Noonan's column was perhaps a little hackneyed, but her thesis was dead spot on. Fair or not, Obama has been pegged as yet another "snooty left winger" in the mold of Kerry, Dukakis and McGovern.

Obama's love of country is in question, because, well, a lot of Americans are questioning it. The learned on the left cannot deconstruct, fisk and snark away this problem.

One problem is how we define patriotism. Many progressives love an idealized version of America, one where "We are a tolerant people who tend to judge all, including presidential candidates, as individuals." (Until affirmative action, or equal pay, or some other group-rights program is desired anyway). Progressives love America as it ought to be, as they want it to be, and not necessarily as it is. This is for them a perfectly reasonable view.

Many of us, however harbor irrational, emotional, unconditional love for America- and this quality is not obvious in Obama in particular. Now, uncoditional love for America is not the same as unlimited tolerance for its sins. Any parent should understand this. No matter how your child might misbehave, no matter how much correction is required, you will sacrifice anything and everything for your children.

Americans need to feel that their president has this kind of unconditional love for America. All the presidents in my memory (which reliably goes back to about Regan) exhibited this, even if their decisions and actions often did not satisfy many of us.

Will Obama stand, right or wrong, and defend America, warts and all, like Horatius at the bridge, against all enemies? Does he love America as it is and not as he would like it to be?

John McCain is a flawed candidate- but nobody can doubt that he would give everything he has to keep America safe. More than perhaps any living American, he has demonstrated that quality.

As for Hillary, well, the Hillary of 15 years ago was where Obama is today on this issue; uncomfortable with all things military, and harboring an academic-at-best idealized, conditional love of America. I think she has matured- I hope now she too is capable of being, as John Birmingham (and Glenn Reynolds) frequently fantasize "The most uncompromising wartime president in US history." I still don't much like her style, but she has persuaded me that she is at least capable of being an implacable enemy to those who would destroy us- a quality I require in a commander-in-chief.

Obama. Obama has a problem here. He has not yet met this standard for many if not most Americans. Even if the left thinks he has, he has not! Stop explaining the problem away and recognize that something must be done before you lose yet another presidency.

What can Obama do? I don't know for sure. Dukakis rode a tank and look what it got him. But I think Obama is smarter and better pol. I look forward to his answer. Because he can gas on about healthcare and hope all day, but if he can't convince us he'll be up on the wall with that shotgun when everyone else runs, then none of it matters.

I feel that Obama is patriotic enough. And by that I don't mean some disspassionate love like the love of brie and fine wine.

I feel that his speech on race, a topic that affects almost every American somehow, somewhere, showed that love.

For a man, half white and half black to say he thinks most people in America of both colors are "people of good will" even when they are acting out of fear or resentment, or stuck in old patterns of behavior, shows that acceptance and love of America, warts and all to me.

His insistence on saying things Americans don't want to hear, because it is what is good for this country, shows me that he loves this country, and that he is not blind to its flaws.

The fact that he has spent his entire life studying the constitution of this nation, and working with its citizens to affect change for the better,through working in poor neighborhoods, working in his state senate, and now working in the U.S. Senate. That tells me that he sees the crooked teeth of our nation and still appreciates its smile.

No one would put himself or herself through the exposure and exhaustion of a presidential campaign without a love of this country. That should say it all and dispel any doubts.

And I think "unconditional love" is not love at all. All true love is conditional. Saying "I'll stay with you no matter how you abuse me, ignore me, and do everything you can to undermine me" is not love; it's irrational and self-destructive dependence.

John McCain is a flawed candidate- but nobody can doubt that he would give everything he has to keep America safe.

I agree that he would do what he thought was necessary to keep America safe, but I don't trust his judgment on this issue. Keeping America safe is not about love; it's about having the ability to make good decisions. And frankly I don't think "love" for the nation has much to do with the ability to decide what policies will be best in the long run.

Moreover, who said keeping America safe was the highest priority? Love of country doesn't mean absolute safety. To achieve absolute safety, we'd have to live in a police state. Is that what this nation stands for?

Presidents don't take an oath to keep citizens safe; they swear to up hold the Constitution and the laws of the nation. Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Madison, and the rest could have lived very safely under British rule. Instead, they risked their necks--quite literally--by starting a revolution in the name of principles that they thought were far more important than their personal safety. The tragedy of the past seven years is that too many people have forgotten that essential founding lesson.

The nation is no stronger than its people. It's not the president's job to be up on the wall with the shotgun; it's our job.

"Will Obama stand, right or wrong, and defend America, warts and all, like Horatius at the bridge, against all enemies? Does he love America as it is and not as he would like it to be?"

This is an absurd statement. This is also exactly what the article mentions with the lack of difference between challenging one's patriotism or challenging the extent of one's patriotism. How can anyone prove a sentiment.

Moreover, isn't the love for the possibility of America a greater love. The love of "progressives" or "lefties" is more like the love a parent has for a child who makes mistakes. They may be disappointed in the present and critical of the actions the child took, but still love the child completely and help guide the child to better actions in the future!

@ moodyguppy:

"One problem is how we define patriotism."

A bigger problem is how we define America. Is it a political abstraction? A territory? A people? A set of ideals? A set of institutions? A set of shared values? Some of these? All of these? If it's all of these then the definition of America is pretty fuzzy.

What does it mean to say "I love America"? Is it different from "I love my children"? Is it different from when a German says "I love Germany"? What about a German saying that in 1942?

I ask these questions not just to be provocative. Part of the culture war tearing America apart involves the notion that conservative patriotism is different from and superior to liberal patriotism. Steven Colbert makes this point when he mockingly says that his patriotism comes from his gut and not his head. Is that a good thing?

Can our culture war be resolved? Can we come to a common understanding of what America is and what patriotism should be? It this even relevant to the current political campaign? Is Barack Obama touching on this when he speaks of divisions within America? Just asking.

Obama 08!

...but seem to be taking the wrong side of it. It's quite true that the far-Right, more-patriotic-than-thou, flag-waving nitwits out there have managed to use the media and the blogosphere to portray the Left, Liberals and Progressives as 'unpatriotic,' 'weak on defense,' and 'un-American.'

I simply don't see how an intelligent person can see that someone 'loves America as he wishes it to be' but then pretend that that's not the same as 'loving America.' Or that it's 'hating America' when that America isn't all you want it to be. That just doesn't make sense. There's simply no reason to think that anyone on the Left, any Democrat, or Obama specifically doesn't 'love America.' No reason at all.

What we're really talking about here is a Left that's too tolerant, progressive, and understanding of the Right, who think that you can discuss everything reasonably, who think that the Right is made up of fundamentally honorable, decent, freedom-loving people. That's simply not the case anymore, if it ever was. The Right is made up of angry, hate-filled wretches who want an America astride the world, dominating its enemies, hectoring its friends, and in complete control of dissent, disagreement, and degeneracy here at home. They're not only religious types, they're old-Testament religious types, IOW.

We need to stop having wars and electing 'wartime Presidents.' We need to reduce the size of the military. We need to start minding our own business. Yes, that's America as it 'ought to be,' but how much do you REALLY love this nation if you're not only unwilling to do anything about its flaws (flaws which YOU'VE helped bring about) but unwilling even to SEE them?

The old saw that's so frequently quoted by the Right goes 'My country, right or wrong.' But the ORIGINAL quote was this:

'My country, right or wrong. If right, to be kept right; if wrong, to be set right. But my country, right or wrong.'

We should remember that quote in its entirety, IMO...and stop demeaning the patriotism of those who want to 'set it right.'

No, the patriotism "issue" is not an issue at all; it's a carnival sideshow cooked up the Right because the Right simply can't win on the issues. So instead the Right invents some idiotic bullshit like "how patriotic ARE you?" and gets the goose-stepping halfwits who listen to Rish Limbaugh and voted for Bush TWICE to take up the chorus and boom, suddenly nobody's talking about the moral and intellectual bankruptcy of the Republican Party or the conservatives, and instead the punditocracy is demanding to know if Barak Obama loves America enough. It's revolting. It's digusting. And it is so fundamentally stupid as to make me question my continued participation in the process...

Which is what it's designed to do. To cause thinking individuals to simply vacate the field, and leave the process in the hands of morons like moodyguppy.

"No, the patriotism "issue" is not an issue at all; it's a carnival sideshow cooked up the Right because the Right simply can't win on the issues. So instead the Right invents some idiotic bullshit like "how patriotic ARE you?" and gets the goose-stepping halfwits who listen to Rish Limbaugh and voted for Bush TWICE to take up the chorus and boom, suddenly nobody's talking about the moral and intellectual bankruptcy of the Republican Party or the conservatives, and instead the punditocracy is demanding to know if Barak Obama loves America enough. It's revolting. It's digusting. And it is so fundamentally stupid as to make me question my continued participation in the process..."

Well said. To quote Samuel Johnson, patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. The politicians who hide behind flag pins and the Pledge of Allegiance do so because they have no interest in actually serving their country, which is a difficult and often thankless task; they would far prefer to serve the symbols of their country, which is easy and rewarding.

Wow- what a lot of great responses. Very thoughtful and well-read. Thank you! However, maybe I have not made my point clearly enough because you all appear to misunderstand it.

Obama has met your patriotism / love-of-country standard, and you are satisfied with his rhetoric and actions on this point. Fair enough.

But Obama already has YOUR votes. He does not have mine, not yet, me and millions of others who have concerns along the lines articulated by Noonan. Obama doesn't have a love-of-country problem with you, he has one with ME.

As an independent who contributes cash to both Democrat and Republican candidates, Obama has not convinced me that he has the same irrational, unconditional love for all most things "American." It worries me.

Does he have our backs? If he does, then and only then will we embrace the change he preaches.

Yet your responses seem to come down to, "Obama is fine with me. You are wrong to feel the way you feel. You don't get it and you need to change to feel how I want you to feel."

I am not persuaded.

This is the problem Obama has. It is real. Whether you call it patriotism, jingoism, or unconditional love, then the standard that must be met in order to win a general election isn't yours. It's mine. He's not there, not yet.

And if he doesn't get there, then progressives had better prepare for another 4-8 years of bitter armchair presidenting...

Guppy - Great posts.

I believe that politicians as skillful as Sen. Obama do very few things by accident. I believe he has deliberately failed to meet your test for love of country. Maybe he reckons he needs to keep his emotional distance from "angry, hate-filled wretches ", "old-Testament religious types", and "goose-stepping halfwits who listen to Rish [sic]Limbaugh and voted for Bush TWICE".

But, by doing so, he is likely to fail to connect with a whole lot of folks in the center, and might very well hand the Oval Office keys to Sen. McCain.

...but I can only go with my own understanding of Obama and his patriotism. The Great Unwashed have to make their own individual decisions about the matter.

What concerns me is that with every false accusation against Obama, with every attempt to further (and falsely) question his patriotism, you and those writing these articles (including the unfortunately persuasive Noonan) are adding fuel to that fire....you're helping to create the very situation you're defining for us.

What is it when partisan politics hide behind 'honest questions about the candidate?' I'd call it 'partisan propaganda.' In effect, if not by intent.

FWIW

When MLK, Jr said that he believed that America would one day live up to the ideals espoused in her founding document that all men are created equal, he was critisizing the policies of his country. When "Reverand" Wright said God damn america for her sins against black people, he was being unpatriotic.

"Many of us, however harbor irrational, emotional, unconditional love for America" " Will Obama stand, right or wrong, and defend America, warts and all, like Horatius at the bridge, against all enemies? Does he love America as it is and not as he would like it to be?"

I never thought I'd hear a definition of patriotism that would rule me out as an American patriot. I think patriotism requires that we want to right national wrongs and break free of what is bad "as it is" to make way for something better for our children. If I'm not mistaken, wasn't that thesis of Thomas Paine's Common Sense?

I think the last thing we want is a leader who'll stand on a bridge defending a wrong, like Horatius or Orval Faubus or Robert Taney or the state police on the Edmud Petis Bridge. Wrong is wrong: patriotism doesn't require you accept it.

I think any American who accepts irrationality (let alone brags about it) as an inherent component of patriotism is a confused puppy.

I think any American who just wants a leader to stand "right or wrong" has forgotten that the very purpose of America was to provide the best possible environment for rational self government.

If our standard for voting for candidates is that they "love America as it is and not as he would like it to be," then we've taken a final leap into self-absorbed complacent insanity.

Muddyguppy's post may have some validity as an observation about some American's attitudes, but I suggest that Americans who embrace the policies promulgated by our temporary leaders with the fervor of religious self-certainty are a dangerous subculture within the nation.

We are supposed to be an educated populace that select leaders for rational reasons, not as demigods to embody our fervor.

Oh for goodness sake: Do you think King didn't think the racists who stood between some Americans and equal freedom wouldn't be damned by God?

Wright may have been preempting God's prerogatives, but he wasn't being any more unpatriotic than all the "true conservatives" who god damned the draft dodgers in Canada during Vietnam.

Judge not lest you be judged,

So do you recommend he pander to ignorance to "connect" with those voters?