EDITOR'S NOTE: An occasional look at campaign arguments and how well they adhere to the facts.
WASHINGTON — "2016: Obama's America," a new conservative film exploring the roots of President Barack Obama's political views, took in $6.2 million to make it one of the highest-grossing movies of last weekend. The film, written and narrated by conservative scholar Dinesh D'Souza, argues that Obama was heavily influenced by what D'Souza calls the "anti-colonial" beliefs of his father, Barack Obama Sr., a Kenyan academic who was largely absent from the president's life.
To document that claim, D'Souza travels to Kenya to interview members of Obama's extended family as well as to Hawaii and Indonesia, where Obama grew up. He also cites several actions and policy positions Obama has taken to support the thesis that Obama is ideologically rooted in the Third World and harbors contempt for the country that elected him its first black president.
The assertion that Obama's presidency is an expression of his father's political beliefs, which D'Souza first made in 2010 in his book "The Roots of Obama's Rage," is almost entirely subjective and a logical stretch at best.
It's true that Obama's father lived most of his life in Kenya, an African nation once colonized by the British, and that Obama's reverence for his absent father frames his best-selling memoir. D'Souza even sees clues in the book's title: "Notice it says 'Dreams From My Father,' not 'of' my father," D'Souza says.
But it's difficult to see how Obama's political leanings could have been so directly shaped by his father, as D'Souza claims. The elder Obama left his wife and young son, the future president, when Obama was 2 and visited his son only once, when Obama was 10. But D'Souza frames that loss as an event that reinforced rather than weakened the president's ties to his father, who died in a car crash when Obama was in college.
D'Souza interviews Paul Vitz, a New York University psychologist who has studied the impact of absent fathers on children. In Obama's case, Vitz says, the abandonment meant "he has the tension between the Americanism and his Africanism. He himself is an intersection of major political forces in his own psychology."
From there, the evidence D'Souza uses to support his assertion starts to grow thin.
D'Souza says Obama's mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, shared his father's left-leaning views. After living in Indonesia for several years, D'Souza said, Dunham sent the younger Obama to live with his grandparents in Hawaii so he would not be influenced by her second husband, Lolo Soetoro, an Indonesian who worked for American oil companies and fought communists as a member of the Indonesian army.
"Ann separates Barry from Lolo's growing pro-Western influence," D'Souza says in the film. Obama has said his mother had sent him back to Hawaii so he would be educated in the United States.
In Hawaii, D'Souza asserts with no evidence, Obama sympathized with native Hawaiians who felt they had been marginalized by the American government when Hawaii was becoming a state. D'Souza also asserts — again with no evidence — that Obama had been coached to hold those views at Punahou, the prestigious prep school he attended in Honolulu.
"Oppression studies, if you will. Obama got plenty of that when he was here in Punahou," D'Souza says, standing on the campus.
In Kenya, D'Souza interviews Philip Ochieng, a lifelong friend of the president's father, who claims the elder Obama was "totally anti-colonial." Ochieng also discloses some of his own political views, complaining about U.S. policy in Afghanistan and Iraq and saying the U.S. refuses to "tame" Israel, which he calls a "Trojan horse in the Middle East." D'Souza seems to suggest that if a onetime friend of Obama's late father holds those opinions, so too must the president himself.
D'Souza then goes through a list of actions Obama has taken as president to support his thesis. Many of them don't hold water:
■ D'Souza rightly argues that the national debt has risen to $16 trillion under Obama. But he never mentions the explosion of debt that occurred under Obama's predecessor, Republican George W. Bush, nor the 2008 global financial crisis that provoked a shock to the U.S. economy.
■ D'Souza says Obama is "weirdly sympathetic to Muslim jihadists" in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He does not mention that Obama ordered the raid that killed Osama bin Laden and the drone strikes that have killed dozens of terrorists in the region.
■ D'Souza wrongly claims that Obama wants to return control of the Falkland Islands from Britain to Argentina. The U.S. refused in April to endorse a final declaration on Argentina's claim to the islands at the Summit of the Americas, provoking criticism from other Latin American nations.
■ D'Souza says Obama has "done nothing" to impede Iran's nuclear ambitions, despite the severe trade and economic sanctions his administration has imposed on Iran to halt its suspected nuclear program. Obama opposes a near-term military strike on Iran, either by the U.S. or Israel, although he says the U.S. will never tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran.
■ D'Souza says Obama removed a bust of British Prime Minister Winston Churchill from the Oval Office because Churchill represented British colonialism. White House curator William Allman said the bust, which had been on loan, was already scheduled to be returned before Obama took office. Another bust of Churchill is on display in the president's private residence, the White House says.
Scripps Interactive Newspapers Group
Comments » 14
mark.murlowski#261177 writes:
I saw the movie and I think it fairly represents very interesting and some shocking revelations. I recommend both liberals and conservatives to see it; formulate your own opinion.
panola60 writes:
"But he never mentions the explosion of debt that occurred under Obama's predecessor, Republican George W. Bush, nor the 2008 global financial crisis that provoked a shock to the U.S. economy"
Fact: Obama has added more debt in less than 4 years than Bush did in 8 years and the 2008 financial crisis was caused by the mortgage meltdown where democrats forced financial institutions to pass out mortgages like candy.
Bush -- 2001 $127.3 Billion Budget Surplus
Bush -- 2002 $157.8 Billion Budget Deficit
Bush -- 2003 $374 Billion Budget Deficit
Bush -- 2004 $413 Billion Budget Deficit
Bush -- 2005 $319 Billion Budget Deficit
Bush -- 2006 $248 Billion Budget Deficit
Bush -- 2007 $162 Billion Budget Deficit
Bush -- 2008 $455 Billion Budget Deficit
Obama - 2009 $1.416 Trillion Budget Deficit
Obama - 2010 $1.294 Trillion Budget Deficit
Obama - 2011 $1.299 Trillion Budget Deficit
Obama - 2012 $1.330 Trillion Budget Deficit
pembroke601 writes:
It seems the latest scam from the liberal media is to have their "opinion" writers pen a left-wing propaganda column and label it as "FACT CHECK" to provide a slight hint of credibility to their absurd misinformation.
Ok, since you said FACT CHECK, I believe you – LOL
1Paradiselost writes:
In response to Panola60
Its simple! It's the compounding of the interest from the Bush unfunded war(s) debt. Try not paying your mortgage for 10 years and see how much you owe.
I just wonder where some Republicans got their education. Look at the above B/S number between 2008 to 2009.
Please, get your facts right before posting, or are you Willard Romney the liar, win at any cost, even the truth?
I have to go back to what my father taught me that "common sense isn't so common"!
Let me repeat again "Its simple! It's the compounding of the interest from the Bush unfunded war(s) debt".
panola60 writes:
The Afghanistan War Belongs to Obama. . .
During Obama's 2008 campaign he declared Afghanistan the "good war" and the "justified war" and promised to double down on America's war efforts in Afghanistan.
Two-thirds of U.S. military fatalities in the decade-long Afghan war have occurred since May 15, 2009, when the first wave of the troop surge ordered by President Barack Obama arrived in Afghanistan.
The United States spent $43 billion on the war in 2008, seven years after hostilities began, according to a Congressional Research Service report. After Obama's massive surge, spending hit $118 billion in 2011. There were 33,000 troops on the ground in 2009. After Obama's surge there were 102,000.
The Iraq war vote passed in 2002 with overwhelming democrat support.
The Democrats That Took Us To War Against Iraq before Bush took office:
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
--Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
--Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and
palaces for his cronies."
--Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
1Paradiselost writes:
In response to Panola60
So whats your point? Your Boy Romney want's to STAY in Afghanistan. How is he going to cut the national debt? BTW your words not cut and paste.
panola60 writes:
Just Some Democrats That Took Us To War After Bush took Office:
"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
--Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
--Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout
his country."
--Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
--Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of
mass destruction."
--Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
--Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
--Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
--Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al
Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
--Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
liberator100 writes:
To: 1Pardaiselost
When are you liberals going to stop lying? When will you ever stop the pettiness? Obama is a total failure by all measures; domestically and internationally. He is a miserable President. This is what happens when the lowest ranked sailor on board is selected to steer the world's largest ship! Back to community organizing and corrupt Chicago politics Barack. Good bye and good riddance...
KlausStoertebeker writes:
Great President Barack Obama will be re-elected in November 2012. All what I learned from this film is our great President is a real American. Worked hard to be President of this great nation. Not a flip-flopper! Took it over from a loser Presidency under the responsibility of W. Bush. Great President Obama is doing his best to bring America back o9n top. It is time for the American people to follow him. Work harder. Take a better education. Start to be the best again. In four years great President will be historically one of the best US Presidents all times in history. And on top peace Nobel price winner. What a leader.
themessiah writes:
I agree with Klaus.
In four years, Great President Obama will be ranked right up there with the other greats, like Carter.
KlausStoertebeker writes:
You are right. Two peace Nobel price awarded great Presidents is historical dimension. How many peace Nobel price winner have the Republicans?
However - the right man on the right spot to the right time:
Great President Barack Obama.
RayPray writes:
"How many peace Nobel price winner have the Republicans?"
>>> At least two, Teddy Roosevelt & Henry Kissinger.
>>> But you're right.
>>>Teddy R was certainly not man enough to carry Jimmy Carter's jock strap.
>>>And unlike the mighty OBAMA, neither Republican was able to ace this prize without actually accomplishing anything.
KlausStoertebeker writes:
Teddy is correct. You past 50% of my test. Henry is a German outstanding character. He loves woman and force. Like me. But he was never a President of America. Maybe a President behind close doors.
However - I understand that you will be equal as Republican.
BUT! Score is 1 : 2 for Democrats. I like that.
Great President Barack Obama too. The winner in November.
KlausStoertebeker writes:
Sorry - I forgot Al Gore!!!!!!!! VP.
Score is 1 : 3 for Democrats. OK - I will be fair.
It is 2 : 3 for Democrats if you count Henry and I count Al. But Henry was a half Democrat.
Share your thoughts
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.