Threats against Obama up 400% from Bush

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
Well this is interesting. It seems the Secret Service is not immune from the recession, and threats against Obama are up 400% from Bush according to this analyst. Read that again. This is an interesting two part article. The first, not so interesting, is that against rising threats against POTUS, the Secret Service isnt able to keep up. But more interesting, is the threat increase. Could it be Obama's outstretcdhed hand really is perceived as weakness? Could it be a war mongering POTUS may actually keep threats at bay? My opinion is the world sees Obama as soft. Of course, the Secret Service disagrees with this report (why wouldnt they?)

Report: Secret Service strained to protect Obama

An internal congressional report questioning the ability of the Secret Service to continue fulfilling its duties was leaked to the Boston Globe. The report says the Secret Service is strained by a drastic increase in threats to President Obama, coupled with deep budget cuts. Some are speculating that the agency may need to relinquish all or part of its roles in protecting the country's financial machinery in order to focus resources on the protection of the president and other high-profile leaders.

The report, issued in August by the Congressional Research Service, claimed that if "an evaluation of the service's two missions" were to be done at this time, there's a good possibility that "it might be determined that it is ineffective...to conduct its protection mission and investigate financial crimes." Additionally, an anonymously quoted government official said that many inside the halls of Congress and within the Secret Service itself are questioning whether or not the agency's effectiveness wouldn't be enhanced by transferring some of its responsibilities regarding the investigation of financial crimes over to the Treasury Department.

Talking Points Memo noted that Ronald Kessler, the author of a recently released book on the Secret Service's protection of U.S. presidents, recently said that threats against President Obama are up 400 percent from the number of threats levied against former President George W. Bush, while the size of the agency's staff has only increased by 5.3 percent. (take that as you will, comment mine)

The Southern Poverty Law Center says that the U.S. has seen a 35 percent rise in hate groups in recent years, and few doubt that the discontent stirred up over the election of an African-American president is fueling the rise in threats. But, could the influx of modern technology also be to blame?

As the cost of computer technology has fallen (and accessibility to high-speed Internet service has spread), more and more people are spending more and more time online. Accordingly, these people are doing what people often do on the Internet: sending emails, communicating in chat rooms and on social networking sites such as Facebook and MySpace, watching YouTube videos, etc. According to results of a recent study by the Simon Wiesenthal Center, these activities seem to be enhancing the scope of extremist groups' reach:


With over 200 million users, online bigots have to date outpaced efforts to remove them. Some sites have thousands of friends, thus enabling the message of hate to spread virally...This user-generated material increases the viral spread of extremism online and aids in increasing the social acceptability of hate in mainstream discourse. By creating an environment where users are equal participants in the Web, all editorial functions are removed and expressions of hate can easily flow unchallenged.

In other words, extremists once confined to small sects can now congregate on the Internet anonymously and distribute propaganda to millions of people in mere seconds. People with extreme views can also now communicate direct threats to individuals quicker and more easily than they have previously, thanks to the immediacy of email and chat rooms.

The Secret Service, presently housed under the bureaucratic umbrella of the Department of Homeland Security, was initially established in 1865 to help combat the rise in counterfeiting that took place in that era. The protection of national leaders didn't become a full-time responsibility until William McKinley was assassinated in 1901. Congress passed a law in 1917 making any threat against the president a federal crime, and the responsibility of investigating such threats often falls upon the Secret Service. Along with protecting presidents, the agency's role in policing financial shenanigans was expanded when the 20th century's technological revolution led to a rise in electronic financial transactions.

It should be noted in all of this, however, that the Secret Service has issued a response in which the agency denied any decreased capacity to carry out its missions, saying that the Boston Globe's report was "not accurate and lacks a good deal of information."
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
72,437
33,025
136
You reasoning is that Obama is soft is the reason for the increase in threats? WTF?
 

Fear No Evil

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2008
5,922
0
0
As much as I support Obama, I do have to admit he is one candyass mofo. He seriously needs to grow a pair.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,701
6,257
126
The Threats are mostly Domestic. So this idea that the "World" sees him as soft is moot.
 

sciwizam

Golden Member
Oct 22, 2004
1,953
0
0
Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
As much as I support Obama, I do have to admit he is one candyass mofo. He seriously needs to grow a pair.

:shocked:
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,528
9,752
136
Originally posted by: ironwing
You reasoning is that Obama is soft is the reason for the increase in threats? WTF?

Yeah... I'm not following that logic either.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
Originally posted by: ironwing
You reasoning is that Obama is soft is the reason for the increase in threats? WTF?

Not specifically, no. The article states alot of the increase is due to his being black. You misread my reasoning.

edit: easy enough to do. I didnt acknowledge part of the rise of threat due to his being black in my OP. My bad. Im doing it now. But its also my opinion he IS soft. Many world leaders have stated as such.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Well this is interesting. It seems the Secret Service is not immune from the recession, and threats against Obama are up 400% from Bush according to this analyst. Read that again. This is an interesting two part article. The first, not so interesting, is that against rising threats against POTUS, the Secret Service isnt able to keep up. But more interesting, is the threat increase. Could it be Obama's outstretcdhed hand really is perceived as weakness? Could it be a war mongering POTUS may actually keep threats at bay? My opinion is the world sees Obama as soft. Of course, the Secret Service disagrees with this report (why wouldnt they?)

Or it could just be that right wing loons are more prone to that sort of thing than left wing loons.
 

seemingly random

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2007
5,277
0
0
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: ironwing
You reasoning is that Obama is soft is the reason for the increase in threats? WTF?

Not specifically, no. The article states alot of the increase is due to his being black. You misread my reasoning.

edit: easy enough to do. I didnt acknowledge part of the rise of threat due to his being black in my OP. My bad. Im doing it now. But its also my opinion he IS soft. Many world leaders have stated as such.
Your reasoning may be questionable but your agenda is transparent. Spread more fud. Spread more fud. Spread more fud. Soon, you're going to transcend hysterical. It'll be fun watching the meltdown.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,577
6,713
126
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Well this is interesting. It seems the Secret Service is not immune from the recession, and threats against Obama are up 400% from Bush according to this analyst. Read that again. This is an interesting two part article. The first, not so interesting, is that against rising threats against POTUS, the Secret Service isnt able to keep up. But more interesting, is the threat increase. Could it be Obama's outstretcdhed hand really is perceived as weakness? Could it be a war mongering POTUS may actually keep threats at bay? My opinion is the world sees Obama as soft. Of course, the Secret Service disagrees with this report (why wouldnt they?)

Or it could just be that right wing loons are more prone to that sort of thing than left wing loons.

That must be it. You couldn't be wrong as to who is a loon. Not you.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,577
6,713
126
I often think to myself that Obama should just quit and tell Americans they aren't worth governing. It was easy for Bush. He was trash too.
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,213
14
81
Originally posted by: her209
Its probably also because he's perceived as a socialist and Muslim.

or communist with Marxist ideals but I am leaning toward his color.

 

ebaycj

Diamond Member
Mar 9, 2002
5,418
0
0
All I can say about this report, is that it sheds a lot of light on which "side" is a bunch of whiny, sore-losers with violent tendencies. Here's a hint: It's not the D's.
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,133
38
91
Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
As much as I support Obama, I do have to admit he is one candyass mofo. He seriously needs to grow a pair.

He's surrounded by women. Two daughters, a wife, mother-in-law, and all those women in his Administration. He's also a lawyer. The guy's probably never gotten into a fist fight in his life.
 

Fear No Evil

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2008
5,922
0
0
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
As much as I support Obama, I do have to admit he is one candyass mofo. He seriously needs to grow a pair.

He's surrounded by women. Two daughters, a wife, mother-in-law, and all those women in his Administration. He's also a lawyer. The guy's probably never gotten into a fist fight in his life.

Maybe we need to send Obama out to Bush's ranch for a little lesson on how to man-up?
 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,816
1,126
126
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Well this is interesting. It seems the Secret Service is not immune from the recession, and threats against Obama are up 400% from Bush according to this analyst. Read that again. This is an interesting two part article. The first, not so interesting, is that against rising threats against POTUS, the Secret Service isnt able to keep up. But more interesting, is the threat increase. Could it be Obama's outstretcdhed hand really is perceived as weakness? Could it be a war mongering POTUS may actually keep threats at bay? My opinion is the world sees Obama as soft. Of course, the Secret Service disagrees with this report (why wouldnt they?)

Or it could just be that right wing loons are more prone to that sort of thing than left wing loons.

Agreed. I can't see DMC grabbing a gun and assassinating anyone. Now buttersotero... yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if he is already a blip on the SS radar.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
:laugh: Seems the author is trying to push a racial motive, as anyone who uses "Southern Poverty Law Center" does. It's a sham organization.

As to the increase in "threats" - yeah, in this day and age with the web and other techs the "threats" can be found more easily. Back in the day this same "threat" might have just been two guys sitting in a coffee shop yapping.
 

surfsatwerk

Lifer
Mar 6, 2008
10,110
5
81
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
:laugh: Seems the author is trying to push a racial motive, as anyone who uses "Southern Poverty Law Center" does. It's a sham organization.

As to the increase in "threats" - yeah, in this day and age with the web and other techs the "threats" can be found more easily. Back in the day this same "threat" might have just been two guys sitting in a coffee shop yapping.

You understand that in the context of this article, "back in the day" is a couple years ago. So under the Bush administration we were so much worse at detecting threats than we are now?