If Obama policy gets the unemployment lower, is that a success or failure.
It could be either. Unemployment figures can drop from discouraged workers leaving the work force. Even ignoring that point, if a trillion dollars of additional debt really does create enough new jobs to shrink unemployment by a couple of tenths its probably not worth it, its probably a failure of policy.
More to the point your question doesn't really address the issue. You could have asked "If Obama's actions result in a nuclear war that kills 200 million Americans is that a success or failure?" Of course it would be a failure (unless one assumes that without his actions we'd all be killed), but that doesn't mean that its what Rush meant by failure.
I can turn it around and say "If Obama failed to get any "health care reform" passed, would that have been a success or failure". I believe Rush meant (and I would agree) that it would have been a failure for Obama (and a success for the country).
Rightly or wrongly (I think mostly rightly, but I know many here would disagree) Rush thought (and presumably still thinks, but we are addressing his comments for awhile back) that Obama's policy ideas where mostly bad for the country.
I'm not saying you agree (or that you disagree, I'll let you state your own opinion if you want to), but assume for a second that you very strongly agree. That you thought almost all of his proposals where bad ideas, and that some of them where disastrous ideas. Would you then not want him to fail (politically)?
Of course if you assume that most of his proposals are good ideas and some of them are vital, then his political failure would be a failure for the country, but its rather unreasonable to think either that Rush supports Obama's ideas (since he has often argued against them), or that he wants the country to fail (since few Americans would, and he's given no indication that he does). |
