Oh, preach it, bro. They treat him like…well, you know, like, it’s totally hypocritical what they do. Both parties do it. The way they…anyway, I’m with you. How do they treat him that we hate?
Also, Obama touched me and it cured my leprosy.
First, Im not your “bro”. Second, there is no “we”. There is you, and there is me.
Lastly, what is the airspeed velocity of an unlaiden swallow
How quickly forget the fact that Obama’s Internet support came from cat memes and shit like http://barackobamaisyournewbicycle.com/.
Yes, he was the projection of every fantasy about the super-leader who would solve all the problems with his wisdom and goodness. Whether that makes him the “Messiah” or not, I don’t know, but that is what the true believers were saying.
A swallow that has just gotten laid has pretty much the same airspeed as another, but rather more cheerful about it.
For you and others, try reading, you knee-jerking nitwit:
I’m going to go on record and defend my fellow conservatives here. We weren’t calling him “The Savior”, we were calling him “YOUR savior”. Whether or not that’s the case remains to be seen. We may yet get Mitts Rompney and his magical underpants so there’s a serious disconnect there.
Ah hell, I got nothing. My former party doesn’t represent me anymore. Please just give me a prick and a square to balance the budget that keeps mommy the democrat from spending all the money. Oh wait, that kind of Republican doesn’t exist anymore.
<<cue war drums>>
You have trouble reading, too? And grasping that a live speech has a different dynamic than a few letters of the alphabet strung together and read? :rolleyes:
I presume “you” in the OP means “conservative”, and “we” in the OP means “liberal”, and the conservative opinion in 2007 claims that Barack Obama is the secular messiah, preaching the words of Tom Hayden. First of all, has it ever occurred to you Straight Dopers that this is a CONSERVATIVE political OPINION website? It’s an opinion, not a fact. Second of all, the quote is from 2007. That’s five years ago. Surely you wouldn’t think that conservatives have not changed since then! Third of all, it’s one website, presumably voiced by one author who has the liberty to say what’s on his mind at that point of time. So, I say, the “Barack Obama = Messiah” thing is probably a joke. The word “Messiah” means anointed one (like Queen Elizabeth I who once said that “I am your anointed Queen.” Not that I consider Queen Lizzy to be “The Messiah”. 
Obama said “we”, not “I”. But I remember the speech, and like any good speech there’s a bit of theater to it. In this case, there was a load of theater. That’s the art of it. I thought it was well done when I saw it. A little grotesque from my personal view, but credit where credit is due. He turned a vote for me event into a calling. That’s what almost every politician tries to do. He pulled it off. I give him props for that. But it also does give some credence to the charge that this whole “The One” thing has not been created out of thin air by Republicans. Them’s just the facts.
Well, yeah, actually. That’s kinda what they do. Or don’t do, maybe.
You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means. [/im]
Sure, but the message conveyed by the art was totally different from what you’re suggesting. A statement like
is not implying “I am your Messiah”. On the contrary, it’s saying “We the people shouldn’t be sitting around expecting some Messiah to fix our problems for us: we need to fix them ourselves.”
It certainly is a powerful and somewhat dramatic message, but it happens to say the exact opposite of the “Obama=Messiah” meme that some Republicans claim Democrats buy into.
I was excited when I voted for Obama in 2008. Not because I thought he was a savior or any kind of miracle worker, but because of what it said about how we’ve grown in America during my lifetime. I toyed with the idea of McCain (I’d voted for Republican presidential candidates before), but then he made my decision easy by nominating Palin.
In 2007 and the early part of 2008 I thought Obama would be a great vice presidential candidate. I felt is was too inexperienced to become president. And there has certainly been evidence of that during his term - especially in 2009.
He has grown into the job, at least to some extent. I think he has finally gotten over his delusion that there are significant numbers of Republicans of good will. But he still hews conservative lines on too many issues.
Given the ideological and extreme nature of today’s Republican party, it seem likely I will never vote for another one of them.
You never know; there may be some gigantic phase shift, as there was between 1860 and 1940, or between 1960 and today. The Grand Old Party might purge itself of the destructive radicalism that drives it today.
But, meantime, this sort of “straw man” attack, where they address themselves to their own caricatures of what other people say and believe, rather than engaging in any kind of honest dialogue, is symptomatic of their near-criminal level of corruption. They want to write both sides of the script, with a sock-puppet to represent us, which they use to attribute opinions to us that we don’t actually hold.
Hell, it’s the only trick Rush Limbaugh knows; try listening to him and see if so much as five minutes go by without him using it!
So, are you saying Jeff Tweedy is the Messiah?
I admit he has the hair and the beard but I don’t know…
I think the OP is forgetting an important fact: the Republican party is full of horrible, hate-filled racists and horrible, hate-filled racists say horrible hate-filled things. I honestly don’t know why decent people still try to engage with them.
Projection. We understand the world through a process of empathy, by putting ourselves in the shoes of others. Republicans want to put Reagan’s image on Mount Rushmore. So naturally they conclude that liberal supporters of Obama must feel the same way.
Dog Whistling. Conservatives of a certain mentality can’t go beyond skin color. In my view this failure is limited to a fraction of dim witted tea party crazies.
Poor character. Those of sensitive disposition thirst for reassurance. The conservative media provides it in the form of misleadingly edited video clips (see Kimstu’s quote below) and silly and historically oblivious claims about teleprompters made by media personalities who know their argument is bogus. Footage from the Fox News Mole shows Hannity chatting with Romney before his show and saying, “It’s smart. You don’t want to make a mistake. I’ll tell you, they’re out to eviscerate anybody who makes a mistake.” He’s discussing Romney’s use of the teleprompter.
This revelation won’t stop modern conservatives from watching Fox News. Misinformation is a feature to them: it props their super-sensitive dispositions. Liberals watch the news to be informed. Conservatives do it for reassurance.
Actually, I’m fine with naming airports and bridges after Reagan. That’s the convention in the US. But Mount Rushmore? Where’s the liberal false equivalence for that?
Yes. Modern conservatives view the world largely through a tribal lens, so hysteria is SOP. It wasn’t always that way. Conservatives used to be problem solvers: the elder Romney, Eisenhower and even the ethically defective Nixon were examples of this. But after 1980 the moderates handed the reins to the cranks and the fantasists, before being expelled from the GOP as RINOs.
What happened to that trope that was common a few years back that it was unpatriotic to criticise the commander in chief?
All the time?
A black Democrat got into office.