OBAMA BACKTRACKS CALLING POLICE ACTION STUPID:
WAS IT MODERATION OR IS OBAMA
BECOMING THE FIRST WIMP?
While watching the president's rambling press conference Wednesday,
I was jolted out of a near snooze when he made a sharp comment, saying
the Cambridge, Massachusetts police had behaved stupidly. I was
excited, because Barack Obama usually plays to the middle ground. Not
because he's a political centrist -- he's not -- but because it often
appears he believes the best chance for achieving success is to offend
the least many people possible.
That's why he wasn't my first choice last year in the primaries --
he was actually my fourth. I viewed him as the sort of guy who becomes
frat president -- not so much to get the girls, but to be everyone's
pal. A glad hander with an even temperament, a winning smile,
soft-spoken, articulate and smart. A great trait to become president of
the Harvard Law Review, but not the leader of the free world.
And so, because Obama measures his words about almost everything, I
was intrigued when he finally said something direct and from his heart
after someone asked him at the end of the press conference what he
thought about the case of Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates, who'd
been arrested in his home.

I liked the way Obama laid it out carefully, saying
the initial stages
seemed fine to him, when someone saw Gates in the dark from a distance
trying to jimmy open the door of his Cambridge home. He said he didn't
mind at all that the police were called to investigate and found Gates,
who was already inside his home.
But at that point he said it should have ended, as the professor
showed the officer his ID, indicating he actually lived there, and
Obama earned a big hurray from me when he said that the police
department acted "stupidly" when they arrested Gates.
He was right. The policeman, Sgt. James Crowley, was wrong. Yet,
though Gates was released without being charged after four hours of
what must have been a humiliating experience for a distinguished
professor -- or any decent American -- mug shots, fingerprinting and
the like -- Sgt. Crowley said he had done nothing for which to
apologize, though the mayor of Cambridge did just that.
When the case became controversial -- lead stories by Brian Williams on
NBC, Katie Couric on CBS, Charlie Gibson on ABC and reports on CNN, Fox
News and MSNBC -- not to mention the inevitable replays on YouTube --
Obama suddenly softened his tone. It was as if he said, "Oh, my God, it
doesn't matter that I was right, but this will take media space away
from my health care issue, and I don't want to make people think I was
playing favorites with people tied to my race."
Then, when the tweets on Twitter became deafening he almost
completely backtracked during a surprise appearance before the White
House Press Corps. He said he was wrong for what he'd said about the
Cambridge Police department and Sgt. Crowley, insisted that Crowley was
an "outstanding police officer" and blamed himself for ratcheting up
the incident by his comment. He further told the press he'd called
Gates and Crowley and invited them both to the White House to have a
beer for a kumbaya moment. Instead of this mealy-mouthed reversal, why
couldn't the president man up and say, "You know, I don't have to
explain myself. I said what I meant and I stand by what I said."
Even though the facts of this case are still as mysterious as the
Michael Jackson toxicological reports, it's clear that had Professor
Gates done anything truly illegal the police would have been champing
at the bit to get the info to us. If Professor Gates had pulled out a
gun or brandished a cane or slugged Sgt. Crowley in the mouth it would
have been assault and grounds for arrest. No such charge has been made.
So since it is just conjecture as to what happened, I'll explore the
most vile possibility. Perhaps Professor Gates is a hothead and quick
tempered. Perhaps he was so repulsed by the thought that he was being
questioned in an accusatory manner -- after having given the officer
proof that he lived in the house -- that he -- hold onto your hats --
said something nasty. Maybe it was more than nasty -- a vulgar epithet
-- maybe even used the "F" word or combined it with the word honkie.
When I was a kid I was taught, "Sticks and stones can break your
bones, but names can never harm you." Was Sgt. Crowley never taught
that? Not even in training for the Cambridge police force? How gutless
of our president in his zeal to be neutral and not make waves to say
that both Sgt. Crowley and Professor Gates overreacted. It doesn't
matter whether Professor Gates overreacted. Such an overreaction is
within his legal rights. It is not within Sgt. Crowley's legal rights
to take advantage of the situation.
There was no reason for Professor Gates to be led off in handcuffs,
whatever unpleasant thing he might have said to irritate Sgt. Crowley.
The officer should have taken a deep breath and walked away. His powers
as a policeman, which include being armed with a gun and a stick to
beat someone back, do not entitle him to use the threat of physical
force under color of authority when someone is exercising freedom of
speech in his own home.
Even Sgt. Leon Lashley, an African American Cambridge police
department colleague of Sgt. Crowley's, admitted that, while he
supported Crowley's action (big surprise), it probably would have
played out differently had he been the officer to arrive on the scene.
When CNN's Anderson Cooper pressed Lashley as to why Gates was taken in
-- whatever he'd said, it was in his house -- Lashley lamely responded
that they were able to do so because Gates had walked outside the
house. Cooper pressed further, saying Gates was on his porch and it was
still his property. Lashley insisted that once out of the house, a hot
exchange of words could then be viewed as disturbing the peace. That's
a big stretch.
There is nothing about this case that doesn't smell phony, and the
fact that our president won't stand behind his words when they become
controversial makes me quite concerned about his future. It's still too
early in his administration to point the finger of failure as partisan
Republicans have done. But whether it's the timetable on our
involvement in Iraq on which he's waffled, his health care deadline, on
which he caved in to congressional forces wanting a delay or his still
unfulfilled promise to gay Americans that he will eliminate the
preposterous "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy -- that even many
distinguished members of our military have lobbied against -- Obama
just doesn't have the cojones to follow through unless he has a clear
consensus. He is so afraid to offend and risk losing support that he
refuses in fact to lead by setting the proper example.
The president says he has to be careful about what he says, because
when he says something it gets a sizable reaction, and that's true. But
in this case it deserved the media attention and exposed an outrageous
happenstance that shouldn't be pooh-poohed and dispensed with over a
couple of Miller Lites. The president shouldn't be so concerned about
offending conservative elements of our society that he somehow compared
Gates and Crowley's behavior as a simple case of two men overreacting.
Even CNN's David Gergen said he was distressed about Obama's conclusion
giving equal status to the men's wrongdoing.
I'll say it again. Gates has a right to scream at a policeman and
tell him to get out of his house. You might not like it if he called
Crowley a pig (and I'm not saying he did), but even if he had it's
covered under the First Amendment. Crowley's "overreaction" went a lot
farther than harmless name calling, forcibly taking Gates from his
house like a common criminal. His deed was a helluva lot more
consequential and an overreaching of the public trust invested in him
as a police officer.
So, if this is another sizable sign of how our president is more
concerned about his television "Q" rating than making meaningful change
for the American people, Obama may well be a one-term president. My
only hope is that if Obama can't get his act together by next year
there will be a strong Democrat standing in the wings to go head to
head with him in the 2012 primaries rather than the party giving him
token support and in the process handing the country back to the
Republicans.
In case you can't tell, I'm thoroughly disgusted with his actions today.
Contact Us