From the same column, on the adoption of the victim stance

Billionaire self-pity and the Koch brothers - Glenn Greenwald - Salon.com
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/03/27/koch/index.html

As anyone who writes about politics can tell you, having vitriol and slander regularly heaped on you is part of the price one pays for the benefit of having a platform; only the most self-absorbed complain and see it as some sort of unique cross to bear.  But the Koch brothers go far beyond mere writing about political issues.  They single-handedly fund advocacy groups and covert campaigns on a wide variety of highly controversial issues that adversely impact huge numbers of people.  That they expect to be able to do that without any vigorous response or opposition or anger is just reflective of their oozing sense of entitlement:  the same syndrome that leads them to perversely believe that the True Victims in America’s political culture are its wealthiest and most powerful.

This strain of delusional self-victimization is not uncommon.  One commonly finds those who are the strongest and most powerful convincing themselves that they are the oppressed and the marginalized.  Many Americans believe that — as they invade, bomb and occupy countless Muslim countries — that they are the ones being victimized by the Muslim world, while many Israelis and their loyalists believe that the nuclear-armed, constantly invading, occupying and bombing nation is the real victim of aggression and militarism in the Middle East.  In Imperial Ambitions, Noam Chomsky described this inverted sense of victimhood in the foreign policy context this way:

In one of his many speeches, to U.S. troops in Vietnam, [Lyndon] Johnson said plaintively, “There are three billion people in the world and we have only two hundred million of them. We are outnumbered fifteen to one. If might did make right they would sweep over the United States and take what we have. We have what they want.” That is a constant refrain of imperialism. You have your jackboot on someone’s neck and they’re about to destroy you.

The same is true with any form of oppression. And it’s psychologically understandable. If you’re crushing and destroying someone, you have to have a reason for it, and it can’t be, “I’m a murderous monster.” It has to be self-defense. “I’m protecting myself against them. Look what they’re doing to me.” Oppression gets psychologically inverted; the oppressor is the victim who is defending himself.

(Nir Rosen speaks about this some.. I once heard him say something along the lines of "Americans don't want to have to face the fact that they're the British in 'Braveheart'.")

▓▒░