• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

POTUS Obama Says Cops Who Arrested Gates "Acted Stupidly" Vs Nixon's "Manson Guilty"

However, Obama did a cool thing thing by inviting both Gates and the officer for a beer in the white house to smooth things over, and both the officer and Gates did the right thing in accepting and, with all probability, willing to make up and put this incident behind them.

I agree with this. I'd love to be a fly on the wall at this meeting!

I do hope they all manage to be friends for real by the time this is done with.
 
So why did POTUS Obama use this incident to bring up racial profiling?

I think because Gates raised the issue of racial profiling, and Obama was probably more comfortable talking about that issue in general which is a very real problem and about which he has some knowledge.
 
It turns out that both POTUS Obama and Nixon were criticized for their comments. While Nixon was correct that Manson was indeed guilty, Obama was incorrect that the Crowley/Gates incident had anything to do with racial profiling.

First, the incident certainly did have to do with racial profiling, since those were the accusations Gates made that Crowley responded to. I'd have to check again, but I'm pretty sure the term "racial profiling" appears in Crowley's report.

Second, Obama didn't say it had anything more to do with racial profiling than the fact that the issue was raised (and it undeniably was--Crowley mentions it in his report). He said "separate and apart from" this incident.

Finally, the difference between Nixon's remarks and Obama's remarks still have to do with there being an on-going criminal trial in Manson's case and nothing remotely like that in the Crowley/Gates incident. Nixon was criticized for making remarks about an on-going criminal trial. As you point out, his position on Manson's guilt reflected that of the vast majority of Americans, so he wasn't criticized for the side he was taking--just that it was inappropriate for him to take any side when the trial was still going on.
 
I think because Gates raised the issue of racial profiling, and Obama was probably more comfortable talking about that issue in general which is a very real problem and about which he has some knowledge.

But the cops didn't pull over Gates' car because he was black. They didn't enter his house because he was black. They didn't respond to the home break in because of racial profiling since the caller didn't describe the two men as black, and only offered her opinion that one might be Hispanic because the operater asked her to chose from a list of Caucasian, Black or Hispanic.

Had POTUS Obama deigned to become familiar with the facts of the case before deciding that this was an opportune time to make a statement on racial profiling, we wouldn't be into the second week of discussing this local incident.

Obama realizes he screwed the pooch with his comment, so why are you still clinging to this racial profiling nonsense when the facts do not support Gates' mischaracterization of the incident then or now?
 
But the cops didn't pull over Gates' car because he was black. They didn't enter his house because he was black. They didn't respond to the home break in because of racial profiling since the caller didn't describe the two men as black, and only offered her opinion that one might be Hispanic because the operater asked her to chose from a list of Caucasian, Black or Hispanic.

Had POTUS Obama deigned to become familiar with the facts of the case before deciding that this was an opportune time to make a statement on racial profiling, we wouldn't be into the second week of discussing this local incident.

Obama realizes he screwed the pooch with his comment, so why are you still clinging to this racial profiling nonsense when the facts do not support Gates' mischaracterization of the incident then or now?

I don't think Obama's remarks were so bad since most everyone agrees that Gates shouldn't have been arrested. Even the city of Cambridge and the Cambridge police officially said it was "regrettable and unfortunate".

To the issue of racial profiling, I still think Obama was all right in using the incident (which undeniably raised allegations of racial profiling) to address the issue "separate and apart" from this incident. That is, that Obama talked about the larger topic of racial profiling does not mean he necessarily agreed with Gates that this was a case of racial profiling.
 
Really? All of sudden you find Crowley credible when the Daily News quotes him?

"All of a sudden?" Have I said a word yet about Crowley's credibility?
You can show me where I made this comment? Otherwise, I can't imagine how you'd know what I think about Crowley.



"The 911 caller who reported a possible break-in at the home of black Harvard scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. did not mention race in the call, according to a statement issued by her attorney and backed up by Cambridge Police Commissioner Robert Haas."

Contrary to published reports that a 'white woman' called 911 and reported seeing 'two black men' trying to gain entry into Mr. Gates home, the woman, who has olive colored skin and is of Portuguese descent, told the 911 operator that she observed 'two men' at the home," Murphy's statement read.


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/07/27/national/main5190309.shtml

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32169213/ns/us_news-race_and_ethnicity/

When the 911 tapes are released in a few days one of us will be sporting an omelet on their mug.

If Crowley lied in his police report, that egg won't be on my face, will it?

I found a quote in a story that quoted the police report. Citing that article here doesn't indicate how I feel about the incident.

It could speak to Crowley's credibility, you're right about that. If it is established that the caller didn't mention race, we'd have to ask why it was in the police report, or why the paper claims it was in the police report. If she didn't say it, the tapes will prove that someone wasn't being honest.

At any rate, I haven't offered any opinion about the officer's credibility, one way or another. I won't be wearing any egg, regardless, no matter how much you might like to see it there.
 
I think because Gates raised the issue of racial profiling, and Obama was probably more comfortable talking about that issue in general which is a very real problem and about which he has some knowledge.

I can give him the benefit of the doubt that it was a clumsy segue but it certainly sounded like 'dog whistle' politics - saying something in a way that makes it sound like you believe the opposite of what you are saying.


http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2009/07/26/2009-07-26_she_called_cops__now_shes_lying_low.html

I bolded the pertinent part, so you couldn't miss it this time.
How inconvenient for your argument.

Murphy said Whalen, who works nearby, called because she had been aware of recent break-ins in the area and was "personally devastated" by suggestions that she placed the call because the men on the porch were black.
Murphy said Whalen was 100 per cent certain that she never said she saw two black men.
"It was very clear that she wasn't sure what the men's race was," Haas said in an interview with The Boston Globe on Sunday night.
Haas said Whalen, after questioning by the dispatcher during the call, speculated that one of the men - who turned out to be Gates and a black car service driver - may have been Hispanic.
The emergency call tapes have now been made public.
The commissioner acknowledged that in the police report the caller is said to have observed "what appeared to be two black males" on the porch, but he said the report was a summary and not necessarily based on the initial call.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/devastated-caller-caught-in-obama-harvard-race-row-20090728-dz3b.html
 
Then you'd better go tell the people reporting what she said that she didn't say it, hadn't you?
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom