Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
David Harsanyi :: Townhall.com Columnist
Nothing Personal, but I Hope You All Fail
by David Harsanyi
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


Is it inherently unpatriotic or immoral to want to see a president fail? After chewing over the larger implications of that vital question, I've come to a conclusion: I am a twisted human being. Thankfully, I'm not alone.

You see, when I'm not wasting time greedily praying to be rich, I plead with some higher power to sentence my middling local representatives to painful obscurity and professional failure. My congresswoman, for instance, carries an intellectual confidence so severely out of step with her skill set that the promise of disappointment, I trust, one day will bring me great joy.

If we can't look to our politicians to fulfill our yearly schadenfreude quota, whom can we trust?

Which brings me to radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh, who recently, at a conservative conference, had the temerity to reiterate his desire that President Barack Obama "fail" -- not the economy or nation, mind you, but the politician. Pundits across the nation went into apoplectic tizzy fits over such blasphemous and ugly thoughts.

Since when is rooting for the success of an ideologically driven elected official a civic duty, you may wonder? Wonder no more. It merely depends on the politician.

Limbaugh's comments were, apparently, so abhorrent that the host is accused now of being the de facto voice of conservatism and the Republican Party.

That, as we all know, is technically impossible, considering someone actually is listening to Rush Limbaugh. Obama's chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, went so far as to call the radio host the "voice and the intellectual force and energy behind the Republican Party."

That is a neat trick. If Limbaugh is the voice of conservatism, conservatism must want Obama and, thus, America to fail. After eight years of seething hatred -- plenty of it deserved -- for George W. Bush, this brand of contrived indignation touches a new level of creative dishonesty.

Of course, there is always some gullible and amateurish Republican spokesman -- which is to Washington what a hooker is to Las Vegas (or, uh, so I'm told) -- who picks a needlessly counterproductive fight with Limbaugh. Inevitably, the Republican offers a feeble apology regarding the "inarticulate" or "inartful" initial statement.

The Democrats call this transaction "kissing the ring."

Democrats don't kiss rings. They don't pick fights with allies. Democrats are about peace, after all. Half the Democratic Party's leaders would show up at a Daily Kos convention, and that Web site peddles some of the hardest far-left ideas in this country. I guess you could make the case that progressive bloggers are the intellectual force and energy behind the Democratic Party.

Democrats don't tell union bosses who bankroll their campaigns to buzz off. They rarely question their president. Congress doesn't even bother reading the trillion-dollar bills they send to Obama to sign.

Republicans, conversely, are fighting over their future -- a future that grass-roots figures, such as Limbaugh, certainly will be a part of. In the meantime, Democrats are hoping Republicans fail to come to a consensus and regroup, even though two vibrant parties are always healthier for the nation than one.

And many of us are hoping that all those in power fail, because those in power have a grating habit of being annoyingly self-righteous, hopelessly corrupt, resolutely incompetent and completely apathetic about the freedoms that they have sworn to protect.

Embrace the failure. It's patriotic.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Failure
Whether people like it or not we have a right to hope for whatever we choose.

its a shame the media and the president
have forgotten this important point made by the great president of the 20th century.

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt

Two questions...
1. Why do we allow democrats and the MSM to make Rush into The Issue (the obvious answer is that it detracts attention from the Hugo Chavez wannabe in the White House).

2. Why do we have to put up with incoherent dimwits like Patrick presenting themselves as conservatives?


We should work on this more!
The two corrupt major parties are equally guilty in how they have trashed the Constitution and ignored the rule of law and will of the people. Hopefully, President Obama will do to the Democrats what President Bush did to the Republicans.

The time has come for all of us to change how we think. It is time to let go of loyalty to a party. It is time to elect independents and third party candidates not tied to PACs, unions, corporations, and money grubbing lobbyists. It is time we stood up exercised the authority we have as the rightful owners of this nation.

The DEM/GOP/MSM propaganda machines have duped us all into believing that only the elites have the necessary wisdom, knowledge, and experience to govern. Yeah sure. Look at how well the nation is doing theses days!

They have sold us out to the internationalist agenda that seeks a New World Order/One World Government designed to destroy America and redistribute our resources to the rest of the world.

Are we ever going to show some guts, have some faith in our ability to govern ourselves as a free people? The only way to make it happen is to vote I/TP and forget the elites who care only about power, the next election, and their own personal aggrandizement.

Our inheritance has been stolen from us!! How many more times will we elect the same old people, always hoping for a different result. Ridiculous!!

Nothing Personal
Ha ha ha.....that was a good one, David.

I also have two women Senators and a male Representative who "carry an intellectual confidence so severely out of step with their skill sets that the promise of disappoinment will one day bring me great joy". They are nothing more than talking heads programmed to speak liberal blather and lie to us to get enough votes to stay in office. Every time I write to them and ask for a response I get a form letter that tells me that they support my beliefs and then they vote with the Socialists. Argh!! I going to the next tea party in my area and rooting for their FAILURE!!!!

Rush is an idiot, but....
That being said - he had and has every right to say how he feels. I rarely agree with him, and personally feel that the man is a complete moron, but hey, there are people that do agree with him - more power to him and them. The fact that people are attacking him due to his comment is rather weak. Where was the hate for those that wanted president Bush to fail. I remeber (sorry - dont remember the persons name) who said that success in Iraq would be bad for the democratic party. No hate speeches over that. I just want people to be fair and unbiased with their attacks on people - i know its wishful thinking, but still.


missed opportunity
One increasingly gets the sense that conservatives are not serious people. A thoughtful topic could have been written on this topic. And Harsanyi is certainly not the worst writer at Townhall, but still he is reduced to this. When one wishes that Obama fails, what is it that one is wishing for? From the discussion above one would get the sense that it is similar to rooting that a particular sports team loses. Someone reading the article above who did not know the context might miss that rooting for Obama's failure in this context means rooting for millions of Americans to be out of work in two and four years when elections are held again. It is rooting for an extended recession in the US. Apparently Harsanyi thinks that is a patriotic thing to root for.

During the last 8 years the right often accused the left of wanting Bush to fail in Iraq. Not surprisingly you would be hard pressed to find actual liberals rooting for Bush to fail. Obviously they expected Bush to fail, but that is a rather different thing. And I certainly had the fear that Bush could create the impression of success long enough to do even more damage, say with an invasion of Iran. And he did do that damage by demogoguing throught he 2004 election. But to actual wish failure on Iraq is monstrous. It would have meant wanting Iraq to suffer, as it actually did suffer, to score points on Bush.

Wanting Obama to fail is a rather similar thing, although while in the Bush case one would be wishing suffering on Iraqis, in the Obama case one is wishing suffering on Americans.

That that is the default, rather unreflective, position of so many conservatives shows just how unserious they have become.

democrat talking points
This liberal fallacy is so easy to shoot down.

I dare say if the GOP had actually took their marching orders from Limbaugh they wouldn't be out of power right now.





WRONG!
Isn't it ironic that Obama is going to need another "job stimulus" package so everyone can get a second job since the hyper-inflation his policies are sure to cause is going to far outweigh any of the imaginary gains.

Lon pt1
Normally I find you a decent enough fellow, but now I am wondering how willfully ignorant can any one man be?

How is it possible to get out of debt by spending yourself further into debt? Is that how you manage your finances? So Bush had a deficit. Big deal. ALL presidents inherit their predecessors' deficits. THAT is not the problem. What IS the problem is that instead of tightening GOVERNMENT'S belt and cutting spending, Obama is not only going to keep on spending (via the porkulus bill-what, some 3 TRILLION?), he is going to raise taxes on those businesses that make over $250K/yr. That's nearly ALL small business, genius. Most of those folks report that income on their personal income tax returns. My own employer has stopped calling me in for even the part-time work I was doing-she hasn't the demand for her product she did last year. She may have to close up shop-and her whole savings are invested in her effort. How many more won't rather close up shop than work to have their hard-earned dollars taken from them and given to some mouth-breathing welfare queen instead? Obamoa WILL raise cap gains taxes, eliminate mortgage and charity deductions,and eliminate the SS ceiling. There has been talk-not so secret-of Gov't taking our 401ks over. What will THAT do to our economy? He is going to raise taxes on energy producers by imposing a stupid cap and trade tax-if the 'carbon footprint' is deemed 'too large' the business is penalized.


Lon, you have it backwards
Wanting Barry to fail is wishing that Americans' suffering stop.

Every time that execrable Socialist opens his mouth on any subject even only tangential to the economy, he takes money out of my pocket.

Would you mind, on behalf of all of us with any retirement savings left, asking him to just shut up and run out the clock? He's done enough damage.

Thanks.


+++

Lon pt2
That's MY husband's business you're going to tax, you know. How much will 'cap and trade' cost his business? He is now worried he'll have to close his doors-putting some 15 people out of work, not to mention the effect it will have on the trucking companies that move his product, the dispatchers that send them out, etc. How much will energy costs nationwide go up because of this? How much then will the price of everything else go up; goods must be transpported and the more it costs to move them, the more it will cost to buy them. We ALL pay those taxes, but you don't want to see that. You just want to punish those you see as those eeeevil rich guys.

Since Obamao was elected, our 401k, IRAs and other investments have lost at least 40% of their value. There doesn't seem to be any indication that this will reverse itself anytime soon. How is that working for you, by the way?

Unfortunately The Rats Have Hit A Nerve
We can poo poo Rham's strategy all we want but its working with a lot of people.

Especially since Maha Rushi decides to show up on TV wearing black and weighing an extra hundred pounds over his 'fighting weight'.

All they have to do is show clips of Rush being outrageous and looking like the bloated whale he is at the moment and a large section of the voting public, otherwise politically neutral, and they are deeply psychologically influenced whether they know it or not.

Rush looks like crap and though I believe most everything he says .... the Rats are making hay out of him.

AliveinHim
Do you think that anything you said in your response was actually responsive to what I said? I didn't say anything about the budget balance, that could be an interesting debate to have, but it was not the debate in the column above or in my comment.

Obviously you see yourself in the position that I was in with regard to Iraq. Namely that we were engaging in policies that were clearly bad for the country. My fear proved correct. Obviously I hope your fears are less prescient. But even under those circumstances I could not hope that Iraq turned out to be a disaster, because that meant hoping for the kind of death and dislocation that actually occurred.

So I can understand your fearing that the recession will be extended by Obama's policies (although the idea that most small businesses take home more than 250,000 in profits suggests you see a better economy than actually exists) but do you really hope that the recession is extended? Certainly to hope that Obama fails entails hoping for an extended recession.

You may think that what I actually said was wrong, but what you wrote was a response to a different argument, not necessarily one I wouldn't make, but I would prefer to defend arguments I actually make.

Charles Martel
So you blame Obama for not fixing the ecomony before his first budget gets passed. Are you just trying to illustrate my point that conservatives aren't serious people?

to bad
he has already succeeded.

Marxist Philosophy
That young Barry is a Marxist is a matter of fact, but there are differnt types of Marxists. Thus, the proper position for all Republicans to take with respect to anything that Barry and his minions in Congress propose, and I do mean anything, is also a Marxist position, as follows:

"Whatever It Is, I'm Against It

I don't know what they have to say,
It makes no difference anyway --
Whatever it is, I'm against it!
No matter what it is or who commenced it,
I'm against it.

Your proposition may be good
But let's have one thing understood --
Whatever it is, I'm against it!
And even when you've changed it or condensed it,
I'm against it.

I'm opposed to it --
On general principles I'm opposed to it!

Chorus: He's opposed to it!
In fact, in word, in deed,
He's opposed to it!

For months before my son was born,
I used to yell from night till morn,
Whatever it is, I'm against it!
And I've kept yelling since I commenced it,
I'm against it! "

I am sure that the intelligent readers will quickly identify the first name of the Marx that I have quoted.

scottr: nerve? what nerve?
Yes, I'm sure there are many of us out here who worry about Rush putting the weight back on. We worry about its potential impact on his health: now would be a terrible time to lose the most important spokesman for regular America. (The prefix "maha-", by the way, means "great" but can also mean "large".)

That said, he doesn't appear to let it be slowing him down. And I must have missed the "outrageous" part. Perhaps you meant to say "outraged"?

There was a great line in the 1981 movie "Reds" that I've loved to use on relevant occasions. Jack Reed (Warren Beatty) has come home from the 1916 Democrat convention, disillusioned with Wilson's promise to keep us out of the war, which he knows is a lie, only to find his wife and his friends drinking and reveling. As he starts to outline his concerns, one of them blurts out "never mind what he said: what was he wearing?"


+++

Response to n @ 10:15
Also, people have right to twist definition as they choose even to the point of absurdity--as we have seen from some groat-troll-spammers who claim Dhimmi Carter (till 2009/01/19, most Americans--and probably over 50% of non-USC's who'd heard of him--would state that he was the worst-ever US president) as successful.

(reason for that specific date--before inauguration/coronation of bh0, who managed to achieve the dishonourable first of actually going to Ottawa with almsbowl within 40 days)

Lon: no, but thanks for playing
No, Lon, I'd just appreciate it if he'd stop talking it down, if he'd stop advancing policies that are anti-investor and anti-capitalist, if he'd just shut up long enough for the Free Market to correct itself. But no, he's not trying to save it: he's trying to supplant it.

He didn't have to pass a single piece of legislation for his influence to crush my life savings. The market -- which is not a "tracking poll", by the way, it's the accumulated wealth of people who work for a living -- has collapsed since he secured his party's nomination (McCain was never expected to win; indeed, the vicious loop created was that as the market worsened, Barry's prospects improved, and vice versa), and the Savior-Leader's ability to enact his hardcore Leftist agenda is enhanced by the impoverishment of the American people: the more people he makes desperate, the more people will cling to his godhead.


+++

Lon,
We will never know... But I wonder what the economy would be like if the new president (whether it is Barack or not is not important) had jumped into the fray, not with bailouts and promises of more bailouts, but a call to make those who took the risks take the responsibility and let the big US auto makers and Wall Street big wigs face the music. Furthermore, what if he promoted the Fair Tax as the best way out of this mess, ridding us of income taxes and capital gains taxes and payroll taxes forever? What if he said he was going to let medicine return to the realm of doctor and patient and the idea of universal healthcare is DOA? What if all of his leading confidants received a clean bill of health from the IRS? What if he constantly went into public and said how great our country is and the future is indeed brighter than to present. Do you think we would be any poorer or richer? We can't anser that, but I am sure things would be far different than they are now. So the fact that he has not gotten his first budget passed really doesn't mean he hasn't had an impact on the economy.

I'm guessing if McCain had been elected, things wouldn't be much different. But if Ron Paul, for example, had been elected, I truly believe things would be quite different. There would be a lot of pi$$ed off rich Wall St bankers and CEOs and a lot of confused average citizens, but I think there would also be the beginning of a revival of business and industry and much more enthusiasm in the market and on Main St than we have today.

For JR & Lon
JR: That's life in the blue states. I thought for sure you were talking about Feinstein, Boxer and Waxman......not to mention Ms. Third in Line "Puhleez-let-her-lose-ee"

Lon: Here's what I think "success" for this president will mean: A U.S. nearly indistinguishable from a E.U. country. (coincidentally, spanish speaking countries already abbreviate 'Estados Unidos' that way)
High times for the U.N. Now that I think about it, what the heck? Isn't universal health care (oh please, please gag me with a spoon that I never, ever, utter the words climate change, a woman's right to choose or that UHC thing again)
worth letting Russia and Iran and North Korea run amok for a while? Here's the closing line from T. Sowell's recent "Fatal Trajectory" column:

"Over the years, we have had our share of miraculous deliverances. But that our fate today depends on yet another miracle is what can turn pessimism to despair."

I think the miracle of which he speaks is somehow undoing the disasters of four years of a 1. radical left wing, 2. rankly amateur, or 3. pathetically incompetant White House.

Please cheer us up Lon, and tell us about all the good things your guy has in store for us.
Shi*! Tell us ONE good thing!

Lon
wishing for Herr obama to fail is wishing the best for the American public. We only have two choices. Herr obama succeeds and the average person will have a much worst life than their parents and grandparents did. Herr obama sucess means the average America has a smaller poorer shorter life than this country has seen since the 1850's.

Herr obaman failing means the econom recovers in the next 5 to 6 years and the average American can look forward to a better life and more importantly our children and grandchildren will have a chance at a much better life than the one we lead today.

We've seen what Herr obama plans lead to we saw them in Russia in the 1920's we saw them in German, Italy, Japan in the 1930's, we saw in the 1960's in China, Korea, Taiwain. We see them today in Mexico, Venezuele, Sudan, and Zimbabwe. Is that really the future you want for yourself or more importantly you children and grandchildren?

So your choice is either to be hope for Herr obama success or the country's success its one or the other its impossible to have both.

I look at hoping Herr obama to fail the same as hoping Stalin, Tojo, Mao, or Mussolini to fail.

I hope Obama fails...
Why would I want a man who is ideologically my opposite to succeed in imposing his ideologies on the country I love? I want the American economy to rebound and I want Americans to succeed. However, I do not want to live in a socialist state so I want his policies to fail. Nothing wrong with that in my opinion. If I had wanted him to succeed, I might have voted for him, which I did not. I campaigned against him and donated money to his opponent. I didn't believe he was right then and I don't believe he's right now.

Got it
So when people say they hope Obama fails they do not think that his success turns on whether the economy improves or not. A more reality based notion of what it is for a politician to succeed would suggest more seriousness.

Of course not wanting Obama to get his ideas passed is a different matter. Obviously conservatives who want Obamas budget not to pass are doing what one would expect them to do. I wish there had been a way to prevent Bush's invasion of Iraq.

But something like Obama's budget is going to pass. And whether he succeeds or not will be a question of whether things improve in this country or not. That is an interesting discussion to have.

This illusion that Obama's succeeding turns on anything but how the economy does (that is how real americans do) and his avoidance of foreign policy disasters in extricating us from Bush's entanglements is silly.

This discussion becomes intersting only to the degree it is a marker of conservatives not dealing with reality.

Sometimes failure is a good thing
It's funny how the trolls come on here, thinking we will ignore what we know to be true, cast our beliefs to the wind, and join them in their worship at the alter of political correctness and their lord obama.

I for one am damned serious. I'm quite willing to live on dirt and turnips to see obama and his socialist polices fail

Lon
He doesn't HAVE to have a budget passed-EVERY time he opens his ignorant yap the market takes yet another dive. I'll type this slowly so you'll get it: the market and its investors DO NOT have ANY confidence in this man or his policies. Period! He's even confessed to having no knowledge of how the stock market works. Well, ring-a-ding-ding. Ya think? Further, with passage of the Porkulus bill, he as of now owns this economy. It's all his, baby. He is the President, he is in charge, it became his responsibility as of 20 January 2009. If he's so darn smart, why keep bringing Bush into it?

I asked a question: How are YOUR investments doing, and why would you think further TAXING them and the employers who make it possible for you to invest in the first place, or having the gov't confiscate them and manage them for a measly 3% return would be better than the 15% return I had going on some of my stuff before it all went to hell?

You're darned right I want him to fail. We will have a hard time surviving one term with this clown. No way will he see two terms. Unfortunately, he will take us all down with him.

Democrats
certainly weren't shy about hoping Bush would fail, in fact, wasn't "the failed policies of this administration" a constant rejoinder? How about Reid saying the Iraq war was lost - almost treasonous. While Republicans try to do the right thing and try to be polite, Democrats are out fully exercising their rights to free speech. Thank goodness that Rush Limbaugh clearly and unashamedly articulates conservative principles.

Awesome column.
Thank you, David.

Lon you assume
that what Herr obama thinks is a success is what the average American thinks is success.

Herr obama will consider his admin a sucess if the American economy is reduced to something near the leave of Germany or France with 25% unemployement. Herr obama thinks if we have health system like Canada or the UK were thousands die waiting for medican a sucess. Herr obama will consider it a success if the USA and China are on equal military footing in the pacific and with Russia in the Alantic. Herr obama would think he is successfull if instead of the country being a military and economic superpower it is just one of a dozen equal military and economic power he doesn't even consider it important that American is the biggest among equal he would consider it a great success if the country was ranked third or fourth.

His ideal of success is based on socialism were everyone must exist at the equal low level that anyone who is successful did so at the expense of someone else. For him the USA being reduced is the measurement of success, he wants a lower economy so we are more fair with Europe and Asia. He wants higher unemployement because that means we are more fair with Europe and Asia.

That is not a defination of success I'm willing to except.

Yes!!I want Obama to Fail!!!!l
He has no goodness of character, NO REAL BELIEF IN GOD-- no true belief in this country and his arrogance is the tip of the iceberg. Underneath the surface are his many bold-faced lies about why he needs to change America, that he'll prevent earmarks, and that he'll not employ lobbyists. His casual excuses for his tax-cheater choices are one more thing that underline this morally and ethically bankrupt president. And I'm not even talking about the crooks he associated with before now or his unseen papers. How virtuous is a man who hides his papers from the citizens he was elected to serve!!! !! What a disgrace!!!

You have to be a lot like him to not see the true face of this NOW REVEALED pig in a poke! Some of us didn't even need to look in the box--- we could tell who he was by his grunts and squeals!!!

PATRICK!!!
DUDE, TURN OFF THE CAPS LOCK!

Richard (& Lon)...
How can we discriminate between Obama's success and the country's success. First we must define each. I'll take a stab and wait for you to tell me where I am wrong.

The country is successful if everybody who wants a job can find one, everybody has an opportunity to choose how and where they will live, and everybody is free to do anything that is peaceful secure in the knowledge that the government will work to protect them from harm by others without actually doing any harm itself. While everybody may not be wealthy by traditional financial measures, in general everybody is better off each year than they were the year before (with the possible exception of those who are just leaving the shelter of their parents nest or who face some catastrophe like a tornado or hurricane. Choices and opportunities are limited mostly by imagination. The sick and injured can obtain health services. The currency is stable or if not, the change in value is predictable. Hard work and ingenuity are rewarded and sloth is not.

There are 2 measures of success by which Obama can be judged. One, the traditional measurement is the state of the union. If the country is better off, then he has been successful. Even if the country isn't better off, if it overcomes some major external factor like a war or a 10 foot rise in sea level due to global warming or an outbreak of smallpox or other horrendous disease and he can say he kept us from falling further into the abyss, he will have been successful.


cont'd...
The other measure is whether he is able to get the kind of change he wants passed into law and adopted in the culture. This wold include things like increasing taxes on the rich and increasing benefits to the poor, nationalizing healthcare, strengthening unions and other political sponsors, eliminating any discussion on abortion and allowing it in any form (including so called partial birth abortions and allowing botched abortions to die from benign neglect). This would include getting US CO2 emmissions down to Kyoto or similar standards. It might even include reparations, I'm not sure where he stands on that). Now I can't read his mind and I won't speculate. Are these things he actually believes will help the country be successful or simply things that will make him more successful by enriching him personally in terms of political power, popularity, fame, and legacy, and material wealth?

Conservatives think that if the country is successful, then it will be due to people taking responsibility for themselves and their dependents and the government doing little more than protecting people from theft, fraud, violence, etc. If he meets his political goals, conservatives believe the country will suffer. If his political goals are blocked as Clinton's were after the mid term elections put the loyal opposition in charge of Congress, then he may be successful like Clinton was. The country might be better off, although few of his original plans came to fruition or had anything to do with it. That is the kind of success or failure, however you classify it, that conservatives hope for. That was what Rush was saying. That was what Samuel Adams and Benjamin Franklin both noted back at the time of the nations birth. In fact most of the founders would rather have died than live a life in servitude. You would think that black Americans above all would appreciate that. But too many of the race baiters believe that 2 wrongs make a right.

liberals and Obamaniacs...
seem to believe that Obama's political goals will make the country better off. It is hard to argue until the empirical evidence is in. But earlier data from here and other parts of the world would suggest that if Obama gets the change he is asking for, then the country will be poorer for it. Unfortunately, history is not well taught or well known and the old adage of those who don't learn it are doomed to repeat it is upon us.

Contrived Indignation
David,
I like that phrase. For years the Democrats have had control of the media. Late 80's, along comes Limbaugh. Let the insults and eye rolling condescension begin. Years later, he's moved his base of operation from the frozen northeast to Palm Beach. Guess who's laughing all the way to the bank.

So what does the left do. They just ratchet up. Anyone who calls their conventional wisdom into question must be personally attacked; destroyed if possible. It's just that it isn't working anymore, so they get louder. They'll also get more comical. And we'll be lauging all the way to the majority in 2010. http://theclosetconservative.com

Rush Limbaugh

Educated people know Michael Steele is the head of the Republican National Committee. Its mission is to get Republicans elected to Office.

Educated people know Rush Limbaugh is one of many conservative voices. His mission in life is to get conservatives elected who understand and follow conservative principles.

Rush doesn't care if the conservative is a Democrat, Republican or a Libitarian.

I don't believe...
Rush's "mission in life is to get conservatives elected who understand and follow conservative principles." Rather, he is trying to make a living, albeit a grand one, just like everybody else. It is the "invisible hand", which Adam Smith first noted, that leads to these other side benefits. He may even think about how he can influence more conservatives given he is now financially independent. But your point is noted. He is a leader of conservatives, not of the republican party. While he did indeed shill for the Republican party in recent times, he has always been willing to call out republicans who are not conservative. And Lord knows we have far too many of them in positions of party leadership.

Rush's mission...
in life is to do his part to defend and protect the Constitution.

here is a better one for you
bright:

Grant us fair weather for battle. Graciously harken to us as solders who call upon Thee that, armed with Thy power, we may advance from victory to victory, and crush the oppression and wickedness of our enemies, and establish Thy justice among men and nations. AMEN.

Wanting someone to fail?
Is it wrong to want someone to fail when he is swinging a wrecking ball at your house?

Who cares what he calls himself if he is trying to destroy your house?

Lon
"I wish there had been a way to prevent Bush's invasion of Iraq."

There was. You could have persuaded the Democrats in office to vote against it instead of for it.

"Bush's invasion" was nothing more than a continuation of the Democratic Party talking points and votes.

Lon
A week ago Tuesday, Mr. Obama said that credit was the lifeblood of our economy and that he was dedicated to freeing up the credit markets so that people could get back to using credit for everything.

Yeah, I want that to fail. Here's why. First, I took Economics in college -- both a basic course and a more advanced course (journalism majors were encouraged to take courses like that so we'd know what we were reporting on). Then, I've ready a couple of Thomas Sowell's books and Walter Williams' Basic Economics. Furthermore, a friend is an economist. All of these sources tell me that credit is a useful tool, but deadly if used incorrectly (sort of like a handgun). The economic crisis we are in currently has been a long time coming, the result of consumers, businesses and gov't spending themselves into greater and greater amounts of debt. The contraction we're experiencing right now, painful though it is for people used to living beyond their means, is a necessary period of healing. The last thing we need to do is loosen up the credit markets until individuals, businesses AND gov't have weaned off the addiction to magic money. Individuals and businesses are learning that right now and may be much healthier in a year if they've not been enabled by gov't to remain in their addiction. Unfortunately, our gov't doesn't seem to be able to put the bottle down and is still self-medicating with credit.

The way out of this crisis is to leave the credit markets tight and encourage PRODUCTION. You can't spend your way out of a crisis caused by over-spending. You have to PRODUCE your way out of it.

So, yes, I hope Mr. Obama fails because if he doesn't, this problem comes back to bite us again. That's not me saying that -- that's actual economists and not the sychophants Obama has gathered around him.

Joe Oliva
Technically, I agree with you, but ....

First, there is an Independent Party. Most conservatives find them to be akin to the left-wing arm of the Democrat Party. So, I don't think you really mean "independent" the way you use it. You mean non-partisan or perhaps, moderate. I am a non-partisan in that I am a registered voter who does not belong to a particular political party (I am also a conservative with occasional moderate leanings).

Third-parties are hard to get on the ballot in most states. Alaska is one of the few that if like one person writes-in a vote for a third-party candidate, that third party can now be on all ballots. In most states, the third party has to win something like 10% of the vote, which is darned near impossible if you're relying on write-in votes.

So, while I think third-parties are a great idea, they usually don't work because they can't get on the ballot and they can't win an election if they're not on the ballot. It's just the way it usually is. Only politically astute people will write-in and those are few and far between.

Great idea, but trying to make it work .... Good luck in your local area making it happen! I wish you well. It's worked well in Alaska where the Alaska Independence Party was once larger than the AK Democratic Party before some Alaskans defected to the Republican Party when it became more conservative.

Of course I want him to fail
Everything he is doing goes against what I believe made America great.

If we don't get some conservatives in congress in 2910, he and his buddies are going to destroy this country.

Of course I want him to fail.

Lon-Pa
I seldom even read U anymore inasmuch as, like a couple Lawyers in this Family, U typically don't say anything, but are very adept/willing to argue either/both sides of any debate.. Makes for good Blather, but not much else..
AND , YES, I DEFINITELY WANT HIS MAJESTY TO FAIL IN HIS ATTEMPT TO SOCIALIZE THIS NATION!!
If Princess Polosi et.al. aren't smart enough to equate the mess in CA to OB's *plan* with the US, then , YES, I HOPE THEY FAIL!! CHEERS

How about a little consistency here!
As I recall, not too many moons ago, conservative pundits found it unpatriotic and darned near treasonous to question George Bush's invasion of Iraq. After all, we were a country at war (still are by the way) and good Americans had a duty to support their duly elected President in a time of war. To do other wise Emboldened the Enemy.

Yet now, with another duly elected President not only attempting to wage war on multiple fronts, but also facing the greatest economic crisis in 80 years, all of a sudden conservatives are embracing the concept of the Loyal Opposition.

Now personally, I'm a big believer in the concept of the Loyal Opposition, however the stench of hypocrisy emanating from conservative talking heads at the moment is gag inducing.

I have no problem what so ever with someone expressing a vehement opinion that the President's economic plan will fail. Vigorous debate is crucial for healthy politics. However to say that you WANT the plan to fail, that you would rather see this country go down the economic tubes than risk having your ideology challenged or discredited . . . now that I have a problem with.

Soros, Leader of Dem Party
By the same logic, George Soros is the "Fearless Leader", inspiration and financier of the Demo party (Demo=Demolition)

Spectacles you are so wrong
many thousands of conservatives opposed bush invasion and occupation of Iraq. In fact the only opposition bush faces BEFORE the invasion was from conservatives. The neo-libs in the democratic party and in the media were 100% for the invasion before fact and only came to oppose it when they saw some political gain in doing so.

Second it economic crisis at this time is only the worst in 30 years not 80. Thanks to Herr obama the great leader and future Fuehrer of the USSA it will become the greatest in 120 years. Fuehrer obama plan will make the economic crisis worst than the one in 1880 which was the worst in the nations history. Herr obama is ensure a second page in history books for not only being the first bi-racial president but for being the president that created the worst economic crisis in American history and ending democratic rule in American and turn the USA into USSA. After that its only a matter of time 30 or 40 years till the USSA becames a dictatorship like all socialist countries become.

In the horrendous case he's anti-christ

He could conceivably turn out to be the anti-christ; such was the implausibility he overcame becoming president--

Let's hope and assume Obama won't be anti-christ, for our own sakes. If not; let it all hang out; not only does this Republican HOPE, he expects Obama to crash and burn.

The Secret Service mot look me up now. I meant that rhetorically, not literally.

I expect this moron messiah who won life's lottery-- to fail like a lead balloon. He's a hopeless president, Pals!


Politicians
"And many of us are hoping that all those in power fail, because those in power have a grating habit of being annoyingly self-righteous, hopelessly corrupt, resolutely incompetent and completely apathetic about the freedoms that they have sworn to protect."
AMEN!!! Heavy on the "hopelessly corrupt". Clearly the scum of the universe!


Failure?
Isn't it some '70's economic or promotion deal where if you fail badly enough you will be promoted to get you out of the way? Does anyone remember that? So, if Obama fails badly enough as President do we make him King for Life? OOPS, have we done that already?
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.