According to Frank Rich, of the New York Times, the "Obama-Haters" are getting mighty uppity and their call to resistance is appearing to become "pseudo-Scriptural".
Give me a break.
You can't have it both ways: the left is putting Obama on such a pedestal that they are comparing him to God (see here): you can't expect the loyal opposition to pretend that the rhetoric of the left is simply rhetoric. As always, the left plays with the language so that words mean what they intend them to (like Humpty-Dumpty in Alice in Wonderland); that others understand their words in ways that the language means them to is, for the them, incomprehensible.
You can't have it both ways: you can't effectively claim that your boy is God (and those are the words involved) and then berate conservatives for reacting negatively to that over-the-top rhetoric with their own.
Unless of course, you're Frank Rich. You see, it's okay for the left to call President Bush a fascist and compare him to Hitler, but the other way around?
He didn't seem to grasp that "fascism" is nonsensical as a description of the Obama administration or that there might be a risk in slurring a president with a word that most find "bad" because it evokes a mass-murderer like Hitler.
Just replace Obama with Bush and you'd think that Mr. Rich was deploring the over-the-top rhetoric of the left during the Bush years.
You can't have it both ways: you can't, Mr. Rich, savor the ravings of the Bush Derangement Symptom crowd over the last 8 years and then express dismay and fear that conservatives might use the the same rhetoric and express the same feelings of outrage.
You can't claim the title of godhood for President Obama and then expect someone like Jon Voight not to say that Obama is a false prophet.
You can't have it both ways. The time to have reigned this in was 2001. Not 2009.
You can't have it both ways.