Defending President McCain from Glenn Beck

posted at 12:50 pm on September 23, 2009 by Doctor Zero

TV and radio host Glenn Beck recently sat for an interview with Katie Couric, in which he asserted that John McCain would have been “worse for the country than Barack Obama.” Beck’s remarks were deliberately provocative – he was laughing in a “try this one on for size” spirit when he repeated them. He might have been looking to stake out some unique, independent ground, in the manner of his Fox associate Bill O’Reilly, who awakens every morning to discover the center of the political universe is planted squarely between his toes. I’ll take Beck at his word, however, and strenuously disagree with him.

John McCain was not my choice for the GOP nomination. He ran a perfectly appalling campaign, all the more heartbreaking because he squandered the only exciting opportunity he managed to create: the selection of Sarah Palin. McCain’s greatest mistake, which America has not finished paying dearly for, was allowing the Democrat crooks behind the subprime crisis to skate away without penalty. The miscarriage of justice involved in leaving Barney Frank to happily count the money he looted from American taxpayers pales beside the damage he continues to inflict on the economy. In fact, the Washington Examiner just ran a story about the return of the very same policies that produced the subprime crash. McCain is accountable for every bit of the damage people like Barney Frank and Chris Dodd cause in the future, an accessory through his silence. He spent far too much of his campaign dreaming of a big, old-fashioned wedding with The Media, flanked by honored Senate colleagues in tuxedos and bridesmaid gowns… while the object of his affections staggered out of a tattoo parlor with Obama’s name written all over her, fell into the back seat of the Lightworker’s muscle car, and roared off in a shower of empty beer cans.

He was an awful candidate… but McCain would not have bitten his tongue while Iran murdered its citizens, leaving their Fourth of July picnic invitation on the table. He would not be working to install a Chavez puppet as dictator of Honduras. He wouldn’t have tried to sacrifice American intelligence agents in a show trial for political gain. He wouldn’t shower America’s adversaries with concessions while gaining nothing in return. McCain would have plenty of opponents, but he wouldn’t spend an unseemly amount of time designating groups of his constituents as enemies. He would know better than to casually accuse a cop of racism on national television.

I don’t see McCain setting up an Orwellian email address to rat out political enemies to the White House, or dispatching a horde of thugs to beat up demonstrators at town hall meetings. I doubt he would greet the disappearance of billions in “stimulus” money by shrugging and demanding another trillion. He wasn’t lying when he said he wanted victory in Afghanistan. He would have fewer unelected, unconfirmed “czars,” and none of them would be a Truther, a supporter of cop killer Mumia Abu Jamal, or a communist… let alone all three. His Supreme Court nominations would not have to defend their racial theories of judicial supremacy at their confirmation hearings. Enemies of America wouldn’t have to test John McCain to find out what he was made of – they could just ask the North Vietnamese. I always thought “The Straight Talk Express” was a silly name for his campaign bus, but at least it wasn’t splattered with the political blood of people thrown beneath it.

This is not to say that President McCain’s domestic policies would have been superb. It’s impossible to predict exactly what anyone would have done in the Oval Office. The butterfly effect from swapping out presidents is so huge that it comes with pair of tiny Japanese girls, who speak in unison when they warn of its approach. However, nothing McCain said during the campaign made me anticipate a presidency of bold conservative reform. I suspect we would have gotten something like the lazy Bush slide to the left in most areas, sprinkled with the occasional conservative policy, and the unmitigated disaster of amnesty for illegal aliens.

During the campaign, disgruntled Republicans often said it would be better to have Obama in office, showing everyone just how horrible Democrat policies are, than tolerate a RINO like McCain pushing the same policies in low gear, with bipartisan fingerprints. Glenn Beck’s slap at McCain is a retroactive expression of the idea that conservatism is just one crushing defeat away from total victory. Anyone who thought it was worth putting Obama in office, as some kind of object lesson for the American voter, gravely underestimated the amount of damage he could do. Look at how far we’ve sailed past the edge of fiscal sanity, in only nine months. It would take decades of careful, moderate reform just to get us back to where George Bush left us… and that wasn’t exactly an enviable position. Freedom is an endless voyage, while tyranny has far too many points of no return. The course we steered away from President McCain has taken us perilously close to those terminal waters.

The Obama presidency has been a flash forward to where the post-Reagan glide path might have taken us, in ten or twenty years. It is not the same thing to arrive at this moment in 2009 instead of 2029, any more than spending the night drinking a bottle of whiskey is the same thing as draining it all in one gulp. Toxicity increases with dosage. Many things might have occurred over the next few decades, to help us cope with the coming crash. Instead, the time bomb of Social Security begins detonating next year. Even if Obama left office tomorrow, it would take dramatic reforms to pull us out of our nose dive… and the American voter hates dramatic reforms.

I’ve got a lot of bones to pick with George Bush’s domestic policies, and I doubt President McCain’s would have been much better, but if either of them replaced Obama tomorrow, the economy would begin improving immediately… not because they would do anything particularly brilliant, but because they wouldn’t pummel us with the insane crap Obama serves up as daily fare. At least the markets would have less reason to be terrified of the White House. Simply refraining from the dramatic transformation of our economy and culture would be a huge improvement at this point.

McCain wouldn’t be a worse president than Obama. He would be more politically inconvenient for the conservative movement. Speaking for myself, I’d pay that price in a heartbeat… to spare my country what it has already endured, and what is yet to come.

This post was promoted from GreenRoom to HotAir.com.
To see the comments on the original post, look here.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

Beck does a lot better in prepared monologues than in interviews.

jgapinoy on September 23, 2009 at 12:51 PM

Dead horse is dead.

Smiles on September 23, 2009 at 12:52 PM

McCain would have been worse for the GOP, and conservatism in general. He may have destroyed conservatism. President Obama is much, much worse for both America and the struggle for freedom around the globe.

And if you disagree with me you’re a ‘cultist’.

BadgerHawk on September 23, 2009 at 12:52 PM

McCain wouldn’t be a worse president than Obama. He would be more politically inconvenient for the conservative movement. Speaking for myself, I’d pay that price in a heartbeat… to spare my country what it has already endured, and what is yet to come.

Brilliant Doctor Zero, and I completely agree with the above quote.

deidre on September 23, 2009 at 12:53 PM

One distinct way that Beck is wrong in this- Sotomayor.

Scott P on September 23, 2009 at 12:54 PM

McCain wouldn’t be a worse president than Obama. He would be more politically inconvenient for the conservative movement. Speaking for myself, I’d pay that price in a heartbeat… to spare my country what it has already endured, and what is yet to come.

I only read your first and last paragraphs, you use too many words to convey a simple thought.
But I agree with your last paragraph. I have to assume all the words prior is just supporting this contention.
Not the best, but not the worst…and certainly not have the “Marxist” leanings of Obama.

right2bright on September 23, 2009 at 12:54 PM

Why does the msm ONLY interview our side when a. we step in it, or b. when they have a “gotcha” angle? They are despicable.

marklmail on September 23, 2009 at 12:54 PM

Isn’t it possible that he meant that McCain would have simply kept us on the same slow leftward trek, but Obama is so insane that he’s like to bring us another Reagan and reverse our course?

I don’t necessarily agree (I’m afraid Obama will do irreparable damage), but I wonder if that’s what he meant.

Daggett on September 23, 2009 at 12:54 PM

Agree.

John McCain, despite his faults, loves this country dearly and would never do anything to harm her. He wouldn’t tolerate anyone in the White House who would, either.

I don’t believe the same of Barack Obama, or of his “administration”.

NoDonkey on September 23, 2009 at 12:54 PM

I think everyone agrees internationally he would’ve been WORLDS better then Obama. Say what you want about McCain domestically, in terms of foreign affairs he gets it pretty well.
Domestically though, I don’t know. its a flip of hte coin. He would’ve and did support bailouts and whatnot, but I don’t think there’d be this health care or cap and tax crap to worry about. Maybe we would be better off but with a democratic congress and his desire for bipartisanship, I don’t know if you would’ve just had the same problems but with a Republican president trying to be nice.
I do know the tea party movement and the 9-12ers would not exist, I don’t think McCain would have been so bad as to truly inspire those organizations to rise. So if anything moderate Republicanism/Compassionate Conservatism might have taken rise over full conservatism in ascension in the Party. What that would mean for the future would require those two japanese girls you were talking about.

Frankly I just wonder if his statement was just to show to a wide audience his premise (truthfully done even when the Left Wing media isn’t watching) that he bashes republicans just as hard as democrats.

Defector01 on September 23, 2009 at 12:55 PM

no its better to have a full-liberal than a liberal-wanna-be like mccain.

we would have had cap n trade passed by now, along with amnesty, it would have been much harder for the republicans to stand against mccain…and he would have reached across the aisle every chance he got.

on foreign policy…well let the liberal chickens come home to roost.

it may be that we need to collapse to learn the lesson that government can’t take care of you…

right4life on September 23, 2009 at 12:56 PM

McCain would have been much worse.

A Congressional RINO – McCain – Dem axis would have formed to push a soft-left agenda through – Amnesty, Cap and Tax, “Green jobs”, etc. Note, Obama has gotten almost nothing actually passed in Congress.

Second, all of the resulting problems would be laid at the feet of the right and the GOP.

Clark1 on September 23, 2009 at 12:56 PM

good points Dr. Z

cmsinaz on September 23, 2009 at 12:57 PM

I have to agree with the author. President McAmnesty wouldn’t be worse than Obama, but it still would have been awful.

Probably the one Administration I’d spend every day hoping that his temper would finally blow an artery and the person I really voted for would be promoted to the Oval Office.

Rogue on September 23, 2009 at 12:57 PM

a RINO like McCain pushing the same (horrible) policies in low gear

McCain has an 80% rating from the American Conservative Union. He has some goofy ideas, but I think he’s a good man.
(Some would argue McCain’s rating is actually lower, but it’s miles higher than Obama’s 8%)

jgapinoy on September 23, 2009 at 12:58 PM

McCain may have been better in the short term. But in the long term he would have hurt the conservative movement, probably even killing it altogether.

Obama has ignited the conservative movement, and may get rid of more dems in the house and senate than McCain would have.

Therefore, Beck may be correct.

RedbonePro on September 23, 2009 at 12:58 PM

McCain= Row boat to Ruin

Obama= Jet Boat to Ruin.

I’ll take the row boat. You get to enjoy the scenery alot longer before the ultimate demise.

portlandon on September 23, 2009 at 12:58 PM

Sometimes you need a “jimmy carter” moment to revitalize conservatism. we pay a short-term price but we get a new generation educated on why they should not vote for progressives.

jdpaz on September 23, 2009 at 12:59 PM

The butterfly effect from swapping out presidents is so huge that it comes with pair of tiny Japanese girls, who speak in unison when they warn of its approach.

First Leeory Jenkins and now a Mothera reference? It’s a bromance!

TheUnrepentantGeek on September 23, 2009 at 12:59 PM

We’ll never really know because McCain lost. And he lost because he was a PU$$Y.

Blake on September 23, 2009 at 12:59 PM

The election an utter failure of Barack Obama shows the American people that no one in Washington represents them. If McCain were president, he’d just lose in 4 (probably not 8) years and get replaced with a Democrat. Until the American people realize that no party in Washington represents them, expect “more of the same.”

The Calibur on September 23, 2009 at 12:59 PM

John McCain, despite his faults, loves this country dearly and would never do anything to harm her.

NoDonkey on September 23, 2009 at 12:54 PM

Yeah, he would never to something like suppress free speech in the name of campaign finance reform, or open the borders in the name of Hispandering.

Clark1 on September 23, 2009 at 1:00 PM

How about defending the American people from McCainiac idiots who said only a squeeshy moderate would have a chance at beating the Democratic nominee, and consequently brought Obama to power?

Aristotle on September 23, 2009 at 1:00 PM

I like Beck, but this “republicans are as bad as democrats” shtick is flat out wrong.

McCain, who was nominated mostly due to conservative candidates splitting their votes and open primaries where non-republicans voted, would have been vastly better than 0bama. He at least loves America, fought and bled for America. 0bama hates America and is doing his level best to wreck us, economically, socially, foreign policy wise.

Seriously, Beck needs to knock off this third-party nonsense, a path that will lead to the democrat party domination of America which would inevitably lead to secession of the red states. Which may or may not lead to another civil war.

Rebar on September 23, 2009 at 1:00 PM

Isn’t it possible that he meant that McCain would have simply kept us on the same slow leftward trek, but Obama is so insane that he’s like to bring us another Reagan and reverse our course?

I don’t necessarily agree (I’m afraid Obama will do irreparable damage), but I wonder if that’s what he meant.

Daggett on September 23, 2009 at 12:54 PM

Yes, but again- Sotomayor.

Scott P on September 23, 2009 at 1:00 PM

Dr. Z misses on this one. Beck is merely pulling a Nader calling the Dems “Bush Lite.” He is positing that McCain would put the masses to sleep in favor of the status quo, whereas Obama would cause the people to rise up against the corruption of the single-party kleptocracy we currently have. So far, the massive opposition to Obama is proving Beck right.

Christien on September 23, 2009 at 1:01 PM

I would have endured 4 years of McCain to get to a President Palin, thinking it would take 8 years of Obama to reach that same point. It looks like we’ll get Palin in 4 years after all (but with more damage done).

sleepy-beans on September 23, 2009 at 1:01 PM

Sometimes you need a “jimmy carter” moment to revitalize conservatism. we pay a short-term price but we get a new generation educated on why they should not vote for progressives.

jdpaz on September 23, 2009 at 12:59 PM

I never agreed with this argument and by the time this clown and his “administration” is through, what will be left to conserve?

And will we still be able to vote?

It never made sense to put this idiot into office, in order to prove that liberalism is wrong, but it’s all water under the bridge now.

NoDonkey on September 23, 2009 at 1:01 PM

And if you disagree with me you’re a ‘cultist’.

BadgerHawk on September 23, 2009 at 12:52 PM

You hit the nail on the head.

But I’m kind of a Palinista, which makes me a “cultist” in some circles. So I both agree with you, AND am a cultist.

connertown on September 23, 2009 at 1:01 PM

McCain would have been much worse.

A Congressional RINO – McCain – Dem axis would have formed to push a soft-left agenda through – Amnesty, Cap and Tax, “Green jobs”, etc. Note, Obama has gotten almost nothing actually passed in Congress.

Second, all of the resulting problems would be laid at the feet of the right and the GOP.

Clark1 on September 23, 2009 at 12:56 PM

Yep, this leftist direction has been gaining steam for years. It wasn’t Bush who held it at bay, it was 9/11. McCain would have done nothing but help it along.

genso on September 23, 2009 at 1:02 PM

Which may or may not lead to another civil war.

Rebar on September 23, 2009 at 1:00 PM

Does this mean that I get to see Keith Olbmermann running across an open field towards me in Gettysburg?

Sweet.

NoDonkey on September 23, 2009 at 1:03 PM

This is a no-brainer: Of course Beck is wrong; of course McCain ( on his worst days ) would have been a better President than Obama; of course we are in Big Trouble because of the damage Obama has already done and will continue to do.

Beck is nuts sometimes; this is one of those times. He’s Dead Wrong sometimes, THIS is one of those times

Janos Hunyadi on September 23, 2009 at 1:04 PM

Sometimes you need a “jimmy carter” moment to revitalize conservatism. we pay a short-term price but we get a new generation educated on why they should not vote for progressives.

jdpaz on September 23, 2009 at 12:59 PM

When Jimmy Carter was elected, my dad bemoaned that we would not survive to see the end of his presidency.

And man, it seemed like he was right for a long time.

connertown on September 23, 2009 at 1:04 PM

Clark1 on September 23, 2009 at 12:56 PM

my thoughts exactly. I’m tired of GOP as a whole getting blamed for BS passed by Dem Congress and stupidly signed on to by a GOP president(Bush 41 1990 budget deal, 2008 TARP nonsense for examples). Let the Dems destroy themselves.

gsherin on September 23, 2009 at 1:04 PM

If healthcare reform is defeated, if cap and trade is defeated, if amnesty is defeated, and Obama folds to hawks pushing him to stay the course in Afghanistan, I think an Obama presidency will have been better for us than a McCain presidency. I realize those might be some big ifs.

I’m convinced if McCain was president, much of that would pass. We wouldn’t have seen porkulous perhaps, but the rest of the left’s agenda would have slimed through.

Not only that but come 2013 we would probably be in the same position we are in today.

jhffmn on September 23, 2009 at 1:05 PM

Man, Dr. Zero, these are long posts. I like most of the substance, but they are really long

grosven on September 23, 2009 at 1:06 PM

McCain could possibly be worse than Obama. If you don’t understand why, I’m sorry.

At least with Obama, Republicans have something to fight against. With McCain, they’d almost have to support him as he is their guy. So you’d end up with leftist bills passed by D’s and R’s.

For now, it’s leftist bills with just D’s. I think I prefer the latter.

But that doesn’t say much about the R’s.

lorien1973 on September 23, 2009 at 1:06 PM

We’ll never really know because McCain lost. And he lost because he was a PU$$Y.

Blake on September 23, 2009 at 12:59 PM

Nail, head, hammer, hit…

McCain finished right where “nice guys” are supposed to.

So does it really matter whether Glenn Beck, Doctor Zero, you, me, or the man in the mooon really thinks about Presdient McCain?

No, It’s a moot point.

Keep giving them hell Glenn!

JohnBG on September 23, 2009 at 1:07 PM

Does this mean that I get to see Keith Olbmermann running across an open field towards me in Gettysburg?

NoDonkey on September 23, 2009 at 1:03 PM

yeah, but it was those trying to secede who were marching across that field. Less than a third of them made it back to their lines.

Gettysburg was Lee’s greatest mistake; ours was electing Obama

Janos Hunyadi on September 23, 2009 at 1:07 PM

This story about Beck and Healthcare will make your blood boil

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/408/story/963456.html

jp on September 23, 2009 at 1:08 PM

If Mr. Obama was just screwing up nationally I would grudging say that we need the lesson but what he is doing internationally has me so upset and I know Sen. McCain would never have stabbed our allies in the back as Mr. Obama has. Hopefully whatever mistakes made here can be cleaned up later but no telling what the lasting implications are of this president’s foreign policy.

Cindy Munford on September 23, 2009 at 1:08 PM

The wheels on the bus go bump bump bump.

Proud Rino on September 23, 2009 at 1:08 PM

I respect McCain for his military service to America. God bless for that. But other than that he is a total nit wit jerk AND (as Beck pointed out) a threat to this country because he is so stupid and does not see things clearly from the conservative side. Worse than The Messiah? I’d say yes – but I’ll go with the Doctor here, who is usually correct, and agree to a toss up. But Beck is a gift to this Country and McCain is an Obama “a___ kisser”.

Cinday Blackburn on September 23, 2009 at 1:09 PM

Does this mean that I get to see Keith Olbmermann running across an open field towards me in Gettysburg?

Sweet.

NoDonkey on September 23, 2009 at 1:03 PM

Olbermann would be made a commissar, in charge of the troops who’d shoot their own men who had to retreat.

Rebar on September 23, 2009 at 1:10 PM

NoDonkey on September 23, 2009 at 1:01 PM

unfortunately we have a lot of independent and moderate voters who change their mind from day to day what they think. As frustrating as it is I wished these people adopt some damn principles and stick to them.

gsherin on September 23, 2009 at 1:10 PM

If a major backlash against Obama and the MSM takes place, we regain power and actually are able to reverse all the idiocy, then and only then will I begin to agree with Beck on this absurd claim.

but hey, Obama getting elected has made Beck a wealthy man the last year or so.

jp on September 23, 2009 at 1:10 PM

What I fear was that McCain was in favor of both health care reform and cap and trade.

The Democrats would back both measures regardless of who was president, and the Republicans would have had a much tougher time opposing a president of their own party.

On everything else, McCain would have been much better.

MarkTheGreat on September 23, 2009 at 1:10 PM

Doc, yours is one of the few discussions of the matter that shows full understanding and appreciation of what Beck intended to convey. While I think Beck makes a useful point, on balance I’d agree with you.

McCain wouldn’t be a worse president than Obama. He would be more politically inconvenient for the conservative movement. Speaking for myself, I’d pay that price in a heartbeat… to spare my country what it has already endured, and what is yet to come.

Need I add, that doesn’t make me any less angry at petty radio talkers who eat their own, who seem unable to dispute another’s view without bashing them personally.

petefrt on September 23, 2009 at 1:11 PM

Dead horse is dead.

Smiles on September 23, 2009 at 12:52 PM

Front page, no less.

Meanwhile, back in DC…

artist on September 23, 2009 at 1:11 PM

I think it’s been said a few times on this and the original Beck story, but here goes in a nutshell:

1) What we have gone through, and what is yet to come, has been and will be UNGODLY. Anyone who thinks anything less is simply uninformed (this sadly describes (slightly) most of America)
2) Had McCain won he would have indeed had many of the same policies that Obama has(save for the extremes, but still not enough to make the libs happy)and everyone on BOTH sides would have pointed their fingers and said see! Republicans are horrible!
3) We would then-GUARANTEED have gotten Obama after McCain.
4) Assuming (PLEASE LORD JESUS) we survive Obama’s 4 years, and not a SECOND longer, the conservative base (or something really close) will be back with the vengeance of a lifetime.

So you see, we would have a) prolonged the inevitable, b) quite possibly extended the length of time a real solid conservative-type president came about. People would have been so sick after another 4 years of a “republican” (RINO or not) that as always, their emotions would have went even NUTTIER, and they could have voted DEMOCRAT the next 5 terms. Let them have their fun (we’ve got no choice) but SPREAD THE WORD OF TRUTH to all you can, and do all you can. Oh: and NEXT TIME DON’T LET THE MSM TELL US WHO OUR CANDIDATES ARE!

-and yes I voted McCain (with nose pinched)

dave_ross on September 23, 2009 at 1:11 PM

I still blame Perot for all this. If he hadn’t run in 92, Bush Sr would have won. Clinton would have been a failed presidential candidate. 1996 would have probably gone to a Dem since that is the way it swings, but instead of Clinton, we probably would have gotten someone like Gephardt…..either way, if Perot didn’t get 19% of the vote in 1992, there would have been no Clinton and without Clinton…we would be much better off now.

tatersalad on September 23, 2009 at 1:11 PM

I’m convinced if McCain was president, much of that would pass. We wouldn’t have seen porkulous perhaps, but the rest of the left’s agenda would have slimed through.

Not only that but come 2013 we would probably be in the same position we are in today.

jhffmn on September 23, 2009 at 1:05 PM

Indeed, everyone defending McCain forgets that he is a moderate strictly on the pattern of, “How can I get the democrats to say I’m a good guy?” And on foreign policy I’m pretty sure he’d have been as schzito as Clinton: throw a dart at a map and either ignore or bomb the target without regard to strategic importance.

fronclynne on September 23, 2009 at 1:11 PM

Either case would have been removing a painful band-aid.

McCain would have been slow, and lingeringly painful. 2012 would have come with people as directionless as they were in 2008.

Obama was a quick ripping off of the band-aid, such that the pain is intense, but over with quickly. 2012 is going to be a day of reckoning, with a lot of people more concerned about who is in the White House based on ideas, not on slogans.

MadisonConservative on September 23, 2009 at 1:12 PM

Speaking for myself, I’d pay that price in a heartbeat… to spare my country what it has already endured, and what is yet to come.

What is hard to say is that does the Obama Presidency become so bad that it enables that rapid reforms that Americans generally shy away from. Free societies always seem to oscillate. The magnitude of the responding oscillation seems to grow from the previous. I think we may be seeing the left to right liberty swing right now.

WashJeff on September 23, 2009 at 1:12 PM

Beck corrected himself yesterday saying “I should have said, he ‘may’ have been worse than Obama.”
Of course I disagree with Beck, but I see his point in terms of the conservative movement. Rush also said in March, that he does not blame the millions of conservatives that stayed home and didn’t vote for McCain.
But, I think conservatives that want to throw Beck overboard because they disagreed with what he said, has not listened closely to Beck for a long time. Even on Headline News, he was so against McCain.
But Sarah Palin changed that. Many people held their nose and voted for McCain because of Sarah. But that is no way to win an election. We need a candidate that can motivate people to support the presidential candidate.
Unfortunately, we had McCain who exasperated conservatives because he sided with the democrats on TARP, refused to criticize Obama, and threw conservatives and Palin under the bus.
“There is nothing to be scared of with Obama.” McCain sealed his fate right there. When he said we should not fear Obama, that tells me McCain would not have much difference with Obama.

cubachi on September 23, 2009 at 1:14 PM

Doc, I agree with all of your points regarding what McCain wouldn’t have done, but I also agree with Beck. The conservatives in this country are awakening the likes of which we haven’t seen since Reagan. I don’t think that ever would have happened under a McCain presidency. The government would slower, but surely, continued down the road of socialism and McCain would have contributed his share.

Obama’s speech to the UN was an appalling display of weakness. His apology tour continues right here in our own country. Another year of this guy and Republicans might just get control of both houses of Congress.

orlandocajun on September 23, 2009 at 1:14 PM

I only read your first and last paragraphs, you use too many words to convey a simple thought.

right2bright on September 23, 2009 at 12:54 PM

Not everyone suffers from the delusion that complex subjects can be boiled down to simple, bumper sticker slogans.

MarkTheGreat on September 23, 2009 at 1:14 PM

The “we prefer Jimmy Carter to get a Reagan” meme is complete and utter lunacy.

The world is still suffering from the incompetence, weakness, and evil of the Carter administration. God only knows how much longer it will take to undo the damage he’s done. The idea that it was worth it, in the end, because the GOP had a decade of ideological gain is insane.

And for the record, while it took a Carter to give us Reagan, it took a Reagan to give us Bush and Ginsberg.

Lehosh on September 23, 2009 at 1:14 PM

I don’t care who’s worse. They’re both intolerable. Give me a third party. Fight corruption, no social issues, dissolve the fed, dissolve the IRS, flat tax or national sales tax.

No more regulations.

joshlbetts on September 23, 2009 at 1:14 PM

McCain could possibly be worse than Obama. If you don’t understand why, I’m sorry.

At least with Obama, Republicans have something to fight against. With McCain, they’d almost have to support him as he is their guy. So you’d end up with leftist bills passed by D’s and R’s.

For now, it’s leftist bills with just D’s. I think I prefer the latter.

But that doesn’t say much about the R’s.

lorien1973 on September 23, 2009 at 1:06 PM

Bingo. I disagree with Doctor Zero that this is a matter of “inconvenience” for the conservative movement. It’s a matter of bringing the conservative movement off of life support, and hopefully with it a ton of people from the center who want accountability from their government.

MadisonConservative on September 23, 2009 at 1:14 PM

CAR HEADED OVER CLIFF…..

GOP driving it at 50 mph…..

DEMS driving it at 100 mph…

…..take your pick who you want to drive.

PappyD61 on September 23, 2009 at 1:15 PM

I feel Beck is right in one sense. That the American People electing Obama will usher in a new era of conservatism. I don’t say this lightly. I am not saying it is good that it happened, but that it was inevitable. A McCain Presidency would have led to an Obama Presidency eventually.

I am just glad it happened in an economic crisis. Make no mistake about it, its this crisis that has slowed Obamas statist policies. With economic growth and a booming economy Obama would have had political capital and an unmitigated mandate to “help those in need during an era of unprecedented growth”. The American people would not have blinked an eye to the “public option”.

TendStl on September 23, 2009 at 1:15 PM

McCain has an 80% rating from the American Conservative Union. He has some goofy ideas, but I think he’s a good man.

jgapinoy on September 23, 2009 at 12:58 PM

But where does he stand on the crucial policy issues? He supported, up until very recently, a cap and trade bill (which would have almost certainly been passed into law with bi-partisan support). He’d also be pushing strong for amnesty right now.

On the other side, we wouldn’t have a Sotomayor, and possibly no stimulus.

Domestically McCain would have been awful, though not to the extend that President Obama is. He may have destroyed the conservative movement for decades (or longer).

So while I disagree with Beck’s argument here, I do think there’s a lot more gray area than some people want to allow.

BadgerHawk on September 23, 2009 at 1:15 PM

If McCain would have been president, he would be doing EXACTLY the same things Obama is doing. He is a WEAK, liberal and in NO way conservative. The only success he would have in his presidency would be (“the price” Dr.0 would pay) to make sure no Conservative/Republican would ever be elected again.

hamer500 on September 23, 2009 at 1:16 PM

MadisonConservative on September 23, 2009 at 1:12 PM

great analogy

cmsinaz on September 23, 2009 at 1:16 PM

All of the reasons Dr. Zero lists where Beck is wrong are salient in the present tense. But still I’m somewhat in Clark1′s camp. Obama has awakened our country and we are becoming as energized as we have not been in a long time. With McCain and a dem controlled house and senate conservative idealogy would be snuffed for four years and then who knows, a liberal democrat wins?. I’d rather take the lumps now than later for the sake of my kids. That Obama has his own party so contorted is a good thing too.

DanMan on September 23, 2009 at 1:17 PM

Of course Beck is wrong; of course McCain ( on his worst days ) would have been a better President than Obama; of course we are in Big Trouble because of the damage Obama has already done and will continue to do.

Beck didn’t say Obama would be a better president. He said McCain would have been worse than Obama for the country. Those are not the same thing.

Right now, the brakes are getting slammed on so often tat the White House that they’re going to wear the pedal out. And why? Because the sleeping giant is awakening and he’s quite grumpy. That wouldn’t have happened under McCain. We’d still have gotten health care and cap and trade and we’d be teeing up shamnesty again. Today, none of those things are likely to happen. Under McCain, we wouldn’t have gotten a 1.5 trillion dollar stimulus, we would have gotten a trillion dollar stimulus. And we’d be listening to the Dems screech about the Republicans’ fiscal irresponsibility.

Obama, through the law of unintended consequences, may just bring about change I can believe in: the thorough rejection of big government. McCain, despite his best declared intentions to do that, would not have.

Pablo on September 23, 2009 at 1:18 PM

MadisonConservative on September 23, 2009 at 1:12 PM

Obama WAS ? Last time I checked, he’s still in power.

Not only is nothing over, but Obama is just getting started doing damage. He’s make Carter look like a burp.

There’s no equivalency here: it’s comparing Bad to Incredibly Worse

Janos Hunyadi on September 23, 2009 at 1:18 PM

I doubt Souter would have retired under a republican president. This whole undercurrent of radical socialist philosophy would have gone on unnoticed if Obama hadn’t been elected.

constitutionlady on September 23, 2009 at 1:19 PM

Does this mean that I get to see Keith Olbmermann running across an open field towards me in Gettysburg?

NoDonkey on September 23, 2009 at 1:03 PM

Olberman would never put himself on the front lines.

He’s more the kind of, hide in the basement and send the general e-mails telling the General everything he did wrong, kind of guy.

MarkTheGreat on September 23, 2009 at 1:19 PM

I never agreed with this argument and by the time this clown and his “administration” is through, what will be left to conserve?

And will we still be able to vote?

It never made sense to put this idiot into office, in order to prove that liberalism is wrong, but it’s all water under the bridge now.

NoDonkey on September 23, 2009 at 1:01 PM

If we’re just liberal-lite then the general public never grasps why conservatism is right. McCain’s ilk try to convince the voters that we should go down this liberal road just slower. The voters, in turn, think well if we’re gonna take this route why not take the express?

Once we get the bull out of the china shop and clean up the mess, it’ll be easy to convince folks not to let him back in.

jdpaz on September 23, 2009 at 1:19 PM

Does anyone believe that McCain would’ve bankrupted the country during his first month in office? Hell, no. That cranky old bastard would’ve vetoed that in a hurry.

Obama has done worse than drive us into a ditch. He’s run us off a cliff. A Carteresque ditch is escapable, if annoying. It’s awfully difficult to get back on a cliff once you’ve run off the edge.

It’s not the fall that gets you, it’s the sudden stop.

Urquhart on September 23, 2009 at 1:19 PM

McCain wouldn’t be a worse president than Obama. He would be more politically inconvenient for the conservative movement. Speaking for myself, I’d pay that price in a heartbeat… to spare my country what it has already endured, and what is yet to come.

Agree . . . well spoken.

rplat on September 23, 2009 at 1:19 PM

Can we all agree that re-electing Obama in 2012 is permanently off the table and that Pelosi and the Congressional Dems are toast in 2010?

Christien on September 23, 2009 at 1:20 PM

Isn’t McCain supposed to retire from the senate, refer to himself in 3rd person and start doing V!agra commercials like Bob Dole?

portlandon on September 23, 2009 at 1:20 PM

I’m hard pressed to decide who has the bigger ego. Obama or McCain.

MarkTheGreat on September 23, 2009 at 1:20 PM

CAR HEADED OVER CLIFF…..

GOP driving it at 50 mph…..

DEMS driving it at 100 mph…

…..take your pick who you want to drive.

PappyD61 on September 23, 2009 at 1:15 PM

I choose 100 mph. Get it the hell over with so somebody can go in and start picking up the pieces.

jay12 on September 23, 2009 at 1:20 PM

I think the best thing we can all do right now is to keep on speculating.

Diane on September 23, 2009 at 1:21 PM

Either case would have been removing a painful band-aid.

McCain would have been slow, and lingeringly painful. 2012 would have come with people as directionless as they were in 2008.

Obama was a quick ripping off of the band-aid, such that the pain is intense, but over with quickly. 2012 is going to be a day of reckoning, with a lot of people more concerned about who is in the White House based on ideas, not on slogans.

MadisonConservative on September 23, 2009 at 1:12 PM

Like the Fram man said: You can pay me now, or you can pay me later. Now is better.

Pablo on September 23, 2009 at 1:21 PM

Obama WAS ? Last time I checked, he’s still in power.

Not only is nothing over, but Obama is just getting started doing damage. He’s make Carter look like a burp.

There’s no equivalency here: it’s comparing Bad to Incredibly Worse

Janos Hunyadi on September 23, 2009 at 1:18 PM

Let me put it this way: Had McCain been elected, Obama could easily have won 2012, and we’d be in for the same crap, but with even more of a head start due to McCain’s reaching across the aisle.

Instead, 2012 will be a nightmare for Obama, and nobody like him is getting back into office.

MadisonConservative on September 23, 2009 at 1:21 PM

Pablo on September 23, 2009 at 1:18 P

I understand your point but don’t share your optimism: I think Obama will do so much real and lasting damage that the ‘awakening’ that you and I hope for will be too late to undo the Gigantic Crap-bag left behind.

It’s also possible that any Awakening will fall short of obtaining power: Last time I checked, the Demo in Va was catching up to the Repub.

Lotsa people prefer being given Stuff to the hard work and risks that come with earning Stuff yourself. Obama is creating more of these people each day.

Janos Hunyadi on September 23, 2009 at 1:22 PM

BTW, Beck says he’ll be talking about this on TV tonight.

Pablo on September 23, 2009 at 1:22 PM

McCain= Row boat to Ruin

Obama= Jet Boat to Ruin.

I’ll take the row boat. You get to enjoy the scenery alot longer before the ultimate demise.

portlandon on September 23, 2009 at 12:58 PM

Presidential elections aren’t a zero-sum game; it’s possible for everyone to win, and it’s possible for everyone to lose. Likewise, our two ‘choices’ need not be Ruin and Ruin.

Only a nihilist would accept that taking the slow-boat to Ruin is better than getting a boat (building it if necessary) that’s not going to Ruin.

This is a no-brainer: Of course Beck is wrong; of course McCain ( on his worst days ) would have been a better President than Obama;

Janos Hunyadi on September 23, 2009 at 1:04 PM

You’re assuming that McCain’s hypothetical worst days wouldn’t include signing the domestic legislation the Dems are pushing: Cap & Trade, Gov’t Health Care, Amnesty, etc.

McCain may be far better on foreign policy, but how does one maintain foreign policy aims when the economy crashes, tax revenues plummet, and the rights of the People are trod underfoot by the social engineers of the bureaucracy?

If your house’s wall is crumbling, it doesn’t make sense to ignore it and help someone in a town in the next state fix his roof.

Harpazo on September 23, 2009 at 1:22 PM

The lesser of two evils is still evil.

fronclynne on September 23, 2009 at 1:23 PM

McCain has an 80% rating from the American Conservative Union. He has some goofy ideas, but I think he’s a good man.

jgapinoy on September 23, 2009 at 12:58 PM

The rating is flawed because it assumes all votes are of equal importance. On the ones that matter (free speech, big government, etc), McCain will normally be found on the wrong side.

lorien1973 on September 23, 2009 at 1:23 PM

The truth of the matter is that we will never know.

McCain would certainly have been light-years better than Jug-eared Jesus on foreign policy matters, but in domestic matters, it’s hard to say what would have happened with the Democrat steamroller Congress combined with reach-around-across-the-aisle Johnny in the White House.

I’m sure the people of Honduras would be much better off right now were McCain in office, as would our Eastern European friends whom Obama has shown the finger.

hillbillyjim on September 23, 2009 at 1:23 PM

I doubt he would greet the disappearance of billions in “stimulus” money by shrugging and demanding another trillion.

Sure he would…

And as far as illegal immigration goes McCain would be far more likely to get it passed than Obama. The resulting importation of 12 million new fertile voters that default towards socialism is preferable to Obama detonating Social Security in 2010? Methinks not. Which of those two options has a longer lasting effect on American political culture and lifestyle?

Theworldisnotenough on September 23, 2009 at 1:24 PM

please, please. let’s discuss all this after we’ve un-elected bambi & about 80% of Congress, taken our country back & protected ourselves & our Soldiers.

kelley in virginia on September 23, 2009 at 1:24 PM

CAR HEADED OVER CLIFF…..

GOP driving it at 50 mph…..

DEMS driving it at 100 mph…

…..take your pick who you want to drive.

PappyD61 on September 23, 2009 at 1:15 PM

Keep in mind, the DEMS driving 100 mph will get the car pulled over and impounded, possibly before you reach the cliff.

jhffmn on September 23, 2009 at 1:25 PM

portlandon on September 23, 2009 at 1:20 PM

*sigh*
primary looks like a cake walk for him, unless Chris Simcox starts stepping up to the plate…

cmsinaz on September 23, 2009 at 1:25 PM

I hate 0bama with a passion, but I think having him in office was like ripping off the bandage that covers the infected, pus oozing wound that liberalism is. Liberal infection only leads to gangrene and amputation when left unchecked. At least now we can see what’s going on and can formulate some remedies.

I maintain that the progressive fascists have been planning what they are doing now for a very long time, over 60 years easily. 0bama messed it all up for them by pushing to the maximum for his socialist fascism before the time was right for them. 0bama is so egotistical and narcissistic that he thinks he was the ONE born to do this, he is the ONE to bring this change from a free America to a country full of slaves oppressed by his fascist rule.

He is the one that’s going to bring the progressives plans to a meeting with a brick wall…but only if it’s handled properly by the rest of us.

McCain would not have brought this to a head. Instead, his mushy left leanings would have furthered the progressives plans, entrenching socialist fascism even farther into this country.

Now we need to start pouring the antibiotic on the wound and debreed the dead and infected flesh, and forget about the placebo ‘cure’ that McCain would have offered in the form of more liberal reforms and more bending over to the progressive left.

Spiritk9 on September 23, 2009 at 1:25 PM

I don’t watch Beck regularly, but from what I have seen I have reacted positively to. I’m with Dr. Zero on his assessment of a McCain presidency. At bare minimum, continuing to be steadfast in the face of Islamic terror would have been a vast improvement even with Democrat-lite domestic policy. Beck’s views are his own, and this one in particular I couldn’t disagree with more.

drocity on September 23, 2009 at 1:25 PM

I concur with Beck. In the short term, McCain would not have been as bad as Obama is, but after McCain folowing Bush, long term conservativism would have been irreparably damaged by a complete loss of identity.

That said, I feel Doctor Zero’s frustration by the lack of character of the sitting President.

awake on September 23, 2009 at 1:25 PM

Instead, 2012 will be a nightmare for Obama, and nobody like him is getting back into office.

MadisonConservative on September 23, 2009 at 1:21 PM

You and Pablo are basking in the pre-glow of an optimism that I don’t share. You underestimate both the damage that Obama can do AND the hoped-for Awakening of sensibility.

If this rise of resentment against what Obama is doing falls short, a re-elected Obama in 2013-2017 will make his first term look like CandyLand

Janos Hunyadi on September 23, 2009 at 1:26 PM

Have you listened to our Republican representation in Congress lately? STILL COWARDS! I hope they lose even more seats next year. They deserve to lose. Get somebody with balls in there to fight for the FREEDOM we deserve as Americans.

jay12 on September 23, 2009 at 1:26 PM

I appreciate the good things Glenn Beck has done. I don’t think this is one of them. Obama’s overreach may lead to the downfall of the radical left Democrat party but that’s not guaranteed and the damage to the country in the meantime is real, devastating and long term.

SKYFOX on September 23, 2009 at 1:26 PM

Echoes what I said yesterday in a previous post here:

And from a certain perspective, he’d [Beck] be right…but worse for who?

McCain, if elected, would have been “better” for the nation than Obama, but FAR WORSE, if not fatal, for the ideology of conservatism. He would have went even further left than Bush did (as he often does now), reaching so far across the aisle to make sure Democrat causes were advanced that he’d fall left. But you’d never know it, because any “bi-partisan” mistake or failure would be dropped solely on McCain by the media. Any blowback or disgruntlement would have been thrust on McCain and his “conservative policies”, a perfect excuse for Dems to slap the fault for “moderate left” policies on McCain’s “conservatism”. See Bush for a recent example.

Obama, by contrast, will be FAR WORSE for the nation, but mUCH BETTER for conservatism. Not really Republicans, but conservatism. You can get ignorant or uneducated or biased or uniformed people to understand topics that they were never taught in school quite easily (concepts of overspending and federal/state power, basic economics and civics) by exposing them to it, explaining and showing them they will pay the bill when it comes. My brother calls it “therapeutic check-writing”, i.e. “pay the bills, cure all your ills.” You tend to run shop and be more responsible when you have to write the check at the end of the month. Example- you will never learn a language better than if you need to do so to survive. Obama will be that wake up call for a lot of people. I said this 1 1/2 years ago – he will trash this nation, but do it SO QUICKLY, it will get noticed, and in fact, be hard to ignore. Obama and his ilk are far too arrogant to hide their agenda, or be more clever in selling it. They will thug it in your face and defy you to stop it. Ring any bells to what we are witnessing right now?

Republicans can either be conservative or do a damn good job pretending to be one, and ride the coming wave that rolls that direction, but as you can plainly see, there are few to no big name Republicans stepping up to voice opposition beyond radio and tv personalities.

As far as both sides being a disaster, they are. I don’t trust either one, they are all crooks. I just vote for the one who robs me the least, or is given less opportunity/power to do so. Right now, the Dems are far worse than the Republicans, but give the Republicans a crushing victory, and watch the past eight years of overspending happen all over again.

It is important to note Beck is a conservative independent, not a Republican.

I can’t rule out Beck may be mindf*cking the audience here. It IS an interview with Katie, and Beck is in the “crossfire” for hatin’ on the Messi-uh right now. What better way to head that off than to say something “shocking” that throws people off, i.e. “I’d vote for Hill-Dog and McCain is really Satan.” Beck can always refer to it every time someone in the leftist media or the administration wants to “appoint” Beck “Grand Dragon” because he criticizes Obama politically.
Please consider, there really isn’t much of a difference between the PARTIES, they are both power mongers who will tell ya what you want to hear to get that vote, but ultimately do what they want, unless they are HELD ACCOUNTABLE for their actions, criminal, negligent, stupid, cowardly or otherwise. ACCOUNTABILITY and CONSEQUENCE, two words sorely lacking in politics these days in any form.
DO NOT EVER CONFUSE PARTIES WITH IDEOLOGY. The right conservative/capitalist and left-liberal/socialist/communist ideologies couldn’t BE more different. The parties and politicians “representing” those ideologies are another matter. One does not necessarily equal the other.

Beck was wrong if he meant McCain would have been a substantially worse than Obama right now in the short term. But he would be right if he meant that McCain would have helped insure longer liberal ideological control. Obama’s “orgy of foundational transformation” might be massive enough to actually catch and hold the attention of the ADHD riddled voting public and show them just how bad “liberal” ideology really is.

I guess it is a choice between discovering a massive tumor right now, or having cancer eat you alive undetected for 8-16 years. What is worse? What is easier to catch and treat?

Saltyron on September 23, 2009 at 1:26 PM

but if either of them replaced Obama tomorrow, the economy would begin improving immediately… not because they would do anything particularly brilliant, but because they wouldn’t pummel us with the insane crap Obama serves up as daily fare.

We’re about to hit 10,000 on the DOW, while I agree that Obama is not making matters much better…it doesn’t seem as if he’s terrifying markets in the way you describe. The labor market is notoriously slow to regain lost ground, and one cannot assume that a simple change in rhetoric or economic meddling would lead to job growth given the current environment.

ernesto on September 23, 2009 at 1:26 PM

Love the Mothra reference.

shick on September 23, 2009 at 1:26 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4