Andrew Breitbart has tried to salvage the reputation he dug up to bury even deeper by claiming that even if his heavily edited video libeled Shirley Sherrod, it presented an accurate view of the NAACP, because there was heavy applause during the out-of-context passages. This is, of course, just a different lie:
So, let’s review the Breitbart gang’s allegations:
When … she expresses a discriminatory attitude towards white people, the audience responds with applause. False.
The NAACP … is cheering on a person describing a white person as the other. False.
The NAACP audience seemed to have approved of her actions when she talked about not helping the white farmer. False.
They weren’t cheering redemption; they were cheering discrimination. False.
As Ms. Sherrod recounted the first part of her parable, how she declined to do everything she could for the farmer because of his race, the audience responded in approval. False.
First Breitbart and his acolytes falsely accused Sherrod of discriminating against whites as a federal employee, despite having no evidence for this charge in the original video excerpt. Strike one.
Then they misrepresented Sherrod’s story as an embrace of racism, when in fact she was repudiating racism. They later pleaded ignorance of this fact because they didn’t have the full video. Strike two.
Now, with the full video in hand and posted on their Web site, they’re lying about the reaction of the NAACP audience.
The excuses are all used up, Mr. Breitbart.
It’s always been obvious that Breitbart was a pathetic clown, but it wasn’t always clear that he was a modern, “new media” version of Joe McCarthy. It’s now been established beyond a doubt. And all of the mainstream outlets who have put together respectful puff pieces about him should be ashamed of themselves.