“Third, McCain probably will not serve a second term, which will leave the GOP nomination open in 2012 (depending on who his VP is).”

And he may not make it through his first.  I would bet he won’t.  Look at how past presidents have aged over 4 years.  They seem 15 years older than when they started.  McCain’s bad health is his best asset. I am not at all embarrassed or ashamed to say I hope he makes it to the White House and dies of a heart attack as he walks through the front door.

As for the “ruse” of the judges issue, I think it paid off with Alito, though it is too early too be sure either way.  The Supreme Court issue is not at all about abortion for me, as it is for some.  There are plenty of other issues that I find more important for the highest federal court to deal with.

Generally, I would say you have hit it right with the other points.  The idea that an Obama presidency will wake anyone up is so laughable it could only be believed by some very isolated, people, who have little contact with average Americans.  With all the political, social and legal crisis we have had, have you ever seen any of them wake the public up?

Any mistake made or disaster brought on by Obama will be covered up or spun favorably by his allies in the media.  It is obvious he establishment loves the guy.  Nothing will stick to him.  No alarm, no waking up.

Perhaps worst of all, the symbolism of Obama is enough to finally nail the coffin shut on the USA. I am glad you wrote something about this as these symbols are as important as any law passed.  The issue is often overlooked by political and legal types who don’t focus as much on mass psychology.  Might as well just rename the country

The fact is that nobody knows which will be worse for us.  This is all pointless speculation.  Obama could cause a backlash, or move us all far to the left.  McCain may fully discredit neoconservativism or show that it can survive two terms of a president as awful as Bush. 

I’ve bought into the arguments for Obama, but either way I’m pessimistic about America.  Real, patriotic, truly conservative movements seem to be doing well in Russia, Italy and other parts of Europe.  Hopefully they’ll provide a healthy global alternative to the Tel Aviv-Washington- New York axis. 

The political class in this country is far too insane for anything to be done in the short term.  The number of designated victims that are their natural allies and the diversity-industrial complex keeps growing and will continue to push us towards the Cultural Marxist left.  Obama will energize all these do gooders and anyone with a conservative bone in their body will be shamed into silence.  The best a true conservative can hope for at this point is a decline in America’s global influence.

“Fifth, although America is in precipitous decline (especially in terms of her economy), what the United States does still has symbolic value around the world, especially in the West, and having a multicultural, untethered president like Obama could “send the wrong message.” Is it inconsequential that almost every Anglo or European conservative I know fears an Obama presidency just as much as, if not more than, a McCain one?”

They all hate America. European pride seems in good part defined by opposition to America.

If we become a global beast, perhaps they’d react against globalism.

---

“Finally, make no mistake about it, Obama is a radical leftist. He will establish a PC regime in DC (or rather, expand the existing one) in search of the dragons of inequality and social injustice to slay.”

Would McCain be any different?

“It may take yet another incompetent GOP administration finally to convince your average conservative Americans that the neocons are not their allies. They trusted for a while that Bush was one of their own (until immigration reform came along); but with McCain there will be no illusions.”

How many have we already had thusfar? This is a tried and failed strategy.

“a humiliating defeat for Obama could give leverage to an anti-globalist moderate seeking the Democratic nomination in 2012, perhaps someone in the mold of Lou Dobbs. (This is highly unlikely, but one can hope.)”

Or it could create a Marxist opposition which would build in response to McCain. Obama could be the Goldwater of the left.

---

That said, you present the best case against Obamania I’ve yet seen.

Frank:  “They all hate America. European pride seems in good part defined by opposition to America. If we become a global beast, perhaps they’d react against globalism.”

This is a good point.

“McCain’s dragons reside overseas.” McCain’s dragons reside where Joe Lieberman, the sponsor od S1959
tells McCain they reside. S1959 or HR1955 sponsored by Jane Harmon establishes an American Inquisition.
Obama might, just might, resent the abject toadying he has been forced to undergo by the Israel Lobby
and develop a gag reflex. This would be marvelous because Obama would simultaneously abjure the sin
of one sin that cries to heaven for vengeance, namely sodomy and mitigate American complicity
in two other sins that cry out to heaven for vengeance, “the blood of Abel” and “the cry of the people oppressed
in Egypt and that of the foreigner, the widow, and the orphan.”
1,200,000 Iraquis have been killed since this leg of the American aggression, a fact only noted by Ron Paul, the “isolationist.”
For Christians this is a no-brainer. We are forbidden to be clever practitioners of poltique du pire.
What in terms of the given context will end injustice should be the only consideration.

Thanks. Btw, have you seen this?:

Michelle Obama might be on tape speaking in Reverend Wright’s church.

You only have to look at his positions just on gun control - Obama wants a federal ban on concealed carry and all semi automatic pistols and rifles- to see how embarrassingly far to the left he is. You hear almost no one talking simply about his positions on the issues. I think that it will be surprising how quickly he dries up and blows away once people’s initial infatuations and self induced delusions wear off, and they start asking these simple questions -if anyone ever gets around to asking him. The bare fact of the matter is that they’ve put up another guy who holds positions that, on their own merits, will make him unelectable outside the Seattle to San Francisco corridor.

I’d agree that Obama’s preoccupation with domestic issues is really the kicker, given his politics and his plainly stated disdain for rural and working class whites. I likewise wouldn’t vote for McCain myself, but there is no doubt he is the lesser of two evils, if you put aside the sort of tin pot Machiavellian scheming that’s doomed to blow up in our faces anyway.

“First, the media will interpret an Obama victory as...”

Haha.  By that logic, we shouldn’t be voting for anyone, anywhere, at any time.  The media will find a way to interpret the result however they like; I don’t think that can be a concern.

Chuck Baldwin 2008! The ONLY choice for conservatives.

“No, I’m not endorsing McCain.”
But an Omaba defeat means a McCain victory. Period. So the title of your post should be “Why McCain is better than Obama” or “Why I want McCain to win.”

“anti-war libertarians have argued that Obama will end the war in Iraq–and this above all is the determining issue.”
Many anti-war conservatives like Andrew Bacevich share that view,

“An Obama victory will fuel the neocon media outlets, which could result in the election of another (albeit less ideological) neocon in 2012 (perhaps someone in the mold of Romney).”
Sounds like a form of dialectical thinking. The fact is that the leading “neocon media outlets” and figures support McCain, advise McCain and want him to win. Their favorite Democratic candidate is Hillary and not Obama. Explain why we should join forces with them to elect McCain.

Leon Hader is right, the neocons hate Obama and are working for McCain or Hillary. Obama at least seems thoughtful and has expressed some sane views on Iraq and negotiations with Iran and Cuba. Domestically he will be a disaster but would McCain be much different. Anybody who has Joe Lieberman wispering in his ear is unfit to be President. Our best hope is that a wipeout of McCain and the loss of a lot seats in congress will reenergise the people on the right, to rebuild and fight back before it is too late. McCain will called a man of the right and destroy what little reputation we have left. I can’t vote for Obama but will be rooting for him over McCain. He is the lesser evil but still evil.

Mr. Hadar,

I certainly am not rooting for McCain.  As I said, I’m voting third party.  I dislike both Obama and McCain, I don’t see a substantial difference between the two, and I doubt whether historians 500 years from now (when writing about the decline of the U.S.) will see a substantial difference.  I really don’t follow your logic.  If I am anti-Scylla, does it mean I am pro-Charybdis

If I am anti-Scylla, does it mean I am pro-Charybdis?

Obama may bomb Sudan.

McCain may bomb Russia.

Since I posted earlier, I’ll add that I’m voting Baldwin. I simply prefer Obama to McCain but not enough to vote for him.

And if conservatives go in supporting Obama hoping he’ll create a reaction, they’ll need to be ready to oppose him the moment he’s elected… Amnesty’s one of the big issues.

My humble political strategy then is to oppose both McCain and Obama because either would need to be strongly opposed the moment he took his throne.

“No, I’m not endorsing McCain.” But an Obama defeat means a McCain victory. Period. So the title of your post should be “Why McCain is better than Obama” or “Why I want McCain to win.”

Dr. Hadar comment above illustrates why all these sorts of discussions make my head hurt. The question should be who should conservative be FOR. That is simple. Conservatives should be FOR Chuck Baldwin. Maybe a pragmatic case could be made for Barr, but Barr has waffled a lot on immigration in his effort to secure the Libertarian nomination, and he is worse on foreign policy and the War than Baldwin.

It is absolutely true that the next President of the US, barring death, will be either McCain or Obama. And I guess in a technical sense Dr. Hadar’s dichotomy is correct. But I just can not think in that sort of mercenary two party way, and I’m glad of it. Not when there are better third party alternatives available and not when our system is not officially two party.

In most states the winner is a foregone conclusion. Vote your conscious and vote to send a message. Vote third party. Vote Baldwin. Even a vote for Nadar would make more sense than a vote for Obama.

The best plausible outcome, IMO, would be for Baldwin to cost McCain the election.

Many good comments above.  As they say about law school essay exams, your conclusion is the least important part of your answer.  We are at that stage now. 

Each person who votes 3rd party makes a step forward.  Our best choice is to point out the bad in both and not make either one our hero. When we say which of the two is the bad one, we end up projecting our hopes on the other.

We should advocate 3rd party voting as the solution. When people vote 3rd party it is a step over the two party game.  The two parties have managed to select two choices who are actually quite close, as is often the case.  Then we are supposed to vilify one in our hearts and think the other candidate will do what we want.

I am a recovering projector of my hopes on candidates.  I can never be cured.  I have to fight it every day of my life.  I do this by voting 3rd party and pointing out the flaws in both.  I join NumbersUSA, Fairus, comment at Takimag and Dan Stein and Amren if I’m really bold, and I don’t give in to two party wrestlemania.

Red & OA:  I am 100% in favor of voting third party.  I support neither Obama nor McCain, both of whom I see as two peas in a pod.  My only point in writing this post was to address some of the alleged strategic advantages of an Obama victory, which, I think, may be overstated.

Is it inconsequential that almost every Anglo or European conservative I know fears an Obama presidency just as much as, if not more than, a McCain one?

Really? I live in (western mainland) Europe and I’ve yet to hear this sentiment expressed. The European press, which is unanimously leftist by American standards, is gaga for Obama and very wary of McCain. The “European conservative” is a rare bird I never come in contact with.

Matthew, I get your point and largely agree. I was mainly responding to Dr. Hadar and others who have expressed similar sentiments. I think Obama is preferable to Hillary, but I don’t know if he is preferable to McCain. As a pro-lifer, I have a very hard time supporting a pro-choice candidate over even a nominally pro-life one. The only way that I could justify that is by rationalizing (arguably correctly) that the War and foreign policy is a more pressing and proximate issue. I just try not to think in these terms because it reinforces the two party dichotomy.

Here’s another point to consider.  Since the inception of Bush’s disaster of a presidency, many run-of-the-mill GOP conservatives I know (in day to day life, not from blogs) have become more sympathetic towards paleo ideas (although none of them have even heard of paleoconservatism, except possibly from me).

If Obama wins, many people like these will return to their Rush-listening ways, castigate Obama, and return to the GOP fold.

If McCain wins, his presidency will be just as big of a disaster as Bush’s, and could possibly push even more mainstream conservatives towards paleoconservatism.

“My only point in writing this post was to address some of the alleged strategic advantages of an Obama victory, which, I think, may be overstated.”

Agreed and well done.