Obama Cult Following Scary »
Posted By dandt1612 7 months, 3 weeks ago in NewsThere is something undeniably disconcerting about hearing Obama talk consistently about the "movement" rather than the platform. His followers speek of "coming to Obama" as if they have found the Messiah. This is becoming disturbing on many levels. Read this article.
Read Full Story at thedemocraticdaily.com »
Submitted By:
dandt1612
We are a gay couple and have been partners going on 19 years. We are Independents and think for ourselves. We like everyone who feels ...
Related Articles:
Why not submit a story?
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 21
-
0%
dandt16127 months, 3 weeks ago
This Obama cult phenom is truly scary. These poor people hear one pretty speech (or sermon) and they loose all reason- like his severe deficit on experience or the fact that he WILL veto universal healthcare. It's like they become entranced because they are hearing some things they want to hear (which is all by design by the way). The chanting of "O-ba-ma! O-ba-ma!" at the rallies is spooky. I heard one lady on TV say she "came over to his side" after just one speech and voted for him and didn't even know anything about him. That just doesn't make any sense. We are electing a president here which requires serious evaluation of qualifications.
All I can say to his followers is to snap out of it and come back to reality... think for yourself again. Don't be a follower, be a leader. Vote smart.
Reply-
0%
dandt16127 months, 3 weeks ago
Pamela Leavy with the Democratic Daily..."It's not that I don't see the attraction he holds for some, I just personally feel it leaves me cold. I'm not a joiner, I'm an independent think, a leader not a follower. When someone pushes me to join or participate in something that involves group think, I tend to run the other way, so perhaps that is why I never caught the Obama fever."
Reply -
JohnQPublicComment removed: User banned.
-
0%
jaspersneed7 months, 3 weeks ago
"We are electing a president here which requires serious evaluation of qualifications."
Quite correct, it requires precisely that, yet seldom do we seem to manage it from a sufficient number of voters. Leaving aside the 2000 election that brought us Bush/Cheney, by November 2004 any "serious evaluation" of Bush's putative qualifications should easily have led to his ouster in favor of an "Anybody But Bush" nominee from the democrats. EASILY. Yet what did we get? A literal cliffhanger all the way through, with a Diebold finish at the end in Ohio to seal the deal. Why? Because far too many Americans are completely incapable of seriously evaluating anyone or anything.
Concerning Obama, we'll see whether his substance-free rhetoric cedes to something identifiably positive or negative. Persuasive oratory is nothing remarkable in itself; all politicians have the skill to at least some degree. It is the listeners' response to it that matters. We'll see...
Reply-
0%
ecotourusa7 months, 3 weeks ago
all I know is: Obama is pro-amnesty. so are Hillary and McCain. what's the difference if they all have the same goal?
the goal: that would be the North American Union and the Amero. (the big corps will need the imported slave labor to process all the goods and services from mexico and china...because our ruling elite have sold our nation out.)
and, don't be fooled by the charisma of the benevolent...
AID to Africa = OIL to America!
RON PAUL LOOKS BETTER AND BETTER TO ME...
Reply
-
-
0%
ETproductions7 months, 3 weeks ago
Same goes for other charismatic leaders. Pity the people who read the words of Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence. They listened to speeches of Washington, Lincoln, FDR, and JFK. Oh so sad that they actually followed these misbegotten "speech makers" instead of walking in lockstep with public-opinion-poll driven technocrats who knew exactly how to pull the levers of power, but had no earthly clue which lever to pull.
Reply
-
-
0%
not2needy7 months, 3 weeks ago
I think people are so desperate for something different, a change if you will, that they are just about willing to follow anyone, except what we have already had.
The people of this country are tired of the same families passing the presidency and residency of the WH back and forth among family members.
Let's not read more into this than there is, Let's not look a gift horse in the mouth.
God in Heaven knows, it can't get much worse than it is.
Reply-
0%
dandt16127 months, 3 weeks ago
I know that people are desperate for something different and that is why I support his opponent is because regardless of what her last name is she has been a champion for the less fortunate her whole life- that was part of her before she ever became a Clinton.
With all due respect, we had two presidents from the Roosevelt family that were very effective presidents in their time. We need to focus on the individual up for consideration, not their last name.
Reply-
0%
not2needy7 months, 3 weeks ago
To be honest with you, i won't be unhappy to see Hillary get the nomination. I think she would make us a fine president, IMO, and we all know what opinions are like, BUT, i think we have a win, win here.
I honestly think either of them will make us a fine president. I feel sorry for whoever gets it, they surely have a mess to clean up.
What i would like to hear them say is, They will investigate the goings on of this administration when they take office. I would love to think that would be one of the first orders of business for our new president.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
JoseMadre7 months, 3 weeks ago
"God in Heaven knows, it can't get much worse than it is."
Those who lived under Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot would beg to differ.
Reply -
0%
Poulenc7 months, 3 weeks ago
Let's not panic.
Most of any population is ever-alive to the allure of a charismatic individual.
Some of us are all-too-ready to give allegiance to such a person in exchange, as such people feel or see it, for transformation--of their own lives and for the better.
The more allegiance, the more intimate the connection and thus the firmer the "deal." Or so they feel.
This kind of transaction is the basis of much religious belief: the more you believe in a deity, one believes, the more that deity will throw its weight behind your fate for the better.
My point is, there will always be cultists. In this case, the phenomenon strikes me as predictable and benign. It would be less so if Obama was a demagogue and played to cult hunger.
But he isn't and doesn't.
Reply -
0%
Spadecaller7 months, 3 weeks ago
dandt,.
Your entitled to believe whatever you want. But to pass on this kind of bunk does not say much for your reasoning abilities.
What a bunch of nonsense.
First they tried to smear Obama for his middle name. Then, because of his church. Then his opponents tried to portray him as a "naive dreamer" because he talks about hope. They blame him for being an inspiring speaker. How ridiculous!
That's right! We need another illiterate despot like King George, who never had any vision of hope, no true desire to unite the country, and is incapable of communicating except with bombs.
Now, because some people are enthusiastic about Obama's platform and what they perceive as genuine sincerity, they want to scare people off by charcterizing this new excitement as a "cult".
Obama's enemies are just too obvious. They will try anything to derail his candidacy. Maybe he will laugh the wrong way next.
Get the shovel!
Reply-
0%
not2needy7 months, 3 weeks ago
Spade, i just hope Obama is prepared for this kind of junk if he gets the nomination, it's going to be rampant.
Reply -
0%
dandt16127 months, 3 weeks ago
Obama is a charismatic individual, that is true, and will probably make a good president some day (if he learns to make timely decisions). However, I belive we need someone right now that actually has a long track record of working to make things better for others. His opponent has done just that beginning with her very first job out of law school. In every job she has had in her life she has tried to affect change in some way.
If you strip away everything else and leave just their records and experience in public service and decision making then it is perfectly clear who should be president come next January.
Why didn't he just run on his record instead of instigating a smear type strategy with the "status quo" comment? I think everyone knows why he couldn't just run on his record. It's because of his serious lack of one.
As far as being something new and different, it appears to me that Obama is playing the old politics game pretty well himself.
Reply -
0%
aniokly7 months, 3 weeks ago
What is his platform? Not what is on a website, what has he said is his platform in his own voice? He talks, and talks, and says nothing. He reminds me of a TV Evangelist.
Reply
-
-
0%
Radiofreeeuropa7 months, 3 weeks ago
As someone who has adamantly supported every lie uttered by Bush and Cheney, your evaluation of Senator Obama is surely astute. Having actually attended one of his speeches at a college, I can tell you that I saw very very little of the type of behavior referred to in this article. (I'm sure every candidate have some followers who are not really so bright and follow blindly for stupid reasons, don't we see it on the threads, and is it the Obama and Clinton supporters? Less so I think... ). What I witnessed was a very skeptical politically somewhat apathetic crowd won over to actually caring about policy because he was able to connect it to a bigger picture, who else has been able to do that? Democrats have 2 good candidates with different strengths...Win Win Situation really. (though I think one wins by a big margin.)
Reply
Add a Comment
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.