[Ohioan]

What I think about the article is that the writer is allowing the grasping politicians, inside the Beltway, who have let themselves be intimidated by every grasping special interest group outside the Beltway, define "Patriotism."

The problem of definition is partly in in his own head. Patriotism means what it always meant. Usurpation also means what it has always meant. Washington has become a town full of usurpers. They are not patriots. They are not problem solvers. To paraprase Reagan, Government is not the solution, it is usually the problem.

The writer sees that problem correctly. His mistake is to allow the enemy to define his or anybody else's terms.

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site

[scouse]

Forgive me, but could please explain what you meant by;

"The problem of definition is partly in in his own head".

Thanking you in advance.

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

The problem of definition is partly in in his own head. Patriotism means what it always meant.

I haven't seen any redefinition of patriotism, myself. I hear plenty of complaints about it, however. Democrats try to make it sound like a dirty word. Clinton's UN Ambassore once said, Nationalism is a code word for racism. [His confirmation hearing.] The Republican Senate approved his appointment overwhelmingly, not because they liked what he said, but they had no clear, specific reason not to appoint him. To me, that was specific enough. To me, nationalism is no different than patriotism. I might be wrong about that.

Regardless, patriotism means love of country and it's people. It always had, and God willing, it always will. Being a patriot does not necessarilly mean you love freedom. Nor does it mean you want a nanny state. Nor does it mean you want an Orwellian state. Those are separate issues, IMHO. No idiology other than patriotism [love of country and its people] has a monopoly on the flag. The rats get very confused about that. And that is a powerful advantage of the GOP.

Freegards....