No matter how you spin it, I don’t think it was appropriate for Obama to make any comments. It looks petty and unstatesmanlike.
I agree. It is completely out of line for the President of the United States to address problems that happen in the United States. We should impeach him and get someone who ignores such things in office, post haste.
Wow, you’re so clever. Allow me to bask in the reflected glow of all that is you?
Personally, I like my Presidents to know all the facts before they open their mouths particularly about a relatively trivial issue.
Unstatesman like.
I’m happy if they just admit things like bias and not having all the facts prior to stating their opinion. You know, so that we know it’s just an opinion.
Though I will note that his answer was in two separate parts, and that the second part, answering the different second question, was meant to be heard as non-opinion president-speak. In my opinion.
If that’s your rubric, public officials would almost never have anything to say. However, I think it’s highly appropriate that he said outright that he is likely biased because it’s a friend of his, and that he doesn’t have all of the facts. This implies that should new facts come to light which indicate something contrary to what he believes now to be the case, he’ll alter his view based upon them. I don’t know: a president who has a provisional acceptance of what happened that’s subject to revision should new evidence come to light is bad. Thank god that George Bush didn’t suffer from such an affliction; we might have wound up in a war if dogmatic assertion irrespective of the facts weren’t such a great way to lead one’s life.
And if the issue is relatively trivial, then why would you require more of them in the way of knowing all the facts than you would about rather important things? It is a logical necessity of your assertion that: “particularly about a relatively . . .” The corollary there is that you would prefer them to know all of the facts, but if the issue is rather important that’s less important than it is over something that’s relatively trivial. Hrm.
And how do they do that? By following the procedures laid down by their PD.
First, real life is not quite so binary as you are making it out to be. It’s hard to imagine a real life situation, much less this particular situation, in which a cop could be arrested for following his departments procedures and regulations. That would have to be some wild, crazy, procedural fubar on the part of the department.
It occurs to me to ask, did Obama specify specifically that the police officer was stupid? Or did he just say that the Cambridge Police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home, without specifying whether he was talking about the officer, the SOP policies, or the sum total of all factors influencing police action in the situation?
I think it was clear he was talking about the officer(s) or the larger department in this specific case, and not referring to the department policies.
How do you arrive at that conclusion? I mean, it’s not clear to me that he wasn’t just speaking about the police as a monolithic entity, policies and all.
Yes, because a condition of becoming a police officer is some kind of police training school, which naturally comes after one has been a cop for some time sufficient to allow him to read the SOP, but not sufficient in time to have allowed him to be educated about what the law says. It makes perfect sense to send a person to school to do a job long after they’ve been hired to do it, and have been doing it. You see, there are time restrictions and conditions on commissions for those who are awaiting a class date; certainly, a sergeant would have by now attended such classes.
Somethings in life aren’t binary. Some are.
No, it’s really not that hard to imagine a police officer being arrested, prosecuted and convicted for following something which is contrary to law irrespective of what the thing is. The reason this isn’t hard to imagine is quite simply that it has happened, does happen and will continue to happen. No imagination required.
Then it should be easy for you to cite an instance when a police officer is arrested and convicted for following his department’s procedures.
But I think we should be talking about the real news story today. The one that is getting so much air time. Is Obama really a US citizen? We should teach the controversy!!
From the police officer’s own report:
How can you interpret that as the cop trying to defuse the situation by leaving? Gates was yelling and demanding the officer’s name. Even though the officer had said his name three times, Gates (apparently) was yelling so much that he didn’t hear. The officer was clearly justified in being annoyed that Gates wasn’t listening. But by his own words, he also made it very clear to Gates that he wanted to continue any discussion outside. His report states his reason for leaving, and it was NOT to diffuse the situation, nor was it to end the situation by leaving entirely, it was (supposedly) so that he could hear and be heard better. So Gates didn’t just decide to follow an officer who was trying to leave, he followed an officer who, by his own report, had given Gates every reason to believe that he (the officer) wanted to continue talking with Gates outside.
I think Gates was being a monumental asshole, jerk, idiot, etc. But none of those are arrestable offenses. Police officers are given more power than the ordinary citizen, and consequently are and should be held to a higher standard of behavior. Gates can be the biggest asshole in the world, but a police officer is supposed to be better than that, is supposed to be able to handle that. Responding to a verbally abusive asshole by arresting him is just not acceptable behavior from a police officer.
Obama was completely right, it was stupid.
Just WTF should he be apologizing for? Gates should have been kissing the officer’s ass for trying to protect him and his house.
No. This was quoted previously, but to remind you, from the officer’s own report:
If the cop had suspicions about the legitimacy of the Harvard ID, he would have stated that in his report (it’s pretty detailed in most respects). He said, “Upon learning that Gates was affiliated with Harvard”. That is a clear and unambiguous statement that the cop accepted the ID and believed that Gates was, in fact, who he said he was.
This three minute answer to a simple question could well end up being Obama’s public opinion Waterloo.
He should have had the wisdom and maturity to avoid commenting on the details. His answer has only provided the gasoline for the fire in many camps. His answer has pulled the rug from under most support from the Fraternal Order of Police Union and has given pause to many of the independents that placed him in office.
Poorly played by Obama
It’s not that I am assuming everyone will be reasonable; it’s that I realize there’s news every day and attention spans are short. Harry Reid said today that the health care reform bill won’t be voted on until August, so that’s going to be in the news again then. There are still two wars and a recession happening. This will be over in a few days until Gates makes his documentary about it or whatever his plan is.
Nothing is going to make them go away, but they’e long since been discredited. It’s the same as the Muslim thing. 0.001% of the population will hang on to it forever, but nobody else gives a damn.
Yeah: people who already dislike Obama will natter on about it endlessly, and most everybody else will stop caring in a couple of days.
Could this be the break the McCain campaign has been waiting for?
OMG, I hope not. Best thing Obama ever did was spare us from that asshole
Blacks and poor people who have been rousted by the cops forever are already well behind Obama and Prof. Gates. Their default position is the cops will push them around for sport. It has been true for decades.
The cop screwed up. He got pissed off when the uppity black did not treat him the way he wanted. There was no arrestable offense. Gates was probably rude. That is not enough cause.
No, this is almost a textbook definition of Disorderly Conduct. I read the report and I would’ve arrested him, too. If people persist in being disruptive and uncooperative when we are trying to figure out what is going on, they will soon find themselves in handcuffs. I don’t see any indication that race played any part. What I do see, however, is a pretentious jerk who expects the whole damn world to know who he is, and he doesn’t think the law applies to him.
There was never a question that they wouldn’t be. The support he’s lost with this guffaw is the middle class independents that were responsible for him being elected.