By David Harsanyi
Friday, February 20, 2015
“I know this is a horrible thing to say,” Rudy Giuliani
reportedly told a group of conservative moneymen in New York this week, “but I
do not believe that the president loves America.” This is, evidentially, the most disturbing
example of othering the media has ever encountered.
The perception that Obama dislikes America is nothing new
in conservative circles. Radio talk hosts have asked me numerous times – often,
in creative ways – if I agree that the president “hates” America. Since none of us has the
ability to bore into the souls of fellow humans and unlock all their hidden
motivations, the question is distracting and irrelevant. And as political
rhetoric goes it’s needlessly hyperbolic.
But really, is it that outrageous or surprising that so
many Americans doubt whether the president “loves” the traditional role the
United States has played on the world stage, or whether he “loves” the
capitalism that’s defined us for the past 50 or 60 years, or whether he “loves”
the Constitutional protections we have for religious freedoms, guns, or free
speech?
Now, I’m sure Obama loves America. Mostly, though, he seems
to love the America he wishes existed rather than the one that does. There’s a lot of populist filler in his
patriotism, but in the end it’s always the same: American excellence means a
government that acts as the citizenry’s moral center, the engine of its
prosperity, and the arbiter of all fairness. This is the president that gives
Fourth of July speeches focusing on ”economic patriotism” – a progressive
concoction that isn’t distinctly American in any context. In fact, the statist
philosophy behind that bogus appeal is by definition pretty “un-American.”
The century is young, though, and Obama ran to
“fundamentally transform” the country. And even if we chalk up that dramatic
statement to the enthusiasm of an election season, what are we to make of the
incessant need to denigrate the economic system that made the entire deal
possible? Serious thinkers on the Left will constantly tell us that the
president is simply a pragmatist. What radical things has the president done,
after all? Rarely do they mention that most Obama’s supposed moderation is a
consequence of the checks and balances our system of lawmaking provides: a
system Obama has constantly attempted to circumvent, delegitimize, and deride
when he fails to get his way. Obama loves his ideological ideals a lot more
than the ideals of American governance.
But the most irritating part of all the pearl-clutching
about Giuliani’s remark, though, is the hypocrisy. Just today in Time we read:
“Obama Claims GOP Rhetoric Could Help ISIS.” The president now argues that
those who fail to follow his bizarre aversion to dealing with the reality of
Islamic terrorism are aiding and legitimatizing enemies who burn innocent
people alive. If that’s not questioning our patriotism (and morality), I’m not
sure what is. And it’s not new. Democrats have made a nasty habit of framing
all political opposition to progressive ideas as unpatriotic assaults on the
aspirations of average Americans. For Democrats, patriotism means paying lots
of taxes. One liberal after the next stood up at the Democratic National
Convention in 2012 and accused Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan of betting against
America simply because they engaged in business abroad or made too much money
or had different ideas about the welfare state.
To be fair, the DNC’s rhetoric is mild compared to Al
Gore’s claim that George W. Bush betrayed his country, or Obama’s claim that
Bush’s debt-spending was unpatriotic. (Obama’s debt is, no doubt, a moral
imperative.) No, no one is innocent. And Giuliani’s comments are aimed at
Obama’s foreign policy. Obviously, you can’t measure patriotism by how many
bombs a president drops. But on top of his attempts to redefine patriotism,
Obama’s insatiable need to apologize for our alleged wrongdoings (and to create
ridiculous moral equivalencies between cultures that struggle with violence and
authoritarianism and our own) is also disconcerting. For many Americans, it’s
also suspicious.
No comments:
Post a Comment