Farmer's wife says fired USDA official helped save their land

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Well, it isn't an equal society. But there is more to it than silly tabloid bait stories inflated to the national level. Getting hung up on that trivialises the underlying issues.

Are blacks advantaged because of the perception that they can yet away with more than a white person? Somehow that just isn't a satisfactory argument.

[Ban Hammer 13,334]

So its ok to lose your current job because of something you said nearly 25 years ago? Sounds harsh to me.

yes, it is ok. harsh - no.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

yes, it is ok. harsh - no.

So if you were out for lunch with your boss and you happened to bump into someone you knew from years ago and they say to you "remember back in 1981 when you said..." and your boss turns around and fires you for it. That doesn't seem a bit ridiculous to you? Not even a little?

[Sgt. McGee 27]

So if you were out for lunch with your boss and you happened to bump into someone you knew from years ago and they say to you "remember back in 1981 when you said..." and your boss turns around and fires you for it. That doesn't seem a bit ridiculous to you? Not even a little?

Right, because that's EXACTLY the same. In this case, Sherrod ran into an acquaintance on stage at the NAACP event, and they prompted her to tell the story, which she did only begrudgingly.

Oh, wait, that's not how it happened.

I agree that there's a certain element of "so what, it was a long time ago" involved, especially since the farmer's wife has come out in her defense. However, regardless of the specifics as they relate to her, the agency has a responsibility to demonstrate that they will not tolerate that sort of behavior, and to dispel any notion that there is that sort of thing going on.

Is it unfair to Sherrod? Maybe a little. Is it incumbent upon a government employee to be sure that they hold themselves to a higher standard of behavior, particularly when they're in a position to determine who gets help and who doesn't? Absolutely. Don't like it? Don't work for the government. Go work for ACORN or something...

[Ban Hammer 13,334]

So if you were out for lunch with your boss and you happened to bump into someone you knew from years ago and they say to you "remember back in 1981 when you said..." and your boss turns around and fires you for it. That doesn't seem a bit ridiculous to you? Not even a little?

this isn't about just saying something - this is about her not putting herself fully into helping someone because of their skin color. i'm surprised you're trying to downplay this.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I didn't say that it did.

I'm just wondering whether it's better that people are honest about admitting mistakes from their past, or if they should keep them secret. If honesty isn't respected, all that's left is dishonesty.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I agree that there's a certain element of "so what, it was a long time ago" involved, especially since the farmer's wife has come out in her defense. However, regardless of the specifics as they relate to her, the agency has a responsibility to demonstrate that they will not tolerate that sort of behavior, and to dispel any notion that there is that sort of thing going on.

Is it unfair to Sherrod? Maybe a little. Is it incumbent upon a government employee to be sure that they hold themselves to a higher standard of behavior, particularly when they're in a position to determine who gets help and who doesn't? Absolutely. Don't like it? Don't work for the government. Go work for ACORN or something...

The incident in question had nothing to do with the woman's work for the USDA.

this isn't about just saying something - this is about her not putting herself fully into helping someone because of their skin color. i'm surprised you're trying to downplay this.

24 years ago. Of course it should be downplayed.

[Peikko 1,575]

She's either a liar embellishing a story for whatever reason she thought would paint her in a better light and a racist or she's just a racist.

Regardless of editing: she did not give the 'full force' of what she could do based on the farmer's race. Her words. Spin that however you want, but it still remains. And let's all be honest here, if she were white, and the farmer were black, hispanic, or another minority...you damn well know everyone would be in an uproar. Btw, that includes me...because there's NO TOLERANCE for racism at work in the workplace no matter who who holds those views.

Originally she did not, but in the end she did everything she could to save the farm for the farmers and they became friends, does not sound as though her bigotry lasted very long once she became aware of the consequences in real life situations - and her story if you listen beyond that one soundbite is extremely useful to illustrate that bigotry serves no one well, black nor white.

This ####### about her being once a bigot always a bigot is nonsense, the 82 year old woman, the farmer's wife, who was in the direct line of fire of her former wrong behaviour bears testimony to the truth of this, as does even the telling of this story in the original context. Only those who are determined to pretend that US society has reached a level playing field in terms of equal opportunity would consider this story newsworthy and conclude that this Sherrod learned nothing and is cynically using this story to justify further bigoted behaviour on her own, or anyone else's part. This does nothing to improve society but creates more division, and the people who suffer are the ordinary folk who are working to make things right, not the idiots who believe black people now deserve their fates because they are culturally bankrupt, given too many favours to advance them when they do not deserve it and all the other bullshit that people say and all because of stories like this that fuel false outrage on the part of white people who do not understand the makeup of their own society - white privilege is alive and well thanks to this sort of garbage.

Six is right too, the British media do not stoop to these tactics, the tabloids do plenty of ###### stirring, but nothing this divisive.

Edited July 21, 2010 by Madame Cleo

[HAL 9000 96]

We should see the entire recording to see how much of that hyped up story is hype and how much is real. Of course by that point the out-of-context brigade will be already led by the piper to their next hyped up story.

[Sgt. McGee 27]

The incident in question had nothing to do with the woman's work for the USDA.

Wrong. Unless you don't think people should be held responsible for their actions.

Someone in a position of power states that in a previous position of power, they made decisions based on race, to affect how they'd use their power to execute their professional responsibilities. The agency that now employs her has an obligation to remove her from a position where should could potentially behave in a similar fashion.

If an elementary school teacher came out and admitted that they'd molested a 4-year-old, but it was 24 years ago, would you argue that they should keep their job teaching kindergarten? Why not?

[Ban Hammer 13,334]

24 years ago. Of course it should be downplayed.

good to know you have a statute of limitations on racist incidents.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

This story is irrelevant to anyone who didn't jump on the bandwagon of high emotion and fake outrage.

[Ban Hammer 13,334]

white privilege is alive and well thanks to this sort of garbage.

if white privilege was alive and well as you claim, then this story wouldn't have happened - a black woman in a position to help or hinder a white family.

[HAL 9000 96]

Well irrelevant in being able to recognize it as likely more hype than reality... relevant in being able to perhaps identify the perpetrators of yet another partisan story.

[Peikko 1,575]

if white privilege was alive and well as you claim, then this story wouldn't have happened - a black woman in a position to help or hinder a white family.

Only a moron would draw such a conclusion based on this.