I have to admit. I read her remarks (admittedly taken out of context both from a content and timeliness standpoint), and I thought "this woman should be fired. today. nothing can justify this statement or attitude. Especially not in a government employee. Escpecially not in one setting policy".
On Monday night, I did not think _anything_ could mitigate her statements. Of course, I was wrong. And I was purposefully and skillfully manipulated into that wrongness by professionals. So, I have learned an invaluable lesson that I _thought_ I already knew. Don't take any story at face value. Don't rush to judgment. Nothing I learn today is necessarily more correct than what I learn next week. There are whole swaths of our society whose single profession is to manipulate us into doing what they want and feeling how they want. Advertising. Politics. Branding. Romance novels. Breaking news stories. Blues albums. Movies. I can't blame them too much if they get good at it. On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 8:32 AM, Vivec <[email protected]> wrote: > > "The Obama administration has been shamed by its rush to judgment after it > forced the resignation of a black midlevel official in the Agriculture > Department who was wrongly accused of racism by the right-wing blogosphere. > Shirley Sherrod was sandbagged by a two-and-a-half-minute clip from a > 45-minute speech in which the real message was reconciliation. > > Instead of tracking down the whole speech, the administration ran scared. > Tom Vilsack, the agriculture secretary, dismissed Ms. Sherrod from her job > as the chief of the departments rural development office in Georgia. On > Wednesday, Mr. Vilsack > apologized<http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/22/us/politics/22sherrod.html?hp > >that > Ms. Sherrod had been put through hell and offered her a new job with > a unique opportunity to help the agency move past its checkered civil > rights history. The White House admitted it bungled the entire affair." > > HOLY SH** !!! How messed up are things when politicians so fear the media > that they act before even gathering the facts, rather than risk further > talking heads' "analysis" > > On some level it shows that the media has influence, and that is as it > should be if the Media is to be a watchdog to politicians and bringing > information to the electorate. > > But this has gone too far. > > http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/22/opinion/22thu4.html?_r=1&ref=op > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology-Michael-Dinowitz/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:323551 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
