I didnt define racism in my post

and nothing in your post applies to what the president did or said

unless i missed the part where he implied something negative about a RACE of people or signed a policy that did,,,

When you say he was not being racist you are trying to change the definition. Since he was being racist in his remarks.

He assumed the police officer was racist without any information on the subject.All he knew was the man was black and the cop was white. That was racist.

did he?

“I think it’s fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home; and, number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there’s a long history in this country of Afri can-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately,’’ the president said. “That’s just a fact.’’

where did he call the officer racist exactly?

was there not an inaccurate post made here about blacks committing more crimes and defended as a 'fact'?

was that , by this definition, a racist declaration too?

except, blacks and latinos being disproportionately stopped has ACTUALLY been proven, as he stated,,,

LOL you are making up your own version of what happened to suit your argument. Sorry but it wont work. Thats not what happened. Why don't you go google it and get back to us.

I present PROOF in the form of a STUDY

Here is the link to the downloadable PDF .
http://www.colorofcrime.com/colorofcrime2005.pdf

Major Findings:

Police and the justice system are not biased against minorities.
Crime Rates

Blacks are seven times more likely than people of other races to commit murder, and eight times more likely to commit robbery.
When blacks commit crimes of violence, they are nearly three times more likely than non-blacks to use a gun, and more than twice as likely to use a knife.
Hispanics commit violent crimes at roughly three times the white rate, and Asians commit violent crimes at about one quarter the white rate.
The single best indicator of violent crime levels in an area is the percentage of the population that is black and Hispanic.
Interracial Crime

Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving blacks and whites, blacks commit 85 percent and whites commit 15 percent.
Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks. Forty-five percent of their victims are white, 43 percent are black, and 10 percent are Hispanic. When whites commit violent crime, only three percent of their victims are black.
Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against a white than vice versa, and 136 times more likely to commit robbery.
Blacks are 2.25 times more likely to commit officially-designated hate crimes against whites than vice versa.
Gangs

Only 10 percent of youth gang members are white.
Hispanics are 19 times more likely than whites to be members of youth gangs. Blacks are 15 times more likely, and Asians are nine times more likely.
Incarceration

Between 1980 and 2003 the US incarceration rate more than tripled, from 139 to 482 per 100,000, and the number of prisoners increased from 320,000 to 1.39 million.
Blacks are seven times more likely to be in prison than whites. Hispanics are three times more likely.

haaa,, here we go,,,, no answer is an answer I guess,,,lol

but if google is the authority for anyone,,

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2009/07/23/obama_scolds_cambridge_police/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32092715/

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/23/us/politics/23gates.html


perhaps someone from mingle was actually PRESENT to explain something else that happened thats not in these sources though,,,,

All three of those are liberal cities and stations what a surprise LOL

That is the ACTUAL police report. Provided by FOX NEWS!

A police report of the incident written by Officer Carlos Figueroa, who responded to the call with Crowley, says Crowley was already in the house when he walked in. The report says Crowley had asked Gates for some identification and Gates shouted that he would not give any information and called the sergeant a racist.

According to the report, Gates then yelled, "This is what happens to black men in America." When Crowley tried to calm him down, Gates shouted, "You don't know who you're messing with."

The report continues that the shouting went on after Gates and the officers walked out onto the front porch. When Gates allegedly wouldn't cooperate or calm down, Crowley arrested him.

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Gates_Arrest.pdf

So as you can see for yourself, he didn't provide proof. He got pissy and pulled the race card. What a surprise there ! LOL

nice numbers,, they are my favorite resource of manipulation

actually the post I refuted was the simplistic 'blacks commit more crimes'

first, because crime covers a broad range of activities and
second, because a significant amount of 'crime' goes unnoticed and unprosecuted making it nearly impossible to know who is actually COMMITTING the most crimes

only who is arrested and prosecuted most often for crimes,,,

your numbers merely reflect arrest and prosecution rates for VIOLENT CRIME, which I wont dispute(although there is probably a difference between us two in the assessment of what those numbers mean)

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/henry-louis-gates-jr-police-report


not quite, he initially requested to see the officers ID first, but he DID present ID and the officer knew he resided there and continued on to arrest him , basically for being upset,,,

and there is also some discrepancy between the police report and what the caller says happened,,,go figure,

(those trustworthy cops just doing their jobs and not POSSIBLY capable of dishonesty or ego tripping,,and abusing their authority,)

LOL opinion, opinion, opinion......

Does it bother you that you are exactly as the study indicates? You have NO PROOF at all! The study covers all interracial crime not just violent crime.

A 2003 national poll found that only 28 percent of
blacks, as opposed to 66 percent of whites, thought
whites and blacks receive equal treatment at the
hands of the police.2


Are you sure you wanna do this again?

The last time you tried to debate me over a post that you didn't read you failed are you sure you wanna try again? I suggest reading the study and then comment . I'll wait for you.

LOL of course! It's a conspiracy against blacks!!!!

lol, you are quite the comedian,, the POST you supplied actually references 'violent' crime in nearly every sentence,....

can we stick to THIS instance and THESE people involved,

THIS cop and THIS man overreacted in THIS situation

Who's laughing now?
How about them apple's?


Incarceration
• Between 1980 and 2003 the US incarceration rate more than tripled, from 139
to 482 per 100,000, and the number of prisoners increased from 320,000 to 1.39
million.
• Blacks are seven times more likely to be in prison than whites. Hispanics are
three times more likely.

which goes to the argument about INCARCERATION (prosecution of crimes)not the commission of crimes

Your white's against black conspiracy doesn't apply here sorry . In fact this study proves that your idealism is incorrect. It's something that you believe due to your surroundings.

good grief, is conspiracy the word of the day or something?

I havent mentioned a conspiracy, in fact I implored you to stick to the topic of THIS situation and THESE players,,,IM curious as to why YOU seem to keep referring to racial groups?

we all foster a significant amount of beliefs that stem from our surroundings, inluding yourself

but I am actually using LOGIC , unless you believe that everyone who commits a crime goes to jail....which I find to be quite an idealistic view that I dont share,,,

Are Police Biased?
For someone to go to prison, four things have to
happen. The police must arrest him for a felony,
charges must be filed, he must plead or be found
guilty, and a judge must sentence him to prison.
Racial bias could enter at any stage.
Blacks are certainly more likely to be arrested
than other groups. According to the Uniform Crime
Reports (UCR), blacks accounted for 27 percent of
arrests in 2002, even though they were only 13 percent
of the population, whereas whites and Hispanics
(W&H) accounted for 71 percent of arrests, but
were 81 percent of the population. This means that
when all crime categories are added together, blacks
were more than twice as likely to be arrested as
W&H. Blacks were four times more likely to be arrested
for violent crimes, and no fewer than eight
times more likely to be arrested for robbery.4
Many people believe blacks are arrested so often
because police target them unfairly. Brian Nichols,
the Atlanta gunman, seems to think police are arresting
blacks en masse whether they are guilty or
not. Many local authorities have passed laws to correct
what they believe to be police bias.5 Police argue
that they are targeting criminals, not non-whites,
and that they arrest large numbers of minorities only
because minorities are committing a large number
of crimes.6
The best test of police bias is to compare an independent
and objective count of the percentage of
criminals who are black with the percentage of arrested
suspects who are black. If they are about the
same—if, for example, we can determine that half
the robbers are black, and we find that about half
the robbers the police arrest are black—it is good
evidence police are not targeting blacks unfairly.
But what information do we have about the race
of criminals other than arrest reports? The best independent
source is the National Crime Victimization
Survey (NCVS). For the most recent report, the
government surveyed 149,040 people about crimes
of which they had been victims during 2003. They
described the crimes in detail, including the race of
the perpetrator, and whether they reported the crimes
to the police. The survey sample, which is massive
by polling standards, was carefully chosen to be representative
of the entire US population. By comparing
information about races of perpetrators with racial
percentages in arrest data from the Uniform
Crime Reports (UCR) we can determine if the proportion
of criminals the police arrest who are black
is equivalent to the proportion of criminals the victims
say were black.
UCR and NCVS reports for the years 2001
through 2003 offer the most recent data on crimes
suffered by victims, and arrests for those crimes.
Needless to say, many crimes are not reported to the
police, and the number of arrests the police make is
smaller still. An extrapolation from NCVS data gives
a good approximation of the actual number of crimes
committed in the United States every year. The
NCVS tells us that between 2001 and 2003, there
were an estimated 1.8 million robberies, for example,
of which 1.1 million were reported to the
police. The UCR tell us that in the same period police
made 229,000 arrests for robbery. Police cannot
make an arrest if no one tells them about a crime,
so the best way to see if police are biased is to compare
the share of offenders who are black in crimes
reported to the police, and the share of those arrested
who are black.
Figure 1 compares offender information to arrest
information for all the crimes included in the
NCVS. For example, 55 percent of offenders in all
robberies were black, 55.4 percent of robbers in robberies
reported to police were black, and 54.1 percent
of arrested robbers were black.
For most crimes, police are arresting fewer blacks
than would be expected from the percentage of
criminals the victims tell us are black (rape/sexual
assault is the only exception). In the most extreme
case, burglary, victims tell police that 45 percent of
the perpetrators were black, but only 28 percent of
the people arrested for that crime were black. If all
the NCVS crimes are taken together, blacks who
committed crimes that were reported to the police
were 26 percent less likely to be arrested than people
of other races who committed the same crimes. 7
These figures lend no support to the charge that
police arrest innocent blacks, or at least pursue them
with excessive zeal. In fact, they suggest the opposite,
that police are more determined to arrest nonblack
rather than black criminals.

thats a little better

more numbers and less assessment



here is an assessment from another source

As sociologist Robert O’Brian has noted (using Census data), the odds of a given white person (or white criminal for that matter) encountering a black person are only about three percent. On the other hand, the odds of a given black person (or black criminal) encountering a white person are nineteen times greater, or fifty-seven percent (6), meaning the actual interracial victimization gap between black-on-white and white-on-black crime is smaller than one would expect. In 2002, blacks committed a little more than 1.2 million violent crimes, while whites committed a little more than three million violent crimes (7). If each black criminal had a 57 percent chance of encountering (and thus potentially victimizing) a white person, this means that over the course of 2002, blacks should have been expected to victimize roughly 690,000 whites. But in truth, blacks victimized whites only 614,176 times that year (8). Conversely, if each white criminal had only a three percent chance of encountering and thus victimizing a black person, this means that over the course of 2002, whites would have been expected to victimize roughly 93,000 blacks. But in truth, whites victimized blacks 135,931 times: almost 50 percent more often than would be expected by random chance (9).