Report: Secret Service strained to protect Obama

[Dutch-Guy]

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.

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."

-- Brett Michael ****s is a contributor to the Yahoo! News Blog

http://img202.imageshack.us/img202/6532/captd8072a3ed16c49edb39.jpg

[LuckyR]

Hhmmm... Why is there a 400% increase in threats against Obama, compared to Bush, when Obama has a higher approval rating? Hhmmm, let me think... what could it be? I am sure I can figure this one out if I try really hard...

[max]

. . . hmm, racism you suggest? Perhaps. Yes, I'd hazard a percentage of it is simple racism.

But when the economy's strained as it is, people look all over for scapegoats.

When you propose as many dramatic and drastic and expensive changes in American life, I'm not surprised at this kind of response.

[WChiang]

. . . ....I'm not surprised at this kind of response.

People can keep their heads in the sand and avoid the fact that a LARGE part of this nutcake activity is due to racism. This country has been through hard times before and this type of hateful, ignorant, simplistic bs never reared it's ugly head to this extent.....at all. I'm not surprised either, but for reasons completely different than yours.:cry:

[BreakPoint]

People also need to keep in mind that not all the people who don't like or hate Obama are white. There are also many blacks who don't like or hate Obama. So obviously not all of it can be attributed to simple racism.

[WChiang]

People also need to keep in mind that not all the people who don't like or hate Obama are white. There are also many blacks who don't like or hate Obama. So obviously not all of it can be attributed to simple racism.

LOL, yes Breakpoint, "not all of it" can be attributed to simple racism.:rolleyes:

[BreakPoint]

LOL, yes Breakpoint, "not all of it" can be attributed to simple racism.:rolleyes:
I'm glad you agree. There's this misconception that only white people don't like or hate Obama. That is simply not true. So you can keep your head in the sand if you want. I know better. :-?

[Bud]

It's racism, plain and simple... it's not rocket science.

[atatu]

There are a lot of nut cases spreading hate and false information out there, you need look no further than these message boards for examples.

[max]

Nice generalizations. The problem with generalizations is that you do injustice to particular facts. But facts are stubborn things, no? I have seen no proof offered here by those convinced that 100% of the threat comes from racism. None. Just speculation. We need to be a bit more gentle with the truth of situations.

[Bud]

Nice generalizations. The problem with generalizations is that you do injustice to particular facts. But facts are stubborn things, no? I have seen no proof offered here by those convinced that 100% of the threat comes from racism. None. Just speculation. We need to be a bit more gentle with the truth of situations.

No one stated 100% that I recall.

[Camilio Pascual]

The problem with generalizations is that you do injustice to particular facts.
I'm wondering, what particular facts are you doing an injustice to with your generalization above?
PS - I'm not referring to your specific misrepresentation that somebody here said racism is 100% of the threat.

[BreakPoint]

Nice generalizations. The problem with generalizations is that you do injustice to particular facts. But facts are stubborn things, no? I have seen no proof offered here by those convinced that 100% of the threat comes from racism. None. Just speculation. We need to be a bit more gentle with the truth of situations.
Exactly!

There are plenty of people who passionately disagree with Obama's left-leaning philosophies, policies, and/or actions, be they white, black, brown or any other color, and some of whom may be crazy enough to actually make a threat against him. Nutcases are not limited to only white people.

[WChiang]

.....Nutcases are not limited to only white people.

Uhm, yes. It's not 100% based on race and nutcases are not limited to only white people. You are now a certified "stater of the obvious". And not all pit bulls attack......and some spiders eat pie.....and not every tomato tastes good.......Pat yourself on the back, big guy.

[BreakPoint]

Uhm, yes. It's not 100% based on race and nutcases are not limited to only white people. You are now a certified "stater of the obvious". And not all pit bulls attack......and some spiders eat pie.....and not every tomato tastes good.......Pat yourself on the back, big guy.
Yet, several posters here have declared that the reason for the increase is "racism". Well, no, that's not the only reason. There are many other reasons.

[WChiang]

Yet, several posters here have declared that the reason for the increase is "racism". Well, no, that's not the only reason. There are many other reasons.

Pheww! At least you finally admit that "one" of the reasons is racism. Thanks for agreeing with most of the posters that you are disagreeing with, lol.

[35ft6]

Exactly!

There are plenty of people who passionately disagree with Obama's left-leaning philosophies, policies, and/or actions, be they white, black, brown or any other color, and some of whom may be crazy enough to actually make a threat against him. Nutcases are not limited to only white people.This can co-exist with racism. They are not mutually exclusive and they probably work great together in conjunction.

[Dutch-Guy]

It's racism, plain and simple... it's not rocket science.
Still pulling the race card!!! Don't forget that whites put Obama in the white house.

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

online bigots have to date outpaced efforts to remove them

...sounds like they were reading the posts of certain TT members.

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

This can co-exist with racism. They are not mutually exclusive and they probably work great together in conjunction.


Logical. This is seen amongst some of the anti-health care screamers; some operate off of the belief that expansive health care means coverage for all of the poor minorities they cannot stand, thus health care = black president giving something to those the screamers despise.

[Omega_7000]

Hmm people who take this too seriously?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX-G6mxLuWQ

[BreakPoint]

Logical. This is seen amongst some of the anti-health care screamers; some operate off of the belief that expansive health care means coverage for all of the poor minorities they cannot stand, thus health care = black president giving something to those the screamers despise.
I don't think it's because they can't stand poor minorities, it's because they would have to PAY to cover the health care for these poor minorities.

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

I don't think it's because they can't stand poor minorities, it's because they would have to PAY to cover the health care for these poor minorities.

I specifically pointed out those who do tie their hatred of minorities together with the black president attempting to expand health care to (in their view) the minority part of the poor population (they pay no mind to the poor whites who would benefit). Race has been present in most anti-Obama rants from the various groups; it may not be the reason for all who are ranting, but there's no doubt racist factions stand amongst the collective, and only protest with race as a motivator.

[BreakPoint]

The director of the Secret Service, testifying in front of Congress today on the White House crashers incident, said that the threat level against Obama is NO HIGHER than against the past two Presidents and that 400% increase figure is a myth.

There you go. Certain fringe groups making up false facts and spreading unsubstantiated rumors.

[dParis]

Hhmmm... Why is there a 400% increase in threats against Obama, compared to Bush, when Obama has a higher approval rating? Hhmmm, let me think... what could it be? I am sure I can figure this one out if I try really hard...

People can keep their heads in the sand and avoid the fact that a LARGE part of this nutcake activity is due to racism. This country has been through hard times before and this type of hateful, ignorant, simplistic bs never reared it's ugly head to this extent.....at all. I'm not surprised either, but for reasons completely different than yours.:cry:

It's racism, plain and simple... it's not rocket science.

I specifically pointed out those who do tie their hatred of minorities together with the black president attempting to expand health care to (in their view) the minority part of the poor population (they pay no mind to the poor whites who would benefit). Race has been present in most anti-Obama rants from the various groups; it may not be the reason for all who are ranting, but there's no doubt racist factions stand amongst the collective, and only protest with race as a motivator.
:roll:
The director of the Secret Service, testifying in front of Congress today on the White House crashers incident, said that the treat level against Obama is NO HIGHER than against the past two Presidents and that 400% increase figure is a myth.

There you go. Certain fringe groups making up false facts and spreading unsubstantiated rumors.
And no shortage of soldiers to propagate them.

Good post, BP.

[Enlightened Coelacanth]

The wish for society to be more racist than it is must be a blow to some.

[LuckyR]

:roll:

And no shortage of soldiers to propagate them.

Good post, BP.

Hey, Einstein! I didn't post the article (nor write it). If the original article is untrue, then that is the author's and poster's problem, not mine.

[WChiang]

:roll:

And no shortage of soldiers to propagate them.

Good post, BP.

Please think when posting, or at least look further at the posts used as your "examples" in context before ignorantly waving them around in a holier than thou way.

My post that you used above still stands and does not relate to the Secret Service/400% debate. IN CONTEXT my post was based on my observations and experiences over many years. I have not seen this amount of hate, ignorance, and uninformed bs being spewed against a sitting President in my lifetime. Town Halls, teabaggers, right wing hate radio, southern politicians and simpletons, and the GOP in general have been using hate, racism, and over the top insults more than I have ever seen in the past. Sorry if that doesn't fit in to your world view.:roll:

[Enlightened Coelacanth]

Hey, Einstein! I didn't post the article (nor write it). If the original article is untrue, then that is the author's and poster's problem, not mine.True enough. I guess your problem was in so quickly and willingly believing unsubstantiated claims and broad brushing so many with the charge of racism.

No, you didn't write the article. You only embraced it and believed the worst of others with little or no proof as back up.

[dParis]

Hey, Einstein! I didn't post the article (nor write it). If the original article is untrue, then that is the author's and poster's problem, not mine.

Please think when posting, or at least look further at the posts used as your "examples" in context before ignorantly waving them around in a holier than thou way.

My post that you used above still stands and does not relate to the Secret Service/400% debate.. Blah, blah blah...
Never said either of you wrote or posted the article.
I guess your problem was in so quickly and willingly believing unsubstantiated claims and broad brushing so many with the charge of racism.

No, you didn't write the article. You only embraced it and believed the worst of others with little or no proof as back up.
As I was saying...:p

[WChiang]

Never said either of you wrote or posted the article, blah, blah, blah......

Never said that you did. What does that have to do with anything? Do you have a reading comprehension problem? (nod your head yes...)

This thread has gone way over your head and you are now reduced to using other's unrelated posts, out of context, from other discussions to try to make your point. Try constructing your own argument and THINKING rather than dishing out this junk.

[Z-Man]

According to the Secret Service, threats are not up. This story is all sizzle and no steak.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/12/secret_service_director_threat.asp

Also, the Southern Poverty Law Center is a profitable direct-marketing organization, not a civil rights organization.
http://www.americanpatrol.com/SPLC/ChurchofMorrisDees001100.html

While we're on the subject, why not bring out the classics:

Frozen Hotdog: http://www.snopes.com/college/risque/hotdog.asp

Headlights: http://www.snopes.com/crime/gangs/lightsout.asp

My personal all-time favorite: http://www.snopes.com/risque/juvenile/lobster.asp

[Mulligan]

Why does everything have to be so black/white (no pun intended) with these topics. Why not read the entirety of the issue, both sides, and admit that the truth is often sometimes in the middle.

In this case, the Spokesman for the Secret Service admitted that there were extreme spikes in threats against Obama before, during, and after his election and again with the inauguration. Those threats have now subsided to an amount equal to the last couple of Presidents.....at this time in their administrations. So before quoting lefty or righty blogs and repeating their agendas - why not just admit that there are many whacko's out there (racist and non-racist) that hated Obama's election to the Presidency and there was a bigtime uptick in serious threats to his life. Now, after almost a year the threats have come down. There are still redneck fools out there shouting their hate and there are still left wing nuts that want to turn every word against him in to a racial war. As usual, the issue is more complicated than a few soundbites. Carry on.

[dParis]

This thread has gone way over your head and you are now reduced to using other's unrelated posts, out of context, from other discussions to try to make your point. Try constructing your own argument and THINKING rather than dishing out this junk.
My post related directly to the subject of the thread; I quoted you from a post in this thread. If you're not relating to the subject, that's y.p. not m.p. I was highlighting the knee-jerk liberal acceptance and sleazy opportunistic use of a bogus story to broadly criticize, or rather insult, people who don't agree with them. That the point went over your head is no surprise to me.

Maybe next time you can post something relating to the thread topic. The forum runs so much smoother that way.

[WChiang]

My post related directly to the subject of the thread; I quoted you from a post in this thread.....blah, blah, blah...

It is fun watching you actually try to dig out of this.:) Thank you for proving my point. Just because you "quote" posts from a thread (obviously without understanding the content, context or discussion that the post was addressing) doesn't automatically mean that it is relevant to the point that you are trying to make. Geez, it's like I am communicating with a high school kid that is struggling to explain his tragic mistake in logic. Man up and move on.....your use of my quote had nothing to do with your point re: the Secret Service article. It's ok. Nobody will hurt you.:oops: <and the forum will run much smoother that way, lol>

[WChiang]

....As usual, the issue is more complicated than a few soundbites. Carry on.

Truth. Some on this board have the most juvenile ability to take a piece of news and then conveniently try to use it to forward a completely different agenda. Very lazy and easy to call out.

[dParis]

Just because you "quote" posts from a thread (obviously without understanding the content, context or discussion that the post was addressing)[Sad. I understand your own posts better than you do.] doesn't automatically mean that it is relevant to the point that you are trying to make.

.....your use of my quote had nothing to do with your point re: the Secret Service article. It's ok. Nobody will hurt you.:oops: <and the forum will run much smoother that way, lol>
Fine. So you're just saying most of the criticism of Obama must be driven by racism. Great point. Keep it up, champ.

[BreakPoint]

Why does everything have to be so black/white (no pun intended) with these topics. Why not read the entirety of the issue, both sides, and admit that the truth is often sometimes in the middle.

In this case, the Spokesman for the Secret Service admitted that there were extreme spikes in threats against Obama before, during, and after his election and again with the inauguration. Those threats have now subsided to an amount equal to the last couple of Presidents.....at this time in their administrations. So before quoting lefty or righty blogs and repeating their agendas - why not just admit that there are many whacko's out there (racist and non-racist) that hated Obama's election to the Presidency and there was a bigtime uptick in serious threats to his life. Now, after almost a year the threats have come down. There are still redneck fools out there shouting their hate and there are still left wing nuts that want to turn every word against him in to a racial war. As usual, the issue is more complicated than a few soundbites. Carry on.
Do you have any credible evidence to substantiate your claims? Or is it just your "gut feeling"?

BTW, weren't there a lot of wackos that were pissed off at Bush for stealing the election from Gore and hated Bush's election to the Presidency?

[ninman]

Still pulling the race card!!! Don't forget that whites put Obama in the white house.

yes, but there are large white supremacy groups in America, I'm sure that they don't hate Obama.

[Z-Man]

This thread is like something from The Onion. Newsflash! America is full of crazy people...

[WChiang]

Fine. So you're just saying most of the criticism of Obama must be driven by racism ( I understand that you only said that it is a part of the problem but I thought I would say it because it fits my agenda) . blah, blah, blach.

No, (champ?!, lol).....I said quite clearly that from what I have seen in the past 18 months that racism is part of the problem but only contributing factor to the bigger issue of right wing hate at a level far above what I have seen in the past. Your reading comprehension skills leave much to be desired. But it appears as though you quote & summarize others opinions out of context to suit whatever you want anyway, no matter how irrelevant to the point you are struggling to make, so it is not surprising. Relax pal, it's just opinion. Good luck with yours. Nobody got hurt.

[LuckyR]

True enough. I guess your problem was in so quickly and willingly believing unsubstantiated claims and broad brushing so many with the charge of racism.

No, you didn't write the article. You only embraced it and believed the worst of others with little or no proof as back up.

Look at post #1 and #24 in this thread and you tell me which one looks like it has "little or no proof as back up". Again, I don't work at the Secret Service so I have no particular knowledge of the topic, but my guess is every poster on this thread also falls into this category.

[dParis]

I said quite clearly that from what I have seen in the past 18 months that racism is part of the problem but only contributing factor to the bigger issue of right wing hate at a level far above what I have seen in the past.
Take your blinders off, Chianger. Hate from just about everywhere is on the rise. That some only notice "right-wing hate" is a contributing factor.

[WChiang]

Take your blinders off, Chianger. Hate from just about everywhere is on the rise. That some only notice "right-wing hate" is a contributing factor.

On this we agree. I am not forgetting the hate shown by the left toward Bush nor do I dismiss the left wing fanatics that use the same insulting rhetoric against those they oppose. I do, however, see much more right wing hate at the moment, but obviously that is due to the current Administration's affiliation and policies - it just seems turned up a couple of notches from what I saw with past Presidents. I guess I am just sick of the bs and ignorant shouting going on by the fringes from both sides. It's not helping anything.

[Enlightened Coelacanth]

Look at post #1 and #24 in this thread and you tell me which one looks like it has "little or no proof as back up". Again, I don't work at the Secret Service so I have no particular knowledge of the topic, but my guess is every poster on this thread also falls into this category.I'm glad you brought this up because I went back and researched the original story the post is based on, before making my own post, and on the say so of one man, Ronald Kessler (an author whose specialty is writing books on the Bush's, the Secret Service and other insider law enforcement tales), without any other supporting citations or back up whatsoever the claim that there was a 400% jump in death threats against the president was born!

Where he got his information and any confirmation of what he claims is totally missing. The contention is just stated flatly, as if it's a matter of fact. Is this authoritative to you? Not to me. But then I find it harder to believe, I suppose, that racists making death threats are hiding under every bed. Knowing his specialty is the Secret Service it isn't difficult to look back and read between the lines of Kessler's words and see he is trying to increase funding for the men in dark suits and sunglasses by hyping the danger to Obama (in my opinion).

The article also cites the Southern Poverty Law Center (whose livelihood depends on using racist boogeymen to get frightened liberals to send Morris Dees money) who talks about the rampant threat of racism in America (just after we overwhelmingly elected a black president). This is used as support of Kessler's claim, I guess. As proof, it falls far far short of certifying Kessler's statement.

As far as post #24 goes, the current head of the Secret Service has called stories of a 400% increase in threats against the president bunk. He is in charge of dealing with these death threats so I suppose he would know.
He certainly knows more about this than an opportunistic author and race hustler like Dees.

If I left anything out, let me know. There are many stories like this that put out a lie (like the census worker in Kentucky who was supposedly butchered by inbred redneck anti government racists...except that he wasn't...ooops) and only some time later does the real truth emerge.
I guess when you have an emotional investment in proving what a rotten place America is any excuse to jump to a lying conclusion is fair game (and that goes for the people that uncritically swallow this tripe, too).

[borg number one]

This has been a long-running problem. Security around the President has never been as "air tight" as we would like it to be, and there have been many security breaches over the years.

See article:

"Secret Service counts 91 breaches"

2003 report has been used as training tool

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/06/AR2009120602556.html?hpid=topnews

[LuckyR]

I'm glad you brought this up because I went back and researched the original story the post is based on, before making my own post, and on the say so of one man, Ronald Kessler (an author whose specialty is writing books on the Bush's, the Secret Service and other insider law enforcement tales), without any other supporting citations or back up whatsoever the claim that there was a 400% jump in death threats against the president was born!

Where he got his information and any confirmation of what he claims is totally missing. The contention is just stated flatly, as if it's a matter of fact. Is this authoritative to you? Not to me. But then I find it harder to believe, I suppose, that racists making death threats are hiding under every bed. Knowing his specialty is the Secret Service it isn't difficult to look back and read between the lines of Kessler's words and see he is trying to increase funding for the men in dark suits and sunglasses by hyping the danger to Obama (in my opinion).

The article also cites the Southern Poverty Law Center (whose livelihood depends on using racist boogeymen to get frightened liberals to send Morris Dees money) who talks about the rampant threat of racism in America (just after we overwhelmingly elected a black president). This is used as support of Kessler's claim, I guess. As proof, it falls far far short of certifying Kessler's statement.

As far as post #24 goes, the current head of the Secret Service has called stories of a 400% increase in threats against the president bunk. He is in charge of dealing with these death threats so I suppose he would know.
He certainly knows more about this than an opportunistic author and race hustler like Dees.

If I left anything out, let me know. There are many stories like this that put out a lie (like the census worker in Kentucky who was supposedly butchered by inbred redneck anti government racists...except that he wasn't...ooops) and only some time later does the real truth emerge.
I guess when you have an emotional investment in proving what a rotten place America is any excuse to jump to a lying conclusion is fair game (and that goes for the people that uncritically swallow this tripe, too).


Good on you (and everyone else) who has either the motivation to research or expert knowledge to share on a subject that is the point of a thread, that goes beyond the original citation.

My post was a response to a post that implied that those who don't research articles (which would be every single person on a Forum at one point or another), are somehow biased, niave or lazy. That idea itself is all three.

[10sfreak]

Please think when posting, or at least look further at the posts used as your "examples" in context before ignorantly waving them around in a holier than thou way.

My post that you used above still stands and does not relate to the Secret Service/400% debate. IN CONTEXT my post was based on my observations and experiences over many years. I have not seen this amount of hate, ignorance, and uninformed bs being spewed against a sitting President in my lifetime. Town Halls, teabaggers, right wing hate radio, southern politicians and simpletons, and the GOP in general have been using hate, racism, and over the top insults more than I have ever seen in the past. Sorry if that doesn't fit in to your world view.:roll:
And how is any of this different than the way you on the left treated President George W. Bush?:confused:

[10sfreak]

Truth. Some on this board have the most juvenile ability to take a piece of news and then conveniently try to use it to forward a completely different agenda. Very lazy and easy to call out.
I agree - some dirtbags on here tried to make threats against the obamessiah, and even simple disagreement with his policies, into "racism". What a bunch of losers...