Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You asked for evidence of laughter,I provided you a link to the entire NAACP produced program and even provided the exact time in the program when the laughter occurred.
I would think that should have been enough evidence.
Unless the NAACP program dubbed in the laughter....
You asked for evidence of laughter,I provided you a link to the entire NAACP produced program and even provided the exact time in the program when the laughter occurred.
I would think that should have been enough evidence.
Unless the NAACP program dubbed in the laughter....
Shirley Sherrod, Albany Office, FSC: It makes you wonder sometimes why is it that it took Farmers Home Administration that long to, to send a notice. Why is it that the county supervisor didn't send any kind of letter, you know, leading up to getting' the delinquent notices in '87. So many strange things happen when you have only white people in charge of dealing with our people.
The NAACP members in the audience DID NOT know the path her story would take, yet they applauded, laughed and generally agreed with her behavior toward the white farmer.
That is what Andrew has articulated. He had no interest in Sherrod being fired. He displayed the racist tendencies of the NAACP membership through their reactions to her story.
Well, I see that now that the first BS story has been discredited that the right wing is gravitating to a new BS story: It was never about Shirley Sherrod, but the horrible RACIST people in attendance at this NAACP event.
Back in reality, the audience's reaction should also be viewed in context of the story.
If you look it from the point of view that they laughed because they liked the idea of a black person with power being able to play games with a poor white farmer with no power, then yes, that is of course wrong. But that's not what happened.
They laughed for the same reason I would. It's called situational humor, a concept that apparently escapes the people defending Fox and Breitbart in this scandal. People of color (like myself) who have found themselves in a position of power will invariably encounter a white person who has trouble with (or perceive to have trouble with) some one of color in charge. They laughed because of the situation she setup in which the white farmer's supposed superiority complex had been muted.
Now you may counter with "Well, the farmer was not racist and he didn't think he was superior so laughing at her story no matter the context is RACIST!#?$#?". Again, you would still be wrong. You must remember that rural Georgia was only a few years removed from legalized and institutionalized racism and segregation in 1986. It wasn't as if when the Civil Rights Act was signed into law that people all of a sudden just changed. Once you got out of the cities in Georgia, people still pretty much went about their lives in the same manner they always had and it was decades before real change came.
I am sure the audience is well aware of this fact and given the setting, Sherrod's story becomes funny in the perspective that a person from a maligned group, and a person from the group doing the maligning, were thrust into a situation where they had to work intimately together. It is "funny" in the same way a that if a former Nazi in postwar Germany was forced to accept help from a Jew.
To believe anything else than this would be to believe in a (no pun intended) world that is completely black and white. No room for finding the humor in unfunny things, no room to believe that people change over time based on the situations they encounter in life.
Well, I see that now that the first BS story has been discredited that the right wing is gravitating to a new BS story: It was never about Shirley Sherrod, but the horrible RACIST people in attendance at this NAACP event.
When you are drowning in your own bile, you will reach for anything in an attempt to save what little credibility you have left. Of course in this case, there is so little credibility left, it isn't worth the effort.
Well, I see that now that the first BS story has been discredited that the right wing is gravitating to a new BS story: It was never about Shirley Sherrod, but the horrible RACIST people in attendance at this NAACP event.
Back in reality, the audience's reaction should also be viewed in context of the story.
If you look it from the point of view that they laughed because they liked the idea of a black person with power being able to play games with a poor white farmer with no power, then yes, that is of course wrong. But that's not what happened.
They laughed for the same reason I would. It's called situational humor, a concept that apparently escapes the people defending Fox and Breitbart in this scandal. People of color (like myself) who have found themselves in a position of power will invariably encounter a white person who has trouble with (or perceive to have trouble with) some one of color in charge. They laughed because of the situation she setup in which the white farmer's supposed superiority complex had been muted.
Now you may counter with "Well, the farmer was not racist and he didn't think he was superior so laughing at her story no matter the context is RACIST!#?$#?". Again, you would still be wrong. You must remember that rural Georgia was only a few years removed from legalized and institutionalized racism and segregation in 1986. It wasn't as if when the Civil Rights Act was signed into law that people all of a sudden just changed. Once you got out of the cities in Georgia, people still pretty much went about their lives in the same manner they always had and it was decades before real change came.
I am sure the audience is well aware of this fact and given the setting, Sherrod's story becomes funny in the perspective that a person from a maligned group, and a person from the group doing the maligning, were thrust into a situation where they had to work intimately together. It is "funny" in the same way a that if a former Nazi in postwar Germany was forced to accept help from a Jew.
To believe anything else than this would be to believe in a (no pun intended) world that is completely black and white. No room for finding the humor in unfunny things, no room to believe that people change over time based on the situations they encounter in life.
1999 Documentary....seems her attitude in regards to white people persisted.
Shirley Sherrod, Albany Office, FSC: It makes you wonder sometimes why is it that it took Farmers Home Administration that long to, to send a notice. Why is it that the county supervisor didn't send any kind of letter, you know, leading up to getting' the delinquent notices in '87. So many strange things happen when you have only white people in charge of dealing with our people.
Location: The Greatest city on Earth: City of Atlanta Proper
8,486 posts, read 14,999,411 times
Reputation: 7333
Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in SC
1999 Documentary....seems her attitude in regards to white people persisted.
California Newsreel - HOMECOMING - Transcript
Shirley Sherrod, Albany Office, FSC: It makes you wonder sometimes why is it that it took Farmers Home Administration that long to, to send a notice. Why is it that the county supervisor didn't send any kind of letter, you know, leading up to getting' the delinquent notices in '87. So many strange things happen when you have only white people in charge of dealing with our people.
Again, you are removing the context. She is talking about life in rural Georgia in the 1980s. Those "white people" she was referring to were the same people who were in charge during Segregation. The same people who refused to implement the reforms dictated by desegregation. The same people who when it no longer became an option for them to ignore desegregation, found inventive ways to continue sotto voce Apartheid. Such as promise help to black farmers, and then not deliver it. Funny, if only she had mentioned that fact.....oh wait, she did, and from your source no less.
Quote:
Uncle Leroy:
I believe it was in '86 when I first applied and got the money and everything, put it in the lawyers hands. and he was gon' pay off, I was trying to pay off all my in debt, put it in one note, and he didn't do it. I gave him a cashier's check, he paid off the two least ones, he never did pay the rest.
Shirley Sherrod, Albany Office, FSC:
He owed some money to Farmers Home Administration and he, he negotiated with them and they decided to accept an amount of money for payment in full. So he borrowed the money from a local bank to debt settle, to pay them off. and they actually had a closing. So as far as he knew, he was paid, he had paid them, and he was paying the bank, you know, on the note that he had borrowed to pay Farmers Home.
Uncle Leroy: When I went to Albany when I found out the thing that wasn't in place, the money hadn't been rightly applied. So I went down there and hired a lawyer. The FHA ain't said a word. The bank ain't say nothing. I was just paying the money back, and they was taking it in. Them people knew that just as good as I'm looking at you.
Shirley Sherrod, Albany Office, FSC:<br> The bank had to know that the money had not been transferred. There's just no way it could have happened without the banker knowing what was going on, and certainly the attorney knew.
Uncle Leroy: He look me in the eyes and told me he said I supposed to been dead. I asked him why would he say that. He say because of what they done to me. Say, it supposed to gave me a heart attack or a stroke, and killed me.
Shirley Sherrod, Albany Office, FSC:<br> It makes you wonder sometimes why is it that it took Farmers Home Administration that long to, to send a notice. Why is it that the county supervisor didn't send any kind of letter, you know, leading up to getting' the delinquent notices in '87. So many strange things happen when you have only white people in charge of dealing with our people.
1987 was also a very contentions year all over Georgia. This happened concurrently with the very high profile incident of the KKK clashing with protesters in Forsyth county over it's refusal to recognized MLK Day and it's continuation of discriminatory practices that kept minorities from buying homes in that county (At the time about 40% of Georgia was non-white. Forysth County had a population that was 99.99% white. I think they had a single asian guy). Along with that, the story Sherrod spoke of, and other incidents around the state late-80s Georgia was a hotbed for racial strife.
What she was talking about was that in order for desegregation to be finally complete, you couldn't have the same all white commissions deciding things in counties in the modern era that were responsible enforcing Segretaion in the previous era. Even though to put it in such gruff terms in this day and age seems off putting, that was reality 30 years ago.
I see by your username that you're from South Carolina. Don't act like you don't know what it was like back then.
Well, I see that now that the first BS story has been discredited that the right wing is gravitating to a new BS story: It was never about Shirley Sherrod, but the horrible RACIST people in attendance at this NAACP event.
Did you read the article when Big Government rolled this video out? That is exactly what Andrew said - he's only interested in the reaction of the racist NAACP in the audience.
Quote:
If you look it from the point of view that they laughed because they liked the idea of a black person with power being able to play games with a poor white farmer with no power, then yes, that is of course wrong. But that's not what happened.
That is exactly what happened. They laughed, clapped and gave some "that's right" comments as she was relating the story. They had no idea WHERE she was going with the story.
Quote:
They laughed for the same reason I would. It's called situational humor, a concept that apparently escapes the people defending Fox and Breitbart in this scandal. People of color (like myself) who have found themselves in a position of power will invariably encounter a white person who has trouble with (or perceive to have trouble with) some one of color in charge. They laughed because of the situation she setup in which the white farmer's supposed superiority complex had been muted.
Except, we are given NO examples of why this racist woman believed he was acting "superior", just by talking to her. That was just her warped interpretation of the situation based on rascist views.
Quote:
I am sure the audience is well aware of this fact and given the setting, Sherrod's story becomes funny in the perspective that a person from a maligned group, and a person from the group doing the maligning, were thrust into a situation where they had to work intimately together. It is "funny" in the same way a that if a former Nazi in postwar Germany was forced to accept help from a Jew.
There is nothing funny about it. Basing what help you will give an individual on their race and how much you can "get even" for all the wrongs done to your people. I liked the phrase she used - his own kind - that speaks volumes.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
