I refer to the Malaysiakin i article The problems with Obama.

Thank you for an insightful essay on Barack Obama, I found it thought-provoking and the writer did indeed raise a few points with regards to the credibility of Obama. However, I thought I'd just like to point out a few things.

I think it is rather simplistic to blame the financial crisis on any singular factor. Certainly, blaming it on the rise of Obama is a little far fetched. I think most agree that while markets work on their own, governments can make it work even better.

In fact, it is absurd to think that markets would be very good if left to their own devices: for eg, without an efficient legal system to enforce contracts, our markets wouldn't be nearly as functional.

Yes, free markets are good, but governments have a duty to make them better. There is a strong tendency towards destructive interference during these hard times, and I share the writer’s apprehension that a protectionist president might do more harm than good.

I also think that he gives give too much credit to George Bush. I think it is important to realise that while Bush flies the free markets with a minimal government-control banner, government spending actually ballooned during this tenure.

The budget surplus from Bill Clinton was replaced by a gaping hole and from my understanding, each American citizen owes about US$30,000 worth in government debt.

I guess my point is that the government’s deficit certainly did not become smaller under the previous republican administration despite their rhetoric. Also, in my opinion, while Bush has copped a lot of flak for his Iraq war, he has not been criticised enough for his fiscal mismanagement.

Cutting taxes for the rich while pursuing a large government and waging wars at the same time is nothing short of fiscal incompetence. While I agree that Obama is more interested in distributing wealth than generating wealth, Bush is far more interested in blowing up wealth in Iraq.

In the writer’s defence of the invasion of Iraq, he mentioned the numerous crimes against humanity by Saddam Hussien. However, it is important to note that Bush did not invade Iraq because of those crimes.

He officially invaded Iraq because he had solid proof that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction and was somehow linked to the Sept 11 attacks. I am yet to be convinced that he did not knowingly mislead the world and I am sure we'll never know his real reasons behind the invasion.

Overall, while I agree Obama is not as perfect as the global press makes him out to be, nor do I think he has met expectations in his first month as president, at least he is true, genuine and always means the best.

And being a Harvard law graduate, he has to be smart. I think these qualities ultimately won over critics of the Bush government.