President Obama was right to weigh in

I've gotten a lot of comment from folks who read Sunday's column, wondering why I didn't mention President Obama's words in the piece. It's simple: I have but so much space and the point of the column was to try to put the issue in a larger perspective, not deal with every reaction. But I'll say this: I still believe the president was right to weigh in. Here's why: 

 This particular story gives us a great chance to deal with race in a way that many other cases don't. No one was injured or killed, and it is hard to make the argument that this is a black-and-white case of racial profiling, because it's not. But it's still about race and how it blinds all of us in bad moments. I didn't agree with the president's use of the word ``stupidly.'' That was stupid on his part, and he has since acknowledged as much. But everything else he said -- about not knowing what if any role race played while also talking about the historical context of this particular incident -- was right on, and all the more pertinent because it was the president. His words do matter more and that's why he should not be afraid to deal with an issue as important to this country as race. I voted for Obama to be a leader, not the standard issue politician, and the standard issue politician would have stayed away from this topic with a 10-foot pool. I'm glad he didn't because the issue had already made national headlines and the same old tired, hardened lines had already begun to form and another opportunity to have a frank conversation was about to be lost -- until our leader was frank with his own reaction. I would have been disappointed -- and his words would have been hollow -- had he not followed up. Last week I suggested he call both sides to the White House and show the country that even after an ugly, heated racial exchange that common ground and common sense can win out. And he is doing just that. If you want to really deal with the issue of race, you don't try to make sure these kinds of misunderstandings never occur -- because they are going to -- or by sidestepping it -- like most of the president's critics said he should -- you try instead to teach people that once they happen everyone involved has a choice to either make things better or worse during the actual incident, or even afterwards when people have already chosen sides too quickly or with too little information.

A quick aside: How many times have conservatives warned us about government taking over our personal lives? Why are they not defending Gates, who was in his own home when he was arrested for talking junk to an officer? As I said in the piece, Gates went too far -- he could have shown a lot more patience -- so did the cop, but the arrest should not have happened; it was unnecessary overkill. It was already established that Gates was who he said he was, and the 911 recording even mentioned that the person who called in the complaint said that it was possible the two men lived in the house. The arrest was unnecessary. That doesn't make the officer a racist -- it doesn't -- but it definitely showed that he lost his cool at least as much as Gates. They both could have handled themselves better. That shouldn't be lost in our attempts to either absolve Gates because of racial inequalities or Sgt. Crowley because police have dangerous jobs.

 This particular story gives us a great chance to deal with race in a way that many other cases don't. No one was injured or killed, and it is hard to make the argument that this is a black-and-white case of racial profiling, because it's not. But it's still about race and how it blinds all of us in bad moments. I didn't agree with the president's use of the word ``stupidly.'' That was stupid on his part, and he has since acknowledged as much. But everything else he said -- about not knowing what if any role race played while also talking about the historical context of this particular incident -- was right on, and all the more pertinent because it was the president. His words do matter more and that's why he should not be afraid to deal with an issue as important to this country as race. I voted for Obama to be a leader, not the standard issue politician, and the standard issue politician would have stayed away from this topic with a 10-foot pool. I'm glad he didn't because the issue had already made national headlines and the same old tired, hardened lines had already begun to form and another opportunity to have a frank conversation was about to be lost -- until our leader was frank with his own reaction. I would have been disappointed -- and his words would have been hollow -- had he not followed up. Last week I suggested he call both sides to the White House and show the country that even after an ugly, heated racial exchange that common ground and common sense can win out. And he is doing just that. If you want to really deal with the issue of race, you don't try to make sure these kinds of misunderstandings never occur -- because they are going to -- or by sidestepping it -- like most of the president's critics said he should -- you try instead to teach people that once they happen everyone involved has a choice to either make things better or worse during the actual incident, or even afterwards when people have already chosen sides too quickly or with too little information.

A quick aside: How many times have conservatives warned us about government taking over our personal lives? Why are they not defending Gates, who was in his own home when he was arrested for talking junk to an officer? As I said in the piece, Gates went too far -- he could have shown a lot more patience -- so did the cop, but the arrest should not have happened; it was unnecessary overkill. It was already established that Gates was who he said he was, and the 911 recording even mentioned that the person who called in the complaint said that it was possible the two men lived in the house. The arrest was unnecessary. That doesn't make the officer a racist -- it doesn't -- but it definitely showed that he lost his cool at least as much as Gates. They both could have handled themselves better. That shouldn't be lost in our attempts to either absolve Gates because of racial inequalities or Sgt. Crowley because police have dangerous jobs.