Jim Wallis, the liberal Christian social activist and one of Barack Obama’s spiritual advisers, wrote a piece that included this gem of a paragraph:

I am just going to say it. There is something wrong with a political movement like the Tea Party which is almost all white. Does that mean every member of the Tea Party is racist? Likely not. But is an undercurrent of white resentment part of the Tea Party ethos, and would there even be a Tea Party if the president of the United States weren’t the first black man to occupy that office? It’s time we had some honest answers to that question. And as far as I can tell, Libertarianism has never been much of a multi-cultural movement. Need I say that racism — overt, implied, or even subtle — is not a Christian virtue.

Whatever problems one might have with the Tea Party and libertarian movements — and I have expressed some concerns about them — the charge that what is fueling the Tea Party movement is the color of Obama’s skin rather than the content of his policies is preposterous and slanderous. If Barack Obama were white, the Tea Party movement would certainly exist. And if Barack Obama were a fiscal conservative, it would not.

So I am going to say it. There is something wrong with a self-proclaiming Christian, one who fancies himself as a “prophet,” a man interested in “dialogue,” and a voice for civility and reason in the public square, attempting to recklessly smear an entire political movement. Need I say that libel — overt, implied, or even subtle — is not a Christian virtue.

When it comes to those who hold views different from his own, Jim Wallis is a hater. And I hope that those on the left who express such deep concern about incivility in our public discourse might have a word or two admonishing Mr. Wallis.