The firing of Shirley Sherrod -- and the cowardice of Tom Vilsack

[Renew Deal]

From everything I’ve read, I’m told that the firing of Shirley Sherrod, the once and probably future Agriculture Department official in Georgia, is about race or dishonest journalism or the vagaries of the 24-hour, incessant news cycle. Permit me a dissent. It is mostly about cowardice.

The coward in question is Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack who, even though from Iowa, fired Sherrod in a New York minute, and by extension and tradition –“The buck stops here,” remember? – Barack Obama himself. Where do they get off treating anyone so shabbily?

Sherrod was caught on video supposedly telling an NAACP meeting last March that she had not given a certain farmer the service he deserved because he was white. A clip of that speech made the rounds of right wing blogs and media outlets -- Fox News, for instance -- and in no time Vilsack ordered the woman canned. He moved with what would have been commendable dispatch had he first heard her side of the story, viewed the entire video and asked what its source was. The answers should have stopped him in his tracks.

The full video showed that Sherrod, after repressing some racial antipathy, treated the farmer with dignity and efficiency -- and, anyway, the entire event took place more than 20 years ago. Had Vilsack seen the entire video, he would also have learned that Sherrod’s story had a moral: She learned that poverty, not race, is what mattered. Since this is America, it is God who taught her that.
<snip>

Little by little, the administration backed down. Vilsack yesterday explained that he had asked for Sherrod’s resignation because “the controversy surrounding her comments would create a situation where her decisions, rightly or wrongly, would be called into question making it difficult for her bring jobs to Georgia.” These are appalling words. “Rightly or wrongly?” The two are not the same. One you punish, the other you defend. This is what our system is about. Look it up.

And, even if rightly, you do not dismiss an employee, wreck a career, without doing due diligence. What’s her side of the story? Where did the video come from? Is Breitbart a trustworthy source? The term “rightly or wrongly” suggests that the truth does not matter -- only perception, the politics of the situation. That, in turns, brings us back to the beginning. This entire episode is only partially about race or tawdry journalism. It’s fundamentally about cowardice -- about not doing the right thing until pressured and not adhering to fundamental principles of fairness.
<snip>

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2010/07/the_firing_of_shirley_sherrod.html

This guy is generally a "critic" of Obama and he doesn't pass up the opportunity, but it's mostly a good article.

[Webster Green]

1. Vilsack sucked before this incident, and he now he sucks even worse.

He's a wing nut shill for Monsanto and GMOs. He should not be in the position in the first place.:thumbsdown:

[mod mom]

5. He's just looking our for his people:

unfortunately his people are Monsanto.

[jobycom]

2. He's leaving out a few points. Like, Sherrod said she got five phone calls

from the White House, like the implication is that Obama or Emmanuel was behind it, like Vilsak was probably just following orders.

Further, it wasn't just the White House who jumped quickly. The NAACP also was fooled, and no doubt they were in contact with the White House.

I'm not saying that to blame the White House, but to exonerate them a bit, and to call Cohen disingenuous. It's clear that the White House believed what they had been shown, and that the NAACP agreed with and probably consulted with the White House. It's clear to me that both Obama and the NAACP did not want racism to become an issue in this way. Obama is, rightly, worried about any appearance of favoring African Americans, as we saw with the whole Reverend Wright scandal, and with comments from Republicans that he has been doing so being broadcast almost weekly, Obama is rightfully quick to respond to any such appearance.

So he and the NAACP and everyone else in his administration were quick to jump on this, to fire her before the media could start asking "Why hasn't he fired her yet?" They wanted to handle the problem and make it a non-issue as quickly as they could, before the Republican talk show cycle started for the day and before Limbaugh and his slimy ilk could claim he condoned such things.

Unfortunately, the tape was a deception, and they (and most of us--read the comments here yesterday) did not wait around for further proof.

The real wrong was done by Breitbart, who needs to be charged with libel. He spread a lie with maliscious intent, and Obama should immediately open a state department investigation to see if Sherrod's civil rights were violated. Turn the pressure on the real racists here, make Fox News defend itself publicly. Watch them have to distance themselves. Right now the nation is on Sherrod's side, and Obama can use that.

Just my thoughts.

[malaise]

3. She did not say she got five calls from the WH n/t

[jobycom]

4. Oops. I stand corrected. Four. nt

[malaise]

6. She never said she received a single call frim the WH

That is what M$Greedia folks have been saying.