Agreeing with a progressive; scary

Mitt Romney, The Plutocrat - Ed Kilgore, Washington Monthly

The scary part is I agree with the analysis, just not the conclusions. Well said.

 

"there is one hard fact that American journalism has established since 2009, it is that many of America's rich have gone flat-out bonkers under President Obama. Gabriel Sherman first documented this phenomenon in his fantastic 2009 profile in this magazine, "The Wail of the 1%," which described how the financial elite had come to see themselves as persecuted, largely faultless targets of Obama and their greedy countrymen. Alec MacGillis and Chrystia Freeland have painted a similar picture."

The issue is "is this feeling justified and it is.  The "takers" are too greedy.

 

"Seen in this light, Romney's belief in himself as a just and deserving leader is not merely a form of personal ambition free of ideological content. His faith in himself blends seamlessly into a faith in his fellow Ãœbermenschen — the Job Creators who make our country go, who surround him and whose views shaped his program. To think of Romney as torn between two poles, then, is a mistake. Both his fealty to his party and his belief in his own abilities point in the same direction: the entitlement of the superrich to govern the country."

 

These words I don't agree with:" the entitlement of the superrich to govern the country" and the previous argument does not support it.

 

Republicans and Democrats agree that the proficient should govern.  As long as they are fair to all parties.  As long as he is fighting for the American goals.  A proficient looter of the treasury is in the Whitehouse, he needs to go.