"2016: Obama's America"

Tuesday, September 04, 2012

2016

We went to see 2016: Obama's America over the weekend. After all of the anti-Bush movies of a few years ago my wife wanted to see one from the other side.

I was familiar with the premise of the movie from columns that director Dinesh D'Souza has written but I was still surprised, and a bit pleased, at how they were presented. This is not a Michael Moore movie which mocks its targets and is really about Moore rather than his subject matter. D'Souza uses his background in India to shed light on Obama's upbringing. In doing so, D'Souza never upstages his subject.

The movie has four parts. The first is D'Souza's own biography. He explains what his life would have been if he had stayed in India and how he quickly rose from a foreign college student (at an Ivy League college) to working at the White House.

The second part covers Barack Obama's life prior to becoming famous. D'Souza's focus is on the anti-colonialism that Obama's mother embraced and how prevalent it was in Indonesia and Hawaii during Obama's childhood. He shows how his mother painted a picture of his absent father as a giant in the fight against colonialism and what a shock it was for the younger Obama when he found out that his father was not the man he envisioned him to be. This part ends with Obama's visit to the graves of his father and grandfather.

Along the way, D'Souza talks with Obama's half-brother who lives in a tiny shack. The younger Obama is an author on is own and believes that Africa's problems are not the making of white oppressors. He points to various former colonies that are doing well.

The third part explains how someone with Obama's radical background could have been elected president. D'Souza makes the point that an angry black leader from the equal rights movement could never be elected president because he carries the implied accusation that all whites are racist. Obama's appeal was that he was a blank slate. Obama discovered at an early age that his manner made people want to do things for him.

D'Souza's predictions for the next four years may be the title of the movie but they get the least time. D'Souza believes that Obama will disarm America through reductions in our nuclear arsenal and will allow the Muslim world to unite in a United States of Islam.

So, how compelling is D'Souza's theory? He makes a strong case but it has one weakness. Marxism and anti-colonialism are joined at the hip. Many of the influences that D'Souza cites are as much Marxist as anti-colonial. D'Souza gives examples of Obama's "strange" behavior as proof of his anti-colonialism but some of these could have different or multiple explanations. Nuclear disarmament has been a goal of the left for decades and Obama's desire to reduce the US nuclear capacity is probably rooted in this rather than a desire to weaken America. The Left reflexively prefers the Palestinians to the Israelis so there is no reason to look deeper into that relationship. Obama may be trying to spend the nation into ruin but he is known to read Paul Krugman's columns regularly and Krugman insists that the recovery has been so weak because we did not spend enough. If we spend another two or three trillion then the economy will recover enough so spectacularly that we can pay off that enormous debt.

Obama has done some actions that reflect anti-colonial attitudes. His dislike of Churchill is the most prominent of these. To most Americans, Churchill was the war leader who stood up to the Nazis. To Obama, he was the oppressor of Kenya.

What cannot be questioned is that the blank slate who was elected in 2008 was far more radical than he appeared. Thomas Sowell wrote a column where he points out that in Obama's autobiography, he never looked for dissenting opinions. He was convinced of his views at an early age and never associated with anyone who would challenge them.

Any they called George Bush an incurious president.

http://marks-truths.blogspot.com/2012/09/2016.html

"If you voted for obama to prove you're not racist, you'll have to vote against him to prove you're not an idiot."- Unknown

It's not about race or color, it's about the Constitution.

Awesome movie, by the way.

It really dug into Obama's history and background.

A MUST SEE BEFORE ELECTION TIME!!!

 

Oh great, a propaganda movie attempting to inject life into a failing political career.

 

It's a little speculative to presume that Obama's leftist ideology was heavily influenced by anti-colonialism in the Third World, which the Indian author is familiar with given his background as he grew up in India in the period immediately following British rule. American presidents historically promoted anti-colonialism by opposing British imperialism and Obama's anti-colonialism is no different from what any American citizens would conceive after getting an education in the US. Barack Obama Sr was an anti-colonialist with socialist views but he left the Obama family before Obama could even speak and he had no ideological influence on him.

[video=youtube;kECm7DK-g3g]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kECm7DK-g3g[/video]

 

He is not the persona that he 'pretends' to be; he hides his true angry self! (angry at having been deserted twice and needed a 'cause' to lash out!!)

As has been coming out more & more, ppl around Obama are calling him an elitist, aloof and unpersonable when he is off camera. He gives those around him the 'stare of death' who disagree or challenge him! One Dem said that he didnt have even 10 close friends ...this is the REAL Barack Obama:

 

He is trying (in his own mind) to win the belated approval and carry on the legacy of his dead rebellious parents and their supposed noble ideology. He is 'chasing the brass ring,' of an inherited ideology, as they say..

 

Dinesh D’Souza directed the controversial film ‘2016: Obama’s America,’ which has already become one of the highest grossing political documentaries of all time. He talked to Meghan McCain about his film:

Dinesh D’Souza: This movie doesn’t have a racial bone in its body. By that I mean, it brings up race but only to defuse it. It brings up race to say, “Look, I’m the same color as Obama.” We both have a multi-racial background. I’m not fundamentally about race and neither is he. Now the racial factor comes in, in the sense that there’s a desire in white America to be healed from America’s racial past. That’s part of the key to Obama’s success and appeal. What’s refreshing about Obama is that he seems to transcend race. There’s an Entertainment Weekly article that said [the movie’s] racist because they are showing an interview with George Obama, and he turns out to be darker than Barack Obama. This is all so stretched and preposterous, I don’t think it needs to be rebutted. I think that, in the last part of the movie, it is by its nature a little speculative. It is that way because it’s projecting into the future. It would be very fair to disagree with some of my conclusions. [The part about] about Islam may seem conspiratorial at first glance … but we are already two-thirds there. There are three major countries in the Middle East—Iran, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia. Iran has already been down for the count since 1979. Egypt is almost there. All that’s left is Saudi Arabia. The concept of a Muslim world unifying with the three major legs of its tripod all falling into the hands of the radical Muslims is not so far-fetched. I do think for ideological reasons, [Obama] wants to reduce America’s footprint in the world. I’m not saying he’s anti-American or a bad guy. But he has a different view of America than not only most Americas, but Democrats.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/09/04/meghan-mccain-talks-to-2016-obama-s-america-director-dinesh-d-souza.html

 

I saw this last weekend also. It is a respectable documentary. It doesn't bring up the citizenship issue, the grades issue or the student loan repayment issue. It doesn't delve into Fast and Furious, the racist Affordable Care Act or the 20 years of Black Panther meetings with Reverend Wright. I was a bit disappointed at the lack of rigorous scrutiny. It is a good "personal" documentary of Obama of which I could care less.

 

I saw it last week. I didn't think it was that good. I already dislike Obama's job in office, but if I was neutral or liked the way he was doing, I don't think the movie would've had an effect on me. It wasn't very persuasive, I thought. I wouldn't recommend it, unless you have a particular affection for political propaganda films (i.e. Michael Moore). ... A better argument could be made against Obama than the one in "2016".