18
   

Who Blew It? President Obama, Professor Gates or Sgt. Crowley

 
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jul, 2009 05:14 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Quote:
We flew back on a direct flight from Beijing to Newark. We arrived on Wednesday, and on Thursday I flew back to Cambridge. I was using my regular driver and my regular car service. And went to my home arriving at about 12:30 in the afternoon. My driver and I carried several bags up to the porch


http://www.theroot.com/views/skip-gates-speaks

So when ever you call for a car you always get the driver that you have preselected I take it? What, you don't???? YOu must be wrong...again.

Also, while I can't prove it yet I am pretty sure that Gates was told that he can contract out with what ever company he wants, that the university will pay what ever bills show up. He does not ride in the glorified taxis that the rest of you brainiacs have to suffer through. Gates is a prince, he is much to important to have to subject himself to THAT.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jul, 2009 05:20 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
We flew back on a direct flight from Beijing to Newark. We arrived on Wednesday, and on Thursday I flew back to Cambridge. I was using my regular driver and my regular car service. And went to my home arriving at about 12:30 in the afternoon. My driver and I carried several bags up to the porch


http://www.theroot.com/views/skip-gates-speaks

So when ever you call for a car you always get the driver that you have preselected I take it? What, you don't???? YOu must be wrong...again.


Yes, our car service has one usual driver - Ray Mendicino. He does a great job and all the profs know him on a first-name basis. The whole operation is only 3 Lincoln town cars, and services several colleges here at the University of California.

So, no. Not wrong again. In fact, you are even more wrong then you were originally, b/c you are now compounding your ignorance instead of just admitting it.

Quote:
Also, while I can't prove it yet I am pretty sure that Gates was told that he can contract out with what ever company he wants, that the university will pay what ever bills show up. He does not ride in the glorified taxis that the rest of you brainiacs have to suffer through. Gates is a prince, he is much to important to have to subject himself to THAT.


Well, you obviously don't know much at all about how Universities work. And here you are simply engaging in speculation. The things you are discussing are 100% within my line of work, and I assure you, while Professors are given a great deal of latitude when it comes to deciding how to spend their budget, he certainly does not have a 'blank check.' I don't even know where you get ideas like this.

Cycloptichorn
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jul, 2009 05:42 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Whether or not it saves money it is a perq that the plebians do not have.
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jul, 2009 05:46 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:



True, he acted like an ass; but it isn't illegal to act like an ass. He wasn't causing a public disturbance, he wasn't doing anything except giving a cop a hard time. When cops start arresting those who give them a hard time, it is an abuse of authority and should not be tolerated.

Cycloptichorn


Are you looking at this from the perspective of your locale? Have you ever watched that tv show Cops? Some locales are different than other locales, I believe.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jul, 2009 05:49 pm
@Foofie,
Foofie wrote:

Whether or not it saves money it is a perq that the plebians do not have.


Well, it's no different than any other business trip. Lots of regular folks go on business trips and lots get reimbursed for their driving, taxis and mileage; so what's the big deal, just b/c he's a professor?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jul, 2009 05:49 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
I'll have to keep trying to document this car service thing. The house that Gates lives in is owned by the university, has as a university paid personal secretary that comes out to his house to get his mail when he is gone (and has a key to his house)..... what is normal at the Academy is not normal for Prince Skip Gates, of that I can assure you. Professors don't normally get housing and personal secretaries thrown into their perk package.

I gotta wonder where he stays when he is recuperating out at the vineyard, who owns it and/or pays for it....
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Thu 30 Jul, 2009 05:52 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

I'll have to keep trying to document this car service thing. The house that Gates lives in is owned by the university, has as a university paid personal secretary that comes out to his house to get his mail when he is gone (and has a key to his house)..... what is normal at the Academy is not normal for Prince Skip Gates, of that I can assure you. Professors don't normally get housing and personal secretaries thrown into their perk package.


As for housing, you are correct; most professors don't have houses paid for by the University. As for the secretary, you are completely incorrect; most profs do have a secretary or assistant, whether it be their personal one or a shared one.

Where do you get your info from? Did you even go to college or have any experience working in an academic environment? It doesn't seem so.

Quote:
I gotta wonder where he stays when he is recuperating out at the vineyard, who owns it and/or pays for it....


George Soros, I'm sure. Rolling Eyes

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jul, 2009 06:11 pm
@Thomas,
Thomas wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Do you know the definition for 'disorderly conduct' in MA?

Brandon9000 wrote:
If he was insulting, uncooperative, and aggressive, and if he responded to really reasonable requests with insults, that's good enough for me.

If I may summarize your answer in my own words, it is that, no, you don't know the definition for "disorderly conduct" in Massachusetts. And you can't be bothered to look it up. Your own, subjective, seat-of-the-pants sentiment is "good enough" for you. Frankly, I find this remarkable. You've been dwelling on the issue of disorderly conduct from page one. Is it really too much trouble for you to run a Google search on "disorderly conduct Massachusetts"? It would have quickly yielded a fine summary by a lawfirm specialized in these things -- a secondary, but professional source unrelated to the case, easily good enough for our discussion. Here's what it says:

Quote:
A "disorderly person" is defined as one who:

* with purpose to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or
* recklessly creates a risk thereof
* engages in fighting or threatening, violent or tumultuous behavior, or
* creates a hazard or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose.

Source

May I suggest that you work from the actual definition for a change, and that you show us specific documentation of Gates's behavior fitting the definition? How did Gates cause public inconvenience, annoyance, or alarm? How did he recklessly create a risk thereof? How did he engage in fighting or threatening, violent, or tumultuous behavior, as opposed to just being uncooperative? How did he gratuitously create a hazard or physically offensive condition?

I'm willing to be persuaded -- but don't expect to persuade a lot of people by hiding behind lines like "that's good enough for me".

EDIT: At the end of the page I linked to, they reprint the relevant part of the actual statute:

Quote:
MGL CHAPTER 272. Mass General Laws, excerpt.

Section 53. Common night walkers, common street walkers, both male and female, common railers and brawlers, persons who with offensive and disorderly acts or language accost or annoy persons of the opposite sex, lewd, wanton and lascivious persons in speech or behavior, idle and disorderly persons, disturbers of the peace, keepers of noisy and disorderly houses, and persons guilty of indecent exposure may be punished by imprisonment in a jail or house of correction for not more than six months, or by a fine of not more than two hundred dollars, or by both such fine and imprisonment.


It is blatantly obvious that this does not apply to anyone's conduct in their own home, no matter how much the police may dislike it.

I didn't look it up because it didn't matter to me or to my argument. I'm talking about absolute right and wrong, and not the law. If what Gates did wasn't sufficient legal grounds for a disorderly conduct arrest, it should be, at least based on the acounts I've read of the case.
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jul, 2009 06:16 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

Quote:

I agree, but it's really about a proper placing of the bad behavior threshold. When you get to the point of refusing reasonable requests which the police make so that they can proceed with their investigations, and bellowing insults, it seems to me to be over the threshold. If that's not within the definition of disorderly conduct, it should be. I don't want the police to have unreasonable discretionary authority, but I don't want their job to be so difficult that only a nut would do it.


Surely, as a Conservative, you can agree that a Man's home is his Castle. The cop was not invited in, and if Gates has free speech rights anywhere, it's in his own home!

True, he acted like an ass; but it isn't illegal to act like an ass. He wasn't causing a public disturbance, he wasn't doing anything except giving a cop a hard time. When cops start arresting those who give them a hard time, it is an abuse of authority and should not be tolerated.

Cycloptichorn

Yes. I agree with most of what you just said, and I'm glad that you said it. The problem is that even in the sanctity of ones home, there is such a thing as going too far in refusing to comply with reasonable requests of police doing reasonable investigations, and the accounts I've read make it sound as thought that may have happened. If, for instance, it is really true that Gates initially refused to show ID and responded to polite requests literally with screamed insults, it would probably be over that line.
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jul, 2009 06:20 pm
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:
I didn't look it up because it didn't matter to me or to my argument. I'm talking about absolute right and wrong, and not the law.

Brandon, you are not the arbiter of absolute right and wrong in this world. And I'm glad that you aren't. (Nothing personal -- I'm glad that no single person is.)
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jul, 2009 06:22 pm
@Brandon9000,
Quote:
Yes. I agree with most of what you just said, and I'm glad that you said it. The problem is that even in the sanctity of ones home


the Prince lives in university owned housing......we don't know if he can call it "his" home with all of the rights allowed to normal home owners and renters because we don't know how he came to be parked in that house. Harvard is private, and don't need to document the Prince's perk package, and of course they don't.
Sglass
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Jul, 2009 12:41 am
How many of you watched the "Mary Poppins" beer fest on the White House lawn?

I thought the interview with Justin _________Boston Cop newly fired (or was it a suspension) who circulated a vicious, racist e-mail refering to Professor Gates as a BANNANA EATING JUNGLE BUNNY.

I thought that was much more interesting than the lawn party.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Jul, 2009 02:50 pm
@Thomas,
Thomas wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
I didn't look it up because it didn't matter to me or to my argument. I'm talking about absolute right and wrong, and not the law.

Brandon, you are not the arbiter of absolute right and wrong in this world. And I'm glad that you aren't. (Nothing personal -- I'm glad that no single person is.)

So, anyone who argues ethics on this message board is setting himself up as the arbiter of ethics in the world? Only the law may be discussed here? That strikes me as a very anti-democratic sentiment.
Sglass
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Jul, 2009 03:49 pm
The bottom line here is that Professor Gates has had his civil rights violated and badly.

His financial arrangments (including perks) with Harvard is really no ones business. The public does not pay his salary, rent , nor the salary of his secretary or his driver. These are not factors in the event.

I think that he chose the correct path in dealing with this situation because he could go to court and no doubt win.

I think that Professor Gates has better things to do with his time as an educator than to get envolved with a litigious event. He does not need the money or the agrivation.

I have found most of the postings here very anal and discriminitory.

Often times it's the have nots against the have gots.

Seaglass

ps: there is a message if you care to listen,.

Cycloptichorn
 
  0  
Reply Fri 31 Jul, 2009 04:01 pm
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:

Thomas wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
I didn't look it up because it didn't matter to me or to my argument. I'm talking about absolute right and wrong, and not the law.

Brandon, you are not the arbiter of absolute right and wrong in this world. And I'm glad that you aren't. (Nothing personal -- I'm glad that no single person is.)

So, anyone who argues ethics on this message board is setting himself up as the arbiter of ethics in the world? Only the law may be discussed here? That strikes me as a very anti-democratic sentiment.


Of course not; but when we are discussing justification for police actions, the Law is the appropriate topic to discuss, not our opinions of what the law SHOULD be.

Cycloptichorn
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Jul, 2009 05:48 pm
@Sglass,
Quote:
His financial arrangments (including perks) with Harvard is really no ones business. The public does not pay his salary, rent , nor the salary of his secretary or his driver. These are not factors in the event.


I don't agree, a person who is as wealthy and as influential as Gates is used to being treated a certain way, treated recognizing that he is a member of the privileged class. Being treated in a way that does not recognize his class might certainly piss him off, but we pay our cops to NOT recognize class when they are conducting their duties.

Gate's first expectation when he saw the cop at the door was that the cop had come to help him out, to check up on him. As a member of the ruling class it never occurred to Gates that he was suspected of wrong doing, even though the cop had every reason to suspect him. Gates could not switch gears, he got personally offended, and he rationalized his offense with the race victimology that he carries around with him even though this confrontation had nothing to do with race.

Had Gates not been a prisoner of his class he would have been able to see then that the cop was just doing his job, he would have conducted himself as the gentleman that he sometimes is rather than be the angry jerk that he was. Power and class expectations explain Gate's abuse of a public servant, race does not.
engineer
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Jul, 2009 06:36 pm
@hawkeye10,
You're making a lot of stereotypical remarks about how you think Harvard professors act and projecting them on Gates. You don't know Gates, his background, his expectations on opening the door, etc. You could equally say that Crowley as a police officer thinks that all black men are drug addicts. When he saw Gates at the door, he assumed he was high and assumed a belligerent posture since he always arrests black guys high on drugs hanging out in posh neighborhoods. I doubt that is true, but as a supposition, it is no worse than what you proposed.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Jul, 2009 06:52 pm
@engineer,
Gate's expectations are a matter of record, from his own words. In the beginning there is not even the allegation that the cop was in the wrong, because he was not. What ever his expectations were when walking to the door he conducted himself impeccably at least up till the time that he invited Gates to go outside. Gates was the one that was run over by his expectations, was not able to adjust to the situation, at least to begin with.
0 Replies
 
Sglass
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Jul, 2009 07:10 pm
@engineer,
If I were put in the position of second guessing what Professor Gates antiscipated , when he opened his front door .

"oh, Harvard Housing has reported the attempted break-in at my house and there are some policemen here from the Cambridge Police Department to investigate my complaint and make a report."

This is as good a scenerio as those I've read so far. Wink
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Jul, 2009 07:18 pm
@Sglass,
no, because while the house is owned by Harvard it is mangaed by a traditional property management company, whom gates was on the phone with as the cop rolled up. The cops had not had time to respond to Gates call to the managment company, so he knew that this cop was here for some other reason.

He figured that someone had seen him try to get into his house, and the cop was there to see if he needed anything, in Gate's mind. That he would be suspected of wrongdoing never crossed his mind, because he is as far removed from the hood as a person can be.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Demand a plan - Discussion by H2O MAN
 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 08/11/2020 at 04:47:15