I’ve gotten a lot of email like this re my post yesterday:

Mr. Goldberg,
I sent you one of the many emails that I am sure you received about the Sherrod speech and your statement that she is owed an apology from Mr. Breitbart. The goal on the left is going to be to use this discredit Mr. Breitbart and say that anything that he posts can’t be trusted. It is going to come up now everytime he exposes some liberal shenanigans. “Well, he can’t be trusted. He posted that Sherrod video and that turned out to be a hoax.”
Plus, I still stand by my argument that if that had been a tea party guy who told some story where he says he used to be a real racist, no one would give him the benefit of the doubt. Let’s say he told how back when he was starting out as a public defender and he thought that blacks were criminals and drug dealers and he had his first young black defendant and he admitted that he was sure this guy was guilty and a typical black guy and maybe he shouldn’t do his best for him and it would be better if he did go to jail. And then the tea party audience started laughing and saying “Yeah, they are just like that.” Of course, then the speaker goes on to tell how he did find some evidence that this guy wasn’t guilty and he changed his ways. How do you think that this would be handled in the media? Do you think that this guy would be showing how he can overcome his racism? I don’t think so. And if Politico put out this video and just put out the part about how this guy thought he shouldn’t do his best for him, what would the coverage be? Would this make the evening news? And then if the whole video came out, what would the coverage be of that?
Fundamentally, this is just a White House screw up for firing her. Obama and his crew are the only people who should be apologizing.

There’s a great deal I agree with here. I do think that a lot of folks are trying desperately to discredit Andrew. I am not one of them. Again, Andrew is both a friend and, I think, a valuable force on the right. If you look at the astounding catalog of far worse offenses by The New York Times, The New Republic, CBS and other establishment outlets in recent years, the idea that the Sherrod video discredits Breitbart or Big Government is absurd.

I agree entirely that the air is thick with invidious double-standards for conservatives. It’s been that way my whole life and, I fear it will be that way not only until I die but even after my head is thawed and attached to my kick-ass android body.

But what’s the upshot of that? I know that many folks want to always fight fire with fire. And sometimes I do too, when I think it’s warranted. But I don’t see the logic here.

It’s one thing if you don’t think Sherrod was being treated unfairly. But if you agree that the upshot of that video, as initially edited, is to unfairly tar Sherrod with being a racist (as opposed to having a lot of “racial baggage” as Andy writes below), then I am at a loss to understand how it’s justified to stand by it out of some “never give an inch” policy. It’s as simple as two wrongs don’t make a right. That the liberal and mainstream press routinely demonizes conservatives unfairly isn’t a writ to do likewise.

And for those of you about to send me another thousand emails about how such alleged prissiness and squeamishness on my part amounts to tactical surrender, let me respond with one more entirely tactical point. Your tactic won’t work! If conservatives stuck to their guns and, in lockstep, insisted that Sherrod deserves everything she got because she is an obvious racist, that wouldn’t lead to any kind of “victory.” That would lead to lots of Americans thinking conservatives are being mean and unfair (particularly among the squishy independents and swing voters the GOP needs for crushing victory this November). Watch the Today Show or Good Morning America, read the non-conservative press. Conservative solidarity won’t convince millions of Americans that conservatives are right. It will convince millions of Americans that conservatives can’t admit it when they are wrong. Does anyone doubt this has been a P.R. debacle for conservatives? Would you do this exactly the same way again if you could?

Just for kicks, here’s how I would have responded (or how I like to think I would have responded) once I knew the edited video was misleading: “Look, we should have watched the whole video. But we were responding to yet another deplorable and unfair attack on conservatives in general and the Tea Party in particular by the NAACP which is, once again, behaving as an arm of the Democratic Party. We responded in haste to an attack that was made not in haste but with careful deliberation and malice aforethought which was then magnified by a mainstream press that has been unfairly hostile to the Tea Parties from day one. Ms. Sherrod clearly has views many people can disagree with, but the edited video was misleading and unfair and for that I am sorry. Why the NAACP and the White House acted so rashly and unfairly is something you will have to ask them about.”

Update: From a reader:

Jonah,
I’m generally a big fan, but I find your position sickening.
I’m so tired of conservatives having to play by different rules. And why? Because people like you say that’s how it needs to be.
“That would lead to lots of Americans thinking conservatives are being mean and unfair (particularly among the squishy independents and swing voters the GOP needs for crushing victory this November).”
Are you kidding me? Most of the “squishy independents” think that anyhow! We’ve been saddled with that reputation precisely because the left is shameless in their attacks. We might as well get the benefit of it by sometimes actually being mean and unfair (although Breitbart was neither). But few think the left is mean and unfair, because we’re to polite to point that out.
We continue to settle for asymmetrical warfare at a cost of struggling to reach 50% in every election. We do this so you can hold your head high. If we fought dirty, as the left does, we’d get 65%.
This is a P.R. debacle, yes, but the reason is because our conservative defenders immediately fall to the turtle position.
Guess what Jonah. The “squishy moderates” don’t listen to high minded discussions that you are so interested in having. They see a narrative, and that narrative is Democrat self righteous condemnation and conservatives like you standing by looking guilty, which simply confirms that you deserve to be punished.