Again and again and again I hear that it is "silly" for people to vote for Obama, that he is an

[Levgreee]

"empty" suit. Now, it is fine to disapprove of a candidate, but, people here seem to claim that he has little to no value as a candidate.

If so, are all the newspapers and people who have endorsed him equally "fanatical" for an empty suit?

Harvard, Kerry, Kennedy, numerous governors, union endorsements, 80 attorneys for gitmo victims, numerous newspapers have endorsed him, conservationists, the list goes on and on.

I'm not saying these endorsements mean you should vote for him... I'm saying many incredibly smart, reasonable people have supported him, so it would seem that he is a worthy candidate, unless you think that all these people are being foolish.

Just admit it. He is a credible candidate, giving Hillary a run for her money. As Hillary is a credible candidate also. Your extreme criticism is unfounded, and makes you look foolish.

[abburdlen]

1. the 'it's a cult' bit

bugs me more. They same charges were thrown at Dean and Clark supporters last go around.

Enthusiasm and excitement are bad things I guess to some people.
And then they wonder why the public doesn't rally around politicians like Kerry.

[Skittles]

2. Levgreee

Edit your post to read "HEAR" instead of "HERE"

I agree Obama is a viable candidate but don't use newspaper endorsements as proof - look how many endorsed that incompetent piece of SHIT GWB :o

[Levgreee]

3. done... i need a nap

[Skittles]

4. aw no problem - I'm not picking on you

I find myself correcting my own spelling mistakes frequently - I just don't like to see it prominently in a Subject line as it can distract from the message :hi:

[cloudythescribbler]

5. There are swarm-of-haters' agendae, as well as hatred of idealism ...