So the writer of the pro-Obama letter appearing Aug. 12 thinks we need a dictionary. Balderdash! He hides behind his Funk and Wagnall so he can ignore the basic intent of socialism. Government control of national production and distribution is for the purpose of having all national wealth directed to the government so the government can ration it back to the public as it sees fit.
He asked, "what part of our national production and distribution system does the government own and control today that it didn't ... " decades ago. Obama's intrusion into the car industry, banking, health care and energy sectors is historically unprecedented. Revisit the word "control" in the above definition. These institutions are central drivers of growth and capital within the economy. It undermines his statement that this administration has not overtaken anything of "substance." Obama's declaration that he wants to do the same for other industries also fells his argument that socialism is not close to imminent in America under him.
Let me help the writer out with the other issues he has regarding communism, dictators, and a secret police. Obama's class warfare rhetoric, his "you didn't build that" speech, and his championing self-identified Marxists, such as Occupy Wall Streeters, is most likely why his detractors call him a communist. If we define "dictator" as someone who rules by decree in defiance of written law, then observe how he has issued executive orders that amend and even overturn the rule of law in matters of welfare, marriage, immigration, and energy production. Under our system, these responsibilities belong to the duly elected Congress, not him. Lastly, his political cronies have been able to unseal sealed court records, have smeared and harassed political opponents, have tried to end secret ballots in union elections, have attacked donors to alternative groups, and have used litigation to bludgeon small businesses. With these unchecked and overtly thuggish tactics, who needs a secret police? Obama is not the victim. He has earned the criticism he has gotten.
Lastly, in response to the writer's assertion that we lack the ability to reference a dictionary or the ability to process big words and therefore we should refrain from writing letters to the editor - please look up contentious ignoramus.
Helen Hofawger
Washington, W.Va.
