andrewbreitbart

Andrew Breitbart’s Selective Outrage Over Wonkette R-Word Gaffe

0
Andrew Breitbart's Selective Outrage Over Wonkette R-Word Gaffe

Another day, another inscrutable vendetta-fueled internet fight. Last week, left-leaning political satire blog Wonkette ran a post mocking Sarah Palin’s son Trig, who has Down’s Syndrome, and using the word “retarded.” The post quickly came under fire from conservative blogs, and took off on Twitter from there, getting special attention from Andrew Breitbart affiliates John Nolte and Dana Loesch, who felt that the story was being wrongly ignored by the mainstream media.

The Daily Beast has a breakdown of events, but the short version is that the boycott seems to have been really successful — more people are joining the cause, and more advertisers are dropping out. Papa John’s has been a high-profile victory for the campaign, with CEO John Schnatter endorsing the campaign on Twitter. Wonkette ran an apology on the post, pleading bad editing and saying the post went against their policy of mocking Sarah but not the small Palins, and eventually pulled the whole thing. But the heat hasn’t died down.

So where are we, at the end of the day? Breitbart’s crew decides that an off-color post on a small political humor site that frequently makes fun of them is a prime target for a hard-push boycott campaign, since the story is being mysteriously ignored by CNN. They score a hit at their rival, and get some more names on their mailing lists. ‘Papa’ John Schnatter goes back to dumping money into hardline conservative candidates and their causes. Really, a major coup getting him to pull his advertising from a liberal site he didn’t know he was advertising on. And Rush Limbaugh will go on using the r-word in front of his audience of millions, with only a vague admonition from these same purportedly agenda-free media watchdogs.

The Daily Beast quotes Wonkette editor Ken Layne as saying that:

… the entire political website world would very quickly [be] facing the same kind of dumb mob bullshit as NPR is facing, as ACORN suffered, [and] as Planned Parenthood is fighting.

Layne’s showing some wear-and-tear as the controversy drags on, but in this comment, he names a string of Breitbart’s previous shady victories.

Real people are pissed off at Wonkette, and rightly so, but nobody’s been sent running scared of their political power; the targeted advertisers have merely been given permission to act in accordance with their existing interests. The groups wrangling the outrage are less big business’ angel-on-the-shoulder than growth.

Huffington Post Removes Andrew Brietbart From Front Page

0
Huffington Post Removes Andrew Brietbart From Front Page

[UPDATE 3:22pm EST] The Huffington Post has announced that they have removed Andrew Brietbart from their front page after the Daily Caller published an interview this morning in which Brietbart calls Van Jones a “commie punk.” In a statement to Greg Sargent at The Plum Line, HuffPo spokesman Mark Ruiz said:

The Huffington Post is committed to fostering a lively and often provocative debate about the issues of the day and encourages a wide range of voices from all perspectives to participate. Andrew Brietbart’s ad hominem attack on Van Jones in The Daily Caller — right down to calling him a “commie punk” and “a cop killer-supporting, racist, demagogic freak” — violates the tenets of debate and civil discourse we have strived for since the day we launched. As a result, we will no longer feature his posts on the front page.

He is welcome to continue publishing his work on HuffPost provided it adheres to our editorial guidelines, as the two posts he published on HuffPost did — guidelines that include a strict prohibition on ad hominem attacks. Our decision today recognizes that placing posts on the front page is an editorial call that elevates some posts over others, and is an indication of how seriously we take these judgment calls.

[UPDATE 3:00pm EST] The Huffington Post is standing by Andrew Brietbart. In an email received by Greg Sargent at The Plum Line, HuffPo spokesperson Mario Ruiz wrote:

From the beginning, The Huffington Post has welcomed voices from all sides of the political spectrum, including conservatives such as Newt Gingrich, Frank Luntz, Tom Coburn, Laura Ingraham, Bob Barr, George Pataki, David Frum, Byron York, Mary Matalin, and Ken Blackwell. The idea being that dialogue — from a wide range of perspectives — is preferable to silence. The fact that Andrew Breitbart’s first post on our site drew over 1,635 comments, conducted in a civil manner, seems to validate the premise and the decision to publish his blog post.

ColorofChange.org, the organization that’s leading the call to have Brietbart’s work removed from the site’s front page, responded with a statement of its own:


This isn’t about Breitbart being a conservative, or whether the Huffington Post allows him to post on their site; it’s about the decision of its editors to give him top billing, while he repeats falsehoods that have been debunked. This is about whether or not the Huffington Post considers itself a credible news outlet that chooses to adhere to any basic editorial standards when it decides what to elevate. The Huffington Post claims to have a policy about posts being subject to removal for being untruthful — but they haven’t applied that to Breitbart.


Follow more of the exchange over at The Plum Line.


****

Critics are blasting editors at The Huffington Post for giving Andrew Breitbart prime real estate on the site this week. In an email sent to supporters this week, ColorofChange.org charges that unlike other, perhaps more credible, conservative voices on the site, Brietbart “has no regard for honest debate, and conservatives with integrity see Breitbart as an embarrassment, a con-artist.” Here’s more:

Andrew Breitbart targets key people and institutions within our community, in particular those who have dared talk about the reality of racism and race in this country — Shirley Sherrod, the NAACP, President Obama, the Congressional Black Caucus. And he targets those that seek to increase Black political participation, like ACORN, which until Breitbart’s fraud-based take-down had the strongest record of registering low-income Black voters in the country.

…The Huffington Post understands the power of featuring someone on its home page.5 It gives the author credibility and helps them spread their message. To give that placement to someone who has repeatedly shown complete disregard and hostility toward the truth, and who is a serial race-baiter, is irresponsible. It shows a lack of journalistic integrity, and it’s frankly an insult to our communities.

There’s a petition calling on editors at the Huffington Post to stop giving Brietbart prominent placement on the site. Slade Sohmer at Hypervocal writes that Brietbart’s prominent placement may be troublesome to liberals, but it’s simply part of the business model that puts high-trafficked stories above news from credible writers. Sohmer writes:

In one single decision, [Arianna] Huffington managed to wipe out the good journalistic deeds she’s done by hiring New York Times business reporter Peter Goodman and Newsweek senior Washington correspondent Howard Fineman. And it’s new Huffington hires like that who should be pissed about it.

The site’s also taken criticism recently for refusing to pay some of its writers. Shortly after its $315 million acquisition from AOL, several bloggers at the site protested against doing their work for free. The Huffington Post was clear on its position: bloggers get exposure, not paychecks. But that wasn’t a good enough explanation for some.
“Since HuffPo is worth $315 million, I wonder why Ariana Huffington can’t afford to pay her contributors who make the content a single dime,” said Matt Bors, an editorial cartoonist for United Media, on Twitter, according to Neon Tommy.

From ACORN to NPR: We Rate O’Keefe’s Fake, Sadly Effective Stings

0
From ACORN to NPR: We Rate O'Keefe's Fake, Sadly Effective Stings

Today the Republican-majority House of Representatives begins its effort to defund NPR, in the wake of–well, let’s be honest, they’ve been wanting to hold this vote since before they were a majority, so it’s not really “in the wake of” anything. But on-the-record, it’s in the wake of the newest James O’Keefe sting operation, in which some dudes posed as Muslim Brotherhood members, secretly videotaped a two-hour conversation with some NPR higher-ups, then got home and realized they didn’t have anything especially incriminating. An edit session followed, and the resulting video O’Keefe released–heavily butchered and swiftly debunked–did exactly what it was supposed to do: triggered some knee-jerk firings at NPR, and gave the GOP an excuse to move forward on defunding their least-favorite news outlet.

How did O’Keefe, a protege of consistently-debunked, never-disavowed Andrew Breitbart, know that a plan this dumb would work? Experience. In commemoration of the O’Keefe-Breitbart method’s continued success at making impressions triumph over facts, we rate the four biggest “stories” “broken” by the James O’Keefe school of journalism–and the reactions from the targets and the media.

Sting on ACORN, September 2009

A white kid in a frat-Halloween “pimp” costume walks into an organization vilified by the right for its advocacy of poor people, and asks for help with his child prostitutes. And everyone accepts it at face value. Don’t bother looking into this, New York Times; it smells totally legit. And the edit job, well–ACORN spokesman Kevin Whelan, in addition to pointing out how intentionally butchered the released video was, also claimed that O’Keefe didn’t even actually wear that pimp costume into the offices. Come on, son! At least rock the duds you rented.

• And When It Was Debunked… Despite the Congressional Research Service’s report that ACORN had broken no laws, the damage was done; ACORN was already defunded and disbanded, and the world is once again safe for voter suppression.

OVERALL RATING: A full 4 out of 4 sweatshop-labor zebra-print fedoras for this rousing success!

——————

Botched Phonetap at Sen. Mary Landieu’s Office, January 2010

This might be the saddest of the stings in this list, if only for the details available: some bros “dressed as telephone company employees, wearing jeans, fluorescent green vests, tool belts and hard hats” attempt to film themselves bugging the phones in Sen. Landrieu’s office, right in front of staffers. They get arrested. Half a point for, uh, style: When O’Keefe was released from custody, he reportedly yelled, “The truth shall set me free!” We may never know what stupid headlines these brave modern LARPers would have surely netted with this shenanigan.

OVERALL RATING: This sophomore slump nets O’Keefe and company a mere one-and-a-half phoned-in Village People jokes.

—————–

Out-of-Context Remarks by Shirley Sherrod, July 2010

This one’s an Andrew Breitbart joint, not O’Keefe’s, to be clear. And as such, it’s got that dash of nuance and dignity that comes from not putting on a fake moustache. So it’s only stupid if you know anything about Shirley Sherrod, or the history of race in America…which Sherrod’s employer, the USDA, didn’t. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilseck actually called Sherrod on her Blackberry and made her pull over to the side of the road, so anxious was he to fire her.

• And When It Was Debunked… Within days, the full video was dug up, in which Sherrod was saying the opposite of what Breitbart claimed. Also, the two white farmers mentioned in the original clip came to her defense. Shirley Sherrod has had the best strategy of any target to date–instead of fruitlessly waiting for the mainstream media to do its job, she’s refusing to back down and taking legal action against Breitbart.

OVERALL RATING: Two Shirley Sherrod side-eyes. One. Two. Go sit down, you look ill.

—————

Sting on Planned Parenthood, January 2011

This gets called an “ACORN-style sting” today, but to be fair, hard-working disingenuous people have been targeting Planned Parenthood for decades. Anti-choice group Live Action, founded by O’Keefe associate Lila Rose, sent a dude out to clinics claiming to be a sex trafficker; Planned Parenthood smelled a rat and didn’t hesitate in calling the FBI.

• And When It Was Debunked… In the absence of a proper sting, mere rumors were enough as Congress worked to defund Planned Parenthood, along with anyone else offering poor women of color control of their bodies.

OVERALL RATING: You get one Jezebel post with funny pictures of Speaker Boehner. Now get out.

—————

And finally, National Public Radio, March 2011

NPR’s an odd duck on this list, because it’s the only big target that doesn’t mostly serve to benefit poor people of color. Even Tea Party members say their coverage is fair. So why target them? Still mad over their reporting on how SB1070 was written by prison contractors?

• And When It Was Debunked… More noteworthy is who debunked it: Glenn Beck and crew, in a successful grab back at headlines. Meanwhile, the defunding effort proceeds though Congress unchecked, and Vivian Schiller is out of a job. Seriously, how do you run a massive media organization and not know that you should count to ten before offering to resign in the wake of an O’Keefe sting video?

OVERALL RATING: Five out of five totebags, or as many as you can grab on the way out. Just kidding! Those are a major revenue stream now. Hope you like fundraisers!

—————-

HONORABLE MENTIONS: The time James O’Keefe secretly videotaped some teachers saying mean things about New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie; the time James O’Keefe tried to get his mack on with a CNN correspondent as a sting of some sort. Ick.

Breitbart, Man Famous Solely for Racebaiting Lies, Lands ABC Gig

0
Breitbart, Man Famous Solely for Racebaiting Lies, Lands ABC Gig

Andrew Breitbart, whose hits include the bogus sting tapes that got ACORN defunded and the bogus sting tapes that got Shirley Sherrod fired, is back! For unknown reasons, ABC News has invited the BigGovernment.com founder to be a guest for tomorrow’s election night coverage.

Since news broke of Breitbart’s upcoming appearance, ABC has been fighting to distance themselves from their own guest, saying that he’s slated only to appear in their online content. Breitbart, true to form, has clouded the issue, publishing private emails that he says show that he was guaranteed a spot on their seven-hour live television broadcast. A vicious internal debate has ensued, but at the time of this writing, Breitbart’s still in.

ColorOfChange.org has a petition to tell ABC to keep Breitbart and his agenda off the air. One big question remains, along with the others: what viewers did ABC hope to snag by inviting Breitbart on in the first place? Maybe they wanted someone to talk about race, but moved too slow on that Juan Williams fellow?

Sherrod to Vilsack: Take This Job and Shelve It

0
Sherrod to Vilsack: Take This Job and Shelve It

Shirley Sherrod told the Obama administration this morning she’s not interested in coming back to work for the Department of Agriculture, at least not right now. Sherrod said she needs “a little break” after all of the hubbub surrounding her ousting, but that she may work with the administration in some capacity later.

Sherrod spoke to reporters after a morning meeting with Secretary Tom Vilsack, who canned her after Andrew Breitbart published of a heavily edited video purporting to show Sherrod admitting to bias against white farmers. The full video revealed exactly the opposite. Both Vilsack and President Obama have apologized to Sherrod and had offered her a job working on civil rights issues in the department. NPR reports on how Sherrod described this morning’s meeting:

“The secretary did push really, really hard for me to stay and work from the inside,” she told reporters. “I think I can be helpful to him and the department if I just take a little break and look at how I can be more helpful in the future.”

Sherrod said she’s received “many, many thousands” of letters supporting her and added:

I need a little time to be able to deal with that, to sort of take a break from some of all that I’ve had to deal with over the last few weeks. And I look forward to some type of relationship with the Department in the future. We do need to work on the issues of discrimination and racism in this country, and I certainly would like to play my role in trying to help deal with it.

Vilsack was at the press conference as well and, according to NPR, confessed, “I disappointed this administration. I disappointed the country. And I disappointed Shirley. And I have to live with that.” Vilsack has continually insisted he alone was responsible for the administration’s wild overreaction to Breitbart’s smear and Obama has placed the blame on “this media culture where something goes up on YouTube or a blog and everybody scrambles.” Sherrod, meanwhile, maintained as the story broke that it was clear to her that her ousting was driven by the White House.

Sherrod has also said she has every intention of suing Breitbart for pushing the deceptive video. Asked about that this morning, she said, “I do think a suit will be forthcoming.”

Sherrod Shakes Her Fist at Breitbart–and Hugs the NAACP

0
Sherrod Shakes Her Fist at Breitbart--and Hugs the NAACP

Shirley Sherrod stepped back into the spotlight today. The former USDA state director from Georgia, whose ousting sparked a massive media controversy last month, has some fighting words for the right–and a big make-up kiss for the NAACP.

In an NAACP email, sent under Sherrod’s name this afternoon, she calls out conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart directly, saying that she’s “surely not going to yield because some Tea Party agitator sat at his computer and turned everything I said upside down and inside out.” Which, it’s clear, is exactly what Brietbart did.

Last month, the Obama administration abruptly axed Sherrod after Breitbart published a heavily edited video of an NAACP speech in which she appeared to say she discriminated against white farmers. The full video revealed the opposite: That Sherrod had been telling a story about overcoming personal prejudice in order to confront economic injustice. Both Obama and Agriculture Secretary Tom Visack have since apologized to Sherrod

In her email today, Sherrod doesn’t discuss the Obama administration, but she does make nice with the NAACP. The organization helped fuel the uproar by initially denouncing her, before reviewing and releasing the full video of her faux-controversial speech. The email urges folks to put all that “behind us” and support the NAACP’s work: 

Not long ago, I sat here in my living room in Albany, Georgia for an afternoon of deep conversation with NAACP President Benjamin Jealous. As he has done in public, Ben movingly apologized for the fact that the NAACP was initially hoodwinked by Breitbart and Fox into supporting my removal. I told him what I want to tell you.

That’s behind us, and the last thing I want to see happen is for my situation to weaken support for the NAACP. Too many people confronted by racism and poverty count on the NAACP to be there for them, especially those in rural areas who often have nowhere else to turn.

People ask me, “Shirley, how are you getting through all of this?” I tell them that, if they knew what I have lived through, they’d understand that these current challenges aren’t about to throw me off course.

When I was 17 years old, my father was murdered by a white man in Baker County, Georgia. There were three witnesses, but the grand jury refused to indict the person responsible. I knew I had to do something in answer to my father’s death.

While it’s still unclear if Sherrod will press charges against Brietbart, she’s already making a pretty good case in the court of public opinion. Today’s words are the strongest public statement Sherrod’s made so far. But most importantly, it’s a laudable effort to recast the whole mess for what it really is: a sloppy attempt by the right to put poor black folks on the defensive.

Here’s the full text of Sherrod’s letter:

Back in March, I delivered a speech to an NAACP Freedom Fund banquet in my home state of Georgia. I drew on my personal life story to urge poor people, white and black, to pull together and overcome racial divisions. We have to understand that our struggle is against poverty and against those who are blocking our path out of poverty.

Unless we figure this out, I warned, our communities won’t thrive and our children won’t prosper.

As you know, a Tea Party blogger named Andrew Breitbart released an intentionally deceptive, heavily edited clip from that speech to make it look as if I was delivering exactly the opposite message. Then Fox News blasted that false message across America’s airwaves, creating a firestorm that led to my ouster as the USDA State Director here in Georgia.

Not long ago, I sat here in my living room in Albany, Georgia for an afternoon of deep conversation with NAACP President Benjamin Jealous. As he has done in public, Ben movingly apologized for the fact that the NAACP was initially hoodwinked by Breitbart and Fox into supporting my removal. I told him what I want to tell you.

That’s behind us, and the last thing I want to see happen is for my situation to weaken support for the NAACP. Too many people confronted by racism and poverty count on the NAACP to be there for them, especially those in rural areas who often have nowhere else to turn.

People ask me, “Shirley, how are you getting through all of this?” I tell them that, if they knew what I have lived through, they’d understand that these current challenges aren’t about to throw me off course.

When I was 17 years old, my father was murdered by a white man in Baker County, Georgia. There were three witnesses, but the grand jury refused to indict the person responsible. I knew I had to do something in answer to my father’s death.

That very night, I made a commitment that I would stay in the South and fight for change.

I have lived true to that commitment for 45 years. I didn’t yield when, just months after my father was killed, they came in the middle of the night to burn a cross in front of our house with my mother, four sisters, and the baby brother my father never got to see still inside.

And I’m surely not going to yield because some Tea Party agitator sat at his computer and turned everything I said upside down and inside out.

I learned a lot of lessons from my parents growing up, but one of the most important ones is what my mother taught her children after our father was killed. She told us we mustn’t try to live with hate in our hearts.

My mother led by example. Just 11 years after that cross-burning incident, she became the first black elected official in Baker County, and she’s still serving, still working to bring people together.

You and I have to keep working as well. Change has to start with us. I have been overwhelmed by the outpouring of support I have received over these last few weeks. It means so much to me and my family.

But you and I have to make sure that people all across the country who wage a daily struggle against poverty and racism have support networks as well. And that’s why your personal involvement in sustaining the NAACP is so critical.

The NAACP confronts the virulent racism that my family and so many other families have had to endure. But it is also leading the way in breaking down the structural barriers that block so many people’s paths out of poverty.

In our struggle between the “haves” and the “have-nots,” they want to keep the poor divided – and we have to insist, by our words and our actions, that there is no difference between us.

As we move forward together, I urge you to remember this: Life is a grindstone. But whether it grinds us down or polishes us up depends on us.

Thank you for all you are doing to challenge poverty and racism. I look forward to working and struggling right by your side.

Sincerely,

Shirley Sherrod

White Conservatives Own the "Race Conversation" (Now With Stats!)

0
White Conservatives Own the

Nate Silver, everyone’s favorite election-polls wonk, unveils an interesting chunk of data this week over at his blog FiveThirtyEight.com. In it, he tries to pinpoint exactly which news outlets are talking about race, breaking it down by “new” vs. “old” media and by political lean. He talks at length about his methodology in the post; the short version is that he’s producing percentages of articles that contain the terms “racism,” “racial” or “racist” vs. articles that don’t.

The raw data is interesting, but we can presume that Silver intends this only as an exercise, not as a final statement. The method he uses is almost too shallow to be useful, and he admits that he doesn’t have much appetite for Our Great National Conversation On Race. Or, more accurately and understandably, the cynical pageview-bait that uses race as a cheap grab.

Nate’s face-value conclusion is that everyone’s doing it. Fortunately, we at ColorLines eat cynical, race-based pageview-bait for breakfast, and bring some lived experience to the data. So I can say with some authority that this:

mediadata_080610.jpg

should scare the pants off of all of us.

Since this data is from the last thirty days, what we’re seeing here is Andrew Breitbart’s Big Government site pushing the doctored Shirley Sherrod video that got Sherrod fired, and dominated the news cycle for a week. It makes sense that he’s in first place for amount of race-focused coverage, regardless of his motives. That’s not the scary part.

The scary part is that second place in the “watchdog” category is Media Matters. Media Matters is an excellent and invaluable media watchdog group. The problem? They spend a lot of their digital column space responding to stories pushed, engineered, and sometimes out-and-out fabricated by the likes of Andrew Breitbart. (And in third place, we have NewsBusters, a sort of Flavor Flav to Breibart’s Chuck D, who exist mostly to call Media Matters racist.)

And the red-over-blue pattern continues up the chart. Granted, these numbers are from the last 30 Sherrod-heavy days. But we can imagine how they looked for 30 days after the Tea Party called the NAACP the ‘real racists,’ or after Glenn Beck called Van Jones a communist plant, or after Breitbart himself circulated doctored videos of ACORN employees. The New York Times issued a retraction for their initial endorsement of that last video — after Congress voted to cut off all of ACORN’s funding.

In other words? There is no left-of-center original reporting on race at this level, period. Breitbart, Beck, and their ilk have no compunctions about leading with race, for pageviews or for personal vendettas, because it’s a conversation they dominate — and they spoil the field so thoroughly that smart high-profile liberals with access to real data, like Nate Silver, would rather just stay out of it and call it a loss. Or, news orgs teach the controversy. Scrolling up the chart, I’ll bet most of both NPR’s and CNN’s few race-mentioning stories are hands-off discussions of the Sherrod scandal — a scandal that didn’t exist until Breitbart hit publish.

This has repercussions outside the media. We see Vice President Biden saying that the Tea Party isn’t racist. We see President Obama getting railroaded for saying the Cambridge police acted stupidly for arresting a black man for standing in his own home, and then trying to patch up all of law enforcement’s racially disparate history over carefully chosen beers. We have Mayor Bloomberg’s beautiful speech defending the Ground Zero mosque — made even more poignant by the silence of outspoken health care reform champions like Sen. Schumer, Rep. Weiner and the rest of New York’s Democrats. And we see organized labor being shut out of the conversation about income inequality. Meanwhile, racially disparate policies in health care, in law enforcement, in education, and in employment go unreformed. If everyone’s so afraid of being called a racist, why don’t they do something about racial inequity?

‘Calling it a loss’ on race misses the point; race isn’t separate from policy, because it’s not separate from the people policies affect. Jamelle Bouie, writing at the American Prospect, says:

Of course, you can’t treat race as a box to be checked off. Not only is race a crucial part of American identity; it’s impossible to talk about policy in this country without also, somewhere, mentioning race. Indeed, to talk about race as if it were some “thing” apart is to deny the central role it plays in nearly every aspect of American life.

In short, the problem with our “national conversation on race” is that we refuse to acknowledge race as a basic fact of American life. We bury our heads in the sand and pretend to live in a country where there isn’t systemic, institutionalized racism and where talking about race is somehow counterproductive to governing.

Until we reach an understanding that racial inequity does just fine when everyone ignores it — and yes, worrying about being called a racist is a form of ignoring racial inequity — the Breitbarts of the world will always win the morning. Maybe the best solution is to change the subject to the truth about our post-racial America — about, say, where BP is dumping its spill waste – and see if pundits and facts get along better than oil and water.

Obama: Sherrod Debacle is Media’s Fault, Not Mine

0

Obama: Sherrod Debacle is Media's Fault, Not Mine

No question, the maddening spectacle of Andrew Breitbart managing to tar an innocent woman with demonstrable lies is an indictment of corporate news media. Competition for eyeballs and misguided “objectivity” conspire to give proven dissemblers like Breitbart opportunities to be heard when they ought to be ignored. That said, let’s keep one fact about Sherrod’s ordeal clear: Neither Breitbart nor the news media that credulously reported his antics fired Shirley Sherrod; Barack Obama’s administration did. And that’s what makes the president’s remarks on Good Morning America today so frustrating.

George Stephanopoulos blogged last night on the relevant excerpts from this morning’s Obama interview (which is primarily on the Wall Street reform bill). Of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack’s actions, Obama said, “He jumped the gun, partly because we now live in this media culture where something goes up on YouTube or a blog and everybody scrambles.” Except in this case, of course, the “everybody” is your administration, Mr. President.

Sherrod has said plainly that she understood the White House, not Vilsack to have asked for her head. But even if we accept that this was all a matter of Vilsack wilding out and overreacting, he did so in the context of an administration that is plainly spooked by the far right’s effort to link it with anything that looks race conscious, or even truly progressive. Vilsack’s actions were in keeping with his boss’s political temperament: Avoid fights with the right and take no prisoners on the left.

But Obama nonetheless dressed it up as yet another teachable moment:

“If there’s a lesson to be drawn from this episode, it’s that rather than us jumping to conclusions and pointing fingers at each other, we should all look inward and try to examine what’s in our own hearts and, as a consequence, I think we will continue to make progress,” he said.

Whatever.

  • Email Updates

    Contact us with your name and your interest in getting involved and we'll add you to our email updates list!
  • Post Archives

  • Categories

Go to Top