In 1806, Noah Webster published A Compendious Dictionary of the English Language. What made it so revolutionary was its new style of spelling, breaking away with English tradition (with clear French influences). As Paul Harvey tells it, this was the finishing touch to the American Revolution. Along with its subsequent editions, it established a foundation for words in the American variance of the English language. Not sure what a word means? Just look it up in Webster’s.

Life is no longer so simple or straightforward. Political Correctness, fringe movements that demand ubiquitous recognition, lawyers, educrats and historical revisionists have obfuscated language to the point where people actually say things like “It depends on what your definition of ‘is’ is.” With a straight face, no less. Orwell’s Newspeak has nothing on us hyphenated-Americans.

Patriot

Take the word “patriot” for instance:

A person who loves his country, and zealously supports and defends it and its interests.

Wow, that’s simple, straight-forward. Of course, today it’s been watered-down or rewritten to mean “a citizen”, someone who picks up litter, a community organizer, “citizen of the world”; or (negatively) a nationalist, or simply “idiot”.

Senator Joe Biden defines “patriotic” as paying more taxes.

Dissent

“Dissent is the highest form of patriotism” – Thomas Jefferson Idiot Unknown

Thomas Jefferson is oft misattributed this quote, but there is no evidence to support he actually said it. It is doubtful, not only because it is inconsistent with what he is known to have said, but mostly because it is a nonsensical statement and Jefferson is not known for nonsense.

Do these “patriots” dissent on increasing minimum-wage? Global warming? Universal healthcare? Higher taxes? Daring to ask about higher taxes? Do they dissent with the politicians for whom they voted? Are they so patriotic as to vote for politicians with whom they dissent? Of course not; that would be silly. No, such “patriotic” dissent only applies to anti-war protesting and personal hatred of George W. Bush.

It seems the left has difficulty with patriotism, as Webster defines it. Some talk about loving their country, but need these new pseudo-definitions to give them enough wiggle room to pretend something irrelevant they were already doing makes them patriotic.

Barack Obama

Patriotism, being a form of love, cannot be measured or quantified. Therefore, if someone claims to love America patriotically, we must take their word. After all, only God can look at the heart. All we can do is look at the outward appearance.

For instance, Senator Obama is the Democrat’s presidential nominee. They have decided he is their best and brightest example of everything they believe, stand for and practice. Surely, he is the most patriotic of them all, and his patriotism is representative of theirs.

Barack loves his wife Michelle. Yet would he have sat in the pews so unmoved for decades in a church where the pastor constantly points out her flaws, personally? Would he fail to notice him saying “God d--- Michelle!”? Let’s pretend he was away that week; do you think he might have heard about it? If she told him out about it years later, would he criticize her for “looping” that one quote, and lecture her on where he’s coming from because of his race, and that he could no more disown him than he could disown his grandfather?

What if William Ayers had bombed someone in Michelle’s family? Would he introduce him to their daughters as “a man in the neighborhood”? An “education reformer”? A “courageous individual who rescues hope from despair”? Would his little girls feel safe? Could they trust Daddy to protect them?

Did Barack woo Michelle by wining and dining her at her expense, while telling her he would take her money along with all her family had saved up and “spread the wealth” because she’s not redistributing fairly? And if she had the audacity to ask a question, would his sidekick laugh at her for having the American dream, while government cronies investigate her to shame her for not being properly licensed? Would he make himself look cool to his misogynous peers in San Francisco by talking about her ignorance in clinging to her religion? Would he attend lavish parties at the estates of her fair-weather friends and publically humiliate her, boasting “I’m going to make you a great lady. Why don’t you speak a second language? Why can’t you be more like socialist Europa or communist Chyna? They’re sexy; they’re cool.” Would he remove his ring at these girls’ homes?

Had Barack wooed Michelle in that manner, Oprah would be insisting she have her head examined. Had Michelle Obama suffered such verbal abuse from the pulpit, at her husband’s insistence and complicity, she would not have called it “love”; she would have called a lawyer (and not some constitutional lawyer inventing new imaginary “rights” out of thin air – that somehow magically undermine her rights). No, Barack is protective of his wife Michelle, shielding her from anyone who dares to ask an impertinent question. Suddenly, dissent is far from “patriotic”; it is a racist personal attack.

Had Obama put his children in harm’s way like that, would the nation be fawning over him or would everyone be screaming for child protective services to tear them away from him and lock him up forever? Fortunately, Obama is a fellow traveler, so his daughters were never in any danger in Ayers’ living room; the terrorist Obama thought was “reformed” is only dangerous to other patriotic Americans and their children.

It appears Obama does indeed care for, protect and even zealously defend those he loves. Sadly, it also appears America is not one of those.

It feels like we are watching a Jerry Springer episode entitled “America: low self-worth, no self-respect; needs a manipulative lover” or “Politicians who hate America and the voters who love them”.

The Cinderella Story

The list goes on and on, but let me wrap it up so simply even kids watching Disney could get it (alas, intellectual pinheads probably won’t):

Suppose Cinderella could vote on her new stepmother. She may not know whether the stepmother is wicked or not, but the ugly stepsisters are not nice, and treat her cruelly. “Dad, can we talk? How about you just get a good life insurance policy instead?”

(Note to all idiots, useful or otherwise: unlike those who trashed Palin’s daughter, I am in no way slamming Obama’s daughters any more than I am implying he will marry George W. Bush. The ugly stepdaughters are Ayers, Wright, Alinsky, Marx, Stalin, Castro, Chavez, ACORN, and more – get a clue!)

The Enemy of My Enemy

“The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” – Unknown

This ancient military axiom was the reason we allied ourselves with the Soviet Union to defeat Nazi Germany – even as we geared up for a cold war that would last longer and cost more. But to defeat the immediate threat, we had to set that aside until victory was achieved.

But if the enemy of my enemy is my friend, what does that say about the friend of my enemy? Why are so many Americans eager to defend those who mean us harm, those who speak ill of us, or simply look down their noses at us? Why is it more palatable to condemn Joe the Plumber than Hugo Chavez? Why are there fewer preconditions to meet with Ahmadinejad than Fox News? Why are we expected to “understand” radical Muslim/communist/European hatred for America, but not Americans’ love for America? Why must we empathize with Wright’s condemnation of America rather than acknowledge how America continues to be the country everyone else yearns to come to?

Many on the left constantly find themselves distancing – ever so slightly, rhetorically – from those who overtly hate America and mean it harm. But they never come out and condemn America’s enemies with the same passion, zeal and vitriol they express when condemning their fellow Americans who “dissent” with their views.

Who do they consider enemies? And who do they treat as friends?

The Last Refuge

“Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.” – Samuel Johnson

Again, this quote is clever, but oversimplified. Brevity is the soul of wit (Shakespeare) but the people who buy into the “dissent” mentality are also vulnerable to reading it as “patriotism = scoundrel”. Of course the flag has been abused to cover up legitimate grievances. As a result, politicians are reluctant to criticize another’s patriotism (but many are quick to be “offended” at having their patriotism questioned – whether or not it is actually addressed).

Even commentators such as Rush Limbaugh, who are not personally running for office, often temper discussions with qualifiers such as, “I’m not questioning your patriotism; I’m questioning your judgment.” These qualifiers attempt to discuss really bad ideas that have extremely unpatriotic consequences but which need to be discussed as bad ideas rather than defending overzealous protestation against questions of one’s patriotism which were not actually asked but come through in the bad ideas proposed against one’s country.

I, however, am not focusing on the bad ideas in this essay. There’s plenty of discussion on that already, despite widespread apathy among those who should be examining platforms and history.

I am focusing specifically on patriotism. On love of one’s country – America, for those “citizens of the world” who resent borders, national identity, and, well, America.

And while I cannot presume to know what’s in someone’s heart, I can make an intelligent appraisal of one’s actions. Webster’s definition of patriotism includes not only loving one’s country, an abstract concept, but it also includes zealously supporting and defending it and its interests. Too often, we see more zealous support and defense of America’s enemies.

It is clear that Obama, and many like him, tolerate treatment of America that they would never tolerate towards their loved ones. And that kind of tolerance is, by definition, unpatriotic.

John McCain

This is not a resounding endorsement of Senator McCain. He has shown some serious flaws in his judgment. Not the least of which is his foolish approach of “reaching across the aisle” to work with opponents such as Senator Obama, whose unpatriotic tolerance of America’s enemies is intolerable. The friend of the friend of my enemy… gets to be a bit tangled.

McCain is quick to distance himself from anyone who says anything that might remotely be construed as offensive (for example, “Barack Hussein Obama”). But surprisingly, even though he knows lots of people (one of Obama’s explanations/excuses) I’ve never seen him linked to anyone who’s bombed the Pentagon, stomped on the flag, or preached “God d--- America!”

For all his faults, and lo they are many, John McCain loves his country. And he zealously supports and defends it and its interests.

John McCain is, by definition, a patriot.