Kimball: humor or contempt?

The One seems peculiarly disengaged from the electorate. The louder the tea partiers get, the more The One eggs them on and ridicules them, sitting back on his haunches with a condescending smirk on his face. Kimball breaks down the difference between humor and contempt...this is a really juicy article. Be sure to read the last couple paragraphs about where we're headed.

But it’s one thing to have a sense of humor. It’s quite another to regard one’s opponents with amused disdain. One key difference is the presence of contempt. Obama’s modus operandi excels in the deployment of contempt. Is it part of his instinctive embrace of Saul Alinsky’s “rules for radicals“? I do not know. But in some ways Obama’s habitual expression of contempt is the most alarming component of his style of governing. Together with his evident self-infatuation and notorious sensitivity to criticism, it bespeaks a character that is volatile, heedless, and disengaged from the palpable realities faced by the people he represents. Hence his suggestion — meant, I feel sure, in all earnestness — that the people who rallied against bigger government and higher taxes should thank him for . . . for what? For not taxing them into penury?