Obama's accidental gift on race

[DarrinS]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jul/27/the-presidents-accidental-gift-on-race/





Less than a month after being confirmed as the nation's attorney General, Eric H. Holder Jr. called out the American people as "essentially a nation of cowards" for refusing to talk openly about race.

So, thank you, professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. and President Obama, for starting the long-awaited national discussion on black and white identity - while averting our attention from the cockamamie scheme to nationalize health care.

And kudos to the professor and the president for choosing Sgt. James Crowley of the Cambridge Police Department as the representative of the Caucasian-American side of this difficult and much-needed historic debate.

Poetry was at work as the archetypal racist white cop who, according to the admittedly fact-challenged president, "stupidly" arrested his "friend." Sgt. Crowley waged a swift and effective public relations campaign that quashed the racism meme that Mr. Gates was recklessly pushing.

Sgt. Crowley, as it happens, is the Cambridge police force's hand-picked racial profiling expert and was selected by a former black police commissioner. He also performed CPR on black basketball star Reggie Lewis, whose widow praised the public servant for doing everything he could to save her husband. Sgt. Crowley's own police department immediately jumped to his defense in a picture-perfect multiracial photo op and press conference.

Even though Mr. Gates and Sgt. Crowley are poised to put their individual grievances to rest - over a beer negotiated by the president of the United States - the scope of the problem that brought them international attention lingers, underscoring the need for continued robust public dialogue.

We're finally talking, Mr. Holder and Mr. Obama. Why stop now?

Of course, the attorney general is essentially right in his assessment. Much of America is petrified to bring up race, especially in public forums - the media, in particular. But for exactly the opposite reasons Mr. Holder, the Obama administration and the brain trust of modern liberalism assert.

Americans, especially nonblacks, are deeply fearful that the dynamic is predicated on an un-American premise: presumed guilt. Innocence, under the extra-constitutional reign of political correctness, liberalism's brand of soft Shariah law, must be proved ex post facto.

Think not? Ask the Duke lacrosse team, which had 88 of the school's professors sign a petition that presumed their guilt before their side of the story was known. Even though the white athletes were exonerated and the liberal district attorney who pushed the case was dethroned, disbarred and disgraced, the professoriate that assigned guilt to its own students still refuses to apologize.

Those signatories constituted 90 percent of Duke's African and African-American Studies Department, the subject-matter domain of Mr. Gates, Michael Eric Dyson, Cornel West and other tenure-wielding, highfalutin, iambic-pentameter-filibustering race baiters, and 60 percent of Duke's women's studies department, another hotbed of victimology posing as intellectualism.

While the media was front and center in preparing for the public executions of the three Duke lacrosse players, they scurried away when they were proved innocent. The Democratic Media Complex, in its pursuit of Orwellian hate-crime legislation, reparations and sundry non-ameliorative resolutions to America's troubled racial past, pursues its victims with blood lust. But it cannot act in good faith to redeem those it has destroyed in countless rushes to judgment. (Richard Jewell, R.I.P.)

The mainstream media choose to flaunt story lines that make white America appear guilty of continued institutional racism, while black racism against whites is ignored as an acceptable disposition given our nation's history. This double standard provides a game board on which the Revs. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton can thrive in perpetuity and ensures racial progress is slowed.

And that is why the Case of Sergeant Crowley vs. Professor Gates is so important. As is expected from professional race baiters, Mr. Gates instigated a public brouhaha over race. And Mr. Obama, a man who attended the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's racist sermons for 20 years, used the bully pulpit to grant his friend a national platform to condemn a man for doing his job.

Sgt. Crowley, a proud and defiant public professional, played the moment perfectly and stopped his own assassination by media. Talk about a postmodern hero. Whether he likes it or not, Sgt. Crowley is a potent symbol of how the union has managed to become more perfect, a Rosa Parks of rush-to-judgment "reverse racism."

Now that the facts of the case show that his friend the professor was the man doing the racial profiling, the president wants to end the discussion.

Now we see what the attorney general meant when he spoke of cowards.

[rjv]

ah yes, the suffered anglo man. he will find his place amongst slavery, lynching, segregation and hate crimes.

[101A]

ah yes, the suffered anglo man. he will find his place amongst slavery, lynching, segregation and hate crimes.

Nice use of elitist cliche.

Bravo.

[Nbadan]

.....white mans burden...

[Viva Las Espuelas]

self oppression is a bitch.

[Gummi Clutch]

stupid negros

[Nbadan]

Looking but not seeing
By LEONARD PITTS JR.
[email protected]




Please take a good look at Dr. Henry Louis Gates.

He is five feet, seven inches, weighs 150 pounds, wears glasses and uses a cane. His legs are of unequal length, his mustache and goatee are gray. He is 58 years old and looks it.

It's important to see Gates -- scholar, author, documentarian, Harvard University professor and African-American man -- because that's what Sgt. James Crowley of the Cambridge, Mass. police department apparently did not do in the July 16 confrontation that has ignited debate about racial bias in the U.S. ``justice'' system. For the three of you who do not know: the incident began when Gates, returning home from a trip to China, found his front door jammed. When he and his driver tried to force it, a neighbor, thinking it a burglary in progress, did the right thing and called police. Crowley responded, finding the driver gone and Gates inside. There are two versions of what happened next.

Police say Gates refused to comply with Crowley's order to step outside, initially would not identify himself and became belligerent, yelling that Crowley, who is white, is a racist, that he didn't know who he was messing with and that this was only happening because Gates is black.

Gates says he promptly produced his driver's license and Harvard ID, that the officer refused to provide his name and badge number and that he could not have yelled anything because he has a severe bronchial infection.

This much is not in dispute: Gates was arrested after providing proof he was lawfully occupying his own home. The police report says he was ``exhibiting loud and tumultuous behavior in a public place.'' That being his own front porch.

Small wonder the charge has been dropped.

And here, Sgt. Crowley's defenders would want you to know he is not some Central Casting redneck, but an experienced officer who has led diversity workshops.

On the other hand, Gates is hardly Sister Souljah himself. Rather, he is a man who did the things African Americans are always advised to do -- work hard, get a good education, better yourself, only to discover that in the end, none of it saved him.

In the end, he still winds up standing on his front porch with his wrists shackled, just like any drug dealer or carjacker anywhere.

Because sometimes, they just don't see you. It's one of the most frustrating verities of African American life. Sometimes you simply know: They are looking your way but seeing their fears, their preconceptions, their stereotypes, that other black guy who did them wrong -- everything except the one and only you.

By definition, racism denies individuality, and preconceptions leave us blind, making it possible for even a man who leads diversity training to look at a small, graying scholar and see a menace to society. If Gates was loud and agitated, common sense says Crowley should've simply removed the source of the agitation -- himself.

Problem solved.

Instead, he called for backup(!) and took Gates into custody. And if Gates looked like a lawbreaker to James Crowley, well, to me he looks like former Lakers star Jamaal Wilkes, pulled over because the tags on his car were ``about to'' expire, like clean-shaven 6'4'' businessman Earl Graves Jr. detained by police searching for a mustachioed 5'10'' suspect, like Amadou Diallo, executed while reaching for his wallet.

And like me, with hands up and a rifle trained on my chest by an officer who later claimed he stopped me in that predominantly-white neighborhood for a traffic violation.

Because I look like Henry Louis Gates, he looks like Jamaal Wilkes, and we all look like some dangerous, predatory black man intent on mayhem. So there is no shock here -- only a sobering reminder that the old canard is, at some level, true.

[rjv]

Nice use of elitist cliche.

Bravo.

thanks, and the bourgeois condescencion is appreciated as well.

[Nbadan]

on race-baiting...

2JLoX0ugB4g

[DarrinS]

I'm curious why prof. Gates' height and weight are always mentioned. Ok, he's short and skinny.

And...?

[clambake]

I'm curious why prof. Gates' height and weight are always mentioned. Ok, he's short and skinny.

And...?

and......if only he'd been white.

[DarrinS]

on race-baiting...

2JLoX0ugB4g



Yeah, that was pretty stupid. This case has nothing to do with OJ. Or Rodney King.

[ChumpDumper]

I'm curious why prof. Gates' height and weight are always mentioned. Ok, he's short and skinny.

And...?I don't know if it's always mentioned. The same passage was quoted twice on this board. It reinforces the contention that he was a threat to no one, as the police never said he was a threat at all.

[Crookshanks]

Leonard Pitts Jr. is part of the problem, not the solution.

[Nbadan]

lying by police is part of the problem


"She went on to tell me that she observed what appeared to be two black males with backpacks on the porch of Ware Street," the report says. "She told me that her suspicions were aroused when she observed one of the men wedging his shoulder into the door as if he was trying to force entry."

[DarrinS]

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-rodriguez27-2009jul27,0,6227295.column?track=rss




About the only thing as disappointing as the frivolous arrest of Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. was the loud, almost gleeful chorus of "I told you so's" coming from his defenders. You've heard of schadenfreude -- taking pleasure in the suffering of others? Well, this was the peculiar political version. It's not that commentators were happy that Gates had allegedly been mistreated. But they seemed inordinately pleased that some aggrieved yet righteous person had come along to help them prove a point they've been hankering to make since Barack Obama clinched the presidency last November:

"Racism is alive and well in the United States," one woman wrote in the comments section of the Root, the black-oriented online magazine that Gates edits. "It does not matter that we have an African American in the White House."

"We can put all that kumbaya, we're post-racial crap in the toilet," wrote one contributor to the Daily Beast. And according to Gates' friend and fellow tenured Harvard professor, Lawrence Bobo, the arrest proves that there "ain't nothing post-racial about the United States of America."

But the breathlessness and outsized outrage of some of the comments make me think not only that these critics are protesting too much but that they have much more at stake than Gates' four hours in the Cambridge clink.

Once upon a time, well-intentioned people liked to think that we should judge the relative fairness of our society by how the weakest among us are treated. But if reaction to Gates' arrest says anything, it's that elites are suddenly the canaries in the coal mine of racial justice. The logic works like this: If a Harvard professor can be treated that way, imagine how someone without Ivy League credentials is being treated!

But is it the non-Harvards that these commentators care about? Or is this a case of a segment of the chattering class protecting its interests by refortifying an identity issue that's been challenged by the election of the first African American president?

Just listen to the classist -- or is it just plain elitist? -- overtones of the Gates outrage, all those mentions of "brilliant," Harvard and the New Yorker. At issue is not the overall treatment of an entire race but the apparent public devaluation of a highly decorated particular member of that race. And this from commentators who have, or want, similar notches on their resume belts. Would there be such a fuss if the black gentleman arrestee taught at Boise State and wrote for, say, Saltwater Sportsman magazine?

Let me be clear. I think the police officer overstepped. I'm also guessing that he was trying to show a condescending Harvard professor who asked for his name and badge number a lesson in humility, or at least he was behaving in the I'm-a-cop-and-you're-not mode. But to deduce from this incident that the election of Obama isn't really a product or a precursor of racial progress is patently absurd.

The fact is, we are not and may never be (or even want to be) a totally post-racial society, in which race has no significance whatsoever. But the color line is murky now, and black commentators' using Gates' arrest to argue against the historical significance of Obama's electoral victory suggests that they haven't come to grips with how far it has faded.

That need to match attitude to reality isn't unique to black folks. I know upper-middle-class Mexican Americans who drive Jaguars but still see exploited farmworkers when they look in the mirror. I know wildly successful, Ivy League-educated Jews who still see WASP anti-Semites and worse around every corner.

Older minorities who have spent their lives defining themselves by the discrimination they have faced can sometimes have a hard time acknowledging that the world has changed, even as they enjoy those changes. Being discriminated against is one way they see their relationship to the world, and they're unclear how to navigate if they concede its absence. That is what makes Obama's election so unsettling to some blacks. Even as they rejoice in his victory, it requires them to recalibrate their view of the world and their place within it.

Professor Gates should not have been led away in handcuffs. But at the end of the day, he still earns more money, has more privileges, access, influence and, ultimately, much more power than the man who arrested him. How many of you can depend on the president of the United States coming to your defense when you have a run-in with the law?

Gates may be a momentary victim, but here's a flash: By most measures, he's actually one of the victors. Times have changed. It's a good thing.

[clambake]

Professor Gates should not have been led away in handcuffs. But at the end of the day, he still earns more money, has more privileges, access, influence and, ultimately, much more power than the man who arrested him.

and he was told by this lesser man to "tell it to the judge".

[SonOfAGun]

self oppression is a bitch.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

and he was told by this lesser man to "tell it to the judge".
so will you rely on the "lesser man" if you're involved in a hit and run, mugging, or any ill will brought to you and/or your family, or will you call your local loud-mouthed professor?

[clambake]

so will you rely on the "lesser man" if you're involved in a hit and run, mugging, or any ill will brought to you and/or your family, or will you call your local loud-mouthed professor?

i won't have any problem, V. I'm very white.

[ChumpDumper]

so will you rely on the "lesser man" if you're involved in a hit and run, mugging, or any ill will brought to you and/or your family, or will you call your local loud-mouthed professor?Will he throw me in jail if I yell from my porch?

[hope4dopes]

Will he throw me in jail if I yell from my porch?

Yeah... very well could happen. you need to get out of suburbia and see a little of the world.

[ploto]

The election of Obama says absolutely nothing about any improvement in the perception of race with regards to the people who would not even consider voting for him because of his race. Actually, some of these people are even more anti-African American because he won.

[ChumpDumper]

Yeah... very well could happen. you need to get out of suburbia and see a little of the world.Where everyone gets arrested from yelling from his porch?

Which America do you live in, dope?

[ChumpDumper]

The election of Obama says absolutely nothing about any improvement in the perception of race with regards to the people who would not even consider voting for him because of his race. Actually, some of these people are even more anti-African American because he won.The Klan voted Obama into office. Whottt said so.

[SonOfAGun]

Will he throw me in jail if I yell from my porch?

Did Gates get thrown in jail for yelling from his porch?

[SonOfAGun]

The election of Obama says absolutely nothing about any improvement in the perception of race with regards to the people who would not even consider voting for him because of his race. Actually, some of these people are even more anti-African American because he won.

When you are constantly trying to project oppression from another, they tend to develop a disgust/hate/amusement towards you.

[sam1617]

When you are constantly trying to project oppression from another, they tend to develop a disgust/hate/amusement towards you.

I will never forget being told by a dumb ass white chick I know that I was racist because I didn't approve of the way President Obama was handling himself.

I very rarely have been as angry as I was then.

[clambake]

how is he handling himself?

[sam1617]

how is he handling himself?

It depends on the situation...

I believe that we were discussing the Somalian pirates, I didn't approve of how long it took Mr. Obama to decide on his course of action.

[clambake]

so, fluid situations should be bull rushed, regardless of human life?

[sam1617]

so, fluid situations should be bull rushed, regardless of human life?

I don't think that opening a discussion about the Somalian pirates is particularly pertinent to this thread. If you want to discuss it, start your own thread and I will gladly participate.

I gave an example where disagreeing or expressing doubt with Obama's decisions was taken to be racist by some people. The situation shouldn't matter for this discussion.

[ChumpDumper]

Did Gates get thrown in jail for yelling from his porch?No one ever said he did anything else, so yes -- one can only conclude he did get thrown in jail for yelling from his porch.

[Yonivore]

No one ever said he did anything else, so yes -- one can only conclude he did get thrown in jail for yelling from his porch.
Only and idiot would draw a definite conclusion over what we've had access to through the media.

[ChumpDumper]

So now -- from what you have access to through the media -- how do you explain the police report's saying there were two black men with backpacks when the 9/11 call said nothing of black men or backpacks?

[ploto]

Only and idiot would draw a definite conclusion over what we've had access to through the media.

We know he did not leave the porch and that the cop went back to the porch to arrest him.

[Yonivore]

So now -- from what you have access to through the media -- how do you explain the police report's saying there were two black men with backpacks when the 9/11 call said nothing of black men or backpacks?
The report isn't compiled from information just gleaned from the 911 call. It is a summary... Here, let Ms. Whalen's attorney and Chief Haas explain it for you:


The woman, identified in a police report on file in Cambridge District Court as 40-year-old Lucia Whalen, saw the backs of both men and did not know their race when she called 911, said Wendy J. Murphy, a Boston lawyer from New England School of Law. Whalen phoned police, Murphy said, because she was aware of recent break-ins in the area.

In an interview last night, Cambridge Police Commissioner Robert C. Haas said it was ac curate that Whalen did not mention race in her 911 call. He acknowledged that a police report of the incident did include a race reference. The report says Whalen observed “what appeared to be two black males with backpacks on the front porch’’ of a Ware Street home on July 16.

That reference is there, said Haas, because the police report is a summary. Its descriptions - like the race of the two men - were collected during the inquiry, not necessarily from the initial 911 call, he said.
By the way, the media got the caller's race wrong, as well:


"Contrary to published reports that a 'white woman' called 911 and reported seeing 'two black men' trying to gain entry into Mr. Gates home, the woman, who has olive colored skin and is of Portuguese descent, told the 911 operator that she observed 'two men' at the home," Murphy's statement read.
But, unless you're trying to perpetuate the claim that, somehow, race was a factor in this police incident, all the nattering over race is irrelevant.

[ChumpDumper]

So you are just accusing the police of incompetence.

I can believe that.

[Yonivore]

So you are just accusing the police of incompetence.

I can believe that.
You'd believe anything if it supported your idiotic view of the world. As above, you love to create straw men and bait people into knocking them down. Okay, where did I accuse the police of being incompetent?

[ChumpDumper]

There is no straw man.

The police report is wrong.

You just said it's wrong because the police can't write a coherent report.

An old man got arrested for yelling from his porch -- there has been no other reason provided anywhere.

[Yonivore]

So, while ChumpDumper continues his rant, let's talk about the subject of the thread...Obama's fuck up.

It's turning out that this may cost him more than it did Gates or the Cambridge Police Department:

http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2009/07/26/nr.comrade.in.arms.cnn (http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2009/07/26/nr.comrade.in.arms.cnn)

[ChumpDumper]

Are they going to arrest Obama now?

[Yonivore]

There is no straw man.

So you are just accusing the police of incompetence.
From wikipedia:

A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.


The police report is wrong.
Were the two men black? Were you privy to the conversation between police and witnesses at the scene?


You just said it's wrong because the police can't write a coherent report.
Strawman.


An old man got arrested for yelling from his porch --
A asshole got arrested for disorderly conduct.


there has been no other reason provided anywhere.
You don't know that. The officer would have spelled out the elements of the crime in a criminal complaint that, now, will never be filed.

I think the statements of other police and witnesses -- who are saying they saw nothing inappropriate in the police actions -- could be construed as "reasons provided" somewhere but, you refuse to entertain the possibility.

It's okay if you want to stay ignorant. I understand.

[Yonivore]

Are they going to arrest Obama now?
Being stupid isn't a crime.

[ChumpDumper]

Were the two men black? Were you privy to the conversation between police and witnesses at the scene?So you are making more shit up now.


Strawman.It is absolutely what you said.



A asshole got arrested for disorderly conduct.What disorderly conduct? No one has said anything that could have been prosecuted under Massachusetts law.



You don't know that. The officer would have spelled out the elements of the crime in a criminal complaint that, now, will never be filed.He would have spelled it out in the report if it was at all important. The thought typing "tumultuous" a few times would do the trick. It didn't. He also had ample opportunity to give a complete recounting of what happened in his many interviews. Now you are accusing the police of hiding information from the press.


I think the statements of other police and witnesses -- who are saying they saw nothing inappropriate in the police actions -- could be construed as "reasons provided" somewhere but, you refuse to entertain the possibility.I can believe the witnesses were as ignorant of the law as you are.


It's okay if you want to stay ignorant. I understand.:lmao Sorry dude, you can't say that after I educated you on the disorderly conduct laws in Massachusetts and Texas -- of which you were completely ignorant when you were actually claiming to enforce them.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

now i don't know all the facts, but as a wise latino, the prez acted stupidly. thank you and good night.

[Yonivore]

So you are making more shit up now.
I asked you two questions. How's that making shit up? You can accuse Chief Haas of making more shit up, if you like. I based my statement on his.


It is absolutely what you said.
You, obviously, do not understand the meaning of the word "absolute," but, for grins...point to my statement that absolutely claims the police were incompetent.


What disorderly conduct? No one has said anything that could have been prosecuted under Massachusetts law.
I didn't witness the offense. I base my opinion on what those, who were, have said...and not Eugene Volokh's blog.


He would have spelled it out in the report if it was at all important. The thought typing "tumultuous" a few times would do the trick. It didn't. He also had ample opportunity to give a complete recounting of what happened in his many interviews. Now you are accusing the police of hiding information from the press.
You have no concept of police work so, surmising what police would or wouldn't do, is meaningless in this context.

I do believe, however, the press isn't asking the right questions. The first question I would ask, if I were a reporter, is the one you seem to be stuck on; what made Mr. Gates' actions disorderly conduct.


I can believe the witnesses were as ignorant of the law as you are.
By the same mechanism President Obama used to declare the police acted stupidly; ignorance.


:lmao Sorry dude, you can't say that after I educated you on the disorderly conduct laws in Massachusetts and Texas -- of which you were completely ignorant when you were actually claiming to enforce them.
Again, your grasp of vocabulary is severely lacking; "completely" implies an absolute that isn't true. But, aside from that, you schooled no one. You cut a pasted an opinion from a blog. There are a whole host of opinions out there...and they cover the gamut from the police were justified, to they were wrong. I've yet to see any legal scholars (with the exception of Obama) say the police acted "stupidly."

[Yonivore]

now i don't know all the facts, but as a wise latino, the prez acted stupidly. thank you and good night.
He's here all week, try the veal. :lmao :tu

[ChumpDumper]

I asked you two questions. How's that making shit up? You can accuse Chief Haas of making more shit up, if you like. I based my statement on his.I said the report is wrong.



You, obviously, do not understand the meaning of the word "absolute," but, for grins...point to my statement that absolutely claims the police were incompetent.They can't write a coherent report.



I didn't witness the offense. I base my opinion on what those, who were, have said...and not Eugene Volokh's blog.So they said and old man was yelling from his porch. I am basing their reason for arresting him on what those who were there said.


You have no concept of police work so, surmising what police would or wouldn't do, is meaningless in this context.You proved they can work while being ignorant of the law. That's quite meaningful.


I do believe, however, the press isn't asking the right questions. The first question I would ask, if I were a reporter, is the one you seem to be stuck on; what made Mr. Gates' actions disorderly conduct.I believe that yelling from the porch is all they have ever said, and they have been given every opportunity to add to that.


By the same mechanism President Obama used to declare the police acted stupidly; ignorance.Turns out when the facts came out, he was right -- it was a stupid arrest.


Again, your grasp of vocabulary is severely lacking; "completely" implies an absolute that isn't true. But, aside from that, you schooled no one. You cut a pasted an opinion from a blog. There are a whole host of opinions out there...and they cover the gamut from the police were justified, to they were wrong. I've yet to see any legal scholars (with the exception of Obama) say the police acted "stupidly."I've read police and former police saying it was a stupid arrest.

You said it was an awesome arrest, but you proved you are ignorant of the law. Once that ignorance was proven you tried to make Gates' out to be a physical threat to the multiple cops and onloookers there. It was pretty pathetic.

An old man was arrested for yelling from his porch.

It was a stupid arrest.

[Yonivore]

I said the report is wrong.
You said I absolutely accused the police of incompetence. Quit changing the argument.


They can't write a coherent report.
No, you can't read a competent report and put it in context with the known facts.


So they said and old man was yelling from his porch. I am basing their reason for arresting him on what those who were there said.
No, you seem to be basing your opinion on only that fact. You keep omitting the facts that ever other officer on the scene supports the arrest and that witnesses don't find the police actions inappropriate. I would suggest you write your favorite Cambridge news personality and see if you can get them to ask the all-important question of the police; "Why was what Professor Gates did disorderly conduct." I bet you'd get an illuminating lesson.


You proved they can work while being ignorant of the law. That's quite meaning ful.
Strawman.


I believe that yelling from the porch is all they have ever said, and they have been given every opportunity to add to that.
Police Departments...indeed, government in general...isn't wont to volunteer information. If they did, Professor Gates would probably throw another shoe. I think they've chosen to just let sleeping dogs lie. But, I would really like to see the question asked.


Turns out when the facts came out, he was right -- it was a stupid arrest.
I don't think all the facts are out and your opinion isn't of much value here, anyway.


I've read police and former police saying it was a stupid arrest.
Link or cite.


You said it was an awesome arrest, but you proved you are ignorant of the law.
Another hyperbolized strawman. I've never described the arrest as awesome. I even allow it may have been unnecessary. I just argue it wasn't stupid and that the police did nothing wrong in arresting Gates. That's my position, please refer to it accurately in future posts.


An old man was arrested for yelling from his porch.
Professor Gates was arrested for disorderly conduct.


It was a stupid arrest.
You're stupid, as was Obama, for making that declaration from a position of ignorance.

[ChumpDumper]

You said I absolutely accused the police of incompetence.You did.
Quit changing the argument.I didn't.



No, you can't read a competent report and put it in context with the known facts.The known facts were he wasn't called to investigate two black men with backpacks.


No, you seem to be basing your opinion on only that fact. You keep omitting the facts that ever other officer on the scene supports the arrest and that witnesses don't find the police actions inappropriate.I said I allowed for the possibility they were as ignorant as you proved to be.


I would suggest you write your favorite Cambridge news personality and see if you can get them to ask the all-important question of the police; "Why was what Professor Gates did disorderly conduct." I bet you'd get an illuminating lesson.I suggest you go by the facts of the case and not make up things to try to make the arrest look less stupid. At no time has anyone anywhere said that Gates was arrested for anything other than yelling from his porch. That has proven to not be disorderly conduct. You have done nothing to prove he committed any other action that could bring a disorderly conduct charge.



Strawman.It's not a strawman. You proved you were ignorant of the law. It is quite possible these officers were ignorant of the law too.



Police Departments...indeed, government in general...isn't wont to volunteer information.Why? Do they have something to hide? If Gates did something other than yelling from his porch to justify an arrest, that would only help the police.
If they did, Professor Gates would probably throw another shoe.More made up shit.


I think they've chosen to just let sleeping dogs lie.I think Gates did nothing other than yell from his porch.
But, I would really like to see the question asked.It already has been asked: "What happened?"



I don't think all the facts are out and your opinion isn't of much value here, anyway.I think all the facts are out and your opinion isn't of much value here anyway.



Link or cite.In a minute.



Another hyperbolized strawman. I've never described the arrest as awesome. I even allow it may have been unnecessary. I just argue it wasn't stupid and that the police did nothing wrong in arresting Gates. That's my position, please refer to it accurately in future posts.Please, you made up shit in an attempt to make Gates' arrest seem more justified.



Professor Gates was arrested for disorderly conduct.What disorderly conduct? Link or cite.



You're stupid, as was Obama, for making that declaration from a position of ignorance.If there were any more facts supporting a Gates arrest, they would have already been reported. You are no accusing the police of hiding information on top of incompetence.

I merely accused them of making a stupid arrest.

[ChumpDumper]

Link or cite.
I was an auxiliary police officer for 20 years, 11 in Michigan where a wise chief told us never, under any circumstances, were we to arrest someone for disorderly conduct. He said that if we couldn't find a more serious charge it was up to us to calm the person down. Otherwise he told us that using this charge was just an easy way to end a situation with a disruptive citizen without using the skill we were supposed to have to de-escalate.

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/node/18874


We also agree that the officers acted “stupidly” in arresting a man in his own home for disorderly conduct. Police officers are held to a higher standard than the public. They are trained to de-escalate situations and to be more tolerant. The officer in question, an instructor of sensitivity, should have exercised more discretion between free speech and the necessary element of public alarm for disorderly conduct. It is a common practice, often complained of, that requesting an officer’s name and badge number often results in being arrested.

Resisting arrest, resisting arrest without violence, disorderly conduct, obstructing governmental administration and similarly worded statutes are tools for law enforcement officers to advance or support legitimate police actions and strategies. These statutes were never meant to advance the intimidation of the public.

http://nloaus.org/nl/

[Yonivore]

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/node/18874
Stupidly never uttered...and, he wasn't there either.


http://nloaus.org/nl/
Your paragraph taken out of the context of an organization supporting President Bush because they have an agenda. They agree with President Obama. Unfortunately for them, President Obama, miscalibrated his words.

I guess you were able to prove there are also police officers that are willing -- for various reasons (ignorance in the case of the auxiliary officer and racial agenda in the case of Latino organization) -- to advance a narrative they can't support with the facts.

In fact, most of the NLOA statement concentrated on racial profiling which, be everyone's admission, didn't play a role in this incident. Never mind the fact Gates wasn't arrested "in his house" as claimed by the NLOA. Seems they play a bit loose with the facts themselves.

[ChumpDumper]

Stupidly never uttered...and, he wasn't there either.:lmao He says it should never have taken place.



Your paragraph taken out of the context of an organization supporting President Bush because they have an agenda. They agree with President Obama. Unfortunately for them, President Obama, miscalibrated his words.Unfortunately for you they didn't change their words.


I guess you were able to prove there are also police officers that are willing -- for various reasons (ignorance in the case of the auxiliary officer and racial agenda in the case of Latino organization) -- to advance a narrative they can't support with the facts.You have proven that there is a former law enforcement official who -- for various reasons (ignorance of the law, a political agenda and general animus towards yelling black men) -- advanced a narrative he can't support with facts.

[Yonivore]

:lmao He says it should never have taken place.
His opinion. He didn't say stupid.


Unfortunately for you they didn't change their words.
Their agenda was about race.


You have proven that there is a former law enforcement official who -- for various reasons (ignorance of the law, a political agenda and general animus towards yelling black men) -- advanced a narrative he can't support with facts.
You fail again.

[ChumpDumper]

His opinion. He didn't say stupid.It's all the support I need. A former cop disagreed with the arrest.



Their agenda was about race.They said the arrest was stupid, and gave very good reasons against such arrests that have nothing to do with race. You really want to inject race into this every chance you can get.



You fail again.An old man was arrested for yelling at the cops from his porch. That is not against the law, so it was a stupid arrest.

Prove that wrong.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

haven't had time, but i've been wanting to revisit candidate obama's "historical" race speech. the doctor said i've been rather low on irony.