Obama shoots from the hip -- stupidly

Chicago Sun-Times columnist Lynn Sweet used the president's press conference on national health insurance to delve into the deep waters of race in 21st Century America by asking the president his take on the arrest of his friend, Harvard Professor Henry Gates, Jr., on charges of disorderly conduct following a stop at the professor's home

By way of background, Gates' neighbor called the police about a potential burglary when she spotted two black men with backpacks breaking down the front door of the Gates home. Apparently, Gates had lost his car keys following a out of town trip and he, along with his driver, broke down the door to gain entry.

Police responded and, upon seeing Gates and asking to speak to him, were allegedly confronted by an angry Gates who refused to talk instead reportedly shouting, "This is what happens to black men in America." Rather than talking to the police and confirming that he was the home's owner, he accused the police of being racist. He was arrested then later released for failing to cooperate with authorities.

The journalist asked the president for his take on the incident. Instead of doing what any other person who had graduated from law school would do -- decline to comment on the specifics of the case if he does not have all the relevant information -- the president decided instead to unilaterally and without substantiation attack the police of Cambridge, Mass and assert that they "acted stupidly" in arresting Gates at his home.

Interesting how "prejudice" has as its component parts "pre" and "judge." And that is precisely what Obama did in taking sides in this case -- he immediately prejudged the policy actions as "stupid" without for a moment considering his friend's complicity in the fracas. Admitting "he might be a little biased here," he nevertheless went forward to castigate the arresting officers and raising the broader history of the police disproportionately arresting minorities.

But then, the journalist's question basically begged him to go down that road. "What does that incident say to you? And what does it say about race relations in America," she asked the president. Given an opportunity to weigh in on such a large question, while in the process avert attention away from his failed health care policies, the president jumped at it.

He didn't need the facts, he didn't need the circumstances beyond police versus black professor. The police must be the stupid ones. Not the professor who immediately -- and since his whole professional life has been about race issues, how could he not -- made this a racist issue. They were there because he was black, not because he had broken down the front door. He refused to answer their questions because they had no right to question him. He was being treated unfairly because of his race.

It is a racist self-fulfilling prophecy. Act as if you can't trust the police, as if they're suspicious of you, as if they won't give you a fair deal, and voila you have an incident like this one. How would you have handled the police coming to your home on a burglary call after you broke in yourself? Probably not as Professor Gates. He has possibly let his life's work take over his life view and sees everything through the prism of race.

But what is the president's excuse for taking sides in a potentially explosive situation without the facts? What was benefited by his glib comment of stupidity? He is as much the president of those officers, who risk their lives every day on the job defending all of Cambridge, Mass., as he is the president of his friend, Prof. Gates. They all deserved his impartiality and neutrality until the facts were known, and then a sober and reasonable assessment of the facts of the situation. He owes those policemen an apology.