-->
Search the ArchivesNavigationContact InformationThe Citizen Newspapers For Advertising Information Email us your news! For technical difficulties |
Rush II: Would U.S. benefit from Obama’s failure?Tue, 02/10/2009 - 4:24pm
By: Letters to the ...
In response to my letter to the Editor printed in The Citizen on Jan. 27, 2009, concerning the Rush Limbaugh statement that “I hope Obama fails,” I wish to provide a reply to the reasoned, non-vituperative thoughts of three local residents (Robert Brown, USA Ret.; Roger Casale, LTC, USA Ret.; and W. Morgan, homemaker) and congratulate them for not only taking the time to express their views but, more importantly, to openly provide an actual name and location and not hide behind some opaque email moniker. The three take issue with my comment that, in essence, the wish of Rush Limbaugh that President Obama fail is in consonance with that of our most radical terrorist die-hard opponents, and they contend that it was taken completely out of context. For the sake of argument, fair enough, but let’s take a look at our current national situation and compare it to that of Sept. 12, 2001. On 9/12/2001, to paraphrase Barack Obama, there were no red states or blue states, no liberal America or conservative America; there was a United States of America. We, as a nation, put aside partisan politics and backed then-President Bush with an approval rating well over 90 percent. His popularity started to plummet only after his disastrous ideologically based decision to remove Saddam Hussein from power via the invasion and subsequent prolonged occupation of Iraq. My contention is that the United States today is in a more dire situation than it was following the events of 9/11. This nation is facing both an escalating domestic economic problem combined with a foreign radical terrorist threat that has grown in number from an estimated 5,000 in September 2001, to by most estimates 50,000 today and whose major al Qaeda leadership is still intact. Faced with this scenario, Rush Limbaugh proudly boasts of his desire for Obama’s failure, not as he goes to explain in national security terms, but strictly as related to Obama’s proposed domestic economic and social programs. I have not read nor heard Limbaugh’s views on the foreign policy goals of President Obama so I do not know if they have received the Excellence In Broadcasting blessing for success (doubtful!) or failure. What seems to bother Mr. Limbaugh the most is what he views as an Obama initiated onslaught of individual freedom-denying socialist programs. Limbaugh is a master of planting the subliminal seed that a “creeping socialism” will lead, inevitably, to a disguised form of totalitarian communism. One can envision Limbaugh bellowing out that, if he and his “ditto head” Stepford wife-like adherents do not speak out loud and clear, this nation will soon, under the administration of Barack Obama, see the following become government policy: the confiscation of all privately owned guns; the closing of all houses of worship; government control of all forms of media; mandatory union membership for all jobs associated with manufacturing; and, forced abortions. If these were anywhere near the true goals of an Obama administration, I would be among the first to demand his impeachment and subsequent removal from office. Fortunately, the social program goals of President Obama are more realistically in line with the desires of the average American, and that is why he was elected to the presidency along with Democrat majorities in both Houses of Congress. Who among you would deny: unemployment benefits to a hard-working laid-off/”downsized” mother/father; health care to a sick child of the aforementioned laid-off worker(s); Social Security benefits/income to a low-income elderly former wage earner; or, Medicare for senior citizens? With these programs already in place, is President Obama advocating supplementing them with some type of sorely needed, improved and efficient health care system which will reduce costs and improve treatment? To paraphrase Sarah Palin, “You betcha!” The citizens of these United States spoke out loud and clear on Nov. 4, 2008, for change and effective change is what they deserve. Discounting the likes of Limbaugh and his solution-devoid adherents, effective change is what will, hopefully, be delivered. Let us compare what Limbaugh said in 2009, concerning presidential failure, with what would have been the justified outrage directed at any commentator following the events of 9/11 who would have declared, “I hope Bush fails.” Well, wait a minute, he/she mimicking Limbaugh might have said, I was only referring to the “compassionate conservative“ domestic agenda of President Bush. Do you really believe that such a statement would not have been viewed as aiding and abetting the perpetrators of the events of 9/11? Any individual uttering such an outrageous outburst, to put it mildly, would have deservedly received the tried and true “tar and feather“ treatment. Those who support the contention of Rush Limbaugh that the domestic social and economic concerns/problems of this nation can be viewed in isolation from our foreign policy situation should take into account a sampling of the dilemmas inherited by President Obama: after almost seven and a half years, a deteriorating Afghanistan political and military situation: increased dependence on the import of foreign oil; and, an Iraq, which, although rid of Saddam Hussein, in all likelihood will eventually prove to be no more of a friend or less of an enemy than the regime of Saddam Hussein. The overriding question is: can the foregoing can be effectively dealt with (along with addressing issues dealing with North Korea, the Israeli-Palestinian conundrum, a possibly nuclear capable Iran and an unstable Pakistan) while the nation is facing a continuing domestic financial and economic crisis with elements of the opposition party hoping for a failed presidency? In closing, here is the question which should be asked of Rush Limbaugh and his “ditto head” bedfellows: do you really believe that the country would be better off if a) the economic morass inherited by President Obama were allowed to continue and become even more devastating by Republican stonewalling (read “Obama failure”) until the elections of 2010 could usher in a hoped for significantly increased Republican representation in the Congress? Or, should President Obama be given a chance to implement the programs of “change” which over 69 million Americans (52.3 percent of the popular vote) elected him to the presidency to do? Wade J. Williams Colonel, USA (Ret) Peachtree City, Ga. login to post comments |