Chris Matthews Retapes Sherrod Segment For 7PM Hardball Rerun After 5PM Flap

» 87 comments
video

Today on MSNBC’s Hardball, Chris Matthews tried to debate Salon’s Joan Walsh and former Gov. Howard Dean that Andrew Breitbart’s version of the controversial Shirley Sherrod speech was completely unedited. Considering there were about 35 minutes missing from that tape, this was wrong for obvious reasons. But if you caught the 7PM rerun, you wouldn’t have seen that, because Hardball retaped the segment, this time with Matthews admitting the Breitbart version was incomplete.

In the initial live 5PM segment, the conversation between Dean, Matthews, and Walsh turned uncomfortable as Matthews repeatedly defended Breitbart’s tape as “unedited.” After several “that’s not true”s and “you’ve got to trust me on this”s, Matthews still insisted the video was unedited, and, when asked if he had seen the news on the Drudge Report, snapped, “I don’t watch Drudge.” Take 1 of the segment is below:



The above video never made it to the online Hardball channel, as it appears that sometime in between the two airings of the program, the decision was made to do the segment live once again at 7PM, because what aired during what is typically (and, with this segment the exception, was) a rerun was the following video– the same discussion, except with Matthews agreeing that the video was edited and, instead of Gov. Dean, Politico’s Ken Vogel:



In the second take, Matthews emphasizes the fact that the Breitbart tape was, in fact, incomplete, and even plays the Breitbart version of the tape to make the point that it was so. At the end of the segment, Matthews acknowledges the errors in the first take, telling the audience before he thanks Walsh for returning:

“That’s what we’re doing here. That’s what we’re doing here in our 2nd edition tonight, trying to clarify. It’s a better story tonight. We had a good narrative tonight. I think everybody heard what happened. It’s a tricky one, a few rough edges– we got it tonight.”

Hardball has been around for well over a decade, there is a chance that this isn’t the first time they’ve had to retape a segment to replace what would have been the typical rerun. But outside of special Election Day editions of the program where Matthews is embedded on the campaign trail, this is the first time in recent memory that Hardball has run live at 7PM, and probably the first time when the program has run live for only one segment, only to return to the rerun afterwards, barring a major news break.

It seems that Matthews and his crew were not willing to let history repeat itself thanks to a preplanned rerun, and on the rest of the network, MSNBC rarely, if ever, retapes segments for reasons outside of technical error (Matthews not knowing the facts on the Sherrod story is certainly not the fault of technology). It’s a truly rare occasion to see a cable news personality admit a mistake– the best that can typically be hoped for is a passing apology on the night after– and impressive that it took less than two hours for Matthews to make his segment right and acknowledge that things didn’t go so smoothly the first time around.

Update: Walsh expands on her Hardball appearances in a new Salon column posted tonight.

Follow us on Twitter.

Sign up for Mediaite’s daily newsletter.

Email Twitter Facebook Digg Reddit Stumble Upon Yahoo Buzz LinkedIn Tumblr Delicious

87 comments

  • valkyrie101 valkyrie101 says:
    Thumb up 22 Thumb down 9

    Which proves that even Mathews watches FOX. :-)

  • felixw felixw says:
    Thumb up 36 Thumb down 11

    It’s interesting that MSNBC doesn’t worry about going back and fixing mistakes when they falsely smear a conservative. But when Chris Matthews defends a conservative, the network Thought Police dictated that an immediate erasure and correction take place.

    Why don’t they go back and fix the tapes on the hours of accusations, from a few months back, that Andrew Breitabart was involved with wiretapping and responsible for the new Watergate? All those charges were dropped, and even at the time the arresting police admitted that there was zero evidence of wiretapping. Yet MSNBC never retracted their intense, nightly smears — repeated ad nauseam by all their pundits — and certainly didn’t go back a replace the tapes of the shows with an honest presentation of facts.

  • The Real Royal King The Real Royal King says:
    Thumb up 10 Thumb down 45

    valkyrie101 said:
    Which proves that even Mathews watches FOX. :-)

    That’s rich!

    AT FOX NEWS, HONESTY
    IS NOT OUR POLICY!

  • valkyrie101 valkyrie101 says:
    Thumb up 9 Thumb down 28

    Come on felix, the stakes are high. Why repeat the same error on a story of this magnitude? But as for your wiretapping gripe, now you are defending Breitbart because somebody went with a story, following an actual arrest, which did not pan out? Isn’t that essentially what the Moonie Breitbart did, minus the arrest part, and what you are defending?

  • murf murf says:
    Thumb up 22 Thumb down 4

    They should’ve just ran a 77th rerun of a prison doc instead.

    What a joke .

  • libra blue libra blue says:
    Thumb up 36 Thumb down 9

    Did “thrill boy” bother to play the tape of Sherrod’s husband’s racist comments? Anderson played it tonight, but before doing so he apologized to viewers for not challenging Sherrod’s racist comments on the NAACP tape about whites keeping blacks down.

    Something tells me that AC would not have apologized had the husband’s tape not surfaced. He sounds like he is trying to backtrack away from his over-the-top support of Sherrod.

  • MichelleF MichelleF says:
    Thumb up 24 Thumb down 9

    I agree Libra Blue. I think Shirley and her cheerleaders in the media are going to end up regretting this lawsuit that they are cheering for today. The skeletons of her and her husband will see the light of day. I don’t think they thought this through. I’d be willing to bet BO isn’t thrilled with it either. She’d better hope Rhambo doesn’t pay her a visit in the shower.

  • philipjames philipjames says:
    Thumb up 26 Thumb down 7

    I have to laugh. Breitbart was sent two video clips from someone who had access to the whole tape. He did not edit or cut the two clips he got. He posted the two clips. They are part of a long video of the whole speech. How the left wing dolts can get this mixed up reflects the intelligence comparable to the Jaywalk Allstars of Jay Leno fame.
    Breitbart posted them and made comments about how Sherrod appeared to make racist comments and the NAACP audience agreed with those racist statements. He did not cut or edit what he had been sent.

    How about watching the whole tape people. When you do you discover that Sherrod is still a racist (rich whites who have beating down and taking advantage of all the poor blacks) and she is also a marxist – got to get some stuff from those rich whites.

    So, I welcome her lawsuit against Breitbart…. she will get exposed and by the way, how many of you have watched her wonderful husband, another racist, rant about whites and uncle toms?

    Here is a video clip of her wonderful husband… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4ua8liTPzQ

    This lawsuit should be very entertaining and we will all get to see the racist Shirley Sherrod (and maybe even her racist husband too).

  • notsofast notsofast says:
    Thumb up 19 Thumb down 6

    MichelleF said:
    I think Shirley and her cheerleaders in the media are going to end up regretting this lawsuit that they are cheering for today.

    For all their smarts, the pundits and lib apologists have forgotten that the truth is always a successful defense against a defamation charge.

  • BradyCox Brady says:
    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3

    Frances – I think Chris got it wrong in the *7:00 PM* version as well; I don’t think the version of the Sherrod video shown during the 7:00 PM do-over was the version Brietbart initially posted. When I was watching this live, earlier tonight — before I knew that it *was* a do-over — I was thinking: ‘Isn’t Chris giving Breitbart & his source too much credit here?’ Because the very *first* version posted on BigGovernment did *not* go so far as to include the part where she says she realized it’s not about black & white, but about helping the poor. Right? I mean, that’s the whole point; the initial version *didn’t* show that. Contrary to what Chris said, I think the clip shown (in the 7:00 PM ‘Hardball’) was the *V2.0* posted to BigGovernment. Right?

  • MichelleF MichelleF says:
    Thumb up 8 Thumb down 5

    Brady says:

    Because the very *first* version posted on BigGovernment did *not* go so far as to include the part where she says she realized it’s not about black & white, but about helping the poor.

    It absolutely DID include that. I watched it the first day Breitbart posted it and it DID include that part.

  • roxsteady roxsteady says:
    Thumb up 10 Thumb down 27

    Do any of you find it strange that this asshole Breitbart hasn’t said a word since Sherrod stated that she’s going to sue him? Here’s why. He’s in big trouble according to several attorneys who specialize in slander and libel cases. One of them said this:

    “The real question would be did he know or have reason to suspect and never inquired that this clip unfairly represented what she said,” Attorney Martin London of New York said about Breitbart. “Are there some facts that could determine that he would suspect it?”

    London said that Sherrod must prove reckless disregard on Breitbart’s part and prove his state of mind. He said several pieces of circumstantial evidence could help.

    First, that he had the edited clip for at least a day or more: “He had time to check it out and he did not.”

    He also noted that Breitbart’s known conservative bent could prove he might have had a motive to discredit Sherrod. “The fact of his political leanings is some evidence that he was out to get her.”

    London said the burden would be on Sherrod to prove that Breitbart knew that the tape was edited to present her in a false light, or had cause to suspect it did.

    He added that the fact that Breitbart never contacted Sherrod before posting the clip may indicate he had suspicion that she might correct the reporting.

    “If he didn’t call her and ask her opinion that is another fact that is important,” London added. “The jury could infer he didn’t call her because she could deny it and he would lose the story.”

    Another attorney said this:

    Another defamation veteran, Paul Kleven, a lawyer based in Berkeley, Calif., said such a claim could possibly be made more against Fox than Breitbart. Given Breitbart’s history of doctoring videos, Fox should have suspected that a video he provided might have been doctored.

    “For them to accept it as gospel and run with it the way they did, they would have reason to doubt his integrity,” Kleven said. “He would be the sort of person they would suspect of doctoring it in some way. Getting it from Breitbart, they would have a reason to believe it could be slanted in some way.”

    The first person I’d call to the stand is Shepard Smith who said just that. This is why this piece of trash hasn’t said a word. It’s likely his attorney has told him to shut up. He’s done!

  • roxsteady roxsteady says:
    Thumb up 9 Thumb down 31

    By the way dumb asses, it’s the text that Breitbart added at the beginning of the tape that goes directly to intent. Like I said, he’s finished! Shirley is going to bury this stupid son of a bitch. I can’t wait!

  • roxsteady roxsteady says:
    Thumb up 9 Thumb down 27

    Oh, and aside from Breitbart’s own statement that he would prove that the NAACP was racist, which goes to motive and intent, there also the ACORN tapes which show a pattern of reckless disregard for the truth. Stick a fork in this pig. It’s going to be fun to watch the media cover this. The other good thing that should come from this is that the media will never again accept anything from him without checking. That’s called journalism!

  • Big_F-ing_Deal Big_F-ing_Deal says:
    Thumb up 9 Thumb down 26

    Good job, Chris.
    O’Reilly had 24 hours to correct the bullshit he was originally pushing and still didn’t issue any kind of correction the next night.

    Matthews = 2 hours
    O’Reilly = 2 days

  • the real john t the real john t says:
    Thumb up 8 Thumb down 11

    philipjames said:
    Breitbart was sent two video clips from someone who had access to the whole tape.

    Then why didn’t he ask for the whole tape before spouting off?

  • Pablo Pablo says:
    Thumb up 8 Thumb down 3

    valkyrie101 said:
    Considering there were about 35 minutes missing from that tape, this was wrong for obvious reasons.

    No, it proves that he actually read the Breitbart post in question.

  • BradyCox Brady says:
    Thumb up 14 Thumb down 2

    FYI, I just did a little research. MichelleF is correct; the original version posted to BigGovernment — just as Chris said & showed — ended with Sherrod saying, “So I figured if I take him to one of them, that his own kind would take care of him. That’s when it was revealed to me that you’re — it’s about poor, versus those who have, and not so much about white — it *is* about white and black, but it’s not, you know — it opened my eyes, because I took him to one of his own.” <>

  • Pablo Pablo says:
    Thumb up 11 Thumb down 4

    roxsteady said:
    Another defamation veteran, Paul Kleven, a lawyer based in Berkeley, Calif., said such a claim could possibly be made more against Fox than Breitbart. Given Breitbart’s history of doctoring videos, Fox should have suspected that a video he provided might have been doctored.

    “For them to accept it as gospel and run with it the way they did, they would have reason to doubt his integrity,” Kleven said. “He would be the sort of person they would suspect of doctoring it in some way. Getting it from Breitbart, they would have a reason to believe it could be slanted in some way.”

    Anyone who looked at that clip (and the other clip in Breitbart’s initial post) and didn’t know that it was a clip from a longer speech is too stupid to breathe.* And as Chris Matthews notes, the clip included the intro to the part where Shirley was touched by God and forever blessed. But now it’s doctored. I heard that on CNN today too, on Rick Sanchez, right before a Goldline commercial.

  • Pablo Pablo says:
    Thumb up 11 Thumb down 2

    * This is not to insinuate that Secretary Vilsack and President Obama are incapable of inhalation and exhalation. Long may they respirate.

  • Pablo Pablo says:
    Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2

    Brady said:
    FYI, I just did a little research. MichelleF is correct; the original version posted to BigGovernment — just as Chris said & showed — ended with Sherrod saying, “So I figured if I take him to one of them, that his own kind would take care of him. That’s when it was revealed to me that you’re — it’s about poor, versus those who have, and not so much about white — it *is* about white and black, but it’s not, you know — it opened my eyes, because I took him to one of his own.” <>

    Yes, he left the part where she morphed it into a class problem instead of a race one.

  • the real john t the real john t says:
    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 18

    Pablo said:
    Anyone who looked at that clip (and the other clip in Breitbart’s initial post) and didn’t know that it was a clip from a longer speech is too stupid to breathe.*

    Can any of you nitwit Brietbart apologist tell me why Brietbart didn’t post the whole speech? Or are you too stupid to “breathe”.

  • marcoesquondolas marcoesquondolas says:
    Thumb up 12 Thumb down 4

    There have been TWO mediate stories on this tonight and you still can’t get it right…please re-watch the 5:00 pm show segment.
    Dean and Walsh were WRONG
    Thank you

  • Pablo Pablo says:
    Thumb up 16 Thumb down 2

    the real john t said:
    Can any of you nitwit Brietbart apologist tell me why Brietbart didn’t post the whole speech?

    According to him, he posted everything he had. Can you explain to me why you’re in this discussion slinging epithets without understanding the basic facts of this discussion?

    Or are you too stupid to “breathe”.

    Did you watch that clip and think it was Shirley’s whole speech?

  • the real john t the real john t says:
    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 18

    Pablo said:
    According to him, he posted everything he had.

    And he calls himself a journalist. That is pretty damn sad.

    “Did you watch that clip and think it was Shirley’s whole speech?” Only the idiotic RWers would think that, and plenty of them did. Now, don’t you think a real “journalist” would research it before spouting off and running with it?

  • Pablo Pablo says:
    Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2

    So, you’re not going to answer my question, then? Good night, john.

  • the real john t the real john t says:
    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 13

    Pablo said:
    So, you’re not going to answer my question, then?

    I guess the boy can’t read.

  • sarainitaly sarainitaly says:
    Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0

    These were the first clips posted at Breitbart:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_xCeItxbQY&feature=player_embedded

    Shirley at 1:45 begins her *revelation*.

    And this was the second video he posted, Shirley telling black people to get jobs at the USDA because black people don’t get fired from gov’t. jobs.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zXDNlWESD0&feature=player_embedded

  • sarainitaly sarainitaly says:
    Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1

    Chris Matthews was right, Dean and Joan are flat out wrong. Are they intentionally lying, or incompetents who only cut to the end of the tape, without watching the whole thing?

    Joan and Dean are wrong wrong wrong.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_xCeItxbQY&feature=player_embedded

  • sarainitaly sarainitaly says:
    Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1

    “Update: Walsh expands on her Hardball appearances in a new Salon column posted tonight.”

    First, let me make one thing clear: According to Media Matters, and you all know they pay attention, Matthews was right about the first video posted by Breitbart. It did include Sherrod alluding to the epiphany she describes in detail later, about the fact that many issues aren’t about black and white, they’re about the haves and have nots.

    Uh…Isn’t she admitting that she was wrong, and Matthews was right? I don’t get where Dean and Walsh get off insisting Matthews was wrong, when he proved, in the second clip, he was right?

    They discuss in the Hardball show that Breitbart left in the redemption portion, but calling it sloppy on his part…?

    Perhaps that reinforces the statements made by Breitbart that it wasn’t about attacking Shirley, it was about showing that racism exists within the NAACP, as demonstrated by the reactions of the crowd.

  • kit9 kit9 says:
    Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1

    ‘Walsh turned uncomfortable as Matthews repeatedly defended Breitbart’s tape as “unedited.”’

    Wrong. What the F is the matter with you people? Is Mediaite trying to kill it’s reputation completely today? First Colby completely gets it wrong-now you. Matthews WASN’T saying that Breitbar’s clip wasn’t edited from the full one hour speech-he’s saying, and correctly, that Breitbart’s original clip didn’t edit out the part of her story where she reveals she realized she was wrong for treating the white farmer poorly in her original meeting with him-or the redemption part of the story. That was always there in Breitbart’s original clip. Jesus, aren’t there basic fact checkers here? Didn’t any of you actually watch the Breitbart clips last week when this story broke?

  • sarainitaly sarainitaly says:
    Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1

    Dean is SUCH a liar.

    HOWARD DEAN: That’s not, I did not see that at in the original on the original website or…

    Stop the tape. As you can see, Dean first said, “I did not see that in the original on the original website.” This is important because he’s going to change his story:

    MATTHEWS: But it is.

    DEAN: …or the original Fox…

    Let’s take out Matthews’ comment to read the entire statement by Dean: “That’s not, I did not see that in the original on the original website or the original Fox…”

    MATTHEWS: That’s why we had the dispute ten minutes ago, because that’s what I saw in the original blog.

    DEAN: Okay, but that’s not what I saw on the network. I didn’t see the original blog.

    Didn’t see the original blog? Well, that’s not what he said minutes ago, “That’s not, I did not see that in the original on the original website or the original Fox…”

    MATTHEWS: Okay, well, that’s what Breitbart put out. That’s what…

    DEAN: He may have. He may have.

    MATTHEWS: He did.

    DEAN: Maybe Fox edited it further.

    MATTHEWS: I’m just telling you that’s a fact. I know what came (inaudible). You can see five minutes after you walk off this set you can go check it come back if it’s not true, but that is in fact…

    DEAN: I’m not disputing you. I never looked at the Breitbart…

    Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/07/29/chris-matthews-and-howard-dean-get-heated-argument-about-sherrod-videos#ixzz0v9XD7edj

  • sarainitaly sarainitaly says:
    Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2

    Who Got to Chris Matthews?: ‘Hardball’ Defense of Breitbart Memory-Holed

    a fully informed Matthews still defends Breitbart making the crucial and oft-ignored point that…
    Well, there you go. [Quoting Ms. Sherrod]

    “I opened my eyes. I realized it wasn’t about black and white. It was, but it was about other things, about poverty.” So, Joan, that part, that part in there about redemptive revelation was actually in the initial tape.

    Well, obviously this couldn’t have sat well with the left-wing Journolistas who are now in full Destroy Breitbart mode and therefore in no mood for independent thinkers not fully on board with today’s talking points.

    So rather than accept the fact that a fully informed Matthews was still intellectually honest enough to make the point that the rest of the MSM is willfully ignoring — that Ms. Sherrod’s redemptive revelation was not cut from the excerpted video — something inexplicable happened between the 5pm and 7pm broadcast, and it’s not crazy to speculate that this something was probably a whole lot of angry phone calls, a flood of scathing emails, and a producer meeting or two that included any and all variations of the word apostate.

    An international story that’s grabbed thousands of headlines over the last week, and Matthews did a 180… between shows? Someone got to him. The MSNBC Thought Police? The JournoList Thought Police? (Did I just repeat myself?)

    http://biggovernment.com/jjmnolte/2010/07/30/who-got-to-chris-matthews-hardball-defense-of-breitbart-memory-holed/#more-151305

  • Big_F-ing_Deal Big_F-ing_Deal says:
    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 12

    kit9 said:
    Breitbart’s original clip didn’t edit out the part of her story where she reveals she realized she was wrong for treating the white farmer poorly in her original meeting with him-or the redemption part of the story.

    If you think the full Breitbart clip, in all it’s glory, comes anywhere near to telling the redemptive part of Shirley’s story you are all clinically insane and there is no point in even discussing this with you.

    Read Breitbart intro on the videotape and tell me he was telling (or even hinting) a story of redemption. Do I need to quote those texts for you that he had embedded in the film? The lies?? Do you forget the lies he spread about when the comments happened and where she was working? Something he himself had to correct?

    Read the youtube comments and tell me you righty’s had a clue it was a goddamn story of redemption.

    Of course you didn’t see that. No one could tell that from the clip that was posted at the time, it is only in hindsigjht that you dirtbags can now say “SEE??? It’s all there! It has always been there!!”
    It would be funny if you weren’t all a bunch of sick and malignant racist fucks.

  • kit9 kit9 says:
    Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0

    ‘ Matthews emphasizes the fact that the Breitbart tape was, in fact, incomplete, and even plays the Breitbart version of the tape to make the point that it was so’

    I am literally floored at how badly, not one, but two, Mediaite reporters mischaracterized this. First, you continue to make a claim that Matthews never made-that the tape wasn’t edited at all. But, worse, you claim Matthews is saying something he clearly is not-’Matthews emphasizes the fact that the Breitbart tape was, in fact, incomplete’. He does no such thing! What he emphasizes in the second segment is the part of the clip at the beginning where Breibart says she did this while working for the Feds. THAT’S what he’s emphasizing-along with his original point of contention with idiot Dean-that Breitbart’s original clip had always included the redemption bit of her speech. It’s amazing that Mediaite would so completely bungle and lie about what someone said in a segment focusing on alleged bungling and lying.

    ‘At the end of the segment, Matthews acknowledges the errors in the first take’

    NO HE DOESN’T. He doesn’t acknowledge any errors nor did he make any. He simply made the points more clearly that he made in the first airing. Jesus, do you think that people won’t actually watch the clips and just take your word for it?

  • Big_F-ing_Deal Big_F-ing_Deal says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 13

    sarainitaly said:
    “I opened my eyes. I realized it wasn’t about black and white. It was, but it was about other things, about poverty.”

    You dumb fucks hang on to this quote if it makes you feel better about what was done to her. It explains nothing about Shirley and the grace she displayed in going back and helping that farmer save his farm. The clip stopped with Shirley handing off the farmer to “one of his own”. That’s just where they wanted to stop the clip. Continuing on from there would have led too much to the TRUTH.

  • sarainitaly sarainitaly says:
    Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2

    Big_F-ing_Deal said:
    You dumb fucks

    Look in the mirror.

  • sarainitaly sarainitaly says:
    Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1

    Big_F-ing_Deal said:
    sick and malignant racist fucks

    I think I will sue you.

  • Big_F-ing_Deal Big_F-ing_Deal says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 14

    sarainitaly said:
    I think I will sue you.

    Someone needs to talk to you like that..
    It ain’t always about Left and Right, you know.
    It’s about right and wrong too.

    Show some goddamn humanity.

  • sarainitaly sarainitaly says:
    Thumb up 15 Thumb down 1

    Big_F-ing_Deal said:
    It’s about right and wrong too.

    exactly. and you and joan and dean are wrong. i comment all the time, correcting the wrongs, and people like you call me names like ” You dumb fucks” and “sick and malignant racist fucks” and right wing racist hack…etc.

    That is wrong. I am not dumb, racist, or a right winger. You just can’t handle the TRUTH so you resort to personal attacks.

    I am calling my lawyer now.

  • ifpff ifpff says:
    Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0

    The man’s got no integrity left. Simple as that.

    Like I said, go hang out with Schieffer, live on an island together.. no pesky computers, televisions, blogs. Or I guess maybe something he “watched” on Drudge caused a change of heart.

    All jokes aside, this is actually really disheartening. And this Sherrod case has exposed so much, amazingly, not even about the subject itself. And I’m NOT talking racism.

    No integrity. And it’s patronizing. Deceitful, seriously.

  • Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1

    I am so glad that what journalists and their guests do, is independently confirmed to be less than beautiful to say the least. (No I don’t want to get too many thumbs down on this.) When that woman admits that she wronged someone, even when she righted it after that, and especially if she tells that whole story, then what she did wrong is not forgotten, and is still a fact we need to consider seriously. When the Tea-Party is accused of racism, out of political motives (which I believe is the case), then reminding of something like that which admittedly happened, is valid. I hope that after journalism, justice and even science will be held accountable to the TRUTH as much, since it is their own raison d’être in the first place. Or was, anyway.

  • TfT TfT says:
    Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0

    How much difference does it really make what he did or didn’t do? Today’s jouno’s are gonna make shit up to put forth the message THEY want put forth, based apparently on guidance they get from Rham or Ezra.

    It just makes them look more and more foolish in the eyes of the public. Today’s journolistas are not to be trusted, period.

    Journolist took them down once it was revealed. Funny how journolist stories from the daily caller are pretty much ignored by the media sites. TVNewser still hasn’t had one direct story on journolist, and although mediaite has had a story or two, it hasn’t reported Palin’s response to the Trig messaging even though it posted a link to the Trig messages. PATHETIC.

  • MartiniShark MartiniShark says:
    Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0

    Big_F-ing_Deal said:
    Of course you didn’t see that. No one could tell that from the clip that was posted at the time, it is only in hindsigjht that you dirtbags can now say “SEE??? It’s all there! It has always been there!!”It would be funny if you weren’t all a bunch of sick and malignant racist fucks.

    You are certainly the one sounding malignant. Don’t even try to take the intellectual high-road on this issue. If her story of redemption was so obvious and clear, then why did the NAACP and the WH stampede to have Sherrod fired? The NAACP should have had that full tape, and they should have reviewed all the evidence before acting, as Ben Jealous has admitted to doing. Brietbart did not call for her firing, that was their decision. PLus CNNnn and MSNBC had just as much of a field day running the clips before the full tape came out.

    Your level of anger has to stem from the uncomfortable reality that the NAACP and the WH did a royal job of screwing this up, and their attempts at scape-goating are not working. They wanted to blame Fox, but now we know they covered the story after the fact. Brietbart’s tape was available at the NAACP since March — it was at their event! Get pissed off at Andrew all you want, but do not lecture on “the truth” when you want to avoid looking at it directly and resort to deflecting responsibility. Nobody called for Sherrod’s firing at Brietbart, or Fox. Yet she was fired. And we all know why.

  • kit9 kit9 says:
    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

    OH, one last bit..I think it’s pretty obvious the reason Matthews retaped the segment was so he could clearly make the point he had been attempting to make before being derailed at length by idiot Dean and his antiFox crusade. Chris definitely didn’t do it for the reason Mediaite is claiming he did.

  • Sean68 Sean68 says:
    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

    Matthews is doing damage control. The shit storm that rained down on him and MSNBC from the left must have been hellacious.

  • MichelleF MichelleF says:
    Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0

    Joan and Howard looked as uncomfortable being challenged by Tingles as Rangel did when Luke Russett challenged him. It’s so sad that these people don’t know what to do when challenged because they NEVER ARE!!

  • MichelleF MichelleF says:
    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

    “”We must stop the white man and his Uncle Toms from stealing our elections” – Charles Sherrod

    This lawsuit is gonna be fun!

  • valkyrie101 valkyrie101 says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3

    MichelleF said:
    “”We must stop the white man and his Uncle Toms from stealing our elections” – Charles Sherrod This lawsuit is gonna be fun!

    “Judaism committed a historical sin in front of Jesus, so Jewish people experienced the Holocaust under Hitler.”

    “One reason you like darker people is that throughout history, perhaps the race that killed more people is the white race, not the other way. It’s not reasoning, it is a fact. When you go to spirit world there are not many white people in heaven.”

    “As the Lord of the Second Advent I am the owner of this world of death… therefore, the world must follow Rev. Moon. There is no other solution, no other direction or choice…”

    “When you work hard, Congressmen and Senators must be controlled by you.”

    “The Religious Leaders that attend Father will have more and more influence over other religious leaders and soon they will influence political leaders as well…”

    “The significance and meaning of Father’s last world tour was in his gathering of the heads of state and teaching them. In other words, he rose above them and declared kingship.”

    “The time is coming that we have to abolish the concept of separation between church and state. We need a political party centered upon religious ideology…This democratic period in human history is passing away. Soon the heavenly sovereignty will be established to lead the world.”

    “This is the time when I can carry out a revolution. I can exercise my authority according to my wish. In the future 70, 80 or even 90% of the world we know today will disappear. What can I do with an offspring of enemy.”

    “If Catholic priests and nuns remain single, they will all end up in hell… The Unification Church blesses the bride and the bridegroom so they will not perish.”

    “They may be proud to call themselves Catholic, Protestant and so forth, but they have nothing to be proud of. God is even rejected in the true sense by Christians, so how can God visit the Christian churches and expect something?”

    “Homosexuals: … They have no rights. There should be a law to prohibit this. … But homosexuals and lesbians are lower than animals.”

    “America declined because it rejected Reverend Moon. …Once the Messiah sits upon that throne, the Kingdom of Heaven on earth will come about through the unification and perfection of the family, world and cosmos…”

    “Where is the root of the problem of divorce? It is in the woman.”

    “Alcohol, smoking and evil social behavior are also satanic weapons to destroy the human race. Once we understand this clearly we cannot touch those kinds of satanic weapons. We have to destroy them.”

    “Weapon factories must be placed under the supervision of the religious spheres…”

    “All the irrelevant books in the world should be burned away. I cannot tolerate books that belong under the leftist ideology. Do you understand?”

    —Direct quotes of Reverend Sun Myung Moon, founder of the Washington Times, and Andrew Breitbart’s long time employer and benefactor.

  • MichelleF MichelleF says:
    Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0

    I’m kind of surprised you want to open this can or worms Val, but I’ll play.

    Reverend Wright, Obama’s spiritual mentor

    “We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye.”

    “We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America’s chickens are coming home to roost.” (Sep 2001)

    “The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing ‘God Bless America.’ No, no, no, God damn America, that’s in the Bible for killing innocent people. God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme.” (2003)

    “In the 21st century, white America got a wake-up call after 9/11/01. White America and the western world came to realize that people of color had not gone away, faded into the woodwork or just ‘disappeared’ as the Great White West kept on its merry way of ignoring black concerns.” (magazine article)

    “Racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run!…We [in the U.S.] believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in God.” (sermon)

    “Barack knows what it means living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people. Hillary would never know that. Hillary ain’t never been called a nigger. Hillary has never had a people defined as a non-person.”

    “Hillary is married to Bill, and Bill has been good to us. No he ain’t! Bill did us, just like he did Monica Lewinsky. He was riding dirty.” (sermon)

    “The Israelis have illegally occupied Palestinian territories for over 40 years now. Divestment has now hit the table again as a strategy to wake the business community and wake up Americans concerning the injustice and the racism under which the Palestinians have lived because of Zionism.”

  • MichelleF MichelleF says:
    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1

    Part 1 – Obama’s Ties to Socialism, Marxism, and Communism

    1. Obama’s Father Wrote About Socialism – His father wrote a paper called “Problems With Our Socialism” that advocates 100% taxation of the rich, communal ownership of land and the forced confiscation of privately controlled land. Source: Greg Ransom, PrestoPundit

    2. Obama’s Mother Was a “Communist Sympathizer” – ” Friends describe her as a “fellow traveler”, that is, a communist sympathizer, from her youth, according to a March 27, 2007, Chicago Tribune report” Source: Spengler, Asia Times “The values she taught me continue to be my touchstone when it comes to how I go about the world of politics – Barack Obama” Source: Tim Jones, Chicago Tribune

    3. Obama’s Parents Met in a Russian Class (Back then it was the Communist USSR) – “His mother, Stanley Ann Dunham (her father always wanted a son), was white and just 18 when they met in a Russian class” Source: Sharon Cohen, St Louis Times

    4. Obama’s Teen Mentor was Frank Marshall Davis (a known CPUSA member) – “…through Frank Marshall Davis, Obama had an admitted relationship with someone who was publicly identified as a member of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA). The record shows that Obama was in Hawaii from 1971-1979, where, at some point in time, he developed a close relationship, almost like a son, with Davis, listening to his poetry and getting advice on his career path. But Obama, in his book, Dreams From My Father, refers to him repeatedly as just Frank.” Source: Cliff Kincaid, Accuracy in the Media “Kathryn Takara of the University of Hawaii, who wrote a dissertation on the life of Frank Marshall Davis, confirming Davis was a significant influence on Obama when the senator attended Punahou prep school in Hawaii from 1975 to 1979″ Source: Jim Corsi, WorldNetDaily based on Communism in Hawaii and the Obama Connection (Cliff Kincaid and Herbert Romerstein)

    5. Obama’s Brother Roy and Cousin Odinga are Marxists – “Barack Obama’s older brother, Abongo “Roy” Obama. He is a Luo activist. militant Muslim and a Marxist.” Source: Barbara Busby, 180people.com “The person who made me proudest of all,” Obama wrote, “was Roy Source: Bill Sammon, The Examiner “Odinga is a Marxist who reportedly has made a pact with a hard-line Islamic group in Kenya to establish Shariah courts throughout the country” Source: Invenstor’s Business Daily

    6. Obama Attended Socialist Conferences at Cooper Union – “He went to socialist conferences at Cooper Union and African cultural fairs in Brooklyn and started lecturing his relatives until they worried he’d become “one of those freaks you see on the streets around here.” Source: H Kennedy, NY Daily News

    7. Obama Was Hand Picked by Alice Palmer to Succeed Her in the Illinois State Senate – “Nine years before Palmer picked Obama to be her successor, she was the only African-American journalist to travel to the Soviet Union to attend the 27th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, according to an article Palmer wrote in the CPUSA newspaper, People’s Daily World, June 19, 1986.” Source: Jim Corsi, WorldNetDaily based on Communism in Chicago and the Obama Connection (Cliff Kincaid and Herbert Romerstein)

    8. Obama’s Run for the Illinois State Senate was Launched by a Fundraiser Organized at Bill Ayers’ and Bernardine Dorhn’s Chicago Home – Ayers and Dorhn are former terrorists from the Weather Underground who’s SDS organization received financial contributions from the CPUSA. “Obama’s run for the Illinois state Senate was launched by a fundraiser organized at Ayers’ and Dorhn’s Chicago home by Alice Palmer. Palmer had named Obama to succeed her in the state Senate in 1995, when she decided to run for a U.S. congressional seat.” Source: Jim Corsi, WorldNetDaily based on Communism in Chicago and the Obama Connection (Cliff Kincaid and Herbert Romerstein)

    9. Obama Had a Close Relationship with the “Anti-Capitalist” Group ACORN – “Obama has had an intimate and long-term association with the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (Acorn)…Chicago Acorn appears to have played a major role in Obama’s political advance…Acorn’s radical agenda sometimes shifts toward “undisguised authoritarian socialism.” Source: Stanley Kurtz, National Review

    10. Obama Attended Several Meetings with the Democratic Socialists in Chicago and Was even Endorsed by Them – “Obama’s socialist backing goes back at least to 1996, when he received the endorsement of the Chicago branch of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) for an Illinois state senate seat. Later, the Chicago DSA newsletter reported that Obama, as a state senator, showed up to eulogize Saul Mendelson, one of the “champions” of “Chicago’s democratic left” and a long-time socialist activist. Obama’s stint as a “community organizer” in Chicago has gotten some attention, but his relationship with the DSA socialists, who groomed and backed him, has been generally ignored.” Source: Cliff Kincaid, Accuracy in the Media “In its broadest sense, democratic socialism could refer to any attempts to bring about socialism through democratic means as opposed to violent insurrection.” Source: Wikipedia

    11. Obama Endorsed Openly Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders – Video ” “Sanders is the first self-described socialist to be elected to the U.S. Senate.” Source: Wikipedia

    12. Many Obama Supporters Idolize Che Guervara – Obama Campaign Worker Seen With Communist Cuba Flag Depicting Marxist Che Guevara on it. Source: David Benzion, Lone Star Times

    Guevara later served as Minister of Industries, in which post he helped formulate Cuban socialism…Guevara played a key role in bringing to Cuba the Soviet nuclear-armed ballistic missiles that precipitated the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962. During an interview with the British newspaper Daily Worker some weeks later, he stated that, if the missiles had been under Cuban control, they would have fired them against major U.S. cities.” Source: Wikipedia

    http://obamaism.blogspot.com/

  • MichelleF MichelleF says:
    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

    Obama Mentor Frank Marshall Davis an Admitted Child Rapist

    Maya Soetoro-Ng, Obama’s half-sister, told the Associated Press recently that her grandfather had seen Mr Davis was a “point of connection, a bridge if you will, to the larger African-American experience for my brother”.
    In his memoir, Mr Obama recounts how he visited Mr Davis on several occasions, apparently at junctures when he was grappling with racial issues, to seek his counsel. At one point in 1979 Mr Davis described university as “an advanced degree in compromise” that was designed to keep blacks in their place.

    Mr Obama quoted him as saying: “Leaving your race at the door. Leaving your people behind. Understand something, boy. You’re not going to college to get educated. You’re going there to get trained.”

    He added that “they’ll tank on your chain and let you know that you may be a well-trained, well-paid nigger, but you’re a nigger just the same.”

    It has also been established that Mr Davis, who divorced in 1970, was the author of a hard-core pornographic autobiography published in San Diego in 1968 by Greenleaf Classics under the pseudonym Bob Greene.

    In a surviving portion of an autobiographical manuscript, Mr Davis confirms that he was the author of Sex Rebel: Black after a reader had noticed the “similarities in style and phraseology” between the pornographic work and his poetry.

    “I could not then truthfully deny that this book, which came out in 1968 as a Greenleaf Classic, was mine.” In the introduction to Sex Rebel, Mr Davis (writing as Greene) explains that although he has “changed names and identities…all incidents I have described have been taken from actual experiences”.

    He stated that “under certain circumstances I am bisexual” and that he was “a voyeur and an exhibitionist” who was “occasionally mildly interested in sado-masochism”, adding: “I have often wished I had two penises to enjoy simultaneously the double – but different – sensations of oral and genital copulation.”

    The book, which closely tracks Mr Davis’s life in Chicago and Hawaii and the fact that his first wife was black and his second white, describes in lurid detail a series of shockingly sordid sexual encounters, often involving group sex.

    One chapter concerns the seduction by Mr Davis and his first wife of a 13-year-old girl called Anne. Mr Davis wrote that it was the girl who had suggested he had sex with her. “I’m not one to go in for Lolitas. Usually I’d rather not bed a babe under 20.

    “But there are exceptions. I didn’t want to disappoint the trusting child. At her still-impressionistic age, a rejection might be traumatic, could even cripple her sexually for life.”

    He then described how he and his wife would have sex with the girl. “Anne came up many times the next several weeks, her aunt thinking she was in good hands. Actually she was.

    “She obtained a course in practical sex from experienced and considerate practitioners rather than from ignorant insensitive neophytes….I think we did her a favour, although the pleasure was mutual.”

    On other occasions, Mr Davis would cruise in Hawaii parks looking for couples or female tourists to have sex with. He derived sexual gratification from bondage, simulated rape and being flogged and urinated on.

    http://confederateyankee.mu.nu/archives/275493.php#Scene_1

  • essequamvideri essequamvideri says:
    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

    What kit9 & sarainitaly & Michelle F said …

    Mediaite is & has always been a defender of all things Obama – including the Obama press machine, which is comprised of MSNBC & .the Journolist/CabaList members & their organizations as well. They ridicule Beck, Palin et al – although they go to great lengths to pretend to be objective criics of media coverage, which they clearly are not.

    Like all Leftists, they have a definite political agenda, and will do absolutely anything to defend that agenda – and that includes deliberately mis-reporting & misconstruing interviews & videos.

    Funny how II haven’t seen anything on Mediaite about how Bret Baier (of Fox’s Special Report at 6 pm) ripped Howard Dean’s lies about Fox coverage of the Sherrod story to shreds:

    http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/special-report/index.html#/v/4296135/grapevine-fact-checking-howard-dean/?playlist_id=86936

    Guess that’s just not newsworthy, huh Steve & Dan & Tommy C & Frances & Glynnis?

    Just for fun – compare Tommy’s obsequious interview of New Black Panther Party head & horrible racist Malik Shabazz (oh gee shucks, “I’m the most open-minded person” shufflin’ & jivin’), to his coverage of the Breitbart & Sherrod charade. I’d bet Tommy C would love to see Breitbart lynched – but Sherrod & her blatant racism & scamming the U.S. taxpayer of millions of dollars – oh, she’s a hero – a saint.

    To expecti some measure of integrity from Mediate writers is like expecting integrity from MSNBC, or Media Matters, or Organizing for America, or from George Soros.

    It just ain’t gonna happen – ever.

  • MichelleF MichelleF says:
    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    I could go on all day Val, but I’ve got work to do. I think you get the point.

  • MichelleF MichelleF says:
    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

    Funny how II haven’t seen anything on Mediaite about how Bret Baier (of Fox’s Special Report at 6 pm) ripped Howard Dean’s lies about Fox coverage of the Sherrod story to shreds:

    I hate to defend Mediaite, but they did cover that one. Whether or not it was because I pestered them, we’ll never know.

  • essequamvideri essequamvideri says:
    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

    My apologies then – although I certainly don’t see it on the “front-page”, and I looked for it. They certainly buried it quickly.

    Oh, I see – there’s a much more important story taking up space – whether J Lo or Steven Tyler will be the next judge on American Idol.

    That explains it.

  • valkyrie101 valkyrie101 says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3

    Michelle,

    The difference between Reverend Sun Myung Moon and Wright is that Moon has contributed over 2 billion dollars to the conservative Republican cause, including hundreds of thousands of dollars to the Bush family, while ranting some of the most intolerant, racist, homophobic, anti-Christian, and anti-American teachings on record, with hundreds of politicians, religious leaders and “journalists” like Breitbart in his pocket, while Wright is just a sad old man with racist issues who has finally been rejected even by those who patiently waited for their elders’ redemption. And Moon continues to use his billions to influence American culture while the people who should know better just shrug and continue to take the money.

  • MichelleF MichelleF says:
    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

    Well Val, you guys have George Soros running your side, so you don’t have any room to talk, now do you?

  • valkyrie101 valkyrie101 says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4

    MichelleF said:
    Well Val, you guys have George Soros running your side, so you don’t have any room to talk, now do you?

    I guess I will wait to read your posting of sordid Soros quotes, in any way comparable to Moon’s, so that comparison can be made. In the mean time, what we know for sure is that Moon brags about controlling our nation’s politicians, and “journalists” like Andrew Breitbart, to do his bidding as the messiah and king of the world.

  • MichelleF MichelleF says:
    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

    Well, I’m busy, so I’ll let you do your won Soros research, there’s plenty out there. I do find it odd that you are more concerned about who breitbart hangs with than who Obama does.

  • valkyrie101 valkyrie101 says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4

    MichelleF said:
    Well, I’m busy, so I’ll let you do your won Soros research, there’s plenty out there. I do find it odd that you are more concerned about who breitbart hangs with than who Obama does.

    That might have something to do with the topic of this thread…

  • possumdearie possumdearie says:
    Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0

    “Can any of you nitwit Brietbart apologist tell me why Brietbart didn’t post the whole speech?”

    Because it’s not a story of redemption, as the left is furiously trying to spin it. Sherrod’s “come to Jesus” moment explained that some whites maybe deserve help, but blacks always come first. She gets into wealth redistribution. Her Pigford lawsuit was an embarrassing case of misdirected government funds, if not outright fraud. Her husband has made some even more over the top racist comments. Discovery is going to be a bitch for these two when their suit against Breitbart comes to trial, if it ever does.

    An excerpt is not an “edit.” Her words were not “taken out of context,” and good luck using that in a defamation suit. Those were her own shocking, ugly words. Helping the white farmer still meant “taking him to his own kind.”

    Breitbart included the end where she said it was not so much about black v. white… though “it still kind of was.” It was about helping people, etc. She still admitted that she used to discriminate based on racial preference while she worked at an NP that was under the USDA. Her comments about blacks taking government jobs, because they can’t get fired and her husband talking about white devils and uncle toms is horribly racist and offensive.

    She can’t keep her mouth shut. She should have just taken her job. That’s another thing… where’s the damages? But she has made a living using our legal system for race hustling lawsuits. She really can’t help it. Breitbart has no need to comment; you don’t interrupt your opponent when they are gloriously self-destructing.

  • MichelleF MichelleF says:
    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

    That might have something to do with the topic of this thread…

    I suppose that’s one way to spin it.

  • valkyrie101 valkyrie101 says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3

    MichelleF said:
    That might have something to do with the topic of this thread… I suppose that’s one way to spin it.

    Actually, it started with you posting a “quote” from Sherrod’s husband and mentioning how much fun the Sherrod v. Breitbart lawsuit will be. And since Andrew “the Moonie” Breitbart is one of Moon’s followers, I thought it was relevent as a response to what you said, and, of course, also germaine to the thread, unlike your predictable Obama diatribes. But I do admire you for your tenacious defense of the right, which is a tough sell these days, for sure.:-)

  • writer writer says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    valk, pointing out Moon’s influence only proves what independents have long been saying. Both parties are corrupt. Pointing out which one is more corrupt than the other on any given day is little comfort. The thing is, it’s not mutually exclusive. Breitbart showing a video out of context was wrong. It’s also wrong when the NAACP invites avowed racists such as Louis Farrakhan as speakers, and applaud their racist rhetoric. The left has been dancing with joy, as if Breitbart showing an out of context video completely destroys any notion that the NAACP is rife with racist elements. All it proves is that Breitbart showed a video out of context.

  • Yarbels Yarbels says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    “Sherrod also went on CNN to defend herself and attack the NAACP for criticizing her without first calling her to confirm details. She also charged that the White House wanted her to resign – a claim the White House denies. ” Lets see who do I believe this nice lady or Obama? Sorry Obama you can’t have your racism and eat it too! And the NAACP the most hypocritical organization this side of the Democratic party. If you look up the definition of Affirmative Action then look up the definition of racism you will see that Obama is a racist that is a simple fact. Unfortunately for America the Joke is on us! Your thoughts would be appreciated. I can be contacted at work http://www.bestmichiganbusinesses.com were still in Beta so me and Granholm and Obama are all doing the same thing. Watching the paint dry. I wish my boss would give be enough time off the get in some golf, oh well.
    “your religion is politics and your God is Obama”a great man said that. Continue to cling to your religion and your God I understand how it can be comforting to someone stupid enough to think the Government is going to take care of them. Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/40003.html#ixzz0uLKVfrt

  • valkyrie101 valkyrie101 says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

    writer said:
    valk, pointing out Moon’s influence only proves what independents have long been saying. Both parties are corrupt. Pointing out which one is more corrupt than the other on any given day is little comfort. The thing is, it’s not mutually exclusive. Breitbart showing a video out of context was wrong. It’s also wrong when the NAACP invites avowed racists such as Louis Farrakhan as speakers, and applaud their racist rhetoric. The left has been dancing with joy, as if Breitbart showing an out of context video completely destroys any notion that the NAACP is rife with racist elements. All it proves is that Breitbart showed a video out of context.

    Yes, both parties are corrupt. But in this case we are talking about Sherrod and Brightbart, and the fact that Breitbart is a Moon follower, is highly relevent, since Moon is an outspoken racist, anti-semite, and, tellingly, a conservative who employed Breitbart for many years. As for the NAACP inviting Farakhan to speak, etc., I would agree that is nonsense. Yet Breitbart’s long time employer and benefactor, Reverend Moon, gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to Farakhan’s organization as the co-sponsor of Farakhan’s million family march in Washington a few years ago. The NAACP may have allowed him to speak, but Moon paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to provide a national platform for Farrakhan to speak from. The Washington Times, therefore, which Moon uses to promote his agenda, and his influence, as the “messiah of mankind”, and which helped promote Farakhan’s million family march, is equally, if not more “racist” according to your way of thinking.

  • writer writer says:
    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    valk, when Dan Rather muffed a story about Bush’s guard service, did that make Bush a hero in your eyes? In this case, Breitbart muffed a story. And that’s all it means. And no matter what Breitbart’s agenda was, it doesn’t change the fact that the NAACP has a long history of inviting racists to speak. And if Rev. Moon shovels millions to whomever, it still doesn’t change the fact that the NAACP invites racists to speak. Just FYI, but it was jailhouse snitch, a convicted criminal, who gave the cops the info that brought down the Manson family. Using your logic, because a criminal provided the info, the info must have been false. Real life doesn’t work that way. Breitbart could be Satan himself. It still doesn’t mean the NAACP isn’t racist.

  • valkyrie101 valkyrie101 says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3

    writer said:
    valk, when Dan Rather muffed a story about Bush’s guard service, did that make Bush a hero in your eyes? In this case, Breitbart muffed a story. And that’s all it means. And no matter what Breitbart’s agenda was, it doesn’t change the fact that the NAACP has a long history of inviting racists to speak. And if Rev. Moon shovels millions to whomever, it still doesn’t change the fact that the NAACP invites racists to speak. Just FYI, but it was jailhouse snitch, a convicted criminal, who gave the cops the info that brought down the Manson family. Using your logic, because a criminal provided the info, the info must have been false. Real life doesn’t work that way. Breitbart could be Satan himself. It still doesn’t mean the NAACP isn’t racist.

    You say the NAACP is racist for having some racists speak, but you do not take the same position when it comes to tar and feathering the entire tea party in that way because some racists have emerged as speakers sponsored by that organization. In fact you strongly disagree with the notion that the tea party is itself racist. Why is that?

  • possumdearie possumdearie says:
    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

    “Yes, both parties are corrupt. But… ”

    In your moral equivocation, you’re going to call Breitbart a Moonie? That’s the justification for an admittedly failed stimulus, a disastrous foreign policy, a nonexistent budget, an oil spill due to government negligence and BP bribes, an unpopular healthcare bill, an unpopular immigration policy and bankrupt entitlement programs?

  • writer writer says:
    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

    valk, the tea party is more of a loose amalgamation of like-thinking people than a national organization. And could you list some of the ‘racists’ they’ve invited to speak? (I know. Some far lefties include Sarah Palin in that list. But the far left doesn’t count. They call everyone racists.) As far as I know, there was one guy calling himself a tea party leader who was making questionable remarks, and he was thrown out. Plus, the tea party has only existed for a short time. The NAACP has a history of inviting people whom the general public considers racists to be guest speakers, and the NAACP receives them warmly. The difference is, the media bends over backwards to find racists in the tea party. They also bend over backwards to ignore them in the NAACP.

  • valkyrie101 valkyrie101 says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

    writer said:
    valk, the tea party is more of a loose amalgamation of like-thinking people than a national organization. And could you list some of the ‘racists’ they’ve invited to speak? (I know. Some far lefties include Sarah Palin in that list. But the far left doesn’t count. They call everyone racists.) As far as I know, there was one guy calling himself a tea party leader who was making questionable remarks, and he was thrown out. Plus, the tea party has only existed for a short time. The NAACP has a history of inviting people whom the general public considers racists to be guest speakers, and the NAACP receives them warmly. The difference is, the media bends over backwards to find racists in the tea party. They also bend over backwards to ignore them in the NAACP.

    …yes, bending over backwards to ignore racists is catching.

  • Rescuedog Rescuedog says:
    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    kit9 said:
    ‘ Matthews emphasizes the fact that the Breitbart tape was, in fact, incomplete, and even plays the Breitbart version of the tape to make the point that it was so’

    I am literally floored at how badly, not one, but two, Mediaite reporters mischaracterized this. First, you continue to make a claim that Matthews never made-that the tape wasn’t edited at all. But, worse, you claim Matthews is saying something he clearly is not-’Matthews emphasizes the fact that the Breitbart tape was, in fact, incomplete’. He does no such thing! What he emphasizes in the second segment is the part of the clip at the beginning where Breibart says she did this while working for the Feds. THAT’S what he’s emphasizing-along with his original point of contention with idiot Dean-that Breitbart’s original clip had always included the redemption bit of her speech. It’s amazing that Mediaite would so completely bungle and lie about what someone said in a segment focusing on alleged bungling and lying.

    ‘At the end of the segment, Matthews acknowledges the errors in the first take’

    NO HE DOESN’T. He doesn’t acknowledge any errors nor did he make any. He simply made the points more clearly that he made in the first airing. Jesus, do you think that people won’t actually watch the clips and just take your word for it?

    I agree. This is just amazingly slipshod and misleading work on Mediaite’s part. It’s almost as if you’re doing it deliberately. As Chris Wallace said the other day, “I know facts are inconvenient things, but let’s try to deal with the facts.”

    Dan Abrams and Rachel Sklar, if you care about your reputations, you need to step in NOW and fix this. Your people need remedial reporting lessons and adult supervision.

  • Catoi Catoi says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    valkyrie101 said:
    —Direct quotes of Reverend Sun Myung Moon, founder of the Washington Times, and Andrew Breitbart’s long time employer and benefactor.

    The implication: Moon is to Breitbart as Rev. Wright is to Obama. Not even remotely true.
    1. Moon is NOT “Breitbart’s long time employer and benefactor.” Breitbart has penned a few dozen editorials for the Washington Times over the past couple of years (as a freelancer, not an employee) — just as he has written pieces for other publications. I highly doubt he has ever met Moon, who has no direct role at the Washington Times (other than contributing to its budget).

    2. According to Barack Obama himself, he knew Rev. Wright personally for more than 20 years. He spent most Sundays in Wright’s church, listening to his sermons. Wright officiated at Obama’s wedding. Obama took the title of his first book from a Wright sermon. Obama said, “I can no more disown him [Wright] than I can my white grandmother….” — the woman who raised him, for crying out loud. (Of course, Obama threw Wright under the bus mere weeks later, like he did with Sherrod once it looked like she could be inconvenient, but that’s grist for another mill.)

    Comparing Moon’s influence on Breitbart to Wright’s influence on Obama is absurd. You might as well cite the U.S. Treasurer’s pull, since her name is on the cash in Breitbart’s wallet. Now, if Breitbart was wedded at one of Moon’s mass ceremonies, you might have a point. But where’s the evidence of that?

  • valkyrie101 valkyrie101 says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

    Catoi said:
    The implication: Moon is to Breitbart as Rev. Wright is to Obama. Not even remotely true.1. Moon is NOT “Breitbart’s long time employer and benefactor.” Breitbart has penned a few dozen editorials for the Washington Times over the past couple of years (as a freelancer, not an employee) — just as he has written pieces for other publications. I highly doubt he has ever met Moon, who has no direct role at the Washington Times (other than contributing to its budget). 2. According to Barack Obama himself, he knew Rev. Wright personally for more than 20 years. He spent most Sundays in Wright’s church, listening to his sermons. Wright officiated at Obama’s wedding. Obama took the title of his first book from a Wright sermon. Obama said, “I can no more disown him [Wright] than I can my white grandmother….” — the woman who raised him, for crying out loud. (Of course, Obama threw Wright under the bus mere weeks later, like he did with Sherrod once it looked like she could be inconvenient, but that’s grist for another mill.) Comparing Moon’s influence on Breitbart to Wright’s influence on Obama is absurd. You might as well cite the U.S. Treasurer’s pull, since her name is on the cash in Breitbart’s wallet. Now, if Breitbart was wedded at one of Moon’s mass ceremonies, you might have a point. But where’s the evidence of that?

    Breitbart was well paid by the Moonies to write articles to support their newspaper which Moon states is his way of influcencing people further to his designs on world conquest as the messiah of mankind. And Moon has made so many public statements even more racist, homophobic, anti-Christian, than Wright that there is no comparison. Two minutes on google makes that clear. Tell me, would you work for a man who claims to be the “messiah” and who obviously is a racist? Yet there is Breitbart, promoting Moon’s agenda. And whereas Obama sat and listened with many other black congregants his age, wincing at Wright’s incendiary comments when they occasionally appeared, Breitbart signed on to be a Moon spokesperson. Moon used Breitbart to promote his agenda. But did that bother Breitbart? And as for Breitbart never meeting Moon, not so. Breitbart attended more than one of Reverend Moon’s speeches, together with dozens of Republican (and some Democratic) congressmen, including Newt Gingrich, for example. Moreover, given that Moon has invested over two billion dollars in furtherance of the conservative agenda, Breitbart and other conservatives are covered in Moon’s dirty money that mostly came from Japan from people who were defrauded of their life savings by being told if they gave up their money they could buy a better place in heaven for their ancestors. That is too sick. And Breitbart took the money.

  • valkyrie101 valkyrie101 says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

    …and now Moon owns him.

  • FairNYC FairNYC says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    “But when Chris Matthews defends a conservative, the network Thought Police dictated that an immediate erasure and correction take place.”

    As they should.

    Andrew Breibart , a well honed hack for Moonie Conservatives all over the world…..shameful.

    How can the Republicans and Tea Partiers support Rev Moon?

  • felixw felixw says:
    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

    Valkyrie, your tired slander is getting old. Breitbart is not a Moonie, and you know that. But you continue to post the same lie over and over again. If the owner of a newspaper is Jewish, are all the writers Jewish? If the owner of a newspaper is Christian are all the reporters automatically Christian? If the owner of a newspaper belongs to the Rotary Club, does the Rotary Club “own” all the reporters? Of course not, and you know that. But it doesn’t stop you from spreading lies.

    The bigotry and duplicity you show in your posts is almost beyond belief. Do us all a favor and drop this garbage. It just stinks up the place.

  • valkyrie101 valkyrie101 says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

    felixw said:
    Valkyrie, your tired slander is getting old. Breitbart is not a Moonie, and you know that. But you continue to post the same lie over and over again. If the owner of a newspaper is Jewish, are all the writers Jewish? If the owner of a newspaper is Christian are all the reporters automatically Christian? If the owner of a newspaper belongs to the Rotary Club, does the Rotary Club “own” all the reporters? Of course not, and you know that. But it doesn’t stop you from spreading lies. The bigotry and duplicity you show in your posts is almost beyond belief. Do us all a favor and drop this garbage. It just stinks up the place.

    What does it take to be a Moonie? Membership in the Unification Church? Nope. You have to be part of Moon’s agenda to become a Moonie, and Breitbart has done that. Moon has him under his magical power. Like Falwell, who took the money, hugged Moon, and became his follower. And as I mentioned, that Moon money is as dirty as it gets. Another guy who cozied right up to Moon, besides Bush 41, Dole, Graham, Rangel and many others, was Dick Cheney. Moon has been working behind the scenes seeking to control our government. And he brags that he does that. Amazing he has gotten away with it without reproach. Wright is nobody compared to Moon.

  • valkyrie101 valkyrie101 says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    valkyrie101 said:
    It just stinks up the place.

    Exactly.

  • felixw felixw says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Valkyrie, how low can you sink? If you work for a business, you automatically become the same religion as the owner. Nobody is stupid enough to believe this stuff. So you are just wasting your breath. And you would be losing your credibility…but that was gone long ago.

  • valkyrie101 valkyrie101 says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

    My goodness, felix, you, the master of the guilt by association angle, working Wright and Ayers for all that they are worth, object to arguments related to guilt by association? LOL. Breitbart took money from Moon, spoke out in support of the agenda Moon promotes in his newspaper, went to see him speak, and you consider that insignificant? And Moon is no Wright, he is a billionaire who has given maybe 2 billion dollars to men like Breitbart, Gingrich, Falwell, Farrakhan, Sharpton, Bush 41, Dole, former speaker Hastert, Ensign… and the conservative cause. Liberty college, the place where conservatives are born, would not even exist without Moon, who bailed them out of bankruptcy. Of course his price was Falwell’s soul, but that is a small price to pay, afterall.

  • felixw felixw says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Valkyrie, why don’t you make some anti-Semitic remarks against reporters at the New York Times, since the paper is owned by the Sulzberger family? I guess it’s all a question of how much slime do you want to dish out.

    I gave up trying to have a dialogue with you long ago. So I will just call you out for what your are — a bigot.

  • valkyrie101 valkyrie101 says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

    felixw said:
    Valkyrie, why don’t you make some anti-Semitic remarks against reporters at the New York Times, since the paper is owned by the Sulzberger family? I guess it’s all a question of how much slime do you want to dish out. I gave up trying to have a dialogue with you long ago. So I will just call you out for what your are — a bigot.

    The Sulzberger family do not say things like this:

    “Judaism committed a historical sin in front of Jesus, so Jewish people experienced the Holocaust under Hitler.”

    “One reason you like darker people is that throughout history, perhaps the race that killed more people is the white race, not the other way. It’s not reasoning, it is a fact. When you go to spirit world there are not many white people in heaven.”

    “As the Lord of the Second Advent I am the owner of this world of death… therefore, the world must follow Rev. Moon. There is no other solution, no other direction or choice…”

    “When you work hard, Congressmen and Senators must be controlled by you.”

    “The Religious Leaders that attend Father will have more and more influence over other religious leaders and soon they will influence political leaders as well…”

    “The significance and meaning of Father’s last world tour was in his gathering of the heads of state and teaching them. In other words, he rose above them and declared kingship.”

    “The time is coming that we have to abolish the concept of separation between church and state. We need a political party centered upon religious ideology…This democratic period in human history is passing away. Soon the heavenly sovereignty will be established to lead the world.”

    “This is the time when I can carry out a revolution. I can exercise my authority according to my wish. In the future 70, 80 or even 90% of the world we know today will disappear. What can I do with an offspring of enemy.”

    “If Catholic priests and nuns remain single, they will all end up in hell… The Unification Church blesses the bride and the bridegroom so they will not perish.”

    “They may be proud to call themselves Catholic, Protestant and so forth, but they have nothing to be proud of. God is even rejected in the true sense by Christians, so how can God visit the Christian churches and expect something?”

    “Homosexuals: … They have no rights. There should be a law to prohibit this. … But homosexuals and lesbians are lower than animals.”

    “America declined because it rejected Reverend Moon. …Once the Messiah sits upon that throne, the Kingdom of Heaven on earth will come about through the unification and perfection of the family, world and cosmos…”

    “Where is the root of the problem of divorce? It is in the woman.”

    “Alcohol, smoking and evil social behavior are also satanic weapons to destroy the human race. Once we understand this clearly we cannot touch those kinds of satanic weapons. We have to destroy them.”

    “Weapon factories must be placed under the supervision of the religious spheres…”

    “All the irrelevant books in the world should be burned away. I cannot tolerate books that belong under the leftist ideology. Do you understand?”

    —Direct quotes of Reverend Sun Myung Moon, founder of the Washington Times, and Andrew Breitbart’s long time employer and benefactor. And you have to assume that Breitbart was savy enough to google Moon. Thus, he chose to support Moon’s agenda inspite of Moon’s stated goal to take over the world.

  • David King says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Obama For The World

    ITunes:http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/obama-for-the-world/id382415281

    Amazon:http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=obama+for+the+world+david+king&ih=38_2_0_1_1_0_0_0_0_1.10_677&fsc=-1&x=17&y=18

  • David King says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

    Obama For The World `

    ITunes:http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/obama-for-the-world/id382415281

    Amazon:http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=obama+for+the+world+david+king&ih=38_2_0_1_1_0_0_0_0_1.10_677&fsc=-1&x=17&y=18

  • David King says:
    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

    Obama For The World “

    ITunes:http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/obama-for-the-world/id382415281

    Amazon:http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=obama+for+the+world+david+king&ih=38_2_0_1_1_0_0_0_0_1.10_677&fsc=-1&x=17&y=18

  • If you would like to comment, please login or register:

    » Login » Register

    Chris Matthews Looks At Growing Gay Marriage Support Within The GOP

    video

    Last night Chris Matthews invited Joe Solomonese of the Human Rights Campaign and R. Clarke Cooper of the Log Cabin Republicans to discuss what Matthews is describing as a movement by the Conservative Elite to make the "Republican Case for Gay Marriage."

     

    Another Look At Fox News And ‘Ground Zero Mosque’ Imam’s Shared Money Man

    Perhaps taking a page from Jon Stewart's relentless criticism of Fox News' coverage of the proposed Lower Manhattan mosque NPR's David Folkenflik is further investigating the money connection between Fox News and Park 51's Imam Rauf: Saudi Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal.

    © 2010 Mediaite, LLC | About Us | Advertise | Self-Serve Advertising | Newsletter | Privacy | User Agreement | Disclaimer | Power Grid FAQ | Contact | Archives | RSS RSS
    Dan Abrams, Founder | Power Grid by Sound Strategies | Hosting by Datagram