I read a blog post on Balloon Juice discussing a Rolling Stone roundtable with Matt Taibbi and David Gergen. During the roundtable Taibbi said the Tea Party supporters are crazy because they vote without "acting on the evidence". From my reading of the Balloon Juice blog post, my interpretation of the phrase "acting on the evidence" is Tea Party supporters ignore facts and evidence when voting. But Tea Party supporters aren't the only people who ignore facts and evidence when voting. Liberals who voted for Obama ignored facts and evidence too.
If you paid attention to Obama's campaign, you found plenty of evidence Obama was not a liberal. Here are some examples.
- He threw Reverend Wright under the bus.
- After the House voted against the bank bailout, Obama stopped campaigning, went back to Washington, and strong-armed House Democrats into voting for the bailout.
- He promised to escalate the war in Afghanistan.
- His proposal to end the Iraq War left 50,000 troops in Iraq indefinitely.
- He supported giving immunity to companies that helped spy on Americans illegally.
Do those seem like the actions of someone a liberal would want to be President? I would say "No", yet liberals voted for Obama. If they based their votes on facts and evidence, they would have voted for Ralph Nader or Cynthia McKinney. But they voted for Obama in spite of the evidence he did not share their interests.
