Skip to comments.Sherrod Story False (claims relative was lynched)
Posted on 07/26/2010 10:17:09 PM PDT by This Just In
Sherrod Story False
By Jeffrey Lord
It isn't true.
Shirley Sherrod's story in her now famous speech about the lynching of a relative is not true. The veracity and credibility of the onetime Agriculture Department bureaucrat at the center of the explosive controversy between the NAACP and conservative media activist Andrew Breitbart is now directly under challenge. By nine Justices of the United States Supreme Court. All of them dead.
But first, it's important to say this.
After Shirley Sherrod's firing I wrote a column congratulating Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack for removing her -- based on a viewing of the now infamous edited Breitbart clip. I was wrong. I should have waited to see the entire video or read the transcript before writing a word. So my apologies to Ms. Sherrod.
I have now done exactly what I should have done originally. So there's no mistake about "selective editing" of videos or speech transcripts, here is a link to the website of the NAACP, where they have made a point of posting the full video of Shirley Sherrod's speech. I have seen the entire speech as supplied by the NAACP. The now-famous speech runs just over 40 minutes. If you don't have the time, here is a link to the printed transcript of her speech supplied by a site called American Rhetoric Online Speech Bank. The transcript is taken in full from the video version of her speech, which American rhetoric also supplies. I have read the transcript as well.
Let's get to this.
In her speech, Ms. Sherrod says this:
I should tell you a little about Baker County. In case you don't know where it is, it's located less than 20 miles southwest of Albany.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Lyin like a rug....married to an open racist..
Like Hillary and EVERY other liberal liar, she just “misspoke”
I think it’s rather generous to assume that she knows exactly what the word ‘lynching’ means.
Hola crapola, another twist.
Father, uncle, brother, friend - circumstances no less depraved nor gruesome.
Maybe Shirley is truly related to Crystal Mangum-—she of Durham, NC. false allegations of rape against some white boys Duke lacrosse team. Liar, pants on fire!
What about her story about her father being murdered by white men even though there seems to be no proof? Was that exaggerated or fabricated as well?
Couldn’t Sherrod’s use of the term ‘lynch’ be considered a colloquial usage?
I would certainly interpret it that way.
No trial. And beat to death before he was even placed in his cell.
Hold on there. This man is saying that her relative was not “lynched” because he was only he was arrested by a sheriff and then *beaten to death on the courthouse steps while allegedly resisting arrest while handcuffed*.
And this is supposed to be a lie because the man wasn’t HANGED?
M dictionary, the venerable Webster’s Fifth, defines “lynch” thus:
To inflict punishment, especially death, upon, without forms of law, as when a mob captures and harms a suspected person.”
To call her a liar because her relative wasn’t hanged is just plain ignorant, ignorant as well as petty and mean. Either you don’t know what the meaning of the word “lynched” is, or you do and don’t care, because you get to insult the woman some more.
Beaten to death in front of the courthouse. Not strictly a lynching, close enough I think. The Spectator should pull this story.
Sounds like a typical RAT liar at work to me.
FReepers would do well to read this article before posting. Glancing at the thread heading won’t tell you what you need to know.
“.....almost sounds like nitpicking, in the context of it all.”
Well, aside from the fact that Sherrod may have lied, which should always be a big deal, and especially when we are talking about public officials, “nitpicking” is putting it mildly. We are talking about a woman who may have intentionally used inflammatory language to be divisive and continue the progressives race-baiting tactics in order to insight animosity towards white people.
Furthermore, her statements expose a public official who is morally bankrupt; to mislead the public by using her own relatives death, and worse yet, to describe that death, no less tragic as it was, is reprehensible.
Lynching-beat to death are “semantics”? No wonder Republicans and conservatives have an uphill battle.
“Lynching” was sometimes used as a broader term for the various means and schemes in which black people were illegally and evilly offed in the white supremacist heyday. If this is the worst “error” she ever caused to meet the air, it would hardly be worth a batted eyelash.
What she is, is a garden variety racist leftist dabbling in the same poison that fueled those who killed her father, except the movie music has been transposed from the white keys to the black ones.
What was the full name of Sherrod's father?
Who killed him?
How was he killed?
There is no statute of limitations on murder. If her father was murdered, and assuming it was racially motivated, should not Eric Holder start an investigation?
Pull this story? You’ve missed the point. Are you afraid of the truth about the man’s death? Racism is no secret, but to allow such individuals as Sherrod to use such incidents, and to lie about it in order to further her progressive agenda in race baiting blacks against whites is irresponsible journalism. Frankly, we would be just as guilty of bias if we did not expose Sherrod. Lest we forget, Obama may reconsider appointing her.
If you’re concerned that the Left will use the incident to further attack the “white man”, I’ve got news for you; the Left’s agenda has been to attack the white man for over 40 yrs. now.
I spit on PC, and on the thought that my tax dollars must pay such a political activist so she can spit on me.
Don’t pull this story for the following reasons:
1. Memory can change over time. There is a need to go to all possible primary documents/sources whenever possible, such as the Supreme Court decision.
2. Sherrod enhanced this terrible murder by using a well-known word/image of “lynching” instead of a beating. Her fault.
3. It was not her father but another relative. This is important. It was a deliberate distortion of the truth.
4. Remember, the three civil rights workers in Mississippi were beaten to death in a most horrible way. Murder is murder and should be acknowledged as such no matter what weapon or manner was used.
5. Sherrod comes from a family with some heavy racial luggage in it. Her husband is definitely anti-white, just as Mel Gibson’s father is a raving anti-semite. Hate is catching.
6. The mainstream media is totally incompetent, biased, and unwilling to go after the truth, and Breitbart proves it all the time.
7. Someone might have been trying to set Breitbart up, and the leftist media fell for it hook, line and stinker.
8. We must be very diligent in what we write about people and events, providing documentation whenever possible. (Some of my editors hated my listing many citations in my columns but I had to show my readers that I had done my homework and that my writings would withstand any challenges on accuracy and authenticity).
9. If apologies are due, give them.
Freepers should read the entire article because this black man was beaten to death by the sheriff and two thugs. Not a lynching in that he was not left swinging from a tree. But close enough for me.
A minor exaggeration by Shirley Sherrod and maybe she equates a beating with being lynched and she’s not too far off on that.
FROM THE ARTICLE-——>>>>>
It’s also possible that she knew the truth and chose to embellish it, changing a brutal and fatal beating to a lynching. Anyone who has lived in the American South (as my family once did) and is familiar with American history knows well the dread behind stories of lynch mobs and the Klan. What difference is there between a savage murder by fist and blackjack — and by dangling rope? Obviously, in the practical sense, none. But in the heyday — a very long time — of the Klan, there were frequent (and failed) attempts to pass federal anti-lynching laws. None to pass federal “anti-black jack” or “anti-fisticuffs” laws. Lynching had a peculiar, one is tempted to say grotesque, solitary status as part of the romantic image of the Klan, of the crazed racist. The image stirred by the image of the noosed rope in the hands of a racist lynch mob was, to say the least, frighteningly chilling. Did Ms. Sherrod deliberately concoct this story in search of a piece of that ugly romance to add “glamour” to a family story that is gut-wrenchingly horrendous already?
If her “lie” is only to call the murder a lynching, we should let it rest. Lynching itself is a term which came from an actual Mr. Lynch who presided over kangaroo courts. Isn’t it cool how English lets nouns be verbed?
Maybe I’m wrong, but I think being killed by “petitioners” while hand-cuffed and in police custody is worse than being lynched by a mindless, unruly mob.
You can expect no protection from a mob bent on murder. If handcuffed and in the hands of the law, you can. Or should.
Sheriff Screws had a duty to protect his suspect, lawfully apprehended and without incident, and he failed.
You might read the article before spouting. It goes way beyond the semantics of murder vs lynching. It scratches old Democrat scabs and teases out a couple of American maggots, Hugo Black and Richard Brevard Russell. It raises the question of why Sherrod and her ilk still genuflect before their party.
Oh, it is important that this not go down the memory hole.
Yup! Worst I have ever seen from them and I used to read the Spectator as far back as 1988
Oh, there is no reason to miss the irony. But getting all bent out of shape over a broad sense of “lynching” is, to me, beyond the pale.
In light of the spotlight on racism that is occurring in the press, to call this woman a liar based on a questionable difference between the definition of “lynching” and “beating to death” is wildly misguided. It really makes it sound like beating a man to death is way better than a lynching. Utterly indefensible.
I agree with whoever said they should get rid of this article now.
Reread the article.
“And that sheriff was Claude Screws. Claude Screws lynched a black man.” - Ms. Sherrod
Are you saying that the truth doesn’t matter? Are you saying that a public official doesn’t have to be accurate in discussing historical incidents involving murder?
Well, I guess our law enforcement officers shouldn’t worry about whether or not a person was murder by way of drowning, or stabbing, or being thrown off of a cliff, or shot. All we need to know is that the victim was murdered. After all, who needs the facts? /s
It was more of a beaten to death by the legal authorities, than merely being “beaten”.
I’ve had it with this women. She’s had her 15 minutes. Let it go.
Agree. That memory hole is already crowded with killed, ignored, undercovered, slanted and forgotten stories.
Thanks to the internet, we now have a way to see and save information. God bless Al Gore for inventing it. NOT!
Freepers are getting that this article is awful and a detriment to the conservative cause. Media Matters will be jumping on it tomorrow
This article helps 0bama and the Democrats
Yes, the story is wonderfully convolute. Hall was lynched. The lynchers were convicted — and eventually freed by a Progressive high mucky-muck in the KKK, abetted by a Progressive white supremacist. With friends like the Progressives, blacks need no enemies.
In the broad sense inspired by the great Mr. Lynch, this is close enough. Deadly “street justice” enabled for the sake of racist ideals. You can quibble and even sub-quibble (did they simply want to make the victim miserable and not actually kill him) but it’s pretty darn unseemly and obscures much larger points.
What I believe is that conservatives on this thread are worried that liberals will use this incident as fuel for the fire, but as I have said a few posts ago, do excuse such a statement, or at the very least, sweep it under the carpet is irresponsible journalism.
The comments on this thread also reveal how far reaching PCspeak has affected our public discourse.
What I find to be utterly indefensible is, at the very least, Sherrod didn’t bother to get her facts straight (if given the benefit of a doubt).
Don’t forget why Sherrod made headline news in the first place.
Couldnt Sherrods use of the term lynch be considered a colloquial usage?>>>>>>>>
Today it definitely fits within colloquial usage. Not so in the 1930s, but we are living today and the elections are in three months
Obama and his race agitators are tyring to mobilize the base
This is a caution worth great consideration. Like worms, rats turn. It is only a convenient happenstance that Progressives seem to be the friends of black people today. Progressives are not married to any particularly noble ideals and black people could find themselves under the bus, as well as in the back of it again, tomorrow if Progressives get their way.
I read it. The story should be pulled and re written, or at least re titled. Sherrod is not a liar because she said someone was lynched when all that happened was that they were beaten to death. Hugo Black was a Democrat racist on the Supreme Court, does that really have anything to do with the title of the article?
The weirdo-led Media Matters would jump into a pile of steaming dogshit if they thought it would help them attack conservatives, Republicans, Independents, and anyone else who is pro-America.
The Media Research Center and Breitbart can handle them.
The truth doesn’t matter to Media Matters so, like any psychopathic liar, bitchslap them with the truth.
Your raise an interesting point by inference. Did Sherrod lie, or was she telling the truth, when she said that someone from the White House asked her to resign? Was it the Dept. of Agriculture liaison to the White House, the White House itself, Secy of Agric. Vilsack (aka SackofShit), and/or others?
This has never been satisfactorily settled.
Shirley has given us the gift that keeps on giving. Tis better to receive, than to give, in this case.
No. “Lynching” is the execution of an individual for a real or false crime by a group acting without judicial sanction. Death can be by hanging, shooting, burning, drowning, bludgeoning, dragging, stabbing, cutting, etc. Sherrod’s usage is not colloquial, but Jeffery Lord's is. This may be from watching a lot of Westerns.
She knows it better than the author. Lynching isn't just by hanging.
No. Lynching is the execution of an individual for a real or false crime by a group acting without judicial sanction.>>>>>>>
The sheriff and three civilians beat the man to death. There is no judicial sanction there plus the sheriff looks like part of a lynch mob to me. A small lynch mob but with 3,000 lynching (of white, black and Indian) in our history I’m sure there have been other small lynch mobs too
I am suspicious that her father was caught stealing those cows. I noticed when I read the story about her father being “murdered” over a “dispute about some cows” it seemed like a smoke screen. One of the articles even said something to the effect of “the details are fuzzy.”
Yeah...I just bet they are.
>> No wonder Republicans and conservatives have an uphill battle.
But it’s not for the reason you cited.
It would be good for people to drop the apologies regarding the reactionary reactions to the “edited” tape. It’s f’n annoying to have to wade through guilt associated with presumptuous indignation so many experienced in response to Breitbart’s “hasty” release.
The “full” version shows more racial hostility than the “edited” version. The segment depicted by the “edited” version is a non-starter in every sense except for the sober, historical concern of racism and the effect it has on Blacks today. But, we don’t talk about that - it’s too difficult. Instead, it’s all about the superficial, politically divisive racism designed to get Black to vote Left. So, let’s keep it there - where it’s about the votes.
If the pubbies are to attack this issue, they need to recognize the nature of the battle they’re fighting. It ain’t about overreacting to the “white man” nonsense of individuals. It’s about the institutional racial divisiveness that’s pushing the Country Left.
The hypercritical hysteria over someone’s anger needs to take a rest. Sherrod’s pissed, I don’t blame her. But we need to push back on her promotion of Leftism and Socialism as the cure for what ails the Black Community - it’s a damn lie, and Sherrod was wrong for promoting it using the veil of poverty.
The American Soectator has gone way downhill. :-(
And every time some conservative politician or pundit thinks they can get way with a racial comment or ethnic joke, apologies, retractions and resignations follow.
The particular incident in this story adds nothing to the discussion about whether this woman is a racist or not. (The more she talks, the more she reveals herself to be.) What the article does is makes conservatives look like petty racists because they are saying that there is such a huge difference between lynching someone and beating them to death, that using the wrong definition makes one a liar. It's a stupid argument.
A political savvy editor would have never let it be posted.
So that makes the lynching / beating to death okay?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.