Justifiable Anger and Racist Police Actions Duly Explained by the NYT

We are always excited to study and digest the frenetic political theorizing that is proffered as thinking at the New York Times—aka the Walter Duranty Papers. [1] When any economic or political event transpires, particularly one that can be deftly sculpted to showcase the ever-present racism by the mostly white police, the propaganda machines hum so that the public might be reeducated. Bob Herbert[2][3], whose articles rarely offer any new information and are mostly ignored by this blogger, since they tend to be mechanical and pedestrian in mentality, springs forth as if he has now had some advanced instruction in the proper use of propaganda and wants to show off.  He graduated today! In today’s article in the soon-t0-be-bankrupt Times Herbert reshuffles his authorized stack of soiled clichés and breaks new [to him] journalistic ground as he ‘teaches’ us all about the ‘attitudes’ of the Cambridge police and the civil rights incidents that have rocked the nation.

Herbert begins:

“If Professor Gates ranted and raved at the cop who entered his home uninvited with a badge, a gun and an attitude, he didn’t rant and rave for long.”[4]--Anger Has Its Place By Bob Herbert Op-Ed Columnist Published: July 31, 2009 from Cambridge, Mass. [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

If pigs could fly…………. Notice that Herbert finds some ‘attitude’ problem on the part of the police that is not documented in the police report or given by witnesses. This crass assumption is essential to building his ‘case’ that Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. was clearly innocent with the underlying assumption that he was justified at howling at the police. Perhaps, we might muse, because the cop was white? Well, let us read further.

“The charge: angry while black.”-- Bob Herbert July 31, 2009 from Cambridge, Mass.

Another academic opinion should have been used by Herbert to amplify his premise:

“All white people are racists.“[5]-University of Delaware.

Actually the charge was disorderly conduct and is defined this way in that state:

“You can argue the facts in court, but there's no question that the police report described the misdemeanor offense of "disorderly conduct" under Massachusetts law, which includes engaging in "tumultuous behavior" in "any neighborhood," thereby causing public "inconvenience, annoyance or alarm."[6]— How About A National Conversation On Race Hoaxes? By Ann Coulter July 29, 2009

Herbert ignores all this and ignores the police report and the facts by creating a mythical political world where truth is unnecessary and racial politics are steered into a ‘blacks are innocent’ motif by any convenient means.

President Obama is challenged:

“The president of the United States has suggested that we use this flare-up as a “teachable moment,” but so far exactly the wrong lessons are being drawn from it — especially for black people. The message that has gone out to the public is that powerful African-American leaders like Mr. Gates and President Obama will be very publicly slapped down for speaking up and speaking out about police misbehavior, and that the proper response if you think you are being unfairly targeted by the police because of your race is to chill.”-- Bob Herbert July 31, 2009 from Cambridge, Mass.

Herbert magically conjures up these demons from the abyss with exactly no facts, but facts are not necessary in a political screed where chum is constantly chucked to the loyals to preserve the Democratic party and their essential black votes. Herbert announces that there is nothing to learn from this  “teachable moment.” Perhaps Herbert is unteachable.

“Mr. Gates is a friend, and I was selected some months ago to receive an award from an institute that he runs at Harvard. I made no attempt to speak to him while researching this column.”-- Bob Herbert July 31, 2009 from Cambridge, Mass.

Can any reader find Herbert’s research findings in any of this?? I cannot.

“Professor Gates did absolutely nothing wrong. He did not swear at the officer or threaten him. He was never a danger to anyone. At worst, if you believe the police report, he yelled at Sergeant Crowley. He demanded to know if he was being treated the way he was being treated because he was black.”-- Bob Herbert July 31, 2009 from Cambridge, Mass.

Here is the police report:[7] Professor [Do you know who I am???] Gates initially refused to show his ID to the police. That is a crime in itself. He was loud and unruly and that fits the criminal description of disorderly conduct in Cambridge and elsewhere in the civilized world.

Herbert urges:

“Black people need to roar out their anger at such treatment, lift up their voices and demand change.”-- Bob Herbert July 31, 2009 from Cambridge, Mass.

Inciting to riot?? Is that a crime?

“We’re never going to have a serious national conversation about race.”-- Bob Herbert July 31, 2009 from Cambridge, Mass.

We hear about them all the time.  We read this every day in the New York Times. And Herbert is correct about the legalities of yelling at police:

"Contrary to the city’s [Houston, TX ed] contention, the First Amendment protects a significant amount of verbal criticism and challenge directed at police officers.  'Speech is often provocative and challenging...[But it] is nevertheless protected against censorship or punishment, unless shown likely to produce a clear and present danger of a serious, substantive evil that rises far above public inconvenience, annoyance or unrest." -- Houston v Hill, 482 US 451; 107 S Ct 2502; 96 L Ed 2d 398 (1987) and 482 US at 461.

Herbert rants on:

“So that leaves it up to ordinary black Americans to rant and to rave, to demonstrate and to lobby, to march and confront and to sue and generally do whatever is necessary to stop a continuing and deeply racist criminal justice outrage.”-- Bob Herbert July 31, 2009 from Cambridge, Mass.

Somehow, we don’t really see much that is new here. Apparently the cop committed the crime. Herbert howls about the eternal racism and sounds the old stale trumpet and signals a clarion call for action in the streets.  Why not do Watts again? The mentality of such a piece in the NYT is surprisingly not out of line with the rest of this paper’s opinion op-eds. Racism is the very bedrock of the Party of Democrats[8] and without this social element, real or imaginary, they would have little power outside the inner cities, which are filled with black-on-black crime,[9] also probably to be blamed on whites in some manner.

Perhaps a solution to Herbert’s problem from another academic he has not commented on so far in his columns:

A quote by Kamau Kambon “[blacks must]…exterminate white people off the face of the planet.” [10] [The New York Times did not comment on this guy.] This affords a ‘solution’ to the problem of sorts.  Nobody is yelling at Professor Kambon it seems.

Gates is a sour affirmative action candidate who attempts to conform to an academic setting sans the cognitive or social skills to do so. We should wonder what his SAT score was. He is a howler and not a thinker. As such he acts like strange and reveals his character and demeanor with comments like this in this video and the transcript in the footnote:[11]

Gates missed an opportunity to show how modern Democrats feel about whites and Republicans in general:

"[Republicans] can go f--- themselves!" --Rahm Emanuel[12], Barack Obama's Chief of Staff[13]

It has been several decades since attempts were made to educate the wide spectrum of blacks in this country coupled with the use of emergency measures like affirmative action.[14] Sadly, very little progress has been made other than to cement the certainties of racism into a rugged and durable edifice that defies bona fide change. Given the indoctrination, the sorrowful cognitive skills[15] and other marginal attributes of those players like Gates who would speak for black Americans we can expect little in the future.  The NYT thus maintains a careful eye on the racial sty it has nutured and hopes to use this hatred to political advantage.

Maybe another 50 years of affirmative action will be necessary to elevate some of our citizens into the civil middle class outside the city projects where they can get real  jobs and earn a living on their own without so much help.

Maybe not with people like Gates and Herbert.

rycK

Comments: ryckki@gmail.com