This piece argues that patriotic concern, not disloyalty, drove critics who hoped early progressive policies would fail, and it pushes back against media and celebrity voices that say Americans should be embarrassed by their country.
Shortly after Barack Obama won the presidency, Rush Limbaugh sparked outrage when he said he hoped Obama failed. Critics shouted, “How could you root against America?!” but the context mattered: Limbaugh framed his stance as a refusal to let policies he viewed as destructive take hold. That distinction still matters when you look at how policy choices shape political parties over time.
Many on the right see a clear line from Obama’s administration to the more aggressive strains inside today’s Democratic Party, and they view that trend as a real threat to institutions and freedoms Americans have long valued. Saying you want a policy to fail because it seems harmful is different from rooting for the nation to collapse. That nuance got lost in the headlines, and the loss of nuance has consequences for public debate.
I have said before, and say again now, “I was never ashamed to be an American, and I was never not proud of this country.” Pride in the country does not require agreement on every policy or every leader, and honest criticism can coexist with deep affection for our institutions and history. That balance is the backbone of a healthy civic life.
Right now, many on the Left react to a Republican in the White House with anger that goes beyond policy disagreements, especially since that Republican is Donald Trump. When dislike of a leader morphs into disdain for the country itself, the attitude becomes corrosive to the civic trust we need. Worse, critics often go after ordinary people who celebrate American life, turning social media into a hunting ground for outrage against anyone who shows national pride.
The online harassment that pushed Freddy, the German World Cup tourist, to delete his X account is one recent example of that behavior. Instead of debating ideas, online mobs looked through his posts for anything they could label offensive and then weaponized it. When expressing appreciation for American culture gets punished by mobs, it chills ordinary people who might otherwise speak up for their country.
There is a strand of left-wing thought that seems to want the current system dismantled, then rebuilt along socialist lines, and many conservatives see that as an attack on the experiment that produced relative prosperity and freedom. Those concerns are not just partisan talking points; they reflect different visions of governance and liberty. The dispute is lawful and political, but the tone and tactics sometimes cross into contempt for America itself.
Recently, Joy Behar told viewers she felt Americans should share her embarrassment about the state of the country, echoing comedian Larry David’s remark that he was “embarrassed to be an American” after a White House event.
Joy Behar said Friday that Americans should share her embarrassment about the state of the country, agreeing with comedian Larry David that the White House’s recent UFC event was a national humiliation.
During the Friday episode of ABC’s “The View,” Ms. Behar played a clip of Mr. David calling the June 14 UFC Freedom 250 event on the White House South Lawn a “travesty” and saying he was “embarrassed to be an American.” According to Variety, Mr. David made the remarks at the Hollywood premiere of his new HBO show, “Life, Larry and the Pursuit of Unhappiness: An Almost History of America.”
“I have — I’m very good friends with Larry David, and so I’m not going to — I think he’s right in many ways,” Ms. Behar said. “I mean, you listen to Trump. We have — we used to have friends around the world. Now we don’t have them anymore.”
https://x.com/WashTimes/status/2070983353554141612
The claim that a sporting event equals national humiliation ignores other instances of real diplomatic or cultural decline, and it treats spectacle as equivalent to statecraft. At the same time, many left-leaning commentators applied double standards: they excused or ignored conduct from their allies while seizing on any perceived misstep by those they oppose. That kind of selective moralizing is what drives people away from mainstream discourse and into defensive patriotism.
Why should Americans care what distant critics think when those critics often tolerate far worse practices at home and abroad? Plenty of foreign governments enact harsh speech laws, tolerate brutal ideologies, and struggle with basic governance issues, yet their critics here look down their noses at America. The world still depends on American strength and aid, and that dependence should remind us of the concrete value of our system rather than prompt national self-loathing.
Patriotism does not mean turning a blind eye to faults, but it does mean defending the country from those who want to tear it down. People who question policies or challenge cultural trends are not traitors; they are participants in a civic conversation about the future. Keeping that conversation honest and robust, without bowing to performative shame, is the best way to safeguard what made this country worth defending in the first place.
