The President had his sit-down over beer with Prof. Henry Louis Gates Jr. and Sgt. James Crowley yesterday afternoon. Apparently Vice President Biden dropped by as well and all the families picnicked beforehand. But Pres. Obama also said he wouldn't be issuing any statements, so perhaps we'll need to discover the teachings by inference or by subsequent statements from Prof. Gates or Sgt. Crowley.
I'm strapped for time (and no doubt for insight), but I do have a discussion starter for those who are interested. The following tidbit was from a CNN.com commentary by Donna Brazile:
"I was not surprised by the findings of a recent WSJ/NBC poll. It found that just 4 percent of African-Americans think Gates was more at fault compared to 30 percent who pointed to the officer. Among whites, 32 percent said Gates was more at fault while 7 percent identified Crowley."
Discuss please.
wow...
It's not as though I would prefer to see the numbers in such a poll break down in a different way (I guess I would... I do have my own opinion). It's just that I feel this (and the fact that I'm not sure if I'm surprised either) points to a population with small worldviews. We side with who we are like (or worse, who we look like).
Maybe I'm just using statistics to say what I want them to but, given that most people I've talked to don't seem to have very nuanced opinions on what happened, I think this makes the case that one's race is a significant factor in one's opinion. Or maybe the poll just accounts for the fact that, generally speaking, white people don't know what it's like to be profiled. I'm confident that's pretty true.
Regardless, I gather that we live in bubbles. And for a country as diverse as we are, we can't stay that way and expect to move forward and grow closer together. Paul Haggis' movie "Crash" from some years back illustrates this well: In our multicultural, globalized society, eventually, people who live in different bubbles collide... What do we do when that happens? How do we pick up the pieces? Can we move forward? How do we do that? A lot of this depends on how big our worldviews are.
Posted by: Vinceation | July 31, 2009 at 08:48 AM
The numbers are disappointing, but not altogether surprising. It's a me-first, sue-you culture, and when something so racially charged and high-profile hits the news it's no shock that we Americans tend to blame the other person. That said, I think taking a stage 4 approach has something helpful to bring to the discussion - namely, the willingness to listen and withhold judgment on both sides. From that perspective this situation is at its core could be seen as a misunderstanding between two men, which was escalated by the racial subtext and propelled into iconicity by the media.
Posted by: Jonathan | July 31, 2009 at 09:40 AM
Hmmm, funny... I actually thought it was encouraging that the numbers weren't more polarized than they are. I guess that says something about my expectations.
Posted by: Krissy | July 31, 2009 at 09:41 AM
First, what did the other 60% say?
2nd, who do I have to honk off to get to have picnic a beer with the president?
Posted by: Ellen | July 31, 2009 at 09:52 AM
Thanks all. I'll be totally interested to hear your comments.
And, who am I kidding? Upon minimal reflection, I do have a few more comments.
One is that all three men involved actually, to my mind, come off pretty well at this point. It was Sgt. Crowley who said at the end of the conversation after Pres. Obama called him (kudos to Obama--what other President would have gotten involved or made that call?), "Maybe we can all sit down over a beer someday." Obama apparently instantly said, "We can arrange that right now."
Evidently, thanks to the picnic that the White House set up for the families (and who had that bright idea?), the Gates and the Crowleys had already started to talk before the big sit-down. Gates and Crowley had already scheduled a follow-up lunch together in Cambridge irrespective of what happened in the sit-down with Obama and Biden. Gates to the New York Times: “We hit it off right from the beginning. When he’s not arresting you, Sergeant Crowley is a really likable guy.” Which strikes me as a pretty good line.
And this from CNN.com.
After the meeting, the renowned Harvard professor reflected on the significance of the event and thanked Obama for arranging the meeting. "It is incumbent upon Sergeant Crowley and me to utilize the great opportunity that fate has given us to foster greater sympathy among the American public for the daily perils of policing on the one hand, and for the genuine fears of racial profiling on the other hand," Gates said in a statement on his Web site, The Root.
"Let me say that I thank God that (I) live in a country in which police officers put their lives at risk to protect us every day, and, more than ever, I've come to understand and appreciate their daily sacrifices on our behalf. I'm also grateful that we live in a country where freedom of speech is a sacrosanct value and I hope that one day we can get to know each other better, as we began to do at the White House this afternoon over beers with President Obama," he said.
Back to me: Obama was mocked by his opponents during the election cycle for having been a community organizer, as if that was...I never quite got it...a useless, vaguely communist, certainly pointy-headed leftist thing to do. But what have those instincts done here? Rather than each side just pontificating, though that happened initially, it got the parties into a room. The statements above are the first fruits of that, and it set a context where the two antagonists not only got to hear and respect the opposing perspectives, they also realized they wanted to continue the conversation on their own.
In response to our post of a couple weeks back on "Are You a Patriot?": at moments like this, I say God bless America.
Posted by: Dave Schmelzer | July 31, 2009 at 10:18 AM
or mine =)
Posted by: Vinceation | July 31, 2009 at 01:37 PM
Yeah, I'm with you Dave. Despite all the flack for the off-the-cuff comment, I think Obama has really shined as a model for mediation here. It is strange that that quality seems so foreign to others in politics.
Posted by: Vinceation | July 31, 2009 at 01:45 PM
My only beef with the president in this case was his choice of beer.
Posted by: jeff | July 31, 2009 at 06:02 PM
This is really encouraging. To me it shows that people can get along, even if they hate each other or have grievances against each other, if they are willing to step out of their stories (narratives, as Dave S. called them) and see the other person as another human being.
And I agree, this is great leadership from Obama. Although it may seem like a trivial gesture, I think this makes a difference.
Posted by: Otto | July 31, 2009 at 10:26 PM
Did anyone notice that the two parties really didn't need Obama to mediate? According to a news report this morning Crowley and Gates had already met and discussed issues before the now infamous beer meet and greet. Call me cynical, but I see it more as alot of posing and grandstanding, As we all know politicians excel in that department, some more than others.
Posted by: Slider | July 31, 2009 at 10:48 PM
I don't think it's worth a special merit to side with Gates if you're white or Crowley if you're black. I don't think one narrative is privileged over another. Paul said it's better to be wronged than to sue. I see how that applies to citizen Gates but not to Crowley who carries the sword. For all the leadership Obama showed in bringing about the summit ~ indeed, a good move ~ neither he nor Gates nor Crowley apologized. At least not yet. "Dialing back" still isn't an apology. You want to lead? Be the first to do what you ought to do. Has either even said, "I see your point?" Obama's good move is a good move, period. Give it all some time to see what really happens.
Posted by: Dave Thom | July 31, 2009 at 11:32 PM
They met first AT the White House (before the official beer party, to be sure, but nevertheless at the White House). I find it unlikely that the two would have ever gotten together and discussed ANYTHING had it not been for Obama's invite. Maybe you should try to see past your hatred of Obama to see that something good actually happened here--political opportunity or not. Imagine, a president who encourages actually sitting down together and talking instead of standing at opposite corners and shouting.
Posted by: Krissy | August 01, 2009 at 10:11 AM
Seriously, no one is going to take me up on this chance to have a polarized national debate about the seriously bad beer choice of the president?
Posted by: jeff | August 01, 2009 at 03:03 PM
I think he chose Bud Light because he HAD to. The other two stuck to their respective guns. Gates went Jamaican beer, Crowley went White-country-club-beer, so Obama had to stay middle of the road. Neither of them would budge so he had to drink a beer that ALL races drink, or at least have tried. Bud Light is like the Ellis Island of beer. You either came through it when you first started drinking beer or snuck across a boarder, like a Molson (Canada) or Corona (Mexico). I could keep going on this for paragraphs and paragraphs...
Posted by: Dano | August 01, 2009 at 04:25 PM
lol.. I would hate to be president and have to watch my choice of beer to make sure it's politically correct.
Posted by: Otto | August 01, 2009 at 08:09 PM
I don't hate Obama at all, I just don't trust him. I stand by my post that Obama is a man who has a real flair for high drama and the grandiose, but when you boil it all away there's very little substance. How else can a man become elected presdent and not really say anything but "hope".Maybe if you were a little less star struck you'd see through him too. By the way the two of them(Gates/Crowley) would not have had to come together had Obama not made such a mess of things.Thanks for your reply.
Posted by: Slider | August 02, 2009 at 12:00 AM
So why do I care about this incident and the subsequent attention it has drawn?
I don't ask that facetiously; I'm honestly curious as to why I care. I don't have to care. I'm a white male. It's not my problem.
Oh yeah. The reasoning "I'm a white guy, and it's not my problem" is precisely the problem. I am not merely an individual citizen of this country and this planet; that is an illusion. I'm a citizen of God's Kingdom, and if others are wronged or treated unjustly because of systems that the world has put into place, then I have an opportunity to participate in establishing justice however God sees fit to use me.
As long as I remain here in this age I will remain part of the problem. Hopefully, I can be part of the solution in the interim.
Posted by: DJ Sybear | August 02, 2009 at 06:51 PM
Oh, I'm not at all star-struck by Obama. And Obama didn't start the mess with the Crowley/Gates thing, but he did make it worse. I still admire the fact that he got them together and talking.
Posted by: Krissy | August 02, 2009 at 08:04 PM