printIt is all about the legacy of Shirley Sherrod; didn’t you know it? In the universe of a dim bulb like CNN’s Suzanne Malveaux—who together with hormonally charged sisters such as Jessica Yellin just about climax on air when their president performs—the untimely passing of Andrew Breitbart, of the BigGovernment.com enterprise, is about Shirley Sherrod, the black woman Breitbart is alleged to have wronged racially.
Lies.
Sherrod, as this analysis revealed, “was fired by an administration that mistook her for a worse racist than she actually was. The Obama posse had overestimated the extent of Sherrod’s animus for whites. She turned out to be merely a mezzanine-level racist, rather than a hardcore honky hater.
One day, as she told the NAACP gathering, God put things in her path that made her realize she was there for poor people. A white farmer appealed for her assistance. Had the white farmer been a brother forced to beg before a sister in a position of power, Sherrod might have characterized him as a proud man in humiliating circumstances. Given the desperate farmer’s hue, Sherrod alleged he had a superior attitude, before going on to describe her dilemma: having to help a white man save his property, when so many black people had lost theirs.”
So, I didn’t give him the full force of what I could do,” Sherrod smirked. “I did enough. I took him to a white lawyer; one of them; to his own kind.”Drum roll for Ms. Sherrod
As I wrote at the time, “The acme of ethics in American is a black woman who has graduated from hard-core to soft bigotry. … if an African-American rejects her birthright, and demonstrates less prejudice toward whites than is her right—she is up for beatification.”
Do read the moron MALVEAUX’s reverential love-in with Sherrod (well-annotated with my comments).
RIP Mr. Breitbart.
UPDATE I: Myron, you make the perennial libertarian mistake of reducing all argument to the state dimension. We’ve been over this error on BAB, many times, last in “Liberty’s Civilizational Dimension.” Breitbart is not to be compared to Sherrod. Not ever.
UPDATE II: Andrew Breitbart being something of a neocon garnered plenty criticism from me. Here is one of quite a few critical posts from the past about “big this, big that” “Conservative Cretinism.”
There’s a reservoirs of piss-poor conservative commentary on the Internet. (People lap it up.) Trust Lawrence Auster to point out what few others do: “So much of the conservative part of the Web is unintelligent, incoherent partisan trash. Mondo Frazier’s article at Big Journalism about the Gore sex assault charge is an example. I saw it because it is listed in the ‘must-reads’ at Lucianne.com.”
Andrew Breitbart’s “Big this; big that,” ever-mutating websites exemplify what Auster terms “low-grade conservative media.”
But then, you had to concede that Andrew Breitbart was splendid when he told the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People), “Go to hell.” He just wasn’t your typical crunchy conservative, forever cowering for fear of being called a racist.
UPDATE III: “O’Keefe Antics, Again.” And I have not been very flattering about a brand of tease journalism Breitbart sponsored, I believe.
Among the many dumb things Republicans have given us (read “GOP and Man at Yale”) is a brand of tease “journalism” headed by Hannah Giles, a well-connected, monosyllabic, Town-Hall tartlet, who partook in an ACORN-exposing (tush-wagging) operation. Her partner (he played the pimp) was James O’Keefe, who, it transpires, is even dumber than Hannah.
It should be remembered that the Sherrod imbroglio, and Sherrod’s entire career at the USDA in fact, was an outgrowth of the Pigford v. Vilsack settlement, one of the biggest, in dollar amounts, racial shakedowns of recent years. The white farmer’s failing was not to have recognized in our contemporary racial order which animals are more equal than the others.
Partisan Republican white hack (journalist) takes on partisan Democratic black hack. Admittedly, Breitbart did not suck up taxpayer money while Sherrod lived off the taxpayers…. – but sadly this is the state of politics of the 21st Century.
I recall a very intelligent comment (on a slightly different matter in 2004) – which went something like “our republic has progressed from Adams vs. Jefferson to Eisenhower vs. Stevenson to Kerry vs. Bush – what’s next?”
As for the racist or non-racist Sherrods, why does the US need a Department of Agriculture (did Americans not eat before Abe Lincoln established the Department??).
[See Post Update.]
A neo-con, but best of the lot by far. Breitbart subbed for Dennis Miller a few times lately, and I always liked what he said; he was at his best taping the lies and hypocrisies of the Left. Also a great anti-lib activist, as witness his takedown of the Weiner. Breitbart will be hard to replace, and will always be missed by those of us on the Right.
Rest in the Angel’s arms Mr. Breitbart, you will be missed.
I think it would be problematic to place Breitbart anywhere on the map with regards to his political bent (i.e. to call him a neocon). His field of battle — where he thrived most — was taking on the (leftist) media hypocrisy. That’s where he excelled.
He was a reformed leftist. He brushed up against the Reason crowd, but at the end of the day I suspect he felt comfortable as a GOP-supporting conservative (a little too comfortable with the (R)’s for my tastes). But, as I said, talking policy was never really his thing.
[A fair assessment.]
When my co-worker called me yesterday to tell me about Breibarts death, we both talked about the possibility of him being murdered. I doubt he was, we were just thinking out loud.