Modern day liberalism is nothing like the liberalism of decades ago.
Liberalism of decades ago was something more akin to a more modern day libertarian viewpoint. However, if your world view is that in order to have peace and coexistence on a global basis and there needs to be a global balance of power and economics, everything Obama is doing makes a great deal of sense.
The genesis of the view is that the globe is a finite pie, in order for someone to succeed, someone has to fail. This makes even more sense if you look at the modern liberals view when it comes to punishment of a crime, and the victimhood of the perpetrator. It is never solely the perpetrator’s fault, it is the fault of society as a whole.
In this view, regardless if someone succeeds or fails, it is the responsibility of everyone to provide a balance to the scale.
Look at the case of "climate change". This is not about the environment. The carbon credits took from the prosperous nations and gave to the non prosperous ones. This is about wealth transfer.
Look at allowing rogue regimes continue to develop nuclear weapons. This is not about safety and security; it is allowing others to gain power, thus tipping the scales into more of a balance.
As another case in point, look at the devaluation of the dollar. This is pure a tax on all Americans. It transfers wealth from our nation to others.
The dangers in this view affect everyone, regardless of political affiliation. But I think the true danger is a liberal not knowing what liberalism is any more.
Modern day liberalism is about power and maintaining control at the expense of the ones they profess to be helping.
Liberals have professed to be helping African Americans and Native Americans for half a century now. How are these groups doing? Right now, unemployment is these groups are higher than any other, alcoholism and drug addiction are higher than any other group, education is lower than any other group, and wealth is lower than any other group.
Liberals have been supporting these groups for half a century. I’d say the results are quite poor. But they have to be, as there is no alternative. If these groups were to succeed, they wouldn’t need help anymore. Liberals need racism, they need class warfare, and they need wealth disparity. Without it, they don’t get elected.
Viewed in the backdrop of Marx’s Paris Manuscripts, "the worker relies on labour to find money to be able to live; but he doesn't simply live, he actually only survives, as a worker. Labour is only used to create more wealth, instead of achieving the fulfillment of 'human nature'", the agenda becomes more clear.
This philosophy negates the fact that some people are smarter than others, work harder than others, have greater skills than others, are more fortunate than others etc. In essence, for all their pontification about Darwinian theory of evolution when the topic of religion or faith is brought up, they completely negate it in practice.
Posted in: US
uf.a ¥,g YsIH;aj yo, ÿkafk f.daGdNh 
l< Èkhl ud uf.a ìß| yd orejka iu. lsßn;a lE,a,la ld wjqreoao iurkak isysk ueõfjñ' hqoaO ld,fha ud isáfha hqo ìfï ksid Tjqka wjqreoao ieurefõ ksjfia .Dy uQ,slhd jk ud ke;=jhs' tfy;a hqoaOh wjika jQ miq 2010 -2011 wjqreÿj,;a ud yg wÆ;a wjqreoao iurkak isÿjqfKa je,slv isrf.orhs' ckdêm;s yd wdrlaIl f,alïjrhdf.a ksjfia;a lsß b;srek;a uf.a ksjfia lsß W;=rkakg udf.a ìß|g jdikdjla fkdùh' 
jõkshdjg f.dia fld<U wd wjia:d ;snqKd' ta hqoaOh meje;s wjqreÿ 2 udi 9 ld,h we;=<; .=jka yuqodm;sg;a jvd jeä ld,hla uu .=jfka /£ isáhd' t,a'à'à'B' .=jka hdkd ñihs, m%ydr ms<sn|j wk;=re w`.jd ;sìh§;a tu ;¾ck fkd;ld iEu m%foaYhlu .uka l<d' idudkHfhka hqoaOhla isÿlrkd úg ´j¾frda,a Tmf¾Ika ludkav¾ flfkla isákjd' kuq;a ug ta i|yd m;alsÍug iqÿiq flfkla fkdisá ksid ishÆu fiakdxl fl<skau uf.a wëlaIKh hgf;a ;ndf.k ud hqoaOh fufyhjQjd' Yfõkao% is,ajdg fï nj muKla u;l ;snqKd' hqo NQñfha§ ,enqKq ch.%yKj,g muKla fkdj miqneiSïj, j.lSu;a ud Ndr.;a;d'
f.daGdNh ud nodf.k l;d l<d
1:00 PM
samavadey
