Criticism of Obama? Or Hate?

To the Editor:
There’s a difference between hate and criticism. Someone wrote a letter to the editor that appeared in the Herald Feb. 25, not for the first time, that the right “hates” Obama. I wish no harm on Obama and pray for his well being. But I’m critical of the destruction he’s wrought on our economy, health system, and personal freedom, most recently with his giant step towards squelching Internet freedom through an opaque FCC power grab.
To the contrary, the letter writer has recurrently expressed distaste towards past presidents at a personal level. His perceived unfairness against Obama, relative to other presidents, is based on discredited arguments he clings to although they were previously refuted. I’ll cite some examples:
1) “No one said ‘You lie’ when George W. Bush said Saddam has WMDs.” That’s because it wasn’t. Even the leftist New York Times reported in 2014 this was true all along.
2) “The only time the President [Bush] was scrutinized … the right forced CBS to fire the man who broke the story, Dan Rather.” The story was concocted, not “broken.” The phony memos were printed at a Kinkos copy center. Dan Rather, disgraced, wasn’t fired. CBS just moved to another program. Moreover, how is that the only time Bush was scrutinized? How many years were spent on the WMDs alone? See No. 1.
3) “Bush was never called the food stamp president.” This is grasping at straws. He would have been if the number of people on food stamps skyrocketed under his term. Obama wasn’t hung in effigy by Americans in protests, or depicted being murdered in several movies. Obama’s eternal free pass from the mainstream media means he never experienced the level of real hate, let alone mere criticism, that Bush experienced.
4) Ronald Reagan’s amnesty was approved by Congress. Obama’s wasn’t.
5) Criticism of Obama’s executive orders aren’t about quantity, only constitutionality. Even the Supreme Court, including Obama’s own leftists, ruled unanimously the illegality of 13 executive actions.
6) Unless Gruber was on their editorial staff in the 1990s, National Review (NR) had nothing to do with the so-called “Affordable Care Act!” It’s a strange claim. NR wholeheartedly joined America’s vehement opposition when the Clintons tried to ram it through.
7) The GOP set filibustering records? No, they were the only ones passing laws to save the economy, all killed in Harry Reid’s senate.
A president isn’t a god who’s above criticism. I fault Bush when he was wrong: no child left behind and the bailout, for instance. Obama’s criticism is well-deserved. It’s not based on hate, but on his actions and lack of character.