Letters to the Editor

+ They hear what they want
Dear Editor:
Thank you for the editorial. 

Every thinking person who understands a little economics, history and government cannot vote Obama another term. He opposes Democrats and Republicans alike. 

Those who found the need to object to you read and hear daily the side they want to hear but have the audacity to reject your opinion.
Jules Rauch
Longboat Key

+ That settles it
Dear Editor:
I have read the Observer editorial criticizing Barack Obama, and I found it to be rather lenient. This man and his supporters are driving nails into the coffin of the United States of America, a once great country that, among other things, saved the world from the domination of insane dictators 67 years ago.

I am 83 and a Korean War veteran. I never thought I would experience what I have seen in the past few years.

How can any patriotic American support a man whose entry into politics was sponsored by a domestic terrorist named Bill Ayers, who hated everything this country stands for and who participated in bombings and other violent acts against government structures? And the personal spiritual adviser of Obama for many years was the Rev. Jeremiah Wright who preached hatred of the U.S. in his sermons — while Obama sat and listened.

The economic success of this country, which is unparalleled in world history, was not achieved by government but by the hard work of citizens in the private sector. The business community is a producer of wealth, while government is a greedy, inefficient consumer.

The pro-union, anti-business attitudes of the Obama administration are as clear as a bell, and they have wasted billions of taxpayer dollars on Solyndra and numerous other boondoggles. And now his target is Mitt Romney, a successful businessman who is being demonized. I do not recall this kind of criticism of the wealth of Jack Kennedy. I am not certain that Romney can do it, but Obama has proven that he cannot.
William B Allen
Harbor Hills

+ I’ll vote for Obama
Dear Editor:
I am adding my voice to all the other concerned readers who found your editorial about President Obama unsettling. They have covered all of the salient points concerning the unfair judgments made about a leader who has been working hard and intelligently to solve some of the problems he inherited the day of his inauguration.

Trying to help the middle class succeed amidst a Congress stacked with naysayers has been a daunting job but one that Obama continues to believe in. I will vote for him as he fights for my right to have a job; save for my old age; make decisions about my physical person; and have the time and freedom to pursue happiness.
There is no room in this democracy of wonderful Americans who all strive for good health, a satisfying job, a good education and a peaceful life to call them to arms when they should instead be encouraged to go to the ballot box. That's what the early settlers and the signers of the Constitution called for.
I also will no longer support the businesses that give you advertising money.
Lucinda Barrett
Sarasota

+ Don’t know Marxism
Dear Editor:
The issue about your “anti-American” editorial is not about the right of free speech but about the right of stupid speech.

To call our president anti-American and Marxist is not only debasing the presidency, but also reveals an utter ignorance of what Marxist communism really is in theory or practice.

You may dislike or hate President Obama all you want, but I guarantee that in a communist country under a Marxist president your paper would not operate long. 

My family lived under Marxist communist rule for years, and if you believe that our president is a Marxist, you simply don’t know what you are talking about.
Thomas Thiringer
Sarasota

+ Treasonous remarks
Dear Editor:
After much encouragement from an outraged friend, I read your opinion piece about what you call “The anti-American president.”

I have since read the firestorm of responses taking issue with you about your incendiary and treasonous remarks.

While I support the First Amendment, it occurs to me that you probably would make such remarks in hopes of creating uproar to get people like myself who don’t normally read your paper. It worked.

This seems to be a popular sentiment “anything for business,” even if it hurts our country by creating more divisiveness.

You should be ashamed of the part you play in this, and how you shirk your sacred responsibility of fair journalism. But this is just another example of getting what you pay for. What should be expected of a throw-away?
Chris Raetz
Sarasota