On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 07:28:02 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 23:27:41 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 19:21:29 -0400, Harry ?
wrote:

(AP) - Ousted Agriculture Department employee Shirley Sherrod says she
will sue a conservative blogger who posted an edited video of her making
racially tinged remarks last week.

Sherrod made the announcement Thursday in San Diego at the National
Association of Black Journalists annual convention.

The edited video posted by Andrew Breitbart led Agriculture Secretary
Tom Vilsack to ask her to resign, a decision he reconsidered after
seeing the entire video of her March speech to a local NAACP group. In
the full speech, Sherrod spoke of racial reconciliation and lessons she
learned after initially hesitating to help a white farmer save his home.

- - -

Breitbart libeled Sherrod big time, and also did her great harm. He's
not going to be able to hide behind a freedom of the press claim. His
activities against Ms. Sherrod were *not* absent malice. Malice was
uppermost on his mind.

Gosh darnit you beat me to another one.

Let's dance in the streets in celebration and hope that others will
pile on this piece of **** Breitbart.

Posting a video for public consumption of a news worthy event? Sherrod
is going to be laughed out of court if the suit isn't summarily
dismissed.

As usual, you speak from your ass. She's not a public figure.

It doesn't matter, she was speaking in a public forum.

15 years ago while working for a private charity concern.

Breitbart did a hit piece and will have a log shoved up his ass as a
result. Time for his comeuppance.

As usual, you speak from your ass. She's not a public figure.

Lemme get this straight. She's a government employee of a large agency, and
she's speaking in a public forum. Everything she says is recorded or
written down. All her actions and directives are a matter of public record.

Help me understand what you do not understand about her being a public
figure.

Or maybe you are just plain stupid. From your eloquent post, I would guess
the latter to be the case.

Steve

visit my blog at http://cabgbypasssurgery.com

Posting a video for public consumption of a news worthy event? Sherrod
is going to be laughed out of court if the suit isn't summarily
dismissed.

This will be interesting. You must admit that cases reach trial, and awards
are given on things that would have been dismissed with prejudiced plus
plain being laughed out of court twenty years ago. Such is modern
lawyering.

Steve

visit my blog at http://cabgbypasssurgery.com

In article ,
says...

Posting a video for public consumption of a news worthy event? Sherrod
is going to be laughed out of court if the suit isn't summarily
dismissed.

This will be interesting. You must admit that cases reach trial, and awards
are given on things that would have been dismissed with prejudiced plus
plain being laughed out of court twenty years ago. Such is modern
lawyering.

Steve

visit my blog at http://cabgbypasssurgery.com

Everyone believes that they have the right to be compensated for being
offended.

"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
In article ,
says...

Posting a video for public consumption of a news worthy event? Sherrod
is going to be laughed out of court if the suit isn't summarily
dismissed.

This will be interesting. You must admit that cases reach trial, and
awards
are given on things that would have been dismissed with prejudiced plus
plain being laughed out of court twenty years ago. Such is modern
lawyering.

Steve

visit my blog at http://cabgbypasssurgery.com

Everyone believes that they have the right to be compensated for being
offended.

Being compensated for being offended was never a right.

Where does it say that?

How did these people get this impression?

I don't believe I have that right, so why did you say "everyone"?

I've been offended thousands of times, and never received a dime.

Steve

visit my blog at http://cabgbypasssurgery.com

On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 20:40:51 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

Posting a video for public consumption of a news worthy event? Sherrod
is going to be laughed out of court if the suit isn't summarily
dismissed.

This will be interesting. You must admit that cases reach trial, and awards
are given on things that would have been dismissed with prejudiced plus
plain being laughed out of court twenty years ago. Such is modern
lawyering.

Steve

visit my blog at http://cabgbypasssurgery.com

Everyone believes that they have the right to be compensated for being
offended.

If this is true, why haven't you sued your mom?

On 7/31/10 3:35 AM, wrote:



I do wonder what her "damages" actually are. I agree she did have one
horrible week but now she is the belle of the ball with job offers
coming out of the woodwork.

You're kidding, right? The right-wing slime machine slanders a woman who
had no business being its political target, and you think she wasn't
damaged by that? She was ridiculed on national TV, her reputation was
damaged, she suffered emotional damage, and who knows what else.

It's not relevant whether she "recovers" with a new job.

Breitbart, Fox, et al, told gross lies about the woman and defamed her
character. There was malice aforethought. Breitbart, the slimeball who
started the defamation, has a reputation for this very sort of character
assassination. He got caught...again...and *this* time he may have to
pay for his shenanigans. If there is a settlement or a jury award for
Ms. Sherrod, I hope it bankrupts him.

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 20:40:51 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

Posting a video for public consumption of a news worthy event? Sherrod
is going to be laughed out of court if the suit isn't summarily
dismissed.

This will be interesting. You must admit that cases reach trial, and
awards
are given on things that would have been dismissed with prejudiced plus
plain being laughed out of court twenty years ago. Such is modern
lawyering.

Steve

visit my blog at http://cabgbypasssurgery.com

Everyone believes that they have the right to be compensated for being
offended.


I do wonder what her "damages" actually are. I agree she did have one
horrible week but now she is the belle of the ball with job offers
coming out of the woodwork.
Instead of being stuck in some mundane department director job until
Obama leaves office (it was a patronage job after all) , she will now
end up with a much better job, speaking fees and she will probably
write a book.
I imagine Beyonce Knowles will play her in the Movie.

That is one middle class person who will get a raise Bob.

And who says the Obama administration isn't creating jobs?

Steve ;-)

visit my blog at http://cabgbypasssurgery.com

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 19:21:29 -0400, Harry ?
wrote:

(AP) - Ousted Agriculture Department employee Shirley Sherrod says she
will sue a conservative blogger who posted an edited video of her making
racially tinged remarks last week.

Sherrod made the announcement Thursday in San Diego at the National
Association of Black Journalists annual convention.

The edited video posted by Andrew Breitbart led Agriculture Secretary
Tom Vilsack to ask her to resign, a decision he reconsidered after
seeing the entire video of her March speech to a local NAACP group. In
the full speech, Sherrod spoke of racial reconciliation and lessons she
learned after initially hesitating to help a white farmer save his home.

- - -

Breitbart libeled Sherrod big time, and also did her great harm. He's
not going to be able to hide behind a freedom of the press claim. His
activities against Ms. Sherrod were *not* absent malice. Malice was
uppermost on his mind.

The open question would be whether she was a public figure. If so the
press has great latitude. I bet he wins, only because of the screwed
up legal system.

She's not really a public figure, at least in my estimation. She was a
fairly low-level bureaucrat, and she was deliberately targeted and lied
about.

On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 02:27:29 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 21:18:07 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 19:21:29 -0400, Harry ?
wrote:

(AP) - Ousted Agriculture Department employee Shirley Sherrod says she
will sue a conservative blogger who posted an edited video of her making
racially tinged remarks last week.

Sherrod made the announcement Thursday in San Diego at the National
Association of Black Journalists annual convention.

The edited video posted by Andrew Breitbart led Agriculture Secretary
Tom Vilsack to ask her to resign, a decision he reconsidered after
seeing the entire video of her March speech to a local NAACP group. In
the full speech, Sherrod spoke of racial reconciliation and lessons she
learned after initially hesitating to help a white farmer save his home.

- - -

Breitbart libeled Sherrod big time, and also did her great harm. He's
not going to be able to hide behind a freedom of the press claim. His
activities against Ms. Sherrod were *not* absent malice. Malice was
uppermost on his mind.

The open question would be whether she was a public figure. If so the
press has great latitude. I bet he wins, only because of the screwed
up legal system.

She's not really a public figure, at least in my estimation. She was a
fairly low-level bureaucrat, and she was deliberately targeted and lied
about.

She was making a speech in front of a national organization and it was
published. All BB did was edit it. He will take the standard tack, "I
am an entertainment show".

The footage was not taken from a period in which she held the job she
holds now, which is still not as a public figure making public policy.

At the time of the speech, she was working on a private effort to help
those losing their farms retain proper counsel.

Breitbart will have his hands full.