Try to answer the two questions that follow, then read Kevin
D. Williamson's article of February 20, 2015 in National Review Online. It came
under the title: “Rudy is Right” and the subtitle: “Barack Obama doesn't even
like America .”
And here are the two questions: Can a father continue to love a son that shamed
him by raping the little girl next door? Can a daughter love a mother that
continually embarrasses her in public where she is never seen in a state of
sobriety?
The point is that love manifests itself in many ways; one of
which being “tough love,” which means disapproving of someone's conduct so
vehemently as to hurt them now in the hope of saving them from something worse.
With this in mind, you deduce that Williamson's article is not worth
considering as a legitimate contribution to the conversation on the subject.
And this may answer his own question: “Those are questions that we are not
allowed to ask in polite society. Why?” He answered it: “Because polite society
does not want to hear the answers.” But the fact is that a good debate on the
subject would interest everyone regardless as to the conclusions that may be
reached by the various debaters.
So then, we repeat the question that Williamson kept asking
on behalf of Rudy Giuliani: “Does Barack Obama love America ?” To respond, we recall
that if you ask any politician why they run for office, the answer invariably
comes back to the effect that they love the country so much, it hurts them to
see it kept below potential by the management style of those they seek to
replace in office. This is what candidate Barack Obama was saying … and a
change in the style of management is what President Obama is now delivering.
As to Michelle Obama, she sounds like the daughter who never
gave up loving her mother even when she thought the mother was ashamed of her.
Michelle appeared to return the feeling till such time that the mother clearly
expressed her pride in the daughter and her husband. Only then did Michelle utter
the words: “I have always been proud of you too, mother America … and I
never stopped loving you.”
The question to ask should not pertain to someone's love but
to their loyalties. This is because love can neither be measured nor compared
to something, whereas loyalty to someone or to something can be assessed and
compared to the loyalty that one has to another someone or something. In this
regard, it is better not to question Rudy Giuliani's own love for America , but to question the degree of his
loyalty to America as
opposed to say, his loyalty to Israel
and to other Jewish causes.
What begins you on this track is the fact that Giuliani
married three times. Right there, an endless stream of questions can be asked
as to when he stopped loving one woman in favor of the next. And by what
percentage his love for one woman was reduced before realizing that he loved
another by a higher percentage. This being a futile exercise, it is better to
leave it aside, and to stick with the question of loyalties.
And given the fact that the last of Giuliani's wives is
Jewish; an ideology where no love is allowed to exist unless it is transformed
into loyalty to Israel and to all Jewish causes, the question becomes this:
Does Rudy Giuliani realize that he is motivated not by love but by a Svengali
kind of brainwashing which makes him sabotage America's interests in favor of
promoting Israel's interests – and the other Jewish causes?
This is pertinent in view of the fact that – like Rudy
Giuliani – the people who question Obama's love for America are the ones who
clearly, unequivocally and shamelessly display their “love” for Netanyahu … an
almost exact replication of the intense love that the Jews used to display
towards Joseph Stalin; the butcher of the old Soviet Union to whom they
referred as their dear uncle.
When we see the intensity with which subject matters are
being debated nowadays, we cannot fail to conclude that we are approaching the
apogee of something without knowing what it is. The only thing we can be certain
of is that a general kind of dissatisfaction is setting-in among the masses
which are clamoring for the perfection of the authentic, wishing to see it
triumph over the shoddiness of the fake imitations.