How Many Racists Are We?
Whether you voted for him or not, Barack Obama is the president of the United States.
He is our president. And therefore we should all be worried that he is apparently the recipient of so many disturbing death threats that the FBI has now had to create a special and highly secret task force to investigate them all.
Some of the threats, according to investigative reporter and author Ronald Kessler, who just updated his book, "In the President's Secret Service: Behind the Scenes With Agents in the Line of Fire and the Presidents They Protect," are believed to be from domestic or international terrorists. But many of the assassination threats are thought to be inspired by good old fashioned, homegrown, evil racism and lobbed by haters who have no real connection to politics.
In the first printing of Kessler's book, this highly acclaimed veteran of reporting on national security and intelligence matters revealed that threats against President Obama were up almost 400 percent compared with the average 3,000 threats George W. Bush received each year when he was president.
Today, it's apparently gotten so bad the chronically understaffed and underfunded Secret Service is getting help from this new investigative task force because each and every threat must be diligently checked out.
Kessler reports that the evil has spread outward into the upper echelon of the administration, and there are now some 40 members of Obama's team under Secret Service protection, compared to 32 under Bush.
I know some out there reading this will blame Obama's politics, his programs, or his economic, education or health care wish lists for the rage that spills out in the form of senseless threats. But that doesn't make logical sense to me.
If one is angry about a politician's policy stance, you vote the man out of office next election — you don't scrawl a death threat about a "free public hanging" and post it on a tree, as someone did in Idaho awhile back. You don't plaster a wall with racist graffiti targeting our first African American president, as was done near the North Carolina State University campus. And you certainly don't do what a convenience store employee in Maine did — namely, invite customers to join a one dollar betting pool called, "The Osama Obama Shotgun Pool."
No, those kinds of threats and many more the Secret Service and the FBI refuse to describe for fear of inciting copycat activity come from hatred of other races.
The Obama presidency was supposed to have marked the start of the beginning of the end to our racial divide. Instead, it seems to have brought out the died-in-the-wool racists we feared were still out there. To be fair, however, once Mr. Obama began to have serious popularity issues, his critics were often labeled as racists when they weren't — they just didn't like the direction the country was going.
Both situations make me sad.
You might be surprised what the Secret Service constitutes a threat. It's a federal offense, according to the criminal code, for "anyone to willfully make a true threat to injure or kill the president of the United States." What exactly is a "true threat?" It's anything deemed "serious ... as distinguished from words used as mere political argument, idle or careless talk, or something said in a joking manner."
I was raised to respect the office of the president of the United States even if I don't like everything the person does and says, even if I don't like hardly anything the person does or says. I'm uncomfortable with the glib way in which so many of us toss out pithy phrases intended to disparage our presidents. It's somehow become an almost daily occurrence to hear our relatives, friends and neighbors launch vicious verbal attacks on the occupant of the oval office.
Gerald Ford was an ineffective, clumsy oaf. George W. Bush was stupid. William Jefferson Clinton was nothing but a skirt-chaser. I can't think of any recent president who hasn't been labeled in some pejorative way. But, with Barack Obama it has crossed a line and escalated into something much uglier and potentially deadly.
I'm all for citizens speaking their mind — in an intelligent way. Complain about the state of our do-little Congress. Yell at the top of your lungs that the White House is pushing a plan that you think will harm our country's future. But keep it civil, and remember when we engage in personal attacks and presidential name-calling we tell the world its OK to disregard our commander in chief. Worse, we teach our kids the nation's top leadership spot is not important. Most importantly, it denigrates the office for every other president that comes after the one we don't happen to like at the moment.
The discourse as it stands now diminishes us as a people. And if the criticism crosses the line — and assassination is the center point of the discussion — it's criminal.
Pass it on.
Visit Diane Dimond's official website at www.dianedimond.com for investigative reporting, polls and more. To find out more about Diane Dimond and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM

|
 |
Comments
|
8 Comments | Post Comment
|
|
I agree that the Office of the President is to be respected. But, any man who has lied to We The People as much as this man warrants no personal respect. Wanting this President gone [from office] is NOT the same thing as wanting him dead. As long as there are people on this planet, there will be extremists. Lumping the rest of us, (300million plus) who are angry with this President's agenda of destroying our Country, in with a handful of nuts no more makes us racists than "all black people are.... whatever". Just because a few wackos (yes, a few, out of millions) want him dead does not demean us as a Nation. Please. Use a little perspective. Your article smacks of leftist journalism, when you use a one-size-fits-all scenario to defame the rest of us.
Comment: #1
Posted by: David Henricks
Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:56 AM
|
|
|
|
I sam nolt recist at all till someone makes me a=mad as hell which has been done time and toime again since obams got omto office that all has done I can not support any one who womt listen to us at all I did npot vote for him i\n tje fist place at all
Comment: #2
Posted by: Margaret
Sun Aug 1, 2010 5:42 PM
|
|
|
|
that os not fair at all he needed to figure out whos asses to kick wsith the dang oil treagedy I think he needs his ass kicked
Comment: #3
Posted by: Margaret
Sun Aug 1, 2010 5:43 PM
|
|
|
|
Ms. Dimond - I agree with you. However, you failed to mention that this president has failed to act in the "post racial" manner that he promised and in fact has further aggravated the racial tensions in this country. You only have to look to the most recent debacle with the Dept of Agriculture employee firing to see that. Then there was the immediate accusation that policemen acted stupidly when they arrested the Harvard professor. In both and repeated other instances, it was shoot first then see what he was aiming at. His policies, actions, etc have illustrated that his vision is still clouded as much as anyone elses in regards to race. The unwarranted attack on Arizona for trying to reinforce it's borders while completely ignoring cities with "safe haven" policies for illegals is yet another illustration of how he is trying to shore up a the latino vote over enforcing the laws of the land and defending the constution i.e. playing racial politics over doing his duty.
It is unfortunate that our society is polluted with those who practice racism in any form. So it is only logical that the whackos that still suscribe to ignorant racist beliefs are coming out in droves with death threats.
Comment: #4
Posted by: Charles
Mon Aug 2, 2010 6:58 AM
|
|
|
|
You are incorrect, Mrs. Dimond, that there is a lot of racism in this country. Liberals WANT there to be, and scream it at every turn, but what you fail to mention is the fact that ObaMao is just as racist against whites as those, who you claim, that are threatening him. Whilst he and his cronies refuse to prosecute the Black Panthers and the NAACP for their racist rhetoric (as well as law breaking actions) against whites (and Asians/Latins for that matter), he has the audacity (of hope?) to openly criticize a non-racist organization like the Tea Party (which is made up, roughly, of the same percentage of blacks as the country itself). Why does racism only have to be directed at blacks, and not any other group? According to Sheik Hussein ObaMao that is the case. Any discrimination against whites or any other group (unless its immigration related) should be dismissed as frustration over the "unfairness" of economic diversity, ala the Black Panther case and poor, poor Sherrod and her abject hatred of whites. Lets not forget, even if she claims to be reformed, or apologetic for her actions, she never actually lifted a finger to help the person she was racist against, instead asking a white lawyer to do the job because of her disdain for whites. 80,000 claims of racism against black farmers payed out by the Feds, when there were, at most, about 45,000 black farmers in this country and any one time. Nice and fair there, eh?
It makes me sick that Liberals scream about equality and fairness when they themselves are pushing for inequality and desire the segregation of this country by color and status. All of their policies are pushing for more and more of that division... unless it has to do with them. Then, of course, they shouldn't be subject to those policies because it would impact their power and status (ObaMaoCare anyone?). ObaMao is the great divider, and his downfall has been written in stone, as is the Liberal agenda.
Comment: #5
Posted by: Charles
Mon Aug 2, 2010 12:45 PM
|
|
|
|
You are incorrect, Mrs. Dimond, that there is a lot of racism in this country. Liberals WANT there to be, and scream it at every turn, but what you fail to mention is the fact that ObaMao is just as racist against whites as those, who you claim, that are threatening him. Whilst he and his cronies refuse to prosecute the Black Panthers and the NAACP for their racist rhetoric (as well as law breaking actions) against whites (and Asians/Latins for that matter), he has the audacity (of hope?) to openly criticize a non-racist organization like the Tea Party (which is made up, roughly, of the same percentage of blacks as the country itself). Why does racism only have to be directed at blacks, and not any other group? According to Sheik Hussein ObaMao that is the case. Any discrimination against whites or any other group (unless its immigration related) should be dismissed as frustration over the "unfairness" of economic diversity, ala the Black Panther case and poor, poor Sherrod and her abject hatred of whites. Lets not forget, even if she claims to be reformed, or apologetic for her actions, she never actually lifted a finger to help the person she was racist against, instead asking a white lawyer to do the job because of her disdain for whites. 80,000 claims of racism against black farmers payed out by the Feds, when there were, at most, about 45,000 black farmers in this country and any one time. Nice and fair there, eh?
It makes me sick that Liberals scream about equality and fairness when they themselves are pushing for inequality and desire the segregation of this country by color and status. All of their policies are pushing for more and more of that division... unless it has to do with them. Then, of course, they shouldn't be subject to those policies because it would impact their power and status (ObaMaoCare anyone?). ObaMao is the great divider, and his downfall has been written in stone, as is the Liberal agenda.
Comment: #6
Posted by: Charles
Mon Aug 2, 2010 12:45 PM
|
|
|
|
You are incorrect, Mrs. Dimond, that there is a lot of racism in this country. Liberals WANT there to be, and scream it at every turn, but what you fail to mention is the fact that ObaMao is just as racist against whites as those, who you claim, that are threatening him. Whilst he and his cronies refuse to prosecute the Black Panthers and the NAACP for their racist rhetoric (as well as law breaking actions) against whites (and Asians/Latins for that matter), he has the audacity (of hope?) to openly criticize a non-racist organization like the Tea Party (which is made up, roughly, of the same percentage of blacks as the country itself). Why does racism only have to be directed at blacks, and not any other group? According to Sheik Hussein ObaMao that is the case. Any discrimination against whites or any other group (unless its immigration related) should be dismissed as frustration over the "unfairness" of economic diversity, ala the Black Panther case and poor, poor Sherrod and her abject hatred of whites. Lets not forget, even if she claims to be reformed, or apologetic for her actions, she never actually lifted a finger to help the person she was racist against, instead asking a white lawyer to do the job because of her disdain for whites. 80,000 claims of racism against black farmers payed out by the Feds, when there were, at most, about 45,000 black farmers in this country and any one time. Nice and fair there, eh?
It makes me sick that Liberals scream about equality and fairness when they themselves are pushing for inequality and desire the segregation of this country by color and status. All of their policies are pushing for more and more of that division... unless it has to do with them. Then, of course, they shouldn't be subject to those policies because it would impact their power and status (ObaMaoCare anyone?). ObaMao is the great divider, and his downfall has been written in stone, as is the Liberal agenda.
Comment: #7
Posted by: Charles
Mon Aug 2, 2010 12:46 PM
|
|
|
|
You are incorrect, Mrs. Dimond, that there is a lot of racism in this country. Liberals WANT there to be, and scream it at every turn, but what you fail to mention is the fact that ObaMao is just as racist against whites as those, who you claim, that are threatening him. Whilst he and his cronies refuse to prosecute the Black Panthers and the NAACP for their racist rhetoric (as well as law breaking actions) against whites (and Asians/Latins for that matter), he has the audacity (of hope?) to openly criticize a non-racist organization like the Tea Party (which is made up, roughly, of the same percentage of blacks as the country itself). Why does racism only have to be directed at blacks, and not any other group? According to Sheik Hussein ObaMao that is the case. Any discrimination against whites or any other group (unless its immigration related) should be dismissed as frustration over the "unfairness" of economic diversity, ala the Black Panther case and poor, poor Sherrod and her abject hatred of whites. Lets not forget, even if she claims to be reformed, or apologetic for her actions, she never actually lifted a finger to help the person she was racist against, instead asking a white lawyer to do the job because of her disdain for whites. 80,000 claims of racism against black farmers payed out by the Feds, when there were, at most, about 45,000 black farmers in this country and any one time. Nice and fair there, eh?
Comment: #8
Posted by: Charles
Mon Aug 2, 2010 12:46 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|