Media Failure: Gates And Crowley Need To Personally Lead
Yesterday morning I posted (Henry Louis Gates’ Contempt Of Cop) on the legal implications of the Henry Louis Gates arrest thrust into the national consciousness by President Obama with his response to a question at Wednesday night’s prime time healthcare press conference. The discussion here was outstanding, however in the major media forums of print, and especially television news and talk programming, the situation has devolved and cleaved into the all too predictable he said/she said pitting of one side versus the other. Left versus right. White versus black. Conservative versus liberal. Law and order versus criminal. Yadda, yadda yadda.
In short, what passes for media and journalism in this country today has failed the public audience it is supposed to serve. Again. A disappointing, but certainly not shocking result.
None of us, and none of the chattering media, were there at the Crowley-Gates scene, but we never really are for these moments in life and history; we still learn and live vicariously through them. By no means was Gates’ conduct exemplary in the encounter, it simply was not. As far as the encounter itself, he was every bit as responsible for the escalation, and quite arguably more so, as the officer, James Crowley. By the same token, Crowley is the trained professional, who teaches other officers how to handle and diffuse situations exactly like this one, and he did not acquit himself well at all either. But that is as to the facts and interpersonal dynamics; from a legal standpoint, Gates’ conduct was clearly and unquestionably completely legal. Irrespective of his conduct, Gates’ arrest was patently false and illegal; you would think some of the media’s vaunted "experts" might could point that out.
The Crowley-Gates incident, however, provides a great teaching moment from both points of view, because each side made their point with classically poor conduct; we can all learn much from both. It is a perfect, and for once not tragic, vignette from which to discuss lingering and important issues of race in America. We owe both sides of the incident, Mr. Gates and Mr. Crowley, as well as the President and ourselves, the duty to take advantage of the moment and raise the discourse.
The media, and the citizens it serves, need to stop debating the legality of the arrest, because there really is no valid legal dispute there. The arrest itself was illegal. The national conversation should accept that, leave it behind, and move to the ground of what happened in the interpersonal dynamics of the two protagonists, what it meant to each other and what it means to our national collective. The dynamic occurring between Crowley and Gates takes place every second of every day between whites and blacks as well as police and citizens of all colors. Let the focus be on defusing the tension in every one of those encounters in the future through the lessons learned here.
It is time for Henry Louis Gates and Sergeant James Crowley, and the media that will cover them and feed their causes, to quit the personal posturing, step into each other’s shoes and lead us to a better place. Their respective backgrounds should make them two of the most perfectly suited individuals possible for the task. If Henry Louis Gates and James Crowley are each the men they claim to be, they will start the process together and force the recalcitrant media and public to follow. Are they such men, or just the petty posturers they have each been to date?
Compare the media response to Mike Nifong and the Duke lacrosse case with the media response to Crowley (and his police union buddies) in this case.
Yes bmaz, and thank you. It would be really nice if they could take deep breaths, step back, sit down together, talk it over and move forward. Like adults. What a teachable moment if they could find it in themselves to do so.
Both, however, will have to accept some responsibility for their states of mind at that time and subsequent actions. And that’s really hard to do. But that’s what leaders do.
I saw a very level headed discussion early this a.m. on msnbc, with Dylan somebodyorother (the host), Eliot Spitzer, and a clip of Bill Cosby saying just what you say here. It was a good piece and didn’t pick sides. If I find a clip I’ll post it.
Yes I would like it if they emphasized that Mr. Gates did nothing wrong. As I told my co-worker yelling and being an ass is not yet against the law. I think this is a good opportunity to talk about the erosion of our civil rights and the creep of the police state as well. My co-worker just assumed that Mr. Gates broke the law. She assumed that him being loud and mean to the cop was illegal.
Yes his being outraged probably escalated the situation, but this is a perfect opportunity to not just confront race and racial profiling but also our ever expanding police state. We need to guard what civil rights we have left and make sure that citizens know what their rights are.
The Ron Paul supporter at the airport I think is another example of this. I listened to the tape and basically the cops felt like they could mess with him because they thought he didn’t know his rights. They threatened him by saying they were taking him to the DEA. I mean seriously his offence was that he had cash on him. He was going about his business and work and he was harassed by cops for having cash.
Every person should know their rights.
The oppressive inference wildly presuming guilt in many exchanges with police and citizens strikes me as being the problem: every question becomes interference, every flinch resistance, every stop an opportunity to check for identity, ownership and insurance. And I have hesitated with this hyperbole but I think it nevertheless makes a point about the psychological defense that a presumption of guilt gives the police.
And appellate jurisprudence in my state is interesting in this regard. Appellate courts seem to bend over backwards to find constitutional guarantees and affirm their existence but rarely find police work to have exceeded constitutional limits. In the cultural conflict between power and reason especially in our age of media and urban “gang” behavior rationalization and extremism continue to gain ascendancy. And for me it is easy to be idealistic in looking at this problem. Bmaz is right, this is a matter of community and of otherwise alienated elements getting to know and understand one another better and the time for demonstrations of leadership in this regard is now.
This is a very salient point. Cops act with impunity because they perceive themselves as being the law, and those who they encounter having violated some law.
If the law being broken is not apparent, they can arrest for resisting arrest, being a public nuisance or a host of other non criminal reasons. Cops call the shots. Do not engage, raise your voice, assert your rights, ask questions.. just shut up and hope the cop is not an SOB and has a prejudice about something about you.
Cops are know to beat (blacks) in NYC and then report that they has to because the person was resisting being arrested. Videos taken are now proving these claims to be false. Hopefully these cameras will have a positive effect and lessen the out of control behavior of out of control cops.
I was in court fighting a ticket (I won) and I was told several times not to put my hands in my pockets. This of course after have passed through security including being padded and emptying all my pockets. Is putting your hands in your pockets a threat in a court room? Or is this just a stupid “rule”? It made me feel like an errant child at 62. hahahaha.
In the Army they got all pissy if they saw you playing “pocket pool”
Exactly correct.
Once Gates proved he was the owner of the house, the officer should’ve moon walked out the door regardless of what Gates was saying.
A police officer is trained to diffuse such situations, not resort to an arrest just because someone is mean mouthing him.
There was no ‘danger’ to the community at that point, what was the need for the arrest in the first place?
Is civil discourse compulsory? No, but it has its place.
Teh media is the villain here stoking the fires on both sides. You think they’ll let this cash cow die ? No way.
Might not be such a bad thing, to air out all the dirty linen.
Changing the subject (meaning the lead story in the media) is the result of a tactic.
Every time a major “event” occurs resulting in a dramatic shift in the news cycle and diminished coverage of the prior lead story, the question must be asked, “cui bono?’
While often these changes occur via random acts, this one smells of strategy and planning…like so many false terror threats – timed perfectly to “bury the lead.” Who plans them? Who orders them? Are these not by definition, domestic propaganda operations? Is that not illegal?
Who wanted to change the subject away from the health care debate and the influence purchased by the health care lobby? How badly? How much does this industry spend on paid advertising to finance the “news” operations of the mainstream media?
“A government of the Oligarchs, by the Oligarchs and for the Oligarchs.”
Right Warren?
Good to see you back. Your period absence from the threads is noticed.
bmaz, you keep saying that Gates’ actions were legal, and Crowley’s actions were illegal (and I agree); but in this post you seem to suggest that they have an equal responsibility to walk back their behavior, come down off their high horse, and take the high ground?
This strikes me as reinforcing/perpetuating the notion that citizens owe deference to authority above and beyond what the law requires, and that authority’s only obligation is the letter of the law (and, of course, Crowley failed even that limited duty).
I’m with Ben Franklin on choosing liberty over security.
Deep thoughts from Sgt. Crowley: “Gee I guess I’m not a racist because I gave mouth to mouth to a dying Reggie Lewis.”
Dude, get over yourself. You did your job in 1993 trying to save Lewis’ life. Pat yourself on the back. But trying to say you aren’t racist by using Lewis as an example is just a less sophisticated version of “some of my best friends are black…”
BTW, yesterday’s Boston Herald (former Murdoch fishwrapper) quoted an expert on police procedure that said cops are not taught to trick people into coming outside in order to cite them with disturbing the peace.
Yr BTW. So, it’s not learned behavior. Must be innate, then.
Both Gregory Bateson and and Murray Gell-Mann recognize deceit as a strategy in the animal kingdom. And this is intended as no slight to police officers. After all the evolutionary trend points to the fact that we all may be homo sapiens sapiensis.
You betcha! Runs rampant amongst politicians, too.
Fixed that for ya.
Bad facts make bad law. Bad conduct makes bad facts. Good Constitutions make good people. Bmaz is right as usual, and this is a great moment for teaching about good cop, bad cop, good guy, bad guy, and what is legally due to guy. I also agree with Obama, “they acted stupidly”. Luring someone out of his house to then charge him with disturbing the peace (disorderly conduct) makes a mockery of the law. It is like throwing down a gun on the ground and arresting him for brandishing it. Stoopid.
i suppose you are right, bmaz.
but i am not in a forgiving mood.
furthermore, i am not at all convinced that walking in each other’s shoes will do as much good as reviewing what it was that the two antagonists did and how one of them, the cop, was unambiguously able to use the power of his office to deprive of liberty and humiliate a citizen who angrily disagreed with him.
probably 99% of the people who have commented on this incident have said, or thought, that american blacks face this kind of rudeness and abuse of power repeatedly in their lives (i consider that an incontrovertible fact, not a personal opinion).
i wonder though if the greater issue here is not “our national black/white dialog”, but the issue of police abuse of the powers entrusted to them, of which routine police mistreatment of black citizens is a very important subset.
this kind of abuse happens though out this nation and i think it needs public light shone on it. this is a perfect case to do so.
furthermore, i suspect that this misconduct has escalated substantially following the 9/11/2001 attack in new york.
blacks certainly,
but also
muslims in american
hispanics in america
airline passengers in security lines in america.
it’s high time that our police were again held to very strict standards regarding their use of the powers society grants them.
I copied and put this back up again because orionATL is spot on here. The conversation should and must be broader, and the bit about the projection of police powers is especially true. My point is there are precious few points of entry to these necessary conversations that have a national scope, but do not possess a truly tragic aspect such as a death, beating or other impossible to digest act involved. This one has presented itself on the national stage absent that kind of distractive and disqualifying pain. It presents an avenue into black/white, police/citizen, state/person. It is a rare and compellingly useful vehicle, and it should be taken advantage of. The protagonists should get off their high horses and help us all do that.
So far I’ve seen this rather small news item to be a distraction from more urgent stuff, like the subject of that news conference, health care.
The racial bit is a factor yes, but police arrogance is the bigger issue. While our big 21st century terror boogieman (premeditated and forced) has boosted this arrogance, it has always been there. I personally had a couple of experiences up close with the Boston police (not Cambridge but maybe they are the same?) in the 60s wherein they were not only arrogant but incompetent too. This assessment was confirmed by other incidents in other jurisdictions. Pre-Miranda this was, but that seems to make little difference.
The point is, as long as the enforcers see the people as the enemy, this conflict won’t change. I think part of it is that the cops try to justify their own paycheck – you know, do police work whether it is necessary or not.
Which is exactly why the GOP/Media Complex wants to push it.
Yep, if I hear “librul media” again I think I’m gonna scream. They own and control the entire friggin media, and run it just like puppets.
I’m amazed at how much control they do have over the media. And even more amazed, and saddened, by how many people (Americans) somehow agree that we are supposed to be almost like “slaves” in the presence of police. I think we get the police (and media) we deserve.
LOL, back in my day we used to take to the streets over almost anything, sometimes protesting protests. Today, we can’t be bothered to rise up over illegal wars, torture, lack of health care, police brutality, or the entire trashing of the Constitution. Yep, we get what we deserve.
I’ve been in the streets since late 2002 protesting against Shrub’s wars but the apathy of the citizens of my locality is stunning.
O/T. Chip Pickering’s explcit affair diaries (listing time, places, people who counseled him, etc) have the GOP worried. Possibly worried there may be some revealing C Street content in there.
Scott Horton says, though, Chip Pickering has the Mississippi system wired and court is entirely deferential to him. Diaries may never see the light of day.
On an earlier thread, it was noted that MS Judge Oliver Diaz had been retained to represent Mrs. Pickering. Diaz suffered at the hands of the Bush justice system. Her choice of counsel may be revealing.
I want to see the pictures!
Does Sharlett’s book say anything about keeping a diary as part of the spiritual journey that is C Street?
There are other Members of Congress (former Senator Bob Graham, for example) who are known to keep diaries. Members can feel secure in this practice because their Congressional records are not FOIA-able. [Not implying that Graham is a member of The Family, just evidence that Congressmen feel okay to keep diaries, unlike Presidents].
But I’m really wondering about the C Streeters. John Ensign’s (FedEx’ed) letter to Cyndi read like a 14 year old girl’s diary. So are there other confessional documents we should be asking about? Ensign? Sanford?
I’ll pass on the pictures, though.
Crowley’s not going to lead — he’s letting himself be used by the right-wing noise machine and is already hammering Obama for an apology. Obama’s response:
And yes, the media is totally on Crowley’s side over this, because it gives them another reason to bash Obama. Kiss kiss kiss!
And cops all over are standing behind him in solidarity. I warned yesterday about the strength of the Blue Line; here it comes.
About the one good thing is that they’re doing their hissy kabuki on a Friday. It’s going to lose at least a little momentum over the weekend, even with the active aid of the GOP/Media Complex.
And now replacing Joe the Plumber, we now have Crowley the Cop.
Ugh, here we go at warp speed in the wrong direction. From ABC News:
The police got the angry man to come outside his house so they could arrest him for causing a public disturbance.
Quite clearly, they have pulled this trick before, some lawyer told them how they could manufacture a scenario to allow them to arrest somebody.
It’s what I call Police Entitlement Syndrome — Gates yelled at them, so they thought they were entitled to arrest him and they used what are apparently standard tactics to do it.
So in that sense, I guess you could say the policeman wasn’t racist, he was just normally abusive.
I still think the burden is on Crowley (and his fellow officers who were on the scene), who wrongly (even if legal) invaded a man’s house and forced him into a confrontation that led to his being forcibly taken away from his home.
That said, has anyone questioned why one of Gates’ neighbors couldn’t recognize him and called the police about a break-in? Gates sounds like he’d be recognizable, with the cane and the limp. And how many other black families live on that block? On top of everything else, this is Cambridge and not some crime-ridden low income area.
I don’t know the exact address of Gates’ house, but I know the street. The neighborhood has a lot of really nice houses, and also a lot of multi-family and apartment buildings that house a lot of student renters. Obviously there’s a lot of turnover in that.
If they are so sure of the justifyablity of their actions why don’t they refile their charges and see how far it goes in court.
Exactly!
The deference to overbearing policing is not confined to the USA as anyone who followed the case in the UK of Jean Charles Menezes, the harmless Brazilian electrician who got shot by the police essentially because a cop thought “brown = Muslim = terrorist”. The officer directly in charge of that debacle got promoted to one of the most senior jobs in the police in London and no one seemd to find it odd.
Oops! In my post the word “knows” should follow “anyone”. Preview be my friend.
Let me comment on the allegation that Crowley has taught a course on race relations to other cops. Years ago in a little town just north of Bryan, TX, a cop arrested a black who was a local political leader in the fight against a particular town attempt to do something that would have detrimental effects on blacks. The cop claimed that the guy was driving drunk, but a blood test showed 0.00 alcohol level in his blood. The defense on the part of the constabulary was the same as in the Gates case, that the cop had taught classes to people convicted of DWI. If anything, this “defense” brings into question the value of those classes.
The photos that I have seen show nearly a dozen police there. Who was escalating the situation?
Thanks. Gates and Crowley should share a shot and a beer or exchange mementos. Courts of law are too blunt an instrument to settle these sorts of disputes; newspaper headlines and Shout Media are worse. They owe it to their neighbors and community and to themselves.
Might be too late for that. It’s likely that money is already being funneled in Crowley’s direction to make him the new righty whitey poster-boy.
BMAZ, is as usual, correct relative to this incident being a “teaching moment”.
However, as a Chicano here in Metropolitan Phoenix, Arizona, our infamous and crazy Sheriff of the Pink Skivvies, implemented his 10th or 11th version of a “Crime Suppression Sweep”. And what makes this different?
Yesterday was the last “official” day for the Police Chief of Mesa, Arizona, a suburb of Phoenix. So, the Sheriff moved into Mesa, and done so on purpose in order to send a message to his white supremicist buds. By way of back ground, the Chief in Mesa, is a California Chicano, has a J.D in Law, and moved up the ranks in the Los Angeles Police Department until he retired as an Assistant Chief. Moreover, on Monday of next week, he starts his new job as the Chief of Police in San Francisco. Gascon–the Chief, professionalized the police department at least three-fold, and San Francisco, has gained enormously. And despite all th political hassles between the Chief and the Sheriff, the Sheriff demonstrated a lack of any class for ‘invading’ Mesa again with another round of a ‘crime suppression sweep.
The point of this post, is that if you have the ‘authority’ and the ‘expertise’ to make a person’s life miserable, the authority figure can do so easily, regardless of the impact of the law. And in this instance, the Sheriff has been sued numerous times for ‘racial profiling’ and these legal cases are slowly moving through the legal system, and at a tremendous cost to the taxpayers since the Sheriff will lose most of these cases. And yet, the level of Trust among the Spanish-speaking here in the Valley of the Sun, for the law enforcement function, has pretty much vanished.
And the Democratic Party affiliated Sheriff of Pima County (Tucson, Arizona) is still attempting to send in his deputies into the primary schools in search of the Undocument Immigrant parents of these school kids. Thus, Chicanos, and Democrats at that, have now taken to ’satirizing’ the Pima County Sheriff for “wanting to inspect the broken bicycle reflectors” of these innocent victims for the adults’ political shenanigans.
And said sadly on my part, this overall political behavior is only going to get worse, or until someone has to be buried with “full military honors” and when this happens, an Inland Katrina shit-storm will ensue since the military vets are considered the ‘glue and the moral ‘guide’ for good citizenship.
Jaango
Go BMAZ, good post
When I heard Obama say the word ”stupidly,” I knew all this would come to pass.
The media hates to do policy. This gave them something else to do.
The Right hates Obama and this was the stick they have been looking for.
What a damn tragedy.
One good thing: Mika Brezinski just got her butt handed to her on Morning Joe when she tried using it as a club against Obama.
I saw it and enjoyed it. Yet, this whole episode is still a political disaster. The very last thing Obama needed at this point in the health care fight, was this.
Lynn Sweet, the reporter who stupidly changed the subject of the presser to talk about the Gates arrest, is the real problem here.
I groaned audibly when I heard the stupid question. The most important social program in my lifetime, and Lynn Sweet asks Obama about Gates?!? There is an important place for the discussion of this arrest, but not during a presser on something as important as national healthcare. Lynn Sweet is the problem here.
Gates had every right to be angry. I certainly would have been. If he had refused to show ID, the officer might have had cause but he did show ID with his address on it. How much more did the officer need? Crowley stepped into the house which he never should have done and then tricked Gates onto the porch. This is not okay in the America we would choose to have. How did Gates overreact when he got angry – he had good reason and it’s not a crime to ask for a name and badge number or even to verbally answer angrily. The officer was wrong – period.
Thanks bmaz. IMHO a central point is that Crowley’s refusal to apologize for the illegal arrest puts every police officer in America at greater risk.
I’m also anxious to hear the NRA’s
dissemblingresponse. We just had to sit through confirmation hearings in which Senator Tom Coburn (Wingnut-OK) asked the wise Latina all about awhiteman and woman’s right toshoot from the rooftop with a high-powered rifledefend their home.What we don’t need in these times of trouble, attempted reform and wrenching economic change are community leaders exacerbating tensions.
I can easily understand why Prof. Gates reacted as he did: jet lag, exhaustion, memories of decades of discrimination, irritation at being so directly challenged in his own home by someone employed to protect him and his neighbors. Sgt. Crowley, too, has his passions and prejudices, his fears of the next minor disturbance turning into a major one, perhaps the usual resentments between town and gown that Cambridge exemplifies.
The way this has become a national circus makes it much harder for them to come to terms with their respective overreactions. I hope they do. And shame on the national media – were it capable of having any – for not saying the same thing. They act like little children, or, which is worse, US Senators.
Great Post, bmaz.
My Self-Referencing Media Moment of the morning.
Mika Brzezenski cooing about how “this has become a major controversy”.
(while holding up a newspaper with a similar headline)
That’s why I’m glad she got smacked down by the guests on her show.
Along with the ranting Sean….heard him a bit yesteday. Another Jeremiah Wright non-stopper and glee.
Ever since Commonwealth v. Alegata, 353 Mass 287 (1967), and Commonwealth v. Feigenbaum, 404 Mass. 471 (1988), and particularly Commonwealth v. A Juvenile, 368 Mass 580 (1975), mere words, no matter how offensive or loud cannot be the basis for a conviction of “disorderly conduct.” Sgt. Crowley needs a refresher in the law: he was wrong. Which is why the charges were dismissed pronto.
Thank you.
By asking a stupid (and irrelevant) question at the healthcare presser, our media has basically said that the tittillating details of a racial incident is more urgent to discuss than reforming our system of healthcare. People are dying and going bankrupt because of our system, and the media wants to talk about this more?!
FWIW, I think using terms such as white and black plays right into Crowley’s handlers hands. I don’t have a great alternative, but I think the reality is that a majority of Americans unconsciously put a great deal of weight in the a-historical concept of “ethnic purity.” Personal ads routinely elevate ethnicity to the level of marital status and gender.
I grew up hearing stories about how upset/scandalized/she-let-the-family- down my Roman Catholic German grandparents were that their eldest daughter had married a Roman Catholic “shanty Irishman.” They were stunned that she did not marry a 100% German.
Gates isn’t “black,” and Crowley isn’t “white.” What’s primarily relevant in the U.S. is that photos of Crowley reveal that he is 100% European American. His ethnic features, skin color, lips, nose, HAIR, all confirm that he has no recent ancestors who were not 100% European. That’s the real grand canyon imho. Throughout U.S. history, there’s been enormous pressure for American who were 100% European American to not dilute that ancestry with someone who was not 100% European American.
I would invite Gate’s handlers to consider that they may have more “reach,” by emphasizing Gates’ age and need for a cane. They don’t have to mention ethnicity, because the photos of Gates and Crowley have already told that story.
This was an illegal arrest and no discourse is possible until that is found to be a fact.
I am white, grew up in the projects of Boston and the Police daily picked on teenagers in our project. Going so far as to run their motorcycles up on the side walks to get us off our play areas where we hung out. We got real good at going over fences to get away. You didn’t want to get caught by them because more than one or two were then driven down to the train yards where they were beaten bloody. Not enough to put you in the hospital but… So this whole profiling has and always will be part of the make up of cops. They are trained to not do it but we all know they do it. It is their way of exercising their power over you and your friends. No matter your color, it is really based on their thought that you are really nothing but vermin to them.
Just my experiences as a kid in Southie, but I see it continuing today with this generation. And boy do Cops stick together, they will always back each other up. So it becomes your word against several cops and You know the judge will listen to!
Baby Dick saying Pres. Obama “has a right to be President” was some sort of keywords to the haters. She avoided “is a citizen” and “was born in the US.” There is a law about children born outside the US – something about military families. I think the wacko haters are pretending to accept that law and some how flaunt the idea that Pres. Obama falls under its dictates, as opposed to saying “he was born in the US.” And I think they think they can have that law changed once they do their little revolution tea-thingy.
She and others are fueling a flame for political gain. And people could easily get hurt or worse, if they haven’t already.
Thanks, Phoenix Woman!
I didn’t get to see the smack-down.
Had to get to work.
And guess what? The GOP’s attempts to hog the news cycle with this have just been shot down by Henry Waxman:
remember, we still haven’t resolved (from a few weeks ago) the North County San Diego police raid, involving pepper spray, half a dozen squad cars and an assault helicopter, on a Democratic campaign fundraiser for congressional candidate Francine Busby – an event almost exclusively attended by a bunch of wealthy 60 year old white people. The raid (which resulted in two arrests, no warrant, and sheriffs simply walking into a private home, manhandling people and seizing them) was in response to an alleged noise complaint, but the homeowner is gay.. so the real crime appears to have been people suspected of the crime of being at home while liberal and gay. Bad things are happening in America.
It’s also a function of corporate hiring policies going nationwide and becoming adopted in the public sector. Five years is considered deeply experienced; anyone with ten becomes a candidate for a RIF. There are fewer and fewer men and women with real experience to train and supervise new hires, including those who carry a gun for a living, and who know how to manage situations rather than escalate them.
Just as companies have few people who’ve managed through good times and bad, who have hired people as enthusiastically as let them go, so too, city and county gubmints are facing the consequences of adopting corporate hiring practices. Bad things, indeed, are happening.
The Teaching Moment: Henry Louis Gates Jr.
I’m glad you’re back at this, bmaz. I agree with all of the points, but I’ve been looking at it from a different perspective since yesterday afternoon, when I heard guys talking about it as a police issue on sports talk, of all places. I haven’t read through yesterday’s comments, so my point below might have been made elsewhere.
We’ve heard about Gates thinking this might be a teaching moment, showing how black people can be treated by the police, and he remarked yesterday that the only “post-racial” black home is Pennsylvania Ave., or something like that.
But it seems to me that the real teaching moment here is about the man himself, Henry Louis Gates Jr., who he is, what he has accomplished, and what his accomplishments mean in an America that is evolving daily with Obama as president. I just don’t think enough people know enough about him, and this is an opportunity to highlight an extraordinary citizen and scholar. The conversation is being reduced to “black professor” and “distinguised Harvard professor,” but that doesn’t really cover who Gates is.
Unless I’m wrong, Gates is a national treasure. He’s pretty much “the guy” in African-American Studies, Literature, and History. Others can tell me more: a good post and thread would be what we know about Gates, general and specific impressions. There are all sorts of giants who came before him, and all sorts of important contemporaries, but Gates was something of the right man in the right place. Again, I’m no expert, but my sense is that when I graduated from Berkeley in ‘80, roughly the same generation as Obama, African American Studies was still just getting started, and the work of Gates and his key colleagues was still gathering steam.
Until a year ago or less, my impression of Gates was very non-specific: yeah, he’s that Harvard guy, big time scholar. I was already beginning a modest mid-life 2nd run through African-American Lit, reading some James Baldwin, Douglass, and DuBois. After the election I read James Weldon Johnson, and started to get my bearings. Gates was everywhere, a guiding presence, and the progress of the field since the death of King is astonishing. We English Major types know our Norton Anthologies all too well, and the Gates-Nellie Mackay NAofAfrican-American Lit, published in 1994 I think, is an incredible book, 2800 pages that were barely imaginable 15 or 20 years before. When you look around at random editions of African-American Lit, virtually all of them were published in the 90s or more recently. This rise is a major change in our sense of American History and Literature. And Gates is the godfather.
I don’t want to yammer on, but I wracked my brain trying to find a comparable figure or intellectual, and how the response might differ with him not being recognized and acknowledged in his own home. Bob Woodward in DC isn’t so bad: what would happen if he was arrested in his own house? You can see him being belligerent: “I’m Bob Woodward! This is my house!” For the sports guys, I wanted to say that Gates has the revered seniority of Jack Nicklaus, is still competing like Tom Watson, and he had the revolutionary influence and dominance of Tiger Woods in his day. But there really isn’t anybody I can think of, no professor or intellectual, who has had a comparable post-war effect, especially now that we live in Obama’s America.
So perhaps the opportunity is here to change the conversation slightly by studying and discussing Gates himself, his status, role, and impact, and what he means in a larger sense. Maybe I’m wrong, and he’s not all that. But my guess is that when Obama said the word “stupidly,” he might have meant that it’s regrettable that a person as important in his own life and rise as Gates, someone he’s probably honored to have as a friend, isn’t better known or recognizable enough that he wouldn’t be arrested in his own home.
You are absolutely right, imho, about Henry Louis Gates. I’ve been following his work for many years, since reading his memoir about growin up in small-town W. Va. He has gained some visibility through his PBS specials on African-American history, including travel through some of the African places from which most slaves in the U.S. originated, and his DNA project, tracing family history from the starting point of DNA plus family lore.
In which, ironically, he was astounded to learn his own DNA showed a majority of European, not African ancestry.
He has rediscovered and published originial documents, such as “A Bondswoman’s Narrative,” and as you say, is everywhere in documenting African-American history.
which is why my blood boiled reading comments (not here) that claimed “accusing folks of racism” is the “basis of his career,” His career is about revealing and understanding.
That this should happen to him is beyond appalling. I’m trying to think of a white equivalent – maybe Shelby Foote? – with somewhat similar visibility and gravitas (also from PBS).
Not to sound biased or anything, but I doubt that PBS is Sgt. Crowley’s favoritte channel.
Shelby Foote is a decent stab, but he doesn’t really come close I don’t think. My impression is that he was a really solid Civil War scholar and strong writer who achieved some public notoriety through the Ken Burns documentary, but he didn’t guide and partially “create” an entire, important field of study, and one that is especially important to the current president. Woodward at least broke Watergate, certainly historic enough, and he has continued as a public figure, writing books and interviewing presidents, access to Bush, etc. It’s a tough task. Kissinger and Macnamara might qualify, as I believe they had strong intellectual credentials before joining government–and what would the reaction be like if Henry Kissinger was arrested in his own home?
No, you’re right, it was just a stab. ; )
No, I think you make an excellent point. It is a moment to learn about the man, his message and work and that all fits in with the discussion that ought to develop out of this situation. Instead we have Gates screaming nothing but the racism angle (and there is at least some factor of that present, how much still to be determined, but it is a factor) and the cop and police associations crying foul from the opposite end of the spectrum. Gates is talking about suing (he has a clear case for false arrest; less clear whether he really has one on racism) and now the cop talking about suing for defamation (that is going nowhere) and the police associations carping at Obama. It is all so predictable.
I agree, but talking about Gates isn’t really up to Gates. It’s up to us, and the rest of the media. It would be a little weird for him to be running around sayind “this is who I am!”
It would just be nice to see an NYT story going into some depth on Gates and his impact, along the lines of “what we should all know about HLGates Jr.” A magazine profile like the recent one of Valerie Jarrett would be nice too. It’ll probably happen over time, now that his name is out there, but it would be nice to get ahead of it.
The road tripper, ew, She Who Knows All who started out as the smartest kid in every lit class, would kill this of course, but she’s so busy trying to save the Constitution and the country that you hate to ask.
I am sorry Obama stepped into this. But, as it goes on, it supports something I have long argued. That is, that the primary reason we have such a piss poor social safety net, including the lack of universal health care, is racism.
Isn’t it? I admit my heart sank when I heard the question asked – crossed my fingers that the answer wouldn’t creat a firestorm– flinched a little at “acted stupidly” (though I so agreed), and hoped against hope that what’s happening wouldn’t happen.
Sigh.
You are right, bmaz (and brave to wade into this subject again today), these two could make a teaching moment – but I don’t think they will. Their egos are involved (contributing to the escalation, of course) and they are now being reinforced in their positions.
I do want to add that I am pleased to see so many comments pointing out the aspect of society becoming so accepting of this kind of police behavior. It’s a most unpleasant change, and this could be a turniing point, if only we (and our stupid media) could see it.
When I was in law school, it was a given that if questioned by police or stopped for traffic infractions we would exercise our rights to decline permission for a search, decline to answer questions that impugned our right to be where we were, etc.
These days, I, too, am extremely deferential if stopped by a traffic cop. Texas has actually passed a statute making it a crime to refuse to identify yourself if asked by a cop. It’s encroachment on rights we once took for granted, but people (white Anglos, anyway) don’t see it until they find themselves in some Kafkaesque situation. Thanks again for taking this issue on.
Sorry to be late for the party, but it’s morning here in Hawaii, and I haven’t even had my first cuppa coffee yet. However, I wanted to offer a slightly contrary view to bmaz here, although of course he is mostly right.
Since President Obama’s trip to Ghana, CNN has been offering a series of programs on racial themes, Black in America, which have been featured extensively by Anderson Cooper on 360, and by Soledad O’Brien.(http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2009/black.in.america/)[Link feature not working because my browser is hanging on ”Transferring data from action.firedoglake.com…] The conversation about race by Anderson Cooper and his guests has been a good bit better, ISTM, than the MSM norm.
Bob in HI
Bob I have seen parts of that Black In America presentation, and it was good. Of course other than that they are the same old same old, just like MSNBC and the networks. Even the print media seems to often be running one story from one angle and another story from the other exploiting the divide.
Funny that I began my ill fated conversation yesterday by wondering if Gates had pushed to be arrested in order to manufacture a “teachable” moment and had to be battered to realize that Gates should not have been arrested no matter what he said or how he said it. Tejanarusa, you were gone by the time I admitted, based on this fact, that my contention and subsequent arguments couldn’t be correct because the premise was wrong. While, in the “legal” world, this may be true I sure think that trying it in the real world would get you 1) busted for sure and 2) an ass whippin maybe. My bad.
I actually saw that, Raven. Very nice of you to say again.
I always enjoy your posts.
As bmaz said, that discussion was orders of magnitude better than what I’ve seen to teevee.
Hey Raven, how are you today? This may shock you but I think whether Gates purposely tried to get arrested as an opportunity to make a point is a very valid question. He is a smart and educated dude, and as a black man he “knows the drill” to not make waves with Johnny Law. I think there is a decent chance it was intentional. Still a bad arrest understand you, and all the more reason Crowley should have walked away, but a salient possibility.
Doin fine down here!
Crowley should have walked away, ok, I get that. The rest of the “he tricked him out on the porch” stuff I just don’t buy.
I am absolutely shocked that you and Raven would make this absurd, disgusting assumption. Listen to yourselves. Jeesus. Already I was going to comment on Bmaz’ weird criticism of Dr. Gates, apparently based entirely on Sgt. Crowley’s self-serving, racist caricature of Dr. Gates’ behavior. I read “responsibility for escalation,” “petty posturing.” And then I come to this Limbaugh-like suggestion that Gates planned to get arrested for the publicity. Racist much? The man is a world-renowned scholar. Crowley’s behavior was aggressive, intimidating, insulting, illegal, and unprofessional from the moment he stepped on the porch. Gates was ill, exhausted, frail, and even frightened. “All the hairs stood up on the back of my neck, and I realized that I was in danger,” he said of his response when Crowley appeared on his porch and demanded without explanation that he step outside. And yet you suspect Gates hoped to get arrested. Gates did nothing but stand up for his rights and our rights, despite being vastly the weaker and more vulnerable in the encounter. For that — and for the important discussion of just what those rights are — it seems a great many people don’t know — we should all be thankful.
I expect more from this blog.
I would also point out re the despicable “intended to get arrested for the publicity” theory that Gates did not speak out about the arrest until some five or six days later, and then only after it was reported in the Harvard Crimson and elsewhere.
Crikey, this is all a little harsh. In the first place, I did not say that he intentionally got arrested, I said it is a salient possibility. Quite frankly, even if he did, I do not have a problem with that; it is his right as a form of civil protest. Heck, I might even commend him. The motivation is somewhat irrelevant though because it is an illega arrest under pretty much any set of facts near as I can tell.
Secondly, your horse is a bit high here because you have no better idea what Gates’ motivation was, and what the real dynamics of the situation were, than me or anybody else here unless you were there at the scene and inside Gates’ house, which I seriously doubt. The purpose of the thread was to engender a discussion, that is what people are doing; not everybody has to agree with you or stifle their thoughts.
One of the things that is so interesting and revealing about this event is that it is a kind of Katrina moment, different but also similar to the OJ Simpson moment, in the sense that a great wave of public discussion and reaction washes over the country and people are revealed and divided for their racial biases and assumptions that they didn’t even know they had. That’s one of the things about racial bias – people often don’t even know they have it.
And as for Gates’ motivation, I am going to assume it was the same as that of any other conscientious, ethical person in the circumstances based on what Gates actually did. And that is that he cooperated with Crowley to – even beyond — the limits of his responsibility (he apparently did not object when Crowley illegally followed him into the house – he should have) and then stopped and protested when Crowley went beyond his authority, did not leave, and continued to treat him as a suspect even after Crowley had determined Gates’ right to be there. And frankly, if Gates chased Crowley out of the house shouting “yo mama,” I think that’s wonderful.
On topic but not related to the post above:
http://www.boston.com/news/loc…..ons_c.html
My first reaction is that calling for Pres Obama & Gov Patrick to apologize to the police is an unnecessary escalation of the stupid (yes, stupid) rhetoric.
Good overview of Gates and his accomplishment, winner of Hubbell Award, lifetime achievement in American Literature:
http://als-mla.org/HMGates.htm
I read this a couple of months ago, and it’s a big reason why I’m extra-conscious of his impact.
There won’t be any discussion until we can get it through people’s heads that, in fact, police don’t have the right to arrest you for mouthing off to them.
Since you are a law student why don’t you take your “fuck the police” rap and put it into practice and see where that gets you?
I know that. See the link I posted above, which includes the following:
Thanks
What do you expect? Health care in this country is in shambles, and all of the news outlets lea with one meaningless comment.
On top of that, half of the things these pundits are saying is nonsense.
Take for example this gem of an analogy.
http://progressnotcongress.org/?p=2275
& just to clarify on the link I posted above, I think there are two things wrong with Mr Killian’s statement. First, he misquotes Obama, who did not say the police were stupid but that the officer in question had acted stupidly. Anyone can act stupidly at any given time, regardless of the level of their intelligence. Second, the poorly worded bit about how all policemen are offended by the statements by Obama & Patrick (coincidentally two black men in positions of power) is surely an over-statement of things.
The Cambridge police should be using this episode to reflect on why things played out the way they did. Instead, they’re taking a belligerent “we didn’t do nothing wrong, no sirree” stance that is, on the face of it, absurd. (Remember that the charges against Prof Gates were quickly dropped.)
As much as I wish Obama hadn’t gotten involved in this — it’s a distraction from other vital things imo — he didn’t actually say anything inflammatory at all … unless you want it to be.
He did not, he said “The Cambridge Police acted stupidly”.
Final O/T.
Is it a coincedence that Mrs. Pickering has decided to “wind down” her Mississippi-based charity?
http://www.clarionledger.com/a…..ding-down-
Mrs. P’s HANDS charity received a $10k donation from Rick Santorum’s “Operation Good Neighbor Foundation” charity in 2004 or 5. Fellow C-Streeter Rick’s charity was roundly criticized for, among other things, not giving out much of its charitable funding.
The cops in my community have absolute total control .NO questions asked.
The chief is Ex-FBI and no bigger bully to be found.
I have had cops-notice I said plural- tell me point blank-we make our OWN rules at this police department. We don’t care WHAT the city ordinances say.
BTW, TRY finding a lawyer ,in this town,to sue their sorry asses!
And I know cops in Athens, GA who are hard working, sympathetic, intelligent people who put up with incredible amounts of horseshit from all kinds of people.
Good for you!
I have NO doubt that there cities with very decent public servants,i.e., cops,but this is not Athens,Georgia.
And in THIS case,the old saw that “Fish rots from the head” is tailor made.
INCLUDING and ESPECIALLY the Mayor who APPOINTED the fishy police chief!
TPM has breaking news that Obama hopes Gates incident will be a “teachable moment.” The WH read bmaz this morning.
Also breaking news (via the Boston Globe) that Obama spoke with Crowley.
I don’t think Prof Gates wanted to get arrested and use this as a reminder that we have racism still to deal with. The cops behavior seems more the fascist rather than the racist nature in the incident according to the reports I have read.
Why did they need all those police? They thought they had a break in in progress. But they learned they didn’t and he responding cop should have called his buds off and told them to go back to their patrols. He didn’t. He was faced with an angry citizen who was thought to be breaking into his own home and he failed to understand that this would disturb ANYONE in the same situation – black, white or yellow.
Prof Gates would be wrong to think the attitude was because he was black. He was “abused” because that’s how cops treat anyone they “investigate” and they don’t like to “back down” and show any vulnerability or humility. Perhaps Gates was tired on adrenalin and over reacting as we all might do if a cop came into our homes without a warrant and asked us to prove it was our home… he had entered with a key in the back door. Cops need to be able to asses the situation and back down when there is no threat as there obviously was none. But they see the world as a series of threats. A traffic stop presumes the person is a drug runner with a cache of weapons and not until they run a license check do they back away from that.
Forget the presumption of innocence.
Obama is going to turn this into a lesson for all and do some jujitsu on Crowley and the right.
From Salon:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/f…..index.html
An article that adds social class and academic elitism to the discussion. It’s an interesting read.
“By no means was Gates’ conduct exemplary in the encounter, it simply was not.”
In what way was it not? Is there an ettiquette book now for how to behave when subjected to pig harassment? Did Gates break the law? Yes? No? If he didn’t, and was arrested anyway, isn’t that the one and only outrage here, the one piggy was responsible for?
This commentary is exactly he kind of pathetic, mealy-mouthed, whiny moralizing that makes so many people recoil in disgust from liberalism. “I, as a principled liberal, find this citizen’s conduct unexemplary and call for a teaching moment!!”
Only one thing should be expected of citizens in a free society: that they obey the laws. Asking that of citizens already gives cops every advantage, with these meaningless laws like “disorderly conduct” that anyone can be arrested for at any time (and a chimp can prosecute successfully, especially with “testilying” pig witnesses).
Pigs are beating and tazering citizens every day in this country. Why isn’t stopping that priority #1? Instead we have people, especially *white people*, practically turning cop-worship into a religion. I wonder why that is. Hmmmm.
Law enforcement officers have enormous power and privilege granted to no one else in our society. Abusing that power is thus a uniquely despicable crime.
Here’s were we can take a page from the conservative book. When it comes to police brutality, how about instead of teaching moments, let’s have zero-tolerance, get-tough policies with teeth! Ideally, pigs that frivolously or wrongfully arrest citizens would go to prison for life. Those that assault citizens or use more than minimum force necessary, no matter what the circumstances, should be executed. (I oppose the death penalty, but so long as we have it, let’s put it to good use!) Those two reforms would put an end to police misconduct in a heartbeat.
Teaching moments only work with *police officers* who do not abuse their power, not with PIGS.
As for you, “liberals” like you should wait until we have a proper fascist party to join, one that will release your inner authoritarian yearnings.
I thought I was stupid
Posting content-free comments is indeed one of the main symptoms of stupidity.
Referring to the police as ‘pigs’ without any other qualification is a sign of something, but probably not anything good.
Your not seeing the specific qualification I made is a sign of your illiteracy.
The cringing reluctance to call a pig a pig shows how far our notion of citizenship has deteriorated, to the point where liberals (and even some leftists) fall all over themselves to show deference for the police.
If a cop does not want to be called a pig, that cop can, for starters:
1) Not pull over people without probable cause.
2) Not lie on the stand.
3) Treat all citizens professionally.
4) Put covering for cronies over obeying one’s oath of office and the law generally.
5) Not take bribes or engage in other corrupt activities.
6) Not stop, question, disturb, or harass people on the street without objectively observable evidence of illegal activities (or probable cause).
7) Always use the minimum amount of force necessary to effect an arrest or to stop illegal activities.
Then that person would be a police officer.
I have encountered some cops but I have not encountered any pigs (at least to the best of my knowledge).
I’m with PJ, there has to be some rational basis for calling a police officer a pig. Whether one chooses to use that particular term is entirely up to each person; however, there should be some factual and contextual basis before disrespecting a police officer or any other human being. And having known PJ Evans for quite some time now, I guarantee illiterate is an inapplicable term. Jeebus.
I call the pig who arrested Gates a pig because of his behavior, which in my view fits the textbook definition of “pig.” That’s my rational and factual basis for using the term.
As for PJ’s illiteracy, he said I referred to police as pigs without qualification, whereas if one *reads* my second-to-last sentence, lo and behold! it’s a qualification!!
I saw your qualification but thought you should fend for yourself and of course you have done a fine job and I also think I understand that you are coming from a place of wanting to be free from state influence based on probably great historical basis in the abuses of power that are possible in police activity and which are explicitly checked in the bill of rights.
In other words from your point of view the scope of your constitutional protection permits you the use of the word. I get all that but I tend to agree that its not a very enlightened way to treat an another human being name calling and all. And I get that there are police excesses but this does not excuse the responsibility to fundamental decency.
So anyway I do not know if this will be useful to you or not but you know like you sometimes I just want to have my say.
“[R]esponsibility to fundamental decency” regarding language should be a secondary consideration when far more serious abuses of power occur (i.e. when a citizen is in danger of experiencing something much worse than hurt feelings). Otherwise, this emphasis on the use of “enlightened” expressions and adherence to “fundamental decency” in relation to rhetoric sound like nothing more than Sunday school moralizing.
I think you will find there is more of an emphasis on rule of law here than on politics. But if you like getting mucked up that can be accommodated as well, but you should know, you may not notice it at first.
I think I understand, and in most spheres of life I agree with you. But I think that in politics using language to identify certain behaviors and practices as illegitimate and unacceptable–or employing it as a weapon against the enemy–is usually more important than civility.
Should we not use FDR’s term “banksters” when discussing the financial crisis? Was it wrong to call Bush a “chimp” and worse? What should we call those who have been and are doing our torturing for us?
Pray tell,when will we Dems have or find the equivalent to Repube Wordmeister Wizard Frank Luntz?
Never, I hope. There is a distinction between using fighting words to heighten meaning, as notaliberal advocates, and using intentionally deceptive words to obfuscate meaning, which is what Luntz does. Both are manipulative emotionally and cognitively, but one is essentially honest and the other essentially dishonest.
MmmmHmmm:
I couldn’t agree with you more.
HOWEVER, the dialog and the paradigm that has been EFFECTIVE has been the Luntz machinations.
I am NOT advocating disassembling,but surely there needs to be a NEW paradigm speak,in FAVOR of Dems and Progressives.
This reminds me of the old joke about the mule.
A man sold his mule to another.
The buyer returned the mule complaininjg that the mule wouldn’t obey commands.
The seller said,oh, I forget to give you this.
He presented the buyer with a heavy hickory stick and whacked the mule between the eyes,whereupon the mule began to obey commands.
See,said the seller, all you need to do was GET HIS ATTENTION.
MAYBE Waxman can be the AXE man—we sure need one.(Whacksman?)
I’ve got a comment for you buster.
Ooooh. I know you do, but you haven’t figured out how to say it yet. You’re still at the grunting stage. If you stop dragging your knuckles, you could look in the mirror and practice speaking. On the other hand, I wouldn’t recommend that. You’re too upset already.
I just watched Obama’s statement to the press concerning the Gates matter. It was excellent. He did a lot to improve this situation.
Police routinely abuse power granted to them and people have come to act like sheep around them.
I won’t fly because I refuse to subject myself to the security searches.
I have witnessed scores of killer cops being exonerated because of some sort of presumption that they were acting properly and excused for acting egregiously. I don’t like cops and I have no use for them.
Cops protect property and control people. I don’t have property that needs cops to protect and I don’t need to be controlled… nor do the 100 of thousands of people at PEACE demonstrations, but they are ringed by thousands of cops who usually make no arrests.
911 was just another excuse to ramp up the national security state, and take more rights away and hobble the citizens.
We DO need a second American Revolution. The first experiment didn’t work out too well for MOST of the citizens… did it?
You have no personal possessions, live under a bridge, and don’t care what happens to you?
If not, then the police are, in fact, there to protect you.
Amy Goodman talk about her arrest at the Republican National convention last summer.
In response to notaliberal @101
First off, I posted @38, so take a gander if you have the time.
As a general observation, two weeks ago, one of buds from Boston and I were having a conversation regarding the notional of ‘white supremacy being mainstreamed. He and I both served in the Vietnam War and his distinction is that he served in Special Forces, and returned disabled. And his response to me was quite succinct, “I have two choices, ignore the racists and the bigots, or shoot’em. And I prefer the latter but it’s against the law”. I offered a ‘third’ choice or option, and that is to ‘challenge ‘em’ and I used a sports metaphor as in in a “full-court press”. Here in Arizona, there are 14 extremist groups operating. In New Mexico there is one and in Utah, there are four groups. And needless to say, but I will, these extremists groups are NOT going to willingly take themselves off the radar screen and disappear. Thus, the conservatives brought these groups out into the sunlight, and my responding a manner that reaffirms and reinforces this conservative behavior, is not in my self-interest for either the short term or long term.
So, again, short of actual violence, BMAZ is correct for positing this instance as a “teaching moment”.
Jaango
I read that earlier post. Thanks for the reference. What is happening in Arizona is horrible. And then there’s the Border Patrol…
I absolutely agree with you about violence not being an answer, but I think that tough language has a place in political debate, especially on fundamental issues like state violence against citizens, white supremacy, or torture.
Isn’t this fact situation, the one involving Gates and Crowley, eerily similar to an Obama constitutional law examination question? I am just saying.
I’m a teacher who values productive and respectful discourse, but I fail to identify any “teachable moment” that can be garnered from this appalling and high profile incident of cops and the media evincing racist behavior and rhetoric. Your attempt to equate Gates’s actions with those of the cop is dubious and laughable at best, itself a form of insidious racism at worst.
While notaliberal’s comment is indeed inflammatory, its inflammatory nature appears deliberate and seems the closest thing to a “teachable moment” in this thread. What do liberals stand for if not to mobilize resistance against authority figures who abuse their power? In the absence of this crucial quality, “liberals” risk become politically useless hand-wringers fixated on the supposedly high-minded activity of examining *both sides* of an issue, even when one side is unquestionably oppressive and unjust.
Got around to putting the earlier version up on my blog: the teachable moment is about National Treasure Henry Louis Gates Jr., who will now be better known. Perhaps it’s a way to raise the level of the discourse.
http://zhiv.wordpress.com/2009…..-gates-jr/
PTMP, I have repeatedly reiterated that one cannot substitute a wishbone for a backbone.
Since there has been no ‘announced’ Native American opinion being posited, I will step into the breach.
Crowley was Honored and thusly, provided with the opportunity to carry a badge and gun. When all the facts are made available, the Native American will render his Moral result. If Crowley did not Honor himself, his badge and gun will be removed. Thusly, Crowley will be given an opportunity to “redeem” himself. And if he fails in this new opportunity, he will be ostracized.
Now, not much is known about the Aztecs in American history books, but they were a subset of Yaqui Society and of which I am a part and parcel to. Consequently, the Aztecs were ostracized, they moved south into what is now Mexico, and we all know their history, for rape, pillage and plunder. Moreover, Honor mobilizes behavior when done in a “good” manner. And of course, Honor is not the penumbra that mobilizes American Law.
Jaango
Excellent! Absolutely excellent!!!!
The police are not always the bad guys. They really don’t get paid all that much for putting their lives on the live virtually every day and sometimes they actually save people’s lives.
I’m glad we have police to protect us. I doubt if the Progressives will agree.
Teachable moment?
Apparently Professor Obama is learning a new thing or two.
Now, I find this incident regrettable with Gates.
But to conflate Obama’s comment that the policeman’s actions were stupid to be the equivalent of being racist is SOME PRIMO Murdoching.
I know plenty of stupid folk(some include me), but they aren’t racist at all.
This is a WHOLE lotta fluff,with very little stuff,methinks.
Those who are defending the institution of the police certainly are within a prerogative of a kind of idealism. But what is being called for is a dialogue concerning reasonable police conduct based on the facts of the situation. I will admit that it is easy for me to want to bring my impressions of the institution both good and bad into the fray.
And on balance being arrested is not congruent to having to weather words spoken in anger. There is a larger question concerning the reasonable institutional limits of the police power and this incident highlights that those expectations are not settled. The abuse of power is a very real issue in our society and in the subset of black and white relations or relations with indigenous populations the use of the penal system as an socio-economic instrument seems yet to have been broached as being relevant.
This kind of issue is where Obama, despite his apparent concessions to the needs of the security state and the grand strategy, is indeed playing to his strengths and his aspirations are indeed revolutionary.
Perhaps the reason ncident has struck such a deep chord with the American public is it is another example that many perceive and believe to be an abuse of power.
People with guns and authority doing a job ON us,instead of FOR us,once again-one time too many.
Somewhat off topic,but here’s another example,imho, of an abuse of power by an “armed”someone who is mandated to defend and protect-
Source: Honolulu Star-Bulletin
A Kaneohe Marine and two other Marines on the mainland have been charged in Oklahoma with first-degree rape of a 12-year-old girl….
Kinshella is among several Marines accused of having sex with the sixth-grade girl as part of what investigators call a bizarre and disturbing sex scandal, according to a Lawton (Okla.) Constitution report. The Marines were attending the U.S. Marine Battery at Fort Sill, Okla., which serves as a temporary school for Marines who take classes and undergo training….
Comanche County District Attorney Fred Smith told the Army Times early this month that Rivera, of Fletcher, Okla., befriended the Marines after her husband deployed to Iraq, partying with them regularly. She began bringing the girl to the parties in March, with several Marines having sex with her until recently, Smith told the Army Times….
The newspaper added that authorities believe several more Marines sexually assaulted the girl over several months, and they are working on tracking them down since they are no longer at Fort Sill.
Read more: http://www.starbulletin.com/ne….._ma…
Also Okinawa.
I think under the circumstances the best outcome would be for Obama to use this opportunity to continue the thread of reality-based, meaningful discussion of race relations in the US, the one he began with the excellent speech on the campaign trail. Use the Gates incident as an instance of a pattern, a springboard, rather than drill down into the weeds of this one example, since (as with almost any real-world case) the deeper you go the messier it gets and the more distracting the particular details become.
Note, that is not to assume Crowley is a racist, I appreciate that Crowley claims not to have been motivated by race bias, and that many folks here feel that there is no evidence he was. But it seems clear to me that Gates’ keen awareness of past race bias in policing factored very significantly into the unique way in which the incident escalated, and that alone makes this a data point in history of race relations in the US. Like Faulkner said, “The past isn’t dead. It isn’t even past.”
Now personally I would prefer to see the authoritarian police aspect plumbed — @19 bmaz uses the term “police/citizen” which I might argue is, though related, distinct from that — but since that doesn’t seem like a place into which the tradMedia is capable of gazing (…insert obligatory Dune reference here…), I’d be happy to see the adult discussion of race relations resume. It would help inform the immigration debate as well, and as a result (to bring things back full circle to where they were immediately before the egregious Lynn Sweet interjected her non sequitur self) the health insurance debate too.
This whole event is sick. Yes, S-I-C-K. No, the cop and the prof were not equally bad. The prof was in his house, showed his ID, and was still asked to come outside, handcuffed, and taken to jail. I would have questioned his sanity if he HADN’T yelled at the cop.
Oh, but Mika on Morning Joe just had to sob over her “mean emails” over her stance on this issue. Which was to make it all seem equal — after all, she is a JOURNALIST, she says. What a laugh. Yes, you dumb blonde — everything is equal — SOME SAY the sky is blue, SOME SAY the sky is green. Just two points of view, you idiot. I must say, Mika is probably the dumbest female on TV today — she rates right up there with that ditzy blonde on Fox and Friends.
And she was STUNNED when the black guests on her show didn’t agree with her that it was all a “he said, he said” deal. The black men tried to be as gentle as they could, but poor Mika was almost in tears. She just can’t handle it when viewers write in to criticize her. She much prefers giggling when they write in to tell her they want to DO her. What a bimbo!
Time for Mika to go home and spend time with her children, rather than flitting all over the country with “Morning Joe” on his book tour. I am NOT a “mothers can’t work” freak. I worked full-time while raising my children. But IF you choose to be a mother and CHOOSE to have a career, at least have one when you can go home every afternoon. If you can’t, don’t spawn!
You mean the “Morning JOKE” show?
ain’t that the truth
Yes! Thank you. This entire blog post and most of the comments defy belief.
“[Gates] was every bit as responsible for the escalation, and quite arguably more so, as the officer, James Crowley […]”
On what planet? Forget that, in what universe? I am stunned that anyone is responding seriously to your incredible finger-wagging and tsk-tsking at Gates. Your condemnation of his rational and justified response is blatantly unsupported by the facts of the case.
From a Big O diary:
Well, bmaz, I salute you on your stated attempts to take the higher ground. Still I would only point out that your comment about the “arrest” being patently illegal is your opinion based on what you know or rather what you think you know. Granted my opinion is likewise is on that slippery slope.
The reason I interject here before I take my blessed mother, who has been through a tough time recently, to supper is that I just looked at the News.
I see that the NY Times is running still another Opinion piece on their front page on the Gates issue. The second I think with various experts and notables speaking out. None of them this time mention the remarks “acting/ed stupidly” much less saying that they were not worthy of the President or the supposed real purpose of his press conference – Health.
And then on the same front page is a story where Mr Obama addresses those words and indicates that he is sorry about them though not sorry for addressing the issue. He even has talked to the SGT. about the issue. He is a hell of a better man than those experts and notables.
I can only ask how disjointed and removed from the real issue can those so-called experts and notables be? How far can Prof Gates be from the real issue not the issue he would like it to be, not the issue he would like to make a documentary on?
A quick aside. I was fortunate in my early career with the Navy to have been stationed at Annapolis, MD for a period, teaching the Academy. It was at the end of Vietnam, and a while later. I enjoyed it greatly. Even learned to sail on the boats the Academy had available. A skill I enjoy to this day.
But there was another thing I remember quite well. I and some of my other friends from the South would remark often on the panels that appeared on MD TV at night where several highly educated and liberal experts and notables would form up and debate the war, race, and politics. One thing we noted that was they liked to have at least one idiot on the panel just to allow the experts to show their stuff. To be their target! It was usually an uneducated racist white supremacist war mongering Southerner who couldn’t think through getting a paper bag open.
I just hope this Policeman isn’t such a target.
Now the question becomes whether Prof Gates is as big a man as his friend President Obama is?
A simple “I was tired from my trip and having a bad day, and a lot of history and grief came up in my emotions while dealing with the Cambridge Police Dept. I should have said Goodnight, and turned around and walked back into the house and gotten a good nights sleep.”
But that is still only my opinion.
Respectfully, Gerald.
Just a couple facts and comments.
(1) The “remarks” were not Obama’s idea, he was responding to a question from the press. Would you have preferred he refuse to answer the question?
(2) The context of the word “stupidly” was as follows: “…the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home…” which is pretty hard to disagree with as far as it goes.
If you review the text of today’s statement, there is no apology involved, only a clarification/restatement:
Hmmm,
my comment was “Mr Obama addresses those words and indicates that he is sorry about them though not sorry for addressing the issue.”
You, Hmmm then say there was no apology, …, that Obama said “I helped to contribute to the ratcheting up…in my choice of words, I unfortunately gave the impression that I was maligning the Cambridge Police Department or Sergeant Crowley specifically,..”
I never said apology, only said “indicates that he is sorry about the words.”
I think what I properly addressed Mr Obama’s statement.
I had just been talking to my downstairs neighbor about the Gates/Crowley affair and disappointment with Obama giving a hand grenade to the wingnuts with the ’stupidly’ comment. I thought it would have been more Obama-like for him to ask Gates and Crowley to the White House for a beer and have them figure out what went wrong in the encounter. Lo and behold, I turn on the computer to see Obama replace Gibbs and the daily presser expressing regret for miscalibrating his language, and had talked to Crowley about the situation. Here was the Obama that won the election based on an appeal to our better selves making a generous, sincere appeal to ratchet down the situation. He ended by saying he was trying to get Gates and Crowley to the WH for a beer and turning it into a teachable moment….just as was mentioned here several times.
It was a shining moment.
As an aside (and one that does not seek to further the high-minded task of improving civility in this discussion, but rather seeks to advocate rigorous and focused thought on an important issue):
In another context, all this sharing of personal anecdotes could be considered heartwarming, but within the platform of political debate, it is pointless and distracting.
How would one go about getting a picture of the state of police/citizen relations without relating anecdotes?
Aren’t ALL politics local….ergo, personal to one degree or another?
Fair point, and I should clarify. I was referring specifically to the inexplicable sharing of irrelevant personal anecdotes that, while revealing some perhaps mildly interesting information about a commenter’s private life, offer no insights or information about this case or police behavior in general. Further, anecdotes are a questionable means of unraveling and better understanding a difficult topic because they are by nature highly personal, subjective, unverifiable, and extremely limited in scope.
Thanks for amplifying, but I’m still not sure which anecdotes meet vs. don’t meet your criteria. Would be interested in seeing some post numbers, for example, if you’re so inclined.
Your welcome for the amplification. Here are some examples of anecdotal comments that do not meet my stringent criteria: references to one’s blessed mother, Annapolis experiences, talking with neighbors, and–of course–notaliberal’s bewildering and yet, given the overall tone of this thread, fitting ramblings @149.
Well, @149 is IMHO both very, very funny and an extremely effective position statement.
Agreed. That was an outstanding burlesque/parody of problematic posting styles, and it expressed some of my points much more effectively (and humorously) than I.
Haven’t been here long, have you?
It’s what we do. There’s a name for it: community.
A couple weeks ago there was a new commenter who complained about the sarcastic attitude in some of my comments. I pointed out that sarcasm is kind of the stock-in-trade here, and without it there wouldn’t be much going on at all. The larger point I guess is that meaning and discourse can be carried in many many diverse styles of writing, including but certainly not limited to sarcasm and anecdote. Which doesn’t make it out-of-bounds for a commenter to express a dislike for any of those forms, of course.
My mistake. I thought this was a political blog, not a coffee klatch.
There’s a word for it: patronizing.
Good compilation of facts and analysis at Gawker.
“Crowley himself now says that he “regrets that I put the police department and the city in the position where they have to defend something like this.” So if Crowley wasn’t stupid, then what, exactly, does he regret?”
I have a fascinating anecdote that’s tangentially related to all this and may be helpful.
Now believe it or not my good friend Bucksaw called just minutes ago. Now the thing about Bucksaw is that he has a lovely wife. Her name is Beatrice. Now the thing about Beatrice is that Beatrice likes to take care of their lawn. And so she was mowing the lawn and a great big stick got caught in the mower blades, and so the mower froze up. She got the thing out (funniest thing, it had a plastic horse’s head on it), but there was damage to the motor or something, so she had to take it in. While she was dropping it off, the repair guy told her he once knew a cop that was a great guy. She told him that she once knew a politician who was salt of the earth and spent all his spare time saving stray puppies. Then the repair guy said that he once knew a priest that drank. Beatrice said she once knew one who didn’t ever drink.
Then the mower repair guy, his name was Buster, said that he used to fix Nixon’s mower and that Nixon was always very polite and friendly, not like on those tapes. But then Buster said he didn’t agree with everything Nixon did when he was president, even though he thought he was a good man at heart. Beatrice said she didn’t either, and they both agreed that he was probably both good and bad mixed together, and anyway each individual’s opinion is going to be different.
Anyway, the mower won’t be fixed until Monday, so that’s that for their lawn for the weekend. Beatrice is just going to weed. Bucksaw said that for his part he was going to back up the hard drive. I told him that I once had a hard drive that never crashed, so he should think about coming over for a beer. Bucksaw said that he once knew a fella who got sick from drinking beer, but he’d consider it.
Now another funny thing about Bucksaw is, and it’s the dardnest thing, he’s always eating corn nuts when he talks on the phone. One after the other. Corn nuts, corn nuts, corn nuts… So really I couldn’t understand much of what he said. So I’m just telling you what I think Bucksaw said based on my own knowledge and what I believe based on my own opinion.
Oh, and these bogus authoritarian laws like “disorderly conduct” and so on need to be rewritten into real laws that enumerate the specific acts they cover. But then Bucksaw and Beatrice think that some of these laws sound quite nice when read aloud.
Totally my favorite comment of this whole event, thank you, it was a delight to read. Now if you could just get Norman Lear to cast and produce it…
Welcome to teh anarchy pool. Hope you learn to swim here, I like your thinking.
What I find appalling is the officer’s refusal to apologize. The man is [a] a public servant and [b] supposed to be a peace officer expert at confrontation. Surely he should know that the best thing a public servant can do to defuse a confrontation with a citizen is to apologize early and often? Whether or not the professor was loud or unreasonably angry is not the point–an officer should be expected to keep the peace, not escalate.
Based on a few of my own experiences, I doubt that racism has anything significant to do with this phenomenon. The problem is “policism”, the notion that police belong to some sort of superior class to which citizens owe deference. Those of us that are as close to “white” as any human being gets get harassed in much the same ways mmore often than anyone reports. Arrogant, cocksure policemen can’t admit they made a mistake and forget who pays them. The only reason more of us don’t get locked up is that most cops aren’t quite dumb enough to harass us when we are exhausted from travelling and locked out of our houses.