Glenn Beck posted something on Facebook this past Saturday that’s getting a lot of attention.
Everyone knows that he’s no fan of Donald Trump.
Some of his arguments make perfect sense. Some don’t.
But his post on Saturday definitely made him sound like someone who is ready to support Hillary or at least justify her winning the race. The difference between actually voting for her and actively encouraging millions of people not to try and stop her is microscopic.
The Blaze founder Glenn Beck took to his Facebook page last Saturday to urge his followers to abandon support of Republican nominee Donald Trump, declaring that if such an action results in the election of Hillary Clinton, “so be it” because “[a]t least it is a moral, ethical choice.”
“If the consequence of standing against Trump and for principles is indeed the election of Hillary Clinton, so be it. At least it is a moral, ethical choice,” Beck wrote.
Here is the Facebook post. Read it for yourself.
I’m not one of those guys who hates Glenn Beck and he really knows his stuff when it comes to history. He seems like a good guy who only wants what is best for the country. I’ve got his books and listen to his show so by no means am I a “Beck hater”.
But how condescending does this sound? This translates, at least to me, that not voting for Trump is the moral thing to do.
So many people have tried to make this similar argument that somehow morality says Hillary is the answer or that Trump isn’t. We hear this all the time that “true Christians” can’t support Trump or that morality says that you can’t vote for Trump.
When in reality, it says the exact opposite.
Morality would not let you vote for someone who violated the public’s trust and earned millions from being a public servant thanks to an insanely diabolical pay for play operation disguised as a foundation. Then she lied to our face about it for a year.
Morality wouldn’t let you vote for someone who lied under oath during her Benghazi testimony. It wouldn’t let you vote for someone who intimidated alleged victims of sexual assault. It wouldn’t let you vote for someone who ignored hundreds of requests for more security at Benghazi and failed to send help for 13 hours resulting in the loss of four American lives. It also wouldn’t let you vote for someone who supported an organization like Planned Parenthood that commits barbaric and immoral acts on a daily basis. That’s just the tip of the iceberg.
Morality would also at least suggest that it isn’t “moral” to sit back and not try to stop someone who did that. Even if it made you uncomfortable on some issues. Morality is not only nuanced but it is different for a lot of people. Voters prioritize different issues.
So to sit back and pretend that Trump making rude comments about women somehow excludes any moral person from voting for him just doesn’t hold any water. Beck didn’t say that word for word of course but the obvious implication is that not voting for either is the moral thing to do. I would argue that stopping the kind of immorality we see from Hillary on a weekly basis, or at least trying, is the right thing to do.
And yes, it’s a bummer, but by not supporting one of the two candidates you are very much supporting whoever wins. Maybe not in Southern California where I am but certainly in a place like Pennsylvania or Florida.
That’s how our system works.
You can bet that a lot of conservatives won’t be happy with Glenn. He knows that. So I respect him for coming out and just saying what he feels regardless but I’m pretty tired of the implication that a vote for Trump is a vote against morality or a vote against the Church or something like that. How is that different than Hillary’s comment about Trump supporters being deplorable?
At the very least, let’s knock it off with criticizing the moral compass of fellow conservatives.
You ever notice how the left doesn’t do stuff like that? That’s why they win elections. Wouldn’t that be nice for once?
That’s my take. What’s yours?
Let us know below.