Wow, someone is SO not getting a judgeship.

At least one when a Democrat is in office.

I did not find Obama's statements re: the flag pin
surprising in the least. Mr. Obama, like George W. Bush,
believes that the United States is a multicultural free trade zone, and not a nation with a coherent culture, language and even pride. Obama's statements against English as a national language, his marching in the Chicago illegal alien rally on May 1 2006, his defense of
the U. Mich. racial preferences pre-Grutter and his
votes for amnesty suggests a Carteresque hatred of
America as an ideal.

The American people want a President who loves their country and who expresses that love, at an emotional as well as an intellectual level.

Expanding on my last post, I would add with regard to the above: Says who?

Obama probably didn't want to be associated with pretend patriots -- it's a lot easier to stick a flag pin in your lapel and talk the talk than it is to walk the walk. Now I'm remembering the painless pretend patriotism of many American's during the 60s, when flag decals were stuffed into copies of Reader's Digest. In the words of John Prine:
But your flag decal won't get you
Into Heaven any more.
They're already overcrowded
From your dirty little war.
Now Jesus don't like killin'
No matter what the reason's for,
And your flag decal won't get you
Into Heaven any more.

Obama probably is tired of the pretend patriots who stick the flag pin in their lapel and don't do anything substantive. Reminds me of the painless pretend patriotism of those back in the 60s, who stuck the decal that came in Reader's Digest on their car, but didn't do anything for their country.
But your flag decal won't get you
Into Heaven any more.
They're already overcrowded
From your dirty little war.
Now Jesus don't like killin'
No matter what the reason's for,
And your flag decal won't get you
Into Heaven any more.

I hate symbolic expressions too, Zhenia.
I never wore komsomol or pioneer's pins or ties.
My love to the country does not need symbols corrupted by ideologues...

In other words, if I really cared how much Obama loved his wife, I wouldn't look to see if he had an "I love my wife" T-shirt before I could make a decision.

I think Obama's choice to not wear a flag pin is sound, and pretty much for the reasons he says. I also wouldn't want to wear a flag pin; I don't express love for my country in an emotional way, nor do I think of myself as particularly "patriotic" under most people's definition of the term. If I had briefly worn a flag pin after 9/11, I probably would have stopped by now, because flag pins carry particular political baggage these days.

But I also agree with Eugene that, "for better or worse," this is something that could be made into a campaign liability. Not necessarily, but I could see a clever campaigner figuring out a way to use this to make a narrative of an "unpatriotic Obama" just a bit more compelling. I think Americans prefer their candidates not just to espouse ideals, but to show an emotional love for their country.

Because really, regular use of "I love you" in a marriage is a necessary and sufficient indication of its health, and certainly cannot hide a total collapse of emotional involvement behind a thin veneer of cliché.

Forgot to add.
Probably the most valuable thing a Democratic candidate could do right now is to hack away at the forest of false memes and disinformation that pervade the current landscape. Once people start realizing how many of their basic assumptions are deceptive republican/neoconservative constructs maybe they’ll also realize how bankrupt this ideology has become. Keep it up Obama.

And btw, Evgeniy, InstaPundit is totalitarian communist, or at least he looks like one to me( and I have seen a lot, to understand that there are not much difference between the worshippers of unlimited executive power called commies or neocons)

Interesting that Sasha and Eugene take opposite positions on this. I would certainly hope that in the post-9/11 world, we realize there are greater issues at stake in electing a President than whether they choose to wear a flag pin or not, but you never know. Maybe we do still have the luxury of obsessing over trivia.

There was certainly a dramatic upsurge in displays of patriotism after 9/11, not that I find anything wrong with that at all. Something I found humorous, here in NYC, was that the extent of one's patriotism display tended to increase in direct proportion to one's foreign-ness.

For example, Ray's Pizza might slap a flag decal on the front window. But if you run something like the "Kabul Deli" - and thus have a vested interest in showing everyone that you're with us, not with the terrorists - your place of business was practically WALLPAPERED in American flags. Kind of funny when you stop to notice it.

EV,

i think your post is much exactly what obama was decrying about the use of the flag pin. you say that when he stopped wearing the flag pin he sent a powerful message, of what? that he is not patriotic. so if you wear the pin your a patriot and if you don't wear it, then your not a patriot. it makes no difference what ideas you espouse or what beliefs you have...all the matters is that you have a pin on the lapel. and obama is absolutely right to decry this. especially given some the horribly unamerican things people have said while wearing a flag pin.

Yet if you used to say this and then you stopped, the symbolic message is pretty powerful. And that’s true even though many people say “I love you” without meaning it (just as there are some who wear the flag pin but are just opportunists, not patriots). Even if this abuse of the phrase weakens its symbolism, an outright renunciation of the phrase retains its symbolism just fine.

This is only true if you stop saying it WITHOUT EXPLANATION. If you used to tell your wife "I love you" all the time, and then at some point decided that it was so cliche, so overused, that it had ceased to mean anything to you, then stopped without a word, okay, she might wonder. But what if you said, "honey, I love you very much, but I'm starting to feel like just saying "I love you" every day isn't doing a good job of expressing it. So instead, every day I'm going to tell you a new reason that I love you." And then you go ahead and do that. I think the reaction might be a different to that.

I don't see how what Obama is doing is any different, or how his sentiment is invalid in any way, and I would hope that people would be intelligent enough to understand that anyone can wear a US flag lapel pin. But it takes something more to articulate actual plans for this country, and what you think makes and will make this country great. Perhaps we should remember where meaningless and overused slogans has gotten us. And if we vote for the guy (or girl) with the best meaningless slogan, but who can't articulate a vision or plan, well, then perhaps we deserve whatever we get.

I think one common characteristic that we expect in our presidents is an uncomplicated, sincere, genuine, almost reflexive love of country.

I can't help noticing that both you and Eugene-- and perhaps conservatives generally, with their self-proclaimed monopoly on patriotism-- seem quite comfortable making blanket statements about what "we" want in our national leaders. Personally, I find the notion of feeling the same affection that I have for individual human beings for a political abstraction to be simply ridiculous. I would hope for political leaders who feel a sincere commitment to advancing the common good through the political instutions that they aspire to lead, but I certainly wouldn't call that "love" in any legitimate sense of the word.

Isn't Prof. Volokh the one who usually reminds us to avoid the pitfalls of bad analogies? What the heck happened with this post?

As soon as somebody's affection for their spouse is used to justify some sort of massively aggressive act (e.g. the relationship equivalent of bombing Afghanistan, invading Iraq, authorizing torture and shipping folks off to rot in Guantanamo), I'll take another look at the reasoning in this argument. Maybe it would make sense, for example, if the words "I love you" were followed up by, "and that's why I'm going to take our a second mortgage on our house to buy you $100,000 worth of chocolates, take out an ad on the Goodyear Blimp with your name in blinking lights, stalk you everywhere you go from now on, and have my old ex-girlfriends murdered, all so you know how very very much I love you."

Until such an example exists, I think it's safe to say that expressing one's love and pandering to jingoists doesn't have very much in common.

CrazyTrain.
I have also noted that this is very common with the immigrants from Eastern block, especially the the wave of the late 70th-early 80th. They predominantly have become republicans and espouse the ideas of importing the ideology of liberty and freedom to all other people around the world through military means ( which i attribute to the virus of Bolshevism, still lurking in many even intelligent brains), and more over when they arrived
in the USA in the tender age , thus escaping and not realizing how skillful and pervasive government propaganda can be , and how strikingly similar is that technique employed by bush administration and neoconservatives
to those of their enemies from USSR

We have created a system where Spock cannot get elected. Pity. :-(

I don't see what I'm saying as disagreeing with what Eugene is saying. I don't see, in Eugene post, any disagreement with Obama's substantive reasons for not wearing the flag pin -- he's just saying that "for better or worse," his stopping wearing the pin has a symbolic message that voters won't like. Everyone is interpreting Eugene's post as endorsing pro-flag-pin patriotism; who knows, maybe that's what he thinks, but I didn't read it that way.

I agree with the sentiment behind what Obama is doing (though I can't speak for Eugene), and I also agree with Eugene's assessment that the action carries a symbolic message that could hurt Obama the candidate.

I'm confused. Eugene, are you speaking purely as a campaign advisor who wants to share his wisdom about what might help get Obama elected? Or are you suggesting that people would be justified in having the negative reaction you suggest they might have? I can't tell.

The analogy seems sound to me. Your wife isn't interchangeable with all other women, and she shouldn't be treated as if she is. Your country isn't interchangeable with all other countries, and it shouldn't be regarded as if it is (despite what the multi-culties may believe.)

A patriot supports his country even if it's difficult or dangerous to do so. Those who behave differently aren't patriots, they're opportunists. When things are going well, any fool or charlatan can be a patriot. When things get tough, that's when we find out who means it.

So, why is Obama running for President of the US? Just because he happens to live here? That seems like a feeble excuse nowadays when travel is easy. Or is he running because he thinks the US is something particularly worth being the President of? If so, why? These are fundamental questions which some of our candidates seem to have skipped.

I don't see what I'm saying as disagreeing with what Eugene is saying. I don't see, in Eugene post, any disagreement with Obama's substantive reasons for not wearing the flag pin -- he's just saying that "for better or worse," his stopping wearing the pin has a symbolic message that voters won't like.

I think this is right. My reading of the post leads me to believe: Lapel pin = I love you; wife = voting public.

Even if you show your love in many ways, most wives would not happy with a husband who forewent saying those three little words. I mean... Who hasn't tired this argument: "We shouldn't have to celebrate Valentine's Day. It's a Hallmark Holiday. Besides, I show my love every day. Why validate a corporation's efforts to separate us from our money?" Even when sincerely made, it's a sure loser.

Wives (and husbands, for that matter) want to hear, "I love you." The voting public wants to see people wear American flags.

Much about being a politician involves pandering. Senator Obama should be well aware of this. As someone who is part of the power-elite, it's unlikely that he dines with or socializes with the unwashed masses - except when he needs their votes. You eat hot dogs and fried twinkies with them, and you wear lapel pins and John Deer hats. It's part of the game.

Obama should know better.

Obama probably didn't want to be associated with pretend patriots -- it's a lot easier to stick a flag pin in your lapel and talk the talk than it is to walk the walk.

And it's a lot easier to NOT stick a flag pin in your lapel and talk about how that makes you superior to the pin wearers than it is to walk the walk.

Not wearing, being a trivial action, can easily be as shallow as wearing it.

I think your explanation and analogy are right on the nail. The question is just whether we want a president who treats the good of the country more like the emotional but unexamined love one has for one's wife or the more reasoned but less passionate desire one has for the betterment of mankind.

I know damn well which one I want: the intellectual not the lover. I want my wife (well girlfriend) to love me unconditionally not coldly assess my flaws and virtues. I want my girlfriend to believe in me and trust that I will behave morally and stick by her. It would be a negative in a girlfriend for her to emotionally internalize statistics about divorce rates and the affects of marriage on happiness and view our relationship in a pessimistic manner.

On the other hand I don't have the emotional need for a president who loves me or loves the country. The country and I won't feel lonely or lack personal support if the president doesn't tell us he loves us. I don't want a president who trusts in the good sense and morals of our military servicemen and dismisses the sugestion that they might mistreat prisoners. I want a president who has read about the stanford prison study and institutes realistic countermeasures to prevent that sort of abuse from happening. I don't want my president to 'have faith' in the countries ability to pull together and win a major war. I want a president who goes back to the evidence and sees what is most likely to happen.

In other words while I want a girlfriend who is smart enough to realize it is irrational i want her to indulge in irrational attachment and faith in a relationship just as I do. In a relationship the costs of this are fairly small but the benefits in terms of how we feel about each other are huge. On the other hand the benefits of having a president who passionately believes in the country are miniscule at best while the potential harm from inaccurate judgments about the country or it's citizens is HUGE.

So yah, count me as someone who wants to elect a president not choose the country a spouse. If you really really want this sort of thing we should do what the UK does and separate the political control from the ceremonial position of the head of state. That way the Queen can go wax patriotic and inspire people about the country without risking bad decisions.

The reason Obama doesn't wear the flag pin is simple: It's associated with Bush, and he doesn't like Bush. Liberals think of the flag pin as part of Bush's attempt to sort of snooker the country through misdirection. They think Bush uses his patriotism as a way of getting people to stop paying attention while he ruins the country. I totally DO NOT agree with this, but I can recognize what Obama is doing: Sending a signal to liberals that he too is sick of Bush.

Such a poor, poor analogy by Eugene, here. The use of expressions like "I love you" has the effect of communicating affection to the object of affection, whereas public displays of patriotism have a completely different communicative intention and effect. Nobody with an ounce of perspicacity should buy the idea that by flying the flag or wearing a pin, patriot-boy is simply communicating to his country his unabashed abstract love. Engaging in overt manifestations of patriotism serves many other purposes, purposes that are not at all parallel to the purpose of telling a loved one "I love you."

I agree with the posters who say (more or less) "no lapel pin, no problem" -- but with a caveat..

I've never been one for overt patriotism--I was moved to tears after 9/11, yet when my college roommate got a flag for our door and one for his bookbag I found it...annoying I guess--I didn't personally see the need for that kind of overt EXTERIOR patriotism, feeling more or less like Obama, that the trappings of patriotism often have nothing to do with the ideas of patriotism.

HOWEVER... having said all that, when I first read this article, and before reading Eugene's take on it, my take was very similar to Eugene's--this action is a big turnoff from Obama (who I will admit to not liking). It just absolutely reaks of "well, my opponents are outwardly patriotic, and I don't want to be associated with them, so blah blah blah." Why start wearing the pin and then stop?? And more to the point, why go into such depth to describe being outwardly patriotic as inferior to Obama's patriotism??

It's really just a patriotism pissing match, and a fairly stupid one (and from someone attempting to take the high brow road here..)

I can recognize what Obama is doing: Sending a signal to liberals that he too is sick of Bush.

Agreed. Senator Obama is still campaigning to win the Democratic nomination, not the general election. This was a symbolic sop to the Bush-hating Democratic base and his explanation for the gesture was perfectly consistent with that sentiment: I'm going to try to tell the American people what I believe will make this country great, implying, of course, that America is no longer a great country because of Bush.

pedro,

Ohh, and saying "I love you" is always an unabashed declaration about your feelings. Sure perhaps you may not say "I love you" without meaning it but do you really think nothing but pure emotional experience determines when people say it.

For instance most people are probably a lot more likely to tell their wife that they love her when they see she is particularly unhappy or had a bad day to cheer her up. It may be laudable to do so but surely one of the motivations is something besides pure emotion and often there is a bit of selfishness in there as well (wanting her to be happy because that is more pleasant for you).

We also use "I love you" in dating to telegraph our feelings about the seriousness of the relationship. I know I usually *feel* the emotion of love towards someone long before I'm willing to say it because saying it to your gf telegraphs not only an emotion but the intention of a certain kind of seriousness.

Less nobly I think many people use "I love you" to reassure their s.o.'s when they have done something wrong, to deflect criticism or to encourage them to go along with something.

So no I don't see much difference here. A politician wearing a pin to express his feelings for the country is much like the boyfriend you just broke up with expressing his love to you so you'll take him back.

Cf.:

The American people want a President who loves God and who expresses that love, at an emotional as well as an intellectual level.

I suppose this means all candidates should don "Ichthys" lapel pins. (As long as everyone else is doing it, of course.)

"I guess I don't understand the Chesterton quote. I love and support my mother whether she's drunk or sober."

Um, does it make a difference to you whether a parent be drunk or sober? Presumably yes. You should also care whether your country is doing the right thing, and reflexive patriotism tends to blind people to our flaws and mistakes. Thus, reflexive patriotism might actually be a bad thing, and it is hard to tell the difference between generic, authentic, and reflexive patriotism.

Being generally supportive of your nation should not require displays of generic patriotism, particularly when the context of the flag pins was set by hysterical right-wing warmongers. Basically, whatever nice symbolism of the flag pin might have had, generally, has been (temporarily) ruined by the foolishness championed by those most eager to wear it, and the demand that others do so as well.

Fwiw I refuse to peel off the American Flag sticker I put on my car in the fall of 01. I once was challenged by a colleague for wearing an American flag tie on 9/11/04 and I finally got through to her by emphatically stating that "the flag does not belong to THEM." That is the best argument I can think of for why Obama should consider wearing the pin. It is a damn shame to see a national symbol appropriated for the propaganda of ideologues. If I were a public figure, however, I would be reluctant to let anyone, even well meaning patriots like Eugene, to establish a norm for displaying patriotism. It is actually rather creepy. It is not totally dissimilar to the feeling I have about burning the flag: I'd never do it, unless some authority told me it was un-American to do so. Dissent is not unpatriotic. Period.

I don't think there is anything wrong with him refusing to wear "that" pin. In fact, I respect Mr. Obama for his honesty, which he doesn't really have much of. He is a one-world liberal who thinks the United States is a land mass on one of the seven continents, and that there is nothing special about it. I think with his attitude towards the pin he reveals who he truly is.

Sen. Obama is running for President, not America's Husband.

TruePath:

So no I don't see much difference here. A politician wearing a pin to express his feelings for the country is much like the boyfriend you just broke up with expressing his love to you so you'll take him back.

Bollocks. There is no chance in hell that liberals in America will ever "feel the love" in Bush's or Cheney's patriotic overtures. It is disingenuous or rather naive to think that such overtures do not serve a purpose other than to express love.

TruePath:

Besides, you don't seem to get the point. The point isn't that saying "I love you" to a significant other has only one communicative intent or effect. The point is that the class of plausible communicative intents and effects of doing so is strikingly different from the class of plausible communicative intents and effects of publicly displaying patriotism. The former is most often a private affair, to begin, whereas the latter is public.

That there are elements of performance in both communicative acts is rather unremarkable. But the intended audience, in one of the two situations, is a person you presumably do love (at the very least, you intend to convince you love), and in the other case, the intended audience is twofold: those with whom you identify--often, those in power--and your adversaries. Correct me if I'm wrong, but when Rudy Giuliani commemorates 9-11 with Ann Coulter, he probably isn't telling me he loves me, is he?

And it's a lot easier to NOT stick a flag pin in your lapel and talk about how that makes you superior to the pin wearers than it is to walk the walk.

Huh? What walk would he be walking? The walk of actually being "superior"? And, if so, "superior" in what sense?

Barry, bull. Why did he raise the stupidity in the first place. EV may have some implausible deniability, but anyone with a room temperature IQ knows why he made that post.

I would have had this guy wearing a pink ribbon right from the start. If he wins the primary, then the ribbon turns to yellow.

Oh yeah? I am going out and getting a bigger flag pin to wear, so I can express more love on an emotional level!

The wedding ring isn't really an apt analogy either, unless you consider a flag pin as a primary indication of one's patriotism (the way you'd consider a wedding band or lack thereof as a primary indication of someone's martial status).

I still think the more appropriate analogy, if we're going to insist on sticking to the "love" theme, is wearing an "I love my wife" T-shirt. A totally crass superfluous and empty advertisement to the world. The kind of thing that doesn't really mean much at all to your wife, nor to anyone who reads it unless they happen to have recently fallen off a turnip truck.

Oh yeah? I am going out and getting a bigger flag pin to wear, so I can express more love on an emotional level!

Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others!

Yeah, and I wonder about the used car dealer in town who, after flying a whole buch of giant American flags night and day (even though they were faded and tattered)for years, has now taken them down.

Some patriot; I guess the terrorists win!

MikeC&F:
Either your concept of some exceptions runs to the hundreds of thousands or you have never attended any groupings of veterans, such as VFW meetings, military funerals, Memorial Day ceremonies or 4th of July parades.
In either case, your blanket statement sounds a little overeaching.

You inhibit a different world than I do when you say that the American flag carries "political baggage." Swastikas carry political baggage. Confederate flags carry political baggage.

pedro:

I agree that the intended audience when you say "I love you" to a s.o. is just that s.o. while when you wear a flag pin it is the voters of the US. So sure one is private and the other public. Also one says, "I love you in a romantic way" and the other says, "I feel strong emotions of patriotism and unconditional loyalty to the country." They are different statements the claim is only that they are analagous in the relevant sense.

My argument was that you haven't shown that the analogy fails. Yes, people who wear American flag pins often have other motives (making people like them so they can get elected) than merely expressing their emotional loyalty to the country but what I pointed out above often people who say, "I love you," do as well. They want to be forgiven, get someone to like them so they can date or have sex again, etc.. etc.. Sure some politicians wear the flag pin without really feeling that emotion but some guys say "I love you" without feeling it as well. So at the very least you haven't established they are disanalagous.

Now I happen to think these two expressions are similar as, while the particulars of the emotions conveyed are different, they both express the fact that the speaker puts emotional attachment over rational examination in the relevant area. Symbolically telling your s.o. that you love her is expressing the fact that you have put your strong emotional feelings for her above any cold calculation of benefit. The same can be sad about wearing the american flag pin.

Basically people we say, "I love you to" are the ones who we would be likely to get into a fight to defend their honor. Even if there is suggestive evidence that your wife stole money from the orphanage you won't process any accusation like that rationally but rather defend her purely on emotional loyalty. Similarly the guys wearing american flags are the ones I expect to get up and start bar fights because someone talked shit about US soldiers or irrationally insist that we don't need to worry about US soldiers mistreating prisoners as they are honorable and decent men. In other words both of these gestures symbolically indicate that the person has put emotion and loyalty above reason and evidence in the relevant area.

It's just generally a good thing to have a s.o. who has your back and puts irrational faith in you. Everyone needs someone they know they can count on no matter how bad things look. On the other hand the American public doesn't need emotional hand-holding they need thoughtful intelligent leadership. So while the two gestures say the same thing one tends to be quite positive and the other very negative.

pedro:

It occurs to me we may be just talking past each other. I had a certain specific way I thought the two gestures were analogous and on consideration (and reading some other comments) it occurs to me that this is not the sort of analogy that seems to be salient to other people. Thus it is entirely possible that I would agree the two things aren't analogous in the way you have in mind if I knew what that was.

For instance I agree that saying "I love you" frequently tends to express a much deeper seated emotion than wearing a flag pin. I also think that wearing a flag pin is just crass and silly but that's just a matter of taste. Some people are really into bringing bouquets of flowers home to their girlfriends/wives and I happen to think that is kinda crass as well (in my mind it is just so closely associated with the stereotypical jerk who spends the day trying to sleep with other women in the office and the spends $20 on the way home to score points with his wife).

TruePath: You do have a certain specific way in which you find the two gestures analogous, but the isomorphism you are seeing ceases to be one if you enrich the language, if you catch my drift. X says to Y "I love you", and X is engaging in communicative action with a host of possible intentions and effects, but these ordinarily omit communicating to Z something along the lines of "...and you don't love Y as much as I do", nor does it achieve the effect of making X part of an in-group of Y-lovers and distancing X from those who do not agree with the current way X is treating (or leading) Y. (The analogy further breaks down, because in the reduced language of personal affection and relationships, there is very little chance of reflecting the power-relations context of political reality, let alone the context of war, say.)

It is clear to me that, at a conscious or intuitive level, people on the left pick up on the fact that patriotic chest-thumping on the right is being exercised as a way to disenfranchise others. (Not to imply that there aren't analogous ways in which leftists are trying to disenfranchise right-wingers.) On a personal level, uttering "I love you" is very rarely related to a desire to put other people down, to perform an "I-am-more-patriotic-than-thou" routine that is intended, if not to discredit a certain outside-group, to at the very least exclude political others from the "you" whom the patriot supposedly loves.

This reminds me of the Seinfeld episode when Kramer would not wear the AIDS ribbon at an AIDS march, then got roughed up by the gay toughs there. The flag lapel pin is silly.

Richard, I like your idea. I am going to find my pocket constitution and pin it to my lapel right now.

Above commentor writes:

"Excellent! Liberals once again ceding symbols of patiotism to conservatives."

Well, yes. Ceding the symbols of patriotism -- which is not, and should never be, confused with actual patriotism as evidenced through acts and deeds.

This is, I think, Obama's point. It's similar to the point echoed by Edwards a few weeks ago when he called Iraq a "bumper sticker" war.

Flag pins are just the political equivalent of emoticons. They say something, but not that much.

It seems that our attention-deficit society tends to reduce all political views to easily readable slogans (bumper stickers, T-shirts) and iconic symbols (flag pins). And that's fine.

But I prefer my president to be a man (woman?) of substance. Just a little substance is all I ask.

Question for EV (if he doesn't mind): Did you ever have a yellow ribbon magnet on your car?

Is it still on? And if not, how should I interpret that?

"Shortly after 9-11, particularly because as we're talking about the Iraq war, that became a substitute for I think true patriotism, which is speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security."

Now that's an interesting definition of true patriotism. It's talk.

I wonder if Obama ever wears one of those little pink breast cancer ribbons?

I guess he is going to tell his wife he doesn't need to wear a wedding ring too... because he loves her in his heart and stuff... Not that fake kind of love.

Wonder how that would go over. :)