any power it once had has lost nearly all meaning due to it being verbally raped and molested by anyone who wants to relentlessly bitch about any little thing they feel like bitching about.

[treestar]

57. Yes, exactly. +1000

If there was too much sugar in the WH iced tea, they'd be claiming Obama was responsible for that, too.

[SammyWinstonJack]

83. Seriously?

:eyes:

[Donnachaidh]

77. uhh. what about that much vaulted phrase *I've got this*.

So basically, it's only *got* when it's politically expedient?

:wow:

[bobbolink]

79. Its people like you, who see "attacks" on Obama behind every post, who are doing the

constant bitching and moaning that is raping and molesting the forum.

[Green_Lantern]

32. so you think Sherrod is ignorant of how the federal bureacracy works?

nt

[phleshdef]

43. I think Sherrod is not an all knowing, all seeing flying spaghetti monster...

...and thus is a human like all the rest of us. You may not realize this, but as humans, we are limited in our ability to know the details of events we weren't present for.

[Green_Lantern]

52. Sherrod would know if the person telling her to resign worked

At the WH. It wasn't an assumption...she said the call was from someone in the WH.

[phleshdef]

55. Cheryl Cook does not work in the White House and thats who fired her.

And Cook only said that the Whitehouse wanted her out, which could mean a million different people suggesting as much. It in no way proves Presidential involvement, no matter how much you would like it to. Either produce the proof or admit you really don't know.

[Green_Lantern]

61. sorry...the BBC story I quoted wasn't very clear about who told her

To resign...

It said "Mrs Sherrod was phoned not once but three times as she drove home - and she says the official who phoned her at the prompting of the White House was so desperate to get her to quit that she ended up pulling over to the side of the road and resigning by e-mail."

I interpreted that as saying the official was from the WH.

[MyNameGoesHere]

50. Yes I am sure the headlines about a Obama "appointee"

<That was what Fox was calling Ms. Sherrod> that supposedly made a racially divisive speech was of no concern to the Admin or the President. I am sure they were ignoring it all together. Are you suggesting that Obama is dumb? Pretending to say he had no knowledge is about the same as calling him incompetent.

[DURHAM D]

6. Exactly - it was discussed at the Monday morning WH staff meeting. nt

[rocktivity]

48. Or, at the VERY least

putting the presidential seal of approval on it.

x(
rocktivity

[jeffrey_X]

84. Vilsack was supposed to check with Obama before he fired her?

are all department heads supposed to check with Obama on every single move they make?

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Green_Lantern]

7. Obama throws many things under the bus...

Next he'll divorce Michelle because of a Foxnews story.

[Sebastian Doyle]

12. Michelle has an organic garden behind the White House

That would also make her more qualified than VilSuck to run the USDA.

[texastoast]

9. Maybe that was the WH plan all along?

Villy is not a very popular Obama choice. Fox. Henhouse. And maybe O is starting to wise up about how appointing soulless corporate shills to positions like this really isn't the best idea he has had.

[Green_Lantern]

15. or maybe Obama can step down and let Sherrod be President..

nt

[gratuitous]

8. I think I would be happy if . . .

If this latest episode causes the Obama White House to (1) not be quite so cowed by the prospect of whatever Glenn Beck is going to rant about; (2) stand up for their own people and their governing principles instead of seeking to appease nitwit yammerers who they're not ever going to satisfy; (3) realize that by pandering to the yammering nitwits, they're only emboldening them to keep up their nitwit yammering; and (4) by folding faster than Superman on laundry day in these episodes, they're discouraging people who would really like to support them.

I'm asking a lot, I know.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

10. I like all the calls for Vilsack to be fired.

It's like the same calls for Sherrod to be fired.

[Sebastian Doyle]

14. No it's not the same at all.

Sherrod was helping family farmers. VilSuck is a tool of those who want to make them extinct. As are you. ;)

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

16. It's irrational knee jerk fingerpointing, of the Breitbart variety.

your post only illustrates my point.

[joeybee12]

23. Let's Sherrod was fired in 3 minutes...a few days later Vilasck still has his job...

...so even if he is fired, then it's hardly comparable...epic fail...yet again.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

26. Dumbasses call for Sherrod to be fired for no good reason...

...you can fill in the rest.

[SidDithers]

28. Good point...nt

Sid

[Green_Lantern]

18. I hope you aren't a Luddite...

Oh wait...you're on a computer.

Honestly I know very little about Vilsack or agricultural politics.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

19. Oh, he is.

In his world people are either luddites or monsanto shills.

[SidDithers]

45. MonSatan...

c'mon, get it right :)

Sid

[ljm2002]

21. Hmmm, let's see now...

...Ms. Sherrod: Mr. Breitbart posts an edited video that purports to show racist remarks when in fact the whole video shows just the opposite. Ms. Sherrod is fired before all the facts come in. Ms. Sherrod herself denies the charges against her and the tape shows that she is 100% correct.

Mr. Vilsack: Mr. Breitbart posts the edited video, Vilsack spasms and insists that Ms. Sherrod be fired before he ever talks to Ms. Sherrod to get her side to the story, and before doing any investigation to see what the rest of the video showed. He himself affirms that is what he did.

Yes, I can see how you might think those situations are exactly the same, considering the source that is.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

25. Here's how it's the same.

RW launches a smear campaign to damage the Obama administration. Some people get suckered by it, and continue to attack the Obama administration and demand resignations for no legitimate reasons.

It's almost like they want to be suckers.

[ljm2002]

35. Here's how it's different.

RW launches a smear campaign to damage Shirley Sherrod and the NAACP. Some people in the Obama administration get suckered by it and fire Ms. Sherrod before knowing all the facts, which quickly come out and exonerate her 100%. The Obama administration looks bad because they fired someone for no legitimate reason. Inexplicably, however, no one in the administration has any consequences. Except for the entire administration, which continues to look weak, and like they are unwilling to hold people to account (see, e.g.: no prosecutions of the Bush admin for anything at all).

It's almost like they want to look like 90-pound weaklings.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

38. The Obama administration looks bad because people still carry Breitbart's water.

Are you calling for anybody at the NAACP to be fired even though they made the same mistake? No? Well there you go.

[ljm2002]

46. Actually, I haven't called for anyone to be fired...

...however, I do see the point of those who are calling for Vilsack to be fired. It's not a pet issue of mine though.

When it comes to the NAACP, I ask you: which officer of the NAACP was put into office by the voters? None? Well there you go.

[tkmorris]

53. Yes, it's exactly the same thing

[bvar22]

86. Not at all.

I was calling for Vilsack to be fired the day he was appointed.
He is waaaaaay to close to Monsanto to be in charge of protecting our Agricultural Hen House.
This latest flap merely highlights Obama's Error in Judgment at appointing a Corporate Yes Man like Vilsack.

Same goes for Salazar.
EXPERTS should be in those positions....not crony politicians.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

13. Last I heard presidents hire cabinet secretarys to carry out THEIR policies.

Either Vilsack was "just following orders" or is a loose cannon that should be fired.

Ironically, Shirley was fired for not doing something she was accused of, while Vilsack remains on the job after admitting to doing something that was obviously wrong. :crazy:

[phleshdef]

24. Firing someone because you thought they did something wrong is a pretty normal policy to have.

Vilsack was wrong for not looking into it. But at the end of the day, if he actually believed the evidence put forth was all there was and fired her, you can't exactly accuse the President of putting forth a bad policy. It was a bad execution of a valid employment policy.

When it comes down to it, Vilsack himself said it never went above him. Until there is concrete proof otherwise (and there isn't at the moment), then thats what happened, period.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

29. And, Vilsack is still employed, while Sharrod isn't.

[phleshdef]

33. Horse shit. The administration has apologized to her and offered her re-employment.

If she wants it, she can have it.

And despite what people may think of Vilsack policy wise, as bad as this mistake was, he doesn't deserve to be fired for it anymore than she deserved to be fired over the edited tape. He wasn't doing anything crooked or illegal. There was no great national disaster caused by his actions. He panicked. And considering the history of the racist shit that has gone down in the USDAs past, its no wonder.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

37. Sherrod was offered her job back.

You, however, want to keep making the same mistake.

[Sebastian Doyle]

64. No she was not

She was offered a different job. One that would prevent her from helping family farmers, as she was doing in her previous position. No doubt the person VilSuck hires to replace her would be more MonSatan friendly, like himself.

And THAT is the reason why VilSuck needs to be fired, and Shirley Sherrod should get HER job back. Not a different unrelated job. Although I would have no objection if they gave her VilSuck's job.

[phleshdef]

66. Vilsuck, you must have laid awake all night thinking that one up.

Seriously, how old are we here?

The rest of what you said there are just based on conspiratorial day dreams.

[Sebastian Doyle]

73. I've been calling him that since 2004

When he helped Chimpy steal the election, 11 months before the fact. He's a rancid piece of shit, and I make no apologies for anything I've ever said about the backstabbing DLC bastard.

[Hannah Bell]

41. if he believed fox news without looking into it, he's an idiot who should be fired.

[phleshdef]

44. I hope you never run any company I ever work for.

[Hannah Bell]

47. do you dispute the contention that personnel decisions shouldn't be based on propaganda

from fox news?

do you dispute the contention that someone who uses fox news to make such decisions is an idiot who should be fired?

if you'd like to provide an argument, as opposed to personal attack, feel free.

[phleshdef]

54. I dispute the basis for your argument in general.

For one, I'm not sure Fox news was the only network carrying the story. The video was put out there, someone brought it to Vilsack's attention and he acted on the face value of the video without questioning whether or not it had a different context. It was a bad mistake to make only because the video wasn't telling the whole story, but that doesn't mean that the person that made the mistake should be punished for it with their job. It wasn't illegal. It wasn't crooked. And it didn't illustrated bad intentions on Vilsack's part. As I said, I disagree with Vilsack on certain policy issues, but I'm not going to be so out of touch with my own sense of humanity that I refuse to see how someone would make a mistake like that.

Regardless, just because it was on Fox news doesn't mean its automatically a setup. If Sharrod really was publically admitting to discriminating against white people during the past 2 years she had been working at the USDA (in other words if she really was guilty of the accusations) Fox news STILL would have carried the story.

Aside from how much we hate Fox news, using their involvement as an argument for firing Vilsack is extremely weak. We've seen what Fox does when they have a legitimate controversy to push. They push it even harder than the fake ones.

[Hannah Bell]

58. "doesn't automatically mean" -- which is why investigation should be done before snap decisions.

vilsack himself admits he didn't even look at the full tape. or hear sherrod out.

ergo, he's an idiot who should be fired.

fox is a full propaganda organization. *nothing* they do is "legitimate".

[phleshdef]

62. Fox tore into John Edwards for fucking around on his wife. That was legitimate.

And in the world of post-Rev Wright Youtube and the well document history of the USDAs racial discrimination problems, if you can't see why Vilsack would have panicked the way that he did, then you have a serious empathy problem. I can't argue against an empathy problem. I'll ask you to try to understand and you will just issue more foamy mouthed yells for someone to be bludgeoned over it. I guess its the "progressive" way of acting out hawkish instincts. There is no point.

[Hannah Bell]

68. oh, please. fox news selectively reports cheaters, as it selectively reports everything else,

and the rest is more personal attack.

you have no argument, & your defense of fox's legitimacy as a news org is interesting, to say the least.

[phleshdef]

70. I didn't say they were a legitimate news organization.

They are the political equivalent of the national enquirer with a heavy Republican bias.

That doesn't change the fact that you can pass a story off as automatically false because it was on Fox news. Thats a losing argument.

Call it a personal attack if you like, you are personally attacking Vilsack with no regard as to why he might have panicked the way that he did. I'm just pointing that out. If you don't like me pointing out exactly what you are doing, then maybe you should stop doing it.

[Hannah Bell]

71. i didn't say any story from fox was false. i said anyone who makes a decision based on a report

fox, without investigating further, is an idiot who should be fired.

quit moving the goalposts.

[phleshdef]

72. So Fox was the ONLY media outlet reporting this prior to the firing?

And there are no goal posts. This isn't a fucking game.

[Hannah Bell]

74. more goalpost moving & diversion. it is to you, apparently.

Yesterday, right-wing media tycoon Andrew Breitbart posted a video of Department of Agriculture official Shirley Sherrod, who is African-American, telling an NAACP gathering that she withheld help from a white farmer, in part because of his race. “Video Proof: The NAACP Awards Racism,” Breitbart declared on his BigGovernment.com website. “er federal duties are managed through the prism of race and class distinctions,” Breitbart wrote, just days after the NAACP condemned “racist elements” within the tea party movement, of which Breitbart is a key supporter. Right-wing blogs and Fox News quickly picked up the video and demanded blood.

Within less than a day, Sherrod resigned from her USDA post under heavy pressure from the White House, saying she received “at least three” frantic phone calls from superiors demanding her resignation. At first glance, the forced resignation seemed fair — even the NAACP endorsed it, calling her comments “shameful.”

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/07/20/shirley-sherrod-video/

[phleshdef]

81. Yea, even the NAACP thought there was something to it.

You need to be calling for the NAACP to be completed dismantled, or at the least call on all progressives to boycott the NAACP and never give them another dime. Renounce the NAACP RIGHT NOW or else face the fact that your bullshit opinion on this is a complete double standard, devoid of any and all credibility.

[spin]

87. The mistake was in not waiting to hear Sharrod's side of the story ...

a good supervisor stands behind their employees and a really good supervisor will fight to support an employee he believes is right, even if it costs him his job.

But first, a good supervisor has to know exactly what happened. Obviously, you don't fire an employee who is driving to tell you what happened.

Bill O'Reilly made an apology to Sharrod for his blunder in showing a clip from a speech without viewing the entire speech. But then, he's a pompous blowhard who has allowed his fame to convince him that he is a superior journalist that can give Rush Limbaugh a run for the most influential conservative voice in the media.

A lot of people ended up with egg on their faces. Shirley Sharrod might be the only person to walk away a winner.

It all will depend on what Cheryl Cook (the person who asked Sharrod to resign while driving) has to say when the media finally corners her. She is the person who mentioned pressure from the White House. She can only play hide and seek for a little while longer before she becomes the story. That assumes the media is willing to track her down. If they don't try than they don't deserve to be called journalists.

[Spazito]

20. Vilsack, himself, said, in effect, he 'jumped the gun'...

and he certainly did. President Obama was merely stating what was true and self-admitted by Vilsack but we ONLY have a deliberately selected clip to go by as opposed to any context in which the President made his belief known.

Oh, and I believe the FULL interview has yet to air which is this evening so, yet again, outrage over a deliberately selected CLIP which is being accepted without any question as to why THAT clip might have been selected, is not unlike the reaction DUers castigated the Obama administration for doing, not waiting to get the full facts, the entire interview, before rendering a verdict.

[Green_Lantern]

30. your logic doesn't make sense

You imply Obama didn't say Vilsack jumped the gun but that Vilsack said he jumped the gun...yet even so Obama either a.)didn't dispute Vilsack jumped the gun or b.)Obama doesn't think Vilsack jumped the gun

Also why does Sherrod say the WH pressured her to resign?

[phleshdef]

36. Your reading comprehension makes even less sense.

That post did not imply, even in the slightest that the President didn't say exactly what was quoted. What that post is implying, thats completely obvious, is that without seeing the entire clip of the President's take on the events, we don't know what his story is in regards to his own involvement or how much responsibility he is taking for the incident.

She says the WH pressured her because her boss that fired her told her that the WH wanted her to step down. The "White House" is pretty vague and it doesn't speak at all to the President's actual involvement. The federal government is a lot bigger than a fast food restaurant.

[Spazito]

49. Huh, this is what I said...

"President Obama was merely stating what was true and self-admitted by Vilsack...", you seemed to have missed that along with the point of the SELECTED clip from an interview, as yet, unaired provides no context in which the President's remarks were voiced.

As to Ms. Sherrod, she did not say the WH pressured her to respond, this is what she did say:

"Shirley Sherrod, the former Georgia director of Rural Development, said she received a phone call from the USDA's deputy undersecretary Cheryl Cook on Monday while she was in a car. Cook told her that the White House wanted her to call it quits."

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/07/20/2010-07-20_shirley_sherrod_exusda_worker_white_house_forced_me_to_resign_over_fabricated_ra.html

So, the real facts as to what Ms. Sherrod said was to name Ms. Cook, who was the one who said "the White House wanted her to call it quits".

Please don't mislead by saying Ms. Sherrod said things she did not, that is quite unfair to her, imo.

[Green_Lantern]

59. sorry...the BBC story I quoted wasn't very clear about who told her

To resign.

[Spazito]

63. That's the unfortunate side of taking any, and I really mean, any news...

article at face value. We now know the media will go to great lengths to protect their own while attempting to re-direct the attention from the facts.

We are all guilty of doing that at times, myself included certainly, but I am really working on doing some research before trusting what any of them say.

[quiller4]

51. Actually Sherrod doesn't say that the White House pressured her

to resign. In two interviews with her that I've heard she has corrected the interviewers who suggested that White House pressure was involved saying that she doesn't believe that the White House was at all involved in her forced resignation. I heard her say that on MSNBC and on CNN

[Hannah Bell]

69. cbs says: Shirley Sherrod: White House Forced My Resignation

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20011099-503544.html

Shirley Sherrod, the USDA's former director of rural development in Georgia, said USDA deputy undersecretary Cheryl Cook called her Monday and said the White House wanted her to resign, the Associated Press reports.

"They called me twice," Sherrod told the AP, noting that she was driving when she received the calls. "The last time they asked me to pull over the side of the road and submit my resignation on my Blackberry, and that's what I did."

[opihimoimoi]

34. It real guilty MFKR is Brietbart and his minions incl FAUX NOOS

Sherrod has mentioned since he came after HER

she can go after HIM ....w a sue job....holding major cards in her hand...

DEMS got caught with jumpin guns n all, but the real asshole is a GOP OP

[Spazito]

56. Yep, Vilsack acted wrongly and has admitted it, apologized for it...

and the President, himself, has spoken directly to her. The media, on the other hand, have been closing ranks to protect the scumbag, Breitbart, for their own self-interest. If the public actually looks at the catalyst for the hell Ms. Sherrod has been through, Breitbart followed by the mainstream media, then their credibility, already in the toilet, will be completely flushed, hence the scramble to point fingers at the Obama administration, imo.

I hope Ms. Sherrod does, indeed, sue the hell out of Breitbart and whoever else was guilty of promulgating the deliberate smearing of her.

[opihimoimoi]

60. FOX is stuck in a Nuts Vice.....nuts squeezed with 4756 lbs psi pressure

They will be sued as well as they pushed the story knowingly it was false....they had the entire tape and edited it to smear Sherrod..

I hope she drags in Hannity and the rest....

[Spazito]

65. Yep, totally agree! n/t

[spanone]

39. well?

[SidDithers]

42. Wasn't it Vilsack who fired Sharrod?...nt

Sid

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

67. According to Ms. Sherrod, she was told several times that the WH wanted her to resign.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5TV479_oC8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kV4k1B4drMQ

[dtexdem]

75. Yeah, so? Are you saying that someone else fired her?

Vilsack is Secretary of Agriculture, so administrator with the responsibility. Are you suggesting that the President was so micromanaging as to tell Vilsack to fire Sherrod?

[cwydro]

76. President Obama is blowing a lot of stupid stuff here

He has blown some serious stuff too...the bailouts, the Gulf, Afghanistan...but this is just stupid.

And inexcusable.

[Minimus]

80. It also isn't true

but maybe that doesn't matter.

[cwydro]

82. Sure

that is why he apologized to her.

This is a huge cluster and if you can't see it, well, ok.

Just one of the many.

[moondust]

78. It's true but...

I have no doubt that Obama would accept his share of the blame if anyone asked him that question specifically. The idea that he's just trying to pass the buck is another fabrication.

As Jonathan Alter noted on Rachel's show, the WH does not want distractions. They didn't want them during health care passage. I'm sure they especially don't want them now during an election season. I'd assume that Vilsack and the other members of the administration are keenly aware of this unwritten rule: no distractions.

It could be that Vilsack "jumped the gun" to try to smother the story before it became a distraction. Trigger happy. After all, "the camera doesn't lie." And even some reasonable people may not readily believe that Fox News would openly promote a blatant lie.