Is Hate Spreading a Part of Liberal Agenda?

      Please try to imagine how a typical liberal looks like. Personally, when I think "liberal" I  think one of three types. Either a type wearing loose fitting albeit quite expensive clothes with manufacturer-made holes in them, with messy but artful hairdo and somehow hysterical features. Or an academic type, with no small amount of salt & pepper facial hair, distinguished look and authoritative manners. Or maybe a Hollywood character, with mansions all around the world and a huge saving account, flashing a professional botox-supported smile with a lot of concern for Sudanese poor or Nigerian sick in their eyes.
      Now all of these don't seem like dangerous characters, do they? Usually their favorite song is about poor & oppressed, or about people who are taking advantage of any underdog & are hell bent on exploiting these poor & oppressed. It pays to admit that they do cause some sympathy. More then that, I am willing to admit that every now & then they even have a bona fide cause. After all, they try to unite with needy, and isn't that what every decent human being should do?
     Unfortunately for the humanity, they know little about history. Similarly, they know next to nothing about sociological aspect of their preaching & what deadly consequences many modern societies could experience as the result. And they have one more thing in common: zero tolerance for dissenters. Everyone who disagrees with them at the slightest is an idiot, a stupid fool or an outright enemy of humanity. Every label is easy to fly from their tongue, including bigot, racist or chauvinist. That serves the purpose of immediate alienation of every critic - no matter his or her good intentions - of the minorities, be it racial, religious or sexually oriented. No matter that these people are no friends to many minorities. To some they are outright hostile. To some, indifferent. To some others they are doing a grand disservice. But this article is about liberals & hate.
     Many decades back a liberal was someone who stands, among other good causes, for the freedom of opinion. No more so. The dissenters are labeled as an enemy. As such, they could be called any names simply because they don't share the same philosophy.
    Following are just a few examples of blunt hate speech from the left. Everyone is invited to verify this information on the internet.
   - Ex-CIA agent Larry Johnson: " Karl (Rove) is a shameless bastard. This could explain why his mother killed herself. Once she discovered what a despicable soul she had spawned she apparently saw no other way out".
   - Mike Malloy: "Maybe at that point, Limbaugh will do the honorable thing and just gobble up enough – enough Viagra that he becomes absolutely rigid and keels over dead.

  -  Brian Mallony: "Maybe then O’Reilly will just drink a vat of the poison he spews out on America every night and choke to death! Because that’s what’s gonna to happen, that’s what they are pushing, these right-wing, nut case, fringe, militia jerk-wads to doing! "

     - Ed Schultz (later apologized)."... this right-wing slut, what’s her name, Laura Ingraham? Yeah, she’s a talk slut".
     - Ben Affleck: "gross, racist, disgusting views..." while Bill Maher rather than anyone else, a well known liberal himself, reminded him that "Freedom of speech, freedom to practice any religion you want without fear of violence, freedom to leave a religion, equality for women, equality for minorities, including homosexuals, these are liberal principles that liberals applaud for,"  

   I can easily go on & on but that's good enough. And these are the people which claim that they preach universal acceptance & love. Truly, the 21st century expressions of love had probably changed in some circles since they were invented.

   Looks like the liberals are succeeding in their appeal. Lots of high school & universities students are buying  these rhetoric. This is disturbing. Do we want to become "united country" just as the communist regimes wanted their people - no opinion at all except the officially declared one? Why many otherwise good folks are accepting that? Because it's so easy? Because it does not require you to comply logical arguments or to get involved in any discussion which would force you to exercise your brain? Or because they lose hope not seeing really strong leadership from the conservative side? So now it is "cool" when your principal is referring to the people on the right as "these idiots". Or refuse to let Condoleezza Rice at Rutgers while willingly accepting some hate-promoters from the opposite camp. Or to ostracize a college sophomore if she does not support left wing demagogy. Hollywood is notorious in sustaining this agenda. Just take a look at some network anchor comments in TV series "Newsroom". Presidential candidate & the mother of five Sarah Palin, not a genius in politics but a decent human being nevertheless, was made the object of bad taste personal jokes on a lot of TV shows during 2008 election campaign. Subsequently, she has been portrayed brainless by Julienne Moore in very average "Game Change" movie. Sure enough the piece is getting Emmy Award, and Tom Hanks, the movie producer, was even thanking "our Founding Fathers for the process they came up with that has provided not only us and HBO and all the comedy series here a plethora of material...".  Very funny indeed!

  The purpose of all this is to dehumanize their opponents. Anything goes when talking about conservatives. Lie stops being lie. Offence stops being offence. Decency is not existent. Exactly the sane tactics were used by communist regime rhetoric to describe "capitalists" and by Nazi to describe the Jewish people. Americans are pushed to believe that all problems in their lives are caused by someone else, someone different to the point of being inhumane. Only future will show if this tactic works. Hopefully, as November'14 elections showed, Americans have started to realize the liberals for what they are: anti-American populists trying to intimidate the entire country into accepting their ideology of  welfare state. I let everyone to decide for themselves, how much do you want this. 

Why liberals are so "popular"?

       I am sure that everyone registered this in his or her mind. New liberals appear everywhere like mushrooms after an August rain. They are effectively taking control of just about everything which has to do with forming a public opinion. Media, including all the major TV networks (believe it or not, even the Fox News, with some exceptions), majority of newspapers & radio stations, colleges & universities - both public & private, most of non-profit media outlets & think tanks. Blogs and internet magazines & comments constitute the only media space where dissenters are still able to voice their opinion.
       It goes without saying that having an active & unrestricted opposition to every public opinion is a sign of healthy democracy. Of course, there is no reason to oppose anything just on principle. But we can safely assume that extreme left-wing liberal ideas have a lot of opposition in any current society, not just in America. Just Google up any related phrase & thousands hits will pop-up, on both sides of an isle. You may have a different perception but in my view most of the hits don't support the libs.
The best case (or is it the worst?) that the left-wingers have authored maybe 30% to 40% of the comments.  Now why they are so plenty?
      Back in 19th and the most part of the 20th century the "liberal" used to be a good word and being a liberal meant being a good person in the minds of many. Why the meaning has changed here in America - and that is a perception which is shared, of course, by the conservatives, traditionalists and in general the folks which would like to preserve something called "American values" or who still have respect for the Constitution -? Without making a direct comparison, can someone answer the same question about the German word "genosse" or the Russian word "tovarisch"? If you need a translation, both words in English mean a "comrade" or a "friend", or something which Australians attribute to their usage of "mate". The meaning of words, like a perception of beauty, do fluctuate as time pass. And before someone from the other side will accuse me of comparing the liberals with fascists or communists (I know there is a huge difference there), let me remind you that the far left often has the same set of values as the far right. But let's leave them out of the quotation. Let's talk about more or less moderate folks on the left.
      So why is that so many people, most of them even good natured, are positioning themselves in the  liberal crowd? Why so many in the entertainment industry, media & education are against traditional values? Now I am not going to argue against the notion that liberals should be granted with the credit for outlining many concepts of individual rights and acceptance of those rights by the societies and the governments. In fact, without the liberal ideas of 18th century our founding fathers won't be able to establish the principals of this country. And I am completely susceptible to the fact that even so called traditional values, both in cultural & political sense, need to be reevaluated and modernized. But what about the core values? What about things like loyalty, friendship, integrity, love for your family & love for your country? What about unreplaceble value of hardworking people for the country? What about paying your bills?
      Can someone honestly claim that the love for your family or friendship has a different meaning now then 200 years back?
      Everyone can say that the definition of acceptance, mercy or what is considered civilized or not has drastically changed and rightfully so. Whatever was considered not acceptable or even severely punishable could be more or less perceived as totally normal or at least tolerable. One easy example is gay relationship. And that is fine. 
      Does this mean that now, in the 21st century, virtually everything is acceptable? Absolutely not. Civilized societies don't accept child pornography. We don't accept rape. We don't accept murder. And we do not accept hate. Or do we?
      Why is that so many people on the left are more concerned with the rights of criminals - or even terrorists - then the rights of a victim? Why is that they are more concerned with the rights of atheists then the rights of religious people?  Why are they labeling so many groups as being oppressed while in reality there is either no oppression in the true meaning of the word?
     These folks on the left, often well educated and mostly good by nature, have acquired a habit of always marketing themselves as the greatest supporters of the rights of the underdog. This notion, although quite noble at the first glance, causes all major problems in our society. They don't care that maybe - just maybe - the underdog is willing to work hard enough to become a success. Never mind. They don't plan to educate him, they don't aim to make him competitive in some way, they don;t want to teach him to be self-reliable. They just want to give them more privileges. For free! They never realize that, given a slightest chance, in many cases the underdog will become an oppressor. The underdog can even force you to give up you liberal values under a certain condition. You need examples? Look in the history books.
     No matter. The liberals will fight nails & teeth for their underdog cause - whoever the underdog is in their mind - up until it will be realized they don't have rights any more to do what they used to do all their lives. Like voicing a favorable opinion about a new underdog - who quite possible will include themselves. https://contributor.yahoo.com/content/article/edit/?type=43&input_type=on