home

Tuesday Afternoon Open Thread

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Blog Related
Posted on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 12:06:46 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Lawyers working. Your turn.

This is an Open Thread.

< Video Thwarts Officer's Attempt to Blame Victim Of His Own Brutality | Senate Adds Expanded Death Penalty to Hate Crimes Bill >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Tuesday Afternoon Open Thread | 190 comments (190 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Charges dropped against Gates (5.00 / 3) (#1)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 12:16:22 PM EST
    Story here.  Interesting that Cambridge cops and Gates released a joint statement with a conciliatory tone.  Smart way to end this on both sides.

    Thank goodness (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by coast on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 12:27:54 PM EST
    Sharpton was there to bring this to a speedy end.

    Parent
    Why am I not surprised (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 12:39:26 PM EST
    The Rev.Al so quickly arrived?

    Parent
    What am I missing? (5.00 / 0) (#15)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 01:40:51 PM EST
    I read your link and can't find a mention of Gates being conciliatory...and I'm glad because there is no reason he should be, the man was wronged and the wrong was on all on one side of this incident, the fuxx and the dime dropper, imo.

    Parent
    I'm having some trouble on this one. If (5.00 / 5) (#17)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 01:48:07 PM EST
    someone saw two people muscling open the door of a house in my neighborhood, and the someone didn't recogize the musclers are residing in the house, I would prefer the someone call law enforcement and law enforcement respond to the scene.  The latter didn't have a warrant but had every right to ask Gates to step outside and he had every right to refuse.  He produced id for himself and his residence at that address I gather.  Why did he go off on law enforcement though, which was doing the job tax payers pay them to do; following up on a call. Doesn't sound like the officer would have done anything further if Gates hadn't gone off.  Officer should have walked away though.  

    Parent
    He asked (5.00 / 0) (#19)
    by eric on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 01:53:17 PM EST
    the cop for his badge number.  Maybe he was mad at that point, who knows, but the cop should have given him the badge number, apologized, and walked out.  Instead the thing escalated.  And the cop new he had to lure Gates outside before he could arrest him.

    Parent
    Law enforcement, at least in CA, is (5.00 / 2) (#21)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 01:58:00 PM EST
    required to give badge no.  Has all the markings of an attitude arrest, but it sounds like the attitude started with Gates.

    Parent
    Adding to this (5.00 / 0) (#24)
    by eric on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 02:04:00 PM EST
    I think the underlying situation going on here is that the cop thought he was being disrespected and Gates wasn't bowing down before his authority.  Even assuming Gates was angry and yelling, why is this a problem?  And how dare Gates accuse him of being a racist!  Maybe he hates cops and just wanted to get this cop's ID and and get him out.  Clearly the cop was satisfied that Gates owned the house because he was willing to leave.

    Cops somehow think that we need to give them respect and comply with their every request.  I know, there job is tough, blah blah, and maybe we do need to comply.  But when something like this happens IN ONES OWN HOUSE, the cop should just go away.

    Parent

    I agree. (none / 0) (#25)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 02:11:19 PM EST


    Parent
    He asked the cop for his name (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:36:20 PM EST
    his badge number would have been easy to see without asking. This was a uniformed cop, not a plainclothes guy.  According to the cop's version, he asked for the name but didn't stop yelling to listen to the answer.

    Parent
    You say "gone off"... (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 01:57:04 PM EST
    I say defended his rights...just because it is rare for a citizen to refuse to eat sh*t from a badge doesn't mean its wrong.

    Officer should have walked away is right...end of story.  And if the neighbor can't be bothered to know who their neighbors are, they shouldn't bother droppin' dimes.

    Parent

    I think Gates was really quick to assume (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 01:59:03 PM EST
    the entire reason the officer came to the home was racial.  

    Parent
    Call me crazy... (5.00 / 0) (#27)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 02:12:08 PM EST
    but it may well be the case...yeah, the cop has to come once a citizen drops a dime regardless of race, but would the nosy neighbor have dropped a dime if two white dudes were entering the home?

    Parent
    Okay, you're crazy :) (5.00 / 2) (#43)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:11:46 PM EST
    I "dropped a dime" on my upstairs neighbors a couple of years ago.  I was the only tenant in that building of 8 units home at the time, and heard loud banging noises all of a sudden from the apt above me. Thought maybe the tenants were moving, so I peaked out my window to the driveway to see if there was a moving vehicle out there.

    What I saw instead of a Uhaul was a small, older vehicle do a quick backup into an empty parking spot, driver got out, opened the trunk, and three teens (a white, a black and a hispanic) loaded a big screen tv, and a couple of laptops into the trunk. They saw me looking, so I quick wrote down the license number and description of the car.

    First I called the apt manager who could have cared less, then I called 911 and reported it. Tell me, kdog, which of those boys was I profiling?

    The tenants were really grateful for my intrusion, but...this part infuriated me...the manager tried to claim this very mild-mannered 30-something white couple probably knew the guys, and hired them so they could file an insurance claim!

    Oh, and the cops easily found the guys because of the license plate, but they were teens. Don't ask me why, but the fact they were teens stopped the cops from searching their homes for the stolen property and they got away with it.


    Parent

    Your no profiler inspector... (none / 0) (#53)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:19:32 PM EST
    just a dime dropper.  Not how I woulda went about it, but what do I know, I'm crazy:)

    What I woulda done is asked the dudes if they knew my neighbor under the guise of "ya need a hand?", and if my spidey sense picked up shadiness I woulda either chased 'em off or called my neighbors so they could call the cops.  What if they were hired movers?  I'd never forgive myself for getting a couple movers hassled by John Law.

    Parent

    You're braver than I am (5.00 / 4) (#58)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:24:29 PM EST
    Or, you could ask them and if they are robbing the place, you could also get shot.

    Not worth it - I'd call the cops and have a possible "oopsie" than end up in the hospital or the morgue from some tools who think it's ok to take other people's stuff.

    Parent

    I'd be more worried... (none / 0) (#63)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:28:10 PM EST
    about getting one of the robbers/hired movers shot by the police...I just can't be that afraid of people without just cause to be afraid...thats no way to live, but then again I'm a scrappy dude who can run pretty fast if the sh*t hits the fan...I can understand how it is more of a risk for other people.

    Parent
    god bless you kdog (5.00 / 2) (#77)
    by ruffian on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:38:50 PM EST
    We'd miss you if the bad guy thieves-in-mover-disguise got you!

    Parent
    I may not be a smart man ruffian... (none / 0) (#89)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:46:53 PM EST
    but I can run like the wind blows:)

    Lucky for all of us mother nature gave us two choices in her natural law...fight or flight, and I much prefer flight:)

    Parent

    I'd prefer flight too (5.00 / 2) (#130)
    by ruffian on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:55:04 PM EST
    Unfortunately I would lose either way.

    Parent
    Don't sell yourself short... (none / 0) (#147)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 05:59:14 PM EST
    adrenaline is a helluva drug...ya just don't know what you're capable of till it starts pumping through your veins...people have performed superhuman feats on the stuff.

    Parent
    You are quite the superhero (5.00 / 2) (#60)
    by ruffian on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:26:05 PM EST
    Spidey sense, plus chasing off 3 guys.

    I could certainly forgive myself for getting movers hassled a little, and I hope my neighbors could too. After friends of mine got robbed in exactly this way last year, I hope my neighbors feel free to call the cops on anyone hauling stuff out of my house when I'm not standing their supervising.

    Parent

    No superhero... (none / 0) (#66)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:30:33 PM EST
    by any means, most robbers get startled and bolt rather than fight when questioned or noticed...the job is already sullied at that point.

    Parent
    Heh (5.00 / 4) (#67)
    by Steve M on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:30:52 PM EST
    If they turn out to be legitimate movers, it will take them a whole 2 minutes to show their documentation to the cops.  Big deal.

    If the event turned out to be exactly what it appeared to most likely be - a robbery in progress - would you actually admit to your neighbor, "Yeah, I saw some guys loading your TV into a trunk, but I didn't call the cops because I figured you might have hired movers"?

    Parent

    Huh? (5.00 / 0) (#73)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:36:36 PM EST
    exactly what it appeared to most likely be - a robbery in progress -

    Broad daylight in Cambridge? Trying to knock down the front door? Luggage on the porch or sidewalk?

    Robbery in progress would be the last thing that occured to me.

    Parent

    You are losing track of the thread (none / 0) (#76)
    by Steve M on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:38:01 PM EST
    I was talking about Inspector Gadget's story with three teens loading a TV into a trunk, not the Gates incident.

    Parent
    Oh (none / 0) (#79)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:39:54 PM EST
    Thanks..  missed that.

    Parent
    I think real movers are easily identified (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by ruffian on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:40:02 PM EST
    by their pace!

    Parent
    Unless the movers... (none / 0) (#74)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:37:22 PM EST
    stood up for their rights and had the gaul to give the officer some lip...then it becomes more than a two minute thing, it becomes a potential tazing, beating, or god forbid shooting...at the least an arrest for disorderly.

    I'd tell my neighbors the truth...I don't call the police, but I tried to scare the guys off.  

    Besides...my neighbors have as much contraband in the house as I do and probably wouldn't appreciate the cops being called for any reason...I love my neighbors:)

    Parent

    It is suddenly becoming clear to me (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:49:52 PM EST
    why you didn't want to meet after work when I was in NY.  Coulda dropped a dime.

    Parent
    No... (none / 0) (#96)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:55:30 PM EST
    If I remember right I said get we should together as a joke, not thinking you'd want to hang with the criminal element:), and then when you said you would I couldn't make it or didn't see your reply in time...not 100% sure.

    I don't think you'd drop a dime on me Oc, not at all...am I wrong?

    Parent

    I wouldn't. But I would enjoy mtg. you. (none / 0) (#101)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:03:24 PM EST


    Parent
    My apologies Oc.... (none / 0) (#133)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:58:06 PM EST
    for flaking out...it would be a trip to meet you too:)

    Parent
    It's ok. I'm pretty sure you are bunch (none / 0) (#135)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 05:00:53 PM EST
    more interesting to talk to than moi.

    Parent
    I don't know about that.... (none / 0) (#138)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 05:16:43 PM EST
    I'm a one-trick pony of degeneracy, I've probably already shared all the juicy bits.

    Ya know what they say about opposites, we'd probably have gotten off smashingly...and there is always baseball, the uniter of many divergent thinkers

    If you're ever in town again, gimme another shot:)

    Parent

    That's it A Mets game (none / 0) (#152)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 06:32:50 PM EST
    Of course my real fear is you might turn out to be this bland and boring person--nothing like the blog commenting persona!

    Parent
    Then by all means... (none / 0) (#153)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 06:40:34 PM EST
    be afraid, be very afraid...though I am a colorful heckler at times...ya know I still haven't been to Sh*ti Field yet, I can barely watch 'em on tv.

    Parent
    Exactly (5.00 / 0) (#70)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:34:19 PM EST
    It is a no brainer. Daylight on the streets of Cambridge? Ask the guys if everything is OK. Do they need help etc.

    Things would sort themselves out rather quickly with little risk to the questioner, imo.

    Parent

    How about if they were a couple of movers (none / 0) (#55)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:21:07 PM EST
    at the wrong house?  It's happened.

    Parent
    Wouldn't that mean (none / 0) (#64)
    by coast on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:29:44 PM EST
    that the neighbor is more the racist, and not the cop?

    Parent
    Um (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 02:11:21 PM EST
    according to the story, it was a "passerby" who saw two men trying to force their way into a house.  Don't know if it was a neighbor that lived close by who would know who lived there - I would do the exact same thing - call the cops.

    My favorite part of the story:

    A Cambridge police report described what followed as the police sergeant stood at Gates's door, demanded identification, and radioed for assistance from Harvard University police when Gates presented him with a Harvard ID. Gates became visibly upset, according to the report, when the officer said he was responding to a report of a break-in. "Why," Gates asked, according to the report, "because I'm a black man in America?''

    "Gates then turned to me and told me that I had no idea who I was `messing' with and that I had not heard the last of it,'' the report said. "While I was led to believe that Gates was lawfully in the residence, I was quite surprised and confused with the behavior he exhibited toward me.''

    When the officer repeatedly told Gates he would speak with him outside, the normally mild-mannered professor shouted, "Ya, I'll speak with your mama outside,'' according to the report.

    Oh, and at least one of the officers there was (and still is, I imagine) a black man.

    Parent

    Stand corrected... (none / 0) (#28)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 02:14:28 PM EST
    thought I saw it reported as a neighbor.

    But it is sh*t like this which is why I never ever ever call the cops...I ain't piling onto anybodys misery.

    Parent

    Once again kdog (5.00 / 3) (#69)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:33:29 PM EST
    you are expressing a strong opinion about something you haven't bothered to inform yourself about first.

    The woman who called the cops is not a neighbor, she works at a building in the area and was walking down the street on her way to or from her office.

    And quoted from the joint statement: "This incident should not be viewed as one that demeans the character and reputation of Professor Gates or the character of the Cambridge Police Department."  And "All parties agree that this is a just resolution to an unfortunate set of circumstances."

    I'd say the good perfesser realized he'd behaved badly and that there were witnesses to his behavior.

    Parent

    His statements... (5.00 / 0) (#151)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 06:25:09 PM EST
    in jb's link sound to me like all the good professor has realized is what it is like to get a little taste of our petty tyranny...damn right I got a strong opinion about it whenever it rears its ugly head.

    I suspect the "joint statement" is the game he's got to play to get the charges dropped and dodge a hassle...a game most anybody through the petty tyranny ringer has played.    

    I'd still expect better of a member of the community, if not a neighbor.  And thanks for keepin' me honest callin' me on my bullsh*t pal:)

    Parent

    Dan Kennedy has the latest information re: Gates (none / 0) (#154)
    by dutchfox on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 06:41:47 PM EST
    From Boston this afternoon, Dan Kennedy has the latest information re: Gates and the Cambridge police debacle.
    Gates disputes police report

    The Cambridge Police Department would have some problems even if its account of Henry Louis Gates' arrest proves to be entirely accurate. But Gates, a Harvard University professor, says it isn't.



    Parent
    Probably the best resolution to a sad situation. (none / 0) (#30)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 02:32:31 PM EST
    Apparently an unfortunate set of circumstances converged.  One contributing factor may well have been that Professor Gates was returning from a trip to China, and any air travel these days can be trying let alone one of that distance; and then, add to the mix the frustration of finding a jammed front door.  And, on the other side of that door--an adrenalin-fueled police response to a passerby's cell phone call of a burglary in progress.  A situation made for sorrow with, in all likelihood,  some blame to go around.  

    Parent
    Prof. Gates, under the circumstances, (none / 0) (#31)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 02:36:41 PM EST
    should be grateful there wasn't use of force by the responding law enforcement officer.  Possible burglary in progress.  

    Parent
    The plot thickens (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 02:50:37 PM EST
    Now Gates is demanding an apology and is claiming he is "a black man with a prison record."  He's also now considering a documentary on racial profiling.

    He also claims HE never made inflammatory remarks

    Sorry - not buying it. An opportunity presented itself so he could stir things up, and lo and behold, it has.

    Parent

    Of course you're not (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by CST on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 02:53:12 PM EST
    guilty until proven innocent right?  He got arrested, so he MUST be guilty.

    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#38)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:04:54 PM EST
    I didn't say he didn't have a point, but I'm  not buying his story that it's all the cops fault.  Yes, I would be ticked if the cops thought I was breaking into my own house, but I also wouldn't be telling the cop he'd be talking to my momma on the front lawn and that the only reason the cops came to his house was because they thought was because a black man was breaking and entering (um no - they were told two guys were trying to break down a door - you tell me if you saw that you wouldn't call the cops?)  Or would you just ignore it?  

    And again - at least one of the cops that was involved is black.  I think Gates was (rightly) miffed and is going to use this to turn it into a crusade.

    Parent

    A worthy crusade imo (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:54:46 PM EST


    Parent
    What a lucky man (5.00 / 3) (#35)
    by Steve M on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 02:56:25 PM EST
    How fortunate he was to be arrested and handcuffed in front of his own home.  Sadly, as a white man, this is just another one of those breaks I don't seem able to catch.

    Parent
    You are lucky (5.00 / 2) (#107)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:08:45 PM EST
    Not all white men can say the same thing.

    Parent
    He may be. Did he waive a 42 USC (none / 0) (#36)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 02:59:39 PM EST
    section 1983 lawsuit?

    Parent
    F*ck Yeah (5.00 / 0) (#41)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:09:26 PM EST
    "If he apologizes sincerely, I am willing to forgive him. And if he admits his error, I am willing to educate him about the history of racism in America and the issue of racial profiling ... That's what I do for a living."

    I would say that this is mighty magnanimous of Gates. Were he a white 58 year old man in front of his house during daylight hours, the officer would have apologized on the spot.

    That the police was a racist should come as no surprise.

    Parent

    Why the subject line? (none / 0) (#44)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:12:40 PM EST


    Parent
    Because (5.00 / 0) (#47)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:14:56 PM EST
    Expletives are quite effectively used as a way to emphasize a point.

    What Gates is asking for, is unbelievably generous, imo.

    Parent

    So far, not one quote has been (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:03:35 PM EST
    given where the police officer gave Gates any reason to believe he was being questioned because of his color. The quotes are all Gates accusing him of refusing to give him his badge number because "I'm a Black Man in America".

    I don't know what happened on his porch, so I'm not going to claim I do.

    Gates didn't go to prison, and I certainly expect he is knowledgable enough to know he does not have a prison record.

    Parent

    Were All Things Equal (5.00 / 0) (#109)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:12:01 PM EST
    Maybe what you write would have some standing. Thing is, people of color are abused by the police on a regular basis and more often than not get entirely different treatment then their white counterparts.

    The fact that you would imagine anything else to be true, either shows that you are naive or have a distorted view, imo.

    Parent

    Nope, not naive at all (none / 0) (#113)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:21:06 PM EST
    in fact, have good reason to be very afraid of armed men with bad information.

    Click on my link in comment #107 below.


    Parent

    Sure Pal (none / 0) (#118)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:27:49 PM EST
    That proves that Police in Boston, and elswhere LA (lol) do not have a racist bias.

    Hilarious.

    Parent

    There you go again (5.00 / 3) (#121)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:33:02 PM EST
    making things up, and creating your own meanings.

    Your credibility remains stuck in your mean-spirited character.


    Parent

    Huh? (5.00 / 0) (#125)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:40:56 PM EST
    I suggested that you are either naive or have a distorted perception because historically and currently racism is prevalent in policing in most of the US. Well documented. The statistics of jailed population is a clear indictment of a racially skewed system.

    Your response: Well my son was arrested because a gang member gave his address as a cover. And he is white.

    No one ever said, or even suggested, that white people are not falsely arrested. Your comment is a complete non sequitur and adds nothing to the discussion of racism and the police.

    Parent

    Maybe he does. Resume (none / 0) (#105)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:07:42 PM EST
    deflation and all that.  Kidding.

    Parent
    Besides (none / 0) (#103)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:06:03 PM EST
    I thought you found the occasional profanity refreshing?

    So, why the question?

    Parent

    You are quite the archivist. (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:08:19 PM EST


    Parent
    Nah (none / 0) (#110)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:13:36 PM EST
    Just an ok memory.

    Parent
    Yeah (5.00 / 1) (#177)
    by cal1942 on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 02:02:55 AM EST
    complete with link.

    Parent
    Of Course (none / 0) (#182)
    by squeaky on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 12:35:53 PM EST
    I remembered oculus comment and then searched for it. As for your comments, can't say a single one is memorable, but then again I rarely read them.

    Parent
    Can't (none / 0) (#188)
    by cal1942 on Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 09:24:26 AM EST
    write anything without some form of a personal dig can you.

    How often do you do this face to face.  Or, put another way, how many times have you had the crap kicked out you.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#189)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 10:59:36 AM EST
    At least my comment is direct, unlike the passive aggressive one of yours that I responded to:


    Yeah (5.00 / 1) (#177)
    by cal1942 on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 02:02:55 AM EST
    complete with link.

    You want respect, earn it.

    Parent

    I don't need (none / 0) (#190)
    by cal1942 on Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 04:36:31 PM EST
    anything from people like you.

    Parent
    Be happy. Don't worry. Some things (none / 0) (#191)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 04:38:45 PM EST
    nver change.

    Parent
    When he speaks of creativity, he (5.00 / 3) (#86)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:44:53 PM EST
    knows what he's talking about.  A PRISON RECORD?! I think he's perfectly capable of major embellishment. The photo makes him look quite agitated, and hollaring.

    Crying wolf just makes change take longer.

    He made numerous statements that knock his credibility down a couple of notches for me.


    Parent

    Does it? (5.00 / 0) (#88)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:46:09 PM EST
    Interesting.

    Parent
    The photo? (5.00 / 0) (#97)
    by CST on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:57:34 PM EST
    The one where he was being arrested at his own home after getting off a flight from China???

    Why ever would he appear "agitated"?

    And he is definitely not hollering in that photo.

    Parent

    Telling (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:02:21 PM EST
    I agree with you.

    It makes the cop a complete piker. Gates is an old man for crissakes.

    Parent

    So, old men don't commit crimes? (5.00 / 2) (#112)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:18:37 PM EST
    from one profile to another :)

    Parent
    Younger than Watson. (none / 0) (#104)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:06:18 PM EST


    Parent
    You think the police officer asked him (5.00 / 1) (#111)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:17:23 PM EST
    if he had just gotten off a long flight?

    I'm sure it's possible, but I don't know anyone who opens their mouth that wide to just talk. Well, except to sing. That's it, maybe he was singing.

    I have failed to share that I truly do not think he should have been arrested, and the police officer should know how to calm down a situation - especially when the person is saying things that give the officer a big opening to why he is probably agitated (accusing the officer of profiling). Big wide open door for the officer to assure Gates he was not profiling, and he chose not to walk through it. Dumb move.

    I just am not convinced this is a case of profiling.


    Parent

    the photo was taken (5.00 / 0) (#114)
    by CST on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:22:17 PM EST
    after he was in hand cuffs.  No reason at all to appear agitated.  You have no idea what he looked like before that.

    Parent
    Wow...just stay focused on 3 words (none / 0) (#128)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:51:35 PM EST
    and ignore the rest.

    Parent
    This is Talk Left, the politics of crime. (5.00 / 2) (#117)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:27:24 PM EST
    Translation:  the law enforcement officer is presumed wrong or more.

    Parent
    Doesn't appear Prof. Gates was (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:42:02 PM EST
    in the mood to listen.  

    Parent
    Profiling... (5.00 / 0) (#131)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:56:14 PM EST
    on the part of the dime-dropper, not the cop...black guy monkeying with a door, he must be a robber!  Call 911!

    In fairness, the passerby might just be a think the worst dime-drop happy person and woulda called on anybody, who knows.

    The cops mistake was not backing off the second he knew he was talking to the legal resident...as a cop he should be trained in taking lip from citizens tyrannized because of a mix-up and eaten it.  Anybody who works in customer service knows how to eat some sh*t, its part of the job.

    Parent

    I will pass it along to my staff (none / 0) (#137)
    by coast on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 05:06:59 PM EST
    "Anybody who works in customer service knows how to eat some sh*t, its part of the job"

    Classic.

    Parent

    Just ate... (none / 0) (#140)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 05:22:30 PM EST
    a big plate full for my daily bread today...more coming tomorrow.  Feel free to use it at the next staff meeting coast:)

    The problem is cops often forget who they work for...that whole "protect and serve" thing flies right over their head, they think their the boss instead of the employee. They need to remember every time they respond to a call who the servant is, and it ain't the complainant or the suspect.

    Parent

    "Worst dime dropper" (none / 0) (#174)
    by cal1942 on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 01:42:05 AM EST
    So you wouldn't call 911 if you witnessed unusual activity that you felt might be a crime in progress and anyone who would is a "dime dropper" which I'm GUESSING is meant to be a pejorative term.

    Parent
    An opportunity? (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:45:32 PM EST
    Sheesh.

    Parent
    Or Vice Versa (none / 0) (#37)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:04:09 PM EST
    When the cop refused to identify himself. A more hotheaded property owner might have shot him on the spot for threatening and impersonating an officer. If it were in FL been justified.

    Parent
    Apparently (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:08:43 PM EST
    Gates initially refused to identify himself when asked by police why he was breaking into the home. What on earth do you expect police to do?  Take his word for it??  And then he gave them a Harvard ID, which would still not prove that he lived there.

    When Al Sharpton gets involved, especially as fast as he did, you know there's going to be an uproar for the TV cameras.

    Parent

    Wrong (5.00 / 0) (#48)
    by eric on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:16:26 PM EST
    he showed him his ID and a drivers license.  Plus, the cop called the Harvard Police for confirmation.  CLEARLY, the cop knew this was Gates' house because he wasn't pursuing the issue any further.

    It was the cop refusing to provide his badge number that put him in the wrong at this point.  Further, even if Gates was yelling and swearing, I think he can do that in his own house.  Especially after it has been established that is WAS indeed his house.

    Parent

    Once again (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:42:37 PM EST
    cop says he absolutely did provide his name.  The badge number is totally visible.  This was a uniformed cop.

    Parent
    Cop sez (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:48:31 PM EST
    Gates sez.

    The cop acted a fool at the least.

    He should have left Gates' house once Gates' identity was confirmed.

    Simple as that.

    Parent

    Bingo (none / 0) (#134)
    by eric on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 05:00:32 PM EST
    it would have solved the problem.  Even assuming Gates was doing or saying anything like it is alleged, the problem would be solved by just leaving.  But the cop apparently couldn't let it go.

    Parent
    I don't disagree (none / 0) (#148)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 06:08:14 PM EST


    Parent
    How did gates (none / 0) (#178)
    by cal1942 on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 02:08:24 AM EST
    end up back on the front porch?

    Parent
    Once again (none / 0) (#129)
    by jondee on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:51:56 PM EST
    the unwritten, but acted on constantly, cop ethos is that those who balk their authority in any way must pay the price -- and if they pay it too severely, no cop ever saw or heard anything.

    If your not at least cognizant of that reality, you have no business assessing reports, official or otherwise.

    Parent

    I find it rather shameful (5.00 / 2) (#144)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 05:45:44 PM EST
    that so many educated individuals here can assume they know exactly what happened, and what everyone was thinking, based on whether someone was white or black.

    One thing for sure, based on this thread, very few here would make a good Joe Friday.

    Parent

    Maybe (5.00 / 0) (#146)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 05:58:58 PM EST
    Although the case stinks. Gates is a highly respected member of the Academic community. It is almost impossible for me to imaging someone like Larry Summers, let's say, getting this sort of treatment.

    It is also hard to not look at this case through the lens of well documented racism amongst police all across the US.

    This happened in broad daylight, in a nice area of Cambridge. The police are in desperate need of sensitivity training, imo.  

    Parent

    I'm guessing that everyone involved (5.00 / 1) (#150)
    by Anne on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 06:24:52 PM EST
    could have done something a little differently that would have changed the whole tone and tenor and outcome of the situation.

    The person who reported the activity has nothing to apologize for.

    When the report came in, I would have to think that running the address would have revealed the name of the owner, so that when Gates presented his ID, with name and address matching the info officers had already obtained via computer, it would have been simple to end the whole thing right then and there.

    I respect Gates' initial feeling that he had been singled out because of his race, but I expect he should have also respected that the officers were doing their jobs - would Gates have been just as angry if, upon his return from China, he had found his home broken into, and found out that the police had not bothered to respond to a report of suspicious activity?  Am I the only one who thinks that he would have accused the police of not responding because somehow they knew the home was owned by a black man?

    Maybe Gates was jet-lagged and too tired to have responded more appropriately - does he not have any responsibility, or is it that hard to say, "I just got off an 18-hour flight, I'm exhausted and frustrated that I can't get into my house, so I'm sorry if I'm not responding as you think I should be."

    We will never know if the whole thing would have gone down differently if Gates had been white - assuming it would is only useful to support a claim of racial profiling or bias.  Would Gates still be making that claim if he had acted differently, and thus caused the whole event to end better?  I don't think so.

    There are good cops and bad ones - it's ridiculous to make the assumption that all cops are bad, and if something goes sideways, it's always the cops' fault.  It's not.

    Parent

    Apology (5.00 / 0) (#155)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 06:59:33 PM EST
    "I believe the police officer should apologize to me for what he knows he did that was wrong," Gates said in a phone interview from his other home in Martha's Vineyard. "If he apologizes sincerely, I am willing to forgive him. And if he admits his error, I am willing to educate him about the history of racism in America and the issue of racial profiling ... That's what I do for a living."

    not coming.

    Seems an entirely reasonable request to me, to drop the whole matter.  

    As regards your hypothetical about Gates house getting robbed, I do not see it as relevant, save for he would be pissed if the burglars successfully stole from his house. But, imo no 58 year old grey haired burglar in a polo shirt, would be trying to gain entry to the house by trying to knock down the front door in broad daylight in Cambridge.

    If the police stopped a burglar, I guarantee you that the burglar would not be getting all "uppity", produce ID with the house address on it, or show the familiarity of being in one's own home.

    The cop wanted to arrest Gates for being 'uppity', imo, and lied in order to draw him outside where he was fair game. Disorderly my a$$..  

    Parent

    Now why wouldn't the officer and/or his (none / 0) (#156)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 07:06:24 PM EST
    department apologize at this point to Professor Gates?  Possibility of claim being filed (maybe already has been filed) followed by a lawsuit seeking punitive damages from the officer.  No city attorney would advise an apology at this point.

    Parent
    FYI, he doesn't own the home (none / 0) (#163)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 07:53:37 PM EST
    He rents from Harvard.  Far as I know, there's no immediately available on-line database of tenants the cops can consult in this kind of situation.

    Parent
    But if it revealed that the house (none / 0) (#169)
    by Anne on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 08:46:35 PM EST
    was owned by Harvard, I have to think there was someone there who could verify who the house was being rented to, no?  Maybe that would have taken too much time, I don't know; I do think that cops are supposed to be trained not to get pulled in emotionally to the acting out/reactions/emotions of the people they stop - if someone doesn't remain calm and objective, things can quickly get out of hand.  Doesn't mean citizens just get to act however they want with no consequence, but someone has to be the "adult."

    Parent
    It shouldn't have mattered (none / 0) (#171)
    by nycstray on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 10:18:43 PM EST
    I don't own where I live, never have. My ID would have my current address and I'm sure I would have mail pretty darn handy that showed who was responsible for the bills. Most burglars aren't willing to pay the electric bill for their victims  ;) Showing a "legal" picture ID w/address should end a discussion of who's home one is walking into :)

    Parent
    It did end the discussion (none / 0) (#186)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 03:31:23 PM EST
    by both accounts.  What prolonged the incident beyond that was either that Gates kept yelling at the cop or the cop didn't give him his name, or both.  The cop had asked -- by both accounts -- Gates to step outside the house right from the get-go, which is standard procedure for investigating a possible burglary, and Gates refused to do so-- by both accounts.

    Then you had two stubborn and prideful guys with their backs up having a tug of war.

    Parent

    Really? (none / 0) (#172)
    by squeaky on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 12:19:20 AM EST
    That is strange, because Harvard, in order to lure the top faculty from around the world, offer ownership of a house as part of granting tenure. They pay the mortgage for a certain number of years (5 or so) and then the house is owned free and clear by the faculty member.

    Parent
    Really? (none / 0) (#185)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 03:27:06 PM EST
    Funny, they never told my dad that when they lured him to Harvard, nor any of his colleagues, either.

    Parent
    Oh Well (none / 0) (#187)
    by squeaky on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 04:18:57 PM EST
    I guess my friend lucked out. She got tenure from a junior faculty position as the first female in a very sexist department.. She was 34 or so when she landed the job.

    $500,000 towards any house she wanted. If I remember the deal correctly, Harvard paid the mtg and after 5 years the house was in her name.

    From what she said it was standard Harvard policy so that they could compete with other Universities where the housing was much less expensive.

    Parent

    From Gates (none / 0) (#183)
    by squeaky on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 01:44:05 PM EST
    He has no qualms about the neighbor who called the police.          

    "I'm glad that someone would care enough about my property to report what they thought was some untoward invasion," Gates said. "If she saw someone tomorrow that looked like they were breaking in, I would want her to call 911. I would want the police to come. What I would not want is to be presumed to be guilty. That's what the deal was. It didn't matter how I was dressed. It didn't matter how I talked. It didn't matter how I comported myself. That man was convinced that I was guilty."

    WaPo

    Parent

    What does (5.00 / 2) (#179)
    by cal1942 on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 02:11:52 AM EST
    broad daylight and a nice part of Cambridge have to do with anything?

    You think break-ins don't occur in nice places in broad daylight?

    Try being at least remotely objective.

    Parent

    What CoralGables Said. (none / 0) (#149)
    by Dr Molly on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 06:22:09 PM EST


    Parent
    Really? (5.00 / 0) (#159)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 07:35:49 PM EST
    Then I am sure that you will see this incident as entirely unrelated.

    Race problems in Cambridge? Nah, too progressive... lol

    Parent

    I don't think (none / 0) (#181)
    by CST on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 09:23:41 AM EST
    there are "so many" people here making that assumption.  However, there are also a lot of people here who are ready to accept whatever was written in the police report as gospel, despite multiple conflicting stories, and very recent historical evidence from that particular area that indicates a serious problem.  That's not to say that must be what happened here, but that's not to say it didn't happen here either.  Especially considering the police report is being challenged and the police clearly acted out of line regardless.

    Personally, I find the police report to be pretty hard to believe considering the character and reputation of Gates as being pretty mild mannered and fair.

    The fact is, he is no Al Sharpton who would beat this to death for no reason.  And the Cambridge police hardly have the best record dealing with this sort of thing.

    That's not to say the cop was being racist, but it's also not to say he wasn't in the wrong.  We don't know what happened.  But I personally feel there are too many people here who are just swallowing the police report whole, and I seriously doubt that it is accurate.

    Parent

    Not Surprised (1.50 / 2) (#45)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:12:58 PM EST
    That you are a racist apologist. Were Gates a white professor, the police would have been respectful from the start, even if the professor got upset.

    BTW- were you there? Because the" facts" you seem to believe are the ones that the Police are supporting, not Gates or his attorney.

    Parent

    Yawn (5.00 / 3) (#52)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:19:03 PM EST
    More name calling from you.  Not surprised from someone who can't discuss things civilly or above an 9th grade level.

    Parent
    Who's the racist in your mind, (5.00 / 2) (#61)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:27:12 PM EST
    squeaky?? I'm going to hand your own statement back to you...

    BTW- were you there? Because the" facts" you seem to believe are the ones that the Police are supporting, not Gates or his attorney.

    What is it that makes your knowledge of what is "fact" in this case more credible than jdindc's? You always assume the worst in people, so your credibility is really embedded in that flaw.


    Parent

    Knowledge of History (5.00 / 0) (#68)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:32:30 PM EST
    Not to mention a lot of experience on the streets of NYC.

    And that is exactly what Gates teaches. Sounds to me like a racist cop, quite common in Boston and elsewhere.

    The copy is extremely fortunate that such a high level scholar would feel gracious enough or inspired to give him a free education.

    Parent

    Nasty (5.00 / 2) (#180)
    by cal1942 on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 02:15:34 AM EST
    name calling, a sickeningly regular feature of your comments.

    You seem to believe only Gates and his attorney.

    Were you there?

    Didn't think so.

    Parent

    Likely (none / 0) (#78)
    by coast on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:39:38 PM EST
    if Gates were a white prof he would not have been belligerent to the officer from the start by calling him a racist for simply asking Mr. Gates to step outside.

    Parent
    Yeah (5.00 / 0) (#84)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:42:48 PM EST
    Because the cop needs some race sensitivity training.

    This case stinks of racism and from what I have read Gates was 100% right if indeed he did call the cop a racist.

    Happens all the time. A large portion of the whites community think that the police are there to protect them from blacks.

    Parent

    Do you really believe (none / 0) (#93)
    by coast on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:53:16 PM EST
    "a large portion of the white community think that the police are there to protect them from black"?  The statement in and of itself is racist.

    Parent
    OK (5.00 / 0) (#157)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 07:14:24 PM EST
    So you believe that it is racist to point out that many white people are racist???? Is it sexist to point out many men are sexist too?

    lol

    Something tells me that you do not get out much. You might want to do a bit of research on sundown towns, for a start.

    Parent

    No (5.00 / 2) (#168)
    by coast on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 08:44:46 PM EST
    I believe that any generalization based entirely on race ie. most white people believe the police are there to protect them from black people - is racist.

    Hate/racism is not defined by or exclusive to one color.

    Parent

    Twist (5.00 / 0) (#173)
    by squeaky on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 12:24:02 AM EST
    A large portion of the whites community think that the police are there to protect them from blacks.

    How does that translate into most whites? Anyway considering you have not looked at the link, you may want to enroll in one of Dr. Gates classes on the history of racism in US. Your education seems to have major holes in it.

    Parent

    Hold up (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:51:25 PM EST
    Why exactly did the cop ask him to step outside?

    Moreover, your comment begs the question - a white professor almost certainly would never have been treated this way - starting with the 911 call "by a passerby."

    Look, Gates may opr may not have have overreacted but based on HIS OWN WORDS, there can be no doubt that Officer Crowley needs some training in how to deal with these types of situations.

    He completely effed up and it amazes me to see so many unable to admit that and instead engaging in willful blindness regarding the history of race relations in this country.

    Parent

    The cop's story (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by Steve M on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:58:07 PM EST
    was that he was trying to call back to the station or something, but he couldn't hear anything over Gates' yelling due to the acoustics of the home, so he asked Gates to follow him outside.  A ridiculous story IMO.

    Parent
    Why didn't he just go outside (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:00:53 PM EST
    and leave? Or call? Or do whatever the hell he said he needed to do?

    Why did he stay in Gates' house?

    Parent

    No good answer (5.00 / 2) (#108)
    by Steve M on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:09:30 PM EST
    It is remarkable to me how many people are willing to take the police report at face value and try to comment on Gates' behavior within that frame.  Someone tell John Dean that conservatives aren't the only ones with authoritarian personalities.

    Parent
    I don't take the police report (5.00 / 1) (#119)
    by coast on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:30:11 PM EST
    at face value just as I don't take Gate's story or his lawyer's as gospel.  The truth is always somewhere in the middle.  Gates overreacted to the initial request (if the police report is correct) and the cop should have never have arrested him no matter how upset Gates got because it was only going to make a bad situation worse.

    Parent
    Always Somewhere in the Middle (5.00 / 0) (#122)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:33:20 PM EST
    Well yeah, maybe. Unless there happens to be a video. In those cases it seems, more often than not, to be verbatim what the arrested person said, and total lies from the cop.

    Parent
    No (none / 0) (#42)
    by CST on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:11:11 PM EST
    He went inside and got his MA drivers lisence.

    They cops refused to identify themselves though.

    Parent

    I assume the law enforcement officers (5.00 / 2) (#46)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:13:42 PM EST
    were in uniform with visible badges?

    Parent
    He asked for (none / 0) (#49)
    by CST on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:17:05 PM EST
    name/badge number.  I am pretty sure he is required to provide that information.

    Parent
    I agree. Is Gates contending he (5.00 / 2) (#51)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:18:39 PM EST
    didn't think the person at his door was a legitimate law enforcement officer?

    Parent
    I don't think so (none / 0) (#54)
    by CST on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:20:06 PM EST
    I was just pointing out that Gates did in fact provide ID and the officer did not.

    Parent
    Cop says he absolutely did provide ID (none / 0) (#81)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:40:31 PM EST


    Parent
    Fair enough (none / 0) (#85)
    by CST on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:44:19 PM EST


    Parent
    No (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:17:52 PM EST
    that's why the Harvard police were called.

    It's good the police asked for the charges to be dropped.  The truth is somewhere in between the police report and what Gates and his lawyer are claiming.  This was a misunderstanding that is going to be used for grandstanding.

    Parent

    Yes, and once (5.00 / 0) (#56)
    by eric on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:22:19 PM EST
    the Harvard Police confirmed it was the good professor's residence, the cop should LEAVE.  And he should have provided the badge number when it was requested.  And he should have said he was sorry for the misunderstanding, etc.  Instead, the cop wanted his respect and felt he should arrest Gates for a bad attitude, i.e. not bowing down to the cop's authority.

    Parent
    Yes (5.00 / 2) (#59)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:25:36 PM EST
    But Gates shouldn't have been screaming like a crazy person and trying to start up something racial.

    They.Are.Both.Wrong.

    Parent

    Exactly (5.00 / 2) (#65)
    by ruffian on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:29:45 PM EST
    As the spokesperson said today, it was niether party's finest hour.

    I think it has been resolved the right way.

    Parent

    Start up something racial (5.00 / 0) (#94)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:53:49 PM EST
    Therein lies the flaw in your analysis.

    "Something racial" has been a part of this nation forever.

    I remember having this discussion at docudharma with people with your attitude on race questions.

    You want to deny history. Sobeit but do not ask the rest of us to play along.

    Parent

    Screaming like a crazy person (5.00 / 1) (#123)
    by jondee on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:39:03 PM EST
    I seriously doubt that happened. From all reports, and judging by every Gates media appearence I've ever witnessed, he's one of most mild mannered indivuals around.

    Your thin blue line hero is covering his sorry as*
    -- because, as anyone with any street experience knows, those who dont snap-to when an officer's "controlling the situation", must pay the price in some way.

    Parent

    I love how the papers... (5.00 / 0) (#141)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 05:24:58 PM EST
    quote the police report as if it is gospel...they do realize who wrote the damn report right?  

    Parent
    not according (none / 0) (#62)
    by CST on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:27:43 PM EST
    to the article in the globe.

    Parent
    The story (5.00 / 1) (#176)
    by cal1942 on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 01:59:21 AM EST
    I read said that two uniformed officers responded to the call.

    If their uniforms are like any uniform I've ever seen then there was a numbered badge in plain sight.

    Parent

    Look pal (5.00 / 2) (#175)
    by cal1942 on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 01:49:30 AM EST
    He was a UNIFORMED officer wearing a numbered badge in plain sight.  He was identified.

    Parent
    Senate bows to Obama veto threat (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by andgarden on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 12:18:17 PM EST
    and kills the f-22.

    This is a really significant moment, because it shows that the defense contractors can be reigned in.

    Nice (none / 0) (#7)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 12:36:53 PM EST
    Looks like he is learning how to manage the congresscritters.

    Parent
    May I suggest (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Steve M on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 12:38:11 PM EST
    that this probably doesn't happen without Gates at the Pentagon.

    Many here were vigorously opposed to Obama's decision to reappoint him, but I was not one of them.

    Parent

    I'm sure that's right (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by andgarden on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 12:39:36 PM EST
    But there are tradeoffs to keeping him that I'm not going to ignore. He has been decidedly unhelpful on DADT.

    Parent
    Well, Gates does have that great (none / 0) (#16)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 01:45:52 PM EST
    plan to overlook those cases where, for example, an "ex" is vindictive. Guess he is close to being indispensable.

    Parent
    Yeah (none / 0) (#13)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 01:07:21 PM EST
    He, being a commie and all needed some one like Gates to owe him a favor..

    Parent
    I read that (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 12:30:01 PM EST
    Major "Birther" Cook's attorney claims she has 170 soldiers desiring to file protests similiar to Cooks.  If this 170 really does exist will they also be volunteer reservists volunteering for the sole reason of participating in a political stunt and telling Obama "No!" like some sort of two year old, or will they actually be active duty soldiers who deployed for and served Bush now telling our President no?

    I wonder (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Steve M on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 12:36:52 PM EST
    if Ralph Peters will call for their execution as well.

    Parent
    You should only (none / 0) (#12)
    by coast on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 01:03:32 PM EST
    be allowed to look like an a$% on national tv once in a lifetime, but some were born to be overachievers.  I would put him in that category.

    Parent
    Dear God! (none / 0) (#14)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 01:11:08 PM EST
    Only on Fox News!

    Parent
    Sound (none / 0) (#5)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 12:35:12 PM EST
    Like a great resource for community service. Maybe they should start by cleaning the toilets at the department of Immigration.

    Parent
    Best wishes... (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 01:52:15 PM EST
    for a speedy recovery to Adam Yauch, aka MCA, of The Beastie Boys...he's got a cancerous tumor in the salivary gland.

    Ya can't, ya won't, and ya don't stop...MCA come and rock the Sure Shot again real soon I hope.

    I Keep My Underwear Up With A Piece Of Elastic
    I Use A Bullsh*t Mic That's Made Out Of Plastic
    To Send My Rhymes Out To All Nations
    Like Ma Bell, I've Got The Ill Communications
    Word. (none / 0) (#29)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 02:27:19 PM EST
    A lot of folks around here are disappointed they won't be coming to Red Rocks this Summer.  

    Parent
    I know that feeling... (none / 0) (#39)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:06:12 PM EST
    I had tickets to see the Beasties in Atlanta back in 2000 when Mike D. went and boke something, I think it was his leg or foot if memory serves, and the gig got cancelled...total bummer of that summer.

    They kick it like few others....Ill Communication was the soundtrack to my junior year of high school...good memories.  Paul's Boutique is the record though...The Sounds of Science...love the verse over the Beatles sample beat.

    Not like a roach or a piece of toast,
    I'm going out first class not going out coach.


    Parent
    Glad I saw Beastie Boys at Bonnaroo (none / 0) (#120)
    by ap in avl on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:30:30 PM EST
    in mid-June.  They gave a great performance and, as a woman of a certain age, I was not a fan before but left impressed.  Sorry to hear about the health problems.  Will hope for the best.

    Parent
    Poor, poor... (5.00 / 0) (#124)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:39:34 PM EST
    ...Princess Snowmachine of the Great White North.

    An independent investigator has found evidence that Gov. Sarah Palin may have violated ethics laws by accepting private donations to pay her legal debts, in the latest legal distraction for the former vice presidential candidate as she prepares to leave office this week.
    The report obtained by The Associated Press says Palin is securing unwarranted benefits and receiving improper gifts through the Alaska Fund Trust, set up by supporters.

    An investigator for the state Personnel Board says in his July 14 report that there is probable cause to believe Palin used or attempted to use her official position for personal gain because she authorized the creation of the trust as the "official" legal defense fund.

    Via the liberal gotcha media

    Whenever will she be freed from these witch hunts don't 'cha know?  Also.

    I read her twitter (none / 0) (#127)
    by lilburro on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:50:15 PM EST
    account today for the first time.  It confirmed for me that:

    1.  Focusing on her really is a waste of time.
    2.  She's going nowhere.

    I know twitter doesn't bring out your best and brightest moments, but hers is like some kind of acid trip of self pity (the whole "public scandals" & "vets" & "freedom of speech" series).  I look forward to tweets being quoted back to politicians as they seek reelection though -  "Pres Obama while u sightseeing in Paris u said 'time to delivr on healthcare' When you are a "hammer" u think evrything is NAIL I'm no NAIL"

    Parent
    Just wait... (5.00 / 0) (#132)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:57:57 PM EST
    ...until she's unfettered by public office.  She's promised to really "tweet" it like it is then.  

    Nothing like self-absorbed, inane, ill-thought out, heat of the moment rambling in 140 charactors or less put out for public consumption (and I'm talking about ALL politicians, not just St. Sarah).  

    Parent

    It is pretty funny. (none / 0) (#136)
    by lilburro on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 05:05:45 PM EST
    You would assume they'd know it would bite them in the @ss some day down the line, but no...

    Parent
    The Boston Globe (none / 0) (#11)
    by CST on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 12:59:21 PM EST
    Unions accepted consessions.  The article says the nytimes wants to sell the paper.  Well, personally, I want them to sell the paper too.  I do not want the times to own the globe.  They cannot be trusted.

    The New Yorker has an excellent profile... (none / 0) (#22)
    by Tony on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 01:58:55 PM EST
    of Sheriff Joe Arpaio in the most recent issue.  I know he is a Talk Left "fave."  Unfortunately the full text is not online, but I recommend you check it out if you can find it.

    http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/07/20/090720fa_fact_finnegan

    Love the image. Studs Terkel's (none / 0) (#32)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 02:49:35 PM EST
    Lawyers at Work.

    andgarden, this one's for you: (none / 0) (#57)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:23:56 PM EST
    unicameral legislature good or bad idea

    His objections seem stupid (none / 0) (#72)
    by andgarden on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:36:24 PM EST


    Parent
    I know. But I thought you would enjoy (none / 0) (#75)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:37:38 PM EST
    his rationle that the U.S. Congress works just fine.

    Parent
    That one was most stupid (none / 0) (#82)
    by andgarden on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 03:40:43 PM EST
    Bicameralism makes very little sense at the national level. At the state level, it's beyond stupid. If you want more legislators, fine, but don't create a parallel and duplicative body with larger districts.

    Parent
    Up in the clouds, maybe this makes sense (none / 0) (#143)
    by andgarden on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 05:36:34 PM EST
    but down here on earth, it doesn't work--especially in the form of the egregiously malapportioned United States Senate.

    Parent
    Tweeting from space they are (none / 0) (#115)
    by nycstray on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:23:27 PM EST
    Astro_127 is the guy's twitter name that he's using in case anyone wants to follow along :)

    My goodness (5.00 / 2) (#116)
    by Steve M on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 04:27:09 PM EST
    Just think of the roaming charges.

    Parent
    Magnanimous (none / 0) (#139)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 05:18:24 PM EST
    From Mike Allen's Playbook: "SCOOP - N.Y. Daily News, "President Barack Obama authorizes extended Secret Service guard for former VP Dick Cheney," by James Gordon Meek and Thomas M. DeFrank: "Former Vice President Dick Cheney's Secret Service protection has been extended for at least another six months, beginning Tuesday. Normally, ex-veeps only get six months of protection at taxpayer expense. But Cheney asked for an extension, and President Obama - whom Cheney has excoriated in several interviews since leaving office - recently signed off.

    Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano signed the order extending Cheney's security detail, her spokeswoman Sara Kuban confirmed Monday. If the Obama administration hadn't gone along with Cheney's request, he would have been forced to hire his own security agents - or go without. Cheney's friends have said he has become more concerned about his privacy and personal safety in recent years."

    Laura Rozen

    I meant to comment on that... (5.00 / 1) (#145)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 05:51:49 PM EST
    how much of a punk can Dick Cheney be?  And a welfare queen to boot...if you're that much of a fraidycat, hire a bodyguard on your own dime, ya big wuss.

    And I love how his "friends" say he's concerned about privacy, if only he was half as concerned about ours.  And he knew he had friends?...:)

    Parent

    It's not like he can't afford it.... (none / 0) (#158)
    by sallywally on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 07:26:12 PM EST
    his net worth must be immense!

    His paranoia is interesting. I wonder how it relates to his Dark Sidedness. Who does he think is going to kill him? The killers are pretty much all on his side, imho.

    Parent

    Solar Eclipse Tomorrow (none / 0) (#160)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 07:43:08 PM EST
    Tomorrow, July 22 2009, we will witness the longest solar eclipse of our century. The first who will be able to see it are the inhabitants of the Gulf of Khambhat, India. Instead of the sunrise, people will see a black hole rising in the sky and birds will be unsure if the day is beginning or not.

    link

    wait a minute! (none / 0) (#161)
    by Steve M on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 07:47:46 PM EST
    "longest of the century" = 9 years...

    Parent
    Yes Longest (none / 0) (#162)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 07:49:47 PM EST
    Youth has its advantages...

    Parent
    wouldn't "our century" (none / 0) (#166)
    by nycstray on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 08:01:56 PM EST
    be the past 100 yrs? It sounded kinda like they were saying our lifetime on the news, iirc. My brain wandered when I realized I couldn't see it :)

    Parent
    Actually (none / 0) (#167)
    by Steve M on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 08:08:30 PM EST
    Squeaky's link says it is the longest of the 21st century, including the 91 years that haven't happened yet.  There won't be a longer one until 2132.  I had no idea they could calculate a solar eclipse 123 years from now with that degree of precision!

    Parent
    IPhone (none / 0) (#170)
    by coast on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 08:48:00 PM EST
    has an app for it :)

    Parent
    Well Longest In 18 Years (none / 0) (#184)
    by squeaky on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 02:17:26 PM EST
    Visible only in Asia it reached its peak in India at about 6:20 am local time (0050 GMT), and will last 6 minutes and 39 seconds at its maximum point.

    It is the longest such eclipse since 11 July 1991, when a total eclipse lasting 6 minutes, 53 seconds was visible from Hawaii to South America. There will not be a longer eclipse than today's until 2132.



    Parent
    More (annular eclipse) (none / 0) (#164)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 07:56:35 PM EST
    Weather permitting, a man in his lifetime might expect to see some 50 lunar eclipses, more than half of them total, and perhaps 30 partial solar eclipses. A total eclipse of the sun, however, is a rare event at any one location. For example, the last total solar eclipse visible in the vicinity of New York City was in 1925 and the next will not be until 2079. What makes the spectacle so rare is that the sizes of the sun and the moon in the sky are almost identical, and as a result the conical shadow cast by the moon barely reaches the surface of the earth. The path of totality may be some 15,000 kilometers long, sweeping across as much as 140 degrees of longitude, but the umbra, or region of dark shadow, is seldom more than 250 kilometers wide.

    Whether a given solar eclipse is total or annular (with a bright ring of sun surrounding the disk of the moon) depends on the position of the moon in its elliptical orbit. When the moon is near perigee, its point of closest approach to the earth, it is able to cover the sun completely for as long as 7.5 minutes. When the moon is near apogee, its point of most distant recession, its shadow falls considerably short of the earth and the eclipse is annular. The duration of an annular eclipse can be as long as 12.5 minutes. Astronomers call total, annular and near-total eclipses of the sun large events, as opposed to the smaller events of partial eclipses.



    Parent
    link (none / 0) (#165)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 07:57:06 PM EST
    here

    Parent
    Tuesday Afternoon Open Thread | 190 comments (190 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment