>

Dave (imported) wrote: Mon Sep 03, 2012 3:06 pm Dinesh D'Souza's book and movie a pack of lies and falsehoods written by a partisan party apparatchik.

I am in agreement here. Why waste my time with a hit-piece from the Repukes? Substitute the sound of a Fart, put it in a loop, make the playtime as long as the movie and you have the same thing. Never waste time with what the other side says about your candidate. if you do, you are playing their game, and you will lose.

A-1 (imported) wrote: Mon Sep 03, 2012 5:35 pm It makes no difference to me about what this film says or what it doesn't say.

At this point I am VOTING AGAINST the Republican candidates.... ALL OF 'EM!

...especially RICH Rombama and the GREEDY LITTLE Lying Shit-Bagger from Wes-CAAAAN-SIN...

What he said...only said nicer

Dinesh D'Souza is the naturalized citizen, Barack Obama is not. In fact, Obama never lived in Africa.

D'Souza was born and raised in Pakistan and only became a citizen after he immigrated to the USA. He also changed his religion and all sorts of other stuff. So he is in denial of his birthplace. His problem is that HE was raised under the British Colonial background and now is imposing that on everything he sees.

Barack Obama was raised mostly in Hawaii and went to school their. his cultural experiences are basically American. In fact, he wasn't raised "black in the USA" as most of my African American friends were. That makes a big difference.

That's the prime reason I don't trust D'Souza from the git-go

The usual partisan idiocies. Some people saw a movie. One person read a book. The movie people reject the book; the book person rejects the movie. People who've neither seen the movie nor read the book chime in to remind us which party they support.

Might I suggest that both the movie and book are partisan and tendentious? Why should we accept either as authoritative? All efforts to "explain" someone by layering theories and generalizations over aspects of their past are likely to be entertaining at best. I remember these exercises going back at least as far as Lyndon Johnson. Every President since has been similarly "explained" by several biographers and essayists, usually with competing theses. The only question is how persuasive the reader finds them, and the most persuasive may still be entirely wrong. The past weighs heavily on us, but we do more than repeat ourselves. Being President is enough unlike common experience to bring out new behavior.

For me, the last word about "2016" is that it isn't entertaining. It's a video version of a small-magazine essay.

I don't need the movie to tell me that Obama's Presidency has been a failure and harmful to the country.

I desperately try to avoid Polemic movies. All of them. Like the plague.

Hell, as many movies as I watch, I should talk... but I avoid some of the best when they're free and I refuse to watch "agenda" movies like this.

From what I understand:

The best recommendation NOT to see the movie is it relies so much on Obama's words.

I do regret, when I hear him speak now I feel the anger of betrayal as I did with LBJ.

NIXON did not betray me. I just could not stand him nor would I listen much to his words.

That's just me, I am not trying to sell anyone.

If someone produced a 2016 based on Deeds Not Words, it might be worth a look.

Then we have the problem or interpretation of those deeds like Job Numbers going up means . . .

When job quality goes down, and some quit looking.

NIXON gave us the Endangered Species Act. LBJ, Civil Rights and Medicare. Not 100% bad.

Obama has betrayed the Progressive Agenda he speaks so eloquently about. And we have Obamacare

As soon as he says, "the truth is . . " I just can't take it no more.

Would someone please concisely explain anti-colonialism in the 21st Century.

Moi

...

moi621 (imported) wrote: Sun Sep 09, 2012 2:47 pm Would someone please concisely explain anti-colonialism in the 21st Century.

Moi

A Newt Gingrich catchphrase to make his political opponents into something less than American.

Moi, read "The Wretched of the Earth" by Frantz Fanon. It's considered the classic of the genre. Used to be on many college curricula. I had to read it back when.

In brief, being dominated by alien cultures fucks with people's heads. Feelings of worthlessness alternate with anger and resentment. Some identify with their overlords and try to be like them. Others rebel. Most are in between. To recover their full humanity, conquered peoples must rid themselves of their conquerors, not just physically but culturally. They must assert their own values.

That's anti-colonialism. (Wow! I remembered that after 40 years.) D'Souza claims Obama believes his father was anti-colonial, and that he has internalized his father's attitudes. This makes him wish for the decline of America's global power, and makes him sympathetic with developing nations that come into conflict with the US.

bobover3 (imported) wrote: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:38 pm Moi, read "The Wretched of the Earth" by Frantz Fanon. It's considered the classic of the genre. Used to be on many college curricula. I had to read it back when.

In brief, being dominated by alien cultures fucks with people's heads. Feelings of worthlessness alternate with anger and resentment. Some identify with their overlords and try to be like them. Others rebel. Most are in between. To recover their full humanity, conquered peoples must rid themselves of their conquerors, not just physically but culturally. They must assert their own values.

That's anti-colonialism. (Wow! I remembered that after 40 years.) D'Souza claims Obama believes his father was anti-colonial, and that he has internalized his father's attitudes. This makes him wish for the decline of America's global power, and makes him sympathetic with developing nations that come into conflict with the US.

Hey, Bob/3.

...anti-colonialism IS as anti-colonialism DOES...

What about the exporting of JOBS to Third-World countries via the REPUBLICAN deregulation? Things such as steel mills moving to Red China and all manners of industry moving to third world countries to take advantage of cheap labor without legislative labor protection or taxes on businesses?

Obama DOES NOT condone this. It is disingenuous to project your vitriol upon Obama and the Democrats when from a standpoint of actual actions and acts the Republicans and the Corporate Raiders such as Mitt Romney have actually committed that YOU accuse President Obama of just thinking about. They have actually not just thought about it, they actually HAVE DONE IT, all in the name of exploitation for MONETARY gain.

Again, your feigned IGNORANCE of the Wall Street gang and the REPUBLICAN outcomes ignores the greedy, selfish motives that the Conservatives, Tea Party, RICH BITCHES and the Republicans demonstrate. This is unconscionable and inexcusable. The tax rates for capital gains and dividends and DEREGULATION have financed these exploitations. These actions feed the terrorists selling points against America.

Finally, NOBODY, but NOBODY, FUCKS with people's heads more than Fox News who continues to sell Austerity to the poor, Palin to the foolish and stupidity to the STUPID...

A-1, who isn't greedy? Don't most people try to do as well for themselves as they can? So why say that a few are greedy, while the rest are ... what? Don't be silly. The only difference between the greedy people on Wall Street and the greedy people at Obama campaign headquarters is that the Wall Streeters are smarter and more successful. One of the saddest political comedies is toothless tigers pretending their toothlessness is a virtue they chose, rather than an infirmity. Every loser a saint.

One day, you'll come to your senses, and you and I will steal old ladies' rent money together.