The premise Limbaugh objects to is that reasonable people can disagree with him.

Rush is an entertainer. He knows very well that what he says makes no sense, but he doesn't care. His only goal is ratings. To pretend that his views are in any way logical is to misunderstand this goal.

I'm not a Limbaugh fan by any stretch, but I find your incredulity disingenuous. If you wanted Bush's Social Security privatization scheme to fail, and you accept the premise that IF it passed, THEN it would save the country money -- then by definition if you want the legislative effort to fail, you want to see the country not save that money. But you don't accept the premise that it's good for the country to fix its books short term in this manner -- for a variety of reasons: the problem is exaggerated for political purposes, the fix is harmful long-term and serves the rich to the detriment of the poor, etc.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123604419092515347.html

Read it with an open mind.

So, any way we can get the rumor going that that thing attached to his head behind his left ear is really a communications device between him and the mother ship?

Read it with an open mind.

...and try not to laugh at it?

Shorter right-wing rag: the only thing wrong with the economy is Obama.

John Gonsalves: If President Bush had passed Social Security privatization, I, for one, would certainly not wished for it to fail. I would have been against the policy, but, once passed, I would have wanted it to succeed.

To hope for it to fail would be like, hoping your 401(k) would lose half its value. Oh, wait...

Read it with an open mind.

'calling all toasters' is right on this one. It's another rehash of the tired argument that if you spare businesses, they invest.

It's patent stamped-and-sealed bullshit. If you spare businesses, they pocket the savings or give it to their CEOs.

Away with your intellectually bankrupt drivel.

"We will not accept a government of wrong-doers. We prefer death than to be a part of an evil government."

WHO SAID IT?

__Mullah Omar

__Rush Limbaugh

The fact that we may have to mull this over should tell us something.

"Obama's policies are NOT designed to help the economy, and they won't."

Why anybody would take Limbaugh's prognostications seriously is beyond me. The man's predictions, in all areas, are nearly always wrong. He's proven repeatedly that he doesn't know jack. Yet, he still has a following who seem to want to be lied to. Very odd.

See? Those who adore Rush are the same blithering idiots who believe that death isn't really death and their own physical bodies are so universally special, they've been chosen by some grand poobah to live forever. Why then would they give two farts that America, The World, or anything earthly do well? If you're *chosen* you have a place in eternity up in the air somewhere, so of course you would feel it's OK to trash this temporary holding cell.

Rush is no different. Besides, the asshole makes 33 mil a year. Why would he give a fuck what happens? America is his yo-yo. Rush bin Laden and The Whitey Tali-Band.

Rush is the big, fat pumpkin head who in 2006 and 2007 was saying there was no housing crisis and that the economy was just fine, and that anything to the contrary were just stories made up by the liberal media to make Bush look bad.

That's how stupid he is.

Also: Hansen was saying the same thing.

I'm reminded of the saying on a T-shirt they used to sell in the shops in Westwood, CA - "Never try to teach a pig to sing...it wastes your time and annoys the pig."

Rush must be laughing - he's having a ball being the de facto leader of the GOP, having the leadership kowtow to him. It runs up his ratings and increases his take, which is the bottom line he is concerned with.
And it definitely gives him credibility with the base - so what's not to like.

Does he make sense? When does the GOP make sense?

The GOP is a party constructed to get an artificial plurality of the vote, in support of policies that favor an absolute minority of the population. In order to achieve this, they go for divisive "flag burner" issues that get people who think they are wealthy or conservative to vote for the GOP.
There is no way you can pull off this smokes-and-mirrors trick and actually make sense.

The Republican Party sure has picked an odd one as their leader.

I understand the strategy with elevating Limbaugh into the titular head of the GOP since he is disliked by a majority and a large majority of women voters. But if the last century taught us anything, it is that especially when people are really hurting economically, slightly unhinged demagogues who ramp up the truly unhinged and play on their resentments can be very, very dangerous. In this country those people all have guns, remember.

So sometime soon I'd like to see Obama and the Left stop paying so much attention to Rush. He could become the sorcerere's apprentice.

For anyone interested, I just wrote about what a mistake all this is:
Rush Limbaugh as Party Elder

The WSJ Editorial Board: Wrong Yesterday, Wrong Today, and Wrong Forever.

This guy is not qualified to be speaking on the economy or policies. His only purpose is to condemn democrats...it's what his radio show is based on. His mission is to protect his wealth (he's under a $100 million contract) and the wealth of his pay masters. He makes no sense when held to scrutiny and is used to oppose dems and liberals with loud and cheap rhetoric. No new ideas, no untried policies, just a big fat loudmouth who claims to be an entertainer rather than an instigator who wants to just say and do what he wants as if America belongs to him alone. A cultivator of ignorance and mis information swallowed by greed and fantasies of selfishness as an art rather than a defect of character. A really ugly character who has not seen his own penis in years.

Rush rejects the premise because he can't do anything BUT reject it. He feeds on the irrational. The funny thing is that Democratic leadership is Rush's meal ticket. The only way Rush can increase his ratings, yes they have been tanking, is to make himself relevant again. Rush is trilled with Obama and his policies. He loves them. His audience is the hopeless and the angry. He gives them a target for their hate and convinces them that they are not responsible for their own terrible choices in thier lives. It is the Blacks and the Gays and the Latinos that have robbed them of their rightful place in America. And they hate on his word. Without question or reason he tells them who to blame. And they make Rush rich in the process. And he is laughing all the way to the bank. Rush is loyal to Rush and no one and nothing else. He appeals to the last dregs of the Republican Party. (We use to call them Bush's 23%). What the Republican party of Steele, Cantor and Jindal fail to realize is that 23% will never win them elections but they've put all their hopes in him anyway because it is all they have left.

The comparisons to the debate about the Iraq War are striking.

Back in 2002-2003, I (like many) was opposed to the invasion of Iraq. But, because I have a brain, I understood that Bush's war plan was DESIGNED to bring peace and stability to the region. I just didn't think it would. For that, I (and people like me) were called "unpatriotic" (by Rush, among others) for supposedly wanting Bush's war to fail. Of course, we didn't WANT it to fail; we just thought it WOULD.

But Rush is saying something different. He is openly admitting that he WANTS Obama's economic policy to fail. He's not only saying that he thinks it WILL fail; he's tacking on the proposition that Obama is acting with the INTENT that it will fail.

When do we get to start calling Rush and his ilk "unpatriotic"?

When do we get to say that they "hate America"?

We don't have to look very far into the history of this country to find a president who proposed policies that he dishonestly claimed would improve the US economy, but which were actually intended to enrich a tiny, ultra-wealthy minority at the expense of, and to the detriment of, everyone else.

That would be George W. Bush.

All of Bush's policy proposals -- huge tax cuts for the rich, radical deregulation of corporations, privatization of Social Security, the invasion of Iraq, the destruction of basic Constitutional rights -- were marketed to the American people under the false pretense of doing good for the country, when in fact they were not intended to help the country at all, but to enrich and empower Bush's rich and powerful, rapacious and reactionary corporate-feudalist cronies and financial backers, to the detriment of the country as a whole.

There's nothing puzzling about what Limbaugh is saying. He is plainly saying that Obama's proposals cannot succeed in improving the economy, because they are not intended to improve the economy. They are a power-grab in the guise of helping the economy. Limbaugh is saying that Obama is a liar and a fraud, and that Obama's proposals will not improve the economy because they are not actually intended to improve the economy -- they are intended to "increase the size of government" and to "attack wealth, producers and achievers" under the pretense of improving the economy.

As always, Rush Limbaugh is merely reading the script that his corporate paymasters give him, and his anti-Obama rhetoric is transparently bogus.

There is absolutely zero evidence that Obama is like Bush -- that Obama has a hidden agenda that he knows will be detrimental to the country, that he is marketing to the American people under false pretenses.

But there is nothing preposterous or bizarre about the idea that a president might do that, given that we just spent eight years watching Bush do exactly that. And there is nothing difficult to understand about what Rush Limbaugh is saying.

So sometime soon I'd like to see Obama and the Left stop paying so much attention to Rush. He could become the sorcerere's apprentice.

Mimikatz - While I understand your concern, I fail to see how any of these people aren't already listening to him. In fact, it's not US who are making him the GOP leader. They've established that all on their own. We're just advertising the fact, so the people who hate him will see where the Obama-bashing is coming from and realize what a joke it is.

Guys like Limbaugh are like cockroaches and it behooves us to shine the light on them as much as possible. We want Limbaugh to know that sensible people are hearing his words, which will make him less likely to say truly offensive things. That's why Limbaugh isn't crazy enough for the far-far-right; because he's too famous to be super-crazy. And yes, there are people too crazy for Limbaugh.

Oh, and just so you know, Limbaugh's not the "titular" head of the party. I looked up that term a few minutes ago to make sure I wasn't misusing it in regards to Michael Steele (I was), and saw that it refers to someone who has a meaningless title and no real authority. So, Limbaugh is the opposite of a titular leader: He's the leader, but he has no title. But again, we had nothing to do with that. He's making that mistake on his own.

Now every time a Republican politician makes a statement on any issue, the obvious question to ask is, "Well, what does Rush think about it?"

They'll have to parrot every word that comes out of Rush's mouth or face his mighty wrath.

The bad thing for them is that that more Rush accepts the role of Great Leader, the more people will actually hear what he has to say and wonder why their elected representatives have anything to do with that bloated sack of protoplasm.

The Dem strategy is clear, and it will work. Blowhards and bullies like Rush can only succeed when they're talking to a very limited audience. Once they get out into the larger world, they self-destruct and leave a trail of disaster behind them.

Keep it up, Dems.

Why does Rush "want" them to fail. According to his view they will fail inherently. So why not just say that they will fail and leave it at that?

Wanting something to happen assumes that the desired outcome might NOT happen.

Methinks Rushie is a tad afraid, no?

>
>

I agree. But why the Republicans have surrendered their authority to him is beyond comprehension -- remember, if they had not, no one would have to apologize for criticizing him.

Meanwhile, Santanyana's description of a clown perfect describes Rush the entertainer. THAT role/personna, the Entertainer, not the "real" Rush behind the clown face is the leader of the Republican Party, because most Republicans seem to respect the speaking mask more than any other authority.

I give you Santanyana ...

"The clown is the primitive comedian. Sometimes in the exuberance of animal life a spirit of riot and frolic comes over a man; he leaps, he dances, he tumbles head over heels, he grins, shouts, or leers, possibly he pretends to go to pieces suddenly . . . All this he does hysterically, without any reason, by a sort of mad inspiration and irresistible impulse. He may easily, however, turn his absolute histrionic impulse, his pure fooling, into mimicry of anything or anybody that happens to impress his senses; … Such mimicry is virtual mockery . . . so that the clown feels himself immensely superior, in his role of universal satirist, to all actual men, and belabors and rails at them unmercifully.

"He sees everything in caricature, because he sees the surface only, with the lurid innocence of a child; and all these grotesque personages stimulate him, not to moral sympathy . . . . He is not amused intellectually; he is not rendered wiser or tenderer by knowing the predicaments into which people inevitably fall; he is merely excited, flushed and challenged by an absurd spectacle." (From "Soliloquies in England and Later Soliloquies," Chapter: “the Comic Mask� pp 136 )

The fact that RL says that he is just an entertainer, when it suits his purposes, in no way exculpates him for the serious damage that his words do. The right screams bloody hell when some Hollywood entertainer with no credibility and no possible significant impact says something they don't like. They call it, no matter how trivial or valid, treason. Yet BlimpBoy, another supposed entertainer, whose words have real effect, can say anything and they just swallow it. He is exploiting the gullible for his own gain with no regard to the cost.

So, which party was it that was saying, for the last decade, that anyone who went against the President was unpatriotic traitor that should leave the country?

Oh, yeah, right. So I guess these dittoheads should leave the country for one more to thier liking. Iran maybe?

It boils down to Flush Lemmingbaugh wants everybody on the bus to follow him off the cliff and he'll do or say whatever it takes to keep Obama from diverting the bus from the cliff edge. I say we chip in and send the rotund son-of-a-bitch to Guinea where he can build his own "Jonestown".

I worked with a district manager of a company that had Rush on his radio all day long. He also had a picture of Bush in his office. Guess what happened? The company closed it's operation in his district mainly because it was incompetantly run.

John Hansen says: Read it with an open mind....
You expect me to read an article published by the WALL STREET JOURNAL on what we should be doing to help the economy? That is beyond humorous. Farcical is a better description.

I have been pounding this point for awhile now and will continue to do so: Republicans are always WRONG. Anyone with an iota of logic can see, based on the evidence, that their philosophies don't work, economically OR socially. To continue to lobby for and defend policy that has been tried and has failed at a very high cost is, well, insane. Really, it is insane.

If you bought a used car from a sweet talking salesman, and after driving it for a few years it suffers irreparable damage, would you then go and buy ANOTHER CAR from the same man?

What Obama is essentially doing is introducing a new new deal. If you look back at those days and the arguments among the parties, you'll find a stinking similarity to what is being discussed today. The right is using the same arguments against Obama's plan as they did 70 YEARS ago.

Based on the RESULTS of the New Deal in terms of growing the biggest and most prosperous middle class in the history of civilization, making American the strongest country known to man, I'd say the evidence is in that Obama's plan will work, or get us well on the way to a successful transformation of society to tackle 21st century problems.

And what does the right have to offer? Tax cuts.

You write: "But if Obama fails, the economy won't improve, more Americans will suffer, and the country will continue to decline."

I have to object to your premise. Economic cycles go up just like they go down. If we can get through this downturn without yielding to Obama's Europhilic preference for massive government, we will all be better off for it.

If you wanted Bush's Social Security privatization scheme to fail, and you accept the premise that IF it passed, THEN it would save the country money ...

I stopped reading your post at this point because it was NEVER intended to save the country money. And that's not an opinion, but actual fact.

It's a fact because: a.) SS isn't in any kind of financial crisis; b.) it would have put more of a burden on the government during downturns (millions of people would be penniless right now had the plan succeeded); c.) fighting for the plan's failure wasn't going to cause our nation's economy to implode.

In other words, the fight against Social Security privatization vs. the rightwing wanting Obama to fail aren't even in the same fucking universe, let alone ballpark. So please stop trying to compare apples to band saws.

The post so far on this blog is the MAIN reason Rush is right. Barry and these post don't have a clue what he is referring to. The Ditto Heads do and we're behind Rush 150%. You can go suck a lemon if you would like. That just might make your lips look even. Because every time you open your mouth out comes ..stupid is as stupid was.

Barry's plan will ruin this country. You guys don't have a clue what's happening at the WH. Barry's plan has NEVER worked..never in any country that has tried it. So the track record is against Barry. Rush knows this but to go down this road will cost the US Trillions of dollars that will be lost forever. Your kids and mine will be paying for Barry's mistake. We know this for a FACT. Get outside your comfort zone and read what others are saying. Look at the stock market..they know it wouldn't work. Every time someone from the WH speaks..the DOW goes down. And NO, this is not Wall Street fault. This entire problem can be placed at the foot of the government. Both R & D's. Barney and Chris Dodd have not even been asked about their role in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, not by one reporter. You guys are still looking for GW and Rush to keep beating up because you have no core values. Nothing that you truly believe in. Nothing that you would give your life for..nothing...nothing. Until you find that missing piece in your life I don't want to tell me or any conservative what we are to do. You sirs can go kiss up a rope. As Mr. Harvey would say "Good Day".

Anybody who cares about a word that Rush Limbaugh says is not worthy of an educated person's time or attention.

And what does the right have to offer? Tax cuts.

The WSJ article had another solution: do nothing. They claim that we're "awash" in liquidity and the economy would be recovering right now if it weren't for those meddling kids.

Which again raises the question: do they not understand economics, or are they just playing dumb?

"If we can get through this downturn without yielding to Obama's Europhilic preference for massive government, we will all be better off for it." Except the 38,000 Americans that die every year because they don't have healtcare.

The premise Rushbo rejects is that Obama was legitimately elected President and has the authority to recommend progressive fiscal, regulatory ane economic policies that may well work but that go against Rushbo's right wing bias.

NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams thinks Limbaugh should get more credit

Brian Williams, who replaced Tom Brokaw as anchor and managing editor of NBC's Nightly News on December 2, 2004, said in an interview with C-SPAN founder, president, and CEO Brian Lamb: "it's my duty to listen to [nationally syndicated radio host] Rush" Limbaugh and that "Rush has actually yet to get the credit he is due."

From the December 26, 2004, interview:

WILLIAMS: I do listen to Rush. I listen to it from a radio in my office, or depending on my day, if I'm in the car, I will listen to Rush. And he will tell you I've been listening for years. I think it's my duty to listen to Rush. I think Rush has actually yet to get the credit he is due, because his audience for so many years felt they were in the wilderness of this country. No one was talking to them.

[...]

Rush said to millions of Americans, you have a home. Come with me. For three hours a day you can listen and hear the like-minded calling in from across the country, and I'll read to you things perhaps you didn't see that are out there. I think Rush gave birth to the FOX News Channel. I think Rush helped to give birth to a movement. I think he played his part in the Contract with America. So I hope he gets his due as a broadcaster.

Here are some examples of Limbaugh's commentary, for which Williams apparently thinks Limbaugh has "yet to get the credit he is due." He has:

compared U.S. guards' torture of Iraqis at Abu Ghraib prison to a fraternity prank, saying the guards were "having a good time," "blow[ing] some steam off" [May 5, 2004];

claimed that women "actually wish" for sexual harassment, and said he "laughed [him]self to tears" when Media Matters for America documented that remark and other sexist remarks he has made [April 26, 2004; May 5, 2004];

said: "Hugo, Cesar -- whatever. A Chavez is a Chavez. We've always had problems with them." [March 26, 2004];

stated, when African American Reverend Jesse Jackson joined Senator John Kerry's presidential campaign: "The Kerry campaign has finally gotten a chocolate chip"; University of Maryland political science professor Ronald Walters described Limbaugh's comment as a "backhanded racist remark" [September 29, 2004];

said: "John Kerry really doesn't think 3,000 Americans dead in one day is that big a deal" [October 11, 2004]; and

said Democrats believe "the more deaths in Iraq the better" [December 9, 2004].

Before his promotion, Williams hosted several other NBC news programs, including The News with Brian Williams on MSNBC and CNBC, where Limbaugh was a frequent guest. On September 24, 2002, Williams introduced a News segment on a speech made by former Vice President Al Gore by observing: "[O]ur friend Rush Limbaugh told his radio listeners he almost stayed home from work, not due to any health reasons, but because he was so livid at the speech given yesterday by former Vice President Al Gore criticizing the Bush administration's apparent march to war in Iraq." Williams asked, "Is it un-American to speak out against the Bush plan to take on Iraq? Is it democratic to ridicule and threaten those who do?"

Washington Post columnist and Brookings Institution senior fellow E.J. Dionne Jr. responded on the September 28, 2002, edition of CNN's Reliable Sources:

Since when do we debate that it's un-American to take on a president? Sure, that subject surely didn't come up during the Clinton scandals when people were trashing Clinton's foreign policy all the time. ... Have you ever seen the news report, "Jane Fonda couldn't get out of bed because she was so mad about former Vice President Nixon's speech," or "Phil Donahue couldn't get out of bed because he was so mad about President Bush's speech?" ... We are told all the time it is the liberal media, and here Rush Limbaugh not being able to get out of bed supersedes what Al Gore says. If you -- if you want to have Rush Limbaugh on trashing Al Gore afterward, fine. Report the news. Report what he said, and then criticize him.

Limbaugh's remarks downplaying, dismissing, and even endorsing the abuse of Iraqi prisoners prompted Media Matters to create an online petition that calls for Limbaugh's removal from the taxpayer-funded American Forces Radio and Television Service (AFRTS); more than 47,000 people have signed the petition. On June 14, the U.S. Senate unanimously passed a resolution calling for fairness and balance on AFRTS. Limbaugh is presently the sole politically partisan host featured on the service's talk channel.

—J.C.

I just don't understand what's so outrageous about this. Limbaugh hopes that Obama fails in implementing his economic plans because Limbaugh believes Obama's policies would be harmful to the national interest. We hoped Bush would fail in privatizing social security for the same reason. I don't see what's illegitimate or inappropriate in expressing the desire that a president fails in implementing policies to which one is opposed. (Certainly there's room to take issue with Rush's economic analysis, but most of your posts on this have suggested that it's somehow improper to hope for the failure of an administration regardless of the merits of its policies).

Pardon my typo, I meant healthcare, not healtcare.

(I also posted this at Sargent's website.) I can't believe I'm doing this, but I'm actually going to defend Rush.

Even though his position isn't grounded in reality and he doesn't know what the hell he is talking about, his position is still cogent. He believes that if Obama's agenda succeeds America will suffer and that if it fails it will be better off. So he doesn’t actually want America to fail (even though he’s not helping himself by saying things that could be taken that way). And he believes that it is absolutely impossible that Obama's policies will improve the economy so there is no point in answering a question with a premise like that.

(It's like asking a reasonable person, "What if signing Brett Favre, will make the Detroit Lions will win the Super Bowl?" Most reasonable people would reject the premise. And to Rush the premise that Obama’s policies will improve the economy are just as absurd as Brett Favre taking the Lions to the Super Bowl.)

Barry's plan has NEVER worked..never in any country that has tried it.

You = Fail.

The rest of your rant is so delusional and so out of touch with reality that I'm wondering how long the hospital gives you computer access ...

I suppose the Rupub’s feel about Obama’s stimulus package sort of like we felt about Bush’s Iraq War. In out heart we knew it would probably fail, but if it did succeed it would lead to all sorts of follow on projects going down a road we most definitely didn’t want to go down. We weren’t against the troops and we didn’t want to see the U.S. loose a war, but it was just hard to see how anything good was going to come out of it. That said, there is one more similarity, we were right and they were wrong on Iraq, and we are still right and they are still wrong on the stimulus. And Rush is still a big fat idiot.

Who is John Galt?

pj in jesusland wrote: "The premise Rushbo rejects is that Obama was legitimately elected President ..."

The premise that Rush Limbaugh rejects is that Rush Limbaugh has any obligation to say or do anything other than whatever he thinks will get him more money.

Look at the comment from the self-proclaimed "Ditto Head" posting as "Loadmaster" above. He appears to be a genuine Limbaugh fan, not a parody.

Rush Limbaugh has become a mega-multi-millionaire, by peddling sleazy lies and vicious hate-speech to lots of weak-minded, ignorant, mean-spirited, gullible dupes just like Loadmaster for many years.

Rush Limbaugh rejects the premise that there is any reason why he should stop doing that, while there are still millions more dollars to be had from that racket.

J. Frank--
Please show us all where several prominent Democrats wished for the Iraq war to fail. Not those who argued against it, nor protested it, but openly and vehemently wished for its failure.

As soon as you can, the analogy will fit. Otherwise, not so much.

One other thing we should all consider: Rush is less popular than Dubya.

So at least he's just preaching the choir--the rest of America realizes what a scumbag he is.

re "Barry's plan has NEVER worked..never in any country that has tried it."

Looks like loadmaster has a pantload alright.

Why anybody would take Limbaugh's prognostications seriously is beyond me. The man's predictions, in all areas, are nearly always wrong. He's proven repeatedly that he doesn't know jack. Yet, he still has a following who seem to want to be lied to. Very odd.

Exactly. The only "premise" that should be rejected here is that Limbaugh's opinion has greater than zero worth.

They're not paying Rush almost a half a billion dollars for nothing.

As Frum frames it, I like the match up: Obama vs. Rush. Let's get Rush more scrutiny. We all know he would not last a month in a Presidential campaign. Let's not let this issue slide. Let's get him on Letterman or the View - apparently the only MSM outlets not too polite or afraid to ask the tough questions.

Explain to us Rush: How can the President's policies fail and at the same time country succeeds?

I'll answer that for you: Rush will be filthy rich whether or not Obama fails. He doesn't give a shit. He's just doing his job and he's got 20 million - he claims - historically-, mathematically-, and economically-challenged ditto heads.

I've known a fair number of radio guys. Limbaugh is a typical radio guy. Radio guys love the sound of their own voices. Doesn't matter what they're saying. If they make lots of money and get to talk on the radio, they're happy.

Loadmaster: What a diatribe there pal. Funny you make claims as if they are fact, yet offer absolutely no evidence to support your positions. You sound like you have been drinking the kool-aid laced with a little of Rush's Oxycontin. Seriously, it is YOUR political and economic policy that has failed for all the world to see.

I am still dumbfounded at how many people still cling to a tried and proven failure.

A progressive agenda HAS ALWAYS pulled America out of a conservative republican wrought disaster. See Teddy Roosevelt the trust-buster (gilded age) or FDR's new deal (great depression). In the case of the new deal, the strongest middle class in civilization was created, and EVERYONE, from main street to Wall Street, benefited.

If you argue that point, you are beyond any sense of reason.

As for opposition to Bu$h's SS privatization scheme, yes, we hoped it would fail. Because most sane people knew if you turned over SS accounts to Wall Street, their worth could vanish into thin air. Just imagine where millions of people would be right now if Bu$h had succeeded?

John,

"http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123604419092515347.html"

Read it with an open mind."

More like an open head wound.

WSJ: "Our Troubled Economy Is A Response To Barack Obama's Policies"

Ah, the National Bureau of Economic Research, which is the official arbiter of when recessions begin and end, declared that the recession began in the 4th QTR of 2007. Add to that the stock market has been declining for eight years in a row in inflation-adjusted dollars.

Just HOW did "Obama's policies" go back in time and kick off this disaster ???

Limbaugh is a dick.

Loadmaster - I just love a good parody troll. That was teh awesome the way you mimiced ditto head speak just like they do. A fucking work of genius. Good on ya, we need a good laugh every now and then.

Read it with an open mind

Don't you just love how Hansen points us to the perenially dishonest Wall Street Jounal editorial page and admonishes us to "Read it with an open mind," as if Hansen's faith-based belief in the right-wing myths the Journal pushes equates to Unquestionable Truth, depsite his not even bothering, much less succeeding! -- to defend his faith-based right-win bullshit when it's challenged by his betters?

I don't, either. Shame on you, Hansen.

Hey Loadmaster, what planes were/are you working on? My brother was in the Air Force Reserves and was a loadmaster on C130s and C124s. Pretty awesome planes when I've been in them at air shows etc.

One out of every six Tennesseans(?) has admitted telling racist jokes about our duly elected president - and I surely bet that one in six is an ardent Limbaugh listener.

Let's peel back the layers to that stinking onion - RUSH LIMBAUGH WANTS PRESIDENT OBAMA TO FAIL SIMPLY BECAUSE PRESIDENT OBAMA IS AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN.

Whomever does not pick up on the racist overtones of Mr. Limbaugh's diatribes is a fool! -Kevo

The reason to keep talking about Rush's influence in the GOP is because the man bloviates for 3 hours a day, 5 days a week-- it is INEVITABLE that he will say something completely and indefensible and the GOP won't know what to do.(Remember the "Barack the magical negro" song, anyone? That was a Rush thing, something that he thinks is HILARIOUS.)

As someone who has listened to a fair amount of Rush as a preview of the GOP's future talking points, Rush WILL cross the line, Rush WILL take it too far and he'll do it soon. The GOP leadership-- Steele, Cantor, etc.-- is making a huge mistake proclaiming their adoration and that he's so important to their party and/or conservative movement. The one lesson the GOP hasn't learned is that there are times to STFU, sometimes it is in your best interest. However, like Rush, they have become infatuated with the sounds of their own voices.

As for the likes of Mr. Load upthread, his post was a lovely mashup of everything Rush says, only he makes even less sense than Rush does. (Which is saying a lot.) It's unadulterated ignorance, fact-free, and predicated on accepting the Gospels According to Rush without question. That is why they're called dittoheads. Rush "jokes" that he tells his audience what to think so they don't have to-- but it's not really a joke. Dittoheads don't get it, the joke is truly on them.

To those defending Rush Limbaugh:

I understand what you're saying, but I dont agree.

We're in a situation where Obama has the presidency, large majorities in both houses of Congress, and a sizable approval rating. The policies he comes up with are largely going to be passed.

Rush can wish that they dont get passed, and that's fine. However, they're going to get passed. The stimulus package already has been passed.

At this point, for Rush to hope that Obama fails is to hope that his policies will fail. And to hope that his policies will fail is to hope that America will be worse off in 2012 than it is now.

It's absolutely fine for Rush to *think* that Obama will fail, or even believe beyond any shadow of a doubt that he will fail. But to hope for it is to truly hope for America's failure.

Think about the Iraq war. I thought it would fail, but I never *hoped* it would. In regards to Social Security privatization, I hoped that it would fail to be enacted. But if it had been enacted, I would hope that it works.

I hope that Bush did something in his time in office that prevented or at least delayed Iran and North Korea from getting nukes. I dont think he did, but I sure hope he did!

All Rush had to do is say "I think Obama will fail" or even "Obama will absolutely fail", and that would have been fine. But to *hope* for his failure is beyond the pale. He deserves to be criticized for it.

More to the point, it's to the Democrats' advantage to shine a light on it. Moderates will be turned off by talk like that. Rush will push people towards the Dems. Even if you disagree with me and believe that his comments are reasonable and part of a fair discourse, they're still politically unwise.

Loadmaster--what a load of crap. Methinks thou dost protest too much. I suspect your life is crap.
How fortunate you get to be anonymous to drop such drivel then fly away.
What are you doing for the economic cause? Did you speak out when your Bushites destroyed this country?
You offer nothing but negativity and doom.
Your conservative buddies caused this mess with not wanting to regulate markets and lenders. Maybe you need to educate yourself.
Your poor use of language, grammar, syntax and tense confirms it.

HTF does he "reject the premise"? Sargent's two hypotheticals--the economy recovers, or it doesn't--exhaust all of the possibilities. Limbaugh "rejects the premise" in precisely the Republican way: by rejecting reality itself.

I just don't understand what's so outrageous about this. Limbaugh hopes that Obama fails in implementing his economic plans because Limbaugh believes Obama's policies would be harmful to the national interest. We hoped Bush would fail in privatizing social security for the same reason.

That's what Sargent was trying to clarify. It's fine to oppose Obama's ideas for the economy. What is not fine is to hope that, once those proposals have been enacted, the economy subsequently tanks to teach everyone a lesson. No liberal would have hoped, if Bush's SS plan had passed, for lots of old people to be poor just so that Bush would be wrong.

Limbaugh responded, "I reject your premise."

Does El FlushBo even know what the statement "I reject your premise" mean? After all, he seems to getting a live feed from Drudge during his program every day. I can bring up Drudge, hit "refresh" right before Limbaugh goes on the air, and pretty much see what he'll be bleating into the microphone about---sometimes in a precise, word-for-word format.

It's a nice, comfortable feeling to know that the entire GOP is cowering before the throne of a self-anointed, stone-cold poser. It's like discovering that Emperor Napoleon is none other than Pee Wee Herman....

I think it has become obvious that the right-wingers have an absolute incapicity to see that their policies are COMPLETE AND TOTAL FAILURES!!!!!! And, that what they spout is gibberish and drivel. Modern conservativism has become a mental disease, and Rush is the head lunatic.

To echo Steve W. and kth above me, I dont see how Rush can object to this premise:

Or, alternatively put, putting aside the question of what the policies are in your view destined to do, is it true that if they fail in their stated goal of righting the economy, won't the country suffer further as a result?

I mean, that's what Rush claims is going to happen. And he's not willing to discuss that? That just makes no sense.

Without hearing Limbaugh and only hearing the rants against him:

Limbaugh hopes that Obamsa fails in his attempts to implement his policicies, just as many hoped Bush would fail in his attempt to get us to go to war in Iraq.

He wants his policies to fail because they will reduce our freedom. Even if they fix the economy it is not worth our freedom. If we could improve our economy be importing slaves would you support it? No because it would be wrong. Limbaugh thinks the policies are unconstitutional and wrong because they limit our freedom so he hopes they fail.

If stopping all welfare and gov provided health care improved the economy would you support it? For those who beleive we have too much welfare and gov't health care they will also hope that expansion of those fail for the sake of freedom.

Disagree with him if you want to but he is not saying anything inconsistent or unpatriotic.

"Limbaugh hopes that Obamsa fails in his attempts to implement his policicies"

No. that's simply not true. If you read what he actually said in the context he was saying it, Rush was not hoping Obama failed to IMPLEMENT his policies. That's clearly not what he meant.

Mike

Limbaugh hopes that Obamsa fails in his attempts to implement his policicies, just as many hoped Bush would fail in his attempt to get us to go to war in Iraq.

Um, no.

Limbaugh doesn't want Obama to fail to enact his policies - he hopes the policies themselves fail. The last thing he wants after eight ears of Republican policy screwing up the country is for a popular Democrat to succeed in fixing it. That would take his credibility from its current value of 0 down to around -1000.

He (and his "interpreters") can tap dance, spin and bullshit all they want, but it's pretty clear what his position is, here.

On a related note: doesn't the fact that he doesn't run for office kind of speak for itself, and tell you everything you need to know about him? In addition to rendering all his blather about "guts" and "balls" even sillier, I mean.

To Rush and other Republicans, the producers and achievers are market manipulators and the like, not actual productive workers, inventors, original investors with ideas (Steve Jobs, the Google crew) etc. Hence they promote dishonest trash like low capital gains tax rates.

I fully understand how Rush would want the president (his policies and agenda) to fail, for the sake of the survival of the country. Its very simple and many, many people feel that way.
almost half of America did NOT vote for onamanation. No landslide victory there....those that did will watch in horror as they see their savings dwindle to zero, hear the Dr. say the gov't won't approve your treatment, watch the dems spending spree get bigger every month, and have to answer to our kids about why they are paying almost 50% of THEIR income for the choices made by this congress. There is no "tax cut"..its a trap. other taxes are going up, and we get what we knew we would have under this admin....nothing. No change. no hope.
I'd rather have lower taxes, choose my OWN healthcare, know my kids and grandkids are keeping their fair ahare of their earnings, and if Obama's agenda is all he has to offer us..no thanks.
He can keep the "change".

To 'hope the policies fail' presupposes that if they succeed he will lose all credibility, position or power.

If he said 'that is why they will fail', does not stake out his position in the starkest possibly way.

But he does stake out his position in the starkest possible way. For people like Rush it is existential conflict. They cannot live with us and must do anything they can to destabilize any part of the Democratic agenda to make it not succeed. It's merits are irrelevant.

For people like Rush, it's all about them.

It's who they are.

Americans United for Change has a GREAT new TV ad about the Congressional Republicans saying NO to rebuilding America and Mush Limbaugh wanting Obama to FAIL:

Rebuilding America

Elaine says: I'd rather have lower taxes, choose my OWN healthcare, know my kids and grandkids are keeping their fair ahare of their earnings, and if Obama's agenda is all he has to offer us..no thanks.
He can keep the "change".

Woman, you are an idiot. That's exactly what you have had the last 8 years. Maybe you are doing well, and if so, your words are shameful. Basically you say I am fine, the hell with everyone else. You are a big part of the reason why this country is in a tailspin.

Thanks to TG Chicago at 6:25pm and DH Walker at 7:38pm. I have said the same thing in previous threads, but it needs to be repeated every time someone tries to defend Rush.

Rush has not phrased his wish for Obama to fail as a hope that Obama's policies will fail to be enacted. If you listen even briefly to his ranting, it becomes clear that he wants the policies themselves to fail. And Rush does not do nuance, so he has never tried to explain how Obama's policies, once enacted, can fail without causing significant hardship to the country.

Despite slanderous claims to the contrary from Rush and many other rightwing blowhards, nobody on the left has ever rooted for more American servicepeople or Iraqi citizens to die in order to prove that Bush's decision to invade Iraq was wrong. We were sure this would happen but we did not root for it. If we had, it would be exactly equivalent to what Rush is publicly rooting for now with respect to the economy.

Typical idiotic right wing shitheads thinking that the DOW is going down because of Obama instead of a world wide meltdown of the capitalistic system. Typical right wing shitheads with little experience of the world think that 800 billion is going to matter to a global economy that is overleveraged because of phony money to what some estimates have as 500 to 600 trillion. Did you catch that Loadmaster? 500 to 600 TRILLION DOLLARS DOESN'T EXIST AND IS ON THE BOOK!! You've been in charge for 30 years strong and you've created a Tsunami that the world has never seen and now, there is some sucker named Obama we've asked to stand in front of the tidal wave and take the crushing blows and try and figure a way out.

What do the right wing shitheads do? Blame the guy now stuck with the onslaught instead of the ones that brought it on. Of course the ones that brought it on are they themselves. Why would an authoritarian personality type that is slave to the mindless drivel of a failed shock want to step outside of their ignorance for a few moments and evaluate the situation honestly?

There are a handful of people who have really screwed up America in the last few decades.

Who owns FOX news? Why does she/he hate America?

failed shock jock.

Elaine wants to choose her own healthcare. As if she won't be able to. Of course Elaine doesn't comprehend that her children will be paying 50% of their income in taxes because there has been a massive transfer of wealth for the last 30 years to the upper 5% and the higher taxes her children pay will be because of the party she and anyone over 40 has thrown for the last 3 decades.

Let's face it Americans are stupid and they aren't getting smarter. they have no understanding of any kind of history and we're expecting them to understand recent history?

These are the people that Rush appeals to, the ignorant adnthe uniformed, those that think having an opinion equals possessing actual knowledge. They are uneducated and stupid and therefore resentful and there are massive amounts of them.

The times are precarious.

I answer that question with another: how can someone wish for a country the succeed but a war to fail?

cat: you may not understand the economy, but boy do you understand the enemy! Good thing we have a populist like Obama in office to protect us from those authoritarian types.

All value is imaginary. It doesn't exist in the physical universe. If you propose that we tear down our cursed running-dog bourgeois lifestyles and rebuild from the rubble based on bartering hard assets, that's fine; however, it would be nice if next time your candidate stated his goal as such while running for President.

I am confused by most of you folks. Resorting to foul language and name-calling over someone that you say is mentally imbalanced? Try to think clearly, and please respond in an adult manner- If America had a total right-wing hard-liner as president now, who was pushing for all he was worth to wipe out liberalism once and for all, doing away with all special privileges for homosexuals, revoking all abortion rights, standing firmly with Israel against her enemies, ending all taxes on capital gains and inheritance, allowing AIG and the failed banks and corporations to go out the natural way, allowing the housing market to balance itself through the open market, supporting capitalism as the only valid economic philosophy- would you honestly be hoping for that person, his philosophy and his policies to succeed?

Grow up and live in the real world.

Yes, hardline right wingers believe in the free markets. What other fantasies rattle around in your head? Oh that Obama isn't "standing with Israel against her enemies".

---

"All value is imaginary". Get a clue. Life exists outside of etrade, your stock picks, and your econ 101 textbook.

Folks like Eileen must have a different kind of health care than the rest of us, because as of now everyone I know has private company bureaucrats that decide who gets what treatment based on profit margins and you can't appeal their decisions.

If government-run health insurance is so bad why does John McCain have it? I haven't heard of a single GOP congresscritter rejecting their government-run health insurance and opting to get private insurance out-of-pocket, have you? Not to mention how often they all confuse government-run health insurance with government-run health care. Big difference.

lest it need to be said...
I never HOPED Bush's economic & foreign policies, or his war on terror strategy would fail.
I KNEW they would fail.
And I HOPED I was wrong.

I'm willing to assume most of you felt the same way, which is a fundamental difference between us & the douchebag dittoheads.

Final word of advice - never take the words of someone who uses the word "load" in his screenname seriously. To paraphrase, it is a waste of time & amuses the pig.

The "real world" doesn't require you to paint with a broad brush.

Black and white is what fiction is made of. Good and evil, hero and villain. We had plenty of that in the last administration.

Obama is attempting things that Rush should hope he succeeds in, even if it is not in the way he expects to work.

I was against neo-conservatism but Rush's promise (and I heard his show during the debate) of a domino effect of democracy across the Middle East was appealing and while I was skeptical, I truly hoped I was wrong.

I might STILL be wrong. I REALLY won't mind if we leave Iraq and it becomes a shining jewel of peace and prosperity that rubs off in all the right ways on its neighbors and Bush is redeemed for having made pre-emptive war into a useful tool to alleviate world suffering.

I can live with wounded pride for the sake of good results.

Rush clearly wants to get his way more than he wants success for our country and be proven wrong.

Most of the liberals I hear from here at WM stand behind what we believe in because we think we will accomplish more good in the world that way. Rush and his followers (the GOP members of Congress) fight Obama for the sake of fighting him. They will not concede one inch of common ground. It's wholly unrealistic that Obama miraculously has chosen the incorrect path towards progress in every single thing he's attempting. Obama WILL succeed at something good; not just popular but acknowledged as beneficial by most of the population (28% will say it's bad. It's always 28%). Rush will be upset by this triumph. Perhaps he will privately be pleased but will not admit sharing any joy. The malevolence needed to sacrifice our brethren in humanity for the sake of his kabuki theater profoundly disappoints me.

Hillary committed $900,000,000.00 this week in aide to Israel's sworn enemies.

And yes, we really do believe in a free and open market, as opposed to redistribution/socialism/collectivism/communism (all invalid economic philosophies).

What do you believe in, Cat?

Tooweary- while I disagree entirely with your worldview, I want to honor your thoughtful and mature response.

Rush is simply verbalizing the collective outrage of 55 million fellow Americans. It is not designed to avoid polarization. But then, neither is Obama's administration. Polarization is the driving force of American politics.

Ken-

You still don't get it. Stop throwing around all the red herrings (abortion and gay equal rights, etc.). There is a very important context here. Rush has stated repeatedly that he wants Obama to fail-- even more specifically for his economic policies designed to help turn around the economy to FAIL. What does that mean for the country? It's really not that hard to understand.

Additionally, if the GOP further embraces Rush's Fail Doctrine it's not going to help them in the eyes of the 68% of Americans who approve of Obama and his policies. It's one thing to disagree on policy and it's another to do what you can to ensure that policies fail.

Hillary committed $900,000,000.00 this week in aide to Israel's sworn enemies

False, you mealy-mouthed fuckwit.

Obama, exactly like Bush before him, has committed aid to rebuild Gaza with provisions that no money go to Hamas.

You'll need to do a little better than that.

Hillary committed $900,000,000.00 this week in aide to Israel's sworn enemies

Funny, as an American, my allegiance is to America, not Israel. Perhaps you're a little conflicted about where your allegiances lie. Our very first president had something to say about this:

"Avoid foreign entanglements."

And yes, we really do believe in a free and open market

No, you don't, or you would oppose the billions in corporate welfare that take place every year, and all the redistribution in wealth that has taken place as wages for the middle and lower classes have stagnated while the ultra-wealthy have gotten wealthier.

Don't try and pretend now that you do. Get tossed.

Rush is simply verbalizing the collective outrage of 55 million fellow Americans. It is not designed to avoid polarization. But then, neither is Obama's administration

In fact Obama's administration is designed to avoid polarization, as he has reached out to Republicans by naming them to his cabinet, drastically compromising on the stimulus bill, using inclusive language, and meeting with Republican leaders and pundits for dinner, for fuck's sake.

Because you don't like Obama's politics and are apparently some slack-jawed follower of a drug-addled felon doesn't mean that Obama has pursued a policy of polarization, which clearly he has not.

Rush is simply verbalizing the collective outrage of 55 million fellow Americans.

Collective stupidity, perhaps.

Ken-

I'd say we just came out of a period of pretty pure laissez-faire capitalism-- look how stable an outcome that produces! I have no problem with most aspects of capitalism, although I do have a problem with capitalism that has absolutely no ethics and no oversight that is driven by such unfettered and unrestrained greed that it leads to the collapse of the global economy.

I love it when people are so emotionally committed to capitalism that they remain completely blind to its painfully obvious pitfalls and weaknesses. That is the inherent danger of worshipping a system and deciding it is inherently better than every other because it's unamerican to think otherwise.

While I don't think socialism is the answer either-- and the vast majority of dems don't think so either-- I don't think the republican's version of capitalism is particularly healthy or good for our stability as a country (or world) either. That's pretty damn obvious to everyone right now, or at least to those who are willing to open their eyes and face the truth.

If you want to export capitalism as the best economic system EVER it might help if out-of-control capitalism isn't seen as leading to the collapse of the global economy. I know it's more fun for republicans to pretend that it's capitalists v. socialists, but really it's different takes on the government's role in a capitalistic system. Dems want some government restrictions and oversight to help keep things more stable, the GOP wants next to none.

The truly ironic thing is that if it weren't for the GOP version of no-rules capitalism we wouldn't have to use so much government power to try and stabilize the economy. If you don't break the economy then we wouldn't need to take such extreme measures to try and fix it.

"Rush is simply verbalizing the collective outrage of 55 million fellow Americans."

No, dear, he's not. He's engaging in silly diatribes to enhance his ratings and his ego, and a few, fortunately very few, silly people like yourself are eating it up.

"It is not designed to avoid polarization."

No shit, Sherlock. Limbaugh's ratings *depend* on polarization, as he is well aware.

Depends on what your notion of success is? Britt said it best.......do we want a nation where everyone is poor and equal or a nation where only some are poor and its not equal? Obama wants us all poor and equal...Limbaugh wants this idea to FAIL and so do I.

And although I think Limbaugh bcan be an absolute ass....he is smarter than any of you clowns.

"I am confused by most of you folks. Resorting to foul language and name-calling over someone that you say is mentally imbalanced?"

Dear heart, why on earth *shouldn't* we use "foul language and name-calling" when describing Limbaugh? Of what relevance is the language to the points we are making?

"Try to think clearly, and please respond in an adult manner"

ROFLMAO.... Dear heart, you don't get to define what "an adult manner" is. Moreover, considering that you've started your post with an ad hominem attack, you're hardly one to talk about responding in "an adult manner."

"If America had a total right-wing hard-liner as president now, who was pushing for all he was worth to wipe out liberalism once and for all"

Dear heart, since Obama is doing no such thing, forgive me if I treat your "analogy" with the laughter and mockery that it deserves.

"doing away with all special privileges for homosexuals"

ROFLMAO.... My goodness, you really are unhinged, aren't you? Man, this is hilarious.

"standing firmly with Israel against her enemies"

LOL.... Yeah, because no Democrat has every stood "firmly with Israel against her enemies."

"supporting capitalism as the only valid economic philosophy"

Dear heart, the U.S. does not have a pure capitalist system and has not had one for over a century, nor has the Republican Party supported a pure capitalist system in decades, nor is pure capitalism "the only valid economic philosophy." In fact, history demonstrates that quite conclusively.

"would you honestly be hoping for that person, his philosophy and his policies to succeed?"

If the consequences of failure were so extreme? Damn right, just as I did with the Bush administration. Sadly, I was right.

"Grow up and live in the real world."

ROFLMAO.... Oh, the irony.... Dear heart, wherever the real world is, it's quite clear that you, at least, don't live there.

"Depends on what your notion of success is?"

Not really.

"Britt said it best.......do we want a nation where everyone is poor and equal or a nation where only some are poor and its not equal?"

ROFL.... I do so love reading delusional morons. Here's a free clue: that's a false dichotomy and nobody, anywhere, advocates that lovely little strawman argument of yours.

"Obama wants us all poor and equal..."

No, dear, he doesn't. It's only delusional morons like yourself who believe shit like that.

"Limbaugh wants this idea to FAIL and so do I."

ROFL.... No, dear, Limbaugh wants Obama to fail. Period.

"And although I think Limbaugh bcan be an absolute ass....he is smarter than any of you clowns."

Sure, dear, whatever you say. I'm sure that, to you, Limbaugh really does sound smart. To the rest of us, not so much.

Oh get over yourselves you moron democrats. I want Obama to fail to implement socialism. I want Obama to fail to cram damaging green policies down our throats. I want Obama to fail to screw up the Supreme Court. I want Obama to fail to turn the country into a business wasteland. AND SO SHOULD YOU ZOE instead of trying so hard to be superior but only succeeding in illustrating your insufferable lack of a brain...dear, sweet darlin' heart.

I WANT OBAMA TO FAIL. Gatting my drift?

Here is how what Rush is calling for is different. We might have opposed Bush's policies-- especially life or death issues like declaring war-- but you never heard any of us saying that we hope Bush's ideas fail, driving the country into the ditch and collapsing the global economy-- just to teach the GOP a lesson about the crapiness of their misguided, wrongly-held beliefs!

Right now Obama is trying to help a dangerously sick and ailing economy-- if what he's doing doesn't work logic dictates that things will get far, far worse. Please explain to me how openly wishing for Obama's economic policies to fail isn't wishing for American to suffer more?

Kate/Ken/Bush and Rush's deadenders,

You wouldn't recognize socialism if it walked up to you and bit you on your nose. Seriously. What is socialism to you? An economy strengthened by cutting-edge energy jobs that can't be exported? Doing nothing to try and stop a massive, catastrophic economic failure of financial institutions just to support your political ideology? Affordable health-care accessible to all Americans, not just to those who work for the federal government?

You know what I really want Obama to do? Return the top tax rates to those of the Reagan Era. Apparently since it makes Obama a pinko because he wants to raise them 4% then Reagan was a HUGE commie pinko.

I want Obama to fail to turn the country into a business wasteland

We are in a business wasteland right now!

Over the past two years the economy has lost millions of jobs and thousands of small businesses. Even our largest and most stable corporations are teetering on bankruptcy.

This is because of the kind of policies that Rush Limbaugh unthinkingly supported.

We are in a business wasteland caused by a disastrous Republican ideology which was supported by mouth-breathing ditto heads who don't understand economics, don't understand the dynamics of what has been happening in the financial world -- and tellingly, can't even tell the difference between zoe and PaulB.

And as a case in point, you were unable even to deduce from her diction and grasp of the material that zoe probably possesses 50 or 75 more IQ points than you do.

Epic. Fail.

Welcome to the conversation Kate (well, not really). Now please explain how Obama is going to fail in all these things?

Will unanimous Republican opposition somehow block him from getting these things passed in Congress?

Will they get passed but somehow fail to have the dire consequences you predict? (I would call that success not failure since neither I nor Obama want to implement socialism or turn the economy into a business wasteland)

Will the economy tank and thus discredit Obama and let the Republicans win seats back in 2010 and 2012? (I would call this failure for Obama and America. If this is what you and Rush are rooting, then every nasty thing we are saying about you is true)

Why can't trolls use spell check?

Anyone else gatting my drift?

Britt said it best.......do we want a nation where everyone is poor and equal or a nation where only some are poor and its not equal?

In other words, you want to turn the United States into Brazil or Mexico, where rich people buy private armies to protect themselves from the rest of their fellow citizens. But you're okay with that, because you just know in your heart that you'll get to work for a super-rich guy like Britt someday, which will be just like being super-rich yourself.

FDR's government intervention succeeded and the country failed (17% unemployment in 1n 1937).
Richard Nixon failed to cover-up an illegal action by his subordinates and failed to stonewall the investigation. That's certainly an example of a president failing but the country succeeding.
In Obama's case, you leave out the option of the economy getting better without government intervention, when in reality, that is the NORMAL occurence in a recession. Got it yet?

To Rush's fan club: We had a war in this country between 1861 and 1865 to settle these issues. Your side lost. Get over it.

I love it-- suddenly conservatives are doing their best attempt at something they usually accuse liberals of, "revisionist history."

FDR's government inverventions DID work-- unemployment steadily dropped from its peak of 25% in '33 to 14% in '38. It spiked back up to 17% in '39 only after FDR rolled back a bunch of New Deal reforms and we had another recession.

The thing is that the New Deal happened without a reference, they were taking a huge gamble to test a theory. This time we have the expereince of several recessions as well as the Great Depression to help guide us. Our economy is much bigger now, our country is bigger and we have a lot more information at our disposal. Doesn't mean things are going to be easy, but the one thing we do know is that doing nothing is the worst thing we can do.

Apparently you haven't heard of Japan's lost decade. Things don't always turn around "normally" or without a lot of pain or a lot more loss. It's far easier to come back from major losses if you don't let it unravel completely first.

FDR's government intervention succeeded and the country failed (17% unemployment in 1n 1937).

Down from 25% unemployment in 1932. But I guess that because FDR did not wave his magic wand and create full employment, the country failed. Here's an idea -- maybe we shouldn't let the country get to 25% unemployment before we get off our asses and do something. Maybe we should intervene while we're still at only 10% or 15% unemployment.

I always thought you guys were speaking metaphorically when you talked about "the magic of the market" but, no, you really do think that magical elves come along and fix everything while you're asleep and if unemployment goes from 25% to 14%, it wasn't FDR's policies that did it. Nope, it must have been magical elves.

I too hope he fails; so should anyone who loves America.

Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis: The Cloward-Piven Strategy

Actually, because of FDR's intervention and the New Deal:

* The Unemployment Rate went from 25% in 1932 down to 9% in 1936 (Note that if we still calculated the Unemployment Rate as we did in the 1930s, our current Unemployment Rate would be over 15%).

* The GDP went from negative in 1932 to over 10% in 1936.

The New Deal, raising taxes on the Rich & Corporate and using the money to create jobs in the national economy, WORKED LIKE A CHARM.

"Oh get over yourselves you moron democrats."

ROFL.... Oh, the irony.

"I want Obama to fail to implement socialism."

Guess what? You got your wish! Because whatever Obama is implementing, socialism it ain't.

"I want Obama to fail to cram damaging green policies down our throats."

Yeah, because reliance on fossil fuels and foreign oil has worked so well thus far, and is such a sustainable plan for the future.

"I want Obama to fail to screw up the Supreme Court."

You get your wish there, too. Happy now?

"I want Obama to fail to turn the country into a business wasteland."

ROFL... As compared to what we have now after eight years of Republican policies? Guess what? You're gonna get this wish, as well.

"AND SO SHOULD YOU ZOE instead of trying so hard to be superior but only succeeding in illustrating your insufferable lack of a brain...dear, sweet darlin' heart."

ROFLMAO.... Dear heart, I assume this was directed at me, not Zoe. And I'm not "trying ... to be superior," dear, I'm mocking you for your ignorance and your mindless partisan drivel.

"I WANT OBAMA TO FAIL. Gatting my drift?"

Yes, dear, we do.

"Freedom Fan"-

Um, perhaps you should get your information from people who aren't convinced that Obama is a secret radical Muslim commie pinko. Not to mention that the article you linked to is asserting the completely batshit idea that the whole financial crisis is some kind of dem mastermind strategy-- "manufacturing" a financial crisis just so they can turn America into a massive socialist state and destroy capitalism. All based on an article written by a couple of professors in a 1966 edition of "The Nation." Um, right. I guess that means that the GOP is in on it too? Is everyone in government a secret commie who hates freedom?

I've read some seriously batshit crazy conspiracy theories but this one takes the cake. This is going to be a very interesting 4-8 years if the wingnuts are already coming up with stuff like this a mere 6 weeks into Obama's term. I love it.

Sorry, I forgot to add that the completely wackadoodle article that FF linked to also asserts that Obama is a Marxist Manchurian candidate.

What is this grand marxist conspiracy all based on? Carter's Community Reinvestment Act, which apparently wasn't actually designed to help poor people become less poor and more financially stable by owning their own houses, but a secret marxist plot to "tear the pillars of this nation asunder in order to replace them with their demented socialist vision." You know, it's so obvious that this all stems from Carter, that secret Marxist who has spent the past few decades destroying America by helping poor families build and own their own homes. The outrage! Carter clearly hates America!

So who is ultimately to blame and got us in this GLOBAL financial mess? Well, there is a one helluva beautiful chart in that article. Apparently it's secret marxist democrats, red diaper babies, ACORN, George Soros, and poor minorities! Isn't there a way to blame all of this on atheists and feminists and immigrants too? Cast a wider net, fellas. You've gone this far with it, might as well take it all the way.

I have to give them props for creativity, they should be writing fiction. Also, whatever they're smoking/drinking, I want some.

Thanks, FF, that is one of the funniest things I've read in a really, really long time.

I am really surprised how misguided the American public is. I thought Americans are somehow better than Russians, but it seems that I've been mistaken. For me it is absolutely obvious that Obama is ruining economy from the day he was elected. Maybe, by economy Americans mean something else, like social justice. That is not going to change until the government introduces food stamps for all population and limit shoes to one pair a year. With present rate of stock falling, that may happen in one-two years.

In Russia in 1917, communists did not promice to organize concentration camps. They promiced equality, freedom and food for all. Food shortage started within a month, wich cam as a huge surprize for them. They intervened to improve situation, which caused hunger. Hope, Americans will wake up earlier.

After the lovely interludes that were Johnson's Great Society and Carterism, it just seemed impossible to me that America would embrace progressivism again.

Now that we have, I guess I have a different take from Mr Limbaugh. Me? I want Ms Pelosi, Mr Obama and Mr Reid to run rampant, succeed to the hilt. Then we'll get the hot-stove experience we need to realize the folly of progressive economics. The best outcome I can see is a meltdown and do-over.

Hey, Dimitri. Great post.

You should tell these readers the difference between the German farmer and the Russian farmer.

Reasonable people can campaign against Obama's economic programs and bailout plans, i.e. hoping he does not "succeed" in enacting them, while at the same time rooting for the economy to "successfully" rebound. I believe Obama's ideas for the economy will lengthen and deepen the recession. Why then should I support them and hope he succeeds in enacting those ideas? In short, I want him to 'fail' in his legislative agenda... I don't want the economy to fail. It's a nuance I know, but I've heard that liberals do nuance very well...

Hitler had plans for his country that would have made them powerful and wealthy. Should we have wanted to see that fail? The Soviet Union had policies that were supposed to make everyone equal and made everyone equally destitute. Should we have wanted them to succeed? Taliban leaders want everyone in Afghanistan to live what they think is a fulfilling life, I guess we should want them to succeed. George Bush did everything he thought he needed to keep America safe. Did all of you want him to succeed in his policies?

I'm surprised that so many people can't separate the objectives from the policies.

Ted said:

"Hitler had plans for his country that would have made them powerful and wealthy... Should we have wanted to see that fail?"

Apples and oranges Ted, apples and oranges. If they would have had a voice, there's not too many people out there that would have thought the Holocast and the killing of millions of innocent women and children was a worthy plan.

"The Soviet Union had policies that were supposed to make everyone equal. Should we have wanted them to succeed?"

Of course we would have liked to have seen them succeed. It didn't though.

"George Bush did everything he thought he needed to keep America safe. Did all of you want him to succeed in his policies?"

Of course, but again, that unfortunately didn't work either.

What's your point?

Yes, you won the argument. Obama is just like Hitler-- just last week I heard Obama promise to make our country stonger, attempt genocide against a historically oppressed minority, and to attack border nations and take them over. (Watch out Canada and Mexico!)

I'm actually surprised that it took so long for the troll(s) to run up against Godwin's Law.

Go back to freeperville, silly trolls. This thread is officially broken.

Ted wins the Godwin Award!

I had to look up "Godwin's law".

"If someone brings up Nazis in any conversation that has been going on too long for one of the parties, it can be used as a fair excuse to end the thread and declare victory for the other side."

YES! We win! Thanks Ted!