My point is that sometimes it is expedient to accept that what he said is a mistake
Sometimes it may be expedient to accept a falsehood, but usually not, and even when it is, it is unsettling, and even just plain wrong.
Which is a bit strong since we don't know for sure that its false. He may not have really meant just the political failure of Obama, because he thought it would lead to more success for the US, but -
1 - That's the obvious interpretation even without his later statements.
2 - The only actual evidence we have of his intentions with the initial statement is his later clarification, which said pretty much the same thing that I've been saying about the statement. Yes its quite possible that he's lying, but that possibility isn't enough to dismiss the later clarification entirely, and even if it was, if you totally dismiss it, then you are just left with no evidence in either direction. When you have no evidence of the worst you shouldn't reasonably assume the worst, when there are quite reasonable, even obvious, alternate interpretations.
Also, not that this last point tells us what Rush meant, but I agree with his later statement. In that sense I wanted and still want Obama to fail. Not to have a disastrous presidency that hurts the country tremendously, but to fail to achieve many of his policy aims, to have some of his policy ideas that have passed reversed, and for him to generally be an unpopular president. I want this to happen precisely because I think it would be good for our country to have this happen. |
