Report: Wife Scratched Tiger Woods' Face, Chased His SUV; Update: Police Unable To Interview Couple Today
Senate Report: Bush Missed Chance To Catch Bin Laden
Dogs Rescued From Puppy Mills And Shelters Arrive In L.I.
State Dinner Party Crashers Want Money For Interview
Tiger Woods Says "Embarrassing" Accident Was His Fault
Last night, President Obama took to primetime to discuss health care reform—or as the Washington Post puts it, he "confronted increasing doubts about the impact of widespread changes to the health-care system, seeking to assure middle-class Americans on Wednesday that the landmark legislation he envisions would improve their quality of life and is essential to curing the nation's economic ills." However, that part of his remarks seemed "lackluster" and "cautious and choreographed" compared his sharper, more passionate thoughts on the arrest of his friend, Harvard academic Henry Louis Gates Jr..
When the Chicago Sun-Times' Lynn Sweet asked Obama about the arrest during the Q&A, Obama admitted he might be "a little biased" because Gates is a friend. But he said the neighbor's call about the potential robbery (when it was really just a locked-out Gates trying to get into his house) was good: Obama hoped the police would be called if he was seen breaking into his home, but just his Chicago home, since if that happened at the White House, "I'd get shot," prompting laughter from reporters.
He went on to point out that by the time the police arrived, Gates was inside his home and proved he lived there, "I don’t know - not having been there and not seeing all the facts - what role race played in that, but I think it’s fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home, and number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there’s a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately. That’s just a fact."
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Obama also noted that he sponsored a bill requiring race, age and gender of drivers to be recording during stops when he was in the Illinois Legislature and said, "Even when there are honest misunderstandings, the fact that blacks and Hispanics are picked up more frequently and often time for no cause casts suspicion even when there is good cause. And that’s why I think the more that we’re working with local law enforcement to improve policing techniques... the safer everybody is going to be.’"
The Boston Globe asked the police officer, Sergeant Joseph Crowley, who arrested Gates about Obama's remarks; Crowley said, "I think I’d be better off not commenting on that one."
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Sound Familiar?
so I guess that ling didnt work...
http://www.entertonement.com/clips/cfclbytjzg--Black-Guy-Broke-in-and-Hung-Up-Pictures-of-His-FamilyDave-Chappelle-HBO-Comedy-Half-Hour-Dave-Chappelle-
If I had a nickel for every white dude in this country that fails to realize just how f*cked up it is that no matter how important you are to society, if you are black you are still a default criminal, I would be a rich man.
Please please tell us the plight of the black man.
While you're busy whining I'll be off DOING something.
I've been on the wrong end of racism too, but at some point you shut up, man up, and move forward.
I dunno, it sounds like a case of Douchebag Cop vs Douchebag Inflated-Ego Harvard Professor to me. Strangely I don't feel sorry for either side...not sure how much it has to do with race vs assholery either.
Exactly.
This story reminded me of the woman with her dog on the L. It helps no one to scream and escalate the situation. You have to pick your battles, to be trite. Take the ticket or citation and battle it later. Or with Gates, just continue to be calm, go down to the station, go through whatever processes, get your lawyer, and then sue the hell out of them.
I agree. Whatever your race, if you antagonize a cop, he's going to push back, right or wrong, because he's the man with the badge and gun.
you have a right to antagonize a cop. why are you so accepting of living in fear of the police? this is not the way america should be
I don't get the sense that djwerdna is "accepting" that police should act like this. The point is that It doesn't matter what color you are when you mouth off to the cops. If people want to make an issue about this incident it should be about police training in defusing confrontations.
It's not illegal to be a douchebag. Even IF Gates was acting that way, you shouldn't get arrested for that.
People with guns and jails shouldn't have the power to just lock up people they don't like or who are talking back to them.
In theory you're right, but c'mon...
I know the fight or flight response and adrenaline kicks in, but antagonize a cop enough and you're going to get arrested. Of course it's wrong, but 10,000 years from now man is still going to have such a problem.
Apparently, you can't verbalize how you feel to the police. They can arrest you for talking back in your own home. F__k this country and the old boy network. It's ending soon and then we will reciprocate tenfold.
Hey man, just remember that not ALL us white dudes are on the side of the cops. a LOT of us are just as outraged as you are by a man being arrested in his own home after showing his ID.
Intelligent, civilized people usually realize that mouthing off to the cops is a bad idea. And it doesn't matter what color your skin is or if you're a guy or a girl.
alright, alright...this story is now officially overblown. and boring the shit out of me.
Cutest president ever.
AGREED!!
That's actually a response to the "Cutest president ever" comment
Man, he aged fast.
I knew that last question would overshadow the rest of press conference. I thought he spoke well about controversial health reform issues. And at one point I realized, had this been on a year ago, I would've flipped the channel after 30 seconds.
...thus making any claims you have against the Bush administration uninformed and unverifiable? Ouch.
So Bottomless Chips, are you:
A. just describing reality
Or
B. you saying because that is the current reality, we should accept it, and people the cops treat wrongly should have known better?
B is lame. B is scary. People who believe in B are part of the problem.
Which is it?
If you read my post, you would see that I agree with you.
In theory you're right and I think Gates was wronged, too.
However, in practicum it will never help any human in any confrontation (police, at a bar, during your fantasy football draft, with a girl/boyfriend) to scream and shout. It only escalates the situation due to a biological trait that humans have.
So I guess I'm B. But part of the problem is people like you, jt10000, who live in a fantasy world and see the racial aspect. I see the human, biological aspect.
How would Dubya have handled the question?
The way a president should; by saying that it was a local matter, that he did not have enough information to comment, and would not want to prejudice the ongoing investigation.
There is no ongoing investigation. The charges have been dropped.
Obama should have had no comment, given thatt Gates is his friend and he wasn't there. Too bad he stooped..
Everyone has an opinion - I'd like to hear that of our President for a change.
Indisputable evidence that blacks and Hispanics are being stopped disproportionately?
Disproportional to what? The percentage of blacks and Hispanics in America vs Others? Or the percentage of crimes committed by blacks and Hispanics vs Others?
What's indisputable is that these proportions are statistically related and accurate.
Not to mention Obama used a safety net over and over by saying he doesn't know exactly what happened and doesn't have the facts. This is clear. Thank you.
Way to take the focus off of one of the most important aspects of your administration barack. I can see how healthcare reform and this guy being inconvenienced should be in the same speech.
wtf.
It wasn't a speech. He was asked a question.
That seems to be one of Obama's weak points, from a politics/messaging POV. He doesn't ignore questions he doesn't like. It should be a good trait, imo, but with this media it's a weakness.
Well the fact that this bullshit is on the cover of the NYT right beside the healthcare issue I think he had a major PR fuckup in getting public support for this bill.
I agree completely. I knew once he started to answer the question by recounting the events (as he understood them) that it was going to be a disaster. But the fact remains that he didn't raise the subject.
Point conceeded.
This defines the phrase 'he has a chip on his shoulder'
Blacks and Hispanics are NOT stopped disproportionately when compared to criminal suspects the police are looking for. Sorry Mr. President, but your "facts" on race are wrong again.
http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon2007-02-07hm.html
All the link does is argue that racial profiling should be acceptable police practice. It says nothing about "criminal suspects the police are looking for", since that isn't what stop-and-frisk is about in the first place.
Thanks for clearing that up Bottomless. Yeah, it never helps to shout. Yeah, don't get uppity or you can expect trouble. Yessir.
It doesn't matter what race you are, if the law enforcement officer ask or tells you to step outside and you refuse to, are in you viloation. Also, a college or university is not a valid id for anything but campus.
A professor or anyone else should have the sence to what is asked to do. Then if he or she should feels it was unjustified, contact a lawyer.
It's just another case where the defendant got a BIG FAT HEAD AND WOULD NOT CORPORATE WITH THE LAW.
You aren't under any obligation to go anywhere with the police unless you're under arrest.
EastRiver is right.
A police badge does not give you the power to order someone out of their own home, except with probable cause or crime in progress, or a warrant.
Although a campus ID isn't a valid form of identity, police should use judgement and restraint when investigating. When a 60 year old man, with a cane, who is "breaking in" to a university house, and says he is a professor, and shows you a university ID, you might be inclined to take him seriously. Also note, that Havard police also responded, and confirmed Gate's identity.
Lets assume that Gates was disorderly, insulting and rude to the kind officer. In turn, lets assume that the officer was kind and helpful.
It doesn't change the fact that Gates was still in the right, as he was in his own home, and committed no crime. By the time he was arrested, his identity had been established, and no crime was committed.
Policing is about customer service..., you have to deal with citizens, some who are dicks, and some who are pleasant.... Just because someone is mean to you, doesn't mean you get to arrest them, especially when they are in their own home.
Please re-read the facts on this case. There was a crime committed. He was arrested for disorderly conduct. Just because they dropped the charges does not mean that the officer did not have reason to arrest him at the time. All he would have had to do was understand his neighbor was trying to look out for him, show a valid id, and thank the officer for actually following up on the phone call from the neighbor. (All too often cops don't even bother checking on calls from neighbors, I know I have been there. I was a victim of domestic abuse and it took 3 neighbors calling in before the cops actually showed up!) The officers have a very dangerous job without adding crap to their lives everyday from assholes that believe they are above the law. I don't give a crap if they are black or white. Just so happened this time the person arrested was black...so now it is a racial issue!!! Get over it!
Looks like the "Messiah" is running out of miracles lately:
1) Drop in his approval ratings.
2) Lack of confidence by the public on the effectiveless of his stimulus package.
3) Lackluster healthcare reforms that will increase everyone's taxes and possibly cut benefits.
4) Generally losing his "cool" more often than before in his public speeches.
I am gonna predict that the middle class will be stuck with huge tax increases, which will lead to a major bounce back by the Republicans in the mid-term elections.
Nice knowing you, Mr. 4 year and done!
I guess he still has the "miracle" of the craptastic Washington Post's unrelenting support and admiration. Hate that paper.
Disgusting to see the President of The United States playing the race card from the bottom of the deck. I guess racist viewpoints like this should be expected by a person who had Rev. Wright as leader of their church for 20 years....
If you antagonize a cop, he's going to push back, right or wrong, because he's the man with the badge and gun.
Truer words have never been spoken. Whether you want to believe it or not, whether you think its right or not, this is, and always will be the case.
Cops will be flying around on jetpacks investigating Pre-crime, and they still will not take any lip from a civilian.
Fuck this shit.
The officer has stated he won't apologize ever, GOOD ON HIM.
Everything is not about race, except in a small percentage of people's heads.
Guy probably mouthed off to the cops at the wrong time.
If a cop catches you breaking in to a building you had better be damn careful about how you identify yourself.
They're going into a hostile situation.
If you antagonize them you deserve to be arrested, black or white.
And now I hear he's threatening a lawsuit?
What will that accomplish other than penalizing the taxpayers of that town?
"It's so terrible but give me some money and everything will be ok"
Fuck off and pay your legal fees.
Rational Anarchy is the wave of the future.
How far did Michelle have to stick her hand up Barack's ass to turn him into this kind of race-trolling puppet?
For the WIN!!
Glad Gates didn't cave and apologize!
Cop who arrested black scholar is racial profiling expert
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090723/ap_on_re_us/us_harvard_scholar_disorderly
Expert or no expert, the cop was in the wrong. He admitted in an interview that Gates was insulting him and making "comments about his mother." Any true professional would just walk away. It's all just words, if true. Sticks and stones and all that. Could have saved everybody a lot of grief.
I have yet to see the jurisdiction's reason for dismissing the charge of the arresting officer. The officer, in his judgement, arrested Gates for his being in violation of statute. The jurisdiction dismissied(?),nullified(?), dumped the arresting officer's filing. Are they saying the AO's complaint was inappropriate? Or are they dumping through pure political expediency? I would have preferred it be played out in the system, get to the best truth possible. Hafta give the AO credit for still not backing down, despite the obvious pressure. BHO was highly irresponsible in his comments. I expected better. Just goes to the point that protected classes benefit from the shield of professed persecution. The true issues will never be dealt with. Smoke and mirrors.
This is absolutely ridiculous. The officer showed up, and was DOING HIS JOB by asking for ID and the man who he was investigating (and had every right to) for ID and to ascertain the circumstances surrounding his using a crow bar to get into a house becomes belligerent and starts to belittle the officer. What would you do? THINK ABOUT IT. The cop showed up to two guys using a crow bar on a house! How is he not going to be automatically suspicious of everything in that situation??
The professors behavior is the definition of disorderly conduct, which is what he was arrested for. Therefore the fact that he was on his own property is irrelevant.
If the cop showed up, took this guys word for it and he was a burglar, and left the house to be ransacked the place, you all would be accusing him of not being a disgrace to the uniform and hanging him out to dry.
Unfortunately, law enforcement in the US will always be in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation. Everyone is looking to be the next hero of civil disobedience, and its pathetic. This guy is a disgrace to every African American who came before him and actually fought for civil rights and freedoms for blacks. He deliberately manipulated this situation and its aftermath to disguise the fact that he is a short-fused idiot who can't take no for an answer.
"It doesn't matter what race you are, if the law enforcement officer ask or tells you to step outside and you refuse to, are in you viloation."
Not true. In fact, unless the police has a search warrant or an arrest warrant, you definitely do not have to step outside of your own home in response to their request. This has been affirmed in the courts many times.
"There was a crime committed. "
Not true.
It's not true based on the police report itself, it's not true based on Gates statement, and it's not true as evidenced by the charges being dropped. Yelling at a policeman is not "disorderly conduct" unless it's likely to incite other people to violence or interference in law enforcement. Hurting a policeman's feelings is not disorderly conduct. An old man yelling at a cop from inside his home is not disorderly conduct.
"All he would have had to do was understand his neighbor was trying to look out for him, show a valid id"
He showed two valid IDs. And there is no obligation to thank police.
Dude, you are on a roll in terms of errors of fact.
And to dadoc, the reason the charges were dismissed is they were bogus.
"Disorderly conduct" has a specific meaning - it means making a ruckus to get other people to riot or interfere with the police. Yelling a policeman as he leaves your own home is almost by definition impossible to be disorderly conduct, unless there is a crowd that is close to getting wild.
"I would have preferred it be played out in the system"
It was played out in the system. The prosecutors looked at the facts and realized the charge is baloney and declined to waste time and money pursuing it. Just because a policeman says something is illegal does not require the state to follow through.
This is absolutely ridiculous. The officer showed up, and was DOING HIS JOB by asking for ID. The man who he was investigating in order to ascertain the circumstances surrounding his using a crow bar to get into a house becomes belligerent and starts to belittle the officer. What would you do? THINK ABOUT IT. The cop showed up to two guys using a crow bar on a house! How is he not going to be automatically suspicious of everything in that situation??
The professor's behavior is the definition of disorderly conduct, which is what he was arrested for. Therefore the fact that he was on his own property is irrelevant.
If the cop showed up, took this guys word for it and he was a burglar, and left the house to be ransacked the place, you all would be accusing him of not being a disgrace to the uniform and hanging him out to dry.
Unfortunately, law enforcement in the US will always be in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation. Everyone is looking to be the next hero of civil disobedience, and its pathetic. This guy is a disgrace to every African American who came before him and actually fought for civil rights and freedoms for blacks. He deliberately manipulated this situation and its aftermath to disguise the fact that he is a short-fused idiot who can't take no for an answer.
"The cop showed up to two guys using a crow bar on a house!"
Not true, there was no crow bar and Gates was inside his house when the police showed up. The police should have asked for ID, and when he showed it (which he did -- two forms, including one with Gates address), they should have left.
Regardless of Gates yelling at them, that is all. Police have guns and the ability to jail people. They cannot let their emotions or insults cause them to misuse that power. That power should only be used in relation to crimes.
"If the cop showed up, took this guys word for it and he was a burglar, "
Are you just making up what happened? The police saw Gates ID. They did not have to take his word for it - they saw evidence in the form of an ID.
Dude, are you a racist or just a police-power nut? It's hard for me to distinguish in your case. Maybe both?
"The professor's behavior is the definition of disorderly conduct, "
You're just making stuff up now.
"Therefore the fact that he was on his own property is irrelevant."
No, it's extremely relevant. Disorderly conduct means you have to be disrupting something. He can't be disrupting something inside his own house. If he had a megaphone, and was blasting noise into the street, it might be possible for someone to commit disorderly conduct from within their property, but this was an old man yelling at police on his porch. Almost by definition, it's impossible for that that to be disorderly conduct.
In fact, insofar as his speech was criticism of police (regardless of whether or not he was correct) that's political speech which is particularly protected by the US constitution and, I think, the Massachusetts constitution as well.
Just to clarify my comment at 9:32 -- the police *did* ask for ID, which was the right thing to do.
When I lived in Boston, the police tried to arrest me for "stealing" my own car. I really was in no position to argue with them; they had a gun in my face.
I've been reading a bit of Buddhist literature, all about "Right Speech," (also called speaking skillfully). The two questions one is always supposed to ask before one opens one's mouth are, "Is what I'm about to say true?" and "Is what I'm about to say useful?"
I don't think the president could answer either one of those definitively in the affirmative when he said the Cambridge police "acted stupidly" by arresting Professor Gates. Read more on Everyday Ethics and let us know what you think!
The more I think about this, the more I think the problem isn't race, or that this guy was kind of a dick. What bothers me is the willing disregard of the law by the police.
Simply put, disorderly conduct is not "calling a cop a bad name." It's not "being loud and boisterous," and it's not "attracting a crowd." In Mass., there's a very particular definition of disorderly conduct -- it has to do with the potential for inciting violence and creating unrest in a public place. Given the First Amendment, speech -- particularly political speech -- must be pretty likely to cause violence in order to meet the definition.
This was one old man with a cane standing on his front porch railing against the police. No one was going to riot. He was upset, but he wasn't going to take up arms with his neighbors and storm the capitol building. No one was building barricades in the streets of Cambridge. For better or worse, standing on your front porch and ranting at the police about racial injustice is political speech -- even if you're crass about it. Whether he's making good use of the right or not, thousands of Americans have fought and died for the right to be able to tell your government -- or any agent of it -- exactly what you think. It may be rude, but not only is it not a crime, it's a fundamental right.
Any police officer worth his salt knows that the charge this man was arrested for wouldn't stick -- he was quite simply not breaking the law. So then why even arrest him? What possible reason could a police officer have for arresting a man he knows isn't breaking the law?
It seems like such a simple rule -- if you aren't breaking the law, you shouldn't be arrested. We should hold police to that very easy bare minimum -- their powers of arrest should be founded on at least some realistic, reasonable expectation that there's at least some actual possibility of conviction. Otherwise, we give them the power to arrest a man just because they don't like what he said.