There Seem To Be 4-Types Of Obama Haters

[THUNDER HANDS]

Type A - The people who disdain crowds and "hip new things." Whenever there's a brand new hit show on tv, they flip the channel. Whenever's there's a new musical group that becomes popular, they hate it before they hear the end of the first song. Whenever a new food or drink becomes popular, they won't try it because they don't want to "follow the herd."

Type B - Those who think that years = experience and you only get experience by sitting in a legislative body for a long time and having bills shoved in front of your face, written by lobbyists, and pressing a button for yes or no. Oh, and occasionally you get to co-sponsor a bill or even sponsor one, that was also written by a lobbyist. Eventually you get to stay there so long you rack up hundreds of votes, and sometimes those votes conflict with eachother and make you look like you're contradicting yourself, and those that do not look like extreme partisans - but they have that hallowed mark of being "experienced." And every now and then you vote on something important, like war, and make your decision based on careful consideration and deliberation, provided you're not running for higher office, or in an election year, in which case you vote whatever way you think will get you the most votes.

Type C - Those who disdain people who motivate and inspire others. They fear the seductive power of language because they've been conditioned for years to believe that all your dreams in life eventually get crushed, and no matter how good someone sounds, if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. They lost the ability to hope and dream a long time ago, and they believe (ironically) that Washington crushes dreams because they've seen it too many times before.

Type D - Envy. They resent that Obama has come so far in so short a time and their candidate has tried for years to get to the point where they are. They feel like their favorite player on a baseball team has just been benched in favor of this kid fresh from the minor leagues who they don't know anything about other than he's highly touted and he's taking their favorite player's spot in the starting lineup. They envy his skills and the attention he's gotten. They believe that if their candidate got the same favorable attention he/she would be doing just as well. Except they fail to realize he gets the attention because of the skills he has, skills which the others lack.

And that would be the four types of Obama haters. Am I missing any?

[uppityperson]

1. Racists. Unless you are meaning anyone just critical of Obama?

[TomClash]

46. bingo - the first thing to come to mind

[XemaSab]

97. Duh... it's the WHITE HOUSE... duhm... HUSSEIN Obama... uh....

I dunno if a BLACK man can run the WHOLE country... duhm... edumacated in a Madrassa... when are WHITE CHRISTIANS going to get a candidate?... uh... Indonesia's the country between Iraq and Afghanistan, right?... dur... I can't vote for a Black Muslim... duhm... :freak:

This is too confusing. I'm gonna go watch FOX and drink my Coors.

[Evergreen Emerald]

2. Yes.

Type E Intelligence: The intelligent people who have looked at the issues and decided that Obama is lacking in depth and experience.

Type F Outrage: Those who are pissed off that Obama would actually call Clinton Racist to win SC.

[jlake]

4. Yep. I am a type E&F as in EF this stupid OP.

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jlake]

81. You don't think the OP is hateful flame bait against anyone who doesn't worship Obama?

[Beacool]

93. Ditto!!!!!!!!!!

:eyes:

[ErnestoG]

11. Really? Care to cite any direct quote from Obama on that charge?

I'm really curious to see it.

[Evergreen Emerald]

18. where have you been?

The obama camp sent a press release suggesting the racism of HRC. INcluded in that press release was the "fairy tale" incident (not racist) and the MLK incident (Not racist).

He shouted RACISM to gain votes. HIs tactic is worse than Willie Horton.

[awaysidetraveler]

Wow, now Obama's worse than Willie Horton? Really?

[Evergreen Emerald]

I truly believe that the campaign tactic--to call Clinton racist--is

worse than Willie Horton.

[awaysidetraveler]

37. Have you got a link to back that allegation up? It doesn't google.

[Evergreen Emerald]

59. which allegation?

The one where they sent out the press release accusing Clinton of being a racist? Where have you been? You seriously don't remember?

[awaysidetraveler]

63. I've never heard it, and I want a link to the information. If it's true.

I don't watch television, if that's what you're wondering by asking me "Where have you been?" I read the news.

[Evergreen Emerald]

77. This is what I found, of course the MSM covered for Obama,

But it was addressed in the "truce" debate when Russert asked obama about his team sending out a memo. Obama took no responsiblity for it and said he suroggotes did it. Where does the buck stop?

Civil Rights Hero John Lewis says Obama camp played the Race Card

At first. I thought the MLK-LBJ flap was just push back Obama's campaign at the way Hillary had framed the distinction between she and Obama. I hugely respect both King and Johnson and only felt that there was a anti-historic diminishing of the role of the President, that cared more about the poor than any other, that concerned me. But after seeing Donna Brazil's response to this on CNN, it was clear she was speaking off of Obama campaign talking points. But, it was when I first heard that the Obama campaign was charging Andrew Cuomo, a good and decent man and Democrat who has spent decades as an advocate for the homeless and and as a provider of low income housing, of being a racist, that was the moment that I realized that the all white triumvirate of Obama strategists, Axelrod, Gibbs and Rouse, were race baiting and it was now clear, that they would say and do anything, to win over the black voters they knew would rally around Obama if they thought he was being racially attacked.

"I must tell you...I'm trying to set the record straight...the Obama camp is doing something else, theyr'e sending out memos to the media trying to suggest that the Clintons are playing the race card."

But let's not talk about that; let's talk, as the “race card” memo from the Obama campaign did, about the time that Bill Clinton said he had known some of the greatest figures of the past 100 years, including Nelson Mandela, yet his wife was the one person in the world he would call on in the toughest of times. And let's talk about whether that meant, as the memo put it, that: “Bill Clinton Implied Hillary Clinton Is Stronger Than Nelson Mandela.” Shame on you, Mr Obama; the world expected more.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/alice_miles/article3192712.ece

[Auntie Bush]

55. I agree!

[awaysidetraveler]

57. Okay Auntie Bush, do you have a link that can back this allegation up?

I'm waiting for proof. Surely you agree it's appropriate... no?

[Kucinich4America]

20. Type H - Hypocrite Hilbots

The type who think being a Wal Mart lawyer and First Lady trumps being a community activist and state legislator.

[Brundle_Fly]

33. Nice!

:toast:

[Auntie Bush]

56. Are you suffering from Alzheimer's?

You seem to have conveniently forgotten an awful lot of history...or are you just young?

[Kucinich4America]

70. No, I'm not that young anymore unfortunately.

My entire adult life there has been a Bush or Clinton on the ballot though, and that is unacceptable for a nation that calls itself a democracy.

And one of my grandfather's had Alzheimers, so I don't find any humor in your reference, you pathetic DLC-bot.

[Auntie Bush]

84. Well my Mother died of Alzheimer's too!

I was her soul care giver for 5 years up to 2 months before she died. And I can still have a sense of humor about that terrible disease. It's humor that gets us through some tough times.. You ought to try it sometimes. You come across as angry and disillusioned in life. Lighten up will ya? By the way...some people use humor to their advantage and some people use anger. Which shoe fits you! Read your post again! Advice from your friendly neighborhood Pathetic DLC--bot. :evilgrin:

edit for errors...as usual!

[Big Blue Marble]

40. Do you really want to claim that we Obama people are less intelligent?

Strangely, it is the highest-educated Dems that are supporting him. Not always, but often intelligence and education
are synonymous. I have a masters myself.

Emerald could you link me to the quote where Obama called HRC racist in order to win SC? Thanks.

[Evergreen Emerald]

78. I posted it up thread...go to the MSN debate

before the last one--you know the "truce" debate in which it was mentioned, and Obama was asked about it...he took no responsibility for it, said his surrogates do stuff.

[mckeown1128]

101. Ohh.. do you have a link to support your claim that Obama

called Clinton Racist. Seems to me that you are making that up.

[awaysidetraveler]

3. You're missing the situationalists objection to Obama: they claim he doesn't represent real change

Orwellian Ghost and some others claim that Obama doesn't represent change, because he takes money from
the same corporate interests that the others do.

Their arguments are based in information that comes from opensecrets.org, and they have a degree of legitimacy to them.

[ruggerson]

5. Then there are those of us who don't hate him

but are very disturbed about his exploitation of homophobia to win votes.

And from every single Obama supporter who I've talked to in private, they agree that his actions in this regard are appalling.

But, they seem to think we should get up after being run over by the bus and then stumble on to it, take a seat and have faith.

[rufus dog]

6. Yes - Combination of all of the above causing blind rage

see post 2!

[Tom Rinaldo]

7. It seems you define anyone who does not support Obama

as an "Obama hater". Am I missing anything? If I have some concerns about Obama's qualifications for the job he is seeking, does that automatically enter me into your Type B category?

[rodeodance]

8. Please remove the word HATE from your post. I think it is offensive and crude

[awaysidetraveler]

10. But, he's writing about people who really do hate Obama.

[rodeodance]

so?

[calico1]

9. Why do you define anyone not supporting Obama

a "hater?" That is so silly. I don't support him because I don't think he is ready for the job. I think he is very bright and would make a good candidate down the line, just not now.

[Skip Intro]

13. absolutely

thanks for a dose of reality here

:thumbsup:

[awaysidetraveler]

14. He's not generalizing to include people who simply oppose Obama's positions.

[saracat]

12. Yeah.Those of us who refuse to vote based on race or gender under any circumstances.

Those of us who do not unquestionably accept rhetoric not backed up by deeds.Those of us who do our research and search to find the candidate most likely to have the best interests of the people at heart.Those of us who want the candidate who actually has a plan to make America great again. Those voters who place the issues first and don't buy into media generated "hype".You left out the voter with the ability to exercise critical thought.

[awaysidetraveler]

17. What issues might those be? I mean the ones that bring you into the Obama hater category?

[saracat]

38. The issues of workers rights and heathcare and predatory loans .The issues of the subprimes morgage

crisis. The reproductive rights issue. The Iraq pullout issue and many more.The economy.All leading economists agree that John has the best plan.Edwards has led on all the issues.The best Obama has been is a copycat who adopts the issues of other candidates and claims them as his own.

Obama makes many claims about his positions which do not hold up under investigation.

[awaysidetraveler]

44. Yeah, I've also researched those issues, and I don't think that they're a good reason to hate Obama.

Or at least I've checked out the healthcare position. It's not as controvercial as you think. "Mandating" universal healthcare won't cause Americans to all buy health insurance. For instance, auto insurance is mandated, but it doesn't matter if you can't afford the insurance. Obama's just going at the problem from a different direction, forcing the price of health insurance down so that people can afford it. That's the source of the argument against Obama's healthcare policy, and I agree with Obama's position.

Obama favors an immediate and complete withdrawl from Iraq (with the exception of the embassies, and saving the attacks of al-Qaeda). That's the strongest pull out that America can possibly stomach.

Not all leading economists agree with Edwards, that's a little offhand. Obama's economics advisors are former columnists for the New York Times, and they're well respected in general.

The subprimes mortgage crisis is bad, that I'll admit. Only who is to blame isn't up to our next president: it's up to our courts.

I also think that Edwards is a fine candidate, and he has my respect. Please continue to support him, if you believe in him.

But don't you think that "hating" Obama takes things a little far?

[saracat]

49. I and you are perhaps using the word "hate" a bit loosely.

I do not like much about Obama. I do not like his background. I do nor like the taint of corruption. I do not like that he has made "race" the issue.(I don't like that Hillary uses gender either). I do not "hate" Obama in the true sense of the word but I will not vote for him.

[awaysidetraveler]

51. Yes, I agree. We have been throwing that word around.

And that's not productive.

Well then, I hope Edwards wins so that we can both vote.

Are you referring to Rezko, when you write about a "taint of corruption"?
Because, I have good reason to doubt the legitimacy of that scandal.

I don't know what you're referring to about his background that you find disagreeable.
He's a Harvard Law graduate that practiced civil-rights law in Chicago, and he's spent the last twenty years in public service.

Also, I think I need more specifics about how Obama made race the issue.
I saw it as Obama making unity the issue--which is something that all politicians do.

Thanks for engaging in a positive way on this thread, I find that admirable.

[ThatPoetGuy]

64. "Obama favors an immediate and complete withdrawl from Iraq"

Not even close.

This is what happens when a candidate runs on personality; his followers project all kinds of fiction onto him. And this is pure fiction.

Obama has not committed to reducing troop levels at all during his first term in office. When asked about it, he won't commit.

The mandate thing is fiction too. It's just Barack Obama lying to smear his opponents again. The fact is, Hillary and Edwards both have plans, and those plans are mandated; but the plans do not yet specify how the mandate will be implemented. Social security tax is a mandate. It's Obama's characteristic dishonesty that causes him to misrepresent the mandate issue as being similar to auto insurance.

Hillary and Edwards' plans both include federal aid for the poor who can't afford their mandates. Obama's plan just leaves the poor out in the cold, while invalidating all the state-run indigent care programs. This would leave poor people much, much worse off than they are right now. Obama's plan is economically unsound and completely lacking compassion.

[ThatPoetGuy]

39. Which issues?

Let's see, there's

1) Obama's plan to occupy Iraq indefinitely, and not just to safeguard the embassy;
2) Obama's refusal to condemn gay-hating scumbags after giving them a national platform;
3) Obama's health care plan will leave 15 million poor people without health coverage while invalidating state indigent care programs, leaving poor people significantly worse off than they are now --

and that's just for a start.

[awaysidetraveler]

45. Where does this latest claim that Obama will "occupy Iraq indefinitely" come from?

It sounds bogus to me, but I'd love to see some proof.

[ThatPoetGuy]

60. I love it!

Yes, I do love it when I get a chance to prove a point.

The point is: Obama's supporters don't know what he stands for.

"Where does this latest claim" come from?

It comes from Barack Obama's own plan, posted on his own website.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/pdf/IraqFactSheet.pdf

It includes such gems as this: "Under the Obama plan, American troops may remain in Iraq or the region. These American troops will protect American diplomatic and military personnel in Iraq, and continue striking at al Qaeda in Iraq. If Iraq makes political progress and their security forces are not sectarian, we would also continue training othe Iraqi Security Forces." Emphasis mine, because it's just so fucked up.

In your subsequent post, alwaysidetraveler, you argue that Obama's plan is fundamentally the same as Edwards. It isn't. That's just Obama lying again.

Edwards' plan doesn't include the nonsensical training program, with its shades of US "advisors" to South American dictatorships, the Contras, etc. Edwards' plan will remove US troops from Iraq within 12 months, leaving only enough to protect the embassy. Obama won't even commit to diminishing the occupation level before 2013.

Obama's plan will leave soldiers to protect the embassy, just like Edwards, but that's ALL Edwards will leave. Obama's plan will leave soldiers to protect the military*, soldiers to "train" Iraqi troops and police forces, and soldiers to make war on the resistance.

It should be pointed out that peace broke out in those regions of Iraq the British military left. Violence is only occurring where there is occupation. Obama's plan is a full-scale occupation, and he has made it clear that it's an indefinite occupation.

* -- yes, his plan really does say that -- soldiers to protect the military.

[awaysidetraveler]

67. Look, I've read Obama's plan. Also, remember what he said to Edwards during the debate.

He was specific. By "the region" he clarified that he meant offshore in international space, and the embassy.

This would tend to defuse radicals who believe that Islam (holy lands like Iraq) must be defended from "infidels" (foreigners who occupy their land). That's the meat of what will bring us out of the Middle East entirely.

Your claim that he won't diminish the occupation level before 2013 makes it sound like you're talking about Iraq.
Afghanistan is what Obama was writing about there--not Iraq. Iraq's a loser and Obama knows it--he always knew it.

I can only take it that your point of view--your righteous anger over Iraq--is obfuscating the truth of Obama's
anti-war position.

[ThatPoetGuy]

74. Wait -- are you saying Obama lied in a debate???

His debate rhetoric doesn't remotely match his own policy statements. If he's changed his policy, why not update his website, make an announcement, and put a new document there?

I'll remind you that Obama repeatedly claimed during the debates that his health care plan provided universal coverage. It doesn't, and he knows it. Nonpartisan groups like factcheck.org have called BS on him for this. He was lying, deliberately, to make Democrats think that his plan was similar to Edwards' and Hillary's plans, which DO provide universal coverage.

And no, if we are to believe the written words of his own plan, he's not talking about offshore troops, he's talking about troops in Iraq itself.

And no, when he said he won't promise to stop the occupation before 2013, he wasn't talking about Afghanistan, he was talking about Iraq.

RUSSERT: "Will you pledge that by January 2013, the end of your first term, more than five years from now, there will be no U.S. troops in Iraq?"

OBAMA: "I think it's hard to project four years from now, and I think it would be irresponsible. We don't know what contingency will be out there.

What I can promise is that if there are still troops in Iraq when I take office -- which it appears there may be, unless we can get some of our Republican colleagues to change their mind and cut off funding without a timetable -- if there's no timetable -- then I will drastically reduce our presence there to the mission of protecting our embassy, protecting our civilians, and making sure that we're carrying out counterterrorism activities there. I believe that we should have all our troops out by 2013, but I don't want to make promises, not knowing what the situation's going to be three or four years out."
-- From 9/26 DNC Debate at Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire.

Protecting our embassy is one thing. That's a no-brainer.

What about protecting our civilians? Ambassadors and their staff are not civilians. He's going to leave the US military to occupy Iraq in order to bodyguard Halliburton executives?

What about "carrying out counterterrorism activities"? The British left regions of Iraq alone, and those regions experienced a huge decline in violence afterwards. These were not regions that people considered subdued.

Tens of thousands of US soldiers will remain in Iraq indefinitely, under Obama's plan, to continue Bush's misguided policies of helping big business turn a buck off that country and fighting terrorists that the occupation created.

[awaysidetraveler]

48. Nope, can't find any proof that Obama plans to occupy Iraq indefinitely. I see the opposite.

Moreover, he clarified that in his statement with John Edwards in the South Carolina debate.
John Edwards was at a loss to say how--excepting instances of al-Qaeda terrorism and the embassy security--their
policies differed.

[ThatPoetGuy]

62. You can't find any proof that Obama plans to occupy Iraq indefinitely?

Hm. Did you look under the desk? Maybe it fell behind the cabinet.

Or maybe it's right there on his website, in his own words.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/pdf/IraqFactSheet.pdf

[awaysidetraveler]

72. Being rude about it won't hide the details of Obama's report. We're leaving Iraq with Obama.

Please reconsider your point of view.

And take care not to distort Obama's record. It's not something that Obama supporters have done about Edwards.

[ThatPoetGuy]

79. Essentially, it's the record vs. the plans.

Obama has a good record on Iraq, sort of; and Edwards has a bad record on Iraq, sort of. I generally agree with those statements.

But we're talking about the future, and it seems to me that the plans matter more than the record.

Obama has announced his plans. Edwards has announced his plans.

One candidate says, I will withdraw all our troops within the first year, leaving only enough to keep the embassy safe.

Another candidate says, I will withdraw all our troops within the first four years, leaving only enough to keep the embassy safe -- plus a few thousand more to protect American civilians, and a few thousand more to fight the very 'terrorists' we help create by occupying their nation.

Come on, let go of the charisma, the big smile, the talk of hope and unity. Just for a minute. Which plan do you like better?

[MoonRiver]

15. And then there would be Type E:

Those who want to win the presidency back. :eyes:

[Proud2BAmurkin]

24. beat me to it!

[MoonRiver]

34. Great minds....

:hi:

[CatWoman]

76. a fucking

men!!!

[emilyg]

83. Amen.

[maximusveritas]

90. So you hate him because you think he can't win?

I can see how that might be a reason not to vote for him, but not to hate him.

[Tennessee Gal]

16. Just because you support him ..............

does not make those of us who do not support him "haters."

Your post is a bit immature.

[robbedvoter]

21. Bingo! Sez it all!

:toast:

[globalvillage]

19. You left out

Paid.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

22. Type E: Those who don't want to lose in November.

[Solon]

23. How about those who don't like people who are soft on Homophobes?

I hate bigotry, period. And I don't take to kindly to those who make light of it.

[NMMNG]

95. Hear, hear

Count me in with you and Ruggerson.

I don't hate Obama, or anybody for that matter. But I don't trust Obama, and some of his "supporters" have made me see things in a whole new light.

[Solon]

100. Heh, just yesterday, let's see, one of his supporters referred to GLBT issues as "lifestyle" issues.

Nice wording there, and only changed it back because of pressure from many people who responded to his post. And another supporter of Obama referred to the McClurkin incident as an "imagined" slight! The gall of these homophobic assholes really has no bounds.

[NMMNG]

104. Typical

I've had it up to my eyeballs with people who've told me to "get over" McClurkin, et. al., yet they go on a bender at everything that could conceivably be construed as racist. I'm supposed to care about their concerns after they've continuously told me mine were nothing? And one of the ever-so polite Obama supporters told me I was "marginal" because I haven't downed the Obamade and still manage to have concerns about Obama's continued flirtations with "Ex-Gay" hate-mongers. Now the oppressed have become the oppressors, and it's both disgusting and disheartening.

[DarthDem]

25. Haters?

Um, I guess I'm in some other category. I don't support Obama because

(1) Hillary Clinton has more experience and is far more intelligent;
(2) All of those closet racists out there will simply not pull the lever in the general election for an African-American man, and if you think they're not out there, you're fooling yourself;
(3) He's run a really odd campaign.

[HughMoran]

30. Don't you love the presumptive use of the word "hate"

You gotta love the Obama hate machine - at least they don't deny their hate.

[DarthDem]

61. Right!

I mean, I just don't get it. I don't hate Obama, I kind of like him, actually. He's not my favorite Democrat, Senator, or anything else, but I think he's a good guy with a lot of promise and some good ideas. I also think he is green as a frog and will lose us the election and plunge the country into an even deeper level of darkness.

[HughMoran]

92. Why do you hate America?

I'm surprised one of the sanctimonious blow-hards hasn't challenged your use of logic yet :P

[TheDonkey]

26. I think the "experience" line is code word for something else

I think those that criticize Obama for a lack of experience are not being truthful. Seriously the man has enough experience and knowledge to match Clinton or Edwards. If experience was the #1 concern we had many more experienced candidates earlier this primary cycle that got trounced.

I think type Ds rule DU and those who just flat out do not feel comfortable with Obama personally for whatever reasons (mostly ridiculous).

[no name no slogan]

27. I'm not an Obama Hater. I'm an Everybody Hater.

So all y'all can go fcuk yoselves.

[CatWoman]

28. I don't think anyone is an Obama hater, per se

but there's lots of hate projected here in other directions.

All of this, "neaner, neaner" shit has to go.

[Yael]

29. Type E

The ones who aren't quite buying into the vague "Hope for Change" campaign and trend toward a fist-shaking populist who vows to not only change the system, but to break the damn thing and rebuild it.

Small but vocal group. :hi:

Oh -- and I am not an Obama "hater", I am an Obama "neutral". A HUGE step up from where I was last week after the Reagan invocation.

[THUNDER HANDS]

31. a bit of clarification

If you don't hate Obama, you're not an Obama hater.

if you just like another candidate better, you're not an Obama hater.

If you post in every anti-Obama thread, you ARE an Obama hater.

If you start lots of anti-Obama threads, you ARE an Obama hater.

I should have differentiated the two a little bit.

[awaysidetraveler]

32. Yeah, that's proper clarification. "Obama haters" means something specific.

[Tom Rinaldo]

36. OK that at least is a comment in a positive direction. I'll take it n/t

[unapatriciated]

88. sorry too late

You already insulted a lot of people with your post. Good thing I won't hold your opinion it against your candidate.:spank:

[_Wayne_]

35. Well, there's just one type of Hillary Hater, Type A: Idiots

[girl gone mad]

41. Don't be a playa hata.

:eyes:

[msongs]

42. I like the beach just fine thanks nt

[frazzled]

43. A fifth type: those who don't understand what he is doing and saying

There are two categories of this type: those who willfully misunderstand him, because they don't like him or support another candidate; and those who simply are ... well ... simple (minded). There's nothing we can say about either of these types, really. The first is simply dishonest; the second not very intellectually engaged.

I am amused at the panty-twisters who, gasp, splutter, can't believe that Obama disrepects Teddy Kennedy, our saintly liberal elder statesman, who deserves all respect. These same folks then turn around and disrespect Teddy Kennedy, our saintly liberal elder statesman, when he decides to endorse the Obama, who purportedly dissed him (but in fact didn't). Go figure. This kind of intellectual dishonesty makes you wonder how people function in their daily lives without twisting themselves into veritable pretzels.

Of the willful misunderstanders: they are just there to play gotcha by taking statements and contorting them ... thinking that this will somehow dissuade people. Only in our pathetically inbred little corner of the Internet.

Of those who truly don't get what Obama is saying: I feel more sympathy. I would blame Obama, I guess, for not making it crystal clear to them. But the ideas that underlie change are not simple or easy. This type tends to prefer the facile political pronouncements of an Edwards, who speaks in platitudes that seem aimed at the level of eighth graders.

Mostly, I think people who dislike Obama intensely do so on the basis of style. They want someone who says what they want to hear, or makes them feel comfortable with the known. Then they have to cast him as the "centrist" or "conservative" one to justify their choices ... when in reality, Obama's two-decade career would suggest that he is the most progressive of any of the candidates: someone who not only has walked the walk but has the rare ability to bring others along with him. I'm not sure I understand what these people don't see when a John Kerry, a Patrick Leahy, a Tom Hayden, a Ted and Caroline Kennedy stand behind the man.

I don't think Obama is the second coming, but I am totally mystified at how villified he has become on this board. It's as much of an upside-down world to me as when the press and the nation fell ga-ga for the simple minded George Bush back in 2000. Obama is smart, progressive, and an incredibly talented politician. You'd think he was some sort of knuckle-dragging idiot from the comments I see around here. Fortunately, here is not the real world.

I don't know that Obama can win this thing. Probablly not. But whatever happens, he will have made an indelible mark on American politics that will be long lasting. He will win either way.

[BlueJazz]

47. I don't want Obama as the Democratic Candidate in November....

...but I certainly don't hate him...in fact, I like him fondly...I just think He can't win against the Republican smear machine....

You thought the "Willie" ads were bad?...Ha!..just wait...

[Auntie Bush]

50. Yes, My type. You neglected my type.

I'm the type that thinks for myself, isn't guided my the media, can tell the difference between bullshit and pandering politics. is understanding, forgiving, compassionate and not full of hate, one who abhors Limballs type tactics, one who believes in playing fair, one who believes in sticking up for the underdog and one who wants what is best for peace in the world and reconciliation. YOU FORGOT ME! How dare you!

PS I haven't seen any Obama haters around here...only people who prefer someone else. Does that make us Obama haters? I think not. So I'd like to know which category you fall under...because if you're generally a hateful person...someday there will be another person to hate and I won't have any part of it...will you?

[krabigirl]

71. Exactly. "Hate" is such a strong, awful word. I don't "hate" Obama. I just don't prefer him.

[smalll]

52. I'm a little of A and B, and also -

Type E - those of us for whom "um, um, er, er, you know, you know" still sounds bad.

Relatedly, Type F - those of us who don't want to have to bow down to the (non-voting) "Youf" -- Hayden in his flip-flops and Madison in her sweatpants with "Juicy" across her ass can stuff it, as far as we're concerned: they dominate everything else: box office receipts, sweeet spots in advertising demographics, etc. etc. -- but for once, when it comes it elections, it isn't about being young and stupid enough to throw money away at hype, it's about being experienced and discipined enough to actually, "you know," get out and VOTE! (OMG! For reals?!?!?)

Also, Type G - those of us who realize that all the dirt they will throw at Hillary is yesterday's news -- cattle futures, Vince Foster, Whitewater, de blah de blah: known quantities. As opposed to: you went to the Mosque with your step-father, your middle name's Hussein, you may not be "black enough" - but you go to a church that's a little too black by half (Zelig overcompensating a little, perhaps?) Your base is the Merlot-and-Lattes crowd, and despite your praise of St. Ronnie, you're not exactly the man to bring back the Reagan Democrats. etc. etc. etc.

[Jamastiene]

53. I'm Type C, the realist. n/t

[Bluebear]

54. Yes, everyone who doesn't like his candidacy is a "hater".

:silly:

[eridani]

58. You forgot people who prefer substance to fluff

A lot of us want universal health care and an end to the US military empire as well.

[OzarkDem]

66. Agree, that sums it up

We've been through an awful lot the last seven years, we aren't going to settle for half measures this time.

[McCamy Taylor]

65. You forgot Pat Buchanan and the crowd at MSNBC who are trying to frame the

election as "Hillary is a bitch" and "Obama is a s-c-a-r-y Black man" (and no one else is running). If you do not think that they have made Obama scary yet, give then time. They are aiming for Mike Tyson, but with a Kenyan accent and a Koran.

[krabigirl]

69. How about camp F - people who just aren't into him, just because.

Freedom of choice, and all.

[depakid]

73. You missed critical thinkers

Who've paid attention to what's said, what isn't said and who and what the candidate associates himself with.

We're labelled as haters, too- which is PRECISELY the sort of behavior that's associated with cults of personality.

[cboy4]

75. What happened to your good sportsmenship from last

night Magic Rat?

You've let me down, after I applauded that conciliatory thread you posted.

[Maddy McCall]

96. Jesus. And I think I called him "classy" last night.

Can I take that back tonight?

[cooolandrew]

80. Yes, experience is a wonderful thing...nt

[cooolandrew]

82. We're going to the world series this year, for sure. =)

[UALRBSofL]

85. You forgot the GLBT's

Except we don't hate Barack we just like Hillary better. :)

[cboy4]

89. With all due respect, please don't speak on behalf

of all LGBT's.

You need to use the word "some."

[Lucinda]

86. Type E - The Vilified Non-Obama Democratics

The type that don't hate him, but don't think he is anywhere close to being the best candidate. These are identified as haters, by those who disagree.

[AX10]

91. True.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4237732&mesg_id=4239691

[Lucinda]

94. Yep. Thats sums it up.

[snooper2]

87. And don't forget....

The stupid trolls that come here from www.hillaryinc.com or whatever site in a futile attempt to sway opinion.

[VotesForWomen]

98. i'm type A and C. nt

[Perry Logan]

99. As Bob Dylan says, "Don't criticize what you can't understand."

[MyNameGoesHere]

102. Um what about people who just do not think

he represents their issues? What about people who want a leadership style of a different candidate? What about people who prefer a woman, because they think it is time? What about....? Please do not confuse the voters with some dolts who just hate. It is demeaning to us and you.

[varelse]

103. None of those are reasons people typically hate others

I do know a few who don't support Obama's nomination, and in fact I do not support his run for President either, but I haven't seen much evidence of hatred toward Obama, either on this forum or among the people I know personally.

I don't *hate* any of the Presidential candidates, although some of the Republican ones scare the hell out of me. I'm not even sure they are all sane :(

[11 Bravo]

105. Damn! It's a shame there are no Hillary haters here. Otherwise, we could conduct a comparison test.

[Scout]

106. you forgot "none of the above" ... he does not inspire or motivate me

and i'm not real happy about his apparent desire to mix church and state


eta: and i do not HATE any of our dem candidates

[JPZenger]

107. Must Spend 30 Years at Lobbyists' Parties

Yes, a person is not qualified to be President unless they have spent at least 30 years at parties with lobbyists inside the Beltway. Otherwise, they can never understand the issues from the lobbyists' points of view.