I can see, though, why some people would believe that. After all, if I were President, and if I was determined to destroy this Nation, I would do everything that Barack Obama and his political party have done and are doing.
1. I would first set out to destroy the American economy and wage relentless war on American jobs. I would accomplish this in a few easy steps: (i) I would pass laws (with respect to healthcare, for example, but any other major sector of the economy would do) that made it so onerous for employers to hire new employees, that everyone in America became a part time employee because no employer wanted to hire anyone on a full time basis anymore. Soon, everyone would be working three part time jobs, one job to pay part of the bills, a second job to make up for the fact that your first job isn't full time, and, finally, a third job to pay for things like health insurance that would have been provided by your first job if it were a full time job, which it isn't, because those don't exist any more. (ii) I would then import millions of unskilled workers from third-world countries who would, by virtue of the simplest and most inelectuble law of economics, supply and demand, drive entry level wages down so far that young Americans would be unable to find work and begin building work experience. This would be especially harmful to minorities who have already lived in America for generations and who are most in need of entry level work in their youth. Nevertheless, I would decry as racist anyone who disagreed with my policies, ignoring those who put me into office and are being most severely harmed by my policies. (iii) Finally, if new technologies emerged which threatened to strengthen the economy, I would choke them off. Fracking threatening to turn us into an exporter of oil and reduce our dependence on oil from parts of the world that hate our guts? Block it, sue it, regulate it, kill it. And if that doesn't work, prevent the construction of any new refineries which can turn the oil into its usable form. Force people to use organic, grown fuels instead, from land that used to grow food to eat, so our society can choose between starving and driving. Enormous oil discoveries in Canada can bring us cheap oil from a friendly nation instead of expensive oil from the other side of the world, controlled by people who want to wage Jihad against us? No way! That's not going to help me destroy America. No XL Pipleline for you, Mr. American hoping for a job or a cheap gallon of gas. Kill it, regulate it, sue it, block it.
2. I would also do all I could to destroy the American family. If I were the President of a nation which I so despised that I felt it was in need of fundamental transformation, and therefore wanted to destroy that country as it had heretofore existed in its untransformed state, I would ignore what numerous studies have shown about the importance of fathers in the home, and the statistical and scientific evidence of how much better both girls and boys do in adolescence and throughout their adult life if they are raised by their own married mother and father, who were married before the child was born and remain married until the child reaches adulthood. Despite those scientific truths, I would promote a new definition of family which had the effect of proclaiming that children do not need both a mother and a father, and, would, indeed, make it socially unacceptable, bigoted and reprehensible, to advocate for the importance of fathers in the lives of children, so that young men can be taught there is no need to curb their sexual appetites within the confines of a committed marital relationship, or be responsible for their sperm donor babies, whether the sperm was donated at the clinic or in person. This will have the inevitable effect of strengthening the hand of government, as the proliferation of single parent homes inexorably leads the government to play a greater role in the lives of the citizens formed in broken families, with government stepping in to act as disciplinarian (through the police and the courts) of sons not raised with a father (many times more likely to end up in juvenile court than sons with fathers), and as bread provider (through welfare services) to teenaged mothers (many times more likely to become teenaged mothers than are young women raised in a home with a father) who find they are unable to both raise their newborns and provide for them in the marketplace. This strengthening of State power will inevitably lead to a destruction of the small government foundational doctrines upon which the Country was built.
3. Another important prong in any plan to destroy America, would be to assault the foundational rights, liberties, and doctrines upon which our nation was founded, and directly subvert and destroy the U.S. Constitution. Then I could strengthen the power of the State, and weaken the power of the citizen, in more direct ways, and at the same time remove the biggest hindrances (the Constitution, liberty) to my nation-destroying objectives. I would for example install on the Supreme Court a Justice (Sotomayor) so radical that she believes the United States Constitution says exactly the opposite of what it says. As demonstrated by her dissent in Schuette, Sotomayor not only believes it is perfectly appropriate for States to ignore the 14th Amendment's requirement of equal protection, such that they are allowed to ignore that Constitution's equal protection provisions and provide preferences which discriminate against certain racial and ethnic groups and prefer others in public university admissions and public contract bidding, but she also believes that States are REQUIRED to violate the 14th Amendment, even when they decide they don't want to do so, and are REQUIRED to discriminate against some of their citizens and prefer others and may not democratically decide to stop doing so by a voter-enacted amendment! Thus, in one fell swoop, Justice Sotomayor would (a) abolish democracy, (b) rewrite the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause to say exactly the opposite of what it says, and (c) create an America in which individuals are not treated as individuals, equal before the law and judged on their own merits, but as members of racial composite groups who are encouraged by law to compete with one another for racial spoils (a truly wonderful recipe for ethnic harmony and cohesion). If I wanted to destroy this Country, Justice Sotomayor is exactly the type of person I would want to intall on the high court.
I would then encourage my party's senate and judicial committee members to wage an assault, unprecedented in all of U.S. history, on the First Amendment and the Bill of Rights, such as the assault currently being levied by the Democrats against the First Amendment in the form of S.J. Res 19, also known as the Udall Amendment. This proposed constitutional amendment, to which all of the democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee, to their everlasting shame, gave their assent, would give to congress the power to restrict any speech engaged in by any corporation or any individual which is politically motivated. It would in other words repeal the First Amendment. And no, that's not overheated rhetoric, that's my reading, as a lawyer, of the text of what this proposed Constitutional law expressly indicates it would do. S.J. Res 19 explicitly and expressly indicates, in section 3 thereof, that there is only one of the five rights guaranteed by the First Amendment which is not to be repealed thereby, in that the Amendment is not to be construed "to grant Congress or the States the power to abridge the freedom of the press." So the other four rights enjoyed by Americans for the past 200 plus years are all fair game: Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly, freedom to petition the government for redress? Bye bye. This is such a blatantly bad idea that even the ACLU has argued against it. But don't worry, Ted Cruz is against it too, so all the cool kids on Kos and the Huffington Post are ignoring the ACLU and making fun of him and fully supporting this monstrosity, because that's how sheep decide their politics, not on the basis of independent critical thought, but on the basis of lining up with their teammates to be "for" whatever the other side is "against." Barack Obama said he wanted to transform America. Well, destroying the First Amendment would certainly be the best place to start. It's a lot easier to transform a nation when you make it impossible to criticize the leaders. Just ask the Russians, that's how they did it in Eastern Europe.
4. The next step in any plan to destroy America would involve weakening the military and the standing of this nation in the world. If I were a President who wanted to destroy this country, I would, against the advice of all of my military and intelligence advisors, remove troops from areas of the world where they had just won a war, so as to allow those areas of the world to fall prey to new aggressions at the hands of terrorist militias. If even members of my own party, such as the highly reputable Leon Panetta, told me this was asinine and insane, I would kick them to the curb, pull out the troops, and go golfing. And then I would ignore briefings on the rise of insurgents who were undermining what American money and blood had accomplished, until the rise of ISIS like fanaticals forced me to engage in a military response which could have been avoided had I just maintained the course to begin with. (Look, I get that alot of Americans on both sides of the aisle were skeptical of the war in Iraq. But just because of the many people who were disappointed that the surge worked, did that really mean we had to deliberately unwind a victory once obtained? Have we stayed too long in Germany and Japan and could they start building their own military now and let us save our money and go home and stop subsidizing their protection? Yes. But that doesn't mean it would have been a good idea to leave two weeks after WWII was over and hand those countries back over to Nazis and Military Imperialist groups who were still eager for victory. That would have been insane, or the work of someone who actually hated America and wanted to see her disgraced.)
It would be almost comforting to believe that Barack Obama was some sort of evil aberration forced upon America by conspiring outsiders, like in the Manchurian Candidate. But the truth, I am afraid, is much more frightening. Barack Obama actually believes his course would be better for America than the pro-American course engaged in by almost every single one of his predecessors (excluding Jimmy Carter). And enough voters agreed, or were simply too simple-minded to know better, that they voted him into office. How did we reach such a point in our nation's history? Part of it is our education system, hijacked by left wing ideologues who have no desire to teach patriotic or uplifting history to our children, or help them understand the U.S. Constitution or the free market system. Part of it is an ahistorical influx of more immigrants, over a shorter period of time, than have ever arrived here before, many of whom came to America because of its prosperity, but came from cultures which made it all but impossible for them to understand the principles and systems which account for that prosperity, such that they end up voting for the same kind of politicians whose policies led their home countries to be such miserable places (which immigrants are certainly not going to be taught more accurate principles by any of the dominant thinking in our current education systems or news or entertainment media). And part of the problem is prosperity itself. Who has time to read history, think critically, understand what has historically distinguished this country and allowed us to buck the tide of international opinion, avoiding monarchy in the 19th century and totalitarianism in the 20th, when there's so many fun things to watch on Netflix and so many fun vacations to go on, and good music to listen to on our iPods? Whatever the sources of our national stupidity, the road it has put us on is not leading us to a happy end.