Re: What Are the Consequences of Obama Failing?May 10th, 2009
Extrafire, that doesn’t make any sense. Obama’s policies are designed to help improve the economy, to dig the economy out of the ditch Bush and the Republicans landed it in.
Success or failure of anything is judged by the outcome. If the outcome is good, the policies are said to be success. If outcome is bad, the policies are regarded as having failed.
So it is reasonable to argue that if Obama’s policies succeed, we will have economic recovery next year, and a depression will be averted. If Obama’s policies fail, we will have a full blown depression, lasting for ten years or more.
But now you want to define success as plunging the economy into a depression, and failure as economic recovery next year? What kind of crazy talk is that?
I can just imagine, assuming Obama’s policies work and we get an economic recovery. Next year Democrats will be campaigning on the platform that Obama’s policies worked, we are out of recession. And what will be Republican argument? That Obama’s policies failed? Republicans will be the object of ridicule.
You are defining success as failure and failure as success. Reminds me of the double talk in ‘1984’, war is peace, freedom is slavery etc.
Well, I don’t put any value in such double talk, and I suspect neither do most people. To me, success is when something achieves the desired aim. If Obama’s policies lead to economic recovery next year, they are a success as far as I am concerned. If his policies plunge us into depression, he will have failed.
But I am really interested which dictionary you got the definition from, that if we get economic recovery next year, that means Obama failed, and if we get a depression, that means Obama succeeded. I suppose it needs a gigantic brain like the blowhard on loan from Christian God, Rush (drug addict) Limbaugh. I wouldn’t put too much stock in what he says, if I were you.
Talk of cloud cuckoo land.