And I firmly stick with my comment:

In effect, the writer is saying: “Mr. Obama, you stop pushing your policies (call it ideology, if you wish), start going along with Republican wishes and policies, and perhaps there won't be so many threats on your life,. because you have just reconfirmed my comments:

Once again, you are saying, in effect: that if the President promotes a radical agenda he will ruffle a lot more feathers of the crazies than you would with a moderate agenda. In the context of the post, that means that you understand why there will be many more threats on the life of the President of the United States.

NOTHING, no perceived “radical” agenda justifies an increased level of threats against the life of the President of the United States. If you can't get that through your head, than I have nothing elese to say.

In effect, the writer is saying: “Mr. Obama, you stop pushing your policies (call it ideology, if you wish), start going along with Republican wishes and policies, and perhaps there won't be so many threats on your life.”

Nope. What the writer is saying is that if you promote a radical agenda you will ruffle a lot more feathers of the crazies than you would with a moderate, well thought out and incrimental approach. The writer is also saying that democrats control the purse strings so if they feel the President is more threatened it is in their power to increase his security detail.

The Herd prefers hysteria to thought. I thought of my own amusing reply: Let them hire Blackwater.

I am sorry, but this is one of the most assenine, insensitive and arrogant comments I have seen.

In effect, the writer is saying: “Mr. Obama, you stop pushing your policies (call it ideology, if you wish), start going along with Republican wishes and policies, and perhaps there won't be so many threats on your life.”

Wow!!

I am sorry, but this is one of the most assenine, insensitive and arrogant comments I have seen.

In effect, the writer is saying: “Mr. Obama, you stop pushing your policies (call it ideology, if you wish), start going along with Republican wishes and policies, and perhaps there won't be so many threats on your life.”

Wow!!

Good question. I do not know the answer, but here's my take. I believe the threats are real. How many news stories did you hear about armed citizens showing up at Bush's rallies? Palin is using the image of death panels in Obama's healthcare reform, which makes people feel that Obama (and Democrats) are attacking Republicans. People of course will feel the need to protect themselves and some will do so more proactively than others. The anti-abortion protestors already kill doctors because they feel they are protecting babies. The hatred that is being stirred up against Obama is even more personal to people. It only takes one nut with a gun and a reason (no matter how illogical or emotional) to hurt or kill someone.

Oh, and many of these people who hate Obama don't even view him as the legitimate president or believe he's even a citizen of the US. At least everyone thought Bush was a citizen of the US and anyone who killed him was a national security threat. Some of these wacko conservatives view Obama as a threat to national security.

So yeah, I think the escalating threats against Obama are real. But that's more from a feeling than objective facts.

That's right and the leaders from all political parties need to stand up and say violence or threats against the president are irresponsible and illegal.

It seems that a good many threats are coming from conservatives and implicitly supported by some political leaders, beginning with the tolerance for death threats and hate spouted during last year's campaigns.

Our elected officials are suppose to be men and women of good character and morals. Not hooligans who stand by and do nothing while violence and threats escalate against someone.

A leader is someone who stands up and says, “Enough is enough, the threats and violence are getting out of hand and are illegal. Stop it now.” Where are the leaders from all political parties and why aren't more saying this?

When someone is hurt or killed our “leaders” can claim they never called for violence. But it's also true that they did not do anything to stop it when it is clearly an issue. What are they waiting for? The moment when it becomes too late?

(Are we sure this isn't just more hysteria though – this time from the left? It really doesn't matter but I'm getting oh so tired of feeling manipulated by both 'sides' of the political spectrum.)

As CNN's Rick Sanchez said on the air, “This looks serious. This almost looks like this is coming to the point where we are even beyond maybe where this nation was on November 22 of 1963, when JFK was assassinated, when there was also an environment of hate in this country.”

Sanchez is correct, of course, but I would take out all those qualifiers he put in when comparing to the JFK assassination (which I am old enough to remember, vividly). I would say that of course we are beyond where this nation was on 11/22/63, not just because the environment of hate is worse, but because of the very fact of 11/22/63. We can see this coming now in a way we could not back then.

At first, I was going to say “you're right, Kathy,” but on second thought I have to say, what a national disgrace and shame that this has become such an alarming issue

This is a high risk presidency in terms of his personal safety and needs to be treated accordingly.

Agree with you; agree with Shannonlee. Thanks for bringing this issue to TMV.