[LifeComesFirst]

emailed to the author of the article:

“Your entire argument, while internally logically consistent, begins with the false antecedent that for a President to fail is necessarily the same thing as for America to fail. Not so. For one thing, we have to know what type of failure we’re talking about. “Fail” at what? Fail to show up for work everyday? Fail to get dressed? Fail to eat breakfast? Fail to lower or raise taxes? Fail to lower or increase spending? Discussion must begin with an understanding of what Limbaugh was talking about.

Fortunately we don’t have to wonder, we do indeed know what Limbaugh was talking about because he said so himself. He wants Obama to fail not at making the country a better place, but to fail in implementing his agenda. He’s not the only one. It is un-American to demand that we owe unfailing allegiance to a President and his or her agenda. Rather, it is quite American to have one’s own opinions about what policies the government should pursue and which it should abandon, and to express those opinions with speech, the written word, and especially at the ballot box.”

[libs_kma]

"It is un-American to demand that we owe unfailing allegiance to a President and his or her agenda."

I agree with your point.

By Pitts own logic, all Germans who hoped Hitler would fail were unpatriotic as well.

I'm sure Pitts also believes that "The enemy of my enemy is my friend", because it doesn't take more than a seconds thought to come down on that side.

[steve8714]

Don’t expect a response.

[MrB]

It is un-American to demand that we owe unfailing allegiance to a President and his or her agenda.

yeah... what happened to "dissent IS patriotic" and

"I'm sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and disagree with this administration, somehow you're not patriotic. We need to stand up and say we're Americans, and we have the right to debate and disagree with any administration."
Hillary Rodham Clinton

[WOSG]

“Your entire argument, while internally logically consistent, begins with the false antecedent that for a President to fail is necessarily the same thing as for America to fail. Not so. For one thing, we have to know what type of failure we’re talking about. “Fail” at what? Fail to show up for work everyday? Fail to get dressed? Fail to eat breakfast? Fail to lower or raise taxes? Fail to lower or increase spending? Discussion must begin with an understanding of what Limbaugh was talking about. Fortunately we don’t have to wonder, we do indeed know what Limbaugh was talking about because he said so himself. He wants Obama to fail not at making the country a better place, but to fail in implementing his agenda. He’s not the only one. It is un-American to demand that we owe unfailing allegiance to a President and his or her agenda. Rather, it is quite American to have one’s own opinions about what policies the government should pursue and which it should abandon, and to express those opinions with speech, the written word, and especially at the ballot box

Brilliant and well-stated. Of course Pitts knew that. His out-of-context quote is all about finding another right-wing strawman to bash.

[WOSG]

“Your entire argument, while internally logically consistent, begins with the false antecedent that for a President to fail is necessarily the same thing as for America to fail. Not so. For one thing, we have to know what type of failure we’re talking about. “Fail” at what? Fail to show up for work everyday? Fail to get dressed? Fail to eat breakfast? Fail to lower or raise taxes? Fail to lower or increase spending? Discussion must begin with an understanding of what Limbaugh was talking about. Fortunately we don’t have to wonder, we do indeed know what Limbaugh was talking about because he said so himself. He wants Obama to fail not at making the country a better place, but to fail in implementing his agenda. He’s not the only one. It is un-American to demand that we owe unfailing allegiance to a President and his or her agenda. Rather, it is quite American to have one’s own opinions about what policies the government should pursue and which it should abandon, and to express those opinions with speech, the written word, and especially at the ballot box

Brilliant and well-stated. Of course Pitts knew that. His out-of-context quote is all about finding another right-wing strawman to bash.