The Arrest of Henry Louis Gates, Jr. (Emily Bazelon & Farai Chideya)

[cragger]

Doc,

Yep, your last couple posts are, should I say. "on the money"?

Bob Wright once said that he lauded the quality of the comments on this board to potential contributors and investors. Do you suppose he still does that?

[graz]

God (Templeton) is providing nicely thanks.
Double down on the moneydoc.

[AemJeff]

Originally Posted by cousincozen

"We are waiting for the next shoe to drop."

Maybe during the next press conference someone will elicit Obama's opinion on the attack on the white family in Ohio. His potential thoughts on the matter are fraught with possibilities.

My mind is fraught with wonder about the relevance.

[AemJeff]

Originally Posted by bjkeefe

...

What it looks like to others is that your uncertainty is getting the better of you, that you're becoming more strident with every post you can't stop yourself from adding, that you're increasingly uneasy that people are reading your self-contradictory nonsense and laughing, and that you're hoping to quell this by spewing a non-stop stream of self-congratulations.

True 'dat.

[AemJeff]

Originally Posted by badhatharry

AemJeff says:

"You give all your credence to the authority's account, distorting the exigencies in your account in their favor".

No one ever tells the whole truth. That would be impossible. Every account of every action is biased. Not only that, even a video of the incident would evince a myriad of reactions and judgements.

....and if Bill Cosby is distressed that the president commented on this incident, I agree with him.

But that's not a contradiction of what I've said. A police report should not be taken as gospel. Nor should the account of somebody like Gates.

Regarding Obama, I don't know what to add to what I've already said.

Originally Posted by AemJeff

True 'dat.

Pat, pat, pat.

Safety in numbers I guess. But oooo I feel the scorn....only tempered of course by the truth. In any case kids, keep it up as I actually find a bit of extra joy every time one of you chimes in to help your failing brethren.

Peace and Love

[DoctorMoney]

Originally Posted by JonIrenicus

Sounds more like you just have some blanket hatred for authority figures. I have been pulled over a couple of times and was fine with it, but then, I am not a paranoid hater of police officers.

Is there any more of an empty 21st century notion than the idea that people who dislike your behavior are 'haters'?

I mean, that's what this comes down to. Jon, you're like a rapper at this point -- not arguing with the substance of the charge but insisting that people who disagree are doing so out of bias. To keep cops down.

How insane is that? Do you really think that's the case here?

[bjkeefe]

Originally Posted by Whatfur

Pat, pat, pat.

Safety in numbers I guess.

Pretty funny coming from someone who, if harkin had stopped short last night, would have had a broken nose.

[grits-n-gravy]

Originally Posted by DoctorMoney

I mean, that's what this comes down to. Jon, you're like a rapper at this point -- not arguing with the substance of the charge but insisting that people who disagree are doing so out of bias. To keep cops down.

How insane is that? Do you really think that's the case here?

Well, I think Jon's point is more complex. What he really believes is this whole misunderstanding was the result of a black man with a "chip on his shoulder". In other words, Gates is just another nigga out of control, viz. the "obligatory" reference to Chris Rock's tirade against dumb niggas.

[bjkeefe]

Ballsy:

Obama Defends Criticism of Cambridge Police in Arrest of Gates
ABC EXCLUSIVE: Obama Says 'Cooler Heads Should Have Prevailed'
By HUMA KHAN and MICHELE McPHEE
July 23, 2009

President Obama today stood by his comments that the Cambridge, Mass., police department acted "stupidly" in its arrest of Henry Louis Gates, telling ABC News that the Harvard University professor should not have been arrested.

"I have to say I am surprised by the controversy surrounding my statement, because I think it was a pretty straightforward commentary that you probably don't need to handcuff a guy, a middle-aged man who uses a cane, who's in his own home," Obama said.

In an exclusive interview with ABC's Terry Moran to air on "Nightline" tonight, Obama said it doesn't make sense to him that the situation escalated to the point that Gates was arrested.

"I think that I have extraordinary respect for the difficulties of the job that police officers do," the president told Moran. "And my suspicion is that words were exchanged between the police officer and Mr. Gates and that everybody should have just settled down and cooler heads should have prevailed. That's my suspicion."

The president said he understands the sergeant who arrested Gates is an "outstanding police officer." But he added that with all that's going on in the country with health care and the economy and the wars abroad, "it doesn't make sense to arrest a guy in his own home if he's not causing a serious disturbance."

Cambridge Police Department Commissioner Robert C. Haas said in a press conference late Thursday that his department was "deeply pained" by the president's comments yesterday.

"We take our professional pride very deeply. ... And when I talked to the officers... you could see they were really stunned," Haas told reporters, adding that they took "those comments to heart" and "were very much deflated."

Many links in the original post.

(h/t: Slansky, via Wonkabout)

[bjkeefe]

Originally Posted by cousincozen

"We are waiting for the next shoe to drop."

Maybe during the next press conference someone will elicit Obama's opinion on the attack on the white family in Ohio. His potential thoughts on the matter are fraught with possibilities.

Originally Posted by AemJeff

My mind is fraught with wonder about the relevance.

Add this to your list of ponderables: Why hasn't Obama yet condemned the Donner Party?

Could it be because the perps were all from Illinois ("Chicago politics")?

Or because he was HIMSELF BORN IN THE LAND OF THE CANNIBALS?

Wheels within wheels, man, I'm tellin' you.

[claymisher]

Originally Posted by bjkeefe

Ballsy:




Many links in the original post.

(h/t: Slansky, via Wonkabout)

Fuck yeah. The Republican Hissy Fit(TM) only works if we play along.

[claymisher]

Remember when conservatives were ranting about Ruby Ridge? Now they're defending arresting people for (allegedly) giving a cop a hard time in their own home. I wonder what the difference is?

[claymisher]

Originally Posted by claymisher

Fuck yeah. The Republican Hissy Fit(TM) only works if we play along.

Oh no, I was wrong. THIS is how you fuck with them ...

Obama makes surprise appearance at White House briefing to address Gates incident.

The President spoke with the arresting officer, Sgt. Crowley, this afternoon by phone and reiterated to him what Obama said yesterday: that from what he knows Crowley is an exemplary police officer.

Obama conceded that his comments at Wednesday night's press conference "ratcheted up" the situation.

The President also reiterated that he thinks both sides "overreacted." While he suggested that he regretted having "ratcheted up" the situation, Obama rejected the idea that he should not have commented on it because it was merely a local issue.

The President said that Crowley joked about whether Obama could get the press off his lawn.

(http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/arc...reaking_17.php)

... you kill 'em with kindness. Good lord is he good at this.

Originally Posted by bjkeefe

Pretty funny coming from someone who, if harkin had stopped short last night, would have had a broken nose.

OMG Perez... I make one post last night in mockery of the CONSTANT back patting you all do and you try to use it as an example. I guess you failed to understand the "/graz made me do it".

Thank you all for adding such hilarity to my life. Its like I have my own personal Keystone Kops falling all over eachother.

[Simon Willard]

Originally Posted by bjkeefe

ABC EXCLUSIVE: July 23, 2009
President Obama today stood by his comments that the Cambridge, Mass., police department acted "stupidly" in its arrest of Henry Louis Gates

NY Times:

Obama Says He Regrets His Language on Gates Arrest

[DoctorMoney]

I hope this triggers a debate about national standards and practices of police departments. Because I certainly don't want to see this individual officer crucified for his poor judgement -- that won't get us anywhere.

Originally Posted by claymisher

Remember when conservatives were ranting about Ruby Ridge? Now they're defending arresting people for (allegedly) giving a cop a hard time in their own home. I wonder what the difference is?

If you actually knew what transpired at Ruby Ridge you would know how ridiculous your comparison is. Actually, ridiculously ignorant of history. And it matters little as to whether you felt they were wronged or not.

[claymisher]

Originally Posted by DoctorMoney

I hope this triggers a debate about national standards and practices of police departments. Because I certainly don't want to see this individual officer crucified for his poor judgement -- that won't get us anywhere.

Yeah, everybody makes mistakes. It'd be better if this just got sorted out honestly than to have it turn into a giant adversarial thing.

Oh good!! At least he realized for once how stupid and wrong he was and did something about it. I commend him. Many here could learn from him.

Now if we can get him address his really big mistakes we would be getting somewhere.

[graz]

I agree with your hope, yet wonder what prevents us (the USA) from following through when the need arises, ie: race, sexism, drugs etc...
Any thoughts, anybody?

[bjkeefe]

Originally Posted by Simon Willard

NY Times:

I see the pernicious influence of Lyle has affected you, Simon!

;^)

Here is a link for those interested in reading more than just the headline.

I'd also observe that this article ought to give pause to those who howl about the supposed "liberal bias" of the NYT. Once you get past the lede, the majority of it is self-serving and unchallenged quotes from the cops.

[Added] And don't miss the link that clay offered, which includes video of the president, rather than just selected quotes offered by the Villagers.

[popcorn_karate]

whatfur,

I expect you'll just insult me, but i'll try anyway.

why not respond to the above with your perspective on ruby ridge and why its not an applicable comparison? it might actually start a discussion or even inform people that may not have as much information about the RR situation.

[ully_otto]

Two questions--just questions--for those siding with the initial actions of the Cambridge Police Department:

One: Putting aside the heat of the moment, does not the fact that the charges for disorderly conduct were subsequently dropped make for good evidence that the arrest itself was ultimately unwarranted?

Two: Can you recall two or more nationally reported cases in the past five years in which you would agree that a police officer unjustly targeted a Black man because he was Black? And if not, is it your assertion that excessive and unfair profiling against Black men among police officers is not a widespread problem in the United States?

[bjkeefe]

Originally Posted by Whatfur

OMG Perez... I make one post last night ...

Yet another easily disproved lie. (Until you start deleting your own posts again, I mean.)

Or is this "one" like you only sent me "one" threatening message last year?

Originally Posted by popcorn_karate

whatfur,

I expect you'll just insult me, but i'll try anyway.

why not respond to the above with your perspective on ruby ridge and why its not an applicable comparison? it might actually start a discussion or even inform people that may not have as much information about the RR situation.

Why would I insult you? Did you insult me? (recently) Well, I mean over and above the assumption that I would insult you.

The reason I did not respond is that the comparison is so ridiculous that I figured it was just bait and anyone can Google it and find 100s of stories that would verify the silliness of Clay's attempt at a conservative slam. Maybe in this same note to me you could have inquired with Clay if he had any specific RR comparison that he would like to share. If it was a general infringement of rights well...I already wrote that I wished that Officer Crowley would have not arrested Gates...but I also don't share Obama's backpedal that Crowley overreacted and just felt Gates pushed one too many buttons and deserved a couple hours in the pokey and thus don't even agree with a right infringement. Thus absolutely nothing I could compare.

[bjkeefe]

Originally Posted by bjkeefe

... The vote against the F-22 is a good sign. ...

And speaking of the F-22 ...

[TwinSwords]

Originally Posted by DoctorMoney

I hope this triggers a debate about national standards and practices of police departments. Because I certainly don't want to see this individual officer crucified for his poor judgement -- that won't get us anywhere.

Believe me, he won't be crucified. He's going to receive massive support from his fellow officers, the residents of his home town, the citizens of the state, and people from all over the nation. He's going to be given television and radio appearances for years into the future, go on the speaking circuit, and get a book deal. Being crucified about the last thing he has to worry about. This was the best thing that could've happened to Officer Crowley. He's going to get rich because of this.

Originally Posted by pampl

The law doesn't say that "badge number" has to be part of the request you idiot.

According to you it WAS, my puss-filled friend. Let me repeat:

1. Quoting pampl: He was breaking the law by refusing to show his badge or give his badge number.
2. Quoting Whatfur: Read the report, there was no refusal of either

My, my this is quite the little shell game you are playing. So I have once again PROVEN that you were obviously in error and instead of getting an apology from you, I am called an idiot and you re-invent your argument. Well, thats fine we can move on to the next shell and in the mean time I will apologize for you:

Fur,

As you can tell by what I say in your initial quote above; I am admitting that my previous quote listed in statement #1 was entirely without merit and further proves that either I did not read the law that I was using against you or I was misrepresenting the law. So let me admit, that I have been either negligent or fraudulent in my arguments against you and subsequently your statement in #2 WAS entirely true and I am deeply sorry for ever having doubted you. It will never happen again.

All my Love,

Pimple

Whew<wipes brow>, glad we got that out of the way. I am glad I didn't have to retort to pointing out the irony of your previous statements of:

Originally Posted by pampl

Normal humans have a sense of shame when they're caught being dishonest..

OR

Originally Posted by pampl

Nothing I could call you would make you look as bad as your own words

Now lets address your brand new argument, shall we? First, of course knowing once I called you on your negligence in reading the law I new you would be flying (your broom?) back to the article to see where you went wrong. Now I have to admit being surprised at how you lefties continue to double down, but I am learning. Here we go:

1. Pimple says: The cop was asked for his ID and he never gives it. That is a violation of the law.

Lets break this down:

a. "The cop was asked for his ID"

Yes we was.

b. "he never gives it."

Couple problems here pimple. First Officer Crowley had already identified himself verbally to Mr. Gates while assumedly displaying his name tag and/or badge as is the law. So one could just as obviously assume that legal identification had already occurred. Now of course I realize you are backpedaling to the other law concerning a printed identification card that YES should be exhibited upon "lawful request". Now, being honest, I don't know if Mr. Gate's was making a lawful request, but assuming he was; as already mentioned...the lack of specific mention of this id card from Officer Crowley's report cannot factually portend that its exhibition did not happen or would not have happened. So once again you are requiring me to blindly take an assumption of yours as fact. Unfortunately, with your track record so far, I cannot do that.

The picture I have already alluded to was that Mr. Gate's "demand" for id was merely a snotty retort for being asked for his identification. You have consistantly left out the line in the report that says that after Mr. Gates initially refused to provide his identification he then relented. So, why did he relent? Because his "demand" WAS just a snotty retort, or maybe because he now could see the name tag and badge or possibly Officer Crowley held up his ID card, or maybe somewhere in the recesses of Mr. Gate's scholarly mind he knew he was just being a dink and that this Officer was merely doing his job, or maybe they both were reaching for their identification and Mr. Gate's handed his over first...allowing Officer Crowley to assess that it indeed was his residence while also allowing Officer Crowley the ability to "prepare to leave" thus making this fourth type of identification unecessary. I guess we don't know for sure...and BOTH of us can ONLY ASSUME!!!

Originally Posted by pampl

Haha, Whatfur you mental midget...

Ahhh yes, projection. Is that another thing you have learned from Perez? In any case; I am not sure that is the image you want to portray here after you have been so intellectually, logically, and thoroughly chastened by that mental midget, Fur.

Peace and Love

[bjkeefe]

Originally Posted by bjkeefe

Again, it's not clear to me that what's happening on the fringe equals "what's happening in America."

Here's a supporting anecdote, coincidentally enough, from DougJ at Balloon Juice:

Admitting failure

You may recall that the NY-20 special election was disastrous for Republican: a well-known Republican candidate, Jim Tedisco, lost to a Democrat no one had ever heard of in a district with a large Republican registration advantage. The primary reason was Tedisco’s opposition to the stimulus bill, which was forced on Tedisco by Eric Cantor et al.

It looks like Republicans are trying something different in NY-23. They’re running the mother of all RINOs:

[...]

I take this as an admission that the “Back In the Saddle Again” hard-right all the time approach has been a disaster for Republicans.

Granted, this is New York, not, say, South Carolina. Still, upstate NY is quite conservative in a lot of ways, especially once you get out of the cities like Rochester and Buffalo.

Hilariously, as DougJ notes via update, Erick the RedFace is not at all happy: "What a Republican Suicide Looks Like."

[grits-n-gravy]

Originally Posted by grits-n-gravy

Well, I think Jon's point is more complex. What he really believes is this whole misunderstanding was the result of a black man with a "chip on his shoulder". In other words, Gates is just another nigga out of control, viz. the "obligatory" reference to Chris Rock's tirade against dumb niggas.

I agree 100%. Better to use this as a "teachable moment" with constructive policy results rather than a public crucifixion.

[JonIrenicus]

That was a sloppy response, this one was infinitely better.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pU79cqLkPG0


That should have been the first one.

[thouartgob]

Originally Posted by BornAgainDemocrat

Gates was not in his home. He was out front on the stoop shouting vituperously, at least according to the police report. There were a number of witnesses including neighbors and passers-by. As to what happened inside the house, only the police tape can show.

YWB (Yelling While Black) vituperously or not.

Yelling with both feet just inside the door = citizen exercising 1st amed. rights
Yelling with both feet just outside the door = CRIMINAL

Why are you talking about racial profiling when he wasn't racially profiled?

And yes black men, white men, brown men, yellow men, red men, purple men, and pink men get unjustly arrested all the time in the United States.

[thouartgob]

Originally Posted by CrowsMakeTools

Encounters with police always involve an asymmetry of power, and this asymmetry creates a potential for humiliation. Sgt Crowley uses his badge, Gates responds by using his professional position, his Harvard faculty badge.

Well Gates didn't have a real Harvard Badge and more importantly he didn't have a real Harvard GUN, but the cop does have a REAL GUN and his fellow officers assisted them with their own REAL GUNS ( as NEO would say "Guns Lots of Guns" ) so there is not REAL symmetry here.

We do ask a lot of our police officers and there are plenty of scary places where cops put their lives on the line to protect the innocent but Gates' house in Cambridge isn't one of those places.

[thouartgob]

Originally Posted by DenvilleSteve

arresting him accomplished the desired affect

Indeed. Whether Crowley was looking to stick it to a smaaaht ass prof. from Haaahvaad or looking to make some other point the answer is clear to anyone of those "chip-on-the-shoulder" types.

[thouartgob]

Originally Posted by Lyle

You could be arrested if you actually did this.

I would just say I saw a er.. shadow on the door that looked suspicious. I would not really suggest people make a point of say calling the cops on a white CEO of some largish company ( you know someone that cons want to identify with) and have the situation reversed but hey that would be a metric to work with if done to a statistically relevant amount.

[pampl]

Originally Posted by Whatfur

According to you it WAS, my puss-filled friend. Let me repeat:

1. Quoting pampl: He was breaking the law by refusing to show his badge or give his badge number.
2. Quoting Whatfur: Read the report, there was no refusal of either

My, my this is quite the little shell game you are playing.

You know, when you were outright lying it was much less pathetic. It was immoral, sure, but trying to play these sad word games is both immoral and pathetic. Your child-like attempts to create a false distinction between "identification" and "badge and badge number" can't fool anyone, not even yourself. If you want to convince anyone you're in the right you need a more adult and sophisticated defense, like claiming yesterday was opposite day and really what you meant was the opposite of what you wrote. Or that you can't respond just now because it's potty time.

So one could just as obviously assume that legal identification had already occurred.

One could especially assume this if they're fond of making things up and pretending they're true. Still no reason given for why anyone should believe a lie that you just invented to suit your position.

The rest of the post is just the same lies and contempt for the law from before. You seem to think that if you can just show the reader how spiteful and unprincipled you are they too would reject all norms of honesty and decency. I'm pretty sure that only works if your degeneration has won you material success you can flaunt, though, and it's not really possible to flaunt such wealth online.

Nobody sincerely believes that the police can detain whomever they want whenever they want, i.e., make unlawful arrests.

However, it is in insincere to argue the Gates' arrest was insincere on the part of the cops, or unlawful. Nothing about the arrest says it was unlawful, i.e., Mr. Crowley had the authority to arrest Prof. Gates.

No offense, but what worries me is the amount who don't understand what the law is what authority it gives to the police. Why impugn people doing they're job? Why impugn people for following the law?

[graz]

One more time. Read it more slowly if necessary.
It is an abuse of authority toadying suck-up Lyle.
Just because cops cover their ass within the confines of law... Doesn't make it right.
The point is only lost to you.

Read it and weep for your willingly lost liberty:
Know your rights and act accordingly.