I love this:

Apart from the fact that there is little distinction between wanting Obama to fail and wanting his policies to fail (with both ultimately meaning that the country has failed)

Why, it’s a liberal Democrat’s policies! How can it cause harm to the country??? They must not have been paying attention the last forty or so years. Liberal policies are behind just about every problem we face today. But their answer isn’t to change their policies, it’s “more of the same”.

And, for the record, their selective quote of what Rush said, they left out some things:

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.

It’s no different than the left saying virtually the same thing about Bush over the last eight years. They thought his policies were bad and they openly hoped he would fail (or worse, they openly hoped someone would blow him away). But now that it’s a Democrat, and a far-left one at that, why, we can’t hope he fails! That’s treasonous! It’s bad for the country! Or whatever lefty meme you want to run with.

Pretty rich rhetoric, considering how the left behaved since the 2000 election, wouldn’t you agree?

Bonus: Don’t you think it’s funny that they think Chris Wallace is a right-winger? Why do they think that? Because he actually is an honest reporter, that’s why!

Related post:

If He’s So Unpopular, Why Are They So Afraid Of Him?

Update: Another liberal who claims he was a Republican at one time (ala Sullivan), and trying to say that Republicans are trying to block good programs proposed by Urklebama. No, they’re not, Mr. Schaeffer, and THAT’S why we oppose them.

Also, as Dana points out in the comments, Patterico found a Bush-era poll where Democrats — surprise, surprise — openly wished for Bush’s failure.

Of course, as I already said in the comments, libs will say “yeah, but no elected Democrat said such a thing.” Running the risk of assuming (there’s that word again) that that’s true, I’ll simply say “Yeah, well Rush isn’t an elected Republican, either.” Pot, meet kettle. I’m sure you guys have met plenty of times before.

P.S.: Mr. Schaeffer’s claim to be a former Republican is backed up because he worked for McCain, that “bastion of conservatism” (*snort!*) we all know and don’t love. And, be still my heart, he has autographs from people like Reagan, Ford, both Bushes, and Goldwater. I have a few notes from former President Clinton*, via the White House when he was in office…does that make me a liberal Democrat? HA!

*I wrote a few emails back in the day saying that although I was a Republican, I supported him on Bosnia. I also wrote an email, in his last couple of weeks of office, saying that although I opposed much of what he had done, I still thank him for his service. The notes I received were the generic, staff-flunkie-generated, ink-stamped “signed” cards of thanks. In other words, they don’t mean a thing. More than likely, Mr. Schaeffer’s “handwritten notes” don’t, either.