Path:
eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september
.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx04.eternal-septemb
er.org!mx04.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: God's Debris
Newsgroups: misc.survivalism,az.politics,dfw.politics
Subject: Re: Neal Boortz
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 07:43:00 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 116
Message-ID: <13r358dfdtrbsokmn1ac0oo5er38pmkjbe@4ax.com>
References:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org;
posting-host="b8fd0dc7e20e5458e0c42abe786bf7e5";
logging-data="2272"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18JwA8mOaM3SfXhlIN9g5XoYCxchmNy5mQ="
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186
Cancel-Lock: sha1:MST4KY9lfweozwTht3qJqdNNVKY=
Xref: news.eternal-september.org misc.survivalism:22413 az.politics:2424
dfw.politics:244
On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 13:48:50 -0700, ? wrote:
>By Neal Boortz
>Yesterday afternoon I finally found the time to head to a theatre to see
>2016 – Obama’s America, a movie based on Dinesh D’Sousa’s book “The
>Roots of Obama’s Rage.”
>In the book D’Sousa tried to determine just what was driving Dear
>Ruler’s rage (dare we say hatred?) against successful wealthy Nations
>and Americans? Why did he send the bust of Winston Churchill back to the
>British Embassy in Washington? Why did he break with many previous
>presidents and take the Argentinian side on the Falkans controversy?
>Why is the centerpiece of Obama’s reelection campaign his obsession on
>raising taxes on the rich, even when history clearly shows that raising
>taxes on the rich only serves to reduce revenues to the government?
>To answer these questions D’Sousa traveled to Hawaii, to Indonesia, to
>Africa and around the Continental U.S. to interview the people who knew
>Barack Obama and people who have studied those who were close to Obama
>as he was growing up.
>Now I tried to watch this movie with somewhat a different eye than most
>of the people in that theater. As hard as it is to do … I tried to watch
>it as an Obama supporter. I was looking for something that was clearly
>untrue or for logical lapses
>relating to Obama’s positions. (Yeah, like a liberal would recognize a
>logical lapse.) Not once did I think to myself “Oh now come on, Dinesh.
>That’s a little much.”
>There were a few things in the movie that I had not realized … a few
>surprises for me.
>
> Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, truly seemed to despise the
>United States, so much so that she gravitated solely to men from the
>“third world.”
>
> Obama’s father was married at the time he met and married Ann
>Dunham. No judgment here – that might
> have been perfectly acceptable in his culture. Just didn’t know that.
>
> While living in Indonesia Obama’s mother sent him to Hawaii to live
>with his grandparents because she was
> concerned that Obama would be influenced by his step-father, Lolo
>Sotero’s, increasingly pro-American and pro-Western views and associations.
>
> It was Obama’s grandfather, from whom his mother apparently got her
>strident anti-American views, who
> introduced Obama to Communist Party member Frank Marshall Davis,
>with the intent that Davis was to become Obama’s mentor.
>
> Obama’s private school in Hawaii, Punahou, was infused with an
>anti-colonialist fervor; an atmosphere of resentment toward the United
>States as having colonized Hawaii.
>
>D’Sousa puts all of the information he gathers together and comes up
>with the conclusion that Obama’s driving philosophy is one of
>anti-colonialism. His mother, father, grandfather and mentor were all
>strident anti-colonialists. They all harbored the feeling that America’s
>wealth came from the exploitation of other nations and people. Obama now
>sees the opportunity to honor the legacy of his parents by righting that
>wrong and by destroying much of America’s ill-gotten wealth. This he is
>intent on doing through the destruction of our economy.
>At the end of the movie the audience – as it had in other venues – burst
>into applause. I heard yells of “Romney – Ryan” and “Take back America.”
>Me? I was shaken. The documentary rang true. It answered question for me
>– and left me even more afraid for the future of my country than I am now.
>Much to the dismay of the left, the movie has been very successful in
>limited engagements across the country; so much so that the movie will
>open in an much-expanded list of theaters over the weekend.
>Now .. here’s the problem. The only people who will go see this movie
>are people who are already predisposed to vote for Romney. The vast
>majority of people who will vote for Obama are not voting for a
>particular philosophy … they are voting for one simple reason: To get
>access to someone else’s wealth. They don’t care what Obama’s motives or
>reasons are. They care about one thing --- their checks – their money –
>their ObamaMoney.
>Here is the best way to use this movie. Get a friend who doesn’t vote; a
>friend who basically shares your political philosophy, but who doesn’t
>plan to vote because they feel their vote won’t count anyway. Take that
>friend to the movie. Offer then dinner before or after .. but somehow
>get them to that movie. This movie is so powerful it will take those “my
>vote won’t count” people and change them into “By God I’m going to MAKE
>my vote count” people.That may save our Republic.
Most of Booristz diatribe is just nonsense. As a middle of the roader
who went to see the movie just to see what the big deal about it was,
I came away unimpressed. DiSnooza clearly has an axe to grind from
the start and while he is entitled to his theories this movie not only
didn't prove any of them, it didn't even provide smoke for any of
them. One of the most telling parts of the movie is when DeSnooza
interviews Barrack O's brother in Kenya. Thruout the interview
DeSnooza attempts to get O's brother to say bad things about America
and specifically about how Barrack isn't doing anything to help his
Brother. DeSnooza keeps trying to get the brother to say that O'b OWES
the brother something. His Brother says O owes him nothing and the
only thing he thinks O should be doing, and is doing, is trying to
make the world a better place, and that if the world is a better
place, then O will have indirectly helped him, the brother, and that's
all that's required. The brother also draws a comparison between the
successful development of some countries under colonialist rule and he
ruminates that perhaps Kenya would have been better off had the
colonialists stayed longer - he makes this observation in light of how
well some other countries did due to colonial influence and how poorly
Kenya has done since the colonialists left and it became a free
country of it's own.
My comments should not be construed as any particular criticism of
DeSnooza, just of Boorishtz, who clearly saw this movie thru shit
colored glasses. The reason "liberals" aren't particularly dismayed
over the movie is because while it's clear DeSnooza intended to
produce a hit piece, he not only failed to do so but he actually did a
reasonable job of presenting what he found, hoping it would be
compelling (it is not) but willing to let the chips fall where they
may it would appear. Either that or he is deluded and really thinks
he produced a damning indictment of O'b.
The only area I agree with Boorishnesstz on is that it's not going to
change any minds, mostly because there's nothing new that's negative
in it, the innuendo's aren't supported by any facts, and because it's
mostly going to be attended by those already full of blind hate for
O'b who aren't going to vote for him anyway.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.1
* Origin: Prison Board BBS Mesquite Tx //telnet.RDFIG.NET www. (1:124/5013)
|
