Reader comments
Obama resembles tyrant

And which dictators and tyrants is the letter writer familiar? He must have intimate knowlege to make such a statement. Has he made a study of tyrants? Perhaps he wrote a paper on high school which made him an expert on tyrantology.

Just because the letter writer doesn't like Obama or he is not the candidate the letter writer wanted does not make Obama a tyrant under the normal definition. However, in this day of hyperbole, the letter writer probably considered his father was a tyrant when he would let him borrow the family car.

Of course, anyone who is not a born-again, social conservative is blind to what is real and important in the world. Somehow, these people cannot recognize a tyrant when an astute observer like the letter writer has both the knowlege and presence of mind to warn everyone of impending doom.

Thank goodness for this warning. Now we are finding tryants under every bed. We need to be more vigilent. And not only is Obama a tyrant according to the letter writer, but is he is a socialist who isn't half as smart as Sarah Palin even with his Ivy League degree.

Yet another conservative oppression fantasy. Do conservatives not realize that when they use ridiculous hyperbole to express their disagreement with someone, their words become shopworn and increasingly easy to dismiss as disingenuous?

Imagine this letter writer arriving in heaven, sitting down with Holocaust victims, people who died at the hands of the Khmer Rouge, etc., and saying "Hey, is this where the OPPRESSED people hang out? Make room! What's that? Hitler? No. Pol Pot? No. OBAMA! Omigosh, let me tell you JUST HOW BAD I had it..."

What an insult letters like these are to people who actually suffered under actual tyrants.

Just how is Obama destroying constitutional principles? Have you ever even read the Constitution?

Say what you want about liberals criticizing Bush, but at least most of them could point to specific things that his administration did. The Obama-bashers on these boards just sound like spoiled children who are finally being told, "No."

Mr. Bender, you say "As soon as he turns his agenda around and decides to uphold constitutional principles rather than obviously trying to destroy them, I will stop criticizing him and support his attempts."

The only thing you forget to do is to say WHAT CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLES Obama is trying to destroy.

Any high school english teacher would fail you for failing to provide support for your assertion.

Perhaps you are one of those people like Glenn Beck the other night on his show who now openly talk about the need for another Osama bin Laden attack to "save this country" from Obama.

So, do you (like Glenn Beck and his guest) want another al Qaeda attack to happen so that we can get rid of Obama?

"The Obama-bashers on these boards just sound like spoiled children who are finally being told, "No."

Are you now suggesting that the Bush-bashers had no "spoiled children"???? Or is it the weak and feeble mind of a left wing nut job spewing his/her ignorance and hatred towards the the conservatives???

Ahhhhh another hypocrite at hand, you guys are too predictable!!!!

This guy has been listening to Rush O'Hannity a bit too much.

Mr. Bender,
Where was your complaints when the last administration was taking away rights?
We had wire tapping, people who said that if we did not agree with their politcal stands we are unAmerican,we had intelligence doctored for personal goals,we had friends put into positions that they were not qualified for,and the list goes on and on.
During the Nixon Administration the president took quite a few step concerning regulation.
Is it okay to you only when one party doesit that you support or are you being hypocritical when the other party does it?
The current President has to fix quite a few things that do to our choices and that of previous Presidents/Legislative branches have caused one great big mess. Sometimes as citizens we lose things in order to benefit the Nation. We as citizens have the right to vote out someone who does not follow our beliefs. We have laws which limit powers and if the majority of the people want change it will happen (electoral college/supreme court decisions exceptions).

My heavens are you people even watching what is going on? He rams through bills in the middle of the night when NO ONE has had a chance to read them (yes - NO ONE)and you think that is the way it should be? He has town hall meetings with staged questions, can't deliver a talk without a totus to assist, has been funded by acorn, comes from the chicago way of politics, fires people (which legally he can't do) and gives damning excuses to destroy a person's life, has friends like wright and ayers, lies about how many jobs he will create, says he will not increase taxes for the middle class, (you just wait), prices of gasoline will skyrocket as well as your electricity bill. Do you think by then you might read something besides the daily kos?
He is spending more than all the other presidents put together.
QUIT BLAMING BUSH

And because President Obama implemented his fervent Marxist belief that the workers should own the means of production, not the people who have every legal and legitimate right under the Constitution of the United States to those shares. Obama is simply waving away the statutory and lawful rights to the property of individuals and entities. Why? Because he is putting into force to the letter the philosophy of Karl Marx. Forget about the Constitution, Obama wants Communism!

To "Just the Facts ...Continued | 7:42 a.m." if you want to get a look into the Obama's playbook, read "The Truth about Socialism" available on Google books. It was written in 1913, but you can see the liberal adgenda clearly. The book explains why socialism is so great. The one thing that socialists forget is that they are working with people. Unless a person has a reward for being better than somebody else, there is no incentive to create or be better.

"The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degrees, all capital from the bourgeoisie; to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the state."
- Karl Marx, Communist Manifesto, 1848.

Although it seems completely impossible and incredible, President Obama's recent policy decisions are 100% in line with Marxist thought. Karl Marx believed that the workers should own the means of production, not the capitalists who provided the funding to build those means. That is basic Communism 101.

Without getting into arcane financial and legal minutae, let's (overly simply) discuss the basic essence of what President Obama has done in the case of Chrysler and soon to also do to General Motors: He told the legitimate creditors who have lent the automotive manufacturer billions of dollars secured on the real property and assets of the company to take a hike. They were "greedy" thus they got cut out. Not only were they prohibited to enforce their legitimate and legal rights to the tangible assets that their money purchased, but they were instructed that they would receive a mere fraction of their rights, and then only if they made it through bankruptcy court.

Goldi,

It takes more than the President to slam down legislation. It is the Congress.
You are probably listening to rich people who are getting paid alot of money to misquote,libel,name call,tell half truths or use any means to keep their agenda going so thus they keep their status quo.
The last president had staged questions. His own administration used doctored intelligence and outed an CIA agent because her husband had told them the Nigerian link for uranium was phony. Are these and the other unethical things that the administration did okay with you. Is it okay that the first time he was put into office it took a Conservative Court to do so?
Both parties have their evils. Americans need/deserve representatives that are in it for what is best for this nation and citizens.

The vast majority ownership of Chrysler would not go to the people who paid for it fair and square... no... it would now go to... the workers!

The auto union is now the owner of the majority of Chrysler shares. Why? Because Obama said so. Did they have a financial stake in the company? No, not to any great degree. They got majority ownership simply because they worked there

Mr. Obama ignored Amendment XIV when he transferred ownership of the auto industry to his friends in the Union.

Mr. Obama fired GM CEO Wagner and most of the GM board - people in the private sector.

Mr. Obama fired Gerald Walpin, an inspector general, who was investigating "AmeriCorps and other government-funded national service programs." Under the law, that firing was illegal.

Mr. Obama demanded and got a $1 TRILLION emergency stimulus package to keep unemployment at 8% or less. Today unemployment is 9.5%, only 6% of that stimulus money has been spent and yet Mr. Obama refused to allow Congress time to even read the bill, much less debate the contents of that bill.

What else?

- Carbon credits based on government sponsored "scientific studies".

- Government control of health care.

What's next? At what point is Mr. Obama going to throw his hands up and declare that things are so messed up that we need to start over and that he has just the thing that we need - a new Constitution - but it has to be approved fast, no time for discussion, no time to read it?

Forget about the facts, conservatives want fascism.

comparing the pres to a tyrant only destroys our democracy by equating true evil with a temporary inconvenience of conflicting political viewpoints. This is the president of our country, and he deserves better than many here are willing to give him.

Yo, all you Obama apologists, please stop defending every single stupid action Obama does and stick to the issues.

Which includes leaving Bush out of the discussion, or simply ascribing everyone's opinions to AM radio. Those have nothing to do with most points made on these boards, it's just evading the issue at hand.

Please try to stop defending Obama without thinking. Please try to defend his actions instead.

Goldi, clearly you forgot the CAFTA vote, where the Repblican controlled house opened the normal 15 minute voting period at 11:02 p.m.

When the vote was supposed to end at 11:17, it was going to be defeated 180 to 175 so Republican Denis Hastert held the vote open while President Bush made phone calls and twisted Republican arms until it finally passed by 2 votes after midnight.

Oh, and then there was the Patriot Act, that gave the Government vast new powers of search and seizure. The bill was rushed to the floor with no committe votes and only two copies of the final text were made available (of over a thousand pages) for the Democrats in Congress to read. But they could not take the copies to their office prior to the vote that evening.

So when you say "He rams through bills in the middle of the night when NO ONE has had a chance to read them (yes - NO ONE) and you think that is the way it should be?" I assume you are talking about Bush and the way Republicans operated from 2001-2007.

Please look up the term psychological projection, it fits.

Grimble and Gus et. al. have been listening to James Carville too much

It is only a matter of time until Obamas personal popularity matches the lack of popularity of his policies.

Can you imagine the outrage that would take place if Bush had done the things Obama has pushed? Conservatives gave up defending the Bush administration when spending went through the roof. I thought Liberals were outraged as well, but I guess it was all an act, because now that it is their guy, it is all good!