You don't have to view Obama as a messiah to feel that he is voicing the desires of many for our government. There really isn't much difference in the way he "gives voice" between Obama and someone like Edwards, who was also a movement candidate.
Obama chooses loftier rhetoric and Edwards chose a more confrontational rhetoric. All this babbling about cults and messiahs is just a garbage meme spewing from op-ed pieces and pundits. I've supported Obama since 2003. I have been very impressed with him and look forward to his presidency, but I am under no illusion that he has been or will be perfect.
I'm glad you didn't really go after him for cribbing from Patrick like I'm sure Marsh does. By the way, you really should never reference her anywhere, it's like citing Free Republic or World Net Daily. Anyway, Obama cribbing from Patrick (with Patrick's permission) is sort of a double dig at Clinton, because her "pretty speeches" line is so generic it had already been countered by one of Obama's supporters.
They ARE a reflection on the worsening atmosphere here and the way right wing trolls and freepers have crept in amongst the Clinton supporters on this site to shovel crap. You regularly see diaries citing Krauthammer and ultra-conservative blogs and the sickness of hatred directed at Obama gets otherwise rational Clinton supporters to start agreeing with xenophobic trolls and freepers pretending to be just concern trolls.
His net worth is known to be a tiny fraction of theirs. Considering that's widely known, I find your point that Obama would turn their high incone into some sort of talking point a thin execuse for withholding their returns.
They aren't entirely meaningless, because they are verified data points that undercut Hillary's claim that she's the most electable. She has "vetted and tested" and Obama has her sky high negatives and her losses to McCain in dozens of matchup polls.
In all honesty I expect her to drop out if she loses Ohio or Texas on March 4th. I was surprised they declared those two "must win" states, but they have since backed away and attempted to conceal their desperation.
On the other hand, I don't think they're helping themselves by claiming they intend to drag this to the floor of the convetion in Denver and fight tooth and claw for a technical victory over Obama. Statements like Icke's and Penn's can easily be viewed, without much of a stretch, as egotistical and apathetic to both the good of the party and the democratic process.
Clinton supporters have to ask themselves, if her campaign pries the nomination from Obama at the convetion do they honestly believe she can then go on and win the nomination? It would seem the answer is "no" and it would be a case of her tarnishing her entire career even more than she already has in order to be handily defeated by McCain.
In other words, I find it hard to believe she'll actually carry out her campaign's kamikaze threat.
I appreciate the diary and your points, but I have a feeling it is going to largely fall on deaf ears.
I still can't believe some diehard Clinton supporters argue that Obama race-baited. His entire career has been premised on transcending racial boundaries and he has held the traditional black leaders at arm's length to achieve his "post-racial" candidacy.
Some of the excuses to explain her poor perfomance that have been coming out of the top echelons of her campaign are particularly offensive. You touched on them in your article, but they include deriding caucus goers as "not needing a president" and referring to midwestern states (and by extension the democrats there) as not "significant" just to name a couple. With a series of quotes like that she has managed to ensure that if she wrestles the nomination from Obama she has almost no chance of being elected in the general.
Obama isn't the president yet. He's just a senator with ties to Kenya running for higher office. I would rather have him try and fail to make a difference than not try at all. None of the other candidates have really even acknowledged the looming civil war there.
What would you have preferred he do under the circumstances?
You know what's REALLY boring? The 20 diaries a day mocking Obama supporters as cultists and kool aid drinkers and lunatics. Citing a neocon columnist who is in turn basing his argument on Jack Tapper is not helping things.
I will vote for whoever the Democratic nominee is in November and I hope some of the people on thie site will put down the hateorade they have been chugging long enough to put the good of the country ahead of their petulant selfishness.