Pat Robertson Denounces Rush Limbaugh For Hoping Obama Fails as President

February 18, 2009

(ChattahBox) — Pat Robertson denounced talk show host Rush Limbaugh for saying he wants President Obama to fail, in an interview with U.S. News & World Report.

Limbaugh has repeatedly expressed his desire to Obama, and the stimulus package to fail, which is more revealing about his true colors and brand of “patriotism.”

Interviewer Dan Gilgoff asked the Conservative Christian leader: “So you don’t subscribe to Rush Limbaugh’s “I hope he fails” school of thought?”
To which Robertson replied:  “That was a terrible thing to say,” Robertson responded. “I mean, he’s the president of all the country. If he succeeds, the country succeeds. And if he doesn’t, it hurts us all. Anybody who would pull against our president is not exactly thinking rationally.”

After the election, Robertson pronounced himself “remarkably pleased” with Obama and not so happy with President Bush. Robertson praised Obama for picking a “middle-of-the road Cabinet.” Robertson told Gilgoff that Obama hasn’t been “as skillful” since taking office, complaining that the recently-passed economic recovery package was “a disaster,” but that he wants “to give him the benefit of every doubt, and I definitely hope he succeeds.”


12 Responses to “Pat Robertson Denounces Rush Limbaugh For Hoping Obama Fails as President”

  1. Paul Stewart on February 18th, 2009 8:09 pm

    Did I hear a voice of reason there Pat? Good for you, good for America, to speak good sense and truth…..

  2. Mike Bailey on February 19th, 2009 9:42 am

    Rush’s statements were taken out of context….again. Surprise, surprise. I was listening and heard them the first time and several replays of them since. His point was that if instituting a more socialist type government and expanding the role of federal government with more regulation and entitlements was the measur of success, he hoped then that Obama would fail. He like myself wishes for the shrinking of government, for less influence upon the private sector and for fewer entitlement based social programs.
    I woul like to see America prosper as a nation again, through personal endeavor and effort, not government mandated charity.

  3. sobe on February 19th, 2009 10:02 am

    Pat Robertson is not a Christian, he is a Bible-worshipper, and thus a heretic.

  4. Marty McCafferty on February 19th, 2009 10:19 am

    I do find it funny that this is news. What is so shocking it was ok to HATE America, HATE Bush, HATE the military. We have movies, famous people, and others all broadcasting HATE. Now if someone does not agree with our President we are shocked and offended? Where where you the last 30+ years? GIVE ME A BREAK!

  5. Craig on February 19th, 2009 10:39 am

    Well Mike Bailey, if Rush had expressed it like you did, no one would be in an uproar about it. The problem is that Rush is an idiot who was given a talk show because he has no other skills than loving to hear himself talk. If he had anything of substance to add to the national discourse, he would not be the bloated, blowhard, bag of bullsh*t that he is.

  6. Julie Simons on February 19th, 2009 10:54 am

    Marty: seriously, I have to ask, what is with the inability for you to differentiate between “hating the military” and “we don’t support a war based on deliberate lies that is killing our soldiers while Osama Bin Laden runs free and the Iraqis sit on their butts and to nothing to help themselves while watching our military die in huge numbers?” To understand the difference between “Hating America” and “I hate what the president’s policies are doing to America” They are not complicated concepts, even for your limited intellect. None of us are asking you to like Obama, I could give a crap what you think at this point if your post is any indication of your reasoning skills. I hated Bush, yes. But I did not hope he failed. I thought he was stupid, inept, arrogant and a danger to our country: but I NEVER wished that he would fail. He was our President and we had to just hope that he would not damage us too badly with the policies he chose to inflict on our country. That he has almost destroyed our country is not something any of us wanted, it is just the unfortunate reality of 8 years of right wing nut policies. Wishing for the president to fail is on of the most appaling and traitorous statements an American could make.

  7. zornwil on February 19th, 2009 11:20 am

    I do not see how anyone can say Rush was taken out of context. I actually share his desire to see liberalism (actually the modern big-government strong-federalist framework, more specifcially) be disproven. But he was qutie clear in his commentary that he wanted the president to “fail,” period, there’s no “out of context” here. And comments as above that just because liberals did the same to GW Bush (and conservatives to Clinton before) does NOT MAKE IT RIGHT.

    For those of us, like myself, who feel big government is wrong, well, first of all, let’s recognzie the GOP has offered NO ALTERNATIVE (merely big tax cuts), so failure of Obama is not going to discredit liberalism as such. So more importantly, we cannot try to kill the country just because we do notl ike an ideology being used for the country. WE MUST STATE THE ALTERNATIVES and we MUST WIN THE DEBATE. I fear it is long lost for since the New Deal we’ve seen nothing but a straight line of big federalism (including Reagan’s and GW’s unprecedented budgets and federal reach), but we must try. And we can only try by giving people a GOOD ALTERNATIVE and not by throwing out the baby (America) with the bathwater (Obama, McCain, and the other big federalists), so to speak (actually I have a lot of respect for the leadership skills of Obama and McCain both, so calling them “bathwater” is not at all fair, but for sake of argument, anyway…).

    Finally, I must say that the vitriol and BAD FAITH discourse offered by right and left has served no good purpose. In fact, it has served as a smokescreen for the federal government’s increasing reach. We have to end this, and that means ending our knee-jerk distrust of each other’s motives, and it means ending the absurdist destructive bombast of such as Limbaugh and Franken (granted, the latter seems to have changed given his political desires) and Hannity and Garrofolo (sp). Let’s stop playing into the hands of the powerful and let’s develop a solid and respectful discourse that can reach across America.

  8. Intuit on February 19th, 2009 11:38 am

    Even if the comments were taken out of context, his sentiments likely weren’t. If he hasn’t just come right out and said it, based upon his self-contradictions from time-to-time, it is likely what he thinks.

    Still, that doesn’t make the act of taking comments out of context right as this was done to then, Senator Obama repeatedly all through-out the elections. (like Lip-Stick on a Pig)

    Still again, sometimes, what goes-around, comes-around.

  9. Jim Dandy on February 19th, 2009 12:36 pm

    I am not sure why President Obama decided to name Limbaugh as someone not to listen to. But that was good advice. I have tried to listen to Limbaugh only to find his style of negativity and bigotry too much to stomach. So, telling people to not listen to him is a compassionate gesture by the President who is helping us forgo the toxic aftermath of a moment with a poisonous mind. Hopefully, the Republican Senators that President Obama was speaking with follow his advice. It will serve their mental health and by extension their service to their country.

    Rush Limbaugh is one hateful and bigoted person. I guess that means that he is the face of the Republican party. After all until a few weeks ago the Chairman of the Republican party was a member of a whites only country club. The second most influential Republican came up with a song that is too racist to repeat. So, Rush, go get ’em boy! You are the man. You and your friend Sarah bring out what is worst about the people in this country. Under Rush’s leadership the GOP will be in lock step with the lowest level of the human soul. Fear, hate, greed will be the issues that define Republicans. Thank you for clarifying the stance of the party that you lead.

  10. nikolai on February 19th, 2009 2:25 pm

    Well, I’ll be damned…

  11. Adam Smith on February 19th, 2009 4:22 pm

    The hypocrisy of the left is incredible. They are outraged that Rush wants Obama’s policies to fail (as do I), but they of course wanted Bush to succeed.

  12. olivia on February 19th, 2009 5:29 pm

    Adam Smith – The Left never said they wanted Bush to fail at anything. We said we wanted his incompetent, law breaking, Constitution-burning ass out of the seat of power.

    You may not see the difference, but at least we recognized the fact that if he failed while he was in office, the whole country went down with him. Which, as you can clearly see by the state of the country now, that is just what happened. He took us down with him.

Got something to say? **Please Note** - Comments may be edited for clarity or obscenity, and all comments are published at the discretion of - Comments are the opinions of the individuals leaving them, and not of or its partners. - Please do not spam or submit comments that use copyright materials, hearsay or are based on reports where the supposed fact or quote is not a matter of public knowledge are also not permitted.