And Obama Wept

Helter Skelter? Really? You're comparing political enthusiasm to a group who brutally murdered a house full of people at the direction of its leader?

Back off, Tapper. You're way out of line.

Perhaps Obama's supporters are exuberant because there has been so little for the American people to be excited about lately. That doesn't make them loony or homicidally maniacal. Maybe you should go back and watch some of the footage of Robert Kennedy's presidential campaign in 1968. Do you compare those excited citizens to Manson's marauders?

Charimsa has a lot to do with success in politics. As does vision and ambition. I don't beleive that either Clinton or Obama are ideal candidates. I beleive that Obama is far too non-committal on his positions and relies too much on his personality and energy. I beleive that Hillary compromises her own personal vision and values to do what she beleives will be popular. (in a way, that's really what a senator should do. I'm not convinced that it's a trait that I want to see in a President, though) Either could lead to a disaster if there isn't someone to balance them out. I think a lot of the ultimate success is going to hinge on who the winner chooses as a running mate.

I'm reminded that both Kennedy and Bill Clinton were perceived as riding on personality and charisma. This alone leads me to lend a bit more slack to Obama. Personality and charisma grease the wheels for a lot of political action.

Honestly, I'd be happy to see either one in office. They're both intelligent, socially responsible and, I beleive, humble enough to listen to advisors. I have my concerns about the ability of either one to swing Republicans over to the Democratic side, though. (heck, I'm concerned about hardcore Obama or Hillary supporters jumping ship if they don't get thier choice and if the Rebuplicans manage put together a moderate enough ticket)

This article is unfair. You people act like Obama's supporters are weak and stupid. We are not! I support Obama because of his state/federal legislative record and current platform. You all are allowing the media to define Obama's campaign as a cult and now you all are jumping on board like sheep. Media controls how the masses think! Right now - the media wants to turn Obama's strength into a weakness. Shame on you all for not thinking for yourselves.

ObamaZomies!, or OZ for short.

Don't worry, I am not joining the cult nor am I swayed by a "rockstar" with a pretty face and empty words. They have called him the American Mandela even though he has done nothing to earn this name. In fact, Obama has done nothing, but being charming and pretty. I can't believe that so many have fallen for empty words. Were is our intelligence, for goodness sake? Aren't we supposed to hire the best qualified candidate, the candidate with the best credential and experience for the biggest job of the nation??? I guess not...because it seems that Oprah just like with her book club will tell us what to buy. Unbelievable...I am not a sheep. I am not a blind follower. I have a brain, so I will NOT vote for Obama.

I watched part of a speech of his where he was knowingly making his voice go up and down, rising and falling on purpose to sound like a preacher or something. Leading the ignorant in America straight to the slaughter.

So distressing. The more I hear about this guy, the less I like him. I wish the media would wake up! I wish people would wake up!!

His support is starting to resemble a cult. Just the other day, I saw a video on CNN about people clapping when he blows his nose.

It's really disturbing all this rah-rah-rah and fervor about how he's the "messiah." Some Americans remind me of sheep unable to think clearly for themselves.

"He's the most liberal senator in DC, and with the crop we have in there no, that is no small statement."

Actually, given how conservative the Senate is, it would be a good thing if Obama were the 'most liberal Senator'.

"It starts me to think of Revelations, on the anti-christ and how the end of the world is perdicted for Dec 12, 2012"

How odd that I can't find that date mentioned in my Bible.

"The problem here is not supporters of the other candidates, it is the fact that the Obama supporters are obsessed over an individual who has not shown to take a stand on any issues, he answers in general to appease both sides."

This is kind of funny given that Obama is the candidate who was willing to oppose the Iraq war back when over 90% of Americans enthusiastically supported it.

The more I learn about Obama the more I get a wierd feeling about him.

Are a lot of Obama's supporters unaware of the issues and taken by his rhetoric?

Yes.

Does this NECESSARILY mean that he is ignorant about policy issues?

No.

Is rhetoric NECESSARILY used for evil purposes?

No.

Is there a mass movement?

Let's see....The democrats are divided. The republicans don't care for Obama. And most of the country, as usual, is too busy to give a crap. hmmmm movement perhaps, but assuredly not a mass movement.

Is attacking Obama supporters instead of his positions a fallacious means of dismissing him?

Yes. Some people on this blog make it seems as if Obama and his policy advisor's would be at a lost for words when asked about policy. Or maybe they think his policy people would reply to every question saying "hope" or "change" with zombie eyes. What nonsense. If you want substance about Obama 's positions, you have to do the same thing you would have to do when seeking substance in any topic, seek it out.

"How fortunate for leaders that men do not think."

Obama, from anti-war speech 10/2/02:
"...I don’t oppose all wars...
I don’t oppose all wars. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of patriots, or of patriotism. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other arm-chair, weekend warriors in this Administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.

What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income – to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics."

Obama's speeches have in fact become increasing critical of experience and the political battles that have been fought, regardless of whether the outcome was good and regardless of what the experienced lawmakers were standing up for. That adds to a growing sense of unease I've had about an attitude I've seen in Obama supporters, a notion that anyone who is not young should just step aside, regardless of their ability or accomplishments, and let the young newcomers take over.
I remember listening to Obama speak at the 2004 Democratic convention, and I thought he was wonderful. I was really impressed -- he sounded so smart, reasonable, capable. I thought this guy will be a rising star in the Senate.
But lately I've been troubled by some of his campaign speeches and the emotional, mass following, cult-leader character that's developing. I thought his comment "We are the ones we've been waiting for" was kinda eerie, but dismissed it as enthusiasm of the moment. Then I read the comment about a beam of light coming down and you'll have an epiphany and you'll go out and vote for Obama, but I just figured that was an anti-Obama misstatement. But I've seen it several times now, and it's the main quote on the obamamessiah.com website. But I still doubted those words had from the mouth of the smart, rational Obama who spoke at the Dem convention. So I did some research on legit news sites and, unexpectedly, discovered that Obama did in fact say those exact words in Hanover NH in Jan 2008. That scares me. And that's just not the Obama from the 2004 convention. That worries me more than the willingness to indiscriminately push out the "older" generation.
History has taught me to be very leery of any mass movements based on personality, and of any movement to exclude any group of people, and particularly any modern day movement that tells its followers to act based on beams of light from above instead of reason, logic, or knowledge. (and yes, I do believe in a messiah, but only the one who came 2000 years ago).
I know you can dismiss my fears, but mark my words, every act has unintended consequences. Some say that the passionate following of Obama is good; but as the Zen master said "we'll see".

You're no cynic. this article is just pragmatic. Great job(ama). No really, great points.

Unfortunately, for too long, cynics like you, Jake, have been given myriad reasons to immediately and systematically doubt anything resembling a unified "movement." I know, because I was once like you--a qualified, certified doubter of all that appeared "good" on the outside. I was so sure that underneath lurked a threat. That below the surface some conspiracy of forces were plotting to strip me of my identity, my rationality, and my values. It was only when Obama reminded me that there is a different way to perceive and live in the world, that politics isn't just a game the old rich folks play to make themselves richer as they get older that I realized my calloused doubt and disbelief was itself the source of my anxiety. What you are seeing in Obamamania is not a cult-like group of pathetic, mindless, suckers who clutch at his robes like he's the messiah--what you're seeing are millions of people who have just woken up from decades of disbelief. What you're seeing is a nation realizing that America is not a machine to be operated by politicians (or even the media)...it's a living organism whose growth depends on each of its individual parts. That's what you're sensing. I understand your tendency to doubt, but have you ever considered trying a different perspective for a CHANGE?

Adding onto Obama's statement regarding God, there is now a website we can go to called, "Is Barack Obama The Messiah?"

What is going on?

“When Morgan Freeman comes over to greet Obama, the senator begins bowing down both hands in worship. ‘This guy was president before I was,’ says Obama, referring to Freeman's turn in Deep Impact and, clearly, getting a little ahead of his own bio. Next, a nod to Bruce Almighty: ‘This guy was God before I was.’”

Policy ideas? Name one original policy idea that works and oh, wasn't proposed by Clinton a few months ago.

Having vision is not the same as being able to carry things through. Yeah he's great at rallying support, but this is like assuming Martin Luther King makes a good president...

And please, stop with the being against Obama = being against hope/change/optimism/all things good. Haven't we heard the same rap when being against Bush = being against freedom/democracy/patriotism/the American ideal?

I find the "all style, no substance" argument to be bit ridiculous (and incredibly unoriginal). Stump speeches are much more effective when they are inspiring rather than policy heavy. For policy information, refer to his website where there are detailed plans for a number of issues. Or, read his book, the Audacity of Hope, where he lays out his policy ideas.

Voting for president is a privilege and a responsibility. Do your research before you vote.

And, the next time you listen to a Hillary Clinton stump speech, listen carefully. How much policy does she really include in her standard stump speech?

Also, if, as people claim above, the smarter choice for president is Hillary (also mentioned was that people voting for Hillary were smarter than those voting for Barack), why does Barack perform better with college-educated voters than Hillary?

I find Barack Obama incredibly intelligent and inspiring. I also, however, have too much respect for Hillary Clinton's accomplishments to bash her for her looks (as someone did Obama above) or for an unfounded reason (all style, no substance). I also believe strongly enough in the Democratic party, that although I support Obama, I will vote for Hillary if she is the general election candidate.

My preference of course is:
OBAMA '08

Obama needs to inspire to win a national campaign. If he talks about the issues in a dry calculated way (ala Gore, Kerry or even Bob Dole; as opposed to an actor- Regan, a charmer- Bill, or a guy you can have a beer with- Bush) he could never garner the support and sustained excitement needed. This is a political move. This does not necessarily mean he is unfamiliar with the issues, he is. Unlike Hillary, he cannot afford to be a policy wonk (she has the name recognition, and thus is not terribly hurt by being stiff and calculating; although she has improved). Moreover, every candidate who tries to win a national election must appeal to a large group, and therefore must have a general message!! ("I am for family values" "I am for the middle class" "No child left behind" etc.) This is not particular to Obama. Moreover, consider the fact that Obama is trying to bring Americans from different persuasions and walks of life together, hence it would require his message to be more general than usual.

The fact that some folks get out of hand and become crazed supporters is no indicator that the movement is not genuine or substantive. After all, we can all think of examples of crazy followers of a moderate and good movement who are not reflective of its core values. If you are interested about where Obama stands on an issue, find out! Then, agree or disagree with him. But please stop this nonsense. What is wrong with inspiring a whole generation of public servants? What is wrong with energizing a bunch of complacent Americans about the good this nation could do?