by Tim Dake

Much has been made of the new Arizona law regarding the treatment of illegal aliens by law enforcement. The cries of “profiling” have been loud and unending from all parts of the political spectrum and the mainstream media. While it has become well established that many of the politicians and news reporters decrying the new SB1070 law have not actually read the law, a greater issue has developed around the concept of profiling.

In the usual sense, the term “profiling” invokes a negative reaction as an act intended to perpetuate racial or gender bias and to make assumptions as to the intent or tendency of an individual to behave in an inappropriate manner, often an illegal manner. Law enforcement is continually admonished for profiling in such activities as traffic stops – why are black American drivers pulled over so often in white neighborhoods? News accounts repeatedly castigate police officers for detaining and questioning minority youths who are loitering in shopping malls or parks. Hispanic Americans are assumed to be illegal aliens and drug dealers.

But the purported bias is not limited to law enforcement or to the right leaning politicians. The political left and the mainstream media have used this ploy effectively to further their own biases. One could devote pages to documenting the seemingly endless list of public statements since the last presidential election cycle of those who wailed that if you are against Barack Obama, then you must be a racist. Recall Janeane Garofalo’s statement regarding the tea party movement, “This is about hating a black man in the White House. This is racism straight up. That is nothing but a bunch of teabagging rednecks.” Hating a black man in the White House? If the people who are being pilloried as racists are that angry at a (partially) black man for occupying the White House, why did they not more clearly express this sentiment on their signage and in their statements to the media? It seems more than a little confusing to hide their message in unrelated comments about taxes, spending and some obscure thing called “fiscal responsibility” - unless that is a code word for miscegenation.

Rednecks? Did the definition of a “redneck” change? Once upon a time it seemed to have something to do with attitudes toward racial segregation, working class values and the superiority of the south. So how did they all get sidetracked by that pesky federal Constitution? It would seem that for some reason, the racists have latched on to the national political charter as some sort of holy word on how people should live – go figure. The new paradigm is that anyone who carries a copy of or can quote directly from the Constitution is un-American, disloyal and simply looking to start trouble. The mainstream media’s use of the concept of profiling as a negative is rarely challenged even when it is blatantly obvious. For example, MSNBC’s Contessa Brewer is establishing a substantial body of work on profiling – as one who is applying it without merit.

At a health care rally in Phoenix on August 18th of last year, Brewer reported on a man carrying weapons, legally, “A man at a pro-health care reform rally...wore a semiautomatic assault rifle on his shoulder and a pistol on his hip.... there are questions about whether this has racial overtones....white people showing up with guns.” The video had been carefully editted to obscure the identity and race of the armed man. The questions, it seems, were mostly hers and the most salient fact overlooked was that the man referenced was, himself, black. So Brewer is profiling a black man as a potential racist with violent tendencies toward… a black president but she deliberately reported him as a white man.

On May 4th she stated in regard to the failed terrorist bombing in New York’s Times Square that:

“I get frustrated and there was part of me that was hoping this was not going to be anybody with ties to any kind of Islamic country, because there are a lot of people who want to use this terrorist intent to justify writing off people who believe in a certain way or come from certain countries or whose skin color is a certain way. I mean they use it as justification for really outdated bigotry. And so there was part of me was really hoping this would not be the case that here would be somebody who is not the defined. I mean he’s accused, he’s arrested you know I don’t want to convict him before it’s time to do so. He’s the guy authorities say is involved. But that being said, I mean, we know even in recent history you have the Hutaree militia from Michigan who have plans to, let’s face it, create terror. That’s what they were planning to do and they were doing so from far different backgrounds than what this guy is coming from. So, the threat is not just coming from people who decide that America is the place to be and you know come here and want to become citizens. And obviously this guy did.”

Frustrated that it was someone from an islamic country. Well that is an interesting perspective.A “justification for outdated bigotry” is hardly an applicable term for the people that are working ceaselessly and tirelessly to KILL you. It would seem that Ms. Brewer is in the same statement both condoning criticism of profiling of Americans and complaining of criticism of profiling of non-Americans – for similar acts.

Similarly, Evan Thomas of Newsweek expressed that, “I cringe that he’s a Muslim. I mean, because it inflames all the fears. I think he’s probably just a nut case. But with that label attached to him, it will get the right wing going and it just -- I mean these things are tragic, but that makes it much worse.” So then it is acceptable to malign those Americans that differ in opinion with you politically, but it is unacceptable to profile those people, American or otherwise, that are seeking to commit physical violence on those with whom they disagree?

MSNBC’s David Shuster commented on the audience of Barack Obama’s September address to Congress with, “You look at the image of the Republican Party, all white males with short haircuts. They look sort of angry. No women, no minorities, and it looks like they’ve sort of become unhinged.” White – short haired – angry – unhinged. Isn’t the Republican Party headed by Michael Steele – a black man?

Profiling, it would seem, is more commonly practiced by the very people who are bemoaning it than the people whom they accuse of perpetrating it.

But let’s put profiling in its proper context. It is a tool used by law enforcement to prevent crimes by identifying the patterns that predict crime. Certain people with common traits and beliefs are going act in a certain, predictable way more than those people who do not share those particular traits and beliefs. The probability of any Swedes flying jets into our skyscrapers is very low. The likelihood of Canadians sneaking across our border is remote. The chance of New Zealanders smuggling a dirty bomb into Omaha is miniscule.

We should endeavor to have the courage to face down political correctness and declare that profiling is a law enforcement tool and not a leftist, liberal weapon. Profiling is based on proven facts and facts are indeed stubborn things.