The NAACP has posted the full video of the Shirley Sherrod speech. After watching it, it is impossible not to conclude that the Obama administration made the wrong decision in forcing her resignation.

I’d encourage you to watch the video for yourself, but the summary version is as follows: After experiencing some hard-core white racism in the segregated South (her father was murdered by white men who were never convicted), Sherrod made a commitment to help black southerners in bad situations. “When I made that commitment,” she said, “I was making that commitment to black people and to black people only. But you know, God will show you things… you realize that the struggle is really about poor people.” She then proceeded to tell the story featured in the clip that Breitbart published. (He says he received the clip in its edited form.) A white farmer came to her for help, and because she perceived him to be like the others, she fobbed him off on a white lawyer — “his own kind.” But the lawyer didn’t help the farmer, and that is what led Sherrod to revise her previous biases against whites and to resolve to assist all economically distressed farmers, white or black, who came to her for help.

As for the ongoing dispute between the NAACP and the tea party and the various accusations of racism that have been flying of late: Sherrod’s speech was about overcoming racist views, including those held by blacks, illustrated by way of her personal story. There would be no need for her to tell that story to that particular audience if she didn’t feel that some in the NAACP still harbored prejudiced views of whites; the moral of her story would be obsolete if black racism didn’t exist. Large and vibrant political organizations attract all kinds of people, and some of those people are bound to be racists. It would be stupid to pretend there are no racists in the tea party, just as it would be dumb to argue that there are no racists in the NAACP. Furthermore, it would be beside the point. The “who’s more racist” argument is tangential to the philosophical dispute between the two groups that lies at the heart of all this. It is perhaps because that dispute — which concerns the size and scope of the federal government’s redistributive power — is so heated and unbridgeable that we descend into pointless and destructive race-baiting (although it’s pretty clear who tends to plays the race card first).

A few more things are clear: It’s clear that Sherrod is on the other side of that philosophical dispute from me. It’s also clear that she used to view whites with a prejudiced eye. But, finally, it’s clear that she doesn’t anymore, and that the administration forced Sherrod to resign before all the facts were in hand. Secretary Vilsack should correct this mistake. Considering the new facts that have come to light, that shouldn’t be too difficult.

Update: Quick response to an e-mail (anticipating similar ones):

Re: You are missing the bigger point of the NAACP story
Who cares if she ‘came around’ to not being a racist anymore? There were two points:
1. Here is a black government bureaucrat using her power in a racist manner. It doesn’t matter if she no longer does it. Or even if she rectified past mistakes. Personally, good for her. But I don’t want to pay taxes to pay the salary of millions upon millions of bureaucrats like her, who may have not awoken to their own racism.

Me: First, she wasn’t a USDA official when the story happened; she was with some non-profit group. Second, this is an argument for dismantling the Ag Department (or any similar redistributive program), and believe me brother, I am with you 110 percent of the way on that. But it isn’t an argument for firing this one government official.

2. Look at the reaction to the NAACP crowd. They’re nodding and agreeing with her during the racist part of her story.

Me: Well, yeah, like I said: Some of them probably agreed with her actions and thought they were justified. My argument isn’t that there are no racists in the NAACP. It’s just that Shirley Sherrod isn’t one of them.

Sherrod the individual is immaterial to the larger issues here.

Me: I agree. But she hasn’t done anything to deserve to lose her job.

Update II: Glenn Beck agrees.