Sour beer: Media conservatives say they wouldn't go to White House if they were Crowley
Since the White House announced that Cambridge, Massachusetts, police Sgt. James Crowley and Harvard University professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. are joining President Obama for a beer at the White House, several media conservatives have stated that if they were Crowley, they would not go to the White House.
Conservatives who say they wouldn't go
Rich Lowry says he "wouldn't go"; Sean Hannity says he "wouldn't either."
LOWRY [National Review editor]: You know, if I were Sergeant Crowley, I wouldn't go.
HANNITY: I wouldn't either.
LOWRY: You know, I understand why he wants to go -- he's a reasonable, public-spirited guy. But Obama engaged in talking about a teachable moments, and when they use that phrase, it's clear who they think needs to be taught -- and it's Sergeant Crowley, rather than themselves. [Fox News' Hannity; 7/29/2009]
Bernie Goldberg: "I wouldn't go. ... [N]ot unless I got some apologies first."
GOLDBERG [Fox News contributor and author]: From the president's point of view, it probably is. Now, I wouldn't even presume to give Sergeant Crowley any advice; he's a big boy and he certainly knows what he's doing. But, just so you know, I wouldn't go and take part in a dog and pony photo op, not unless I got some apologies first. It's a good move for the president possibly, but I wouldn't have anything to do with it.
One guy, a professor, calls me a racist; the president says the cops are stupid, and then says, you know, "I probably should have calibrated my words differently." Bill, who uses language like "I should have calibrated my words differently"? Only a guy who went to Harvard.
Most regular people watching us right now would say, "I was wrong. I'm sorry." But the president can't do that. So it may be a good move for him. It may show that he's trying to bring people together, but I sure as hell wouldn't go. [Fox News' O'Reilly Factor; 7/29/2009]
Larry Elder: "I would say, 'Mr. President, thank you for the invitation, but you can take your beer and shove it.' "
ELDER [syndicated columnist and former radio host]: If I were Crowley, I would say, "Mr. President, thank you for the invitation, but you can take your beer and shove it" --
LARRY KING: But he's going.
ELDER: -- because --
MICHAEL ERIC DYSON [Georgetown University sociology professor]: Well --
ELDER: -- you need to apologize to me --
KING: I think --
ELDER: -- and you need to apologize to the Cambridge Police Department for suggesting that I engaged in racial profiling when I didn't do it. [CNN's Larry King Live; 7/29/09]
Transcripts
From the July 29 edition of Fox News' Hannity:
HANNITY: All right. Well, first, let's start with an issue that has now been going on for an entire week. Barack Obama holds his press conference; Barack Obama accuses the Cambridge Police Department of, quote, "acting stupidly"; next day, he's lecturing everybody about what a teachable moment this is. And now, we're going to have a beer summit, Rich.
LOWRY: Yeah.
HANNITY: Good idea?
LOWRY: You know, if I were Sergeant Crowley, I wouldn't go.
HANNITY: I wouldn't either.
LOWRY: You know, I understand why he wants to go -- he's a reasonable, public-spirited guy. But Obama engaged in talking about a teachable moments, and when they use that phrase, it's clear who they think needs to be taught -- and it's Sergeant Crowley, rather than themselves.
From the July 29 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:
O'REILLY: Now, tomorrow --
GOLDBERG: Right.
O'REILLY: -- President Obama goes to the White House, back to the White House, and he invited Professor Gates and Officer Crowley, the two guys involved in the controversy in Massachusetts, for a beer at the White House.
GOLDBERG: Yeah. Happy hour.
O'REILLY: Now, is this a good PR move?
GOLDBERG: From the president's point of view, it probably is. Now, I wouldn't even presume to give Sergeant Crowley any advice; he's a big boy and he certainly knows what he's doing. But, just so you know, I wouldn't go and take part in a dog and pony photo op, not unless I got some apologies first. It's a good move for the president possibly, but I wouldn't have anything to do with it.
One guy, a professor, calls me a racist; the president says the cops are stupid, and then says, you know, "I probably should have calibrated my words differently." Bill, who uses language like "I should have calibrated my words differently"? Only a guy who went to Harvard.
Most regular people watching us right now would say, "I was wrong. I'm sorry." But the president can't do that. So it may be a good move for him. It may show that he's trying to bring people together, but I sure as hell wouldn't go.
O'REILLY: See, I would. If I were Crowley, I would go -- and I'll tell you why: because then Crowley can come out and report on exactly what the discussion was.
From the July 29 edition of CNN's Larry King Live:
ELDER: Larry, here's my problem with it. When Obama had the press conference -- and he admitted that he didn't have all of the facts, and admitted that he was a friend of Skip Gates, and, therefore, he was biased, but then he proceeds to suggest that Gates was right, that Gates was a victim of racial profiling. And this is a metaphor for what's all --
KING: -- and he's now invited them to the White House tomorrow.
ELDER: -- what's going on in the country. That's right, he did take -- he did dial it back.
ELDER: But a disproportionate amount of crime is committed in the black community and the victims are usually black people. There's a great deal of hostility between cops and citizens, and neither should stereotype the other. And that's what Obama should have said. And I think a lot of people, Larry --
KING: You're -- you're knocking Obama now.
ELDER: And I think a lot of people, Larry -- Larry, should --
KING: Where did that come from? He apologized. They're both going to see him tomorrow.
ELDER: Well, wait a minute. Why -- why should both be invited?
DYSON: But, Larry --
ELDER: If I were Crowley, I would say, "Mr. President, thank you for the invitation, but you can take your beer and shove it" --
KING: But he's going.
ELDER: -- because --
DYSON: Well --
ELDER: -- you need to apologize to me --
KING: I think --
ELDER: -- and you need to apologize to the Cambridge Police Department for suggesting that I engaged in racial profiling when I didn't do it.
Both were at fault for losing their tempers, but the officer acted stupidly in asserting the authority of the guy with the gun and the cuffs to salve his bruised ego.
Now, everybody needs to just let it go. Nothing more to see here.
Yes it is, or Obama would have never gotten involved.
[What would Gordon Liddy do?]
Do you not know what disturbing the peace is? Why did not Professor Gates simply close the door when Officer Crowley left? Why did he continue his confrontation out into the yard?
Had Professor Gates said the alleged racial epithets and derogatory insults in a court of law in front of a judge what do you suppose would have happened? Why do not the police, who are in much more potentially dangerous surroundings have the same protections as a judge in a courtroom?
I'll answer the question, though. Gates didn't have Crowley's badge number, which was owed to him by law. Crowley made further discussion contingent on exiting the house. Therefore, he exited the house.
Now one for you:Why did Crowley call the Harvard University Police? Why is it that a citizen is just supposed to shut up and sit down when they take offense to police action, but police aren't obligated to leave the premises when they clearly have no cause to be there any longer?
That's a new one. Are you seriously comparing someone's own house to a courtroom? Seriously? The police didn't have to be in his house. Someone would have to be in the courtroom. It's not like the judge is going to leave the room. What the hell?
Never, your contributions are strictly to advance fairness and common sense dialogue on this site.
Hmmm, reminds me of Officer Crowley.
Otherwise, spare me your tantrum.
Enjoy your evening.
Because uh, yelling isn't a crime and a private home isn't a courtroom?
We don't know the words used by Professor Gates but we do have Officer Crowley's arrest report. It is undeniable that Gates was out of control. Besides Gate wasn't arrested for yelling at Crowley inside a private home.
Officer Crowley had reason to suspect that there could be two burglars in the house without Gate's knowledge. The chance may be low, but would you as a cop, simply ignore that possibility. Maybe that is why Crowley didn't leave upon seeing Professor Gates ID or maybe Gates was objecting way too much? I haven't seen anywhere that Professor Gates ID proved he lived in the house. I have heard he rented it.
There are a number of plausible reasons why officer Gates did not leave the house right away. Having someone berate and yell at you while you are trying to determine whether a break in has occurred certainly does not help.
You admit that people cannot yell in a courtroom at a judge like Gates did at Officer Crowley outside his home. Whether you agree or not with the arrest, Officer Crowley was within his rights and obligations as a police officer to arrest Gates.
http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/07/30/gay-man-arrested-for-mocking-police-bigotry/
Your claims about being obligated to arrest a man for being rude and yelling at a police officer on his own property are about as un-American as you can get.
Game, set, match!
True. He was within his rights. That doesn't mean he WAS right to arrest Gates, especially since Gates is a 60 year old cripple and the cop is young and healthy and has a gun and cuffs and all the power at his disposal.
Gates had no power but those of his WORDS. Try again.
That would be a threat. Was Crowley threatened? Otherwise, it's just yelling.
You really don't think that Crowley found out that Gates was one of the people who broke in by the time he saw his identification?
"Objecting too much"? Meaning what, that he was conspiring to have two burglars ransacking his house? Or is the theory that the 58 year-old professor was throwing off the cops while his bridge partner was looting the upstairs bedroom?
I hear that many well-known professors rely on extra money from knocking over private homes.
What a damaging admission, right. Of course you can't yell in a courtroom, because it's not your house. It is not illegal to yell at a cop in your own house, and apparently it's not illegal to do it on your front porch either. You don't have a clue what you're talking about.
Brab, you gotta admit, that was a pretty powerful closing argument from Barney.LOL.
"So, you admit one thing that's true. Therefore, you must agree with something very different. I rest my crazy case"
AA and Dobbs may be rubber-rooming together soon. They both seem to be going down the same path, sanity-wise.
This may be a new low for AA. I don't know how it can get much dumber than that.
Crowley's arrest report? That SAME arrest report in which Crowley stated that Lucia Whelan, the 911 caller said SHE observed two Black males with backpacks?
Did you know, that Lucia Whelan DID NOT state the race of the two men she saw, when she made the 911 call? And did you also know that Crowley's police report says Lucia Whalen told Crowley that she saw two Black men with backpacks, yet Lucia Whelan says the ONLY words Crowley ever said to her was "wait here"?
Since I know for a fact, from Lucia Whelan's own statement, that Crowley lied in his arrest report, WHY should I believe ANYTHING in his arrest report?
Yelling at a judge in a court of law is TOTALLY different than yelling at a cop in your own home.
The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts held that the First Amendment prevents application of the disorderly conduct law to language and expressive conduct, even when it is offensive and abusive. The one exception would be language that falls outside the protection of the First the Amendment, "fighting words which by their very utterance tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace."
Which is the reason the bogus charges were dropped!
Huh? Then why did Officer Figueroa - who was in the room for a while according to Crowley and Figueroa's police report, decide to leave after witnessing Gates harranguing Crowley? If Gates was indeed "out of control", I would think Figueroa would stay to backup his partner that was under attack or potentially so.
Classic anti-conservative viewpoint. What was that you were saying about beware of fascism on another thread? Now a man's home and yard are the same as a courtroom. What kind of conservative would defend the state arresting a man falsely on his OWN PROPERTY? Pathetic partisanship at its worst. Where are your principles conservatives?!
Now I just posted a link to another arrest in the ssame as Gates' arrest but instead of racism this one involves a gay man. Let's see how AA and the other resident morons try to wriggle their way out of it.
Think I'll have two Duvels this evening...
The real world is not a courtroom. so get real.
Yelling is not a crime. Yelling does not meet the definition of disorderly conduct in Massachusetts.
Everyone who is defending Crowley‘s decision to arrest Gates needs to read his report. The only violation of law in there is false arrest.
I thought it was reported that officer induced Gates to step out of the house (presumably so he could make an arrest for disorderly conduct in a public place). Unfortunately your private yard is not public enough to be considered a valid arrest and that is why it was dropped. Crowly better go to the meeting to smooth things over or it may lead to a civil suit which could hurt him, his boss, or the city. Police experts have stated this a case is attributable to poor training.
You've just nailed exactly why the far rightys are against it, epk. This type of thinking could lead to meeting with leaders of foreign countries and trying to hash out differences, as well as all kinds of reckless adult behavior. That really can cut into the bottom line of the war industry.
Sorry, wingnuts, we just got rid of the stunted man-child W, who spent eight years dumbing down the office, cheered on by the childish world view of imbeciles like Goldberg & Hannity.
They seem like no one I'd want to have a beer or toke with.
But they would bend over backwards to visit herr dubyah at the White House:
Obama NEVER said that this was a case of "racial profiling".
He explicitly said that he didn't know if race had anything to do with the arrest.
Pathetic.
See? I have a smiley face in my post so we're cool.
I think even AA and I could have a very amusing drunken political debate after a few beers, at least. Elder sounds like the kind of guys I may get up and walk around to the other side of the bar to get away from.
Neither of these losers were invited. They should just shut their pieholes.
To do otherwise is just, to use a well-worn phrase, a demonstration of stupidity.
I despised Bush - but I still would have loved to have sat down and have a beer with him! I'd have had my picture taken, gotten an autograph and everything. What the hell. Why not. In 233 years there have been only 43 of them. [presidents] (Hell I'd even have had a beer with Cheney, though I'm sure we'd have gotten into it, over policy! LOL)
It must be nice to think so highly of yourself and have so much fame and money that you feel you can publicly snub an invitiation to meet with the president of the united states. They're idiots, turning more people into idiots. Such a disgrace.
I can already hear some of you saying, "You're doing the same thing you are railing against." Perhaps that is true to a point, but I am willing to allow my opinions to evolve as more facts come to light (something I am afraid many of the most deeply-entrenched, self-appointed apex predators here are unable to claim). And since it seems some of the "facts" in this matter may never come to light, and in light of this article, I felt the need to make my comments now.
I grew up and live just north of The People's Republic of Cambridge and for those of you not in the know, and it would seem that would be the majority of you, Cambridge is about the most PC liberal bastion in the entire U.S. (and I have spent time in Berkeley, West Palm Beach, Coral Gables, and Burlington). In addition to my experiences living in this area, one of my friends is a Cambridge cop and I therefore have an inside scoop on their training and protocols, and I can say definitively that there is NO WAY that any cop who exhibited any racist tendencies would have lasted a month on the Cambridge force, never mind a decade. Furthermore, my friend on the force, who I consider to possess about the highest character of anyone I know (mom is still tops), steadfastly stands by Crowley and staunchly defends his character as a top-level cop.
The uncontrolled bashing I have seen of Crowley and, secondarily, Lucia Whelan is not only unwarranted, but slanderous. Many of the things said about him simply are not true. I do feel he is owed an apology by Gates, Obama, and many media outlets, and these parties should not be surprised if he sues them in an attempt to recover some of his good name. The fact that many of you have parroted some of these negative claims here and in other threads proves there was a rush to judgement. Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story or talking point, right?
It seems to me that Gates threw the old DYKWIA card at Crowley paired with his other ace, the race card (for the uninitiated, DYKWIA stands for "Do you know who I am?"). On the surface, and I admit to only having superficial knowledge of this case, his actions reek of prejudice and elitism. His subsequent unapologetic and ironic demands for an apology, and his attempts to play the victim here, only help to solidify this superficial assessment in my mind. If anyone abused their position of power, it seems to me it was Gates and Obama. That being said, if Crowley had turned down Obama's offer, he would have deservedly made himself look like a stubborn fool, but I do believe apologies are his due.
I have been on both sides of this issue as portrayed by both Crowley and Gates. I have been profiled (as in, really profiled) more than once by cop, by neighbor, and by stranger, and I have had the DYKWIA card thrust at me as well. As long as I can remember I have had to deal with racism, but never once did I cry wolf (although I have to confess to letting my fists do the talking for me on more than one occasion). When we moved to the neighborhood I live in now in the 1970's, our welcoming party greeted us with vandalism and rotten tomatoes, literally.
And the pre-judging extended to authority figures in school, local stores, work, and the local constabulary, despite what I deem to be my mostly good behavior enforced by my parents and many of my peers. I was mentally and physically assaulted as a child and as an adult for not being the right skin tone, but I guess hate crimes don't apply to a lesser person like me despite the racial overtones of these incidents.
Now that I think of it, one of these incidents was a twofer when, at the age of 32, I was actually "stoned" by a group of caucasian youth in Oswego and, despite almost immediately flagging a cop down in a cruiser (I at first thought I was so lucky to have him pass by), he did nothing at all. "I'm on a call but I'll check into it when I come back," he said, leaving me alone in the same area where the assault occurred. He offered no assistance to ensure my safety and made no effort to investigate. He had not had his lights on nor did he seem to be in any particular rush when I flagged him down, so his claim was a blatant fabrication. I guess I was not the right skin tone for this particular cop either, one of the Invisibles. I was abhorred and vowed never to spend another penny there (I had been going on annual charter fishing trips there but my comrades had decided to go to a casino and I stayed back to check out the scene downtown).
My favorite cop incident though was being pulled over by a Lincoln cop more recently when I made the foolish mistake of "Driving While Portuguese" leaving a national wildlife refuge where I had been doing some nature photography. We passed each other in opposite directions on the small road leading from the refuge and judging by his frantic race to turn around and catch me, you'd have thought I was Clyde Barrow. Apparently my vehicle and I "matched the description" of someone who had been breaking into vehicles at the refuge, yet somehow I was released without any search after he ran my stats and saw I had a "clean" bill of health (maybe I wasn't quite "fishy" enough to truly match the description of this phantom burglar). Go figure.
I still regret not reporting the incident to the Lincoln police station because my bottom line is, and has always been, fairness. I really missed an opportunity to have my own "teachable moment" by reporting the actions of that cop and I will not allow that to happen again, especially now that I am a father attempting to impart the principle of fairness to my son. I don't care who is in the wrong, nor do I care what camp a perpetrator is from, if you treat someone unfairly, you need to be called out on it.
And if you pull a DYKWIA and try to belittle someone trying to do their job, and then go on to claim they are racist and expose your own prejudices for the world to see, you need to be cut down to size and own up to your transgressions. I highly doubt that Gates will be man enough to do that. Crying wolf, as I believe Gates is guilty of doing here, only helps to minimize the true racial injustices taking place. I don't know if this image exists, but if so, I really look forward to seeing the picture of Crowley performing mouth-to-mouth on Reggie Lewis, although I'm guessing some of you would still say that that "stupid" cop would have tried harder to save him if he were white.
Sgt. Crowley has a serious problem with reporting the truth, so I would not hold my breathe waiting for ANY apology.
"As I reached the door a female voice called out to me. I turned and looked in the direction of the voice and observed a White female, later indenfied as Lucia Whelan. Whelan, who was standing on the sidewalk, in front of the residence, held a wireless telephone in her hand and told me she was the one who called. She went on to tell me she observed what appeared to be two Black males with backpacks on the porch." Sgt. Crowley's incident report #9005127
Lucia Whelan's 911 call.
There were two larger men,” she said in the audio released Monday. “One looked kind of Hispanic, but I’m not really sure,” she said, adding that she did not see what the second man “looked like at all".”
Lucia Whelan's new conference.
Ms. Whalen said that the only words she exchanged with Sergeant Crowley in person were, “I was the 911 caller.”
Let's say Lucia did do that. Isn't that just part of good detective work? Her fear at her press conference illustrates the touchiness of what is a ludicrous issue. When I for the first time in my life called 911, I was asked to describe the potential perp involved. So guess what? The next time I called 911, I offered that information without prompting, complete with color, height, weight, age, clothing, etc. I guess that makes me a racist depending on the race of the person I am calling the police about. The last time I called was to report a northern European creep that was peeping on my neighbors--I'm from the same continent, so was I in the clear there by calling him a white guy? Oh good, phew!
And that leads to the crux of the matter. The impetus for the negative racial aspects of this whole case was primarily derived from the actions of the good doctor, and then fanned by Obama. There are other issues involved here, but the reason we are talking about it is because of the race issue, and we are only talking about the race issue because of Gates and Obama. They made it into something it wasn't, and for that they owe Crowley an apology.
Some can argue from the wrongful arrest angle if they'd like, but race does not play a role in that matter. Maybe the 1st amendment or some Constitutional issue is involved if you go down that path, but that brings me full circle. If Gates had done like most of us would have done in that situation, this would have never been an issue. He was having a bad day and he took it out on a cop who was doing his job, and then he dragged the man through the mud, trying to introduce "I got Crowleyed" into the lexicon. The cop warned him to stop making a scene and, unlike most of us, continued his barrage pulling the DYKWIA move. Talk about wrong place, wrong time. Pose a hypothetical and you can easily end this story with a dead cop:
"A cop shows up and sees a man is inside. Unable to see the second person that had been reported, the cop asks the man to step outside. The man refuses and instead turns to the kitchen. The cop follows him in having assessed the man is likely not a threat. The second man, who was hidden off to the side of the door shoots and kills the cop when he enters."
Why vilify someone with a good track record who routinely does things for the greater good, things most of us would avoid? Crowley and Whelan were victimized here, not Gates. What harm really will come of Gates now? If anything this will help his career, except in the minds of folks like me who think, at least from what I have gleaned thus far, that Gates is a pompous, arrogant man with a bag of chips on his shoulder (maybe he should change his nickname from Skip to Chip now that I think of it). He seems to epitomize the "I'm better than you" crowd I am not so fond of. I was raised to judge people based on what they say and, more importantly, what they do. I don't need any lesson from your manufactured "teachable moment" so save your breath. Speaking of which I'll now take one. Sorry for my second long winded post.
You first sort of demure that you really don't know all the facts, and then you draw all sorts of conclusions about Gates. Not only that, you claim that the police officer was slandered somehow by people. Nowhere have I seen this, on these threads. Most posts are of the type that he overstepped his authority, which isn't disrespecting police at all.
The beer conversation proves that the two men are moving on, and so should we. They both seem like decent people willing to communicate...and move beyond the polarization that grips so many others.
WHAT?
Aren't the police suppose to tell the truth?
Really?
So when you trot out Crowley's incident report that says Professor Gates was yelling at the officer I'm suppose to believe it, right? So if I believe that, then I should also believe that according to Crowley, he received a report of two Black men as well, right?
But that is not true. We know for a fact that dispatch NEVER reported two Black males from the recording.
So where did the two BLACK men come from? Did Crowley pull is out of his a**? NO ONE, neither the dispatch or the 911 caller said a SINGLE freaking word about BLACK men!
Crowley also writes in his incident report that HE had a conversation with the 911 caller and SHE describes two Black men. But the 911 caller says she NEVER had a conversation with Crowley beyond her identifying herself as the 911 caller and Crowley telling her to "stay right there.
So far we have two lies that Crowley wrote in his incident report, begging the question, is Crowley just making sh*t up? and what else was "made up" in his report?
You can read the actual conversation between Lucia Whalen and dispatch.
DISPATCH: Ok what's the problem? Can you tell me exactly what happened?
LUCIA WHALEN: Uhm, I don't know what's happening. I just had a, uh, older woman standing here and she had noticed two gentlemen trying to get in a house at that number 17 Ware Street. And they kind of had to barge in and they broke the screen door and they finally got in and when I (inaudible) and looked, I went closer to the house a little bit after the gentlemen were already in the house I noticed two suitcases. So I'm not sure if these are two individuals who actually work there or maybe live ther.
DISPATCH: You think they may have been breaking in?
LUCIA WHALEN: Sir, I don't know. Because I have no idea. I just noticed -- DISPATCH: Were they white, black, or Hispanic?
LUCIA WHALEN: Uhm, well they were two larger men. One looked kind of Hispanic but I'm not really sure. And the other one entered and I didn't see what he looked like at all. I just saw her from a distance and this older woman was worried thinking someone's breaking into someone's house. They've been barging in and she interrupted me and that's when I had noticed otherwise I probably wouldn't have noticed it at all to be honest with you. So I was just calling because she was a concerned neighbor. I guess. Lucia Whalen 911 Gates call audio and transcript...
CONTROL1: Respond to 17 Ware Street for a possible B-D in progress, two S-P's barged their way into the home. They have suitcases. (inaudible) S-P. Standby. Trying to get further.
OFFICER1: 52-0. Ware Street right now, 17?
CONTROL1: 17 Ware Street, uhm, both S-P's are still in the house, unknown on the race. Ah, one may be Hispanic I'm not sure.
It's convenient to disregard Lucia Whalen, but YOU cannot disregard the dispatch. They NEVER giving ANY racial description, except MAYBE Hispanic.
So once again, WHERE did Crowley get the two Black men from that are in HIS official incident report #9005127?
To say that the lack of recorded evidence using the word "black" automatically results in an inaccurate and from your view fabricated police report is to exclude perhaps the majority of evidence that may come to light. Your take may turn out to be the case but it is in fact not a foregone conclusion. Where btw does it say in the report that dispatch describes two black men? I missed that. Regardless, is a cop supposed to remember every last minute detail? Every study of witness testimony shows that humans, including cops, are unable to be 100% accurate in recounting what they have witnessed. I still think race was not the factor in this case at all. Race became THE issue because of Gates from my perspective.
If you can, it will be much appreciated if your response addresses why no REAL conservative, republican (AKA racists in disguise) would have a beer with President Obama.
4, 8 years ago, Bush was selected/elected because he was seen as the person people would want to have a beer with.
What did Bush do and Obama did not that the tables have turned on him? I have a suspicion but would like to hear your opinion.
I am a resident of MA since 1999.
thanks.
As to the issue you bring up that I did not address in my initial post, I think you mistake these reactions in this story for racism rather than just plain dislike. That being said I am sure some folks who say such things are in fact racist, as there are some people who voted for Obama who are racist, and some cops who are racist, and some professors who are racist, and so on down the line.
The people saying these things are entertainers, debaters, and of course, baskers of limelight. They believe what they are saying but the motivator is ratings and scorn for a president they find themselves diametrically opposed to from a policy standpoint, you know, like the majority of Americans (or perhaps you can name a program that the polls show Americans support). I think Obama and Congress are leading us in the wrong direction, as did Bush.
Am I racist for that, or could it be that I was born into a dictatorship and heard stories about my grandfather quietly listening to forbidden radio behind the house? I don't like the idea of an ever-expanding federal government and I think most Americans agree with me on that. That was not what the Founders envisioned. That is what they fought against.
I oppose much of Obama's policies and it has not one iota to do with the color of his skin. We have just about every race represented in my family (nobody has married an aboriginal Australian yet). Growing up where I grew up, I ran into dirtbags of every color, and likewise salt of the earth in every shade as well.
So not wanting to have a beer with someone who called you stupid and refuses to apologize for it would be an understandable reaction, especially if you didn't agree with the person's politics as well. But Crowley made the right decision by going. Bad PR move to turn down the president when he offers you a tattered olive branch. But come on, do you honestly think a beer session between Bush and Howard Dean or Cindy Sheehan would have gone well (I envision both of Dean's shoes flying through the air and bottles would have been banned)? I'm sure Crowley will handle it a bit better than many of the haters of the previous president would have.
Obama said that he thought the actions were stupid. He didn't call the policeman stupid. Big difference. Further, Obama called Crowley and they had a good talk. Frankly, both these men AND Gates seem to be bigger people than a lot of the spectators, who would like this thing frozen in time so they can project like crazy.
In this instance, NOT communicating further could only be driven by egotism.
Yelling is not a crime. Yelling does not meet the definition of disorderly conduct in Massachusetts.
Everyone who is defending Crowley's decision to arrest Gates needs to read his report. The only violation of law in there is false arrest.
And what are you talking about Howard Dean for? You don't think that Howard Dean and G-Dub could have had a rational conversation. I find that stunningly naive. I also find it interesting that the right now finds it acceptable to not want to have a beer with someone because they disagree with their politics. I can tell you from firsthand experience, those are the best drunken arguments there are. I think rightOn and AA and I could have a very amusing night of drunken arguing. God bless America.
The crime committed is outlined in the report: "tumultuous behavior in a public place." I don't know your source for saying "yelling does not meet the definition of disorderly conduct in Massachusetts" is, but my understanding of it says that a person can be assessed as disorderly if they engage in tumultuous behavior.
I don't think a conversation between Bush and Dean would have gone over too well. There is no crime in not wanting to drink a beer with someone you would rather not be near, politics or not. That being said, I have several times said that Crowley made the right decision in accepting the offer. I do wholeheartedly agree with your last points though and think drunken debates can in fact be very amusing.
In the report Sergeant Crowley said he was surprised that Dr. Gates reacted as he did. This is simply unbelievable. That a person in their own home was under suspicion by the police after showing his ID is definitely going to elicit a negative reaction at least some of the time. There was no physical threat to the officer, so please do not tell me the Police need to go overboard to protect themselves. The arrest was done to show Dr Gates who was boss and was unwarranted. I would hope that the brilliant idea of President Obama to get these two men together could yield some genuine understanding and reflection. I would hope both men could admit the situation could have been handled better by both parties.
and if you listen to the now released 911 tapes. you hear her say that one of them maybe was hispanic and they had suitcases.
it was the 911 dispatcher who not only asked what race they were. but also pressed her about it.
Presumably, the door was open, so here's my prediction and you can come back later and see if my gut is wrong or right. Gates does become belligerent and starts slandering Crowley by making him appear to be racist. Crowley's back is turned to the bystanders, and Gates is facing them, so the bystanders do not really hear what Crowley is saying, but they do hear Gates making disparaging remarks about him.
Before making the "cop on a power trip" claim, put yourself in Crowley's shoes at this point. You have a bunch of people outside, presumably from a neighborhood he patrols, hearing you being called a racist and whatnot. In your mind, you think, "These people are going to think I am what this man is saying I am and I'll be labeled from now on." You continue to ask the man to calm down but he does not. You ask him to step outside, perhaps so there would be more direct witness contact (I will give you that), and you ask the man again to calm down and you warn him that if he does not, you will arrest him for disorderly conduct now that his actions are more directly affecting the public. The man continues to berate you and you arrest him for his continued spectacle.
It would seem you buy Gates' version of events and I guess we'll see who is right when it all comes out. You assume that Crowley is one of these cops who is as you describe, and I know firsthand of the type, but all evidence points the other direction. He wasn't showing Gates "who was boss" but rather trying to stand up for his reputation. Abusing a cop is never a good idea in case you do run into the rogue, but not letting up after being warned and instead escalating matters shows heightened arrogance in my opinion.
Cops are trained to deal with these situations. In fact, Crowley does the training as I'm sure you are aware. I am admittedly biased here, but instinct tells me Crowley's version of events is closer to reality than is Gates' version and in the end he gets his apology, even if it is forced out of Gates through a civil suit.
You seem so confident that Gates was under no physical threat. Where was the second man that had been reported? Seems to me you are of the opinion that police efforts to ensure safety are exaggerated, but the thousands of officers who have fallen in the line of duty would disagree were they able. Many of those who died read a situation as being harmless and it was their final fatal mistake. They paid dearly for trying to give someone the benefit of the doubt and their bravery and compassion should be commended. Those bad seeds that can infect any profession simply need to be weeded out and the Cambridge police do a better job than most in doing just that. Crowley does not deserve to have his reputation tarnished and it has been. That is unfair and will hopefully be remedied.
I will finish with my point of agreement with you. I as well would hope that both men could admit the situation could have been handled better by both parties. Unfortunately I am pessimistic that will be the case and, even if the photo-op and ensuing stories say all is well now, we all know that this is just a puppet show, a "nothing to see here" moment, and all parties will go back to work the next day feeling exactly as they had prior to sharing hops.
I'm guessing Crowley will go on to be more careful than ever when working with other races, genders, sexual orientations, etc., as his work will be highly scrutinized for the rest of his life. And I guess that Gates will learn not to cry wolf (alert--my opinion--apparently I have to do this to satisfy some people) and be less speedy to expose his prejudices without cause.
Very nice, and well thought out posts stating your views.
Thanks
You're making it sound like Crowley never entered the house. Are you sure you've read the report?
If there's no legal basis for the arrest, then a warning of that arrest can't be taken seriously. That would actually be antagonizing behavior in itself.
Crowley's version can be 100% true, and it still doesn't warrant an arrest. And a civil suit against Gates? You're dreaming. They dropped the charges, so how on earth are they going to argue that the arresting officer is owed anything? It's clear Crowley made a mistake, one way or another.
Where was the first man that was reported? I don't understand what the thought process is supposed to be here. Is the idea that Gates was one of the people breaking in, and he's in danger from some other man who was helping him break in? Did he help a burglar break in to his own house? You do know that Crowley believed Gates was in his own house very early on, I hope.
I hate to lump my response but I have already taken ("wasted" I'm sure some of you are saying) too much space here. Brabantio, your first two points are taking too seriously my hypothetical about what I feel may turn out to be the case. I do not know what the witness situation is, but I do know that I like making predictions based on limited information and then going back after the fact to see if I was right. I admit to my mistakes, but that is how I feel about this case at the moment until I am proven otherwise. And of course I have read the report, more than once I might add.
I made these same points in another response above, but I do not agree there was no legal basis for the arrest. If Crowley's version is correct, Gates engaged in tumultuous behavior (his assessment of course) and that is part of the statute. And you say that they dropped the charges. And? You can't argue that charges have never been dropped against a person of high standing, especially a person who is a friend of the governor (that would be one Deval Patrick who called the arrest "every black man's nightmare"). You may not realize it, but Mass. has a long proud history of such things, if charges are even brought to begin with. Even a lowlife like me was able to get a speeding ticket fixed once in my youth. I think Crowley has a legitimate case to make that his character was defamed in many ways by many people, and I'm betting some lawyers have already approached him stating such.
And you mention you do not understand my thought processes regarding cop safety. All I am saying is that cops enter these very unpredictable situations and more often than not give the people they are dealing with the benefit of the doubt, sometimes to their own peril. I could come up with many scenarios where a cop in this same situation would be in danger. Crowley made his assessment early on and it was the correct one. Gates was relatively harmless, the danger only coming from his sharp and unscarred tongue, a result of his having never before bitten it.
Mike, I will add that my responses to this whole mess are full of conjecture, opinion, gut instinct, etc. I stated that numerous times throughout my posts. I think I do know most of the facts that are available and disagree with your assertion that my "assumptions" have been proven incorrect. On the topic of false arrest, I made this point to you before as well, but Gates certainly isn't the first person to be arrested for allegedly being unruly on their physical property. And while you claim Crowley was on the power trip, I think it is the exact opposite. If Gates shuts the door after Crowley leaves, dropping a few more verbal slaps as he does, it is over right there. But no, he instead had to follow him out and continue the barrage. "You don't know who you're messing with!" since you are fond of bringing up the report.
Come on, man - all these assumptions you are making are completely inaccurate. Read the reports. It's not nearly as complicated as your posts are trying to make it. The man was arrested on his own property after being told by the officer that he had to come outside if he wanted to continue the conversation. And he was arrested for being indignant about a police officer not showing him deference on his OWN PROPERTY. Nothing illegal here. Nothing complicated. Another cop felt he was being treated rudely and was either having a bad day or is a little too sensitive. And he needs to understand that his badge does not make him above the rules of society. You don't get to arrest people that are rude to you. This is still America.
Crowley DOES NOT deserve an apology from Professor Gates.
Crowley arrested Professor Gates on a disordely conduct charge that was completely bogus.
Here is the law im Massashutes regarding disordely conduct, which will explain WHY the charges were dropped:
The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts held that the First Amendment prevents application of the disorderly conduct law to language and expressive conduct, even when it is offensive and abusive. The one exception would be language that falls outside the protection of the First Amendment, "fighting words which by their very utterance tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace."
1. The defendant engaged in fighting or threatening, or engaged in violent or tumultuous behavior, or created a hazardous or physically offensive condition by an act that served no legitimate purpose.
2. The defendant’s actions were reasonably likely to affect the public.
3. The defendant either intended to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly created a risk of public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm.
Like I said before, the lawyers on both sides could make strong cases, and, depending on witness testimony, that could go either way. I for one think Crowley deserves an apology.
So Gates deserved to be arrested? Interesting reasoning. Do you at least acknowledge that being a complete dick (assuming it is indeed what happened) is not against the law?
This is not about what people deserve. It is about enforcement of the law. Either the law was broken or it was not. It is not the officer's job to mete out justice or to make you "own up to your transgressions", it is the officer's job to enforce the law. This is civics 101.
Actually, I don't know that anyone is bashing Crowley either. He made a mistake. It happens. However, if he cannot handle being yelled at without his feelings getting hurt to the point where he makes a false arrest (of which the charges are immediately dropped) he may be in the wrong line of work.
I strongly believe Crowley is a genuine good guy and think he has handled himself amazingly well through this. I know I would not have handled it well. I know you like to continue taking your digs at him, but who really made the mistake here anyway? I argue it was Gates suffering from jet-lag stuck-door white-cop-insulting-me-in-my-house foyer rage that set off the powder keg, followed by (despite Crowley's efforts to dissipate the event, oops, forgot *opinion alert*), a continued dousing with gasoline all the way out the door. I have had John Kerry as my senator for 20 voting years. I can smell a DYKWIA chap a mile away.
Hannity also said he has "NEVER watched porn".....yea right. Anyone who trys to sell that has got to be hiding some deviancy!
They all had access to the White House over the last eight years. That's enough.
Biden drinks a non-alcoholic brew? There's GOT to be a story behind that one.
I'd rather get a pimple on my nose than have a beer with any conservative. I've tried it and it doesn't work because there is no middle ground when the other person is UNinformed about truth.
Gordon Liddy has a 'deposition' from Mr. Obama's paternal grandmother's friend's midwife who said she was there when Mr. Obama was born in Kenya, and if he said it on fox, it must be true(?). Silly and embarrassing . .
My interpretation of the events is that Obama did make a mistake in using the word "stupid" (and he said as much(. However, I was shocked to discover that "stupid" seems to be such a powerfully racially charged word! All these conservatives have been accusing Obama of "race-baiting" and being a racist by using the word "stupid". I'll definitely have to remember that the next time that any of THEM describe Obama as "stupid".
Obama then created the opportunity for these two men, Professor Gates and Sgt. Crowley, to come together to have a respectful and productive discussion (Sgt. Crowley's words). Since the meeting, both men have publicly expressed that they established a mutual respect and understandning for one another. They have expressed their intentions to meet again in the future and to hopefully continue to offer each other their own unique perspectives and insights on these issues, and to hopefully work together towards improving race relations in America. NOW, these two men (with their newfound friendship) will return to serve their community, and Obama will return to addressing the major issues facing our nation.
Additionally, some people are now even speculating that this "beer summit" might have potentially created a platform from which Sgt. Crowley could launch a political career!! I think he seems like an intelligent, level-headed, and very genuine guy. I think he could have something to offer politics maybe. My interpretation of the arrest is that BOTH men's reactions were heavily influenced (I mean, obviously). Gates knows so very well what it's like to be a black man in America, and understands the extreme mistreatment that black people have often suffered at the hands of law enforcement. Crowley was acting from a position of a police officer, who knows so very well the incredible risks that any officer faces every day and who has, no doubt, witnessed the assault or even death of a fellow officer. Just as Gates' experiences led him to have a certain perception of police officers, Crowley's experiences have led him to have a certain perspective of the people he interacts with on the job (one of my high school classmates went on to be a police officer, and he once told me, in a moment of touching honesty, that one of the worst things about the job is how it changes the way you look at people; that you can see literally anyone as a potential threat).
But, to me, the outcome of this incident has been so incredibly positive. It has brought people together--people that were on the opposite side of a very impassioned disagreement, to work together towards a common cause. What I can't understand is why Hannity and Co. are saying that the "beer summit" was a colossal waste of time and total embarassment? I honestly don't see how you could possibly have that interpretation. The guy that they allied themselves with (Crowley) is saying the exact opposite!!