Originally Posted by Eagle88

You're actually correct in one thing about this statement. According to the original definitions of "liberal" and "conservative" I am not a conservative, I am actually a liberal.

Originally Posted by Speakeasy

Basically, jviehe's post came off as a thinly veiled swipe at the common idea that people who voted for Obama don't know anything. Like I said, I may have taken it completely wrong.

Originally Posted by jviehe

Well, no, that pretty much sums it up. I beleive the majority of people who voted for Obama did so without any clue who he was. Same for McCain. Same for most polticians. People in general are dumb voters.

Originally Posted by Oreo

But the hyprocisy of Powell is: Powell was hammering away that we needed more "moderates" in the Republican party--yet he didn't vote for Moderate republican John McCain--LOL

Originally Posted by Speakeasy

Perhaps I just misinterpreted the post. I thought you were saying that if someone helps someone get elected, then disagrees with them on something, they're a dumb voter. And I don't think it's too much of a stretch to interpret it that way.

In this specific case, yes, Powell should have expected the Obama administration to spend like crazy due to the large D next to his name. However, I still don't see how he's now a dumb voter. I think it would be a pretty safe bet that Powell voted for Obama for a number of reasons, such as foreign policy, social policy, not wanting to endorse the current direction of the Republican party, etc.

I also don't see any evidence from Powell that he didn't expect this sort of thing from Obama when casting his vote. Nowhere does it seem like this has caught Powell off guard or like he feels that Obama has cheated or lied to him. Powell might have figured this exact thing would happen way back in November, but he's speaking about it now because his predictions are becoming a reality.

All we know is he's concerned about this one particular aspect of Obama's presidency, not that he was bamboozled and completely regrets his vote.

Basically, jviehe's post came off as a thinly veiled swipe at the common idea that people who voted for Obama don't know anything. Like I said, I may have taken it completely wrong.

Originally Posted by TSGracchus

You WOULD be a liberal, if we were still living in the America of the early 19th century. Because we no longer live in that world, you're not. Liberalism is defined by ends, not means. The ends are human liberty, dignity, and well-being. In an agrarian, rural society, those ends are best met by the MEANS of limited government and free markets. An industrial, urban society presents threats to human liberty, dignity, and well-being from powerful industrial and commercial interests, and requires a more activist government to secure liberal ends.

Originally Posted by Doctor Who

And who is going to protect us from the powerful and selfish interests of the govt?

Originally Posted by Speakeasy

Well, hey, I guess we ultimately agree. Although, when the only options available in an election are stupid, it's incredibly hard to vote smart.

Originally Posted by Speakeasy

Having disagreements from time to time with the person you voted for doesn't make one a 'dumb voter'. In fact, I'd say it makes them a much smarter voter than those who give the person they voted for a thumbs up in every last thing they did.

Originally Posted by Rakkasan

where is this when the obama love on this board goes overboard and people defend the messiah come blood mud shit or flood??????

wait does that only apply to people other than you

Originally Posted by TSGracchus

Public accountability, separation of powers, an independent judiciary, and the Bill of Rights.

Originally Posted by Doctor Who

a real world answer would have been more appropriate.

Originally Posted by wrxsti

Ahhhh, then the ACLU must be the correct answer.