Hoping for failure

I’ve been following the Limbaugh controversy recently, as it’s been fodder for a ton of outraged blog posts. I’ve been pretty outraged myself.

FOXNews.com – Rush Limbaugh’s Shocking Words for President Obama – Hannity 

LIMBAUGH: I’ll tell you why. I am hearing many Republicans say that — well, we want him to succeed and prominent Republicans. Yes, we wanted — they have laid down. They have totally — they’re drinking the Kool- Aid, too. They have no guts to stand up for what their beliefs are because they’re afraid of criticism, they’re afraid of being called racists, they’re afraid of not having gotten with the program.

Now success can be defined two ways. I said earlier I don’t know about this guy. I really don’t. I’ve got my — I’ve got my suspicions, and they’re pretty close to convictions, but we’re going to have to wait to see what he does. Now if he turns out to be a Reagan, if he adds Reagan to his recipe of FDR and Lincoln, and if he does cut some taxes.

HANNITY: Yes.

LIMBAUGH: If he does not eliminate the Bush tax cuts, I would call that success. So yes, I would hope he would succeed if he acts like Reagan, but if he’s going to do FDR, if he’s going to do the new, new deal all over which we will call here the raw deal, why would I want him to succeed?

Look, he’s my president. The fact that he is historic is irrelevant to me now. It matters not at all. I — if he is going to implement a far left — look it. I think it’s already decided. $2 trillion in stimulus? The growth of government. I think the intent here is to create as many dependant Americans as possible looking to government for their hope and salvation.

If he gets nationalized health care, I mean, it’s over, Sean. We’re never going to roll that back. That’s the end of America as we have known it because that’s then going to set the stage for everything being government owned, operated, or provided.

Why would I want that to succeed? I don’t believe in that. I know that’s not how this country is going to be great in the future, it’s not what made this country great.

So I shamelessly say, no, I want him to fail, if his agenda is a far- left collectivism, some people say socialism, as a conservative heartfelt, deeply, why would I want socialism to succeed?

Now, again, a ton of folks have been shocked — especially with the last two paragraphs. And some have very carefully (and correctly) distinguished between criticizing the President and hoping the President fails, before coming to the conclusion:

Which means that Limbaugh is resporting that he is willing to help bring about that failure. He is saying that the he would view any news of failure as a good thing, as something that he hopes to see, like somebody might hope to see smoke coming from a jet engine that he hopes will fail in flight.

He hopes that you lose your job.

He hopes that your business goes under.

He hopes that your retirement dwindles away into nothing and you are forced to live your final years in abject policy.

He hopes that America itself is forced to declare bankruptcy.

He (unlike the rest of us) does not fear that these things might happen. He hopes that these things will happen.

It is not propaganda – it is a matter of logical necessity – that a person who hopes that such things will come about are anti-American.

Now, I will not defend Limbaugh himself — read the whole interview, as it’s an astonishing array of Right Wing idiocy. But I will note that there is one alternative that the above poster did not consider.

People can propose to do things that are sort-term good, but have long-term ill effects.  In those cases, it is not uncommon, and most people feel it justified, to hope that the short-term goal is not reached. I hope Bob gets caught cheating on the test, because otherwise, sooner or later, he’s going to get himself into even bigger trouble. Or, I hope that guy who just swooshed past me gets a ticket, so that he doesn’t end up eventually killing someone. 

Limbaugh (and Hannity) are not out to have people unemployed and declaring bankruptcy. Their concern, reading the above, is that what they fear Obama will do (a new New Deal) will cause long-term, irreparable harm to the country, even if in the short term they stave off the economic downturn. Yeah, morphine will make you feel better right now, but you really don’t want to have to go through withdrawal later, so I hope the doctor doesn’t give you the prescription. Buying that really nice house will get a nicer roof over your head and impress your friends, but if it leads you to bankruptcy … well, I hope the deal doesn’t go through.  

Or, on the flip side: Wow, high oil prices are really hurting people, but they are encouraging development of alternative fuels, increasing conservation, and reducing sales of SUVs, all of which are long-term good things … so I kind of hope they stay high. 

So Limbaugh believes that nationalized health care (however he envisions it) will have an overall dire effect on the overall health (and economy) of the nation, even if it means that some people will be able to get care who cannot get it today. That may be cruel, but under the “great good” philosophy, it could be quite legitimate. He fears that nationalizing failing businesses and creating a Nanny State and all that will destroy the freedoms and success that this country has had to date for future generations. If to avoid that happening, he hopes that these sorts of experiments fail so that we don’t fall into a bigger trap, there are a lot of cases in our lives (as noted above) where you might find sentiments about something.

Now, I disagree whole-heartedly with both what they fear the Obama Administration will be doing, and the harm it will cause. Their premises are whacked, and their conclusions are askew, and those are all open for legitimate criticism. But they’re not necessarily anti-American … and it isn’t necessarily simply ego on Limbaugh and Hannity’s part. They could hold these views, and Limbaugh could hope that Obama fails, for perfectly defensible (in principle) reasons.

I’d consider that strongly before throwing around a label (too often thrown around the last year) of someone being “anti-American.”