Posted on 07/21/2013 12:26:42 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
President Barack Obama movingly spoke of the “pain” most African-Americans felt at the acquittal of George Zimmerman. But Obama didn’t speak solely because he felt obliged to make a generic observation about the anger of most blacks toward the verdict, or even out of remembrance of the fight he led in the Illinois state legislature more than a decade ago to get a bill passed that put law enforcement on notice that racial profiling won’t be tolerated. It took many tries and four years to get the bill finally passed. He spoke from a well-documented personal experience.
He bluntly noted in his 2006 book The Audacity of Hope that he was not always a high-profile, respected and acclaimed public official, and there was a time in the not so distant past that he suffered as he put it “the litany” of slights and abuses that ranged the gamut. He ticked them off quickly: security guards tailing him as he shopped in department stores, white couples who toss him their car keys as he stands outside a restaurant waiting for the valet, policebarack-obama-trayvon-martin cars pulling him over for no apparent reason.
A year after Obama’s election in 2008, New York Congressman Charles Rangel cracked that if Obama, that is President Obama, strolled through East Harlem at nightfall sans suit, presidential entourage and limo, he could be shaken down, spread-eagled and cuffed. Rangel took much heat for a seemingly impertinent and ridiculous quip and walked it back — but as Barack Obama now strongly hints, Rangel wasn’t too far off the mark in zeroing in on the endemic problem of racial profiling. Now that Barack Obama has used the Zimmerman acquittal as the backdrop to make his toughest and strongest frontal address to date on racial profiling, this further confirms that Rangel may indeed have been on to something.
Much of law enforcement, a wide segment of the public, and even some blacks vehemently deny that black men are systematically targeted for stop, search and humiliation by cops just because they’re black. One Sanford police officer that took the stand as a prosecution witness during the Zimmerman trial was no exception to the rule. He flatly said that he didn’t think that Zimmerman profiled Martin. Though he slightly walked it back under further questioning, he was credible because much of law enforcement has denied that profiling exists. The Zimmerman jurors obviously didn’t disagree with that view.
This is not an academic point. The refusal to admit that racial profiling exists, not to mention the endless columns by conservatives that call racial profiling a flat-out myth, has done much to torpedo nearly every effort by local and national civil rights and civil liberties groups to get law enforcement and federal agencies not only to admit that racial profiling happens but to do something about it. A perennial federal bill served up by House Democrat John Conyers to get federal agencies to collect stats and do reports on racial profiling hasn’t gotten to first base.
The surging number of blacks in America’s jails and prisons seem to reinforce the perception that crime and violence in America invariably comes with a young, black male face. And it doesn’t much matter how prominent, wealthy, or celebrated the black person is.
Others go much further than calling it simply a case of fanning racial stereotypes and negative typecasting; they say that good police work is about the business of catching criminals and reducing crime. And if more black men are stopped in poor black neighborhoods or in any other neighborhood, it’s not because they’re black but because they commit more crimes. This is bogus on two grounds. In the overwhelming majority of stops of black men by police under stop and frisk tactics in New York and other cities, blacks are not arrested or charged with any crime. Also studies have found that blacks are stopped in disproportionate numbers in predominantly white neighborhoods with the same result. They are not arrested or charged with any crime.
Barack Obama’s list of the ways blacks protest that they are profiled years after he first said that he felt profiled follows closely on the heels of U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder’s blunt charge in his address at the recent NAACP convention that he too believed he’s been racially profiled in years past. Now that two of America’s most powerful and recognized officials saying the same thing about profiling, they’ve rammed the issue back on the nation’s table where it never should have left.
The Author
They CANNOT allow people to point out the LIFESTYLE choice and REAL-LIFE conduct of the black community without the ONLY defense being "Racist", "Bigot", etc.
Blacks disproportionately commit crime, disproportionately live on Welfare, disproportionately succeed in avoiding personal responsibility for their actions (fatherless children), and have been receiving handouts to survive for 4 generations. African nations are squaller-infested tribes running rampant, not un-like American cities, with the exception here being that we PAY the blacks to conduct themselves irresponibly.
Most transparent administration in my memory.
its only wrong when other people do it.
All these supposedly educated Blacks making such stupid inferences. He thinks profiling needs to be on the table because it's a problem with racist Whites. It really needs to be on the table because so many Blacks behave so badly that one would be nuts to not profile.
Amen......STop Committing SO MANY CRIMES AND YOU WON”T BE PROFILED!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.