poodle,
I'd like to see a cop refer to black person as a negroid, lmao.
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- I saw a darkie breaking into the house across the street...
I saw a darkie breaking into the house across the street...Follow
This is why I love Obama:
Unlike both Sgt. Crowley and Prof. Gates in this case, Obama's not afraid to admit when he makes mistakes and knows how to de-escalate a situation when it gets out of hand. Can you imagine Bush, or any other recent president for that matter, trying to make peace this fast?
Quote:
I wanted to address you guys directly because over the last day and a half obviously there’s been all sorts of controversy around the incident that happened in Cambridge with Professor Gates and the police department there.
I actually just had a conversation with Sergeant Jim Crowley, the officer involved. And I have to tell you that as I said yesterday, my impression of him was that he was a outstanding police officer and a good man, and that was confirmed in the phone conversation -- and I told him that.
And because this has been ratcheting up -- and I obviously helped to contribute ratcheting it up -- I want to make clear that in my choice of words I think I unfortunately gave an impression that I was maligning the Cambridge Police Department or Sergeant Crowley specifically -- and I could have calibrated those words differently. And I told this to Sergeant Crowley.
I continue to believe, based on what I have heard, that there was an overreaction in pulling Professor Gates out of his home to the station I also continue to believe, based on what I heard, that Professor Gates probably overreacted as well. My sense is you’ve got two good people in a circumstance in which neither of them were able to resolve the incident in the way that it should have been resolved and the way they would have liked it to be resolved.
The fact that it has garnered so much attention I think is a testimony to the fact that these are issues that are still very sensitive here in America. So to the extent that my choice of words didn’t illuminate, but rather contributed to more media frenzy, I think that was unfortunate.
What I’d like to do then I make sure that everybody steps back for a moment, recognizes that these are two decent people, not extrapolate too much from the facts -- but as I said at the press conference, be mindful of the fact that because of our history, because of the difficulties of the past, you know, African Americans are sensitive to these issues. And even when you’ve got a police officer who has a fine track record on racial sensitivity, interactions between police officers and the African American community can sometimes be fraught with misunderstanding.
My hope is, is that as a consequence of this event this ends up being what’s called a "teachable moment," where all of us instead of pumping up the volume spend a little more time listening to each other and try to focus on how we can generally improve relations between police officers and minority communities, and that instead of flinging accusations we can all be a little more reflective in terms of what we can do to contribute to more unity. Lord knows we need it right now -- because over the last two days as we’ve discussed this issue, I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but nobody has been paying much attention to health care. (Laughter.)
I will not use this time to spend more words on health care, although I can’t guarantee that that will be true next week. I just wanted to emphasize that -- one last point I guess I would make. There are some who say that as President I shouldn’t have stepped into this at all because it’s a local issue. I have to tell you that that part of it I disagree with. The fact that this has become such a big issue I think is indicative of the fact that race is still a troubling aspect of our society. Whether I were black or white, I think that me commenting on this and hopefully contributing to constructive -- as opposed to negative -- understandings about the issue, is part of my portfolio.
So at the end of the conversation there was a discussion about -- my conversation with Sergeant Crowley, there was discussion about he and I and Professor Gates having a beer here in the White House. We don’t know if that’s scheduled yet -- (laughter) -- but we may put that together.
He also did say he wanted to find out if there was a way of getting the press off his lawn. (Laughter.) I informed him that I can’t get the press off my lawn. (Laughter.) He pointed out that my lawn is bigger than his lawn. (Laughter.) But if anybody has any connections to the Boston press, as well as national press, Sergeant Crowley would be happy for you to stop trampling his grass.
All right. Thank you, guys.
I actually just had a conversation with Sergeant Jim Crowley, the officer involved. And I have to tell you that as I said yesterday, my impression of him was that he was a outstanding police officer and a good man, and that was confirmed in the phone conversation -- and I told him that.
And because this has been ratcheting up -- and I obviously helped to contribute ratcheting it up -- I want to make clear that in my choice of words I think I unfortunately gave an impression that I was maligning the Cambridge Police Department or Sergeant Crowley specifically -- and I could have calibrated those words differently. And I told this to Sergeant Crowley.
I continue to believe, based on what I have heard, that there was an overreaction in pulling Professor Gates out of his home to the station I also continue to believe, based on what I heard, that Professor Gates probably overreacted as well. My sense is you’ve got two good people in a circumstance in which neither of them were able to resolve the incident in the way that it should have been resolved and the way they would have liked it to be resolved.
The fact that it has garnered so much attention I think is a testimony to the fact that these are issues that are still very sensitive here in America. So to the extent that my choice of words didn’t illuminate, but rather contributed to more media frenzy, I think that was unfortunate.
What I’d like to do then I make sure that everybody steps back for a moment, recognizes that these are two decent people, not extrapolate too much from the facts -- but as I said at the press conference, be mindful of the fact that because of our history, because of the difficulties of the past, you know, African Americans are sensitive to these issues. And even when you’ve got a police officer who has a fine track record on racial sensitivity, interactions between police officers and the African American community can sometimes be fraught with misunderstanding.
My hope is, is that as a consequence of this event this ends up being what’s called a "teachable moment," where all of us instead of pumping up the volume spend a little more time listening to each other and try to focus on how we can generally improve relations between police officers and minority communities, and that instead of flinging accusations we can all be a little more reflective in terms of what we can do to contribute to more unity. Lord knows we need it right now -- because over the last two days as we’ve discussed this issue, I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but nobody has been paying much attention to health care. (Laughter.)
I will not use this time to spend more words on health care, although I can’t guarantee that that will be true next week. I just wanted to emphasize that -- one last point I guess I would make. There are some who say that as President I shouldn’t have stepped into this at all because it’s a local issue. I have to tell you that that part of it I disagree with. The fact that this has become such a big issue I think is indicative of the fact that race is still a troubling aspect of our society. Whether I were black or white, I think that me commenting on this and hopefully contributing to constructive -- as opposed to negative -- understandings about the issue, is part of my portfolio.
So at the end of the conversation there was a discussion about -- my conversation with Sergeant Crowley, there was discussion about he and I and Professor Gates having a beer here in the White House. We don’t know if that’s scheduled yet -- (laughter) -- but we may put that together.
He also did say he wanted to find out if there was a way of getting the press off his lawn. (Laughter.) I informed him that I can’t get the press off my lawn. (Laughter.) He pointed out that my lawn is bigger than his lawn. (Laughter.) But if anybody has any connections to the Boston press, as well as national press, Sergeant Crowley would be happy for you to stop trampling his grass.
All right. Thank you, guys.
Unlike both Sgt. Crowley and Prof. Gates in this case, Obama's not afraid to admit when he makes mistakes and knows how to de-escalate a situation when it gets out of hand. Can you imagine Bush, or any other recent president for that matter, trying to make peace this fast?
Quote:
My sense is you’ve got two good people in a circumstance in which neither of them were able to resolve the incident in the way that it should have been resolved and the way they would have liked it to be resolved.
/this
The prez knows how to talk. Good on him.
I thought Obama's initial comments were a PR misstep. I thought comments were honest and accurate, mind you, but honesty and forthrightness can be quite jarring coming from the president. From anyone else, saying someone "acted stupidly" is the same as saying they made a mistake, but from the POTUS it sounds like a condemnation.
Yeah. I particularly enjoyed Obama's apology that wasn't really an apology, his "facts" which are still inaccurate, his apparent redefinition of the word "malign", and his continuing belief that his interjection into all of this was in any way positive with regards to race relations in this country.
The first is a pattern of behavior with Obama. When he doesn't want to actually say certain words, he'll give a statement which dances around the issue without actually saying the words "I was wrong", or whatever. Then, when pressed on it in the next news cycle, he'll simply refer back to that previous statement and insist that he'd already said whatever it was. I fully expect next week, we'll hear him refer back to his "apology" as though he'd actually apologized and suggest that we all just move on... He's nothing if not predictable.
The professor was at no time "pulled from his home". He pursued the officer out into the yard and proceeded to verbally assault him (publicly, which is what makes it meet the definition of public disturbance). I suppose we should take some comfort that Obama is not still insisting that he was arrested in his home, or that the arrest had anything at all to do with his identification or his residence in the home.
I'm not sure how anyone could think that calling an entire police department "stupid" does not pretty directly malign that department and specifically those officers involved. Yet, apparently, Obama seems to think that his words should not be interpreted that way. Yet another of his "What I meant to say..." dance steps. The reality is that what he said was stupid. He should not have said anything about a subject he didn't know the facts about.
Obama seems to be suffering from a belief that his own press is true. He is clearly *not* above race. In fact, in this case, he showed a shocking racial bias by automatically assuming that the black professor must have been in the right, even without knowing all the facts. It's telling, and somewhat disturbing that in the very first racially charged issue that came along, he responded in an almost blindly racist manner, not only defending the black guy involved, but perpetuating the false claim that the issue had anything to do with race at all...
Gates is a relative irrelevancy in this. A Harvard professor can be a crazy-racist as he wants, and if it's ok with Harvard, then that's his choice. It affects only those who have to deal with him. I'm far more concerned by Obama's reaction to the issue. That reaction was both stereotypically supportive of the most harmful aspects of race-baiting and calls into question his claim to be a president who transcends race.
For a guy who's usually very very good at avoiding falling into political potholes or giving the media sound bits which may nail him down on a position or issue, he really fell right into this one. That his first really bad case of this involved race is worrisome to say the least...
The first is a pattern of behavior with Obama. When he doesn't want to actually say certain words, he'll give a statement which dances around the issue without actually saying the words "I was wrong", or whatever. Then, when pressed on it in the next news cycle, he'll simply refer back to that previous statement and insist that he'd already said whatever it was. I fully expect next week, we'll hear him refer back to his "apology" as though he'd actually apologized and suggest that we all just move on... He's nothing if not predictable.
The professor was at no time "pulled from his home". He pursued the officer out into the yard and proceeded to verbally assault him (publicly, which is what makes it meet the definition of public disturbance). I suppose we should take some comfort that Obama is not still insisting that he was arrested in his home, or that the arrest had anything at all to do with his identification or his residence in the home.
I'm not sure how anyone could think that calling an entire police department "stupid" does not pretty directly malign that department and specifically those officers involved. Yet, apparently, Obama seems to think that his words should not be interpreted that way. Yet another of his "What I meant to say..." dance steps. The reality is that what he said was stupid. He should not have said anything about a subject he didn't know the facts about.
Obama seems to be suffering from a belief that his own press is true. He is clearly *not* above race. In fact, in this case, he showed a shocking racial bias by automatically assuming that the black professor must have been in the right, even without knowing all the facts. It's telling, and somewhat disturbing that in the very first racially charged issue that came along, he responded in an almost blindly racist manner, not only defending the black guy involved, but perpetuating the false claim that the issue had anything to do with race at all...
Gates is a relative irrelevancy in this. A Harvard professor can be a crazy-racist as he wants, and if it's ok with Harvard, then that's his choice. It affects only those who have to deal with him. I'm far more concerned by Obama's reaction to the issue. That reaction was both stereotypically supportive of the most harmful aspects of race-baiting and calls into question his claim to be a president who transcends race.
For a guy who's usually very very good at avoiding falling into political potholes or giving the media sound bits which may nail him down on a position or issue, he really fell right into this one. That his first really bad case of this involved race is worrisome to say the least...
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
You don't like it when people treat complex issue with complexity do you?
gbaji wrote:
Yeah. I particularly enjoyed Obama's apology that wasn't really an apology, his "facts" which are still inaccurate, his apparent redefinition of the word "malign", and his continuing belief that his interjection into all of this was in any way positive with regards to race relations in this country.
Aside from everything else you said, I'm pretty sure Obama used the word "malign" correctly.
publiusvarus wrote:
I'd like to see a cop refer to black person as a negroid, lmao.
There's nothing negative about the term (it really just means "black") but "negro" was what you guys called African-Americans back when they were slaves, and it's obviously very close to that other word starting with N. It's not surprising that it has negative modern connotations because of the circumstances surrounding its original use.
Edited, Jul 25th 2009 8:07am by zepoodle
Quote:
Yeah. I particularly enjoyed Obama's apology that wasn't really an apology, his "facts" which are still inaccurate, his apparent redefinition of the word "malign", and his continuing belief that his interjection into all of this was in any way positive with regards to race relations in this country.
Obama didn't apologize. He did state, multiple times, that he did not know all the facts in the case. I also doubt he believes that his interjection into this has had a positive in fact, so far. He hopes it leads to progressive discussions on race issues.
Quote:
Obama seems to be suffering from a belief that his own press is true. He is clearly *not* above race. In fact, in this case, he showed a shocking racial bias by automatically assuming that the black professor must have been in the right, even without knowing all the facts. It's telling, and somewhat disturbing that in the very first racially charged issue that came along, he responded in an almost blindly racist manner, not only defending the black guy involved, but perpetuating the false claim that the issue had anything to do with race at all...
I find it sad when white people call black people, or oreos in this case, racist for standing up for a fellow black person. You sir, have no earthly clue (nor do I, for that matter) what it's like to be discriminated against because of the color of your skin. Guess what? Obama & Gates do. Obama can, *gasp*, empathize with Gates. And while race may not have played an issue in the arrest part of the altercation, I think the officer simply decided to be a jerk back to the guy being a jerk to him, I believe it did play a part in every other aspect of it.
And while I'm not calling the officer racist, I'm hard pressed to imagine a scenario where an old white man in a suit would have been arrested for disorderly conduct after getting pissed off at the cop who continued to linger inside his home after resolving the mistaken identity situation by showing ID.
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin
Omegavegeta wrote:
And while I'm not calling the officer racist, I'm hard pressed to imagine a scenario where an old white man in a suit would have been arrested for disorderly conduct after getting pissed off at the cop who continued to linger inside his home after resolving the mistaken identity situation by showing ID.
I'm hard pressed to imagine a scenario where the cops would even have been called if the old white man was having trouble opening his door.
Honestly I'm hard pressed to imagine anyone calling the cops on an old black man in a suit trying to opening his door in the middle of the afternoon. I'd imagine who ever did it knew it wasn't a break in and was just being an *******. But then again I lean to the cynical side of things.
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
Quote:
I'm hard pressed to imagine a scenario where the cops would even have been called if the old white man was having trouble opening his door.
Honestly I'm hard pressed to imagine anyone calling the cops on an old black man in a suit trying to opening his door in the middle of the afternoon. I'd imagine who ever did it knew it wasn't a break in and was just being an @#%^. But then again I lean to the cynical side of things.
Honestly I'm hard pressed to imagine anyone calling the cops on an old black man in a suit trying to opening his door in the middle of the afternoon. I'd imagine who ever did it knew it wasn't a break in and was just being an @#%^. But then again I lean to the cynical side of things.
You don't know the reasoning why the caller called the cops, and you're already making the conclusion that he did it to be an @#%^.
Well done.
McGame wrote:
Quote:
I'm hard pressed to imagine a scenario where the cops would even have been called if the old white man was having trouble opening his door.
Honestly I'm hard pressed to imagine anyone calling the cops on an old black man in a suit trying to opening his door in the middle of the afternoon. I'd imagine who ever did it knew it wasn't a break in and was just being an @#%^. But then again I lean to the cynical side of things.
Honestly I'm hard pressed to imagine anyone calling the cops on an old black man in a suit trying to opening his door in the middle of the afternoon. I'd imagine who ever did it knew it wasn't a break in and was just being an @#%^. But then again I lean to the cynical side of things.
You don't know the reasoning why the caller called the cops, and you're already making the conclusion that he did it to be an @#%^.
Well done.
The other option is that the caller was retarded.
Quote:
The other option is that the caller was retarded.
Ok, there's always the third option called - Don't make stupid guesses. Read the news article before you post.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8161929.stm
Quote:
Police were called after a woman reported she saw two black males with backpacks trying to force entry.
Quote:
His lawyer said Prof Gates had just returned from a trip overseas and, upon arriving at the property with a driver, found his front door jammed and had to force it open.
If a person sees someone you don't recognise trying to force open a door to a house that you don't recognise, calling the cops is the right thing to do.
McGame wrote:
Quote:
The other option is that the caller was retarded.
Ok, there's always the third option called - Don't make stupid guesses. Read the news article before you post.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8161929.stm
Quote:
Police were called after a woman reported she saw two black males with backpacks trying to force entry.
Quote:
His lawyer said Prof Gates had just returned from a trip overseas and, upon arriving at the property with a driver, found his front door jammed and had to force it open.
If a person sees someone you don't recognise trying to force open a door to a house that you don't recognise, calling the cops is the right thing to do.
Ok, so she was retarded. You see two people drive into the driveway of a house, unload luggage, and then try to open the door to their house?
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
Quote:
Ok, so she was retarded. You see two people drive into the driveway of a house, unload luggage, and then try to open the door to their house?
Did you miss the 'forced entry' part? Also, nowhere in the news article did it say they unload luggage. Again with your making things up, /sigh. I'm sure you must be in the habit of unloading your luggage from your car outside your locked gate, but most people tend to do it at their front door.
Edited, Jul 25th 2009 9:07am by McGame
McGame wrote:
Quote:
Ok, so she was retarded. You see two people drive into the driveway of a house, unload luggage, and then try to open the door to their house?
Did you miss the 'forced entry' part? Also, nowhere in the news article did it say they unload luggage. Again with your making things up, /sigh. I'm sure you must be in the habit of unloading your luggage from your car outside your locked gate, but most people tend to do it at their front door.
Edited, Jul 25th 2009 9:07am by McGame
Ok, so which article says they were forcing open a locked gate on the road?
Because the BBC, Boston, CNN, and Fox News even says front door.
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
Hmm, I must have misread that. You are right, it is the front door.
But it still hasn't mentioned anything about unloading their luggage. Where did you get that part then?
But it still hasn't mentioned anything about unloading their luggage. Where did you get that part then?
McGame wrote:
Hmm, I must have misread that. You are right, it is the front door.
But it still hasn't mentioned anything about unloading their luggage. Where did you get that part then?
But it still hasn't mentioned anything about unloading their luggage. Where did you get that part then?
They had backpacks and just got back from a overseas trip. The backpacks were at least part of their luggage.
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
You do realise that backpacks can make them look suspicious right? Burglars tend to carry backpacks for their loot.
If what she saw was two guys with backpacks trying to force open a door, then she was no ****** for calling the police. It was the right thing to do.
If what she saw was two guys with backpacks trying to force open a door, then she was no ****** for calling the police. It was the right thing to do.
McGame wrote:
Ok, there's always the third option called - Don't make stupid guesses. Read the news article before you post.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8161929.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8161929.stm
The third option led me to the same conclusion as the second option.
Seriously. I don't know how you mistake a college professor - who is your neighbour! - for a burglar without being painfully stupid.
Quote:
You do realise that backpacks can make them look suspicious right? Burglars tend to carry backpacks for their loot.
They would carry empty backpacks. Not full ones.
Edited, Jul 25th 2009 1:40pm by zepoodle
zepoodle wrote:
They would carry empty backpacks. Not full ones.
They must have already burgled some other houses and were full of loot.
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
Quote:
The third option led me to the same conclusion as the second option.
Seriously. I don't know how you mistake a college professor - who is your neighbour! - for a burglar without being painfully stupid.
Seriously. I don't know how you mistake a college professor - who is your neighbour! - for a burglar without being painfully stupid.
Tell me then, how does a college professor is supposed to look like? I'm guessing he wasn't wearing a suit, since people generally don't wear backpacks with suits on.
Even so, would you really not do anything even if you saw a stranger (wearing a suit!) forcing open a door?
There are lots of people who don't know who their neighbours are nowadys, it's not that strange. (I'm assuming you can confirm that she was a neighbour from some other article, because it's not stated in the BBC article)
Quote:
They would carry empty backpacks. Not full ones.
For all we know, those could have been half-full only. Burglars tend to have a few tools in their backpacks like lock cutters, etc.
McGame wrote:
Quote:
The third option led me to the same conclusion as the second option.
Seriously. I don't know how you mistake a college professor - who is your neighbour! - for a burglar without being painfully stupid.
Seriously. I don't know how you mistake a college professor - who is your neighbour! - for a burglar without being painfully stupid.
Tell me then, how does a college professor is supposed to look like? I'm guessing he wasn't wearing a suit, since people generally don't wear backpacks with suits on.
Even so, would you really not do anything even if you saw a stranger (wearing a suit!) forcing open a door?
There are lots of people who don't know who their neighbours are nowadys, it's not that strange. (I'm assuming you can confirm that she was a neighbour from some other article, because it's not stated in the BBC article)
Quote:
They would carry empty backpacks. Not full ones.
For all we know, those could have been half-full only. Burglars tend to have a few tools in their backpacks like lock cutters, etc.
I'm sorry. How can you live in Harvard Square and not recognize Skip Gates?
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
Recent Visitors: 222
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (222)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- I saw a darkie breaking into the house across the street...
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC