What does it mean to “love” America (or any country)?

A few days ago former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani said that President Obama does not love America in the same way that he does. It was a fascinating comment that, of course, the media jumped on creating its usual noise with no substance so let’s be better than them and look at this comment a bit closer. Giuliani says he loves America, but what does that really mean? What does he really love? Is it the culture? The culture of America is so variable and wide that it’s too hard to pin down. Perhaps he’s just being selective to the parts he likes (baseball, opera, etc.) as Giuliani doesn’t seem like the kind of guy who would like gangsta rap or rodeo. Nothing wrong with that as everyone has their cultural preferences but the point is that American culture is writ so broad (which is a strength), that I don’t think he could be referring to the culture since there is no one American culture. Is it the Constitution? As a former prosecutor, he’s certainly a law and order type, but Obama was a constitutional law professor (adjunct), so I don’t think Giuliani was making that distinction either.

My guess is that Giuliani wasn’t really referring to “love” of country and just chose the word incorrectly to express what he really meant. Giuliani believes, whether we agree or not, that the US should be much more aggressive and in front fighting ISIS and terrorists around the world, and he believes that Obama is not taking the fight to them directly enough. By Obama not taking the fight in such a direct and visceral manner, Giuliani believes that Obama does not love America like he does. And I use the word “visceral” because Giuliani pointed out Obama’s cool manner when discussing ISIS, and his emotional response to Ferguson. Giuliani believes that Obama’s handling of ISIS and terrorists is not only not strong and tough enough to show that he “loves” the country, that is, going on offense directly to protect the defense of the continental United States, but also that Obama simply isn’t angry and outraged enough. Giuliani believes Obama should be more emotional in his speechifying on ISIS and terrorism to demonstrate a true love of the United States.

When to be project logic and rationality, and when to project emotion and anger is the issue between them.

Puerile Theatrics of the State of the Union Address

Are the theatrics of calling out to special guests in the balcony something the American people really want? It’s childish so it’s hard to imagine a nation of adults could take it seriously… yet there it is year after year: a show spectacle a la Broadway of staged events that are meant to be perceived as smoothly spontaneous. Why can’t the state of the union be an intelligent and sober recounting by the chief executive of the state of the nation with his/her prescriptions for the year? Part of the problem is that the US has no royalty to perform ceremonial functions of state, so the President has to take part in meaningless rituals such as staging White House Easter egg hunts and pardoning of turkeys at Thanksgiving. There needs to be a separation of the theater of the White House from the hard business of day-to-day governing and policy-making. The State of the Union has become another proverbial tree-lighting ceremony without real substance.

The Republican “response” was hardly any better. In fact, it’s hardly a response at all, it’s a pre-scripted (i.e. written before the President’s address) speech that offered no riposte to POTUS, but instead offered the opposition party’s policy papers. Why can’t we have a serious debate? Why does it have to be so puerile with petty bickering? Why can’t some of these politicians act and speak like adults? The US Republic is “led” by substandard actors reading from scripts that pander to a public that is apathetic, ignorant and too often beholden to imagined spectacles on their view-screens.

When will there be an adult in the house?

Originally posted: http://www.mccarthyism.com/2015/20150122.htm