OK. First things first. I’m not vetting this and going over it with a fine tooth editorial comb. Also, I have been in the Elijah Craig, so take this for what it’s worth.
What kind of society are we left with if we can’t trust journalists to draw coherent inferences. This from an AP “fact check” article regarding Obama’s primetime press conference this evening, emphasis mine.
OBAMA: “I don’t know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts, what role race played in that. But I think it’s fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home, and, number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there’s a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately.”
THE FACTS: The facts are in dispute between black scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. and the white police sergeant who arrested him at his Cambridge, Mass., home when officers went there to investigate a reported break-in. But this much is clear: Gates wasn’t arrested for being in his own home, as Obama implies, but for allegedly being belligerent when the sergeant demanded his identification. The president did mention that the professor was charged with disorderly conduct. Charges were dropped.
How the fuck do the dimwitted reporters writing this drivel arrive at Obama “implying” that Gates was arrested for being in his own home? Beyond being a prime example of yellow journalism, the inference is simply a baffling non-sequitur. And if writers can’t demonstrate a simple grasp of “if A = B, and B = C” logic, they shouldn’t be allowed to write. And the editors that let this shit through should have their favorite Cross writing instrument driven through their nutsacks (or ovary sacks, I’d hate to be accused of sexism).
