Posted on 09/16/2010 8:57:21 PM PDT by This Just In
What’s Behind David Frum’s Attack on Dinesh d’Souza and Mr. Newt?
Posted By Jeff Dunetz On September 16, 2010
Newt Gingrich stirred up a big of a controversy Friday night just by commenting on an article in Forbes Magazine by Dinesh D’Souza. The premise of the article is many of Obama’s positions were influenced by his dad.
What then is Obama’s dream? We don’t have to speculate because the President tells us himself in his autobiography, Dreams from My Father. According to Obama, his dream is his father’s dream. Notice that his title is not Dreams of My Father but rather Dreams from My Father. Obama isn’t writing about his father’s dreams; he is writing about the dreams he received from his father.
Whether you agree with it or not this is not a terribly, outlandish position, many of us can say that we were influenced by our father’s dreams. I certainly carried many of my father’s dreams into the next generation. Gingrich felt the D’Souza article was incredibly insightful.
Citing a recent Forbes article by Dinesh D’Souza, former House speaker Newt Gingrich tells National Review Online that President Obama may follow a “Kenyan, anti-colonial” worldview.
Gingrich says that D’Souza has made a “stunning insight” into Obama’s behavior — the “most profound insight I have read in the last six years about Barack Obama.”
“What if [Obama] is so outside our comprehension, that only if you understand Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior, can you begin to piece together [his actions]?” Gingrich asks. “That is the most accurate, predictive model for his behavior.”
(Excerpt) Read more at bigjournalism.com ...
D'Souza is ten times the thinker Frum is, and this fiasco of a response shows it.
Yes, the author (who I was not familiar with) had a unique personal insight into anti-colonialism I could only appreciate tangentially from my experience. He did not blow a horn; he just made his points rationally and sequentially.
The subtle application of heat still quickens the boil.
Gator season open soon.
Herpetologists and sportsmen both are eagerly anticipating.
Democrats, not so much.
Well, I am very familiar with the author and admire him and his opinions. Now Frum...not so much - heh.
Mr. Frum is what I call an establishment Republican Light! That means of course that he is for all Democratic ideas unless they are so bad that they should be Republican ideas. Just call him another of those Media folks who think they know what is going on without actually getting out and checking with the voters... you know, the last to know or understand what is happening...
However, he does write some decent articles at times...heh.
Frum doesn’t hold a candle to D’Souza.
Here’s a brief bio:
D’Souza has been called one of the “top young public-policy makers in the country” by Investor’s Business Daily. The New York Times Magazine named him one of America’s most influential conservative thinkers. The World Affairs Council lists him as one of the nation’s 500 leading authorities on international issues. Newsweek cited him as one of the country’s most prominent Asian Americans.
A former policy analyst in the Reagan White House, D’Souza also served as John M. Olin Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and the Robert and Karen Rishwain Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. He graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Dartmouth College in 1983.
Mr. D’Souza’s books have had a major influence on public opinion and public policy. His 1991 book Illiberal Education was the first study to publicize the phenomenon of political correctness. The book was widely acclaimed and became a New York Times bestseller for 15 weeks. It has been listed as one of the most influential books of the 1990’s.
In 1995 D’Souza published The End of Racism, which became one of the most controversial books of the time and a national bestseller. D”Souza’s 1997 book Ronald Reagan: How an Ordinary Man Became an Extraordinary Leader was the first book to make the case for Reagan’s intellectual and political importance. In 2000, D’Souza published The Virtue of Prosperity: Finding Values in an Age of Techno Affluence, which explores the social and moral implications of wealth.
In 2002 he published his New York Times bestseller What’s So Great About America , which was critically acclaimed for its thoughtful patriotism. His 2003 book Letters to a Young Conservative has become a handbook for a new generation of young conservatives inspired by D’Souza’s style and ideas. The Enemy at Home: published in 2006, stirred up a furious debate both on the left and the right; even so, it became a national bestseller and will be published in paperback, January 2008, with a new Afterword by the author responding to his critics.
D’Souza’s articles have appeared in virtually every major magazine and newspaper, including the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, The Atlantic Monthly, Vanity Fair, New Republic, and National Review. He has appeared on numerous television programs, including the Today Show, Nightline, The News Hour, O’Reilly Factor, Moneyline, and Hannity and Colmes.
David Frum, David Brock, David Brooks, David Stockman...
Anybody else sense a pattern here?
Gay people?
1) Fact: It is a very simple and inexpensive matter to **prove** one’s natural born status. Unanointed Americans routinely do so for many reasons.
2)Fact: A normal, natural born, American president would be **HONORED** to promptly prove (with the best evidence) that he was eligible to be Commander in Chief and president.
3) Fact: A usurper would let an military officer be court martialed and would “lawyer-up” as Obama has done to prevent the release of common documents that ordinary Americans routinely provide for many reasons.
Conclusion: Obama is a full blown NUT or he is a usurper and is not a natural born citizen. In fact, he may not even be a citizen of any sort!
There is a problem in the state of Denmark I.
Lets compare Frums accomplishments to Dinesh d’Souza. There is no comparison except that they are both not born here in the US. Frum is increasingly irrelevant as the Tea Party steam roller heads down the road ruining his beloved middle ground soft speak style of governing on the right.
Obviously David Axelrod, Barry, Rahm and Gibbs have coordinated with mainstream journalists to try to discredit the article. Everyone that reads it knows that it rings true, so their efforts will be futile. The U.S. has elected a crackpot to the Presidency.
Ayers may have written the book, and I believe he did, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t reflect any truth about Obama’s father and mother, and their influence on his political/social ideology. After all, his philosophical and political accomplishments mirrors that of his parents.
Neurosis effects the way in which you think, and react, and view the world, and affects the way in which you live.
But I do not accept this explanation because it implies that Obama is not culpable due to a medical condition. You’re suggesting that the “neurosis” is the cause of his actions. Not so. Obama is far more diabolical than simply reducing his motives to neurotic narcissism.
Furthermore, to suggest that Obama can’t help himself by way of this neurosis is to be void of an otherwise ideological motive. It’s not one or the other.
He's not really a Stalinist Marxist or a Maoist Marxist he's more of a Bill Ayers Marxist. He's not really a Muslim he's more of a New Agey Farrakhanish Muslim. Perhaps the only one in the world. The 50s era anti-Colonialist connects the dots between his underlying pathological narcissistic condition and the alter-ego type fantasy he has with Islam and Marxist communism.
Ahhh Newt Gingrich, the political equivalent of a Snake Oil salesman...
Frum is a limp wristed panty-waist
But he isn't outside our comprehension. I defy you to find a single junior college english lit teacher who doesn't have exactly the same political and philosophical conceits, with the exception of O's additional patina of muslim sensibilities which he picked up from his step-dad.
He never knew his real dad, but his parents were communists, and his mentors were communists. He has surrounded himself ever since with academic tin-plate marxists and since arriving in Chicago, tried to prove his street cred by hanging with folks like Reverend Wright, another marxist.
Who is hard to explain is Frum who veers all over the map to the point of incoherency. You have to wonder who pulls his string. Newt and D'Souza are trying to figure out where O's marxism comes from. I don't think its as complicated as they make it, but asking isn't racist, its an obvious question that Frum apparently never bothers to ask.
There are apparently a whole host of questions we aren't allowed to ask, according to Frum. Why he would care if we asked them, I'm not sure. If he's not curious, I don't know how it picks his pocket if some of the rest of us are a bit curious from time to time. The fact that he doesn't want to know isn't odd, necessarily, but the fact that he doesn't want anyone else to ask is a bit weird. Don't ask where his philosophy comes from. Oh, and don't ask about his childhood either. Or his college years, don't ask about those either. Or you're hurting the movement. Or something.
Branch Davidians?
I would say neurosis is the deeper motive, the ideology is more of a prop to be discarded or taken on as the situation calls for.
Interesting you use the term diabolical, which modern thinking attempts to reduce to some psychological cause or disorder, e.g., if Satan would only had more sessions with his therapist he could be cured.
I could buy diabolical quite easily.
Ideology, for me, is not a spring in itself. If Obama's dad was a capitalist and preached capitalism and had the same bad stuff befall him, would Obama now be a capitalist? Hard to say. There is something else underlying it -- a hole or psychological motive -- that has little to do with the content of his thinking. And maybe it is a parent pleasing motive. But it is still about filling some hole in his being.
Frum is anti-birther because of INELIGIBLE MEXICAN MITT ROMNEY.
Romney, like Obama, is not a natural born US citizen.
The Palmetto Scoop reported: "One of the first stories to hit the national airwaves was
the claim of a major internal strife between close McCain aides and the folks handling his running mate Sarah Palin."
"I’m told by very good sources that this was indeed the case and that a rift had developed, but it was between Palin’s people and the staffers brought on from the failed presidential campaign of former Gov. Mitt Romney, not McCain aides."
"The sources said nearly 80 percent of Romney’s former staff was absorbed by McCain and these individuals were responsible for what amounts to a premeditated, last-minute sabotage of Palin."
… aides loyal to Romney inside the McCain campaign, said The Scoop, reportedly saw
that Palin would be a serious contender for the Republican nomination in 2012 or 2016, which made her a threat to another presidential quest by Romney.
Cheers!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.