Crunch Time: American Politics as Usual, Even for the "Transformational" Presidency

Last week's cover story in the weekly magazine the Economist blasted the headline "Crunch Time" with a picture of President Obama. The article's sub-headline clarifies: "The next few weeks could determine the fate of Obama's presidency." The honeymoon's over this soon, apparently.

"If the opinion polls are to be believed, Barack Obama is now, six month into his presidency, no more popular then George W. Bush or Richard Nixon was at the same stage in theirs," the article continues. The story repackages recent history as urgent advice, saying, "On the campaign trail Mr. Obama showed an impressive ability to change gears. He needs to do so again this summer."

But there's an underlying assumption here: a president remarkably good at gear-changing still needs to know when to shift. In the wake of the Crowley-Gates incident and leading up to the so-called "Beer Summit," it seems as if he's stayed in the wrong gear too long. One indicator: last week, the ratio of blog comments about Crowley/Gates/Obama to those about the president's health care proposal was 7 to 1. The reason is clear to the average citizen, even if it's not evident from the inside -- like the reasonable prospects of an Obama administration transforming U.S. policymaking after back-to-back Bush administrations; it was perfectly valid for Americans to believe this president would be capable of transcending the conventional debate on race.

Though not able to manage this news cycle to their advantage, it appears the White House team believes they can manage the issue of race relations in America (and the particularly sensitive area of law enforcement racial profiling of African-American and Hispanic men in communities across the nation) similar to the way they "handled" issues during the campaign. But Obama himself seems to instinctively understand that, now, as president, he must address the racial profiling issue more directly, just as he was forced to deal with the broader issue of race in the campaign on a personal level as a result of his prior close relationship with Pastor Jeremiah Wright in Chicago.

In his initial comment on Crowley and Gates, President Obama said that, "separate and apart from this incident" there is "a long history of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately."

At a subsequent impromptu press conference, called to clarify his earlier statement, he said that the country had to be:

Mindful of the fact that because of our history, because of the difficulties of the past, you know, African-Americans are sensitive to these issues. And even when you've got a police officer who has a fine track record on racial sensitivity, interactions between police officers and the African-American community can sometimes be fraught with misunderstanding. The fact that this has become such a big issue I think is indicative of the fact that race is still a troubling aspect of our society. Whether I were black or white, I think that me commenting on this and hopefully contributing to constructive -- as opposed to negative -- understandings about the issue, is part of my portfolio.

The word portfolio, clearly, is an understatement in this context. If it could be said with a straight face, for instance, that Moses considered it part of his "job description" to bring the Ten Commandments down from the mountain, then yes, it's safe to say that contributing constructively on racial problems should be found among the "portfolio" of our first African-American president's duties. As careful an orator and wordsmith as Obama is, this cautionary phrasing reads political in the extreme. Befitting, I suppose, a man in the midst of "Crunch Time."

Reading, watching and listening to the potpourri of media pundits suggests that a new paradigm of presidential leadership is required if Obama is to respond to his expanded "portfolio" and the exigencies described by the Economist. Whether the talk show and TV hosts or guests were Larry Elder, Professor Michael Eric Dyson, Chris Matthews, Campbell Brown, Bill O'Reilly, Soledad Obrien, Roland Martin, Jonathan Capehart or columnists Glenn C. Loury, Bob Herbert, Maureen Dowd, Eugene Robinson, Kathleen Parker or Colbert I. King of the Washington Post, the common denominator of all comments is that racial profiling by police and their relationship to African-American and Hispanic men throughout the United States has become a "national issue." Accordingly, it is simply not going to go away without either presidential or some other national initiative.

Columnist Kathleen Parker of the Washington Post suggested:

The genie of race was released from the bottle when America elected its first black president -- we could finally talk about it.

Unfortunately, our little genie is still hostage to old resentments -- haunted by subliminal fears and, like all of us, subject to unconscious motivations. This is why we keep talking about Gates and Crowley -- and why psychologists will never go hungry.

Most Americans are probably relieved to have this conversation, but talk therapy requires honesty. Let's start with this: All races are a little bit racist even as they aim not to be (i.e., we make certain assumptions based on race).

Given those understandings, what happened in Cambridge makes perfect sense from every which way. Gates had every right to be outraged that he was being questioned by a cop for being in his own home. Crowley had every reason to feel outraged that he was being accused of being a racist without provocation or any apparent basis for the charge. Both men were reacting to their personal and cumulative histories.

Columnist Bob Herbert of the New York Times reflects the opinion closest to the historical experiences of my generation, but probably not that of Obama and his team of advisers. He concluded, after reading the police report in Cambridge, that the real charge against Professor Gates by Sgt. Crowley was "angry while black." He then goes on to say:

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.

I have nothing but contempt for that message.

You can yell at a cop in America. This is not Iran... You can even be wrong in what you are saying. There is no law against that. It is not an offense for which you are supposed to get arrested.

Herbert reminds us that, "Black people are constantly being stopped, searched, harassed, publicly humiliated, assaulted, arrested and sometimes killed by police officers in this country for no reason... Blacks are tired of being treated as 'black' with all the attendant assumptions. Many, if not most, blacks can justify their resentment with stories of being stopped for 'being black.'"

Kathleen Parker also noted that:

Images of white cops billy-clubbing peaceful black protesters are always at a low boil in American memory. More recent incidents of white cops mistakenly shooting innocent blacks also enter the equation.

A white cop looks out the same window of race relations in America and sees a different landscape. To Crowley's mind, maybe things were beginning to feel out of control. Maybe, too, Crowley was unconsciously responding to his perception of Gates as an arrogant academic who knows nothing of his trials as a working-class stiff -- always potentially facing violence while being treated with contempt by those he's charged to protect.

I agree with the Economist; politically, it is "Crunch Time" for Obama. During his campaign, the soon-to-be sitting president said, "We are the ones that we have been waiting for." If so, then why does it seem as if the wait isn't over? The "we" can clearly see that unless there is a qualitative improvement in the relationship between the police in America and African-American and Hispanic men, there will be no sustained peace and domestic tranquility in America.

We've had the 1968 Kerner Commission Report, the 1998 President Clinton White House Commission on Race and Juvenile Justice chaired by now-deceased Professor Hope Franklin and the 2008 Eisenhower Foundation Report evaluating the findings of the Kerner Commission forty years later. The issue of the actions of the police across the country toward African-American and Hispanic men doesn't need another "study" or commission.

If President Obama doesn't yet see the unavoidable strategic relationship between addressing THIS and other important issues on his national agenda, then we -- the "we" who elected him -- should be pro-active and seek to address the nearly ubiquitous and contentious issue of racial profiling by police, collectively, and immediately, ourselves.

We can let President Obama and his team focus on getting new health care legislation through the Congress, and we should support him by urging our representatives in Congress to support the president's plan.

Meanwhile, we can and should take advantage of those structures put in place by Obama shortly after he took office to enable us to be effective in mobilizing support for one or more national issues. I am specifically talking about the White House Office of Faith Based Initiatives and Neighborhood Partnerships, headed by Joshua Dubois.

There are distinguished educators, leaders of national religious organizations, police organizations, community leaders nationwide that should come together with the assistance of the Office of Faith Based Initiatives and Neighborhood Partnerships to immediately address racial profiling in America. I understand that a bill has been recently introduced in Congress to outlaw this practice. We should get as much information about this proposed legislation and publicize it on the Internet, and subject it to its provisions, call for its immediate enactment.

We are the "we" who can make ending racial profiling in America part of President Obama's here-and-now agenda, not just another slot in the portfolio of the presidency, competing for attention with other high priority domestic and foreign matters on his agenda.

And, of course, yes, we can be political "realists," but not lower our expectations. As Washington Post columnist Chris Cillizza reminds us: "A few backyard beers is some kind of step, but couldn't be expected to remedy the country's long legacy of racism. Even with a black man in the White House."

Comments

[guard]

Yes, the police oppress the downtrodden and disenfranchised, those who do not have power. But sooner or later they will come for everyone. Just look at the police state laws that have been put into place in the last few years. Good police officers become disgusted and quit or are forced out of the system. What is left are the brownshirts. The police are our enemies, period.

[TRYKER]

Thank you Clarence for this important post. Yes, we need to push for the law against racial profiling, partly to show the President that we ALL care about this issue.
I too am troubled by the President's foot dragging on this issue, its time for the Speech on Racial Profiling and some executive orders that give some meat to blacks for a change...e­qual rights.
The very idea that Obama would be thinking "reparations" is just another roadblocking tactic that will keep people stirred up and the necessary changes delayed. Equality isn't reparations, thank you very much.
I suspect this delay in attending to this issue may be simply a matter of priorities, the health care issue is so vital to all that it has to come first...ou­r country is drowning in this insurance industry gouging, fraud and profiteering.

[Get a Grip]

Why doesn't everybody just tell the truth. Everybody profiles!!!!!!!!!!! But it is does not have to be based on skin color. If I see a kid(s) dressed in baggy pants half way down his a$$, a NY Yankee hat turned sideways, and tats up and down, I am going to profile him as a punk. I don't care what color he is. If there are a group of them I will cross the street.

I have no problem with cops profiling on general outward appearance­... they need to. If parents don't want their kids to be stopped for DWB then maybe then should not let them out of hte house dressed like a two bit rapper. AND DON"T say "they should be able to dress any way they like and not be profiled". When you CHOSE to portray yourself in that manner you invite outward criticism.

Q: What is the profile of someone wearing a "wife beater" tank top, and a Mack Truck hat?????

[aahpat]

Jim Crow is alive and well. It is embodied in and empowered by America's war on drugs policy.

President Barack Obama whole-heartedly supports the war on drugs.

We will get no relief from racial profiling and authority based bigotry from Barack Obama.

As long as Democratic leaders, such as Barack Obama, continue to support the policies that license Jim Crow and racial profiling there can be no solutions to the problem.

[aahpat]

Well put Mr. Jones. And all too true.

The issue of racial profiling of non-white men in America will not change as long as the enabling legislation, that empowers and encourages this profiling, continues.

The Jim Crow war on drugs licenses this behavior by police. It has for forty years and it will not end under Barack Obama because Barack Obama supports the war on drugs. He is even escalating and militarizing the war on drugs both on the American street and internationally.

In the Dallas News this spring Obama is quoted as saying this about the drug war:

"Traditionally, the debate is either interdiction, criminalization, longer prison sentences for not only dealing but users – that's one approach," Obama said. "The other approach would be sort of a public health, decriminalization approach. My attitude is we do have to treat this as a public health problem, and we have to have significant law enforcemen­t."

He backed this up with $3-bn in new funds to re-invigorate the Byrne Criminal Justice Grant program that has multi jurisdiction drug task forced, (excuses to more rural and federal police to go into cities), and incarcerate more poverty oppressed urban Americans. Mostly non-white men. Hades, even the thuggish Bush administration tried to zero out this program as ineffective and counter productive.

[furion4865]

Finally, someone had the guts to call Obama out for kowtowing to an outwardly racist policeman who happened to be named "Jim Crow-ley, " I wonder if this was a coincidence or part of the plan to distract the president from discussing healthcare? Food for thought, first: the news conference in which the president was asked about Gates was supposed to be about healthcare reform: second, the reporter that asked the question was dressed in red and seated right in the middle of the room: third, the man arrested was a personal friend of the president: fourth, the arresting officer's name was "Jim Crow-ley," and anyone that has ever dealt with the police knows this type of irony is what passes for humor in their twisted minds; and lastly, the press only presented one side of the story, the press never asked ordinary black folks what they thought of the president's backtracking, the media only solicited the opinions of the usual suspects. Someone needs to let Obama know there's nothing wrong with being a strong black man and being outraged at police misconduct. At this moment, Obama has shown himself to be weak, ineffectual and totally devoid of true leadership qualities. By the way, the reporter that asked the president about Gates should receive the Helen Thomas freeze out, let her attend the press meetings, but never give her an opportunity to ask another question---that's what Dubya would have done. Can Barack play hardball?

[biabouman41]

I do not think Crowley was acting out his racial feelings, whatever they were, but I do think he was acting out being a bone-headed policeman. He could have been a black policeman. Too many have no respect for citizens.

[aahpat]

"Jim Crow-ley, "

Great catch.

[Poboy]

A nation of cowards?

and/or

A nation led by a coward?

Obama doesn't even have the courage of his convictions.

[Lucile Smith]

lucile
LIKE ATT GENERAL SAID THE OTHER SIDE IS A COWARD AND NOW A LIAR SO NOTHING WILL GET DONE BECAUSE THEY ARE GOING TO RUN TO THEIR PROPECTIVE CORNER AND THAT WHERE THEY GOING TO STAY RIGHT ARE WRONG THAT WHERE THE COWARD PART COME IN TO VIEW

[KDM10]

Not having asked every black man, woman, and child I haven't a clue if racial profiling is rampant as the media loves to say it is. No doubt it exists but to what extent I cant say. I can tell you as a farely young white man, that being called a racist if you disagree with someone of color or refuse to to accomidate them makes it a bit tough to buy this same old song and dance.

[Nommo]

Clueless? Typical!

[pghnappyrhino]

being called "racist" ifyou disagree with someone of colour doesn't really have a whole lot to do with the issue at hand and it doesn't change the fact that the problem continues to exist.

and you're right, you CAN'T say to what extent it exists, and at least you admit that. but the media doesn't present 1/100,000th of the cases that occur.

[aahpat]

Non-white Americans use drugs at about the same rates as white Americans. Less in poorer communities with less disposable income to shove up their nose or burn in a joint. So the following Human rights Watch report stands as stark proof of the scale and methods of Jim Crow based racial profiling in America.

HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH
Drug Arrests and Race in the United States
MARCH 2, 2009

Decades of Disparity
http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2009/03/02/decades-disparity-0

"This 20-page report says that adult African Americans were arrested on drug charges at rates that were 2.8 to 5.5 times as high as those of white adults in every year from 1980 through 2007, the last year for which complete data were available. About one in three of the more than 25.4 million adult drug arrestees during that period was African American."

[glockman]

Can you find some other issue besides the drug issue to support your cause?

[Avoirdupois]

Overlap, endogeneity, misspecification, "income evaluation question" IEQ, Clark-Oswald Test, Wu-Hausman Specification Test, Russian Longitudinal Monitoring Survey (RLMS), Economic Ladder Question (ELQ), Wage, salary, social security, private transfer, unrequited transfers, home production, pensions, unemployment benefits, child benefits, government transfers,
stipend, consumption in kind, In Kind, chi-square, econometrics, linear utility function, Preferences and Expected Utility, ordinal, categorical, endogeneity, latent heterogeneity, vector of exogenous characteristics, age, marital status, measures of health, measures of education, measures of employment, measures of consumption, geographic dummy variables, clustering, more than one respondent per household, inter-temporal differences, individual income constant, caveat

I am tiring of the overproduction of the term race so I am compiling some terms that are qualitative. Race is the actual and these therms are the potential descriptive category. Actual divided by potential.­.. Can you describe yourself this way?

[Avoirdupois]

Idem sonans, Bias, interference, latent, self-rated, interpretation, subjective well-being, conjecture, household income per person, adverse effects , work-leisure choice, disincentive, subjective welfare, Social welfare function, relatively stable personality traits, Trait theory, longitudinal, idiosyncrasy, time-invariant, qualitative, antecedent, regress, 10 rung welfare ladder, Council for Advancement of Adult Literacy, fixed effects logit model, respondent, mood variability, long-term determinants, aggregate, cross-section, BOUNDARY CONDITIONS, correlated , happiness, distributional effects, Status verses Growth, SOCIAL SECURITY, inequality, reported incomes, household income, Current Population Survey (CPS) , expenditure survey, Consumer Expenditure Survey, imputation, income-in-kind, white noise measurement error, attentuation ,cost-of-living deflators, Jensen's inequality, self-perception, personal notions, heterogeneity, intrinsic, inter-temporarily stable, meta-analysis, extroversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, emotional stability, Definitions of Child Abuse and Neglect, openness to experience, mean happiness, extraversion, social competence collective self-esteem, "fear of intimacy" (negative), interpersonal locus of control, social tempo, emotionality, social interest, social emotionality, Extroversion, Introversion, and the Brain, trust, conscientiousness, desire for control, "inhibition" (negative), plasticity, "distress" (negative), "rebelliou­s-distrust­ful" (negative)­,"repressi­ve defensiveness" (negative), "social anxiety" (negative), "tension" (negative)", self-confidence, Self Esteem And Confidence, self-respect

[Neico]

Let's talk about it. This post brought different segments of other journalists in print that may have some credibility. As nasty and bitter like some bad cough medicine the discussion of race is always a thorn in this country's history. No one is willing to talk about race. Why? Perhaps it could be that blacks for all their life have been subjugated to humility and reduced to a nothing. Whites have always been priviledged all their life because of the color of their skin. I'm not speaking for neither white americans or black americans, but when race comes up there will be a division. Is it right? Is it fair? To each person there is a measure of worth and should not be reduced to a nothing whether one's skin is white, black, brown or yellow.

Historically, one race tries to dominate the other and I some times think it's intentional. What do one gain by dominance? President Obama will not solve the race issue in America and anyone that thinks that because he's black are seriously dellusional.

Former President George Bush was called a racist because he did not act on the Katrina event, but I disagree with those that say he is. Just as President is trying to bring up race, he too will be branded as such...mea­ning "they knew he was going bring policies to compensate black people." To this I end...let'­s put all the cards on the table and really talk about it.

[PersonaNonGrated]

How is being realistic anything but having little to no expectations for America? Washington is broken beyond repair, and there are still lots of parts of America where racism is hardly a second thought.

[kstoy]

Good point.

[Nommo]

Well, so far he did not do much with the opportunity that dropped right into his lap. Backpedaling can never be the first move from the catbird seat. Let us hope that we never see that again.