Is Obama against police officers and victims of crime?

Obama has really put his foot in his mouth this time by insulting police officers just for performing their duties.

Normally, I would always blog about policy issues and leave these Obama gaffes for other blogs. But in watching the story explained on Fox News below, I began to realize that there was a policy angle after all.

Watch this Fox News clip: (H/T Nice Deb)

And pay attention to the part of the transcript that Deb snipped out from NRO, where Charles Krauthammer makes the point:

I think it was important, because the Democrats have suffered for almost a half a century of a reputation of being soft on crime. The flip side of that is tough on cops, or insensitive to the duties and the sacrifices of law enforcement.

Now click through and see Verum Serum’s video of non-white police officers standing by officer Crowley. (H/T Hot Air)

The police are not happy with Obama calling them stupid. But should we be surprised that he thinks police are stupid?

Consider this article on Obama’s softness on crime from The Hill.

Excerpt:

In 1998, Obama was one of only three senators to vote against a proposal making it a criminal offense for convicts on probation or on bail to have contact with a street gang.

In 2001, Obama voted against a measure that would have expanded the penalties for some gang activity to include the death penalty. The bill was vetoed by then-Gov. George Ryan (R ) not long after he had issued a moratorium on the death penalty in the state.

Obama, at the time, said the bill would unfairly target minorities, stating, “There’s a strong overlap between gang affiliation and young men of color … I think it’s problematic for them to be singled out as more likely to receive the death penalty for carrying out certain acts than are others who do the same thing.”

Obama opposes the death penalty except for terrorists, serial killers and child-murderers, but his campaign added that he does not support the death penalty as it is currently administered in this country.

On a 1999 vote making adult prosecution mandatory for aggravated discharge of a firearm in or near a school, the senator voted “present.”

He explained the vote, saying, “There is really no proof or indication that automatic transfers and increased penalties and adult penalties for juvenile offenses have, in fact, proven to be more effective in reducing juvenile crime or cutting back on recidivism.”

And in 2001, Obama voted “present” on a bill that would increase penalties for trafficking in Ecstasy and other designer drugs.

The senator questioned the length of some drug penalties when compared to other crimes, noting that selling 15 tablets of Ecstasy was a Class X felony, as was raping a woman at knifepoint.

…During Obama’s campaign against Rush, the senator missed a vote on the Safe Neighborhoods Act that would have made illegal gun possession a felony, and Ryan blamed Obama and two other lawmakers for missing the vote and dooming the legislation, though it failed 31-17.

And consider this IBD article:

Excerpt:

As an Illinois state senator, for example, he acted more as a friend to criminals than to cops, legislating among other things:

• Curbs on what he called a “broken” death penalty system.

• A measure to expunge some criminal records and give job grants to ex-cons.

• Tougher handgun controls.

• A vote against making gang members eligible for the death penalty if they kill someone to help their gang.

• Opposition to a bill requiring juveniles to be prosecuted as adults for firing a gun at or near a school.

At the federal level, Obama would:

• Repeal “unfair” mandatory sentences for crack convictions.

• Provide drug counseling instead of jail time for some abusers.

• Rethink criminal penalties for pot.

• Ban profiling by federal law enforcement, even if it helps catch violent criminals including terrorists.

• Strengthen hate-crime laws and beef up civil rights enforcement against police chiefs who profile.

• Provide job training, drug rehab and counseling for ex-cons.

• “Re-enfranchise” felons denied the right to vote.

In addition, Obama, who once vowed to repeal the Patriot Act, still talks about reforming it. He also once proposed banning executions of inmates, arguing he was against capital punishment.

…”In our criminal justice system, African-Americans and whites are arrested at very different rates,” Obama recently complained. “It has to do with how we pursue racial justice.”

This Cambridge, MA story is consistent with Obama’s previous voting record against public safety and law enforcement.

3 thoughts on “Is Obama against police officers and victims of crime?”

  1. I think your beloved Fox News has really murdered this story – the issue most have with this incident is the use of the disorderly conduct charge, a purely subjective charge (and it’s designed to be that way) – so the cops are essentially allowed to write their own laws as they see fit – any freedom loving American should be wary of such statutes.

    As someone who loves freedom wintery, some of your recent posts have really shown your love for a police state. Why would you ever consider it acceptable to be arrested for entering your own house? Then to be charged because you wanted to know why they were harrassing you?

    I’m against Hate crime laws – I don’t see why the penalty for a crime against a black man should carry a stronger penalty than a crime against me.

    But for some of the other points – how long and how much money do you think we should spend on the “war on drugs” before we realize that we will never win and that we need to take a different approach (I’m against counseling – I think it’s a bunch touch-feely crap that doesn’t work on 99.9% of the cases).

    I’m for profiling – statistics and common sense show very clear patterns in crime – why waste money looking in areas we know are unlikely to produce anything to make the groups more likely to commit a crime feel better?

    I’ll keep it short and stop here for now.

    Like

  2. Jerry,

    You’re one 100% right, that there is not enough talk about whether that arrest was called for. We should have a dialogue around what the threshold is. There should be standards, like veiled threats against a police officer (or his momma) being necessary. ;)

    I’m sure you can do us a favor by uncovering some basic facts around that law. First, what is the law? Like the actual wording. Why was it written into the books? You’ve already intimated that you have authorial intent firmly established. Help the rest of us get to where you are. How is the enforcement of the law taught at the academy?

    I’m sure once you uncover that, we can agree with you even more.

    Did you hear the one about the Professor who cries, “Racist,” at a cop who’s responding to a citizen call about a possible burglary in progress, and that professor gets national media attention, and it turns out that same said professor is in talks with PBS to create a documentary about racism in America?

    Me neither, and I wonder why.

    Like

  3. This site has a very nice summation of what the law is and how it was originally intended to be used:

    http://boards.history.com/topic/Current-Events/Disorderly-Conduct-Never/520062783

    Bashing the character of the person in question doesn’t properly address the issue nor does it prove his guilt. Harvard assigned the house for him to live in – it’s no different than renting an apartment – you don’t own it but you still have rights that cannot be violated.

    Wintery also talks about Obama calling police stupid (I mostly agree with that position):

    * http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_56314.html

    * http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/09/nyregion/metro-news-briefs-connecticut-judge-rules-that-police-can-bar-high-iq-scores.htmlhttp://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/09/nyregion/metro-news-briefs-connecticut-judge-rules-that-police-can-bar-high-iq-scores.html

    * http://www.topix.com/forum/city/ontario-ca/TUTSIT96D1SP07LD7

    (just google: “iq too high to be police officer”. This issue was just recently in the news again)

    We know for a fact that police officers are not smart (I define smart for this post as being above average) – we have policies against hiring cops whose IQ’s are too high and who overperform on intelligence tests – all those above links talk about various cases were people were denied police positions because they were too smart. So we know for a fact that police officers are at best average or below average intelligence, nothing more.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s