Words have power, words 
have meaning, words can condemn or inspire. Let’s take a look at the word racist; it is a vile word, an insulting word, and a word some may use with pride. Most of us are very careful not do anything that would earn the label of racist.
The American Heritage Dictionary defines racism as “a notion that one’s own ethnic stock is superior or discrimination or prejudice based on race.” The word or title of racist brings to mind my high school years smack dab in the geographical center of the State of Georgia in the mid-1960s, in a town that was the state capital during the Civil War and dammed proud of it. The civil rights movement was changing our nation and a lot of folks in Georgia did not like it. I knew stone cold racists; it was hard not to, they were vocal 
and numerous.
The modern definition of a racist is anyone who disagrees with an African American leader or self-appointed leader about almost anything; it is sad as the term racist brings to my mind very nasty, mean, vial folks filled with irrational hate.
Every member of the Tea Party movement has been called racists, even though 70% backed Herman Cain, an African American businessman for President. Hate once again trumps common sense and the word racist is way too broadly used. The racists I knew growing up would have called for Herman Cain’s lynching, not his election to the presidency.
President Obama and Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawling-Blake, both African Americans, were recently called racist by Baltimore Councilman Carl Stokes because they referred to the rioters in Baltimore as “thugs.” Councilman Stokes said “the use of the word thug is inherently racist.” The name thug has its history in British India a group of violent criminals referred to themselves in Hindi as “The Thag,” the word evolved to thug. Thug is a universal word that knows no race, gender or nationality.
There is very large problem with calling our President a racist because he blames criminals for criminal behavior or thugs for thuggish behavior; what is a stronger word than racist? We have no distinction between a Klansman and the African American President of the United States. A Klansman is a racist no doubt and deserves the derogatory title racist, but is not that title watered down because we use it too broadly?
We are too quick to jump to hyper name calling and to use over heated names for people with whom we disagree. The right calls the left Commies and the left calls the right Fascists (Fascists were indeed Socialists and politically far left but that is an earlier column); we jump to the extreme and leave no room for compromise. Agree with me or you are dead wrong, 100 percent stupid and ignorant and you should shut up.
If we as a nation are to survive we need to take a chill pill, calm down and recognize words have meanings. They can help or hurt but we cannot continue to use hyper rhetoric and need to do the thing that our system of government is based on, the art of compromise.
If the term or title racist can be used to refer to Nathan Bedford Forrest, the founder of the Klu Klux Klan, and President Barack Obama, we have lost our grip on reality and our grip on the English language. The title of racist should be used for the radical few and not the majority of Americans. It should be used sparingly and carefully, as it is a word with meaning, a word with power; it is however an empty word today with no replacement.
I never thought Bedford Forrest and the first African American president could share the title of racist. Referring to someone today as a racist has no bite to it; the end of a word that had meaning, a causality of our abuse of the language and our hyper rhetoric.
