[speechlesstx]

I've seen people cheer his every word, praise his every decision, and not question a single one of his decisions; pre-election and post-election. Sounds like insane devotion to me.

Jillian, give us some examples. I haven't seen ANYTHING like you describe.

But regardless, what does any of it have to do with the candidate and their qualifications? So Obama has some nutty followers; so what?

My question to you is what are his qualifications? The relevance to why it matters if Obama has - not some - but many, many nutty followers, do you want a bunch of nutty people deciding who sits in the White House? I'd rather people decide based on reality, not what they hope he might be.

[BABRAM]

The relevance to why it matters if Obama has - not some - but many, many nutty followers, do you want a bunch of nutty people deciding who sits in the White House? I'd rather people decide based on reality, not what they hope he might be.

Hey reality check junior, I thought you voted for Dubya twice. How did that work out? Are you going trying to convince Jillian you have a clue? :rolleyes:

[talaniman]

My question to you is what are his qualifications?

You have to be a natural-born US Citizen (a citizen from birth - but not necessarily born in the USA, which is a common misconception).

You have to be at least 35 years of age.
You have to have resided in the US for the last 14 year

Apparently that's all the law calls for, so he is qualified.

but many, many nutty followers, do you want a bunch of nutty people deciding who sits in the White House? I'd rather people decide based on reality, not what they hope he might be.

one has to be 18 and has to be a citizen of the u.s. one cannot be a ex criminal depending on the state one may live in. and the most basic qualification of them all is that one has to register before voting.

Doesn't matter if your blind, cripple or crazy, if your registered, you have a right to vote.

[speechlesstx]

Hey reality check junior, I thought you voted for Dubya twice. How did that work out? Are you going trying to convince Jillian you have a clue?! :rolleyes:

Bite me, Bobby. Do you have anything more than insults these days?

[NeedKarma]

Bite me, Bobby. Do you have anything more than insults these days?

Now, now steve-o. Your past relationships are vital to understand your character and knowledge before anyone takes your advice. We don't anything about you except that you voted and supported Bush twice.

[tomder55]

Your past relationships are vital to understand your character and knowledge

For a minute I thought you were addressing Obama.

[jillianleab]

Jillian, give us some examples. I haven't seen ANYTHING like you describe.

I'm speaking on things I've witnessed, people I've interacted with, even some people on AMHD (no, I'm not going to sling names). Are there news articles about it? I don't know, maybe. I don't really have the time to search, to be honest with you. But look at the crowds during his speeches and appearances - one could make the argument those people are ardent supporters. But really, it doesn't matter.

My question to you is what are his qualifications? The relevance to why it matters if Obama has - not some - but many, many nutty followers, do you want a bunch of nutty people deciding who sits in the White House? I'd rather people decide based on reality, not what they hope he might be.

His qualifications have been established (thanks, tal), and it's also been mentioned that all people have the right to vote - nutjob or not. Besides, "nutty people" can be anyone on the opposite side of your (collective you, not you, you) opinion, right? I could argue that "nutty people" are the ones who think there is an all-knowing, all-powerful, white-bearded man in the sky who listens to their thoughts. Those people get to vote, right? So why not the people who think Obama is the greatest thing since sliced bread? Do you honestly think there is a significant portion of the population (enough to swing the election to Obama) who think he's the messiah? Really?

Look, I'm not saying I support Obama, what I am saying is that taking a satire piece (I think the article and the link are both satire, btw) and using it as evidence as to why someone shouldn't vote for a candidate, or why this candidate doesn't belong in office, is silly. Let's say there are enough wackjobs out there to swing the election and Obama gets elected because they think he's the messiah - he still got elected because that's what the people want. You don't mean to imply we should take voting rights away from people who don't "decide based on" (your) "reality", do you? That sounds very un-democratic to me.

[speechlesstx]

Now, now steve-o. Your past relationships are vital to understand your character and knowledge before anyone takes your advice.

You mean character and judgment, and unlike Obama I have enough of both to know when to back away from people with neither.

We don't anything about you except that you voted and supported Bush twice.

Considering the alternatives - Lurch and the Goracle – who can really blame me?

[NeedKarma]

Lurch and the Goracle

Are you still in high school?

[spitvenom]

What is Lurch and Goracle?

[tomder55]

Lurch is Kerry separated at birth

[speechlesstx]

I'm speaking on things I've witnessed, people I've interacted with, even some people on AMHD (no, I'm not going to sling names). Are there news articles about it? I don't know, maybe. I don't really have the time to search, to be honest with you. But look at the crowds during his speeches and appearances - one could make the argument those people are ardent supporters. But really, it doesn't matter.

Sorry, but I haven’t noticed it anywhere. In fact, most people I know along with most of the conservative talking heads have been much less than enthusiastic about McCain. The best thing he’s had going for him is the alternative would be a disaster.

His qualifications have been established (thanks, tal), and it's also been mentioned that all people have the right to vote - nutjob or not.

That makes him eligible, does it make him qualified?

Besides, "nutty people" can be anyone on the opposite side of your (collective you, not you, you) opinion, right? I could argue that "nutty people" are the ones who think there is an all-knowing, all-powerful, white-bearded man in the sky who listens to their thoughts. Those people get to vote, right? So why not the people who think Obama is the greatest thing since sliced bread? Do you honestly think there is a significant portion of the population (enough to swing the election to Obama) who think he's the messiah? Really?

Tell me Jillian, have you ever heard anyone say anything like this about another politician?

"A Lightworker -- An Attuned Being with Powerful Luminosity and High-Vibration Integrity who will actually help usher in a New Way of Being" -- Mark Morford
"He is not operating on the same plane as ordinary politicians. . . . the agent of transformation in an age of revolution, as a figure uniquely qualified to open the door to the 21st century." -- Gary Hart

"Barack Obama is our collective representation of our purest hopes, our highest visions and our deepest knowings . . . He's our product out of the all-knowing quantum field of intelligence." -- Eve Konstantine

"We're here to evolve to a higher plane . . . he is an evolved leader . . . [he] has an ear for eloquence and a Tongue dipped in the Unvarnished Truth." -- Oprah Winfrey
“I would characterize the Senate race as being a race where Obama was, let’s say, blessed and highly favored. That’s not routine. There’s something else going on. I think that Obama, his election to the Senate, was divinely ordered. . . . I know that that was God’s plan." -- Bill Rush

"This is bigger than Kennedy. . . . This is the New Testament." | "I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean, I don't have that too often. No, seriously. It's a dramatic event." -- Chris Matthews

If people were saying these things about a Republican the cry from the left about conservative nutjobs would be deafening. They would be calling for voter disqualifications if not as Janeane Garafalo thinks is appropriate, put them in jail – while still believing “Democrats as people are fundamentally more decent.”

Look, I'm not saying I support Obama, what I am saying is that taking a satire piece (I think the article and the link are both satire, btw) and using it as evidence as to why someone shouldn't vote for a candidate, or why this candidate doesn't belong in office, is silly. Let's say there are enough wackjobs out there to swing the election and Obama gets elected because they think he's the messiah - he still got elected because that's what the people want. You don't mean to imply we should take voting rights away from people who don't "decide based on" (your) "reality", do you? That sounds very un-democratic to me

I wouldn’t take any qualified voter’s rights away Jillian. I also wouldn’t do as ACORN likes to do and make up names to pad the polls in their candidate’s favor. They’ve now allegedly signed up “the starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys” to vote in Nevada. THAT’S very undemocratic and that’s what troubles me, too many Obama supporters are willing to do anything to elect their Messiah including voter fraud. One person, one informed, rational vote is all I ask.

[speechlesstx]

Are you still in high school?

It's much more catchy than "Dumbya" or "the dufus."

[spitvenom]

OH LURCH!! Kerry does look like him. I think Obama Looks like Alfred E. Neuman the mascot of Mad Magazine.

[tomder55]

Sure does!!

[tomder55]

I always thought Kerry looked more like the old man of the mountain

[NeedKarma]

The Penguin!

[jillianleab]

First off - the Lurch thing - now that's just funny! :)

Sorry, but I haven’t noticed it anywhere. In fact, most people I know along with most of the conservative talking heads have been much less than enthusiastic about McCain. The best thing he’s had going for him is the alternative would be a disaster.

I guess we've seen and heard different things. :)

That makes him eligible, does it make him qualified?

Just on that alone, no, of course not. Those requirements make a TON of people eligible. But what is your standard for qualification? Like I said, I'm not really an Obama supporter, so I won't sit here and spout off about how he's the best person for the job, blah blah blah. But after watching the debates and reading about his policies and ideas, I'm not so quick to label him as "unqualified".

Tell me Jillian, have you ever heard anyone say anything like this about another politician?

Surely you understand a black man running for the highest office in our country (and having a real shot at it) is monumental? The quotes you've posted indicate that to me - people are excited about the progress Obama being elected means we've made in this country, it speaks VOLUMES that we are finally willing and able to put a young black man in a position consistently held by old white men. Of course people are energized, of course they are excited. Top it all off with his whole things of "Change" and you've got a formula for excitement. As for the biblical references made in the quotes, I attribute that to people getting carried away, or, more likely, people seeking ratings and attention. I mean really, you say someone in the public eye is the messiah, you're going to get attention, right?

If people were saying these things about a Republican the cry from the left about conservative nutjobs would be deafening. They would be calling for voter disqualifications if not as Janeane Garafalo thinks is appropriate, put them in jail – while still believing “Democrats as people are fundamentally more decent.”

I don't deny this, not at all. The current Republican party has a reputation for being evangelical, any reference they make to religion is cast out in a negative light by the Dems. But you say the cry about conservative nutjobs would be deafening; isn't the cry from the conservatives about the liberal nutjobs a little deafening?

I wouldn’t take any qualified voter’s rights away Jillian.

I know you wouldn't. But that doesn't change the fact it sort of looks like you are arguing that these people shouldn't vote, or that they are voting "wrong" or for the wrong reasons. People can vote on any basis they want, we may not like it, but they can do it. My own grandmother was a Hilary supporter; when she dropped out of the race (or got the boot, if you prefer) she said now she'd have to vote for McCain. Why? Because she won't vote for a black man. Stupid reason as it is, it's still her right to vote.

I also wouldn’t do as ACORN likes to do and make up names to pad the polls in their candidate’s favor. They’ve now allegedly signed up “the starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys” to vote in Nevada. THAT’S very undemocratic and that’s what troubles me, too many Obama supporters are willing to do anything to elect their Messiah including voter fraud. One person, one informed, rational vote is all I ask.

Do you think I'm going to defend this? I'd like one person, one informed vote too, but the reality is, it doesn't happen that way. My husband mentioend to me an article he read the other day which said most people, when watching the debates, can't tell when the candidate goes off topic. Sounds pretty uninformed to me! So we just have to hope those people for some readon don't make it to the polls that day (like my grandmother... )!

[spitvenom]

NK You are the winner of the look a like contest. Good Job finding that!!

[NeedKarma]

McCain is Jesus... in a penguin costume.