The political world has been rocked. That's right, positively rocked like the audience at a Motley Crue concert in 1988, by the closing of Chet's, a restaurant in Toledo, Ohio that was among several named by President Barack Obama as indirectly benefiting from the Chrysler bailout that allowed a number of car construction plant workers to keep their jobs. Chet's is one of many Toledo-area restaurants within reasonable driving distance of the Chrysler plant that Obama reasoned would only naturally see a continued stream of business from the plant workers. With Chet's recent announcement that it is closing its doors due to financial troubles, we obviously have proof positive that Obama's big business bailout initiative is a complete and utter failure.

Yes, a failure indeed. For you see, if any business that could conceivably benefit from the continued existence of a completely different, totally independent business fails, then that second business truly has no reason to exist and has, itself, failed. Oh, sure, some may say that Chet's closed not because of the bailout's failure to evenly boost the economy of the entire city of Toledo, Ohio but because of any number of factors that traditionally lead to the closure of a restaurant regardless of the economic climate of the nation at large. Some might say that profit margins for even the most successful restaurants are often dangerously thin and can be threatened by such things as fluctuating prices of raw ingredients, which has been happening to common groceries in America such as fresh produce, beef and even bread in these troubled times. Some may say that Chet's couldn't stand up to the competition from other restaurants in its neighborhood in a clear case of consumer selection without government intervention. Some may even have the gall to suggest that the food at Chet's might not have been very good according to its dwindling customer base.

It's really only a matter of time before more businesses adjacent to bailout recipients start to demonstrate the utter failure of Obama's economic policy. Of course, there will always be those Obama apologists who insist that it's not the failure of the bailout that led to these businesses' demise. Yes, those ignorant folks who blindly blame the closure of a newsstand around the corner from a bailed-out bank on the seismic shifts in the print publication industry connected inextricably to the rise of digital media. Or those silly fools who think that their favorite local video store by the car dealership is shuttering its operation because brick-and-mortar movie rental shops are objectively inferior in every conceivable way to services like Netflix. Or even those overgrown children who insist that the taco truck that regularly parks around the block from a GM branch office went out of business because of skyrocketing gas prices and that it shouldn't even count because it's a mobile business that is only occasionally in proximity to a bailed-out corporation.

Idiots, all of them.

Yes, if the closing of Chet's is anything, it's a lesson in the worthlessness of Obama's total financial policy. We don't need a nuanced analysis of what the 2008 bailout and subsequent programs actually did. We don't need to conduct thorough research into whether certain aspects of the bill did what they were supposed to do despite failures and unintended consequences in other areas. No, all we need is Chet's, a business that should have been kept afloat merely by being within a certain radius of a business that received bailout funds and failed anyway. Case closed. End of story.