Gates comments now closed

Are the Muzzle Award nominations closed?

"Ok, Skip. Sgt. Crowley has joined us here in good will, had a couple beers, helped us understand his perspective, and said he's sorry about, you know, handcuffing you on your own front porch. Is there anything you'd like to say?""Yes, Mr. President, there is. LIVE FROM NEW YORK, . . ."

Um, that was supposed to be . . . levity.

i have to side with o-fish on this one, dan. i think it is one of your more head-scratching decisions. you might be the only blogger trying to limit traffic. it's ALWAYS the same group of people commenting on posts here, although it looked to me like every one of your cast of characters was joining in rather than a select few. i was impressed and invigorated with the conversation. rather than your view of more than 20 comments repeating, i think it was one of the most robust debates i've seen on your site yet. i thought the tone was civil, without name-calling and on point top to bottom. i'm not quite sure what prompted the paternalistic and condescending "enough." you clearly have the right to limit commenting and, as you've pointed out to others before and likely will to me again, i have the option to go elsewhere. i hope, however, neither is your goal but it may be the result with me and others if this is a precedent.

meamoeba: Actually, it's very common for blogs and news sites to close comments on a post after about three days.

Dan can do what he wants.However, unless the discussion becomes uncivil, there appears to be no need to limit conversation.What is your motivation. Dan?If and when the tapes come out and Mr.Gates is shown as less-than-honest, will the thread be reopened?Seems to be a fair amount of "protecting" Mr. Gates in this choice.

given that reasoning, dan, then i am more confused as to why you'd selectively close commenting. if it's a new development, surely people will gravitate to the most recent post. they wouldn't comment on something new where it is less relevant. and after 20 or so years on the www, i don't consider myself a newbie but i have to admit i'm unfamiliar with sunsetting comments sections. maybe many do and i'm just unaware but i always thought there was an organic end to reader opining. when i notice other sites halt comments, it's usually posted prominently and a result of an egregious action or iolation of rules, emphasis on usually. also, you are choosing to block comments after 24 hours with what i see as a lack of incivility, somewhat more limiting than the three-day window you cite. either way, like o-fish, i find it ironic the ringmaster of the annual muzzle awards has unilaterally chosen to end commenting on a specific post. but, as i tell my grandchildren, my house, my rules.

i certainly don't think you're talking about me, mike. i'd put me slightly left of che but not quite to the left as mao.

that's a defensive response, dan. no need to lecture me because i fully understand the concept of both editing and censorship. i accused you of neither and with censorship especially, i am completely aware of its uses, abuses and implications, as much as you or anyone out here. so throwing that straw bogeyman into the mix is a non-starter. but the irony was not lost on me, although it took o-fish to trigger the analogy, that you, the arbiter of the muzzle awards who regularly hands them out to private entities, decided what will and won't be open for comments here and for how long. that's not editing; it is controlling. but, again, within your purview as master of this domain. i respect your right and quite often agree with and always respect your opinion. i just don't like this decision or agree with your rationale.

The prophet O-FISH-L has one more prediction on this case. Look for President Obama to make a Presidential appointment of Sergeant Crowley to some type of position in, or related to law enforcement. A top choice might be US Marshal for Massachusetts, although the career people in the Marshals service have been trying to get away from cops as political appointees for the top job.It could be something as minor as the Presidential Commission on Criminal Justice (if there is such a thing), but something along those lines. And Gates, will endorse the appointment, saying that he has now educated Crowley to go forth and spread the good word on race relations. A win, win for all.I think this saga has been so damaging to Obama, (latest tracking polls show him sinking below 50% approval) that he needs more than the ceremonial beer with Crowley, he needs him on the team.And this is the word of O-FISH-L. +

You're welcome to the compliment O-FISH-L, I think you earned it, and thanks for your "blessing" on quoting some of your comments. I may not do so immediately but will probably do so over the next week or so. For the record I am a left of center Canadian liberal, but very much a "moderate" who respects the views of moderate conservatives. I am not big on radicals or extremists on either side of the left/right divide which is sometimes a hard one to determine in any case. From what I can see Sgt. James Crowley seems like a stand-up guy and I respect his manner of standing up for his rights than Henry Louis Gates' bigoted buffoonery. I expect that Gates is crying the tears of a clown now that there's virtually no one around who believes his hyperbolic if not vitriolic BS about racism being the motivation for his arrest. Just trying to fool the public indeed. . . I think I just might do a song parody of Smokey Robinson's 'Tears Of A Clown' dedicated to that now world famous Harvard educating clown known as Henry Louis Gates Jr. It seems to me that 'The Fears Of A Clown' or 'The Jeers Of A Clown' to say nothing of 'Some Beers For A Clown' would be appropriate titles of such a parody song. Personally I think that some enterprising brewer should buy the rights to the arrest photo that shows Gates yelling like a maniac and use it to advertise their product.Let's see now. What might some of the advertising slogans be. . .Busch Beer: Head for the porch.Budweiser: Where there's strife, there's Gates.Coors Light: The Boldest Lambasting Boor In Cambridge.Heineken: A bitter boor deserves a beer with Obama.Bud Light: Be yourself and make it a sad sight.Miller: Everything you always wanted in a boor. And more.or If you've got the time, we've got the boor.Bavaria: And now, for a tantrum.Dos Equis Mexican beer: Sooner or later you'll regret it.Carlsberg: Gates. Probably the best boor from Harvard.Labatt Blue: A whole lot can happen, Out of the Blue. No need to tweak the actual slogan really but I like – A "rogue cop" can happen, Out of the Blue. . . even though I don't believe that Sgt. Crowley is really a rogue cop.Another Labatt Blue slogan is/was -If I wanted water, I would have asked for water.which "translates" to -If I wanted Crowley, I would have asked for Crowley.St. Pauli Girl: Put him on a pedestal, or in an Ivory Toweror You never forget your worst nightmare.Bass Ale: Reach for Notoriety.Schaefer: America's Boldest Harvard Boor.Amstel Beer: Cause strife. Pure Unfiltered.Michelob Ultra:Lose the barbs. Not the face. . .Michelob AmberBock: Rich and _______ (fill in the blank yourself)Sagres: Spot the differencesCorona: Miles Away From Ornery?Harp Irish Lager: Who puts out the fire? Samuel Adams: Harvard's World Class Boor.Guinness Irish Stout: Politeness is good for you. and Bad things come to those who bait.The original beer advertising slogans may be found here.

Robin, don't forget my favorite:GUINNESS: "Pre-eminent African American Scholar dragging Obama down with him, BRILLIANT!"

ROTFLMU*UO!:"If" being the operative word.O-FISH-L and others definitely have something to say whether you, or indeed I. . . *like* it or not mike_bs.:O-Fish and the rest of the republicanazis have made clear that they are interested in nothing but ideology over fact, race over right, and protecting the status quo. That's funny Mike because you yourself seem to be interested in nothing but ideology over fact, race over right, albeit not protecting the status quo. I am all for positive change of the status quo aka progress but you of all people posting here should not be "flinging accusations" as Obama put it about *others* being "interested in nothing but ideology over fact". I dare say that you may be unwittingly engaging in psychological projection with that accusation.

Well I do try to be kind, and give people the benefit of the doubt where possible, lkcape. As a rule most people who engage in psychological projection are quite unaware that they are doing so. Come to think of it. . . that applies quite well to one Henry Louis Gates Jr. doesn't it?Of course on occasion I feel obliged to be cruel to be kind as it were. . . 😉 Enjoy! WVC = cutin as in cuttin'

It was pretty amazing to notice the sheer volume of comments that appeared both on the Boston Globe and Boston Herald stories on the Gatesgate stories. 1300 here, 500 there, ditto for the next story, etc. I didn't read them, I can't imagine anyone who had the time to do so. Yuck!Even the number of those who wrote a formal letter-to-the-editor was off-the-charts: the graphic in Saturday's Globe looked like around 130 or so letters this week. Compare that to a typical hot-button story that would normally generate 5-10 letters, and you can see the amazing response. They basically got a whole month's worth of letters in only a couple of days and only on one topic.The interesting statistic about the Globe's letters-to-the-editor is that they were leaning significantly negative. I think that means that they were leaning against Gates' side of the story (and Obama's defense of him while saying the police acted "stupidly"), but it would be good to get the official editorial page editor's statement on what "negative" meant in this case.

Mike,Every time I start to think that you're a really smart guy with whom I disagree vehemently, you use conflations like "republicanazis" and "rightwingnuts" to snatch the football away from my kick.(That roll of paper should be shrinking, no?)

Obama didn't "suggest" anything. He called the situation for exactly what it was. Whether you yourself are an ex-con (or perhaps should be one) is immaterial.

Hey, if you got off because you had a good lawyer, congratulations. I fail to see how any of that is relevant here.Obviously, certain high ranking officials within the Canadian law enforcement system think their colleagues are crappy cops. Perhaps that played in to your cases. Being arrested, even for the wrong reasons, is nothing to be proud of.

"If the cops had checked the facts and legal precedent more carefully before arresting me they might not have done so."Well put. Same applies to Dr. Gates. The rest is just filler.