Policy vs Person

RUSH: I got a request here from a major American print publication. "Dear Rush: For the Obama [Immaculate] Inauguration we are asking a handful of very prominent politicians, statesmen, scholars, businessmen, commentators, and economists to write 400 words on their hope for the Obama presidency. We would love to include you. If you could send us 400 words on your hope for the Obama presidency, we need it by Monday night, that would be ideal." Now, we're caught in this trap again. The premise is, what is your "hope." My hope, and please understand me when I say this. I disagree fervently with the people on our side of the aisle who have caved and who say, "Well, I hope he succeeds. We've got to give him a chance." Why? They didn't give Bush a chance in 2000. Before he was inaugurated the search-and-destroy mission had begun. I'm not talking about search-and-destroy, but I've been listening to Barack Obama for a year-and-a-half. I know what his politics are. I know what his plans are, as he has stated them. I don't want them to succeed.

If I wanted Obama to succeed, I'd be happy the Republicans have laid down. And I would be encouraging Republicans to lay down and support him. Look, what he's talking about is the absorption of as much of the private sector by the US government as possible, from the banking business, to the mortgage industry, the automobile business, to health care. I do not want the government in charge of all of these things. I don't want this to work. So I'm thinking of replying to the guy, "Okay, I'll send you a response, but I don't need 400 words, I need four: I hope he fails." (interruption) What are you laughing at? See, here's the point. Everybody thinks it's outrageous to say. Look, even my staff, "Oh, you can't do that." Why not? Why is it any different, what's new, what is unfair about my saying I hope liberalism fails? Liberalism is our problem. Liberalism is what's gotten us dangerously close to the precipice here. Why do I want more of it? I don't care what the Drive-By story is. I would be honored if the Drive-By Media headlined me all day long: "Limbaugh: I Hope Obama Fails." Somebody's gotta say it.

Were the liberals out there hoping Bush succeeded or were they out there trying to destroy him before he was even inaugurated? Why do we have to play the game by their rules? Why do we have to accept the premise here that because of the historical nature of his presidency, that we want him to succeed? This is affirmative action, if we do that. We want to promote failure, we want to promote incompetence, we want to stand by and not object to what he's doing simply because of the color of his skin? Sorry. I got past the historical nature of this months ago. He is the president of the United States, he's my president, he's a human being, and his ideas and policies are what count for me, not his skin color, not his past, not whatever ties he doesn't have to being down with the struggle, all of that's irrelevant to me. We're talking about my country, the United States of America, my nieces, my nephews, your kids, your grandkids. Why in the world do we want to saddle them with more liberalism and socialism? Why would I want to do that? So I can answer it, four words, "I hope he fails." And that would be the most outrageous thing anybody in this climate could say. Shows you just how far gone we are. Well, I know, I know. I am the last man standing.
I'm happy to be the last man standing. I'm honored to be the last man standing. Yeah, I'm the true maverick. I can do more than four words. I could say I hope he fails and I could do a brief explanation of why. You know, I want to win. If my party doesn't, I do. If my party has sacrificed the whole concept of victory, sorry, I'm now the Republican in name only, and they are the sellouts. I'm serious about this. Why in the world, it's what Ann Coulter was talking about, the tyranny of the majority, all these victims here, we gotta make sure the victims are finally assuaged. Well, the dirty little secret is this isn't going to assuage anybody's victim status, and the race industry isn't going to go away, and the fact that America's original sin of slavery is going to be absolved, it's not going to happen. Just isn't, folks. It's too big a business for the left to keep all those things alive that divide the people of this country into groups that are against each other. Yes, I'm fired up about this.


More Here

 

I think what it is what the person stands for & supports or opposes tends to overshadow who they really are. Make no mistake though, whether or not he is a "good person" I'll make a fair assessment. If he does something good or bad (everything so far has been bad), I'll call it for what it really is.

 

Sorry. but Obama cant do enough good to overcome his support of abortion and gay rights.

I know that most liberals have a selfish attitude, in that they will compromise, and live with the murder of babies as long as they end up "better off' in 3 years. In other words, as long as they recieve some increase in income or standard of living, the dead babies dont matter.

AJ

 

That's right, the slaughter of unborn children takes a backseat to the expansion of the welfare state.

 

Lets face it-----Americans voted with their wallets and checkbooks!! They don't care what happens if it so happens that the powers that be promise at least another "fistful" of dollars in their accounts!!!

US Citizens are so stupid------but as Forest Gump says----"Stupid IS as Stupid DOES!!"

Whats so spooky is-------Us US citizens are not the only one in the big boat!!!! And the big boat is foundering in the sea of liberalism and socialism!!

 

How does one separate the person from the policies?

At first I thought that this is a silly question.

I vote for a political candidate based on the policies that he supports or promotes - not based on the personality or other personal characteristics of the person such as race.

I then continue to support or not support that politician according to how they function in office in regards to those policies.

Your question only makes sense if one voted for Obama the person - not based on policies. I suspect that is the case with most Obama supporters. So I guess to you the question is not silly at all.

 

I certainly hope you aren't telling us exactly how you vote. For me, I vote for a candidate based upon the whole package. If I went by your method of voting, it would be no problem to vote for someone as long as their policies were ok. No matter that they were an adulterer, liar, drunk, etc.

To answer the OP, I don't separate the person from the policies. Someone can support every policy I like, but if they don't have character or have a terrible personal track record, they don't get my vote. On the other hand, I will not vote for a person just because they are a "great person". If the "great person"'s policies stink, they also don't get my vote.

 

I would agree with you to a point.

For instance is race a part of the package that you are voting for?

Sex, ethnic backgound, social status, wealth... ?

The point that I was trying to make was that I don't vote for a "person" and then blindly follow.

 

An adulterer, liar or drunk would be better than an abortionist.

AJ

 

If you think about it, personally the man Barak Hussein Obama has succeeded. His personal success is in the achievement of being POTUS. The leader of the free world. Now that he has gotten there his life will always be on the top pages of the history books whether or not his policies succeed or fail. He will never be without clout and funds the rest of his life even if he only serves one term.

His policy will make or break our system of commerce and governance. As his policy will cause American capitalism to fail in my view, I pray that the policy will fail.

 

We had that in Bill Clinton including an abortionist, as a drunk though I don't remember him having that flaw. In fact all of those flaws will, in most cases, lead to an abortion.

 

From God's point of view they are all the same.

 

ok, you are right

AJ

 

because I said something that matt wade and palatka51 didnt like

Please forgive me
AJ

 

I'll be happy to debate it with you in another thread. Open one and PM me the link.

As it relates to the OP, I don't think we should compromise our beliefs at all when voting for a candidate. If one candidate supported abortion and another was a drunk, I would vote for neither.

 

First...don't try and say that I'm justifying an abortionist. No where have I done that. It's wrong of you to make such an accusation.

Secondly, policy doesn't have to come first. It should be a part of the entire decision. Would you vote for a person that has a policy against abortion, but personally has no problem with it? Let's say a politician came out and said, "I will vote against all abortion because I think it will get me votes, but personally I see no problem with it." According to you, policy should come first and you should vote for that person. Me? I'll wouldn't vote for the guy.

 

again, you are right...I am sure this happens all the time
AJ