Democrats 'Fail' FAIL

What's in a word?

Whether through deliberate denseness for political point-scoring, or through genuine failure of linguistic understanding, Democrats seem to be having real trouble with the word fail. But the word fail must be defended; or more particularly its usage; or more specifically its recent usage by Rush Limbaugh, which is thematically emblematic of its usance in politics et al.

Understand that I'm not indulging my admitted logolepsy here, and I don't think I'm engaging in ergoism, but being deliberately solecistic is an effrontery to discourse that must of occasion be countervailed against. In political debate, verity. Sine qua non. To term it as an increasingly common idiom: words mean things.

(The headline of this article is not antanaclastic, incidentally. "FAIL" is used declaratively in internet colloquy as a sort of running gag; ergo the sardonic graphic inhabiting the upper right portion of this article.)

The common indictment, hurled most often with a volley of invective, is that Limbaugh's assertion that he wants Obama to fail is unpatriotic or treasonous because, to the left commentariat at large, Obama is the country, res ipsa loquitur. It is amusing, a bit, to witness the turnabout on the part of Limbaugh's detractors. Did they not hope Bush failed? Or did they have secret sweven of Bush policies enacted across the board? What did they hope to profit in waging the theatrical anti-Bush crusades these eight years past if not his failure?

The logical fallacy, be it intentional or unwitting, is obvious and apparent to even the barest of examination. Allow me to impertinently inquire: if your president announces his intent to remove the national border and become a series of city-states à la ancient Greece, do you not hope he fails? Isn't hoping he fails, in that case, hoping the country succeeds? Talk about res ipsa loquitur! Ergo, your argument that it is prima facie treasonous to hope for presidential failure is simply fatuous.


Of course, as is invariably so, the sanguinary left overreaches on the story and on the stories about the stories. For example, after we amateur logicians and a variety of able interlocutors elucidated the errors within the original objection, they proposed secondarily that hoping for his proposals to fail is but a petty desire to be proven right. That republicans want Obama to institute socialist programs, then have them fail, ruining the country, all so we can say "I told you so." Presumably in their vision of our vision of their future, there is some form of tongue-sticking-outtery (my neologism for the day).

It cannot be the case, of course, that perhaps one wishes Obama to fail due to a belief that consummation of his plan, which in unimpeded fruition would fall just shy of a revolutionary alteration of the very fabric of this nation, is something against which one cannot but defend, could it? It couldn't be because the reckless path our feckless leadership is trekking down will wreck this nation in the long term either, right? I mean, who thinks past four years from now? What kind of scaramouch worries over how policy enacted now will affect the future? As long as Obama can maintain his ponzi scheme long enough to remain in office, that's what matters. So hoping he fails, this "reasoning" concludes, is just that most favored of words for the left: hate.

Well I say, stuff and nonsense. Poppycock. Fiddle faddle! Et cetera. I, too, hope Obama fails. That is the right word. It's what I mean to say because I say what I mean. I defend that word. FAIL!

And why? Because one day in the future I want my children to succeed. I want their children to succeed. In short, I want America to succeed. You might recognize succeed as the antonym of failure, but I recognize Obama as the antonym of success. For, if Obama successfully executes his nigh diabolical agenda in toto, it is they who will pay the price. Not the opportunistic politicos with their of-the-moment defense of the indefensible and water-carrying apologia for faux stimulus plans and malodorous agglomerations of pork, entitlements, and political graft. The future will ultimately answer for the present president's phyrrhic victories.

Do Limbaugh, Cantor and Pence want Obama to fail? Unquestionably. As do I. And to say that our defense of America and her future is "rooting for America to fail" is, in a word: quisquilian.

Oh, and now that you've familiarized yourself with the dictionary, look up "FAIL". And while you're at it, "accuracy." Thus ends the lesson.