House of Eratosthenes

I was informed nearly a month ago that Rush Limbaugh hopes Barack Obama fails, and instructed to believe that this meant Limbaugh wants the economy to keep on tanking and for lots of people to suffer. I’m a big believer in following instructions, after all, if someone takes the time to give ’em to you, the least you can do is to obey them. So I penciled in my dutiful compliance, and proceeded to think with all my might that Rush Limbaugh wants the economy ruined.

I did jot myself a note to go and look up context, though. I couldn’t help noticing people were leaving it out when they were telling me what to think.

I just got around to looking it up, and I found out the context changed the message quite a bit. I’m not the least bit surprised. But I don’t think Rush Limbaugh wants the economy ruined or for people to suffer.

Why don’t you read the comments in whole, and tell me what you think.

I got a request here from a major American print publication. “Dear Rush: For the Obama [Immaculate] Inauguration we are asking a handful of very prominent politicians, statesmen, scholars, businessmen, commentators, and economists to write 400 words on their hope for the Obama presidency. We would love to include you. If you could send us 400 words on your hope for the Obama presidency, we need it by Monday night, that would be ideal.” Now, we’re caught in this trap again. The premise is, what is your “hope.” My hope, and please understand me when I say this. I disagree fervently with the people on our side of the aisle who have caved and who say, “Well, I hope he succeeds. We’ve got to give him a chance.” Why? They didn’t give Bush a chance in 2000. Before he was inaugurated the search-and-destroy mission had begun. I’m not talking about search-and-destroy, but I’ve been listening to Barack Obama for a year-and-a-half. I know what his politics are. I know what his plans are, as he has stated them. I don’t want them to succeed.

If I wanted Obama to succeed, I’d be happy the Republicans have laid down. And I would be encouraging Republicans to lay down and support him. Look, what he’s talking about is the absorption of as much of the private sector by the US government as possible, from the banking business, to the mortgage industry, the automobile business, to health care. I do not want the government in charge of all of these things. I don’t want this to work. So I’m thinking of replying to the guy, “Okay, I’ll send you a response, but I don’t need 400 words, I need four: I hope he fails.” (interruption) What are you laughing at? See, here’s the point. Everybody thinks it’s outrageous to say. Look, even my staff, “Oh, you can’t do that.” Why not? Why is it any different, what’s new, what is unfair about my saying I hope liberalism fails? Liberalism is our problem. Liberalism is what’s gotten us dangerously close to the precipice here. Why do I want more of it? I don’t care what the Drive-By story is. I would be honored if the Drive-By Media headlined me all day long: “Limbaugh: I Hope Obama Fails.” Somebody’s gotta say it.

Were the liberals out there hoping Bush succeeded or were they out there trying to destroy him before he was even inaugurated? Why do we have to play the game by their rules? Why do we have to accept the premise here that because of the historical nature of his presidency, that we want him to succeed? This is affirmative action, if we do that. We want to promote failure, we want to promote incompetence, we want to stand by and not object to what he’s doing simply because of the color of his skin? Sorry. I got past the historical nature of this months ago. He is the president of the United States, he’s my president, he’s a human being, and his ideas and policies are what count for me, not his skin color, not his past, not whatever ties he doesn’t have to being down with the struggle, all of that’s irrelevant to me. We’re talking about my country, the United States of America, my nieces, my nephews, your kids, your grandkids. Why in the world do we want to saddle them with more liberalism and socialism? Why would I want to do that? So I can answer it, four words, “I hope he fails.” And that would be the most outrageous thing anybody in this climate could say. Shows you just how far gone we are. Well, I know, I know. I am the last man standing.

I’m happy to be the last man standing. I’m honored to be the last man standing. Yeah, I’m the true maverick. I can do more than four words. I could say I hope he fails and I could do a brief explanation of why. You know, I want to win. If my party doesn’t, I do. If my party has sacrificed the whole concept of victory, sorry, I’m now the Republican in name only, and they are the sellouts. I’m serious about this. Why in the world, it’s what Ann Coulter was talking about, the tyranny of the majority, all these victims here, we gotta make sure the victims are finally assuaged. Well, the dirty little secret is this isn’t going to assuage anybody’s victim status, and the race industry isn’t going to go away, and the fact that America’s original sin of slavery is going to be absolved, it’s not going to happen. Just isn’t, folks. It’s too big a business for the left to keep all those things alive that divide the people of this country into groups that are against each other. Yes, I’m fired up about this.

That changes things just a bit. At least in my world, it does.

Update 2/12/09: I’ve now reached that awkward age at which it is an everyday occurrence for one to follow certain complex thoughts and research projects through to their bloody conclusions, without having the slightest residual idea what originally brought one past the trailhead. I’m afraid it is now costing more than one good blogger friend some well-deserved credit.

Do go see what Rick had to say about this…he was talking about it before I was talking about it…

The culture today is replete with the notion that voices like mine (who Limbaugh represents, people who are direct, blunt, to the point, etc) should be marginalized and dismissed simply because we’re not politically correct in the methods employed in our communications. The substance of what is being said gets lost in the style.

What do you really need to know about leftist propaganda? It makes simple things needlessly complex, and complex things unrealistically simple. That’s what you have to do to make liberal ideas look good.

And so, Barack Obama is not a lousy judge of character because his pastor was Jeremiah Wright…there are way too many “after alls.” After all, Obama didn’t know Wright talked that way, and after all, it’s high time we had a national dialogue on race. Anytime a liberal politician is revealed to be systematically making potentially disastrous decisions, deliberately or otherwise, there’s a bunch of “truths” that have to be considered. Much of the time, these have to do with “moving on” to “more important” things.

On the other hand, Limbaugh wants the economy to tank, plain & simple. Sarah Palin’s a dumbass because she can see Russia from her house (something she never said) — plain & simple. And Guantanamo? We just gotta close it down. Nevermind the consequences.

Simple things complex, and complex things simple; that’s the formula.

It’s truly amazing that some of the same folks who took this totally out of context were the same ones who told us that we took Rev. Wright’s hate speech out of context.

Yes, Rush wants America to fail and Rev. Wright is a patriot. Idiots.
- tim | 02/12/2009 @ 11:01
It’s not amazing at all, Tim, these are the same people who ‘contextualized’ things Sarah never said, because they were said by Tina Fey, or edited by Couric and Gibson. They also did the same for events that never happened in the way that the media portrayed, such as the abstinence only program, available at her daughter’s school; there was no such thing . The point is as long as it feeds ‘the narrative’ that’s all that matters, as Charlie Martin points out. But you knew this already, didn’t you. One hates to keep coming back to this point, but the fulcrum of the lies, part of the campaign to ensure his election, seems to start by discrediting the more charismatic and sympathetic of the two
members of the opposing team. It’s the ‘reality television’ principle brought to current events, if you create a convincing enough facade, weak minded follks mistake it for the real thing.
- narciso | 02/12/2009 @ 11:14
“The culture today is replete with the notion that voices like mine (who Limbaugh represents, people who are direct, blunt, to the point, etc) should be marginalized and dismissed simply because we’re not politically correct in the methods employed in our communications. The substance of what is being said gets lost in the style.”

I keep waiting for somebody to notice the similarity here to marriage (ah, “relationship”) counseling. In my experience and that of every man I know, difficulties always boil down to the “tone” employed by the male half. (Problem: “How can we save more money for the future?” Response: “You’re mean.” Counselor: “You need to learn to restate your concerns in a way that doesn’t make her feel threatened.”)

On a side note, that’s what happened with Ann Coulter on The View. She fights like a man while remaining eternally feminine, and the resident “women” revert to childhood while whining about her “tone.”

This is the nut of the culture wars, I think. Do we have the right to be adults or not?
- rob | 02/13/2009 @ 14:17
What do you really need to know about leftist propaganda? It makes simple things needlessly complex, and complex things unrealistically simple.

Precisely. Which is why every time I wind up getting in an argument with some idiot left-winger, the person has to result to strawmen and reading extremes into my position.

Me: “I believe the Second Amendment protects the individual right to own a gun.”
Lefty: “Oh, so you think that just anyone ought to be able to go out and pick up an Uzi, eh?”
Me: “I didn’t say that.”
Lefty: “Yes, you did. And that whole global warming thing? We need to start cracking down on these polluting industries so the ice caps will stop melting!”
Me: “Eh…even if conclusively demonstrated that polar ice really is experiencing a net shrinkage, it still hasn’t been demonstrated satisfactorily that airborne pollutants from mankind have anything to do with it.”

And on it goes. Brilliant as always, Morgan.
- cylarz | 02/13/2009 @ 22:46

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

On Hoping The Messiah FailsThursday, February 12th, 2009

On Hoping The Messiah Fails
Thursday, February 12th, 2009