Pages Menu
Categories Menu

Posted by on Feb 28, 2009 in Economy, Politics | 19 comments

Limbaugh: EVERY Republican Secretly Wants Obama To Fail

Is Republican Rush Limbaugh, who as you can see HERE is more than ever presuming to speak for all Republicans, correct? Do all Republicans want Barack Obama to fail so the economy goes more south than it is now — which in effect would be close to a total economic collapse?

Answer: of course not. But Republicans have allowed someone who started out as a witty conservative and has now morphed into the face of compassion-less ideology to become their high-profile brand name –and the face of 21st century conservatism to most Americans. Limbaugh thrives on stories and blog posts and other info bits like this that mention his name because it continues to boost his status, solidify his ratings and his power.

FOOTNOTE: Yesterday I drove 5 hours and listened to several conservative talk radio shows. It’s interesting to hear big talk show radio hosts talk about how people who are unemployed due to the recession are really lazy and just want to sit around and get government help and how they just need to get up and get a job and make something of themselves.

Such statements are usually delivered by people who get fat salaries, generally aren’t thin, in many cases will be impacted by changes in taxes that will tax people in higher brackets — and who found jobs doing radio shows where they demonize another political party, the unemployed, or homeowners for three hours a day and then pick up a big paycheck. Nice work if you can get it. Which most can’t.

On the other hand, perhaps this is really all an act: perhaps Rush truly wants whatever Obama does to succeed so that — whether he likes a specific approach or not — more Americans don’t lose their jobs and homes and we don’t get more reports about how the national economy that impacts the entire nation is shrinking.

Perhaps it’s all a front and he really agonizes over the future of the bulk of Americans whose lives have abruptly turned upside down as he gets on his private jet and flies off to another city for a quick dinner.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2009 The Moderate Voice
  • Joe – I’m afraid that, seriously? Limbaugh is a malignant narcissist, truly. I wrote about it last night after reviewing “day two” of his “Female Summit” in which he reveals his magic bullet for how he does what he does. (It’s here)

  • superdestroyer

    Do you really think that Republicans really want President Obama to succeed in creating new entitlements and adding 5 trillion to the national debt in the next four years.

    Also, I doubt if Republicans really want the Obama Administration to succeed in creating job killing labor, financial, environmental, and transportation regulations.

    If the Obama Adminstration is successful, 60% plus of the voters will be motivated by nothing more than how much they can get from the government and how they will stick someone else with the bill. If anyone wants the private sector to make a comeback, they have to hope that some sanity comes back to the Obama Administration.

  • $199537

    I think liberals and conservatives are framing the question differently, ie:

    Liberals: GOP wants Obama to fail therefore they must want the country to fail.

    Conservatives: we want Obama’s policies to fail because we think they are bad and not in the best long term interests of the country.

    Until we all get on the same page this argument is kind of pointless.

  • continuum

    Not much surprise here.

    The neocon sentiments have never been a secret.

    Long ago, most Americans realized that the conservative Republicans have placed their own self-interest above that of the majority of Americans. These neocon nutjobbers would rather see the country go down in flames, than admit that their philosophy is wrong.

    Republicans = party above nation.

  • superdestroyer


    Do I really have to list the ways from closed shop unions to affirmative action to government employees that the left has put itself ahead of others. Do you really think that the teachers unions care more about the children than they do about preserving jobs and keeping all teachers on the job? Do you really think that the CBC cares about the nation or about themselves when they demand separate and unequal standards?

  • StockBoySF

    DaGoat: “Conservatives: we want Obama’s policies to fail because we think they are bad and not in the best long term interests of the country.”

    Well, yes.. the conservatives want Obama’s policies to fail which will hurt the country. The goal of Obama’s policies is to keep the country out of a depression and raise the country from the recession.

    I think a more responsible statement from the Republicans would be, “We don’t agree with Obama’s policies and think they are bad for the country. However for the sake of our country we want them to work. If Obama wants to pursue this path we will work with him to ensure that at least some of our ideas are implemented.”

    Obama has reached out to Republicans and last week Joe G. posted a link to an article which indicated the House Republicans wanted concessions in the stimulus bill, which the Dems gave them, but no House GOPer voted for the stimulus bill anyway….

  • $199537

    “I think a more responsible statement from the Republicans would be, “We don’t agree with Obama’s policies and think they are bad for the country. However for the sake of our country we want them to work. If Obama wants to pursue this path we will work with him to ensure that at least some of our ideas are implemented.”

    I agree that would be a better statement.

  • CStanley

    One problem with saying “we hope these policies work” is that everyone will take a different meaning from what ‘working’ means. Note, for instance, that Obama cleverly said that the stimulus will ‘create or save’ 3.5 million jobs’ which is a completely nonfalsifiable claim. If very few jobs are created, but unemployment levels off right where people think it will, he will claim that unemployment would have been much higher without the bill and his policies.

    And then if there is some short term relief from the policies, in 2010 it will be impossible for the GOP to oppose the Congressional Dems because we’ll hear endless spools of video of Republicans saying “we hope for the sake of the country that this works”, superimposed with some evidence that the policies have ‘worked’ (even if that evidence is as I described above.)

    And yet, the disastrous effects that some of us believe could happen if this fails as badly as we think it is likely to do, may not have become apparent yet. So we’re supposed to sit back and wait another two years, and another, until it’s too late to turn things in a different direction.

    I’m sorry, but there’s never a time that one should compromise on principled opposition, and those who keep haggling over how to politely phrase it in order to ‘prove’ that we’re not wishing ill on the country need to just grow up. It’s not personal, and it certainly isn’t unpatriotic- it’s just a strong difference in opinion about what policies will have the best effect for our future.

    • StockBoySF

      CStanley: “If very few jobs are created, but unemployment levels off right where people think it will, he will claim that unemployment would have been much higher without the bill and his policies.”

      Two points: first of all we know for a fact that jobs will be created (and or saved) through projects that start (or are able to continue) because of the money. That’s verifiable and of course Obama has given Biden that task of creating the website so the American public can see the bailout dollars in action. So there will be tangible benefits, though (more to the point) no one knows the full extent of the benefits.

      Second point… the strategy that the Republicans want to pursue, tax cuts, has absolutely no verifiable benefits. No programs to fund and jobs to create…. And we’ve already had years of failed Republican tax cuts.. which got us to this point…. So I don’t even know why you’re not willing to let Obama’s plan work for a couple years and see the results (and complain that there are not verifiable) when we’ve spent eight years with a proven failed strategy that the Republicans only want more of the same.

      There is only so much money the wealthy will spend in the US from tax cuts…. once the wealthy have their basic needs met (a couple houses, food, etc.) the tax cuts will create additional jobs through the trickle down effect. Jobs in France, where the wealthy buy planes from. More jobs in France where the wealthy will vacation and buy the latest fashions. And even more jobs in France as the wealthy will import fine French wine and other food.

      As far as your statement, “I’m sorry, but there’s never a time that one should compromise on principled opposition”.

      I agree with that but when does principled opposition become cluelessness and failure to admit to reality over a strategy that has been proven not to work? Principles only work when they work. It’s appalling, dangerous and foolhardy to continue to believe in principles that are failures. If it was proven that tax cuts were just as effective at stimulating the economy as government spending then we would have a real argument and good choices to debate. But the government spending will create jobs and a lot of them will be verifiable.

      So, other than tax cuts, what other options do the Republicans have to get us out of this economic situation?

  • $199537

    I agree CStanley and I really think most Democrats know that, too. That’s why this apparent shock from the left about the GOP wanting Obama to fail doesn’t ring true to me. I think most of them know what the GOP is trying to say but are pretending not to.

  • JSpencer

    Predictably (an earned preface, not a gratuitous one) I see far too many republicans not being honest with themselves about just what it means to want Obama to “fail”. Any understanding of human nature will accept there will be detractors, even if Obama’s radical solutions end up being wildly successful, but this imagined surgical disconnect between the Obama policies and how the country will fare if they fail is either uninformed or disingenuous.

    Getting back to Rush for a moment, does anyone think he will give Obama any credit if his policies end up pulling us out of this mess? If you do, then I have a great deal for you on some Pakistan border property! Btw Jill, I think your phrase, “malignant narcissist” really hits the mark. I’ve heard Rush described many different ways, all the way from genius (by his sycophants) to the usual hot air bag references, but I think malignant narcissist is the most insightful of the lot.

  • superdestroyer


    If you actually ever listened to Rush, you would have heard his criticism that President Obama failed to acknowledge the Bush Administration when discussing the partial withdrawal from Iraq. I assume Rush will give as much credit to the Obama Administration that the Obama Administration gave to the Bush Administration.

    The most interesting part about the ecnonomic recovery is that there is no way to know if the stimulus actually worked. However, if in three years, there is still double digit unemployment and zero private sector job creation, will those Obama apologist admit that his program was a very expensive failure.

  • doctorj2u

    THIS Republican wants Obama to succeed.

  • GeorgeSorwell

    I remember when Limboid conservatives said opponents of the policies of President George W. Bush wanted America to fail!

    And now they want Obama to fail.

    Hypocrisy never takes a day off.

  • elrod

    Though I’m a staunch Democrat, I’ve always defended Limbaugh on this point. Look, Rush Limbaugh and conservative Republicans have a radically different vision of the government and the economy than Obama and progressive Democrats. If Obama’s agenda succeeds according to his own goals – pulling the country out of recession and improving the economic life of the lower middle class – the conservative Republican theory of trickle-down economics will go the way of Prohibition and the gold standard. To conservative Republicans, Obama’s success is the nation’s failure because it would validate a theory of economics that conservatives find anathema.

    I say this because I felt the same way about Bush. While I didn’t want anybody to actually get hurt in the war in Iraq, I knew that a “success” – especially in the early going – in Iraq would only encourage the neo-cons to pursue more reckless wars in Iran and elsewhere. And I knew that that would be catastrophic for the country. Therefore, I could never cheer any supposed “good news” coming out of Iraq in the early days of the war because I knew that the powers that be would learn the wrong lesson. After 2006, when the neo-cons were effectively repudiated, the long-term risk to America of success in Iraq dissipated. Nobody was going to look at the successful turn of the war after the Surge and the Anbar Awakening and conclude, “Hey, that was all worth it. Let’s turn to Iran now!” Nobody except marginalized neocons, that is.

    This is all uncomfortable for people to admit, but it’s the truth. I think Limbaugh is right to take the position he does.

  • JSpencer

    With all due respect Elrod, I think you’re being far too generous. I’m willing to meet any disagreement made in good faith and based on sound reasoning halfway, but I’m not so willing to overlook hypocrisy and cultured animosity. These are not ordinary times we live in, and they have been made exponentially more dangerous for us through negligence, a delayed committment to critical issues, the polarizing of a large portion of the world, the wasting of lives and resources in an idiotic war, etc. And all the while this terrible excuse for leadership was cheerleaded and rubberstamped like there was no tomorrow. So now we find ourselves in need of the courage to seize an opportunity to make up for all the backsliding and waste, to start wading out of the swamp, and so many are willing to flinch because it might take sacrifice and new thinking? I see this as 50% simplistic, lizardbrain partisan rut thinking and 50% backbone deficit. Anyone want to see the world keep going down the tubes? Just keep thinking the same old ways…

  • elrod

    Take a look at the polling as of late and you can see why the pseudo-populist ranting of the right wing is harmless. Obviously, if the most dire predictions of the conservatives come true then things will be quite a bit different – both substantively and politically. But barring that, the whelping of Limbaugh and co. is just the impotent rage of the Irredentists.

  • StockBoySF

    I think it’s obvious that the Republican ideas have proven to be failures so why continue to support them? I for one do want two parties (or more) in power… but only if they are both intelligent with something to offer.

    the Republicans don’t have anything useful to offer at this point and want the Dems to fail so they can get back in power to do what? Take our country down the same old path that brought us to where we are today?

  • CStanley

    Stockboy, if the Republican ideas have proven to be failures, then your argument for the Democrat policies must also examine whether or not those ideas have been successful. They’re not proposing anything new either, in fact it’s a return all the way back to the 1930’s and the 1960s under LBJ. So how did that ultimately work out? There’s not a consensus that the New Deal or Keynesianism got us out of the Great Depression, and even if there were there are still a lot of fundamental differences between our current situation and what was happening then. And LBJ’s Great Society caused as many problems as it solved- even liberals had to distance themselves from those kinds of policies when Bill Clinton famously announced that the era of Big Government was over. The big spending policies and social engineering had failed so badly that the party that had created them had to distance themselves from those ideas in order to get back in power.

    Then we can also take Europe as an example. If our current economic situation is a result of failed Republican policies, then how do you explain the fact that Europe (dominated for years by left wing economic policies) is in worse shape than we are?

    If your fundamental diagnosis of the problem is wrong, then you’re going to come to the wrong conclusions about the treatment. It’s true that Republicans have f’ed things up, but they didn’t do so by being too conservative. This isn’t (or shouldn’t be) an indictment on markets and capitalism, just a failure to oversee those institutions in an honest and competent manner. We should not allow this failure to be an excuse for other dishonest and incompetent players to institute their own playground for corruption (one which is inherently unsustainable and has never been proven to work in the long run.)

Twitter Auto Publish Powered By :