Thinking Arthur Wants Rush Limbaugh to Fail (30 cents)

OK, so Rush Limbaugh (I know I have to wash my hands after typing his name) wants Barack Obama to fail.  He said it once, and he proudly says it over and over.

Because, Rush says, if Obama fails, the country will succeed, and he loves the country.  Right?  If Obama succeeds, the country will fail, and then where will be?  Isn’t this insane?  (Of course, it makes good copy for Rachel Maddow, and that’s worth something.)

And, according to the gospel according to Rush, it is up to the conservatives in the Congress to ensure that Obama fails.

Now, having been roundly criticized for this, like by Michael Steele, for whom I actually feel sorry (he has had to apologize at least three times for being honest with regard to not only this topic, but a woman’s right to choose, and homosexuality), and even I believe by Mitch McConnell, who recently said “No one wants President Obama to fail”.  (If no one does, what does that make old Rush?)

In wake of this criticism (and ridicule), Rush (stubborn and arrogant fellow that he is) has become a student of texts.  He goes to the Federalist Papers, and concludes that James Madison wants Obama to fail!  And that this is why the Federalist founding fathers, in their wisdom, created a government with a balance of power, so that the Congress, whenever you wound up with a president who was a demogogue (takes one to know one, huh, Rush?), would not support his program, and would head him off at the pass, so to speak.  Congress would ensure that a demogogue (such as Socialist Obama) would fail.  And that’s what Rush wants, in order to save the country.  Because an improved economy, better health care, better education, etc., etc., will amount to a failure if it is achieved by Mr. Obama’s socialist (let’s go one better, Communist, for after all Limby has pointed it out that Obama was a “communi”ty organizer and this word has the same root as “communi”st; I kid you not) policies.

Well, Limbaugh’s ability to apply historic texts to contemporary situations may be sorely lacking, but at least it shows a type of independence of thought, right?  WRONG!!!!  Byron York (another right winger to be ignored), who is the chief political correspondent of the “Washington Examiner” (a paper that is sliding downhill faster than the Dow), in a column published a few days before Rush took credit for is WWJMD statement, said the exact same thing!

I guess you can’t officially “plagerize” if you are talking and not writing, or can you?  Well, of course you can.  Whether it is illegal or actionable is another question.  And this is exactly what Big Rush has done.

Now I don’t read or listen to Limbaugh very often (my stomach is not that strong), but if this is an example of his methodology behind his madness, as Rachel Maddow would say:  “Wow!”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s