|I've worked hard and earned the American dream - and now have to work for the government for well over half the year (a government that still persecutes me for being an HIV-survivor). Obama will take more of my money - and much, much more in the future. Liberalism believes in punishing hard-working successful people in this manner - and the more you succeed, the more they will punish you.|
This is a pretty self-serving view of liberalism. Quite simply, Obama's liberalism has some faint idea that government deficits are too high, and thus the government has to find some way of increasing its revenue. As we just heard over and over during the stimulus debate, it is better to keep money in the pockets of poor people, as they are much more likely to spend it, creating a bigger multiplier effect, etc. Thus, if the money can't come from poor people it must come from rich people.
I also find it pretty damn galling that Sullivan phrases liberalism's purpose as "punishing hard-working successful people" -- if he actually believes that then he is a fool, and if is writing that for its shock value then he is dishonest. Liberalism believes that there are some things the government can and should provide for its citizens, and what differentiates conservatives from liberals is the scope of those services. While I certainly sympathize with his persecution by (mostly-conservative) anti-gay elements, the very drugs keeping him alive were largely the product of government sponsored research -- which needs to get paid for somehow, and which liberals have championed far more than conservatives.