The Sherrod Affair-Who is the Bad Guy?

As the story of the firing of USDA offical Shirley Sherrod over a March 27 speech she gave to the NAACP, in which she described discriminating against a white farmer, continues to develop, questions continue to come out.

The NAACP, after intially supporting the firing of Sherrod based on the excerpts released by Andrew Breitbart, yesterday released their own unedited version, which they claim is exculpatory. In its total context, they say, Sherrod is describing an old story about how she was reacting to a white client-then apparently experienced an epiphany in which she realized that her job was not about whether to help whites or blacks, but all poor people. Yesterday, I posted the complete video which runs 43 minutes (and no, I have not yet sat through the whole thing. I plan to do so this weekend.) In addition, the farmer involved and his wife have come out publicly in support of Sherrod.

Today, it is reported that the White House has urged the Dept. of Agriculture to reconsider its firing of Ms Sherrod. Secretary Tom Vilsack said he will do so reiterating that it was his decision alone to fire Sherrod.

That, of course, conflicts with Sherrod's account. She says she was contacted by a high level USDA official (whom she identified as Undersecretary Cheryl Cook), was told to pull over to the side of the highway and text her resignation because the White House was demanding it-and that the story was going to be on (Glenn) Beck that evening.

Somebody is not telling the truth here.

As of this morning, Sherrod says she is not sure if she will return to her job. (Maybe the government wants her to sign a hold harmless waiver and promise not to sue.)

* Just being reported by ABC: The Whgite has now announced that Vilsack will reach out to Sherrod and apologize on behalf of the entire Obama adminsitration.

So how is the media reacting? Well, our friends at MSNBC and the NAACP are agreed. It's all the fault of Breitbart and Fox News, which first ran with the story based on an edited tape. (The NAACP wants Sherrod to be re-hired.) That leads to the question of who edited the original tape(s). Breitbart told Sean Hannity last night that he got the two excerpts from a person who did not want to be identified. Originally, he was sent a CD that didn't work. Then, after the NAACP charges of racism directed at the Tea Party, Breitbart claims he took a renewed interest in the tapes and contacted the individual who sent him the two damaging excerpts.

So who made the tapes? Was it a member of the NAACP audience?

Another question that must be asked is this; if, indeed, the entire speech is exculpatory, then why were some audience members laughing, applauding and affirming as the story told of Sherrod's apparent references to how she treated the white farmer with less regard than she would have with a black farmer? Why did Sherrod refer to referring this man to "someone of his own kind"? What did she mean by that?
Breitbart states that he has no axe to grind with Sherrod, but that incident is an embarrassment to the NAACP.

Finally, if the firing of Sherrod was unfair, does this not make the administration look foolish in acting so hastily-or at least, Vilsack? As the story develops in the next couple of days, will Vilsack, in effect, be forced to fall on his sword?

I wonder what that woman in USDA who told Sherrod to resign has to say about all this? What say you, Cheryl Cook?