BE AFRAID...BE VERY AFRAID

[ClericJohnPreston]

I'm not kidding here....

I am a plaintiff's Trial lawyer by trade. I know manipulation from 100 yards and how to do it. I watch the crafted image of Obama, the cadence of his speeches and the REACTIONS of his supporters, and the answer is as clear as an azure sky..there is "NOTHING THERE".

Like some deluded crowd under a mass hallucination, they see substance , where there is only a shell or a mold. There is no specifics to challenge with, because you are always referred by an Obamite to a LINK. Always a LINK. Never an answer to direct questions.

I have seen this adoration in place of intellectual curiousity before. Anyone who is a student of history has seen it.

If you want to see it for yourself, clear as day, read this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4222364

They don't know anything Obama stands for.....anything!

[ClericJohnPreston]

1. Any help

would be appreciated in this thread. I am taking on the worst offenders in the Obamination. One against 20 is a little draining.......

[zalinda]

2. Oh, I know and the "audacity" of these people

:rofl:

They are promoting John to be an AG.:wtf: I guess any old lawyer can be AG, in their minds. I'm guessing that prosecuting someone and defending some one is a little different. They have no idea what John stands for. These people are clueless. I hope and pray (and I don't ever pray) that some thing comes down the pike and takes out both Obama and Clinton. Let's hope that Bill hasn't kept his zipper up and that Obama really is connected to Rezko in a very bad way.

zalinda

[spooky3]

3. two points

a) some Obama support reminds me of some of the Clark support seen in the 2004 primaries.

b) I increasingly feel about Obama the way I feel about business consultants who come in to do "motivational" dog and pony shows. Some employees come out excited, and impressed, but their performance doesn't change. I'd prefer the company just hire a good comedian to entertain me or let me get back to work, and then shake my head with a little envy that the speaker managed to get paid so well for doing so little, and having people love him/her.

[lisainmilo]

4. I agree with you, did you see my post here...the one titled

view... Heres what I think...I would like your'e input if you haven't already.

Thanks
Lisa

[Silver Gaia]

5. You are correct that they are not offering any specifics, nor apparently, does Obama himself..

For instance, this is from Post #63, by awaysidetraveler:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4222364#4223406

Expand Access to Jobs
Help Americans Grab a Hold of and Climb the Job Ladder: Obama will invest $1 billion over five years in transitional jobs and career pathway programs that implement proven methods of helping low-income Americans succeed in the workforce.

In terms of specifics:
1. Define “transitional jobs.” Transitioning from what to what? Provide examples.
2. Define “career pathway programs.” Details? Specifics? Examples?
3. Define “proven methods.” This could mean a LOT of things. What, exactly does it mean? Details? Specifics? Examples?
4. Define “success” in terms of “low-income Americans…in the workforce.” One person's idea of "success" could be vastly different from that of another.

There's nothing there but undefined generalities that could mean all sorts of things.

The same goes for the next one:

Create a Green Jobs Corps: Obama will create a program to directly engage disadvantaged youth in energy efficiency opportunities to strengthen their communities, while also providing them with practical skills in this important high-growth career field.

In terms of specifics:
1. Describe how “disadvantaged youth” will be “directly engaged.” Exactly what does that mean? Details? Specifics? Examples?
2. Define “energy efficiency opportunities.” Details? Specifics? Examples?
3. Define “practical skills.” Specifically, what sorts of "practical skills"? Washing dishes and sweeping floors could be defined as "practical skills," but those skills wouldn't give anyone an edge in an "important high-growth career field." The word "practical" is problematic here because it tends to downgrade the skills in question without saying anything overt one way or the other. Details? Specifics? Examples?

Again, there are many generalities, and little that is of specific substance.

I'd do it, if I had time--I really don't right now, sorry--but this might be a way to approach the issue of generalities vs. specifics. Just point out exactly where these statements are lacking in clarity. They asked for specific questions. This could be a way to pin them down on that. (This is exactly what I'd do if this was a student whose paper I was evaluating and/or grading, BTW.) Sometimes people get so enthralled with pretty-sounding words--especially when those words are so vague as to allow them to "fill in the blanks," so to speak--that they fail to realize exactly where the generalities ARE. They've already filled in those blanks in their own minds, and then, simply can't see it. These are some pretty big blanks, IMO.

To be honest, I haven't gone to Obama's site to see if he goes into more detail. I'm just going on what his supporters copied and pasted FROM the site when asked for specifics--which, even though they tried (and may even think successfully), they failed to provide.

Maybe this sort of approach will help them to see where these "plans" are lacking, maybe not. Just offered as an idea.

[Two Americas]

6. I jumped in there

You are correct CJP. It is all very cult-like.

They always say "read the book" or "read the website" or "listen to his speeches." I have done all three, and gone over and over them and I can find no substance, just some of the most expertly concocted and seductive double talk I have ever seen. There is a hypnotic and mesmerizing quality to his speaking.

I find that when pressed, Obama supporters will finally answer, but always with the most outrageous right wing points of view. I have no idea why people think he represents some radical change.

[Silver Gaia]

8. That was a good post, TA.

Yes. Make them DEFINE their terminology. Who is "we," indeed! Vague generalities is all they seem able to come up with.

[Horse with no Name]

7. They have all bought the Kool Aid on Obama

and I totally agree.
They remind me of George W. Bush supporters in elections past...refusing to see the facts of the matter and voting on strict idealogy.
It will end up sucking for our party if they actually propel him to a victory, but I believe he will self destruct before that ever happens.

[Silver Gaia]

9. I so hope you are right that he will self-destruct.

I'm not very happy with the Clintons right now, either. :(

I've never been one to buy into the Naderite meme that there is "no difference" between the Democrats and the Republicans, but... damn! Edwards is the only one I've seen from the beginning who I thought represented traditional Democratic values *and* who stood any chance at all of winning the nomination. All is not lost, as I've noted, and this is why we MUST stand by Edwards through to the convention (and beyond), but it is very disconcerting to see what is happening right now. We must persevere and ensure that if Edwards cannot WIN the nomination, at the very least he has some power for negotiation at the convention. Helping him to stay strong will help to keep his/OUR message out there as well, and that is of utmost importance.

I WILL cast my vote in the GE for whichever of our candidates ends up on the ballot with a "D" next to their name, but I just don't think I'm going to be able to dredge up any enthusiasm if it ends up being Clinton or Obama. :( Granted, either of them would be better (immensely so) than ANY of the Repub candidates, but the differences seem to be in shades and degrees, not stark contrasts.

[AndyA]

10. I'm going to start referring to it as "Dr. Obama's Traveling Salvation Show"

because that's exactly what it is. A bunch of people believing things that aren't substantiated, selling cure alls from the back of a wagon. And once he's done, he just moves on to the next town.

Obama's telling them what they want to hear, but he isn't explaining how he's going to do it. Anyone can say they're going to do this or that, but if they can't tell you how they're going to do it, it's just a bunch of empty words.

Obama's supporters are serious Kool-Aid drinkers. Really, I've seen nothing like it short of the GOPers.

[ClericJohnPreston]

13. Spot on.....

Can you say, "Elmer Gantry"?

[BuelahWitch]

11. I was a Howard Dean follower in 2003

and made many friends locally (Lawrence, KS). What I find very strange now is that many of these people are now supporting Obama! I felt early on that there wasn't much substance to the Senator from Illinois and am baffled how these people (at least two very long time Democrats who held local party positions) can be taken in so easily. I'm hoping that my caucus will have some reasoned heads who will stand with me for Edwards, if for nothing else, to give him another delegate with which to bargain at the convention (both Dean and Kucinich got a delegate from Douglas county last time).

[Beaverhausen]

12. I live with an Obama supporter

My boyfriend is very smart, very well-read and is convinced that Obama is a 'transcendent figure' He talks about him as a Joseph Campbell "archtype" who can bring about the changes we want.

Now that Obama is being endorsed by "the last relatives of JFK" it's even worse.

I am trying, really trying, to find some reason to support Obama, should it come down to it, because between Hillary and him, I want him. But I don't see it yet.

[ClericJohnPreston]

14. I'm back in that thread again, doing clean up work.

However, most of the worst Obamites, who were in last night, have me on "ignore". They don't like any voice which disputes their false view of the world.

In any event, as they can't be changed, this posting is for the reasonable uncommited viewers who can be swayed by good arguments, which are meant to cause people to THINK.