Bud Light?

My respect for the President of the United States has taken a serious hit.
What a wimpy choice of beer.

Last post on this topic. Ever.

Now that I've calmed down a bit, and started to think about this whole thing from the viewpoint of a media analyst, I realize that my previous post got things exactly wrong. The fact that no one knows what went down on the professor's front door-step is precisely what has made it chum for the commentariat and all the professional posters out there in blogland. There is just enough information to allow people to give their interpretation, but no so much that the interpretations could ever be refuted, only argued about.

Add to this the fact that race and class both got pulled into the discussion very quickly, which allowed folks on the one side to accuse anyone who dared to disagree with them as, at best, clueless white people intent on denying the realities of modern America, and those on the other side to don the mantle of aggrieved populist rage.

Side note. There was actually a sane op-ed to come out of this: one by Glenn Loury in the New York Times. (And for an example of how not to cover a story like this, check out Emily Bazelon and her two guests on this week's Political Gabfest.)

Didn't a Japanese film-maker do a movie about this that one time?

Here's the latest on the Henry "Skip" Gates scandale. The Cambridge police have released the police report on the arrest. The report doesn't present Dr. Gates in a very favorable light. In fact, he comes off like a very arrogant Harvard professor, desperate to play the role of a victim. Having met several Harvard professors in my four-year undergraduate career there, I have to say that I do not find this to be an entirely outlandish portrayal. The size of the egos bouncing around the Yard are comparable only to only a few other places in the United States--some parts of Hollywood, and maybe Wall Street. On other hand, as a few bloggers have pointed out, it was the arresting officer, Sgt. James Crowley, who made out the report. So, you know, he maybe doesn't have the clearest view of the ground on this particular matter.

Dr. Gates, for his part, tells a very different story: one in which he was trying to be as reasonable as possible under the circumstances (those being, like, having to justify walking around in your own fucking house).

Who woulda thunk it, huh? Two guys, get in a fight, end up telling two different stories that make the other guy look like a jerk?

So, with all that, here's my question:

WHY TEH FUCK IS ANYBODY STILL TALKING ABOUT THIS? WHO KNOWS WHAT HAPPENED THERE? WHO KNOWS WHAT ANYBODY'S MOTIVES WERE? YOU SURE AS HELL DON'T! I DON'T! CHRIST ALMIGHTY, I DOUBT THAT GATES AND CROWLEY EVEN KNOW AT THIS POINT!

SO JUST SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!!

Jesus.