Brent Nyitray
Fairlington Blade
Let the mutherfuker burn!
jnc4p
Kevin S. Willis
Michigoose
lmsinca
markinaustin
Arcanaut
novahockey
quarterback
ScottC
yellojktIf you’ve followed Pigford at all, you might want to read this article by Lee Stranahan reiterating his belief that the Pgiford settlement was mostly a fraud and black farmers with legitimate claims pretty much got screwed by folks exploiting the controversy for their own gain.
Of course, Lee Stranahan works with Andrew Breitbart, so if you may draw whatever conclusions, based on context, that you please.
On BigGovernment.com (linked above), Lee asserts that there is video of the Pigford Attorney publically revealing conspiracy to defraud the federal government. Watch it, and decide for yourself (if you’re interested in this kind of thing).
http://www.mrctv.org/jwplayer/player.swf
Given that it’s Breitbart, we can assume the video is heavily edited.
Filed under: Uncategorized |
All Things in Moderation 
I read about this mess some time ago and decided for myself — yes, it is a massive fraud and perversion of the judicial system. A mircrocosm of why the country is currently going to hell in a handbasket.
LikeLike
I'm not a Breitbart hater, for the record. Dudes resume includes the creation of Drudge and HuffPo. What's fascinating is the lefts reaction to Breitbart.
LikeLike
"What's fascinating is the lefts reaction to Breitbart."Yeah, they don't seem to like him for some reason. I can't figure it out.
LikeLike
KW, I think you're being facetious on why they don't like him. What the left hangs their "hate" hat on (Sherrod, O'Keefe) is different than their tactics at discrediting him (and Drudge) by hurling homophobic insults at him. That, to me, demonstrates the lefts rather two-dimensional view of Bernie's "SCAREY OTHER."
LikeLike
Mr. McWingnut, You have to confess, others are very scary. Especially with they don't agree with you! And Breitbart does tend to do everything with something of a cowboy swagger, which never seems to go over well with certain people. Present company exempted, of course. We mean many on the left, not the fine folks here. 😉
LikeLike
Well, not as scarey as Bernie's "SCAREY OTHER," you have to at least admit that.
LikeLike
First off, thanks for the mention.There's no editing of the video — Sanders says she knows about fraud. Grant agrees. They both said the same thing to me.Further, it's not MY assertion — it's black farmers. I don't want to post links because it might get lost in moderaton but they are up on my YouTube profile.
LikeLike
When's the release date for the full documentary?
LikeLike
Lee:Go ahead and post the links. They shouldn't get lost in moderation.
LikeLike
I'm not that familiar with the Pigford controversy but I thought it was both fascinating and far-fetched to claim the "same idea virus" of an oppressed world view with the OWS protesters. You lost me there and once I'm gone I'm gone. The Obama link is tenuous at best and honestly, while there may be some truth to what you're saying that the farmers have been taken advantage of, it's more likely a case of the rich and powerful riding roughshod over the working class. No big surprise there, it's one of the reasons for the OWS protests. If you'd stick to the facts instead of editorializing fanciful connections, I'd take it more seriously.
LikeLike
Stranahan! You are first authentic non-member commenter. You've already got plenty of blogging obligations, otherwise I'd invite you to join us. But you can post links without fear of undue moderation. If I thought you were going to actually read my post, I probably wouldn't have phrased it as solely your assertion. Let's call that editorial decision "shorthand". We are a very mixed group, and I try to be mindful of the audience. My apologies if you feel in anyway misrepresented.Alas, you lost lmsinca. That's unfortunate. I expect I will, at some point, link to some future post on unschooling, which I find interesting (and I work for a public school system, and think public schooling is awesome, but I like the idea of unschooling as well).
LikeLike
Troll, you're getting "scarey". But . . . it'll be halloween soon, so I guess that's all right. 😉
LikeLike
Here's the thing Kevin and Lee. I have no problem believing the NBP's or black ministers have taken advantage of black farmers and I also agree that for some AA's the persecution complex is ingrained and perpetuated. But there's nothing in here that addresses black issues such as the prison population or high unemployment and poor education. And also, afaic Breitbart discredited himself through various editing schemes and so his point in both the Sherrod and the Acorn cases was lost. If you want to do investigative journalism, do it, but don't drop in little innuendos and false assumptions that just piss people off. There is actually a percentage of the population that is open to being proven wrong or persuadable on an issue, but this piece doesn't seem like the best way to go about it to me. Sorry to be so blunt.
LikeLike
OT: Worth a read:"Inside Obama's War RoomHow he decided to intervene in Libya – and what it says about his evolution as commander in chiefBy Michael HastingsOctober 13, 2011 8:00 AM ETRolling Stone"Inside Obama's War Room
LikeLike
"Here's the thing Kevin and Lee."I hope you're not taking my the wrong way, lms. I know you are persuadable and thoughtful and losing you is an unfortunate thing (I didn't elaborate, but that comment was 100% serious). For anyone not preaching to the choir, as it were, you seem the ideal Constant Reader. If I'm not getting through to you when I'm communicating my point, then there is something wrong with how I'm communicating. I like Lee and all, but if he's lost you he needs to re-examine the case he makes with the same critical eye he gives to the Pigford participants. Not as to the facts, but as to presentation and context. That being said, I do understand why he wouldn't cover prison population and poor education–you can't get everything in at one time–but I understand why you feel that context is critical. Still, most important part in this conversation is that I make it perfectly clear I meant what I said, and meant that as a compliment to you (and constructive criticism for Lee, should he ever return to these parts).
LikeLike
Here's Lucious Abrams…http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmjtN5u431I
LikeLike
Here's Eddie Slaughterhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VanVQPpY8T0
LikeLike
Here's head of the BFAA, Inc…http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odY-dUlA_DU
LikeLike
As soon as I say it, there he is. Thanks for the links. I'm going to make them clickable like magic:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmjtN5u431Ihttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VanVQPpY8T0Thanks, Lee!Also, I am happy Lee stopped by, so I will briefly pimp his Unschooling Disc 1, which he released way back in November 12, 2009. I should get that sometime. I don't even know that he has them available any more, but it's the thought that counts, right?
LikeLike
And the link for The head of the BFAA, Inc.Makin' 'em click helps with the click-thru!
LikeLike
lms,I've been looking at your comments and the article, and am having a little trouble seeing where some of the former are coming from.Why is it far fectched to say that an oppression ideology is common to OWS and the Pigford settlement scandal? This seems obvious from my perspective.I also don't see where Stranahan linked it to Obama, regardless of the administrations role since 2009. What is the relevance of high unemployment and prison populations? I'm a little lost on the specifics of what lost you.
LikeLike
I should have said, regarless of any role of the administration since 2009 [not assuming anything]
LikeLike
Obama ties into Pigford in a number of ways..Most directly, he signed Pigford II into law. And even more directly, his administration set up the woman and Hispanic farmers settlements, using the same low bar.Also, Obama introduced the Pigford II bill as Senator.Also as Senator, Obama sent a letter attacking a whistleblower at the USDA who was pointing out the fraud.There's more but that's all very direct, easily verified info.
LikeLike
The Unschooling Movie is still in production, actually. I have 2 more interviews I want to do and then I'm done with the interviews. I have the rest of the structure worked out…hopefully done this winter.
LikeLike
qb"Ideas have consequences and one of the consequences of this oppressor / oppressed worldview is a constant, inescapable paranoia. You can see this same idea virus in a slightly different strain right now in the Occupy Wall Street protests."Why does this sentence even need to be a part of his piece, one thing has nothing to do with the other? The protests are what, 3 weeks old, and we barely know what they're protesting. You and other conservatives have typified it in the framework of an entitlement mentality but clearly it's still a debatable issue. There are even conservatives and hedge fund managers suggesting that people have a right to be either mad or frustrated or both. And what in the world purpose does it serve to link the two, other than to discredit liberals? And I probably should have made clear my reference to Obama……..sitting on the same stage as some Nation of Islam guy……please. Again, what does that have to do with his piece?And I didn't even get around to the notion that white liberals intentionally hold down blacks in some nefarious dependency plot. There are many reasons why a percentage of our AA brothers and sisters are in the bottom rung of society still, most of which have to do with our penal system, education and the stereotypes that exist still. I'd like to know how, if these groups took advantage or committed fraud against these farmers, other factors might have helped perpetuate said fraud? Poverty and lack of education make people susceptible to these kind of schemes. Are there activist groups out there such as the NBP's and Nation of Islam that do more harm than good? Yes, I would have actually looked forward to reading more about that, although it's my understanding that the NBP's are a pretty small and ineffective force, perhaps I'm wrong. The filtering of this story through a conservative framework distorts the value for me. Of course, he's probably not writing for me so it doesn't really matter I suppose.I know a little something about inner city blacks, not black farmers, and I think maybe he's using this case as a bridge too far to make an indictment of liberal advocacy. As a liberal I'm open to a challenge on policy grounds or even unintended consequences but a blanket assumption like he's made based on one case is too much for me.
LikeLike
See Lee, that kind of information is valuable to me because I am not a huge Obama fan for different reasons than others here. Introducing it as a Senator or signing it as President is not that compelling to me but the whistleblower part might be intriguing. He has a record of poor treatment of whistleblowers. As I said in my first comment, I'm not particularly informed re the Pigford settlement or issues, and so I read it as a broad indictment of liberals, and if that was your goal rather than an investigative journalism piece, then you get props.
LikeLike
First off, I'm not a conservative. I consider myself independent at this point although I'm pretty disgusted by a lot of liberalism. The oppressor / oppressed is clearly present in the #OWS movement. The whole line of attack on 'The Rich' and "Wall Street" are based on a worldview where wealth is a zero sum game. I could easily do another 5,000 words on oppressor / oppressed and how it's fundamental to modern liberalism — but ya know, someday.Meanwhile, it's having the exact same practical effect — the #Occupy protests solve NOTHING. It's all theater and dramatics — sound and fury signifying nothing but another pointless, doomed to fail protest because they don't WANT success. They want eternal struggle.
LikeLike
"I'm pretty disgusted by a lot of liberalism."You could have changed that to "I'm pretty disgusted by the lot of them", and we might have found a corner of agreement. Thirty years of conservative economic policy, whether it's neo-liberalism or neo-conservatism is what got us into this economic mess not liberal social policy. I think you're confusing economic policy with social issues. The economic stagnation of the middle class and the revolt against it has nothing whatsoever to do with liberal social engineering which is what I think you're attempting to write about. I'm sure you could write another paper in 5000 words or more to explain how liberalism somehow or other oppressed the middle class to the point of revolt. And how 90% of the population with a median income of $31K don't "WANT" success but I doubt you'd be able to make the connection to the Pigford case. We already had the "Little Red Hen" discussion here and I didn't buy it then so you probably wouldn't be able to convince me in another 5000 words, but you could try.
LikeLike
BTW, I was thinking about your piece again last night after I signed off, see I haven't given up yet, and I do have one more thought. I seriously doubt you can make a true connection between the NBP/Nation of Islam and liberals. Most liberals I know won't show much love for either. That's like saying all conservatives agree with and believe everything Glenn Beck says. I could very easily write 5000 words on how Beck has exploited his listeners and brainwashed all conservatives into believing that progressives (yikes I'm one of those) are evil communist/marxists just waiting to incite violence so you better get ready for the revolution. I wouldn't write that though because it's not true. There are extreme factions in both the right and the left but they hardly speak for all of us or even most of us. It's fine to indict the NPB and the Nation of Islam for what they've done in the Pigford case but to extend that all the way out to liberal ideology and the frustration and anger of the OWS protesters loses your focus and mine, IMO.
LikeLike
Glenn Beck = New Black Panthers or Nation of Islam? lol I'm laughing not yelling, lms, but I think that's misplaced even though I'm not a Beck fan."Thirty years of conservative economic policy, whether it's neo-liberalism or neo-conservatism is what got us into this economic mess not liberal social policy."I would submit that no credible case can be made that we've actually had conservative (libertarian?) economic policy. We had some mild restraint on liberal policy, but never more than that. Government is still huge and spending a large share of GDP. It never shrank at all. The Code of Federal Regulations is larger than ever and never stopped growing. The Fed has been prolificly printing money for years, really since Volker squeezed inflation. We've added departments and programs, not subtracted them. Government policy caused the real estate bubble and ultimately crashed the economy.I also take issue with the claim that liberal social policy has nothing to do with current straits or the crackpot, slacker OWS movement (yes, I'm calling it what I think it is — I've been listening to and watching them). Let's just look at the OWS. Listen to them. Read their signs. Look at their behavior. These kids are the product of being raised in an entitlement mentality, where everyone is special and above average, everyone is rewarded and coddled no matter their diligence or performance. These are the kids raised on oppression/struggle/grievance thinking, from cartoons to freshman seminars. Everything is someone else's fault;they are perpetual victims of unseen forces. They make poor choices, believe they have some right to "follow their dreams" and have someone else pay. I contend that this is 100% the result of liberal social thought and policy. Now, I realize you will object once again that these are generalizations. Of course they are. They are generalizations that are drawn from and that apply to virtually all the OWSers I've seen in the media, who are demanding everything for free, abolition of the military (yes, they are), socalized medicine, and on and on. It's an entire movement of "I want I want I want gimme gimme gimme." This didn't come from conservative economic policy. It came from liberalism. It is the full flowering of liberalism.If I add a smiley face : ) does that sound less strident? It's what I believe is the truth. It doesn't characterize all liberals, but it reminds me of The Forbidden Planet, in which Dr. Morbius didn't realize that the monster was a manifestation of his own subconscious (to reach for a metaphor).
LikeLike
lms,Re your 4:55 response, I suppose that sentence wouldn't have to be in the article. But I don't see why it is improper for it to be there. He is drawing a connection, and, I can tell you, this is how conservatives see things, so it seems to me that it should be said. I have not seen any conservatives who endorse the OWSers. I have seen conservatives who say that (some) people are justifiably angry, but not for the reasons and to the ends that the OWSers are expressing. What kind of conservative would endorse demands for socialism, unilateral disarmament and the like?"There are many reasons why a percentage of our AA brothers and sisters are in the bottom rung of society still, most of which have to do with our penal system, education and the stereotypes that exist still."I don't think liberals and conservatives will find much if any agreement in this area. You take umbrage at the conservative critique of liberalism as perpetuating a condition of dependency and victimhood, but it is hardly new or surprising. This is at the heart of the struggle between two sidss. Liberals see conservatism (broadly defined) as to blame, conservatives see the opposite. That's just reality. More pointedly, liberalism sees oppression, just as Lee has said. That's really what your comments here are saying, isn't it? Discrimination, the penal system, being trapped in bad schools — this is all part of an ideology of systemic oppression. In fact, I would suggest that your argument that we should be exploring the oppressive systemic or societal forces as the real source of the Pigford fraud and abuse is a prime example of what the conservative critique criticizes. From a conservative perspective, we should be holding people responsible for their own decisions and behavior, not trying to excuse it on the ground that they were susceptible to manipulation or had reason to be angry at society in general.These are disputes I think are worthwhile exploring. Whether or not he considers himself a conservative or something else (I have no idea), his critique is an example of the differences between our sides.
LikeLike
qb, I'm not debating the difference between liberal and conservative ideology here, I was trying to point out that if his ultimate goal is a documentary type of investigative journalism, then he lost me. That's all. Maybe I misunderstood his goals. If it's an opinion piece and a blanket criticism of liberalism then as I said, he gets props, and he obviously wasn't trying to persuade someone like me. No problem.
LikeLike