Why Limbaugh Is Right to Oppose Obama's Economic Policies

Radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh wants Barack Obama's economic policies to fail. He said it, he said it again, and he said it again at CPAC. Limbaugh was quickly accused of treason, more or less, and now he says he doesn't understand what all the outrage is about. All he said was that he hopes the economic recovery plan fails.

Why is this surprising? I'm not stunned that conservatives oppose President Obama's economic policies. Actually, I wouldn't have it any other way.

El Rushbo didn't stop there, of course. Limbaugh went on at CPAC to suggest that liberals opposed to the war in Iraq wanted the war to fail. Oh, shock and outrage!!!

Well, guess what? You're damn right I wanted the Iraq war to fail.

Yeah, I said it.

I think I'm not supposed to say that out loud because then I'm supposed to be afraid that I'll be accused of hating America and wanting troops to die. So maybe I should rephrase that tenderly and with great care....

"I wanted the Bush policy on Iraq to fail because the war and the ideas it was based were in complete opposition to my basic principles about how The United States should use its wealth and power. However, I was hoping that a magic genie would be found in Baghdad that would create a situation where Bush's policies didn't work but with no loss of life, damage to property, expense or harm to our nation's reputation."

The problem is -- I'm not Bobby Jindal so I don't believe in magic.

So I repeat -- damn right I wanted the Iraq war to fail.

Not because I hate our country or hate the troops but for the exact opposite reason -- because I love my country and I value the lives of the people sworn to protect it. If you opposed the war, I bet you feel the same way. Now, fasten your seatbelt while I go a step further.

I believe that Limbaugh wants the president to fail because he loves the country, too.

Let me explain with a specific example from the war: torture. I didn't want torture to succeed. That's not because I pray for a world populated by terrorists devoid of fear or the ability to feel pain.

No, I wanted torture to fail because I can't bear the idea of a world where America tortures people because 'it works.' That's not America to me.

I assume Rush Limbaugh feels the same way, more or less, about the president's economic plan. I bet he simply can't bear the idea of a world where massive government spending is effective and therefore popular because 'it works.'

The trick here is not to jump to conclusions. This is where so many fail, both liberal and conservative. They can't just accept a person's statement as it stands. They need to embellish it with accusations of treason. It's wrong to leap from "I oppose policies that I'm opposed to" to "I want people to suffer and die."

Of course, this very thing was done to Candidate Obama during the election. It's been done to all Democratic candidates for years and by people like Limbaugh. Well, not just people like Limbaugh but by Limbaugh himself, obviously.

The real crime Rush Limbaugh should be called out on isn't for his opposition to liberal policies -- because, duh -- but for being such total hypocrite. His bread and butter for years has been forming ridiculous conclusions based on purposely distorting his opponent's statements. He could give it but he can't take it.

But just because accusing our political opponents of treason is a tactic that Republicans have used with glee for years doesn't mean it's something that Democrats should adopt. It's wrong and it's counterproductive.

I have no problem stating the simple truth -- conservatives like Limbaugh love America just as much as liberals do. That's not the issue. The real problem gets lost in all the sound and fury - we just have different ideas of what America means.

Since I'll be accused by conservatives of being part of the 'blame America' crowd, let me be clear -- there's a deep ideological split in this country and I blame America.

We're a complex nation; big, sprawling and full of contradictions. Just looking at the personalities of our forefathers from the pious prudish Pilgrims to libertines like self-help guru / orgy attendee Ben Franklin explains a lot about why the country that we love is such a messy mass of mixed messages to this very day. We had founders like Jefferson who simultaneously wrote stirring words of freedom and owned slaves. Small wonder part of our manifest destiny was the two party system and CNN's Crossfire. Don't blame Michael Moore and Ann Coulter. It's America's fault. The whole country and our rich jambalaya of history.

We're complicated. Deal with it. The thing we can do to get along better isn't to expect to agree on things. Forget that. But we can agree to disagree without the pointless added bullshit playacting of pretending disagreement is treason. The healthy conflict of views on our homeland is as American as Christian TV preachers involved in gay sex scandals.

It's a war of ideas. Bring it on, Rush,. We'll keep the light on for you.

Comments

[Gary Kivel]

02:02 PM on 03/07/2009

I would love to see president Obama face Rush Limbaugh in 2012, but why would Obama let hin start campaigning now, using this "debate" format as his launching post three years before any other candidates start running? if Limbaugh wants to debate Obama, he's got to get the Republicabn nomonation first!

[ASM826]

06:37 PM on 03/02/2009

I'm not a conservative, I'm a libertarian. I'm in favor of decriminalizing drugs, think all people should be treated equally, without regard to gender, race, religion, or sexual orientation. I'm not a Republican. The Republicans are now so similar to the Democrats that there is not enough difference between the parties to matter.

That being said, thanks for being honest. You wanted Bush to fail, I want Obama to fail. You didn't care who got hurt or how badly it hurt the country. Neither do I.

I don't think there has been a national politician that has had a rational budget policy in my lifetime. I don't blame Obama, McCain would have been right in there spending money he didn't have. I would have been rooting for him to fail, too. This insane spending will stop. We will finally run out of anyone to loan us any more. The question is what will be left of America when we reach that point.

[DaveS]

02:06 PM on 03/02/2009

Except, Rush Limbaugh never said he wanted the recovery plan to fail... he said he hoped Obama failed to pass the recover plan (among other of his policies). It's nuanced, but you're a journalist and we expect you to grasp these things.

[long333]

01:14 PM on 03/02/2009

I complement Mr. Stranahan on being able to somewhat acknowledge that turning back from Iraq was no less concern by a liberal for the country (from his point of view) than turning back from socialism for a conservative is any less concern for the country (from Rush's point of view).

[JimmyTee]

12:48 PM on 03/02/2009

"The problem is - I'm not Bobby Jindal so I don't believe in magic."

Do you really think alienating Catholics is going to help Obama in '12?

[hawkdriver]

12:30 PM on 03/02/2009

So Mr. Stranahan, Bravo for your watershed moment that seems to be owed to Mr. Limbaugh. I think you might try to look even deeper though to see the irony of your epiphany. I, like Mr. Limbaugh wished there would have been much more support from the left when the war was being hard fought and its outcome unclear. To hear that the rest of us now who simply think the excessive spending on special interest groups for this so-called stimulus package are somehow out of step for what is good for the country amazes me. Where dissent now could affect your 401K, dissent at the height of the war cost us American lives. Prospective.

(Sorry so many posts. It was a long comment)

[wheyghey]

06:05 PM on 03/02/2009

hawkdriver,

I am opposed to the outrageous spending for the Iraq War and for TARP and for the Stimulus. Why aren't you? If you are opposed to spending, even when some people think it will "help the country" then why aren't you opposed to it all?

[hawkdriver]

12:29 PM on 03/02/2009

But I called over the radio to other aircraft we had in the more volatile area such as Anbar Province. They said the same thing; that the people were peaceful and the only thing they saw pointed at their helicopters was purple fingers. The enlisted men were very quiet on our way back to Balad until one of them noted that it isn’t every day that you could see something like this. I said some people will never see an event like this in their lifetime. Imagine if you could go back to a time in our history to see the signing of the Declaration of Independence. We were excited to get back and see it all play out on the news. It was covered, but it was not the same event we saw below us. It didn’t have the significance that we felt. It was more a story of merely describing an event that had less violence than was expected. One would hardly notice that in a mere two years or so, a country went from despotism to democracy. It was disappointing but telling. The news that night for me was an awakening.

[wheyghey]

06:09 PM on 03/02/2009

hawkdriver,

How you can compare the American Revolution with an invasion and occupation of Iraq is beyond me. There are so many differences. Where to begin? I'm sure it makes you feel better about killing the people that you've killed to think that "this must be what it was like for George Washington." Well, maybe.

Hell, after the American Revolution, not everyone could vote and there was slavery. So you killed people for something BETTER than the American Revolutionaries. Huh. I guess you should feel good about killing then, huh?

[hawkdriver]

12:28 PM on 03/02/2009

I can remember flying over Northern cities in Iraq to record the national referendum on their constitution as one of those watershed moments in my life. We were assigned combat camera crews and we were supposed to record the activities over cities that were most likely to see violence during the voting. My two helicopters were assigned to fly overhead of Kirkuk and Erbil. Circling around the Kirkuk first, we noted very quickly that it seemed to be going better than anyone had expected. The Iraqis were peacefully moving about the city going to the polls. My Crew Chief and Door Gunner stated that they thought the people were pointing things at us. It didn’t look like weapons so we slowly decreased to get a closer look and try to make out what they were doing. When I got as close as I could and still feel comfortable, we could just make out that they were showing us their purple fingers. Almost everyone, as if to say, “Look at me. Today I am a citizen in a country that is voting for its own future; for our rules of law and liberties”, was pointing their purple finger at our helicopters. And there was no violence and it was a moving experience. And there was none then over Erbil. Granted, that was a generally more peaceful region given the country as whole at the time.

[hawkdriver]

12:28 PM on 03/02/2009

I’ve been deployed four times in support of OEF and OIF. The war has not been prosecuted in a perfect manner. But the Bush Administration and the military have had a lot better success than the media would allow you to believe. Don't jump to the conclusion that I’m saying the media overtly worked to affect the war to our detriment. But their coverage was not without consequence. The media in general affected the war in what they chose to record or report and what they deemed insignificant. In so many ways, the media led the wars course of evolution. When there was progress and the media ignored it over more substantially bad news, they told the insurgents what would play in the US news and on TV. They told them that all they had to do to stay front page was to set off an IED and kill a few soldiers. We wouldn’t care about the infrastructure being rebuilt in Samarra, we only care to about how far behind schedule it might be. Everything that was reported seemed to spell out impending doom. They didn’t need to mount a substantial offensive that most conventional conflicts would require to ultimately see victory; they were told that patience could win them the war because the American electorate was split politically. Moreover, there were elements of this great nation that made no bones about who they would prefer to win. Intelligence demonstrated the enemies observation to trends in the American media. (cont)

[hawkdriver]

12:59 PM on 03/02/2009

The world may not revolve around you Mr. Stranahan, but your sentiments don't just sit vapid in a vacuum either. I will admit, I like your honesty. I wish all the Liberals who secretly hoped that we would lose the war would step forward and admit it. I think you would find yourself in very large company. It is not a surprise to me though. Deployed, it was plainly clear how Liberals felt about those of us who were fighting the war. To see what happened where I was stationed from day to day and to see what actually made the news spoke volumes about our main stream media and where their loyalties lay. The only thing I would offer a correction on to your insightful article is to beg to differ with your feelings that your sentiment would have no effect on the war.

[APB]

01:11 AM on 03/03/2009

Thanks for your service, hawkdriver. This country was what it was thanks to folks like yourself, and the free Iraqis now have the same opportunity.

[aspizon]

12:25 PM on 03/02/2009

It would help, of course, if Limbaugh had even a rudimentary understanding of economics.

[scrogin]

01:55 PM on 03/02/2009

Rudimentary understnding? Is that anything like if you spend money you don't have, you end up in debt? How is that sustainable?
Last i checked if I tried to write a check for more money than was in the account, I got charged a return check fee for insufficcient funds. That equals debt, doesn't it?

[hawkdriver]

12:24 PM on 03/02/2009

The world may not revolve around you Mr. Stranahan, but your sentiments don't just sit vapid in a vacuum either. I will admit, I like your honesty. I wish all the Liberals who secretly hoped that we would lose the war would step forward and admit it. I think you would find yourself in very large company. It is not a surprise to me though. Deployed, it was plainly clear how Liberals felt about those of us who were fighting the war. To see what happened where I was stationed from day to day and to see what actually made the news spoke volumes about our main stream media and where their loyalties lay. The only thing I would offer a correction on to your insightful article is to beg to differ with your feelings that your sentiment would have no effect on the war. (cont)

[Exit]

11:29 AM on 03/02/2009

I get where you are coming from with this article and could understand Limbaugh's argument if he made the same argument against Bush. Not only that but the lies and distortions made by him and Hannity during the election about Ayers, Wright, and other wingnut stuff nullifies any argument they make now.

When talk radio grows up and discusses topics like adults then maybe they will be worth listening too. Until then talk radio remains the media for the Right Wing nuts in the country.

[Mgmax]

10:26 AM on 03/02/2009

Although i think you're way too blithe about failure in Iraq (so when you say you wanted us to fail, who exactly is it that you would like to see in power there right now? Funny how that side of it is always overlooked), I admire you for recognizing that there's something fundamentally illiberal and undemocratic about people who win an election 53-46 and insist that this means the almost-half of the country who disagreed with and opposed them must immediately surrender their opposition and disagreement.

Dissent was patriotic... until January 20, 2009, apparently.

[Jan Lystad]

08:58 AM on 03/02/2009

Wow, aren't you a hypocrite. At one moment you're escoriating Limbaugh for wanting Obama's economic plan to fail--because its an incredibly lousy economic plan, which will bankrupt our country--and in the next breath you're justifying your own desire to have the Iraq war fail, for similar reasons.
Why don't we all just be honest and admit that they are/were both bad?

Then, since the Iraq war is over, we could maybe concentrate on making sure our government doesn't bankrupt the country, rather than supporting the Obama administration just because they aren't Bush.

[Godfrey Pereira]

10:55 AM on 03/02/2009

what's with the Jindal is magician comment? You leftist are making more and more racist comments about Jindal and Indians since his rebuttal speech. I don't even want to get into the explanation of magic as racist. Its funny how you stand up for the little guy, the minorities and every one else you can exploit

[timm0]

09:16 PM on 03/01/2009

Interesting spin. Maybe I could agree with you if history, facts on the ground, complete lack of honesty from the administration during the ramp-up, and analysis from anyone with any knowledge of the incompetent f00ls in charge of the operation didn't SCREAM that the whole invasion/occupation idea was a pure dead-end disaster waiting to happen.

I knew we'd fail because the "plan" couldn't succeed. It may as well have been a plan to build a human pyramid to moon in order to mine it for its delicious pies. Impossible logistically and based on the quest for a nonsensical prize.

So it may be semantics, but whether or not I wanted it to succeed, there was just no chance at all for "winning." I think your comparison is flawed because of it.

[JulieSA]

09:22 AM on 03/02/2009

"So it may be semantics, but whether or not I wanted it to succeed, there was just no chance at all for "winning.""

Except it has been won. So as it turns out, you were wrong.