The Low Down On Obama

Roger Kimball brings President Obama down to size. But substitute Obama with harry Reid's name and you get the same result.
Excerpts from the article: Thanks a lot, Mr. President. And thanks to you, too, Secretary Geithner. You inherited the richest, most productive country in history. And you have set it firmly on course for economic stagnation.
It’s all part of your effort to “fundamentally transform the Untied States of America,” isn’t it, Mr. President? That’s what you promised in October 2008: to change America fundamentally. Who would have predicted you were really serious? (Well, some of us did, but you know what I mean.)
You’ve made it clear that, deep down, you really don’t like the United States. In that, you are like many of your Ivy confrères, all those Harvard-Yale-Princeton types who find the spectacle of individual freedom playing itself out irredeemably vulgar. You all are beyond allegiance to anything so parochial as an individual nation. And when it comes to what (even now) is the world’s nation of nations, the United States, you are more than embarrassed: you are downright impatient....
Of course, you are a special case, Mr. President. Your dislike of America has the added ingredient of what, for lack of a better term, I’ll call metaphysical ambivalence. At its core, as Samuel Huntington pointed out in Who We Are, the United States is based upon certain “Anglo-Protestant values” that generations of immigrants had absorbed and made their own in the process of becoming American citizens. (Oh, how the left hated to have that pointed out!) Your filiations lie elsewhere, which perhaps explains why you bow to Saudi princes, why you forbid the conjunction of the adjective “Islamic” with the noun “terrorist,” why, to take an example from the day before yesterday, you pretended to criticize the release of Lockerbie bomber Abdel Baset al-Megrahi — all Americans, you said, were “surprised, disappointed and angry” that the Scots released him. But then it turns out that your State Department explictly, if secretly, told British authorities that you preferred his release for “compassionate” reasons. “All Americans” — did that include you Mr. President? I’m not asking about where you were born: I am asking about where your fundamental allegiance lies....
It’s quite clear — you’ve already announced — that you are going to use this mind-numbing deficit as an excuse to raise taxes—another abstract phrase worn smooth by repetition. The power to tax, Chief Justice Marshall observed long ago, is the power to destroy. How much of the American dream are you preparing to dismantle by depriving people of the means to fulfill it? Do you want to rein in the deficit? Stop spending. But you won’t do that while you can continue depleting the substance of the country by draining away the economic life blood of its citizens. Ultimately, the issue is not the deficit but the spending. That is, the horrendous deficit is a product of incontinent spending. You won’t admit that because both spending and taxing are instruments for the consolidation of your power — no matter that the potency of the country as a whole is diminished in the process. Raising taxes diminishes revenue: that has been shown again and again....
The punitive side of your regime of “hope and change” will soon become starkly obvious to all — all, I mean, except the nomenklatura that inhabit the corridors of power. You and your fellow politicians will not be subject to the new health laws you have imposed upon the country. You’ve made medicine a less attractive career, so there will be fewer good doctors, but still, there will be enough to serve Congress and the executive branch. And of course, you won’t be subject to the delays the rest of us face. You won’t be told, “I’m sorry, Mr. Obama, you are too old for that kidney transplant/innovative cancer treatment/cardiac procedure” as the rest of us will be. Even as Britain is dismantling a large part of the disaster that was its national health service, you are saddling Americans with health care that will be 1) more expensive 2) more cumbersome, and 3) worse....
For the “who,” however, the fundamental effect of democratic despotism is a net increase in arrogance and unaccountability. Remember the way soon-to-be-retired Congressman Bob Etheridge treated that student who asked him whether he supported Obama’s programs? “Who are you,” he demanded as he manhandled the young man. Meaning “Who do you think you are to ask me a leading question?” Joe Biden would doubtless have called him a “smart-ass”: we little people are not meant to ask provocative questions.
http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerkimball/2010/07/26/how-to-bankrupt-a-country/
This is a great article and like I said before, if you substitute Obama's name and put in Harry Reid, you still have the same results of the story. You have two people who do not like the United States and they are out to bankrupt the U.S. and do harm to it. It already has started.