Forget the Kool-Aid: Obama's Support is Real
With Barack Obama's bandwagon picking up speed, Hillary Clinton's sympathizers have been pushing a new caricature of their opponent: the cultish figure who seduces the weak-kneed masses with vague and meaningless but oh-so-warm-feeling generalities.
"There was something just a wee bit creepy," Time's Joe Klein, a Bill and Hillary stalwart, recently wrote, "about the mass messianism…of (Obama's) Super Tuesday speech and the recent turn of the Obama campaign."
Alex Joseph, a student at Georgetown University who supports Clinton, boasted in a Slate column of his unique-for-his-generation ability to resist the siren Obama's call.
"At Georgetown," he informed us, "the Obama supporters—devotees? cultists?—are everywhere."
In their telling, the choice for Democrats is one between the brain and the heart. Obama is for hopeless romantics who are unschooled in and ignorant of the details of public policy and the realities of politics, while Clinton is for the more intellectually mature among us—sober-minded policy purists who have mastered the art of thinking with their heads.
To be fair, the devotion of some Obama supporters has helped advance this caricature, and prompted some members of the media to buy into it.
When Obama appeared at a Democratic dinner in New Hampshire last month, his exuberant supporters rushed the stage in a scene that evoked the Gospel of Luke, forcing the public-address announcer to plead with them to back off. Over the weekend, the Drudge Report linked to a video compilation of people fainting at Obama rallies. And the mere mention of his name in an online political forum has often been enough to unleash an onslaught of rabidly pro-Obama, anti-Clinton comments, effectively shutting down rational discussion of the Democratic race. (For an excellent example of this, check out the blog of New York Times opinion columnist Paul Krugman, who seems to have been pushed perilously close to a Heart-of-Darkness state of near-madness by his running battles with the Obama commenters.)
But this hardly typifies Obama's support. Just consider the difference between Obama's present coalition and the one assembled by Howard Dean four years ago, which featured similarly over-the-top displays of enthusiasm. As with Obama's loyalists, Deaniacs turned out by the thousands to hear their man, expressed their devotion in deeply personal terms, filled his coffers with tens of millions of dollars in small donations, and flooded the email inboxes of journalists who didn't seem to "get it."
In Dean's case, the real-world support never caught up with the intensity of the true believers. He faded badly in Iowa and finished in a distant third place there, then left the race a month later. His core supporters made plenty of noise, but in the end, there just weren't that many of them.
Obama, meanwhile, seems to be appealing to what might be called the new "silent majority." Sure, he's got his share of stage-rushers and Kool-Aid drinkers, but he's also appealed to millions of casual voters—the ones who don't go to his rallies, don't donate to his campaign, but do show up on primary day and check his name off on the ballot. That's the kind of mass casual support that other idol-candidates—Dean four years ago, or, say, Ron Paul this year—never came close to attracting. Next Page >
I agree. I am a Reagan Democrat who has voted Republican ever since Jimmy Carter, and I am considering voting for Obama on March 4. I don't agree with all of his proposed policies or his politics, but he seems to present the first chance in a long time to be able to form a coalition of voters who could support the movement of some bi-paritsan legislation that could take this country forward. As it is, all we have is endless gridlock and contention.
I will vote for Obama, but I will never vote for Hillary Clinton, as she will only polarize us all even more. This is the best chance the Democrats will ever have of pulling people in from the Independent and Republican ranks, and they should take advantage of this opportunity, and quit belittling Obama's efforts. If Hillary wins or "takes" the nomination, I will vote for McCain and people will mobilize in great numbers to defeat her.
Oh please - Obama talks and talks and say nothing. His policies are exactly the same big government plans that Clinton expounds. He has no experience and has no actual accomplishments - apart from becoming rather rich doing "commmunity outreach". He is another Deval Patrick - superficial, vain, ambitious but exotic enough to make people think he is a wise man.
Think about those "Blue Dog Democrats". How many of them will keep their seats if Hillary is at the top of the ticket? Very few.
Here's a nice, funny, Obama site: http://obamawill.com
Well, Obama is definitely a liberal who I think will have a hard time pushing through some of his agenda, whatever that might be, due to the spectacular effect the lobbyists will have on congress. While most of what emanates from candidates mouths' is bilge, many at the grassroots are hungry to elect the person who promises the most. I wish President Obama luck; pray he surrounds himself with good advisers; namely at treasury and state.
Re: "Time's Joe Klein, a Bill and Hillary stalwart"
Klein was the author of Primary Colors. Apparently, you haven't read it or seen the movie.
He is nothing more than an empty suit who has mastered the art of the "group-think".
Obama was born into a Muslim family to a Muslim father. Under Islamic Sharia law that makes him a Muslim. Period. This simple fact that cannot be debated, only ignored. His campaign used to say "he was not born or raised as a Muslim." Now, in the face of overwhelming evidence, they've changed that to "he's never been a practicing Muslim." This is also a lie. He went to Muslim schools in Indonesia (the country is 80% Muslim, so the public schools are Muslim), studied the Quran in Arabic and was considered "devout" by those who knew him. The people in Indonesia speculate, not "if", but rather *when* he will "come out." Even ignoring his hardcore leftist ideology and the sleazy South Side political background, who in their right mind would put this unvetted man in the White House? Are you "Death to Amerika!" Democrats (and a lot of others, evidently) actually dumb enough to vote for a radical left Muslim mole in November? I'm betting you are. It is the logical conclusion of your suicidal, self-hating ideology. But, damn folks, do you have to take everyone else with you?
"Empty Suit - Cult Followers - Kool-Aid Drinkers" - and all the rest. Maybe so - but how then do you explain Obama's endorsement by numerous prominent newspapers around the country - not to mention numerous prominent political officials. Are they too being drawn into the "cult" and are they too being bamboozled by a snakeoil saleman and an empty suit?
Seeker, to answer your question, yes! Have you ever heard the term "anti-Christ"? If there is such a thing he is it! The magic marxist muslim, not for me, nor the Clinton crime family either.
Obama has plenty of Experience:
Hillary has a personal wealth of about 40 million dollars and WILL NOT release her tax returns AND she WILL NOT release her first lady records. She takes money from lobbyists and is running a mean and vicious campaign.
PLEASE get educated and join Barack for REAL change.
The truth is that Barack Obama has MORE substantive legislative experience than Hillary Clinton has.
This is not an attack. These are facts. Please read. Thank you.
Senator Clinton, who has served only one full term - 6yrs. - and another year campaigning, has managed to author and pass into law - 20 - twenty pieces of legislation in her first six years.
These bills can be found on the website of the Library of Congress www.thomas.loc.gov, but to save you trouble, I'll post them here for you.
1. Establish the Kate Mullany National Historic Site.
2. Support the goals and ideals of Better Hearing and Speech Month.
3. Recognize the Ellis Island Medal of Honor.
4. Name courthouse after Thurgood Marshall.
5. Name courthouse after James L. Watson.
6. Name post office after Jonn A. O'Shea.
7. Designate Aug. 7, 2003, as National Purple Heart Recognition Day.
8. Support the goals and ideals of National Purple Heart Recognition Day.
9. Honor the life and legacy of Alexander Hamilton on the bicentennial of his death.
10. Congratulate the Syracuse Univ. Orange Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship.
11. Congratulate the Le Moyne College Dolphins Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship.
12. Establish the 225th Anniversary of the American Revolution Commemorative Program.
13. Name post office after Sergeant Riayan A. Tejeda.
14. Honor Shirley Chisholm for her service to the nation and express condolences on her death.
15. Honor John J. Downing, Brian Fahey, and Harry Ford, firefighters who lost their lives on duty. Only five of Clinton's bills are, more substantive. 16. Extend period of unemployment assistance to victims of 9/11.
17. Pay for city projects in response to 9/11 18. Assist landmine victims in other countries.
19. Assist family caregivers in accessing affordable respite care.
20. Designate part of the National Forest System in Puerto Rico as protected in the wilderness preservation system.
There you have it, the fact's straight from the Senate Record.
Now, I would post those of Obama's, but the list is too substantive, so I'll mainly categorize.
During the first - 8 - eight years of his elected service in the Illinois legislature he sponsored over 820 bills. He introduced:
233 regarding healthcare reform,
125 on poverty and public assistance,
112 crime fighting bills,
97 economic bills,
60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills,
21 ethics reform bills,
15 gun control,
6 veterans affairs and many others.
His first year in the U.S. Senate, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored another 427. These include:
** The Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 - became law
**The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act - became law
**The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, passed the Senate,
**The 2007 Government Ethics Bill, - became law,
**The Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill, In committee
Barack Obama is responsible for this web site that let's you check government spending:
http://www.USASpending.Gov
To Susan T - I'm in agreement that Clinton has never sponsored a significant piece of legislation in her life. Her sole agenda as a Senator was to run for the Presidency and she didn't want a liberal voting record to have to explain in a general election.
Obama, on the other hand, has no such qualms. He has the most liberal voting record in the Senate, and your laundry list of pet causes is good evidence.
Unfortunately, people are supporting the guy without any idea of what he stands for.
Yeah - Susan T - I said up above (first post) that I might vote for Obama, but would never vote for Hillary, but your list may have convinced me to stick with McCain back in the Repub party where I probably belong. I like Obama - who could not "like" him - but he may be TOO liberal for me. I knew he was liberal - but your list gives me great pause.
I am honored to be the first person to call the last poster a moron. This type of fear and speculation led to the Iraq fiasco in the first place.
This type of mindset isn't part of the problem. It is the problem. We have been told since 9/11 to be afraid and to mistrust and all that has done has given us more to be afraid of and less to trust.
Correction Susan T. - I will definitely vote for Obama in the Texas Primary just to help thwart HRC - but I will stick with McCain in general election.
Anonymous - Moron I may be - but I do not cast my vote out of fear, mistrust or speculation, despite your suggestion, but instead based upon the facts of his very liberal cant, which is not my cup of tea. I want someone who tacks from the center - be it left or right. I am not a rabid winger of any kind. At first I thought Obama might be someone who could or would do that, and maybe he would, but his record as presented by Susan T - anyway -seems to suggest otherwise. We all need to look into things further.
Oh yes - thanks for your vote of confidence in my ability to digest facts and think for myself. It seems I can be a "kool-aid" drinker either way. Isn't that what elections are all about - trying to thresh out the truth and come to some reasonable conclusion. In truth - we are not being presented with three very good choices from which to choose when all is said and done.
I saw the movie and read the book. Any real punches in it are pulled and in the end Klein gives Bill exactly what Monica gave him.
When I saw one of his rallies on TV, I thought the crowd was chanting "Change, change, change!" Upon a second YouTube viewing, I realized they were chanting "Che, Che, Che!".
Susan T , I am a smart well read N.Y gal and I completly agree with you.
Deborah Kay is on the mark. Obama is an empty suit.
It is incredible that "some" people still have not come to believe that true change can start to come about with Senator Obama as President of the United States of America! Time and time again we see Hilary and people in "her camp" use negative adds, ignorant rhetoric from ex-presidents,etc. to show that their candidate is the person best to be president. We need to as Senator Obama states, "move away from this form of politics", and change this way of doing business in Washington. All of you who "spew" negative comments about Senator Obama should be ashamed of yourself, but no matter "we" who really see what must be done (change in Washington)and your negative comments about Senator Obama only reinforces your "desperate" attempt to win by "any means".
*This Presidential election is truly about the "past vs. future". Senator Clinton has never been able to bring Americans of all backgrounds together...but you foolishly believe she can be President (not just in name but in actions)???
"Stop the negative comments and join our train of change...Change we can believe in!!!
I hate to break the news to you, but you haven't actually addressed Obama's shallowness. Sitting down with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is hardly substantive. What's the idea, that Obama will inspire him to play nice? Obama talks about "ending the mind-set that got us into war" -- which means what exactly?
You then say, quite rightly, "The truth is that even voters who aren't moved by Obama's substantive appeal are still, by and large, favorably impressed by him and willing to at least consider voting for him." But that's just what Obama's critics have been saying all along: his support is based on an emotional response, not a thoughtful evaluation of his policy proposals.
Regarding the interesting claim that Obama is an Iranian mole... I think if you look at the evidence, it seems far more likely that Cheney is an Iranian mole, given that everything he has done so far has benefitted Iran (and Halliburton), particularly the imbecilic invasion of Iraq, brainchild of a draft dodger, no less. Perhaps while Cheney and Bush were busy avoiding Vietnam they were getting brainwashed by mullahs...
Since neither candidate is running for the position of legislator, community organizer, evangelist or wife of powerful man, neither has a resume worth considering when choosing a POTUS, so let's toss out experience right at the get go.
Since both candidates would expand the federal government to a size and breadth not previously seen or experienced, increase entitlement spending to a level even more unsustainable than it is now, increase taxes substantially and assume greater control over our lives by limiting choices, increasing regulation and making us work harder than ever to support their big government ideas, each is basically interchangeable with the other (mandates notwithstanding).
So basically it boils down to: who have YOU been waiting all life your to vote for? A woman or a man of mixed race who apparently enthusiastically embraces the black half of his heritage while shunning the white?
Oh, I forgot. Obama has vision. Obama is change. Obama will unify the nation. Obama will unify the world. Obama will rebuild the nation AND the world. Obama makes us believe. Obama makes us hope. Yeah well, Obama makes some of us want to reach for an emesis basin. Unifying those of us who find his domestic policies unsupportable, foreign policies non-existent and himself eminently unqualified for the job he seeks with his often empty-minded cult followers who care more about feeling than thinking would, indeed, be one fine hat trick. IF he were actually capable of doing it, which he isn't.
You media types need to get over this Obama/Reagan thing. Ronald Reagan came with a complete set of governing principles and a conservative philosophy that he embraced with his whole heart and mind. He was a successful two-term governor of the nation's most populous state, not a legislator of few accomplishments. He was a true orator, not am empty sloganeer. He didn't work his crowds into frenzies with mindless chanting and fainting groupies. His supporters didn't sound and behave like fundamentalists on the cusp of Rapture. In short, there is no comparison, at least not one of any substance.
Hillary is a triangulator. She would bend over backward not to offend the republicants. And she still can't find it in herself to say that she made a mistake by voting for the war. Is that what we want? another president that can't admit to making a mistake.
And as for reagan, he was willing to let possibly hundreds or thousands of people die just so he could break the airline traffic controllers union. those are some "principles".
To Anonymous above regarding Hillary's war vote - It is highly probable that Hillary doesn't think she did make a mistake in voting for the war - or Bush either. This childish insistance instigated by the Press) that we need the President to 'admit he made a mistake' smacks of Elementary School. What is the benefit, even if he did believe that? The lunatic left wing would still smell blood in the water and rush in with another outbreak of Bush Derangement Syndrome. Grow up already.
What a silly conclusion to Obama being a Muslim. Not because one is born into a Christian family with a Christian name, makes one a Christian. Jesus himself rebuked us at that assumption. History has shown that Christianity had their own 'Jihad' against many other non-Christian races who were more civilized.
I am a 'Christian' of East Indian descendent, my ancestors were Hindu and I have a strong Hindu last name, does that exclude me as being a Christian?. Just like their are radicals in the Muslim faith there are radicals in the Christian faith, do not assume all Muslim are terrorist. Check in your Bible that God also bless Ishmael, the ancestor father of the Muslim faith - the son of Abraham.
Group think is an understatement, although accurate from a sociological perspective.
The supporters of Obama are now referred to as ‘Red Kool Aid drinkers’ mostly due to the overzealous enthusiasm for his rock star appeal. Not to mention a few of the intimidation tactics some over the top supporters utilize when the topics, such as religion or ethnicity, are raised.
Not all voters have had the option to watch CNN continuously as there are swing shifts and double job duty to consider. Thus the debates are incredibly important to the legitimacy of both parties agenda. However, when undecided’s pose questions of legitimate concern or curiosity, and are then berated for lack of Obama History Knowledge or worse, CENSORED altogether, it tends to draw unnecessary negative tension.
If this Is a reflection of things to come under an Obama reign then there will be no peace; which is unfortunate as that seems to be the real desired change which unifies American voters. The methodology of a few Obama supporters does not in fact reflect a message of peace and seems to divide voters within the democratic party even further…thus I beg to differ that he is the be all end all for peace or positive change.
Word.