Op Ed: 'Stupid' Police Policy Produces Stupid Debacle By Stupid MS-Mediation

(EUGENE, Ore.) - “Stupid” is as stupid does. Behavior and action in the public eye prove up what it is, by what it does and the consequences.

Surely in America today --after the past eight years of a very stupid “Presidential administration”--we are suffering from solid consequential proof of that common sense maxim --at high costs around the world.

Especially since that spectacularly failed neo/con- cabal confluence has now been succeeded by another Presidential administration: This time offering some solid continuing hope of reform, remediation, respect and real responsibility.

Its return to Founding Fathers principles and pragmatic program solutions, already underway and pending --as for healthcare reform and strong educational support --have brought desperate demands for destructive attack from hugely-funded private-gain interests. Dollars in the billions are stacked against real public understanding of these real issues.

Public service debacle and demonstration of failure should draw public censure and its consequences.

National-vote action made that entirely clear on Nov. 4 --and set the stage for remorseless, extremely conscienceless attack on our current President --who happens to be black, too.

Cambridge Police policy covering actions by that police officer “arresting” Professor Gates reflect precisely, today, what was in place ‘way back in the early Forties.

I worked then for United Press, based in Boston (and lived briefly in Cambridge, within blocks of the current Gates home.)

By definition, “stupid” means “lacking or marked by lack of intellectual acuity.”

This whole situation strikingly demonstrates the true meaning of that situation, when applied for malign purposes intentional in the action itself; OR simply consequential, initiated rapidly by others seeking selfish advantage wherever possible. (MUCH CHEAPER to motivate and manipulate a willing mainstream media-gang, owned by employer, than to pile up further billions for offensive advertising and “campaign contributions !!).

Here’s the story-situation, clearly reported by some few in the still-responsible segments of national media: Professor Gates had just returned from China, found his front door “stuck”, and shoved it open to get in after a very rigorous trip. His limo driver helped him. Professor Gates was then was accosted by a uniformed policeman demanding personal ID and insisting on explanation of his presence in his own home!

Would YOU,too, then feel at bit “on the hot side” if it had happened to you ? Whether you are black OR white?

Unfortunately, Professor Gates IS black --as is our still-new President Obama, elected Nov. 4 with massive agenda-points dedicated to rapid action on major reforms we all know are absolutely, inevitably demanded for the already-here 21st Century.

The policeman, part of the Boston-area culture, long known for racial intolerance, was white. (At United Press, we were instructed to avoid “local incidents” unless “violence prevails...then write the heil out of that story !” Quotes from clear recall...)

Being of proven rational-and-reasonable attitude and approach --how else ever attain international fame and status as a leading professor in a leading American university ?-- might you then produce both personal ID and proof of home-ownership --fully expecting fair, open and honest treatment from that uniformed police officer ? (Those are Constitutional rights, albeit long denied anyone, of several racial extractions, in our nation. After more than TWO HUNDRED YEARS they are still often denied to many, as public record of many thousands of similar incidents makes excruciatingly clear even today --all too frequently with someone shot.)

Especially if that officer had arrived on casual call from a passer-by reacting to skin-color of two men at a well-known address for a famed person?

Every effective police operation has its list of such addresses and systematic information pattern for all police operations in-and-around any such locations,made simple to run via universal computer-control demanded for many other police responsibilities.

Does Cambridge have such a sensible, proven pattern ? Has anybody asked that prime question ?? IF NOT, that irrevocably proves up “stupid”: “lack of intellectual acuity.”

IF you happened to be black, as Professor Gates is, and had been so subjected to racial indignity over a long lifetime, might you get just a little “irritated”?

Perhaps even find yourself angry enough to show that very natural emotion very naturally by both body language and verbalization?

After a rigorous trip, with open attack on your human rights already demonstrated by casual caller action and rapid police response, with refusal to state name and badge number and forceful demand to “step outside”?

When the officer demanded that you “step outside”,what would YOU have expected was about to happen --if YOU had been Professor Gates?

Would it have been within reason for that officer to have known he was “at the Gates residence”, simply as common sense rapidly-supplied information when the casual-passer/by-call turned up that key location?

IF NOT, THAT’S STUPID FOR SURE... Did the officer converse with the limo-driver, the second “black men breaking in the door”, as reportedly stated by that casual-passer/by-caller ? Not one mention is made of that inquiry, if indeed the police officer did so.

IF NOT, attitude and action again demonstrate “lack of intellectual acuity”. (Read: “stupid”.) Not one story has had dialog by reporter with that limo-driver; Nor with the casual/caller; nor with anyone involved in any previous incidents, surely on this police officer’s record since he has been officially credited with proper conduct in previous similar situations.

Given this situation (accurately reflected from press reports-check for yourself) it was both demanded-and-courageous for President Obama to make precisely the statement he made: Right out in the public eye, in response to an open-dialog question in a Presidential press conference.

Would you wish him to deny and delay and somehow differentiate this decisive demonstration by police action of the well-documented reality of our continuing racist attitudes in America?

Do you REALLY want a President who has guts enough and determination enough to face up directly, openly and publicly to what is actual demonstrated fact in such situations ? Be he black OR white, that’s surely his strong American Constitutional requirement when speaking to the public.

OR do you wish to avoid, avert, and somehow hide what is actually happening in OUR America, today and every day; in many other cities and towns; by still other stupid-policy/stupid-action situations all too similar. Some with fatal results, as you read intermittently right here in Salem-News. The truth is there for all to see and appreciate:

As demanded for our democracy actually to work as our Founders designed it to do for us.

But WE are required to recognize that truth when we find it, and to have the courage to act on the facts when we finally discover that truth, too. One of our sharpest, most conscience-shaped reporters, famed for insights and understandings, is known for his departing saying: “AND that’s the way it is...”

Will we who remain have the wit, wisdom and will to change “the way it is...”? Ennui and apathy and indecisive attitude will never prevail, playing right into the hands of those malign private-gain parties and persons who pervert public policy for their own purposes.

Editor's note: If you intend to leave a comment on this story, do your best to back up what you are saying or we will not approve it. If you send a comment that is directly insulting, that will not be approved either. Finally, if there is even a hint of racism in your comment, it too will be deleted.

At 21, Henry Clay Ruark was Aroostook Editor for the Bango, Maine DAILY NEWS, covering upper 1/4 of the state. In the ‘40s, he was Staff Correspondent, then New England Wires Editor at United Press-Boston; later Editor for the Burlington, Vermont 3-daily group owned by Wm. Loeb, later notorious at Manchester, New Hampshire UNION LEADER for attacks on Democratic Presidential candidates.

He joined Dr. Amo DeBernardis at PCC, helping establish, extend programs, facilities, Oregon/national public relations; moved to Chicago as Editor/Publisher of oldest educational-AV journal, reformed as AV GUIDE Magazine; then established and operated Learning Media Associates as general communications consultant group. Due to wife’s illness, he returned to Oregon in 1981, semi-retired, and has continued writing intermittently ever since, joining S-N in 2004. His Op Eds now total over 560 written since then.

Salem-News.com Top Stories

2025: Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst

Two Wars with No Way Out

No One Owns the Future

The Ugly Origins of Trump's America First Policy

A One-State Solution Could Transform the World

Comments Leave a comment on this story.

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.

Henry Ruark August 1, 2009 3:46 pm (Pacific time)

Armentrout: Again, sir, you prove my point relentlessly and irrevocably by attempting to reverse reality on your own feelings-alone. If you have national non-political sources known as reliable and ethical journalists, why not simply cite for "see with own eyes" and let us evaluate with our own minds ? It is only those who cannot cite fact-and-solid source who find themselves protesting desperately vs demonstrated and undeninable distortion and perversion of testable fact. We here can leave to all serious readers still able to overcome denial the easy and simple search on multiple Internet sources shown to be reliable for the flat facts of these matters. When healthcare reform does become the inevitable reality, in whatever form our awakened Congress now contains in its broad choice of improving and nearly-perfected legislation, we can only hope Medicare can provide for you something to ease both your current pain and perhaps sharpen those so- deficient mental processes clearly obvious in your awkward machinations here. Thanks for participation sp deeply demonstrating precisely what Op Eds have been stating now for several months...

Armentrout August 1, 2009 11:07 am (Pacific time)

It appears that any stated opinion that is opposed to the current administrations actions meets with considerable disfavor with some posters here. I suggest that they be aware that the majority (and in some cases like healthcare, a plurality) of the likely American voter are growing more and more unhappy with Obama's policies. Of course if we were going by the PRAVDA example, we would be quite limited on the information of what is happening, but we are not, thus those who do not recognize the legitimate concerns of the majority (and plurality) are not being realistic. Debate is only a debate when there is an exchange of ideas, otherwise we have fascism, which is easy to spot for those who value the exchange of opinions, a process that the limited cannot grasp very well.

Editor: That's right, have some damned respect for your President or get the Hell out of my country. We are sick of racist ramblings and nonsensical accusations. We had the worst president in history under W. Bush and you will give this man a chance to fix this nation. If you don't like it, then leave it, and I have no obligation to post your divisive comments. Bush was a fascist, Bush's supporters are often the same; buy a dictionary and at least know what the words you choose mean. By the way, WE are the majority. WE elected Obama; and the GOP lost, bigtime. That does not shove Obama supporters into a minority role .

Henry Ruark August 1, 2009 8:16 am (Pacific time)

Armentrout: You wrote:"I dare say if they cannot properly administer the "Clunker Program", how do you think healthcare on a national level will go? Like medicare?" The falsely-based and openly distorted judgment demonstrated should warn us all of the level we can expect from you --and why it will be so stated, too. Given example YOU chose and rapid action thereon via added billions, your own words now demonstrate perfectly and profoundly the open, obvious intent of your lines here. With that and other examples YOU have established your true right to any credence whatsoever here in the future, sir. Per line previously here: "For those who reverse reality, there is nothing but contempt." Surely all those working in good faith via open, honest, democratic dialog here will now rapidly learn to recognize all such and place them where they belong to end.

Henry Ruark July 31, 2009 3:05 pm (Pacific time)

To all: Here's "see with own eyes" AP story re WH Beer Summit, for your evaluation re further strength of strong. honest, open,surely democratic dialog. Do you ever remember any similar occasion ? WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama is hailing his meeting with professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. and policeman James Crowley as a "friendly, thoughtful conversation." In a statement after the three men and Vice President Joe Biden chatted over beers, Obama said he learned that Gates and Crowley had already spent some time talking with each other. He called that "a testament to them." Said Obama: "I have always believed that what brings us together is stronger than what pulls us apart. I am confident that has happened here tonight, and I am hopeful that all of us are able to draw this positive lesson from this episode." Obama, Gates and Crowley were at the center of a national uproar over racial profiling. (Worth noting is Crowley report re talk with Gates: "We agreed to disagree". Surely that was possible without handcuffs, immediately discarded "police" action, and internationally costly debacle revealing reality re racism resonance in nation now deep in other disasters. ------------------- Worth repetition of response to one comment: "For those who reverse reality, there is only contempt, sir". I'll stand on that, as did the President --all the way, with open, honest, friendly, cooperative end to debacle costing us dearly in any kind of international terms...and therefor fitting precisely into definition of "stupid": "Lacking in intellectual acuity."

Henry Ruark July 31, 2009 10:49 am (Pacific time)

J. Armentrout: Thank for rapid confirmation re my realistic, pragmatic diagnosis on continuing denial. What you wrote attempts to spray with racist hatred the smear you attempt across every other Obama action so far. Your singular choice of wording "...now infamous" is dead give/away to both understanding and thus attitude, via rapid language analysis. Fact is the President's word "stupidly" reflects precisely what has now become the fully international understanding of this incident, per some 50 documenting references on file here. So solid factual evident defies, denies, defeats your surely racist-denial assessment. Ask your own psychiatrist what pragmatic assessment he can make of that action. IF you have guts enough after that, please report here, with source to which we can go to check verity. You can surely understand our reluctance to depend on it after clear demonstration here. Otherwise we end up relying on what is already shown to be distorted, if not perverted, source. If you have no contact with psychiatrist, ID to Tim with working phone and I will set up visit for you at cost, to allow your own clearance of mind and conscience.

Henry Ruark July 31, 2009 10:37 am (Pacific time)

To all: Here's "see with own eyes" link to nail down points after mine own last shot: www.americanprogress.org (excerpt from REAL TEACHABLE MOMENT) The Gates-Crowley Affair is a signal episode of racial progress. We don’t see it because we’re looking in the wrong places and drawing tired, old-school conclusions. Think of it this way: Gates sassed a Boston-area cop in broad daylight and in front of other blue-suited officers, and he lived to make a national case of it. In fact, he plans to press the issue in a forthcoming PBS special on racial profiling. He will lunch out on this for years to come. Granted, Gates should never have been arrested in the first place. But his four hours in lock-up did nothing but temporarily inconvenience and humble him—he was never in any danger of losing life or limb. And he had many and powerful friends in high places—including the president of the United States—watching his back. That’s real progress from the bad old days. My late father, who grew up in rural North Carolina, would have danced in the streets to have witnessed what Gates did and will do. By focusing on what racism that persists—and will always be among us—we lose sight of the racism that is dead and buried. Racial healing in this nation is more than a beer-fueled debate. It’s real, tangible, and visible. It’s a slow and inevitable, messy and forward-lurching process that we are still perfecting. Don’t be confused. This isn’t a post-racial anything. Our national work isn’t done, of course, and may never be finished. That’s because human beings aren’t—and probably won’t ever be—perfect. But a great racial democratizing process is loose in this land. It can’t be stopped or turned back. It stares back at us on the television screen or sits among us in the workplace or educates our children. And it deserves our attention and praise at every opportunity. We have only to open our eyes—and minds—to see and experience the many, daily teachable moments." Sam Fulwood III is a Senior Fellow at American Progress.

Henry Ruark July 31, 2009 8:39 am (Pacific time)

To all: "Teachable moment" has now occurred in full sight of many American and international millions. That's UNDeniable: "see with own eyes" at work, around WH garden table. Conclusion based on fact is also undeniable, well expressed here in final pgh of major report: www.opednews.com: Who was being alarmed? The "several Cambridge and Harvard University police" that Crowley noted were "assembled on the sidewalk in front of the residence"?? With so many police present, did the seven citizens still feel threatened by this slender black man who needed a cane to get around?? From the very beginning of his arrest, the charges against Gates were slated to be dropped because prosecuting attorneys know they have no chance of a successful outcome. "The upshot is that a white cop arrested a black man on a trumped-up charge of disorderly conduct, handcuffed him, ran him into the station to be fingerprinted, stand for a mug shot, and sit in a cell for four hours just to show him who was boss." ------------------ Preceding two pp. probing analysis of actual event from text of official reports sets out situation in undeniable fashion. Any rational person not at risk from denial must now face up to fact. This is my final shot on an extremely revealing and thus damaging all-too-often repeated American lifestyle situatiob, also an undeniable fact, as we find ourselves well into thre 21st Century, more than 300 years after the first courageous humans began to define and deny the extreme evil of racism. Anyone care to deny any of that ? ID self to Tim for deep probing continued analysis done over some 20 years for LMA purposes, now with around 200 documenting references. OR you can more simply read CHESAPEAKE by James Michener for distressing early Colonial details, per previous citation here. DO NOT seek further till you have at least read that one of several shown here in detail.

Jack Armentrout July 31, 2009 7:24 am (Pacific time)

It is with that thought in mind that we take a look at President Barack Obama’s now infamous determination from afar that the police in Cambridge, Massachusetts, “acted stupidly,” in arresting Harvard Professor, and Obama friend, Henry Louis Gates. The president has since re-calibrated that remark, offering in his pre-eminent law enforcement opinion that Gates should not have been arrested for verbally assaulting Sgt. James Crowley and causing a public scene in front of his home in protest of the police coming to protect him and his property from potential vandals.

But the “acting stupidly” comment still hangs over the incident and over the White House like a dark cloud. Obama put it there with his inability to restrain himself from commenting on the Gates affair at last week’s White House press conference. And in so eagerly labeling the Cambridge Police, Obama has unwittingly provided the lens through which to view his first six months as president. For the Obama Administration has been acting stupidly almost since the very first day of his presidency. I dare say if they cannot properly administer the "Clunker Program", how do you think healthcare on a national level will go? Like medicare?

Editor: He's ten times the man that Bush was, no matter how many alleged mistakes he makes.

Henry Ruark July 30, 2009 1:13 pm (Pacific time)

Daniel: You wrote: ..."By overblowing this story" --which nobody at any level "can deny has happened at every level,too-- you put finger right on the reason. Op Ed is entirely clear; no fact in it has been nor can be denied; conclusions are mine and well within "informed opinion", qualifications of writer, life and personal experience...et al, et al. Obvious result here is that continued ostensible good faith probing is far from being "kosher" --sorry if use of term may be considered as "racism !", too !--and has due clear undeniable resonance and relevance when used here as tarred-brush (Yes, tar is usually black, too !) to tie into national attack now known underway vs our black President. Does that deserve such truly desperate dialog as elicited here ? Very possibly since clear, openly stated purpose of Op Ed --both here and on-side to Editor Tim-- was to bring on perhaps unwanted and painful cogitation, even to point of recognition of deeply-bured denial... Reading Comments leaves open to any serious reader whether or not that was accomplished, major purpose of my Op Eds and dialog-following here. Re recognition of denial, when reader forced to confront same, its psychitric nature in itself leads to further denial since it is so selfdenigrating and destroying for many...for anyone in doubt, simply seek answer from your own choice of trusted psychiatrist !!

Daniel July 30, 2009 7:41 am (Pacific time)

Skipper there are also many good black , brown ect police , and some bads ones . Not all police are white , why do you limit your comment only to white police officers ? When you say a whole bunch of bad ones are you talking of over half , three quarters ? Gates may have been quite crankey after a very long trip from China plus he was ill . I know i get a bit testy after long trips from jet lag . This whole story to me is about dividing America and getting market share from both the left and right . There is real everyday abuse by the police and not just to black men this story is NOT one of them . Broom sticks , tasers , beating beyond the cameras range , these are the real stories ! By over blowing this non story real abuse gets overlooked .

Kyle July 30, 2009 7:33 am (Pacific time)

The American voter has taken this "teachable moment" by letting Obama know that they are waking up. It's really something that many people attempt to do, with less and less success, i.e. , when you critique Obama for his polocies you call those critics racist. Well "Cry Wolf" is not just a fable. Obama has now lost approx. 6% of his voter base from last November, and soon more and more people, maybe even you ideologically blinded, will see what he is. "Daily Presidential Tracking Poll -12 Rassmussen | 7/30/09

Mark Sichau July 29, 2009 7:30 am (Pacific time)

I also listened to the 911 call, it was just between the caller and the dispatcher? I would say that according to national polls I have seen recently, the interpretation of this incident clearly confirms that it is viewed through a racial prism by many. The people on the scene, police and civilians, back up Sgt. Crawley. DA's frequently dismiss minor crimes for a variety of reasons. Too bad Nifong did not do it during the bogus Duke rape trial that nearly destroyed the lives of some fine innocent men. You know, even now many feel it was a conspiracy and they did rape that individual.

"Skipper" Osborne July 28, 2009 11:34 pm (Pacific time)

My2cents, you did it again. I also heard the released 911 call, maybe I was listening to a different one than you heard. However, I did not hear "any words coming from anyone except the officer" zero, zilch! When the arresting officer found out that Mr. Gates was who he said he was, the officer should have gotten out of "Dodge City." My2cents, tell me why a well respected individual would yell at or berate an officer for doing their duty "if" they are doing their duty justly? What ever the officer reasons were they are "a lie:" that is why the District Attorneys' office dropped the case. There are many good White police officers and a whole bunch of bad ones; it is too easy for a police officer to hide behind "the power of the State" which they have to commit unlawful arrests.

"Skipper" Osborne July 28, 2009 11:07 pm (Pacific time)

Henry Ruark, very, very, very Good article! We need more White journalists to speak the truth, and I thank God that Salem-News their journalists "freedom to tell the truth." Keep on truckin.'

Henry Ruark July 28, 2009 8:41 pm (Pacific time)

Stan:
Distraction by reversing reality never wins anything but contempt, sir.

Re "lifeblood", that now comes in paper format bundled in bigh white sacks, marked very plainly "corporate campaign contributions";
Even though it doth surely originate in obscene profits produced in billions by extremely prolific pharmaceutical perpetrators who then buy up certain msmedia message channels;
with lavish proceeds from perverting healthcare needs to such huge extent millions can no longer worship at altar of "market magic".

Stan July 28, 2009 6:58 pm (Pacific time)

The CNN video tapes speak for themselves. These law enforcement personnel are no doubt being truthful in regards to the positive feelings they have for Sgt. Crawley. Their statements do not agree with those who do not have first hand info, which appears to be quite unpleasant for the detractors. I'm sure the national polls on this issue also are unpleasant for the detractors, such is the way of an informed public when they attain more facts as time goes by. Which as everyone knows aids in good decision-making at the ballot box which provides the lifeblood for our republic.

Henry Ruark July 28, 2009 12:36 pm (Pacific time)

Stan et al: May help if I point out that any true social scientist will never attempt interview with key participant except in very private, protected situation. Anyone skilled in eliciting honest feelings always deeply emotionally-wrapped will understand the necessity of freeing interviewee from fear of status and other losses always implicit in any human situation. First shot in any tv-news int'vw is always "establisher" to show viewers situation, demanded for understandings. CNN int'vw clearly places Crowley in main spot to keep sharp eye and open ear on whatever dialog follows from his (black) collesgue. On TV-news, worldwide, in full view of valued colleague Crowley, Police Chief, Administrators, et al, et al, do you really believe black policeman can possibly speak out true feelings ? Even if he desperately trys, ability to do so almost surely shaped and perhaps even distorted by situation itself. No matter whether he's fully capable, with courage of deep conviction to be completely honest, flying in face of the whole working situation by embarrassing all and, in the view of some at least, openly "betraying" Crowley, is far too much to expect. For solid reaction private protected int'vw demanded with promise of confidentiality and hidden ID in any written report. That's standard social scientist protocol and pattern you may not have known. Does reporter understand that fact, reality surely well recognized by many, and act as demonstrated in shot anyhow ? That's a matter of skilled professional judgment, and not necessarily relevant here. But judgment of resulting impacts on viewer is open and honest consequence of how this one was set up; comments from any participant surely in deep question under these highly visible circumstances. Forgive necessarily detailed analysis, not only for you but as part of now well-recognized "teachable moment" for all who view and then surely should also cogitate, even if at some pain from consequences still not completely penetrating every mind and heart in our still developing "experiment in democracy."

Henry Ruark July 28, 2009 11:43 am (Pacific time)

Stan: Yours re CNN defies reason by pitting black colleagues against white officer with him supervising situation. IF you, by personal economic necessity, depended on white colleague to back you with force when life might depend on it, despite their beliefs or their true feelings, do you really believe they are going to defy, deny, and defeat the white guy ? Oldest propaganda ploy by reporter setting up situation is to make sure supporters ready to endorse and back the point of view chosen --and never to act until that sure situation is readied. (Disclosure: "Been there, done that !" 'Nuff said ??) CNN is NOT noted for its entirely impartial actions toward Obama, as anyone who has skills in critical listening can confirm for you. OR see critical reviews in any one of the three major professional journals replete with similar situations over the past several years. Did you do that demanded first step for any rational professional criticism ? I surveil all three monthly simply as demanded LMA action for years. Key question remains: WHY force Gates out door of his own home in handcuffs, despite anything other than murderous attack with gun or knife on arresting officer ? Commonsense prevailing, the cops should have folded cards and quit after two photo IDs were presented, and facts of situation clearly emerged. They did NOT, thus either acting intentionally to build incident; OR stupidly by failing to exercise mediator skills definitely defined by fact Crowley teaches Racial Profiling --so cannot very well claim lack of knowledge re similar situations. For me, CNN action simply proves up precisely the major massage of massive racialism still highly evident in our nation --distorting it for attack purposes vs Obama. Language analysis --part of propaganda-analysis tooling-- over several major incidents in last year show that to be simple fact of life now. Careful further reading of major consensus now clearly evident nationally supports that view, most rational persons will now agree. SO let's get back to main shot, leaving intentional distraction by distortion from major necessity for all of us: Healthcare reform, clearly now shadowed by this vile incident caused by stupidity --at whichever level you care to define it. Toodle-oo to you, too, friend Stan ! Neat shot but massively misdirected in major national interests --unless you too wish to kill off not only reforms where desperately needed, but our first black President, too. Further emphasis simply reveals which motive drives your very obvious behavior here. Even the most intense of language scientists would do no more to pursue point so clearly killed by factual analysis.

Stan July 28, 2009 10:52 am (Pacific time)

Below is a link to a CNN video that has two black officers from the Cambridge police department who give their "professional viewpoints" on both Sgt. Crawley and the mixed responses of others who have no first hand info. This is an excellent perspective that non-blacks should listen to and evaluate. It cuts through all the distractions many are putting out there to obfuscate the event. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcvUhu5mqJM

Henry Ruark July 28, 2009 9:55 am (Pacific time)

To all serious readers: Two top selections from 20-items chosen for Op Ed preparation are: AMERICAN CREATION; Joseph J. Ellis;2007. He is Pulitzer winner for FOUNDING BROTHERS. Focuses intriguing full detail on six critical moments in early American history. ISBN: 978-0-307-27645-2 and ADAMS vs JEFFERSON; John Ferling; 2004. He is leading authority on era of American Revolution. This title details,dissects, analyzes,summarizes keynote Presidential election of 1800, seen as consummation of 1776, reflecting "issues, passions resonating in our own times." ISBN: 0-19-516771-6. Both run 275 pp.,readable in a day or two. To be informed one must seek out basic best information on past, present and possible future, offsetting ennui and apathy only way possible: By sharing-learning from factual sources. Nobody can plot wise future without knowing first from whence cometh the current situation.

Henry Ruark July 28, 2009 8:46 am (Pacific time)

John et al: You may just have a book-plan there, friend. You could Rightly name it "Much Ado About Nothing".

Stan July 28, 2009 8:43 am (Pacific time)

There sure are a wide variety of opinions regarding this issue and Presidents Obama's handling of the situation. Below is a national poll that breaks down all the demographics from political party to racial backgrounds and much more. It's very insightful. Some interesting internal numbers for one to see how they compare with the rest of the people. Primarily it shows that 26% agree with Obama's response while 46% feel his response was poor. An excellent reflection of Americans exercising their 1st Amendment. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/july_2009/26_say_obama_response_good_or_excellent_on_cambridge_cop_question

Henry Ruark July 27, 2009 8:53 pm (Pacific time)

My2C: So what doth that prove except still more malign and destructive intent on your part now ? Do you wish to deny Obama and his wife their First Amendment rights ? OR is this part of more crazy conspiracy theory tied to tendentious tommyrot as most such stuff proves to be ? Even others here have pointed out the heavy weight of editorial consensus, to which you off further crap without a word or link or other sign of documentation for what is obviously your own b/button massaged machination made into a public statement without accountability or responsibility, while you hide your full colors under an assumed pseudonym. Per original response it is worth precisely what you named it yourself.

John July 27, 2009 7:23 pm (Pacific time)

If the queen owns all of the horses(politicians), does it really matter who wins the race? She always wins, you only win(limited), when you pick the right horse. The C.F.R. owns all candidates and outcomes. Black, white, native, non-oligarch, it doesn't matter. If you play(gamble), you lose, it's the odds! Even the winners are losers, they just exchange liabilities to the next administration and blame the last with indifference.

My 2cents July 27, 2009 6:35 pm (Pacific time)

I listened to the entire 911 phone call several times and contrary to what a few others said about it would have been released earlier had it existed, well it's now in the public domain, so expect this incident to continue for a while longer. Prior to that calls release many pundits out there were calling the 911 caller many unkind names based on zero facts. I guess we could say they were acting stupidly? Regardless of how people want to view this incident, no one could accurately characterize it as an example of racial profiling. I have read that Prof. Gates has had mentoring relationships with many prominent African Americans, which is normal behavior, and according to an interview with him, two of these people were Michelle Obama (maiden name?) when she was a law student and then a number of years later President Obama when he was a law student.

Henry Ruark July 27, 2009 1:50 pm (Pacific time)

My2Cents: You are right, that's what yours is worth. Distorted/perverted fits it neatly, too, since it reverses rights and oblgations in this incident and turns on its head who is damaged, to what extent, by what actions, by whom, and how. ALL of that is major reason why Prof. Gates could never conceivably be dismissed in any suit, either direction. SOlID FACT is that Gates was in his own home, properly ID'd self and that fact,but was then overpowered by police action. Any competent attorney will tell you the huge advantage in any possible suit relates to what happened to Gates --and his international reputation-- rather than what may have been done to lesser dollar-value levels for the sure loser in such suits --the errant police officer. Basic fact is that he could, should and now deeply regrets fact of non-withdrawal when he first discovered Gates full American right to defense in his own home, as admittedly proven specifically by events agreed by participants. It was ONLY AFTER Gates ID-actions that he was to be impelled outside --with his full knowledge of deathly incidents in prior situations. That is WHY the policeman's erroneous personal action was dismissed and derailed by knowledgable professionals immediately when his false charge reached authority level absolutely required to sustain and pursue it. IF it were not false, they have legal, ethical, moral and professional duty to sustain it and summon further court proceedings. They chose NOT to do so. The police charge was thrown where it deserved to go --into the multiple massive actions so manifested by manipulative machination of racists still far too prevalent in a nation otherwise comparatively "civilized". The evil of racism in early America was then concocted to contain, coerce and confine labor captured by slavers and then consolidated for demanded competitive advantage in every Colonial plantation tobacco production. Its defense anywhere is always on that same basic level of economic advantage and fear of loss if not sustained, by those who seek nothing further than private personal gain and perhaps unwarranted power over others. To allow its continuance is to damage the spirit, the tone and both economic and moral meanings both implicit and explicit in our Constitution. We fought a bloody Civil War to set straight ethical and moral requirements for any society pertinent to the 21st Century. Does anyone wish to contend that to reinforce racism by allowing such egregious events as the Gates incident to go both unnoted and uncorrected is to further what slavery began ??? "We can reinvent the world", to quote one Founder. We can hardly believe we have done so --more than 250 years later !!--when incidents like this one occur every day in most American cities and towns.

Henry Ruark July 27, 2009 10:45 am (Pacific time)

Stan: But let's now get specific, too. You wrote:"...it will be a valuable public service when the news media provides the audio converation of the incident." Don't hold your breath awaiting that, friend Stan. IF it had been about to occur, any capable reporter could long ago obtain that whole audio record, and if it were favorable Police would have made sure it was right out there in the public record, for dollar-defense vs damage suit sure to come. You wrote: "...they all seem to be based on opinions not facts." FYI, every published opinion puts the professional writer on public record. His marketability in the world of ideas and as active commercial supplier of heavily demanded content is right out there in the most vulnerable possible position: Full light of scathing public examination. To state "informed opinion" is not based on fact is to deny what those writers all clearly saw as truth, solid enough to put their own public standing right on the line. Do you contend that every one you saw was somehow contaminated by lack of fact ? To do so reveals even more naivete than to confuse the generation of "informed opinion" --paid for from professionals-- as from b-button feeling alone. For me it is comforting to find myself in such distinguished company in many national reliable sources, some cited here and others in my deep documentation done prior to writing this Op Ed. You wrote: "which is being revealed from what I've read today, which should prove illuminating in the fullness of time." In that you are indubitably correct. It is already well on the way, as major historic event invariably doth cause. Consequentially the longtime continuing confusion over what we stand for Constitutionally, and what we actually allow to eventuate in our daily lives in this nation, has come under unceasingly further probe. NOW it is fully illuminated by not only the incident but an obvious --and terribly damaging public attempt to de to turn it, irresponsibly, into full and open further attack on our first black President Obama, To me, that's open defiance of the sacred sense of human rights well written into our Constitution. How do you feel about that, sir ? If and when the audio record, if any there is, does show what really happened, the event itself stands alone as demonstration of stupid action brought on by continued stupid policy in Cambridge,reflecting precisely what I personally encountered in that area --decades ago. Fact is easily defined here: "fact (as in "reality") n. : an event known to have happened or something known to have existed."

Henry Ruark July 27, 2009 9:51 am (Pacific time)

Stan: Yrs shows cogitation and kind concern, sir. Re Constitution,never forget its consummate strength cometh from its magnificent language, written by rich white elite seeking deal with other rich whites holding slaves. Nobody can deny that has shaped, and still does, what we still do in America. The Gates incident clearly proves that. Re Editorial tone,"informed opinion" is demanded to be meaningful to others; that's why we who do them study hard, read, think, talk, listen, and share openly with others: to make sure what we offer for learning to others is worth the time, effort, and the responsibilities imposed by the First Amendment. Early history show clearly how-and-why the Founding Fathers were forced to their magnificent invention, open to right interpretation for coming time to provide room for rigorous, demanded further improvement and perfection. Multiple massive demands far beyond what they could then foresee are cited in depth, detail and devastating reflection by multiple authorities in this area of American History. Those show how well we have done in distancing ourselves from 18th Century conceptions of what is demanded to reach the valued and beliefs set forth in their fortuitous language. Mine re O's courageous stand relies on overall conceptions of what massive and manifold responsibilities the President faces, from study of some 20 books so far on this subject. That's how one arrives at readiness to write in this complex area demanding both research, understandings, and cogitation worth sharing. For single spectacular full statement of the complex human process, see CHESAPEAKE by James A. Michener, published in 1978. It was classically assigned for me by friends who profess in this area. Send full ID and working phone to Editor Tim and I will provide full list of those in work now and those completed, from whence cometh this whole series of Op Eds re D-I-Y democracy --surely what we face in our nation today given ennui, apathy and determined attack continuing on our solid American principles as set for us by the Founders. Unfortunately, due to time demands here as I "coast", I cannot provide list for all at cost of effort and postage. For others, must seek fee of $25. per copy. Your participation fully appreciated and honored, as example for others seeking to share and learn... in this S-N open, honest, democratic channel for American-style dialog.

My 2cents July 27, 2009 7:58 am (Pacific time)

It appears that the arresting police officer has a valid lawsuit for defamation for being called a racist. He is not a public personality, so all he has to prove is damage, and that damage is happening daily. If Prof. Gates sues, then expect President Obama to be called as a witness, though his presence would most likely be quashed. I believe people want this to go away mainly because this is not a case of "racial profiling" no matter how some would like to characterize it, and Gates reaction was pretty over the top "before" his arrest.

Stan July 26, 2009 6:20 pm (Pacific time)

Possibly we can end up having a positive debate on this matter between all of us Americans and work towards some healing solutions. I'm reasonably familiar with the U.S. Constitution and I do not recall any statements, phrases, verbiage that a president has a constitutional obligation to make a determing comment based on imperfect/incomplete information. I may be wrong but I just don't recall reading anything like that. I have read numerous editorials about the Prof. Gates arrest and they all seem to be based on opinions not facts. I believe it will be a valuable public service when the news media provides the audio converation of the incident. Otherwise we just have the statement by Prof. Gates and the several law enforcement personnel and other civilian witnesses to go by. I believe it's reasonable to believe that incidents like this happen numerous times a day throughout the country, so the hoopla over this one has some other characteristics attached do it which is being revealed from what I've read today, which should prove illuminating in the fullness of time.

Henry Ruark July 26, 2009 3:56 pm (Pacific time)

Pat A.: That ONLY correct action was taken responsibly and rapidly simply and only because there was absolutely no reason for the "arrest" ever to have taken place. On public record by law, that's best possible proof that it could never have been sustained in court. To do otherwise was to leave the City of Cambridge open to very heavy law-suit sure to follow. Do you doubt that big guns of judicial weight would be immediately brought to bear from civil rights sources ?? For Cambridge Police policy administrators that's sure and certain slap right in the face and further proof of fact that arrest was unsustainable and guaranteed highly embarrassing consequences to be avoided even by that very revealing administrative action. IF you doubt this analysis, ask any skilled attorney you trust, and report here what you find, please. Be sure also to ask if still further civil or even criminal suit may follow via Gates et al for worldwide professional reputation and personal embarrassment caused by this entire unwarranted and very revealing debacle. Private-source information states that's one reason Pres. Obama seeks to bring both Gates and policeman to D.C. for remediation, healing and further international damage avoidance to our foreign policy and our once strong wordlwide view as "the place where 'the American Dream' still takes place". Gates, Sotomayor, millions of others prove that it still is, every day, in massive and multiple ways. YOU know some of them, in every town and city. Anyone wish to deny that highly obvious and undeniable fact of reality in this the 21st Century ??

Patrick Addison July 26, 2009 2:22 pm (Pacific time)

Someone other than the president thought the arrest was not very smart. I say this because someone in authority dropped the charges against Gates.

Henry Ruark July 26, 2009 1:35 pm (Pacific time)

To all: From distinguished scholar well aware of local climate and working situation, here is "see with own eyes" report. Please note his detailed account from close acquaintance with situation of what --in all rational probability--actually did take place: www.registerguard/opinion.com Post-racial tag doesn’t fit this scene The incident involving a white policeman and a black scholar shows the bias that many know exists By Lawrence Bobo For The Washington Post Sunday, Jul 26, 2009 Ain’t nothing post-racial about the United States of America. I say this because my best friend, an affluent, middle-aged black man, was arrested at his home after showing identification to a white police officer who was responding to a burglary call. Though the officer determined that my friend was the resident of the house and that no burglary was in progress, he placed my friend in handcuffs, put him in a police cruiser and had him “processed” at our local police station. This outrage did not happen at night. It did not happen to an unknown urban black man. It happened, midday, to internationally known scholar Henry Louis “Skip” Gates Jr. I believe the police officer was motivated by anger that my friend had not immediately complied with the officer’s initial command to step out of the house. In hindsight, I think Skip did the right thing; he could have been injured (if not worse) had he stepped out of his home before showing his ID. Black Americans recall all too well that Amadou Diallo reached for his identification in a public space when confronted by police and, 41 gunshots later, became the textbook case of deadly race-infected police bias." ------------------ Point of Op Ed is SOLELY courageous, rational, truly reasonable, demanded approach and follow-action we observed by our black President in very demanding situation. He did NOT stoop weakly to "politically correct" approach but rather took ethical and only correct approach given his Constitutional obligations to all. IF you find you must ask if this scholar is himself black, permit me to suggest that in itself is symptom of denial you should surely consider. Since source always makes strong difference, with white policemen as well as black scholars: FYI, he, too is black and surely psychologically and morally better placed than are we to evaluate the actualities and realities here, I think you must agree. Again, point is NOT that the situation happened --but that it STILL CAN,DOES and WILL continue as irreducible smear on our American exceptionalism just so long as we swallow, then look the other way, and consign it to ennui and apathy as with so much else we must NOW change in the America. We well know what we must all demand and MUST HAVE for the 21st Century. So it now becomes "teaching moment", from which we can AGAIN learn --and teach all others, too. OR Will we NEVER LEARN ??!!

Stan July 26, 2009 1:03 pm (Pacific time)

I have reviewed the official police report and an online video of an African-American police sergeant who works with the arresting police sergeant, who by the way said he was "100% in agreement with the arrest" and that there was zero racial profiling going on. As per any president, for them to make the statement Obama did was wrong. Even liberal Obama supporter Juan Williams, as well as many other well known blacks have gone on record saying Obama should not have made the statement. According to a poll only 28% of Americans felt Obama's response was warranted, so this may be also impacting Obama's approval numbers which are tanking and and are below 50% now, 48% with Zogby and 49% for Rasmussen which are based on likely voters. Since Obama won with about 52-53% of the vote, this means that he is bleeding his supporters, not just Independents and Republicans. This will probably fade away as new breaking news comes about, but it sure will resonate with many for a while, in all racial communities.

Daniel July 25, 2009 9:08 pm (Pacific time)

Does police abuse happen in the usa , yes . Was Professor Gate just pulled from his house for being black , no . Gates is not Emmit Till ! This case has been over blown by the Left and Right to grab more market share and web page hits. This is a time when America needs to come together not further divide . There are too many important economic and social issues to deal with and this story to me just stokes anger from both sides . Gates was jet lagged and sick and acted in a crankey manor .The cops white , black and brown acted like cops folowing the book . No choking no brooms , no billy clubs ,just answer the questions calm down and stop acting like a cranky jet lagged jerk . This non story demeans real police abuse and racist drug policies and distracts from the many problems that we need to face . If gates was poor and white and acted like he did with the police he would still be facing charges .

Henry Ruark July 25, 2009 9:00 pm (Pacific time)

Mike, Mr. Schizo, whomever: Yours indicates woeful misunderstanding of the menta; processes involved in communication. For full detailed explanation in simple enough language for you, send honest ID with working phone to Editor Tim. Doubt if it is reasonable effort, but will still make it when you show decent good faith here.

Give Me Liberty July 25, 2009 7:07 pm (Pacific time)

I agree what the president said was courageous and I hope it can somehow wake up law enforcement to the fact that a man's home is his castle, his personal country, his domain, his last and sole secure place in this world where, barring extremely dangerous or fatal behavior, should be free of interference from anyone. When this lady called (one has to wonder if she knew it was the homeowner in the first place but felt like harassing or humiliating him for some reason) the cop obviously has to investigate, but proper procedure evidently doesn't involve common sense. Whenever investigating these types of things extra care and patience should be a given. If a man is in his own home the crieria fir arrest should always be physical assault or higher as again, the man was in HIS own home. I should b able to get as pissed as I want at my own home at any outside agency person, so long as I don't pysically assault them, without going to jail. Again a mans home is his sacred sanctuary as far as I am concerned. I think in the end it all boils down to this cop not having enough respect for that fact and perhaps lack of intelligence as a second cause. I just hope the president doesn't fully backpedal off his statement because I truly respect and admire him for making it in it's original form.

Larry July 25, 2009 6:45 pm (Pacific time)

I have tried to put myself in Prof. Gates' situation. I, too, am a professor, fairly well known in my community--one plagued by crime--and I live in a fairly affluent neighborhood. I am an aging white man, however, not a black. I have had the experience of police showing up at my door when my burglar alarm went off falsely or when a grandchild, playing with the telephone, punched in 911. In each instance, I have been happy to see the police show up at my door--one officer there, one looking around the yard and under the house. When asked, I've shown my i.d. without complaint, even in the one instance in which both officers were black (and, by the way, at least one of the officers pictured at the Gates home, with Prof. Gates obviously angry and yelling, was black). Frankly, I've been delighted to have the officers come to my house, and so should Prof. Gates have been. I can appreciate his sensitivity to racial profiling; he ought to appreciate the professionalism of police wanting to know who he was and why he was in the house.

Editor: Larry, thanks for your comments. I do not however think two black officers working with one white professor is exactly a recipe for danger. I try to imagine being in this professor's shoes, working with the very subject of racism as a professional educator.

Mike July 25, 2009 6:44 pm (Pacific time)

In my opinion the first sign of wisdom is when one is asked a question that you do not know the answer, or you do not have all the needed info, is simply stating that you do not know. Real easy, and truthful. Frequently politicans, lawyers, police and many other officals will state "no comment." Journalists frequently in their stories, written and verbal, will use the word "alledged." If we cannot critique a situation based on observation that in someone's opinion it sounds racist, then you simply have stopped the information exchange process. President Obama is a trained lawyer, he did not have all the info, he should have told the reporter and the American public that he would respond at a later time when he knew the facts.
This happened in front of a significant crowd. If I were Mr. Gates I think I would just shut my mouth and let this go away quickly and quietly. This will probably not go away for a long time.

Editor: So it's "Mike" today there MR. Schizo? Didn't I warn you once already i the text of the story to not bear your racist garbage on us? I hope you just take your own advice about mouth shutting.

Henry Ruark July 25, 2009 5:23 pm (Pacific time)

To all: The first protests against the evil institution here of slavery took place in March 1661. Ruth Brinton, a Quaker, was sentenced to be stripped to the waist and lashed via cat-o-nine/tails, then taken from one village to others and lashed in each. Economic reliance on cheap slave labor was essential basis for plantation culture which forced our Founders to give additional representation to certain Southern states, thus forever shaping our Congress to their advantage in earliest days. For full details, see the famed novel CENTENNIAL by James A. Michener OR consult any standard American History text. Current continuing racism, as in Gates incident, is flat defiance of known research fact; see Wikipedia, or do a Google-search. To allow it, after more than TWO CENTURIES, to influence information and decision on current issues is to defy, deny, delay still further,what this nation MUST now become in the 21st Century.

Give Me Liberty July 25, 2009 4:29 pm (Pacific time)

Also, I want to make clear that I don't believe it was racial, but just as bad it was abuse of power and lack of patience or understanding that this man was in his home and that they should have just left upon receiving proof of who he was. What was the purpose of hanging around? I'll tell you why. To further instigate and irritate with the knowledge from years on the job that it will eventually more than likely lead to an arrest. It is a common police tactic whenever dealing with someone they don't like. If all else fails get em for disorderly. It's a one size fits all arrest when they want to put the bracelets on. I was in law enforcement.... So no I'm not a cop-hater. Quite the opposite. I usually side with them, but I am a firm believer in homeowner rights and the constitutional rights of the homeowner. Any LEO should use his head when it's in someones home. It's a different ballgame. That's exactly why the cop kept trying to get him to step outside. The game changes when you go outside your home, even if the issue started inside.

Mark Sichau July 25, 2009 3:14 pm (Pacific time)

Below is a link to the police arrest report to get their official version, which would be a sworn statement that would have potential perjury liability if proven falsely made. I see that it was a next door neighbor that called the police and it has been reported that this house (owned by Harvard University) that Prof. Gates lives in has been broken into in the past. The arresting officer also teaches "Racial Profiling" courses for the local police department and it appears that he has excellent relationships with people of all races within the department. I believe via the Freedom of Information Act various media organizations are trying to get the 911 call and the audio stream sent to the police station during the conversation between Prof. Gates and law enforcement personnel before and after the arrest was made. That should go a long ways in giving everyone a fuller understanding, and hopefully this will stimulate a debate where we all can get a better understanding of this situation. Speaking from personal experience, I had a neighbor report my burglar alarm going off while I was on a jog and had just entered my house when the police came by. I had no ID on me because I had been jogging, they came into the house and stayed right next to me while I retrieved ID. I was very grateful for them doing that. I also know that police often have to consider that a hostage situation may be involved, etc. Law enforcement often get a mud storm thrown at them, but glad we have them. We'll probably see who over reacted pretty soon. http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0723092gates1.html

[Return to Top]