Confusing Patriotism With Partisanship
by Brian Maloney, January 4th, 2009 at 12:13pm
For several years, dinosaur media-types have lectured bloggers on the need for a vetting process that true newsroom editing supposedly entails.
Yet today’s Boston Globe features a piece so poorly considered that it never should have been published without answering questions about its purpose and seriously deficient reasoning.
Reading like silly, campaign-generated puffery, Sasha Issenberg’s lengthy piece on newfound Californian “patriotism” in the wake of Obama’s victory missed a key question: how can a true patriot love America only when his or her own party wins the election?
Doesn’t a real American believe in our country regardless of the election’s outcome? Issenberg doesn’t seem to realize that her Berkeley interview subjects have confused partisanship with patriotism:
“People finally felt like our generation had reclaimed patriotism,” said Haley Fagan, 24, a Berkeley paralegal who got stuck in a car trying to cross the street as the crowd surged. “It was a moment that we felt comfortable with it.”
After generations of finding their voice in dissidence, some on America’s left wing are adjusting not only to a new, postelection comfort with patriotic symbols, but the political reality they represent. Believing in Obama after inauguration day will mean identifying with the machinery of American power.
“There’s a left-wing tradition of being systematically opposed to the US government, knee-jerk reactionary - most of our presidents have made it fairly easy to do,” said Jo Freeman, author of “At Berkeley in the Sixties,” a memoir of her student activism. “Those who view everything the US does as automatically suspect already have a problem doing that with Obama.”
At Berkeley, the university has, quite deliberately, chosen to host its first-ever large-scale observance of a presidential inauguration in a spot most closely identified with its radicalism, said Chancellor Robert J. Birgeneau. At Sproul Plaza, site of the self-described Free Speech Movement protests beginning in 1964 - now commemorated with a monument declaring “this soil and the air space above it should not be part of any nation and shall not be subject to any entity’s jurisdiction” - students will gather around giant television screens to take in the nation’s most solemn ritual.
“It will be a patriotic celebration,” Birgeneau said in an interview. “That small circle will now be surrounded by a lot of students who are happy to be members of a nation that just elected its first African-American president.”
Not since Franklin Roosevelt turned the federal government into an aggressive agent of liberalism - pushing the New Deal at home and confronting fascism abroad - has the left felt such a deep attachment and invested such hopes in a head of state.
Here, the story truly jumps the shark:
As opposed to the largely upper-middle-class white students who propelled the 1960s counterculture, leftist students today are more likely to come from working-class and immigrant backgrounds and see college as a route into the middle class, according to Birgeneau.
Got any facts to back up that assertion? The UC system’s student body is notoriously white (or Asian at Berkeley) and upper middle class.
Amazingly, throughout this ill-considered piece, it doesn’t seem to occur to anyone that a true belief in America transcends partisan politics.
In sports, these are the fair-weather fans who suddenly “believe” in the team they abandoned years ago because it has made the playoffs. They pack the stands and hope you won’t notice their past disloyalty.
Why didn’t any of the failing Globe’s remaining editors ask tough questions about the purpose of this silly puff piece before it ran? And does the cash-starved paper really still have the budget to send reporters 3000 miles away to cover this kind of “story”?
When this is the best the Globies can do in covering the presidential transition process, it sure isn’t making the case for the paper’s increasingly-questionable future relevance.
Entry Filed under: Uncategorized
34 Comments Add your own
1. ChrisNH | January 4th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
Just wait till the backlash from all the hate directed at Obama. The whining Libs, who had no problem hating Bush, will be offended at the hate directed at ‘their’ guy. I’m quite fine with hating Obama, and will proudly do so. In fact, his first year will be a disaster. People will stick with their money and not spend it, worsening the retail sector. The Obama-cheering media will implore us to ’spend,’ but CLEARLY their only motivation is to make Obama look good (”SEE? He made the economy better again! He made fire!”). I will proudly save my money and see that this doesn’t happen. I want to see Deval Patrick writ large.
2. NHradiofan | January 4th, 2009 at 1:19 pm
I agree, Chris NH. The lefties will have an awful time when the realize their Savior can’t keep his far left campaign promises because to do so would deepen our economic struggles. I look forward to the day when the left turns on Obama and begins complaining that he is a “sell out” and a traitor to their cause.
The positive thing will be that the economy will actually start to recover IF Obama doesn’t keep his promises. The bad thing will be that he gets the credit for the recovery. I’m willing to accept that circumstance if it is for the good of the nation.
3. Antenna10 | January 4th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
Well ya, the left is kind of fickle with their patriotism. But no one is supposed to say that. That’s why the story got the pass at the editor’s desk. It’s not likely to be questioned by the main stream press. How many times have we heard lefties threaten to move to Canada if they don’t get their way? Fierce loyalty huh? We’ll see how long the left’s celebration lasts. ChrisNH and NHradiofan are predicting Obama’s cheerleaders will burn their red, white and blue pom-poms when they don’t get their people’s utopia. Probably right. Once he takes the oath and begins making decisions, Obama will be the culture, not the counterculture. That breakup will be fun to watch.
4. Mr. Pragmatic | January 4th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
Here’s one semi-lefty who has never threatened to move to Canada and believes that patriotism is supporting your country even when your country is not acting in accordance with your own beliefs. If you want extra credit, exercise your right to free speech and try to change things.
I think the point of the article is that this particular constituency feels represented by their President for the first time either in eight years, or ever in the case of the young. We are anxious for a government that places science over religion and which takes a world view on climate change and foreign policy. The U.S. has tacked hard the other way for a long time and we are anxious to see the country employ a new approach.
I support a great many of Obama’s ideas and expect that he will implement them at the point that they become practical because he is a very intelligent man who makes good decisions. I will NOT turn on him when he can’t immediately address my concerns or interests and I doubt that the politically engaged left will either.
The composition of the electorate (in terms of population, education and engagement) has evolved since our parents’ generation and new measures are called for. The founding fathers were wise but not omniscient and the constitution is a living document. I know that sounds scary to some, but maintaining the status quo may be just as scary.
I voted for Obama because I believe he is best suited to lead the country through this new paradigm.
5. Antenna10 | January 4th, 2009 at 4:11 pm
Mr. Pragmatic: Well written response. My comment should have been “some on the left are fickle….”. As I get older my brush (and other things) gets broader. I understand your point about people feeling that their political and social views are not represented, but the first line in the article as Brian reposted it talks about their generation having “reclaimed patriotism”. Is Haley Fagan saying she finally feels patriotic now that her candidate will be president? It reminds me of Michelle Obama’s comment about being proud of her country for the first time. This is what irks some of us. While I am frustrated that incompetant Republican politicians have let me down, I’ll still be happy to be an American over the next four years. At a minimum, some on the left need to choose their words more carefully. Hence the title of Brain’s column.
6. raccoonradio | January 4th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
Wonder if we’ll _still_ see these bumper stickers on cars: He Is Not My President…I Love My Country But I Fear My Government…Impeach For Peace.org. I know I still see Kerry-Edwards
stickers on moonbatmobiles…
Remember the time around 9/11 when anyone who put up a flag or said they liked a patriotic country song was called jingoistic?
…By the way the backlash from the Left against Obama has already started, with a blog at The Phoenix called Take Back Barack. Apparently he’s too righty for them now? The pic they have shows an Obama doll in the clutched fist of a white (woman’s) hand. If conservatives put that out they’d be called racist.
7. NHradiofan | January 4th, 2009 at 6:23 pm
Raccoonradio is on to something. I can’t wait to see the Kerry-Edwards and 1-20-09 stickers finally scraped off of the rusting Subaru Outbacks. I am going to get one of the “I’ll keep my guns and my money…YOU can keep the CHANGE” stickers. It should make the lefties nuts.
Mr. Pragmatic, you have always made noteworthy posts on this site and even though we may come at the issues from different angles, you are always fun to read and debate. SO…I have to point out that the “global view on climate change…” that you are hopeful our new administration will adopt is founded on faulty science and we have seen an ever increasing number of scientists, who previously spouted the global warming mantras, come out against the idea of man made climate change. Many in academia have been bold enough to admit that the global warming “consensus” is driven solely by the need to parrot the prevailing beliefs of the left in order to secure research dollars for their institutions.
Does it not bother you that the Green movement is populated almost entirely by the far left who moved in after the collapse of the Soviet Union? Or that every solution to “climate change” involves putting shackles on Western capitalism? Other than this small point, I think you are an O.K. guy.
8. Bob Porrazzo | January 4th, 2009 at 7:26 pm
As far as I am concerned about BEZEREKLEY, that fascist socialist enclave, if a nuclear missile were to hit it, I wouldn’t mind see that city of traitors go up in smoke. Then again, since this is California, THE BIG ONE will do that just as effectively!
No shock the GLOB would do such a puff pastry piece pile of c-to-the-r-a-p on a suburb of Boston’s sister city San FranSICKO.
9. bob | January 4th, 2009 at 8:33 pm
Ms. Issenberg is clearly a product of left wing indoctrination. She got it from the school, college, or unviversitiy she attended. She parroted all that she “learned” and it has culminated (embarrassingly) in this Globe piece. Michael Savage said it best…”Liberalism is a mental disorder”…but it’s being taught day in and day out in all our schools. If you are a teacher or professor with a conservative curriculum, you don’t get the job!
So, Ms. Issenberg, I’m sure you’re a nice person…but the world is much larger and more complex than your simple-minded, utopian view.
Have some beef and a few beers (put down the brie) and fire up the other half of your brain. Yeah, we all know you hate Bush…blah blah blah….but quit blabbing the mantra of your liberal friends and do some REAL thinking for a change.
10. Celtic Frost | January 4th, 2009 at 8:39 pm
We control the print and the network media and academia. You control talk radio and Fox News. Big deal; it’s all equal…
11. Joe from Brighton | January 4th, 2009 at 10:04 pm
Patriotism and the Left don’t go together.
This is a collection of non-working-class cult members who either live off government welfare of one form or another, or are members of families that haven’t worked jobs in at least a generation as they live off the work of their parents and grandparents by way of trust funds.
Barack *****HUSSEIN***** Obama: #1 With the Non-Working-Class of America!
12. ChrisNH | January 5th, 2009 at 6:41 am
Libs showed that it’s OK to love your country but hate and despise your President. Thanks for permission!
13. bob | January 5th, 2009 at 7:20 am
Celtic Frost…
You need to go to boot camp and become a man.
14. Celtic Frost | January 5th, 2009 at 7:37 am
Bob, I realize that I would last all of 5 seconds in boot camp (okay, maybe 2 seconds). But that does not make me any less a man, does it? No, just a different kind of man.
And patriotism is, famously, the last refuge of a scoundrel (Samuel Johnson). Of course he meant a false patriotism (e.g., flying flags and wearing flag lapel pins and chanting the national anthem while eroding our civil rights and listening in on our telephone conversations and starting wars all around the world based on deceit). It’s left as an exercise for the reader to decide which is more patriotic - this faux patriotism or speaking truth to power, as we on the left have been doing for 8 long years now.
15. BostonVernon | January 5th, 2009 at 8:01 am
patriot–noun
1. a person who loves, supports, and defends his or her country and its interests with devotion.
2. a person who regards himself or herself as a defender, esp. of individual rights, against presumed interference by the federal government.
Where does a Liberal display any reflection of these definitions?
A devotion to Socialism and a desire to break down Capitalism is not Patriotic.
Liberals bring another definition to mind:
traitor-noun
1. a person who betrays another, a cause, or any trust.
2. a person who commits treason by betraying his or her country.
16. BostonVernon | January 5th, 2009 at 8:09 am
But then again if Liberals can mandate a change in definition of a marriage, why not change the definition of Patriot?
Liberal definition of a Patriot - “any person who believes exactly what Liberals do”.
Liberal definition of Ignorant - “anybody we don’t deem Patriotic”.
That which we call a rose. By any other name would smell as sweet.” Shakespeare
Call it what ever you desire…Liberal views will continue to stink:)
17. the real Barbara | January 5th, 2009 at 8:39 am
Speaking of liberals and mental disorders….anyone tune into the felon this morning?
Good God, I heard over the weekend that Todd would be the permanent co-host so I figured this would be a good thing, the program may actually be listenable for more than 30 seconds……I tuned in this morning to hear the felon and Todd and much to my horror those other prop up co-hosts were still on….what is wrong with RKO? They finally get a decent co-host and they continue to bring back the other ones….what’s the point of a permanent co-host to prop up the felon if you’re going to continue letting all the others co-host, Todd may as well not be there, what a horror show, Holly screaming over Warren, Warren whining, Holly screaming and interrupting, this is good radio? Did I mention Holly screaming and interrupting?
Why can’t RKO get it right? I turned it off after about 8 minutes.
18. BostonVernon | January 5th, 2009 at 8:56 am
Barbara, Barbara Barbara
You reap what you sow…”I figured this would be a good thing”.
Were you not aware that the Felon was still going to be part of the show?
I will add you to my nightly prayers…good luck and God bless:)
BTW - horror and RKO is redundant, before noon anyway.
19. the real Barbara | January 5th, 2009 at 9:07 am
BostonVernon, I figured Todd may somehow cancel the felon out, override his idiot statements, his obnoxious noises on air, his boring voice, etc.!
20. Mr. Pragmatic | January 5th, 2009 at 9:14 am
NH, thanks as always for the respectful discourse. One of my favorite things about this country is the way it challenges us to believe in the rights of others to speak their beliefs no matter how much we disagree. I wouldn’t have it any other way, and I only hope that more people take a civic interest and the discourse in the country gets better. I really feel a “dumbing down” on both sides that has hurt our ability to make the best decisions we can for the country.
I am not a scientist and I suppose we could both find support for our POV’s there (though I suspect there is more for my side), but I wouldn’t minimize the green or climate change movement by characterizing it as far left. He may be left of Bush, but I wouldn’t call McCain far left, and he is a believer. I am in the process of reading up on both sides in order to have a more educated opinion, but in the meantime, isn’t it just intuitive that production systems that recycle waste instead of burying it and cars that pollute less (as long as the alternative fuels aren’t causing more problems due to deforestation) are a good idea for the environment? We can debate how dire the problem is, but when the world population goes from 0 to 5 billion in what, 10,000 years and then from 5 billion to 9 billion in 100 (projected growth from 1950-2050) it seems like something’s gotta give.
21. Massgopguy | January 5th, 2009 at 9:48 am
I just tuned in and the Laura Ingraham Show is on early. What gives?
22. Mike | January 5th, 2009 at 10:46 am
These lefties are like the Tampa Bay Devil Rays fans of patriotism. The stadium is empty until the team is in the playoffs. Then they brag about how long they’ve waited for this!!!
Personally, I wish Obama well. I really don’t want to see him fail miserably. I think he will fail miserably, and will gladly display a “Don’t blame me, I voted for McCain” bumper sticker on my SUV if that happens, but I’m not wishing for a failed Presidency for my country.
To actually wish for the President of this country to fail is about as patriotic as those 1-20-09 stickers that racoonradio mentions.
23. Mike | January 5th, 2009 at 10:48 am
Oops. Not racoonradio, but NHRadiofan mentioned the 1-20-09 stickers.
24. NHradiofan | January 5th, 2009 at 11:08 am
Mr. Pragmatic I agree wholeheartedly with the very real need to insure clean air and water for all and that there are definite problems caused by burning fossil fuels. Anyone who has ever flown into Boston, New York City or Los Angeles has seen the thick brown smog encircling the city and is unsettled by it.
My problem comes from the absolute certainty and near religious fervor with which the global warming alarmists approach the problem of pollution. They INSIST that “climate change” is undisputable fact and that the planet is incapable of repair without draconian human intervention. This intervention almost always involves some form of restraint of capitalism but makes allowances for the environmental damage done by “emerging economies”. If “climate change” is truly the going to be the death of us all, how can some pollution be tolerated just because it is generated by nations who haven’t “caught up” with the Western world? This is but one area where the global warming/climate change alarmists lose credibility. Some of their most vocal proponents are anti-capitalist and, more specifically, anti-American interests. When the most polluted places on earth are industrial and mining cities in remote China with virtually no regard for the filth they generate and the lives they poison locally, it is hard to buy the global alarmists argument that these entities should be allowed to continue because they are “emerging”. Bad is bad.
There is a news story out this morning that claims that sea ice is at the same level as it was in 1979. There are more and more reports citing the rise in global temperatures as having stopped in the eary 1990’s and shredding the climate change models used to build the faulty consensus that has many Western governments on the verge of massive spending schemes to combat a problem that more and more appears to not even exist.
In relation to the topic of this thread, that the disgruntled Left is feeling “patriotic” because now they are in control of government and NOW things are going to be the way they are supposed to be in a fair and caring society, the climate change religion can become a cudgel to damage anyone or anything that the new management finds disagreeable. If we are not careful, we will see a damaging wholesale change in the very fabric of our economy due to pressure from “reducing carbon footprints” and “saving the planet”. This kind of blind faith in a worldview based on very suspect “science” should trouble you as much as those who would administer the government based on fundamentalist religious sensibilities.
25. Celtic Frost | January 5th, 2009 at 11:14 am
As I said earlier in my Samuel Johnson post: it is not unpatriotic to resist a president who seeks to limit our liberties, as President Cheney clearly has done. The passionate, internecine battles that our “founding fathers” endured served to strenghten, not weaken, our republic.
With apologies to Emerson, a foolish patriotism is the hobgoblin of little minds.
26. the real Barbara | January 5th, 2009 at 11:57 am
Massgopguy, Todd is now the “permanent” co-host with the felon and the hours of the show have changed from 6-10 to 5:30-9, so as a result, we now have the full three hours of Laura!
27. BostonVernon | January 5th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
A step in the right direction, hopefully soon it will be Todd from 530 to 9 and I won’t have to cringe when I start my car in the morning and find the dial on RKO:)
28. Celtic Frost | January 5th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
Can you believe this drivel? I wonder who paid these guys off — Big Oil? Big Business? Saudi Royal family? Haliburton?
Global climate change is real. The polar bears are endangered. And man is ruining the planet earth!
http://www.dailytech.com/Article.aspx?newsid=13834
29. bob | January 5th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
Celtic….
Go save the polar bears! Please!
30. NHradiofan | January 5th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
Celtic Frost,
Why is it drivel and the result of a payoff only when it runs counter to your beliefs? Aren’t they utilizing the same satellite technology that the global warming alarmists have used to “prove” that climate change is real? Why do the college brainiacs who come to this conclusion have less credibility than those who share your opinions?
“What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander!”
31. philw1776 | January 5th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
Regarding Climate Change, Anthony Watts blog “WattsUpWithThat.com” has been nominated as “Best Science Blog” for 2008 Weblog Awards. It’s a great spot for curious laypeople and the science trained to look at information mostly from the skeptical side of global warming. Lots of discussion on possible cooling effects of the Pacific Ocean and the unsual lack of solar activity (sunspots).
WattsUpWithThat.com
32. BostonVernon | January 5th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
The globe has been warming since the end of the ice age…
The Boston Globe has been cooling for years.
Both are issues that do not interest me. When Braintree has palm trees or the Globe drops the agenda then I’ll worry. Neither coming soon enough.
Polar bears can go the way of the woolly mammoth and then make a big come back in a Disney movie.
33. Jim from Boston | January 6th, 2009 at 9:49 am
On January 5th, 2009 at 8:39 am, the real Barbara wrote:
“Good God, I heard over the weekend that Todd would be the permanent co-host so I figured this would be a good thing, the program may actually be listenable for more than 30 seconds……I tuned in this morning to hear the felon and Todd and much to my horror those other prop up co-hosts were still on….what is wrong with RKO? They finally get a decent co-host and they continue to bring back the other ones….what’s the point of a permanent co-host to prop up the felon if you’re going to continue letting all the others co-host, Todd may as well not be there, what a horror show, Holly screaming over Warren, Warren whining, Holly screaming and interrupting, this is good radio? Did I mention Holly screaming and interrupting?”
LOL at that description because I heard the show too. IMHO though, I think the best co-host for Tom would be Mariellen Burns. BTW real Barbara do you have anything to post on the WBZ affair that has attracted so much recent comment?
34. the real Barbara | January 6th, 2009 at 11:16 am
Jim, I’m not a fan of Mariellen’s either, in fact all the women on RKO have a terrible habit of whining, screaming, interrupting and carrying on like two year olds…..even hedlund whines……wendy is the worst followed by holly and then mariellen, wait, I take that back, marjorie was the worst then the rest…..lol!
As for BZ, I don’t listen so I can’t make any comment about the layoff situation over there. I’ve read the thread and there are a lot of people very upset over the decisions made by BZ, it’s unfortunate that radio stations aren’t the least bit interested in what the listeners want….I know it’s a business like anything else but come on, you’ve got to please the customer in some way otherwise you end up with RKO……
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed