Racism Being Used to Stop Debate (Martin, Obama, Gates); Obama “Alienated Public Saftey Officers”; Defamation Lawsuit Against Gates?
Just yesterday I had analyzed the over-the-top commentary by a CNN contributor, Roland S. Martin, showing how it is not just fruitless but downright dangerous to attempt to stop the flow of debate in American society based on completely baseless leading conclusions.
Subsequently, the administrator at TheBirthers.org sent my reaction to Mr. Martin and attorney Mario Apuzzo; the following is the result of that email transaction:
Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 2:10 PM
The birthers response to your CNN articleDear Mr. Martin,
Phil at the Right Side of Life made us aware of your recent editorial in his story http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=6732 .
We have posted our reply to your comments on the link below.
———————————--
Roland S. Martin wrote:
And? It’s irrelevant.
Here is an indisputable fact that all of you can deal with until the 2012 elections: Barack Hussein Obama II is the 44th president of the United States. His election has been certified by Congress. He is the president. You can have all of the fun you want with this silly story, and tucker yourselves out by foaming at the mouth. Go right ahead. But it won’t change a thing.
So have fun. I’ll happily laugh at the circus every time. Have at ‘em!
And feel free to post my response. Just spell the name properly and don’t forget the middle initial.
Roland S. Martin
www.rolandsmartin.com
Political Editor, TV One Cable Network
Analyst, CNN
Blogger/Special Correspondent, Essence Magazine
Senior Analyst, Tom Joyner Morning Show———————————-
from: Mario Apuzzo
Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 6:22 PM
Re: The birthers response to your CNN articleMr. Martin:
Thank you for sending me a copy of your response to the Birthers post. Please note that my involvement with Mr. Obama is strictly a constitutional one. If you want to address a constitutional issue with me, I would be more than happy to come on any show that you have to see who can win the constitutional debate. Of course, we have to keep it civil and intelligent which means none of this moon landing stuff. Maybe your principals will take me up on the challenge. After all, what would they have to fear.
Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
Would it be great to see an actual debate between, say, Mr. Apuzzo and someone such as Mr. Martin? Absolutely. Is it likely? Probably not, except maybe in the form of asynchronous communication such as what we have witnessed, above.
And then, wouldn’t you know it, just when I did not watch Mr. Obama’s press conference because I don’t need to be told that I should be liking the President’s health care plan, we would get told that the Cambridge, MA Police Department acted “stupidly” in a situation with a friend of the President, a situation of which Mr. Obama specifically discounted knowing anything about:
Via the AmericanPower blog:
This story is really getting a lot of attention since the Presidents weighed in. See, ABC News, “Cambridge Cop’s Lawyer: Obama was ‘Dead Wrong’ on Gates: Cop Involved in Gates’ Arrest And His Union Lash Out at Obama For Taking Sides” …
There’s been some controversy over access to the police report. See, Newsbusters, “Boston Globe Scrubs Henry Louis Gates Arrest Report From Website.” But Professor William Jacobson has a copy. See, Legal Insurrection, “No, It Wasn’t Racial Profiling.”
Plus, at the New York Times, “Obama Wades Into a Volatile Racial Issue.” And, William Kristol, “Obama Attacks Docs and Cops.”
Also, Dan Riehl, “Obama Destroyed His Post-Racial Theme.” And Dr. Melissa Couthier, at RightWingNews, “President Obama: The Black President Rather Than The American President Who Happens To Be Black.” [emphasis mine]
There’s more at the link. HotAir.com has similarly reported on this story entitled, “How not to win support from police unions,” and Drudge has a portfolio of links on this story as well:
Police Officer denies he’s a racist, won’t apologize…
Audio: ‘I know what I did was right’…
Says Obama ‘way off base’…
Video…
Obama faces criticism in liberal Massachusetts…
Police union condemns president’s comments…
White House qualifies remark…
Republicans question Obama’s police criticism…
But wait, there’s more — TheSmokingGun.com has the actual police report of the incident; below is the summary:
JULY 23--Here are the police reports detailing the confrontation last week between Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr. and Cambridge cops, who were condemned last night by President Barack Obama for acting “stupidly” in arresting the African-American scholar. Cops responded to Gates’s house after neighbor Lucia Whalen reported spotting “two black males with backpacks” trying to gain entry to the home (Gates, returning home from a trip overseas, and his driver were contending with a stuck front door). The Cambridge Police Department reports, authored by Sergeant James Crowley and Officer James Figueroa, quote an incensed Gates yelling, “This is what happens to black men in America!,” and, when asked by Crowley to speak with him outside the residence, Gates replied, “ya, I’ll speak with your mama outside.” A disorderly conduct rap was filed against Gates, but quickly dropped by prosecutors. Gates is reportedly considering legal action against the Cambridge police. (3 pages)
I invite everyone to actually read the police report as it paints a completely different view of the situation than what many press outlets are reporting.
So, bringing this back to the concept of racism — or, more accurately, bigotry — in America, it seems to me that the ones making the bigger issue out of ethnicity are those who don’t want to discuss certain topics that make them feel uncomfortable.
To demonstrate, what enterprising reporter will ask the following questions:
- Did Ms. Whalen — the individual who reported an alleged break-in to Prof. Gates’ house — not know that he lived in that particular house?
- Since Prof. Gates works at Harvard, is he not aware of the rule of law and that if he had a problem with the way that Sgt. Crowley was acting, he should have simply gone along with law enforcement and simply called an attorney or whomever to file a formal complaint (like any other American)?
- What, exactly, was “stupid” about the way that Sgt. Crowley acted? He asked for Prof. Gates’ ID who, in turn, asked for Sgt. Crowley’s ID who, in turn, attempted to provide that information at least 3 times to Prof. Gates.
- Why is the President of the United States stepping beyond his jurisdiction and attempting to directly influence the affairs of a police department at the local level?
This situation has “fail” written all over it for the President.
Update: Via FreedomsLighthouse, the Director of the Brotherhood of Police Officers has come out against the President regarding Sgt. Crowley (video at link):
The Director of the International Brotherhood of Police Officers says President Obama has “alienated public safety officers across the country with his comments,” referring to Obama saying the Cambridge, Massachusetts police “acted stupidly” in arresting Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. The video above gives a synopsis of the story.
Many police officers across the country have a message for President Barack Obama: Get all the facts before criticizing one of our own.
Obama’s public criticism that Cambridge officers “acted stupidly” when they arrested black Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. could make it harder for police to work with people of color, some officers said Thursday. It could even set back the progress in race relations that helped Obama become the nation’s first African-American president, they said.
“What we don’t need is public safety officials across the country second-guessing themselves,” said David Holway, president of the International Brotherhood of Police Officers, which represents 15,000 public safety officials around the country. “The president’s alienated public safety officers across the country with his comments.”
Meanwhile, President Barack Obama stood by his assertion that police did not need to arrest Gates after he had proved it was his own home. . . . . MORE
Obama is continuing to stand by his remarks on the police, even acting shocked that there has been such an uproar about his words. [emphasis original]
Update: Via McClatchy DC, the Fraternal Order of Police has chimed in:
WASHINGTON — The nation’s largest law enforcement organization chastised President Barack Obama Thursday for saying the Cambridge, Mass., police “acted stupidly” for arresting prominent African-American scholar Henry Louis Gates at his home last week.
The criticism by the 325,000-member Fraternal Order of Police came as White House officials tried to clarify Obama’s caustic characterization of Cambridge police’s handling of the Gates situation during a prime-time televised news conference Wednesday.
Chuck Canterbury, the FOP’s national president, said Obama’s comments were “made without the facts” and “do little to narrow the void of distrust that too often separates the community from the men and women who work to keep it safe.” …
Crowley defended himself in an interview with a Boston radio station Thursday, saying the only thing he’s sorry about is that, “I was not aware who Professor Gates was.”
“I am still amazed that somebody of his level of intelligence would stoop to such a level, berate me, accuse me of me being racist, of racial profiling,” Crowley told Boston’s WEEI.
The Associated Press reported that Crowley was an instructor at the Lowell Police Academy for five years and taught a course on racial profiling and how officers should handle certain situations.
Update: And now ABCNews reports that Sgt. Crowley is “not ruling out” filing a defamation lawsuit against Prof. Gates:
The police sergeant who arrested Harvard University professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. last week in his own home may be considering a defamation lawsuit against Gates who has implied his arrest was racially motivated. Alan McDonald, who represents Sgt. James Crowley, said the veteran cop who teaches a racial profiling class for rookie police officers has not ruled out filing a defamation of character or libel lawsuit. “He is exploring all of his options,” McDonald told ABC News.
Update: As guest blogger Nathaniel Givens writes on AmericasRight.com, it turns out that there have been two other police reports that corroborate Sgt. Crowley’s story.
-Phil
Photo courtesy TheWeek
A defamation suit Against Prof Gates? Just huff and puffery from Sgt Crowley. Sgt Crowley made an illegal arrest. No one can commit disorderly conduct in their own home or on their own property. Sgt Crowley would only be in more trouble over this arrest if he had tazed Prof Gates in his home or on his property in addition to cuffing him. Sgt Crowley knows he is damn lucky Prof Gates is willing to settle this over a beer with Barack. Defamation Suit? What a laugh! Sgt Crowley is going to be quietly referred to sensitivity training for trying to punish Prof Gates for “contempt of cop”. Dude’s a hot head.
Sharon2, well said…I would agree with you on that…
Only the ones that use racial slurs or language when they mention the President. (BL)
I agree that there are likely some people who question eligibility solely because of race. I can’t say that every person who uses a racial epithet has that reason as the sole reason, as I believe that there are serious questions that everyone should ask. I denounce any racial slur that is intended as a slur from this and any site.
America elected a non-white President. We are not a country of racists. Although I have my questions, I think back now and again to either the next day or shortly afterward (I can’t remember the exact date) of Obama’s election. There was an elderly Black couple waiting to cross the street at an intersection. I waved them on (as I normally do for anyone). They acknowledged my letting them pass and walked so proudly that I couldn’t help but believe that they felt validated by the election. They were at an age where I am certain they faced discrimination and maybe even brutality, or least were close to some who did experience it. I was genuinely happy for them. I was glad they got to see that a minority race could win enough votes to gain the presidency. If Obama should ever be removed for Constitutional reasons, I would hope that the couple would still know that we are past the age of racism. Racism exists in small pockets around the country, but Obama could have never won the election if racists controlled our country.
Phil says:
July 28, 2009 at 10:34 am
Black Lion,
Do you believe that for all of the individuals that are questioning President Obama’s eligibility. that race is not a factor with any of them?
From the beginning, this site (and likely as well as for those who promote this site) stands for the constitutional eligibility of anyone who chooses to seek or is in the office of the presidency.
Therefore, since race is not part of the qualifications of Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5, I see no point in even broaching the subject.
-Phil
______________________________________________________________
Phil, actually that question was for Sharon2 because of her question to me.
Phil says:
July 28, 2009 at 10:32 am
Black Lion,
You spin like the best of them. Even your report is not entirely accurate.
Fortunately, I’ve already tracked the full two-and-a-half-minute 911 call as a part of my tweets on Twitter.
-Phil
_________________________________________________________________
Ok, can you tell me what was “not entirely accurate”?
Black Lion,
From the beginning, this site (and likely as well as for those who promote this site) stands for the constitutional eligibility of anyone who chooses to seek or is in the office of the presidency.
Therefore, since race is not part of the qualifications of Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5, I see no point in even broaching the subject.
-Phil
Black Lion,
You spin like the best of them. Even your report is not entirely accurate.
Fortunately, I’ve already tracked the full two-and-a-half-minute 911 call as a part of my tweets on Twitter.
-Phil
Sharon 2 says:
July 27, 2009 at 5:16 pm
“I never once advocated selecting someone due to race.”
Have you ever suggested that a person who questions Obama’s eligibility does so only because of race?
__________________________________________________________________
Only the ones that use racial slurs or language when they mention the President. Whether you want to believe it or not some people that are questioning his eligibility are doing it because of his race. Just read the blogs at Orly’s site, repubx, or Stormfront. I personally give everyone the benefit of the doubt.
Do you believe that for all of the individuals that are questioning President Obama’s eligibility. that race is not a factor with any of them?
Just as a follow up the original 911 call was released…In addition the woman that made the original call did not really mention the race of the individuals entering the property…She had indicated that she thought one was possibly Hispanic after being pressed by the 911 operator…So the police report was not entirely accurate. Even the police chief indicated that it is only a summary of events and not an exact accounting. I find that interesting because a couple of days ago people asked how could I question the veracity of the police report, implying that it was the gospel regarding what happened at a specific incident.
Like I said before the truth is somewhere in the middle when it comes to 2 accounts of the same story. And I believe it was two people that allowed their emotions to get the best of them. I said that originally and still stick with that observation.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2009/07/28/2009-07-28_911_tapes_in_gates_case_are_colorblind.html
See my Twitter account for more links RE: Sgt. Crowley.
-Phil
On Fox News today, their chief judicial analyst, Judge Andrew Napolitano made the following points:
- The arrest of Prof Gates was improper because according to Mass Law, a person cannot be arrested for disorderly conduct in their home or on their own property, they have to actually be out in public disturbing other people.
- It was improper for the officer to enter the home when he did not have first hand knowledge that a crime was in progress, for example having seen someone trying to pry the door open.
- On his report he said the woman who made the 911 call was in front of the house when he arrived. The woman says she never spoke to him.
- 4th amendment is to make us safe in our homes from the govt just coming in.
- In many states, if you haven’t been stopped in a vehicle, you are not required to show identification or give your name to an officer just because he asks.
- It’s not against the law to yell at a cop.
If I see a link to the video, I will post it. I think this idea that the police are an authority figure we should obey without question is a post 9/11 phenomenon. I was raised to not smart-mouth cops because it would only make things worse for you, but to make sure they knew you knew your rights and not to let them push you around. For example, like I said before, never, ever let a police officer into your house without a warrant if you didn’t call them. Never talk to the police without an attorney, even if you haven’t done anything wrong, if you didn’t call them. They know your rights. They can’t hold it against you. And don’t ever fall for “if you haven’t done anything wrong, what do you have to worry about talking to us”. If they want to talk to you, you have something to worry about. Not all police are the good and kind angels heroes.
“I never once advocated selecting someone due to race.”
Have you ever suggested that a person who questions Obama’s eligibility does so only because of race?
Civis Naturaliter Natus says:
July 27, 2009 at 7:46 am
It also shows a bias to favor blacks over whites…as I have often read (I have not verified), 90% of crimes commited by Blacks are committed against whites…so the police (even black cops) have reason to be suspect and careful…when dealing with blacks at late hours who apparently seem to be acting like one social class in the homes of another social class…and who show IDs without addresses on them…
__________________________________________________________________
Wow CNN. Be careful, your true colors are showing. First of all you make a unverifiable generalized statement. 90% of all crimes committed by Blacks are committed against whites? Really? That is probably one of the most ignorant statements someone could make. If you are going to say something like that, do your research first. First of all…
“Crime in America is predominantly intraracial, not interracial. About 84 percent of single-offender violent crimes committed by blacks are committed against blacks, and 73 percent of violent crimes committed by whites are committed against whites. Likewise, nearly 90 percent of multiple-offender violent crimes committed by blacks are committed against blacks, while about half of multiple-offender crimes committed against whites are committed by whites.”
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0377/is_n117/ai_16354768/pg_3/
But I do know where you got that 90% number from. It is on the infamous David Duke’s official website. So we know what your mindset really is. You sure you don’t have any numbers from Stormfront you don’t want to give to us?
www2.davidduke.com/hatecrimes/hatecrimeactionplan.shtml
You then went on to write cops “…have reason to be suspect and careful…when dealing with blacks at late hours who apparently seem to be acting like one social class in the homes of another social class.” So you are saying what? That Black people only belong in one social class? Black people can only act like they belong? I don’t follow where you are going with that statement. It seems like you are saying that a police officer should always question a Black person if they seem to be in a area where they don’t belong. really. And Blacks should always carry ID with an address on it because if you don’t then you are suspicious. Interesting commentary on race and racial relations by Civis Naturaliter Natus.
Anonymous says:
July 26, 2009 at 9:43 am
“Blacklion,
Pretend I am from Missouri and SHOW ME where Obama graduated Cum Laude from any undergraduate school, had Harvard Level Law school entrance resume and grades. He had no such thing. His admission to Harvard law school means someone out there was denied his ‘ticket’ because of race.
________________________________________________________________
Anonymous, I decided to “show you” where President Obama graduated cum laude from an undergraduate school…I did not find that. I however did find where he did graduate magna cum laude from Harvard Law…So I would have to believe that he had the Harvard Level Law school enterance resume and grades. That is unless you think that Law School is so much easier that undergrad so it was not difficult to graduate magna cum laude from Harvard.
“Entered Harvard Law School in 1988, was elected the first African–American editor of the Harvard Law Review. He graduated magna cum laude in 1991.”
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/does_barack_obama_have_kenyan_citizenship.html
“…Obama entered Harvard Law School in late 1988. He was selected as an editor of the Harvard Law Review at the end of his first year and president of the journal in his second year. During his summers, he returned to Chicago, where he worked as a summer associate at the law firms of Sidley & Austin in 1989 and Hopkins & Sutter in 1990. After graduating with a Juris Doctor (J.D.) magna cum laude from Harvard in 1991…”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama
Sharon 2 says:
July 26, 2009 at 9:11 pm
BL,
I have trouble with the idea that you are a fair person.
________________________________________________________________
Then you would be wrong. I never once advocated selecting someone due to race. I judge everyone equally. If you can point out where I have advocated otherwise, please let me know.
Anonymous says:
July 26, 2009 at 9:43 am
“Blacklion,
For instance many out there has claimed that the accomplishment of Judge Sotomayor in college and law school were as a result of some sort of Latino affirmative action. The same with President Obama. However you have to realize that to graduate any sort of cum laude, it is all about hard work….”
Pretend I am from Missouri and SHOW ME where Obama graduated Cum Laude from any undergraduate school, had Harvard Level Law school entrance resume and grades. He had no such thing. His admission to Harvard law school means someone out there was denied his ‘ticket’ because of race.
______________________________________________________________
Please reread what I said. I never specifically said that President Obama graduated cum laude. However Judge Sotomayor did from Princeton. President Obama was the editor of the Law review for Harvard, which is voted on by his peers. And if you can show me where President Obama getting into law school denied some else his “ticket” to Harvard because of race, I would like to see it. You just said that President Obama did not release his records from Columbia, so we don’t know what his grades were. So to make that assumption is kind of premature.
Phil,
As per the comment that the police report(s) are biased testimony, it is my understanding that they are prima facie evidence and that the court, without contrary evidence, holds them to be a true account of the facts and incidents reported there in, precisely because the police officer(s) who file them are not private citizens, but agents of the law and trained to do this.
Any allegation against the veracity of the reports, which is based on hearsay evidence, shows disrespect for the police officers of the nation and is uncalled for.
It also shows a bias to favor blacks over whites…as I have often read (I have not verified), 90% of crimes commited by Blacks are committed against whites…so the police (even black cops) have reason to be suspect and careful…when dealing with blacks at late hours who apparently seem to be acting like one social class in the homes of another social class…and who show IDs without addresses on them…