THERE IS ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, NO SUCH THING AS A ‘CULT OF OBAMA’
“He maketh me to lie next to him in green pastures.” (HT: Fellows)
“Cult of Obama?” No such thing. Nosir. A figment of the corporate press’s imagination. A Rethuglican dirty trick. A Karl Rove plot. A Hillary Clinton smear.
Now admittedly, the alternative publication that published the above photo got it from another alternative rag (doesn’t anyone in Oregon read, like, you know, straight news?) and makes the valid and defensible point that the picture is a tongue in cheek representation of Obama, satirizing (not “irony or whatever” you ignorant twits) the feelings of those Obamaniacs who, with doe-eyed worship, gaze upon their champion as if he were more than a politician, more than a man, more than a mere mortal.
What the dilettantes don’t get is that the very act of satirizing the mushy headed fools proves that they exist, that there is a very large segment of Obama supporters who view their man as a savior of sorts. I wrote recently about the pause it should give those of us who are enamored of republican principles when examining this Obama phenomenon. There is the smell of danger to some of his rallies - out of control citizens who swoon in his presence or lose themselves in his well modulated but ultimately empty words.
Not recognizing the danger or denying that it exists has been the standard operating procedure of Obama supporters on the left for the better part of a year. Individual citizens making informed decisions is one thing. A mindless mob being manipulated by a politician is quite another.
This is not to say that Obama has dictatorial tendencies or harbors some kind of messiah complex. But mass movements are funny things and all sorts of people get thrown up into leadership positions. The temptation to thuggery can get almost irresistible.
In the meantime, we can laugh at the Obamaniacs and their obsessive love for someone who, after all, is just a politician. My guess is they will become hugely disappointed in their savior long before he or someone else would have the opportunity to create mischief in the republic.
I wonder why he has such a cult following. He has pretty good speech writers, and he has a soothing baratone voice, but he’s really not a very good extemporaneous speaker. If you read transcripts of his talks, you’ll notice “uh, uh” and pregnant pauses peppered throughout (actually, you have to hear the pauses). He’s handsome, but I refuse to believe that even democrats are so shallow as to align themselves based on someone’s looks. He’s smart, but he mis-steps and gaffs frequently.
I think it boils down to the infectious excitement of the ultra-left, stirred up by his alignment with their positions, as well as the fact that he is the anti-Bush (diametrically opposed to Bush on every position). I am curious to see if the ultra-left turns on him after the convention, when he has to try to appeal to moderate voters.
Comment by Michael B. — 5/22/2008 @ 7:25 am
Must be a real, real, slow news day.
Comment by Larry your brother — 5/22/2008 @ 8:21 am
i am ‘diametrically’ opposed to the view that he is ‘good-looking’ or even charismatic, based on not just my wifes opinion ‘liberal’ but many other females opinion of him, and many of them (women) do not, mind you, disagree with the curious george affiliation. what he has that mccain does not(or any other candidate for that matter) is age and marketing behind him. he has embraced whole heartedly the internet generation (who mind you, have no clue as to jimmy carter and his failures) they want someone who is like them, who they think they could drink a latte with, not to say that they are careless, they are insulated and ignorant, even in a time of war, or a stagnating economy. they care about themselves and feel that anyone who ‘disses’ GW is alright by them. these obamatards do not care that he has one iota of a resume, in fact the best aspect of his resume is that he has zero experience in politics. it is sickening to hear them and the MSM attack mccain, but it is also redundant, their only hook is that mccain is another 4 years of bush. which is a farce, there has been no other republican so critical of bush than mccain, but that doesn’t matter to them nor do all the things mccain has done, what matters is that someone ‘cool’ and like them (ha) is elected, they cannot defend any of their accusations and when they begin to stumble their only defense is to get emotional, or to associate mccain with bush. all of which rick and the other blog warriors have been enlightening us of for months.
Comment by jambrowski — 5/22/2008 @ 8:35 am
With 6 full months before the general election, there is plenty of time for the bloom to come off the rose. Obama has no where to go but down. Every new “mass” rally/rock concert will bring the natural cynicism out of the average American voter (especially the middle or undecideds) who will cringe at the site of the chosen one.
Americans are many things, including fickle mush-heads who turn on thier own idols faster than a pitbull with mad cow. Give us hell Quimby!
Comment by 2 cents — 5/22/2008 @ 8:39 am
“THERE IS ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, A ‘CULT OF OBAMA’”
And I prove it with a bit of dubious linking from people who are mocking the perception that Obama’s campaign is primarily driven by people who just want a Messiah.
From the original site, “Don’t count us among the dewy-eyed who are infatuated with Obama and have conferred upon him celestial qualities: He is not divine. But do count us among those who believe he can inspire the best in each of us, begin to realign America’s international image, restore our civil liberties and expel the criminals and plunderers that have had an all-access pass to the White House since 2001.”
So, you link to a picture presented as a jokey comment on people who are over enthusiastic about Obama (which seems to be gone from the site) which was commented on by someone else who was pointing out the risks of putting that sort of joke up (Namely that some people would present it as some sort of evidence of an Obama cult), and present it as evidence of an Obama cult.
Nice.
When your politicians are popular, they are just being wise, when the other side’s are popular, they are creepy cults.
“The temptation to thuggery can get almost irresistible.”
Yes, just look at those viscious Obama supporting Gathering of Eagles types.
In fact, the last 8 years have seen little more than consistent violent political campaigns from Democrats. Before you know it those crowds will be sacrificing babies and storming the Whitehouse.
So, we’ve been through Muslim Obama, Scary Black Church Going Obama, Unpatriotic Obama, Crook Obama, Terrorist Lover Obama, Irresponsible Bombing Pakistan Obama, Pacifist Obama, Henpecked Obama, Marxist Obama, Chamberlin Obama, Empty Suit Obama, Stupid Policy Obama and now we seem to be at Jonestown Cult Leader Obama with a hint of Dictator Obama.
If you keep running through these creations so fast you’re going to run out come the election you know. Try to keep a few in store for when it matters.
And try to keep them from being mutually exclusive if at all possible.
Comment by Drongo — 5/22/2008 @ 8:51 am
“So, we’ve been through Muslim Obama, Scary Black Church Going Obama, Unpatriotic Obama, Crook Obama, Terrorist Lover Obama, Irresponsible Bombing Pakistan Obama, Pacifist Obama, Henpecked Obama, Marxist Obama, Chamberlin Obama, Empty Suit Obama, Stupid Policy Obama and now we seem to be at Jonestown Cult Leader Obama with a hint of Dictator Obama.”
Best introduction for him I’ve seen yet. But you left out misogynist-Obama (sweetie). But is hen-pecked mutually exclusive with dictator?
Comment by Michael B. — 5/22/2008 @ 10:57 am
I wish the Republicans had a candidate who created some excitement and hope. And, don’t be mislead by the sparkle; Obama is a serious candidate with a huge cash flow and a grass roots operation second to none. Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), an early McCain backer in the primary, called the “Obama juggernaut “a formidable thing to deal with.”
McCain’s campaign pales in comparison. He has recently fired five staff members because they were lobbyists. This, is supposedly in keeping with his image as a reformist? Why did he hire them in the first place?
He hired them because he didn’t have enough money to do anything else. Now, he’s getting some money from the GOP and he no longer has use for the lobbyists – how convenient.
I can only hope that McCain may energize the ticket by adding Mitt Romney or another conservative as his VP (forget Huckabee). Otherwise, we will have to be content enjoying the irony of McCain getting routed by a Democrat who, through McCain-Feingold, generates several times the funds that the GOP can offer.
Comment by DrKrbyLuv — 5/22/2008 @ 11:20 am
Democrats Observe A Fragile Cease-Fire…
Hillary Clinton shows no signs of dropping out of the presidential race, writes The Washington Post,…
Trackback by Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator — 5/22/2008 @ 11:41 am
[...] for the future of the two-party system. In the second half, Rick Moran joins us to talk about the “cult” of Obama and whether it can last through to Election [...]
Pingback by Hot Air » Blog Archive » The Ed Morrissey Show: Keith Poole, Rick Moran — 5/22/2008 @ 12:30 pm
Drongo:
“…Muslim Obama, Scary Black Church Going Obama, Unpatriotic Obama, Crook Obama, Terrorist Lover Obama, Irresponsible Bombing Pakistan Obama, Pacifist Obama, Henpecked Obama, Marxist Obama, Chamberlin Obama, Empty Suit Obama, Stupid Policy Obama and now we seem to be at Jonestown Cult Leader Obama with a hint of Dictator Obama.”
The problem with your attempt, to downplay Rick’s analysis by reciting the list above, is that you overlook the basic FACT that they are ALL TRUE!
Comment by Dale in Atlanta — 5/22/2008 @ 1:04 pm
drongo,
you are wrongo, y’all (libs, dems, leftards, obamaniacs, etc…) have been through
“Muslim Obama, Scary Black Church Going Obama, Unpatriotic Obama, Crook Obama, Terrorist Lover Obama, Irresponsible Bombing Pakistan Obama, Pacifist Obama, Henpecked Obama, Marxist Obama, Chamberlin Obama, Empty Suit Obama, Stupid Policy Obama and now we seem to be at Jonestown Cult Leader Obama with a hint of Dictator Obama.”
as Michael B and Dale have mentioned, none of them have been refuted, and more importantly none of them have passed the independent, middle america, and of course conservative american voters whom without he is not going to win. thanks for your emotion… i mean opinion on the matter though.
Comment by jambrowski — 5/22/2008 @ 1:36 pm
““…Muslim Obama, Scary Black Church Going Obama, Unpatriotic Obama, Crook Obama, Terrorist Lover Obama, Irresponsible Bombing Pakistan Obama, Pacifist Obama, Henpecked Obama, Marxist Obama, Chamberlin Obama, Empty Suit Obama, Stupid Policy Obama and now we seem to be at Jonestown Cult Leader Obama with a hint of Dictator Obama.”
The problem with your attempt, to downplay Rick’s analysis by reciting the list above, is that you overlook the basic FACT that they are ALL TRUE!”
All, of them? He’s a Marxist in the pockets of the oil corporations? He’s a Muslim Christian? He is a policyless empty suit who has stupid policies? He is a misogynist who is controlled by his wife? He is a pacifist who wants to bomb Pakistan?
You can’t even see how ridiculous this scatter gun approach is, can you?
Comment by Drongo — 5/22/2008 @ 2:00 pm
How long would it take someone to get used to being treated as a Messiah? Not long…
Comment by Original Pechanga — 5/22/2008 @ 2:37 pm
Alas, your nattering fails on two levels.
First, you provide no evidence that a “very large segment” of Obama supporters view him as a savior. Some may, but none of the considerable number of people whom I know who support Obama view him as anything more than a welcome change with some big, untested ideas.
Second, you obviously are too young to remember JFK in 1960. You could have written the same thing about him.
Comment by shaun — 5/22/2008 @ 3:00 pm
“as Michael B and Dale have mentioned, none of them have been refuted, and more importantly none of them have passed the independent, middle america, and of course conservative american voters whom without he is not going to win. thanks for your emotion… i mean opinion on the matter though.”
Care to take a $100 bet on who is the next president?
Comment by Drongo — 5/22/2008 @ 5:45 pm
shaun, Rick has already pointed out the parallels to JFK. Read his post about it:
http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2008/05/19/the-man-on-a-white-horse-syndrome/#comments
Salient point:
“Joseph Kennedy told his family at the beginning of JFK’s campaign that they were going to sell the candidate “like soap flakes.” Papa Joe wasn’t just talking about advertising. He was revealing a strategy that for the first time joined the talents of Madison Avenue with the power of Hollywood celebrity to create powerful, irresistible imagery that would elevate Kennedy to hero status and place him on a different plane altogether than any other politician in the country.
It worked beyond expectations. The Kennedy image makers took a sickly, rather bookish 42 year old manchild known for his excesses of the flesh and turned him into a vigorous, glamorous, serious man with a patrician’s attitude of noblesse oblige and a “star quality” unique for its time among politicians.”
Comment by Michael B. — 5/22/2008 @ 6:11 pm
drongo,
nice subject change, just like your pariah, put the interest elsewhere, redirect, dodge, weave, never answer… why don’t you address the d*$n issue i raise? why because you can’t, can you?
Comment by jambrowski — 5/22/2008 @ 8:03 pm
Drongo:
“You can’t even see how ridiculous this scatter gun approach is, can you?’
Ah, let me repeat this…very……s…..l……o……..w………l………y
for you, since its obvious FACTS and reading comprehension are beyond you:
ALL ARE TRUE; FACTS; and you cannot Disprove ANY of them; all you can do is involuntarily unrinate down you leg as you whine about “scattergun approach” and with your typical Anti-American/Pro-Jihadi Leftist Nutbag Love Affair/Man-crush on your “Obamessiah”, all you really want to do, like all of the Left, is SURRENDER, it doesn’t matter to who, you just HAVE to surrender to SOMEONE, ANYONE, as quickly as possible, because “Reflexive Surrender Syndrome” is ingrained in all you Anti-American/Pro-Jihadi Leftist Nutbags from birth, which is why you all reflexively WORSHIP his “Obamaness” as well!
You Leftist Nutbags are the ultimate Leaf-eating Herd-mind Animals; Larry Niven, the SciFi writer didn’t know it when he invented the Pierson’s Puppeteers, but he has described you Assclowns to a “T”: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puppeteer
Little piece of wisdom for you my little Nutbag member of the Lunar Chiroptera Colony; in the end, “Leaf-eaters” ALWAYS lose to the “meat-eaters”, despite temporary “victories” such as the “Battle of Kruger”.
Besides, fact is, we also own the guns, so we’ll always win in the end, while all you Anti-American/Pro-Jihadi Leftist Nutbags jack-knife yourselves into a “U” shape, grab your cheeks, and beg someone to jack-hammer your duodenum into submission, because “surrender” is all you know!
That’s the Anti-American/Anti-Semitic/Pro-Jihadi Leftist Nutbag “Taqiyah” practicing Muslim Obama platform for the upcoming General Election; summed up in an easy to remember, catchy phrase for the electorate to memorize between now and Election Day:
Barack HUSSEIN Obama stands for: “Surrender, Socialism and Taxes!”
Refute that, Nutbag!
Comment by Dale in Atlanta — 5/22/2008 @ 10:47 pm
Since your issue was that Obama is incapable of winning the election because of who he is and what he stands for, I don’t see what you wanted to address.
“why because you can’t, can you?”
Issue : “…whom without he is not going to win. ”
Apart from the obvious “without whom” correction, I was just wondering how confident you were in your prediction. I think that you’re wrong. You’re obviously not that confident.
Hardly a surprise, really.
Comment by Drongo — 5/23/2008 @ 2:02 am
“Refute that, Nutbag!”
That was the funniest thing I’ve read all day. Genuine thanks. Always good to have a smile.
Comment by Drongo — 5/23/2008 @ 5:43 am
Drongo Said:
2:02 am
Since your issue was that Obama is incapable of winning the election because of who he is and what he stands for, I don’t see what you wanted to address.
Typical Nutbag; lie, move, dodge, weave, move the goalposts, refuse to answer the question, etc.
I NEVER, NOT ONCE, NOT EVER, said anything, at all, EVER, about Obama being incapable of winning the election!
Complete and UTTER Fallacy!
My only comments have been in regards to Who, and What he is!
Those are FACTS; you stated them in supposed repudiation of Rick’s original post, I came back and just stated a basic FACT, that your supposed sarcastic list, was in FACT, ALL TRUE.
I never mentioned the election, nor his electability, AT ALL, EVER!
That’s a fantasy of your typically delusional Leftist mind!
Refute that, Nutbag!
Comment by Dale in Atlanta — 5/23/2008 @ 7:25 am
and the song remains the same…
Comment by jambrowski — 5/23/2008 @ 7:28 am
Hey Rick,
Did you read Oleg’s piece at Pajamas?
“It appears that the 75,000 Obama worshipers in Portland over the weekend turned up in such numbers mostly to see a free concert by an uber-hip Portland band, the Decemberists”
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/communists-for-obama/
Who nonetheless opened with the Russian national anthem. Wow, things just keep getting more interesting.
Comment by jambrowski — 5/23/2008 @ 7:38 am
Drongo, I have very little confidence that BHO will be defeated in November, but its not because of who he is or what he stands for as much as how f*cked up the Republican party currently is. The republican leadership is incredibly weak, the supporters are angry and disillusioned, and that is going to translate directly into a probable landslide for the democrats this fall. BUT… that doesn’t change what BHO is and stands for:
Muslim Obama- I don’t believe this
Scary Black Church Going Obama- if he doesn’t believe this crap, why does he let his children go there?
Unpatriotic Obama- I don’t believe this
Crook Obama- probably not, but there were some shady deals with his house in Chicago
Terrorist Lover Obama- not lover, just naive to think he can change their minds
Irresponsible Bombing Pakistan Obama- this stands on its own
Pacifist Obama- lets all hold hands, sing kuumbaya and give up our nukes
Henpecked Obama- I don’t see any evidence of this
Marxist Obama- closer to socialist than capitalist
Chamberlin Obama- read Ricks previous post
Empty Suit Obama- please name any legislation or significant executive experience. It’s like Microsoft hiring you to be their replacement for Bill Gates
Stupid Policy Obama- yep
Jonestown Cult Leader Obama with a hint of Dictator Obama- re-read this post.
Comment by Michael B. — 5/23/2008 @ 7:42 am
“I NEVER, NOT ONCE, NOT EVER, said anything, at all, EVER, about Obama being incapable of winning the election!”
Never said you did. I wasn’t talking to you.
Comment by Drongo — 5/23/2008 @ 8:33 am
“Drongo, I have very little confidence that BHO will be defeated in November, but its not because of who he is or what he stands for as much as how f*cked up the Republican party currently is.”
That is certainly true. Obama is essentially presenting himself as the anti-Bush-years candidate.
“Muslim Obama- I don’t believe this”
I didn’t think that anyone did anymore, but this thread proves me wrong in deeply comic ways.
I don’t carry any water for Obama. He’s another politician like the rest, he can’t change the world, only fiddle around the edges. He’ll raise taxes on this, fund this scheme or that, change this or that law, appoint this or that functionary to this or that position.
However, I judge him much less likely to start stupid wars than the alternatives, as well as less likely to endorse torture as official policy. These things alone make him vastly preferable as an option.
Where people get the idea that he thinks that he could persuade Bin Laden to lay down his AK is beyond me. As far as I can tell he is simply saying that, as Churchill said, “To jaw-jaw is always better than to war-war”. I find that hard to dispute. I also find it hard to imagine how you could derive from that quote that Churchill was an appeasing surrender-monkey.
(On a seperate note, to someone else, on the “They came for the band and stayed for the speech” have you got any idea what sort of crowds that band usually draws? No, I thought not. But are you saying that Obama supporters aren’t deranged cultists but instead are just drifting along for the music and then being bored by the speeches by the roadie?)
Comment by Drongo — 5/23/2008 @ 8:47 am
all you really want to do, like all of the Left, is SURRENDER, it doesn’t matter to who, you just HAVE to surrender to SOMEONE, ANYONE, as quickly as possible, because “Reflexive Surrender Syndrome” is ingrained in all you Anti-American/Pro-Jihadi Leftist Nutbags from birth, which is why you all reflexively WORSHIP his “Obamaness” as well!
You got me there.
Can I surrender to you? Please! NOW! I’m feeling the need to get on my knees and kiss some feet. Maybe the next person who passes by my cube. I just can’t help it……
Comment by An0nymous J3rk — 5/23/2008 @ 10:58 am
Drongo:
Why do you bother to post on this site and try to argue with these morons????
There are a lot of other worthwhile blogs out there where people will appreciate that you have a brain and a point of view.
Rick Moran is an intolerant Republican shill.
Anyone who writes that Obama supporters are “a mindless mob being manipulated by a politician” cannot be taken seriously.
OK Rick - now go ahead, have a tantrum and ban my IP address. Make my day…..
1. You’re not worth the effort to ban.
2. I never said all Obama supporters were mindless. Only a “large segment” - something you would know if you were not suffering from a lack of reading comprehension skills.
3. Drongo has yet to respond to 99% of the arguments people makes against him. His trick is to open an entirely new line of attack with his following comment without even acknowledging any of responses to his original points. It is rank dishonesty and I’ve banned him for it once already. Getting close to being a second time.
ed.
Comment by deglamorize_jihad — 5/23/2008 @ 11:47 am
You got me there.
Can I surrender to you? Please! NOW! I’m feeling the need to get on my knees and kiss some feet. Maybe the next person who passes by my cube. I just can’t help it……
Thank you for being honest…
Comment by Dale in Atlanta — 5/23/2008 @ 12:24 pm
“It is rank dishonesty and I’ve banned him for it once already. Getting close to being a second time.”
Have you? So that was why I couldn’t post. Nice of you to let me back.
” Drongo has yet to respond to 99% of the arguments people makes against him.”
There’s only one of me.
“His trick is to open an entirely new line of attack with his following comment without even acknowledging any of responses to his original points.”
The nightmare that I have is that at least 50% of my posts get lost, either in ther filter, or due to the repeated “404 forbidden” erros, possibly driven by my proxy server. That and the fact that, presumably due to the moderation system, the order of my replies often gets mixed up.
With regard to this thread, I made only three points;
1) The post is based on a posting criticising a joke posting of a joke picture based on the “Obamessia” talking point, which is a bit of a stretch.
2) There is no sign of Obama related thuggery, nor any hint of it in his supporters that I have seen.
3) The absurd and mutually exclusive list of talking points Re:Obama are just hilarious. Look, on this thread we have people who actually think that he is a Muslim secret agent! You couldn’t make it up.
In response to the various responses I would have to write several essays to cover them all. For example one of your readers believes that Obama is a muslim. And, apparently that anyone who disagrees with him/her (not clear on that) desires to be homosexually raped. How exactly are you supposed to respond to that?
Comment by Drongo — 5/23/2008 @ 1:12 pm
“Why do you bother to post on this site and try to argue with these morons????”
(a) I enjoy it
(b) What’s the point of talking with people who agree with you? Once you’ve all agreed it gets a bit dull
(c) You get some interesting commenters here, and Mr Moran’s posts are always well argued (if often flawed, and in this Obamamessiah series, frankly, weak).
(d) You get some great nutcases here who are always good for a laugh.
Comment by Drongo — 5/23/2008 @ 1:15 pm
In response to the various responses I would have to write several essays to cover them all. For example one of your readers believes that Obama is a muslim. And, apparently that anyone who disagrees with him/her (not clear on that) desires to be homosexually raped. How exactly are you supposed to respond to that?
Ah…..HINT: The Truth Hurts???
Comment by Dale in Atlanta — 5/23/2008 @ 8:56 pm
Oh Sweet Jesus…Please stop your whining.
Comment by Tim — 5/23/2008 @ 10:45 pm
I thought that was and old disco tec mural of Andy Gibb with a tan.
My bad.
Comment by 186 — 5/24/2008 @ 12:17 am
After all we’ve been through, why not cut some Deux Ex Machina slack?
Comment by bobwire — 5/24/2008 @ 4:35 am
And if he had FEW supporters (like McCain), you’d criticize him for that too.
Rick, remember how other right-wingers tried to wave off critics of Dubya as “Bush Derangement Syndrome” and said simply not-liking Bush was proof you were CRAAAAAAZY and should be ignored?
Gosh, that argument looked so very relevant up to and after the 2006 elections, right?
Same thing here. Once again you seem gleefully determined to portray all of Obama’s supporters as crazy, the very act of supporting him being that of a brainwashed madman. You’re working very, very hard to ignore everything about the candidate and his campaign, and I hope the memories of all your enjoyable doublethink will comfort you after the American people ejects the Republican Party in ‘08–for valid reasons you either don’t or won’t understand.
As the New York media magnate said upon Reagan’s election: “How could he win? Nobody I know voted for him!”
Comment by TTT — 5/24/2008 @ 10:51 am