Yes, certainly do not lump the rest of us in with a clown like that. One of the problems that many agnostics and atheists have is with an anthropomorphic deity--that man was created in the image of the deity. For example, why would an onmipotent being need arms, legs, fingers, toes, etc.? For some people, the entire scriptural/liturgical/doctrinal song and dance is offensive, but they accept the concept of a deity as a prime mover. For many of these, god is a progenerative force, a cosmos builder, who either sits back and watches, not inferferring further, or simply moves on. For some, such as myself, there is no logical need for a deity--that's why you'll read people invoking what is usually referred to as Occam's Razor (although William of Occam did not originate the idea). Occam's Razor states that entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
--causes are not to be multiplied beyond necessity. In this case, one would question the necessity of an eternal god, because the cosmos itself could be eternal. Further complicating the issue is the understanding that space and time did not exist until the so-called "Big Bang" took place, so that in such a context, the concept of eternity is meaningless.
People hold their beliefs (or reject the beliefs proposed to them) for a wide variety of reasons, and i'm glad to see that you have the good sense not to put everyone in a single box. When atheists do this, it's often because of an "us and them" attitude which has been imposed on them by what they see as a hostile, theistic society. They see all theists as virtually identical because the point of their contact is the condemnation which they get if they bring up their lack of belief.