The Imperial Presidency

Arthur Schlessinger coined the term in his 1973 book (in which he largely slams Nixon), but our current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania takes it to new levels.  The great Mark Levin has this to say:

Obama, it would seem, wants to deny to others what he will not deny to himself. He wants to deny to the children of others what he will not deny to his own children. He wants to amass riches, but he doesn't want you to amass wealth. He doesn't mind private school for his own children, but he minds it for your children. He doesn't mind eating whatever he wants to eat, but he minds what you eat. He doesn't mind taking that 747 one frivolous trip after another, one self-serving fundraising after another, but he minds what you drive and how much fuel you use. And we can go on and on.

That's the nature of an imperial president. That's the nature of a society in which the president views himself as the sovereign and his wife views him as taking us out of the dark and bringing us into the light, like Jesus if you will. While the rest of us are here to serve. Second-class citizens, got to get skin in the game.

These attacks on Romney and his wealth are attacks on you. I know that you're not worth $200 million. That's not my point. There are attacks on your ability to succeed, to prosper and more importantly, the same for your children.

Is Obama jealous of Romney? Is that what it is? Is Obama jealous that he was incapable of earning the kind of money, of creating the kind of wealth, of creating that kind of prosperity in jobs and businesses that Romney did? Is that the problem?

From Real Clear Politics (video at link), via a pointer from I Own the World.