What you’re describing is essentially “racial profiling”. And while I’m not a fan of it, I do recognize that there are rational reasons that it is used. It is undeniably unfortunate that a particular individual would get watched more closely, or stopped, because of the actions of others who happen to belong to the same group as they. It is undeniably bothersome that someone who has never done anything wrong gets viewed with suspicion.

But there is a reason the shopkeeper keeps a closer eye on the kids in his store than the adults. When shoplifting or other trouble has occurred it has been kids that did it. Fair to then view all kids with suspicion? No. But understandable that a default is to at least be more aware of when there are kids in the store.

Doesn’t mean it’s okay to harass them. Doesn’t mean it’s okay to treat them with any less respect or a lower level of service than any other customer. But understandable that the shopkeeper tends to be a bit wary.

The Cambridge Police Department and the City of Cambridge issued a joint statement calling the arrest “unfortunate and regrettable.” I think the Cambridge Police, the city, and Mr. Obama all share one opinion.

Obama said the police acted “stupidly”. The Police Dept issued a statement supporting Sgt Crowley. Hardly the same opinions.

Lots of folks associate the term “racist” with race-fueled hatred accompanied by overt acts of intentional discrimination. If that’s the definition, then I’d probably guess (and I would be guessing) that Sgt. Crowley doesn’t fit the definition.

On the other hand, I can go a whole year at a time without anyone asking, by word or deed, “What are you doing here?” based on what color I am. I can walk through my neighborhood–day or night–and no one assumes I’m up to no good. If I’m outside in my neighborhood at night and a police car passes, I don’t really have to worry that the officer is going to stop me and ask why I’m there.

If I do happen to have contact with a police officer, it’s not because my very presence is suspect. The content of our conversation isn’t burdened by assumptions the officer makes about me or my motives–at least no assumptions based on the fact that I’m white.

A great many of us–police included–act on assumptions triggered by skin color. The assumptions aren’t necessarily hateful and the actions that follow from those assumptions aren’t automatically overtly discriminatory. But the assumption that the black guy is “out of place” or “trying to start something” leads to outcomes that are a much lower probability for me. I’m white. The default position is that I’m not out of place, I’m not liable to start trouble.

These race-based assumptions are racist, but not in the same sense as overt, hate-driven discrimination. If you’re interested in the experiences of black folks in these matters, I suggest you ask around.

As for Mr. Obama, he responded to a reporter’s question. (For my money, the question was a poor one and not appropriate to the given forum. If I had been in Mr. Obama’s shoes, I don’t think I would have answered as directly as he did.) I do think Mr. Obama explained his opinion adequately. The Cambridge Police responded to a call and confirmed the identity of a homeowner inside his own house. They managed to turn these mundane circumstances into a high-profile, controversial (and embarrassing) arrest of a prominent and famously mild-mannered scholar.

The Cambridge Police Department and the City of Cambridge issued a joint statement calling the arrest “unfortunate and regrettable.” I think the Cambridge Police, the city, and Mr. Obama all share one opinion. Mr. Obama’s word choice was less guarded.

Seriously, ACE, you are aware that Sgt. Crowley’s version of events is in dispute, aren’t you? And far from “backing him up 100%,” the Cambridge Police Department called the arrest “unfortunate and regrettable” as they dropped the charges against Gates.

Quibbie, do you think that Officer Crowley is a racist, and was being racist in this case? And do you think it was the right thing for Obama last night to say in a nationally televised presser that the cops in this incident acted stupidly, even though he admitted he didn’t know all the facts of the case?

Here’s your hat.

Read the whole report.

This was corroborated by a witness.

Good Bye.

Game over.

Go fuck yourself.

Well. Goodbye, then.

I ran across this site on a link from another blog. And I’m done with this sorry ass garbage dump of a blog. This dude that hosts this site is about as ignorant as they come. Damn, at least try to make it LOOK like you give a shit about the facts before you start accusing people of being klansmen.

Adios. Your breed is dying man. Each day that passes, the more race-bitches like the people on this site are blown off.

Ah, well, that settles it then. The police always put “just the facts” in their reports, don’t they?

Seriously, ACE, you are aware that Sgt. Crowley’s version of events is in dispute, aren’t you? And far from “backing him up 100%,” the Cambridge Police Department called the arrest “unfortunate and regrettable” as they dropped the charges against Gates.

“Game over” that, sucka!

We’ll see how intellectually honest you are on race issues. Read this and then tell us if you think the officer is a racist….

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0723092gates2.html

Looks more like Gates is an asshole with a chip on his shoulder, and after reading this, he got what he deserved. None of what he did was necessary. The cop showed up for a burglary. He’d should have just said “thanks” to him and let it go at that. Nice to know a cop will respond to a burglary at a black man’s residence, eh? But what does the cop get instead? Some arrogant Harvard prick with a “persecuted black man complex” that talks to him like he’s a lower from of life. Thankfully, the arresting officer is refusing to apologize, and the CPD is backing him up 100%, as they should. If anyone should apologize, it’s Gates himself.

More here. A shame I’m doing your homework for you now, isn’t it Mr. Willis? Perhaps you ought to consider getting all the facts before you start defecating all over this blog with uninformed race-hustling horseshit.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/07/23/officer_at_eye_of_storm_says_he_wont_apologize/?page=1

http://wbztv.com/local/obama.comment.cambridge.2.1097782.html

Game over.

Says an anonymous wingnut in a blog comment.

To be fair, Haplo9 did provide a reason for his comment. But don’t let that stop you from truncating his quote and responding only to the first part.

As a white man, I’m often troubled by O-Dubs feeling that not much is racist.

Now I learn that he’s a racist. Who’d'a thunk.

You catch that, O-Dub? An anonymous, jackass wingnut in a blog comment says you have no credibility on the subject of race. Take that!

Alas, there are times when Democrats and liberals do, too. “Playing the race card” isn’t solely a right-wing activity.

Haplo9: you make up your mind without knowing or seeming to care about what the facts are, then double down when it is pointed out to you that you might be standing on shaky ground.

IOW, acts like most bloggers and commenters on blogs. It’s rare that folks from either side pause to re-consider. Why should they, when it’s so much easier to just claim the other side is a moron? (Yeah, often they are. But it’s a typical response even when a reasonable argument is made.)

Whut th’…?

..otherwise known as a childish unwillingness to admit when you’re overreaching, or even concede that your opponents might have a point. This is why you simply aren’t credible when subject of race comes up – you make up your mind without knowing or seeming to care about what the facts are, then double down when it is pointed out to you that you might be standing on shaky ground.

.. And whats with this, “oh I hate writing about race issues, but for the good of all humanity, I must intrepidly wade into these waters with my trademark bluntness!” martyr routine? I suggest that you get over yourself..