The Obamorons Strike Back By DINESH D'SOUZA

Forbes.com ^ | 9/16/10 | Dinesh D'Souza

[Yardstick]

That line grabbed me too.

Go Dinesh!

[gitmo]

Bookmark for later read.

[alecqss]

Excellent!

[gotribe]

This will fill the huge vaccuum of obama unknown for many, many voters and citizens. People are now wondering “What makes him tick?” And this answers it in tremendous detail. We haven’t had an enemy of the state in the Oval Office since Nixon, and now people will understand that we have another.

[Agamemnon]

I wish he had toned it down a bit.

Have to disagree. He's got them in the kill zone. He's got them on the ropes. He's intellectually head and shoulders above every one of his detractors.

This administration is his toy -- his plaything, at this point. He's taunting and they're biting -- and looking stupider with each snap at his bait.

I say run 'em all through and do so without mercy every chance you get.

His book only gains from the attention focused now upon his continued thrust and parry.

FReegards!

[okie01]

We haven’t had an enemy of the state in the Oval Office since Nixon...

That's a bit of overstatement, isn't it? Perpetrator of a cover-up, true. But short of an impeachable offense -- as later admitted by the special prosecutor.

Nixon was hardly anti-American -- altogether unlike Obama.

[Blind Eye Jones]

Good observation. It`s all part of the same baggage that has been at the same train station — where the trains all run on time — for quite a while for fellow travelers. Why Dinesh centers in on anti-colonialism in particular, as opposed to some other offshoot of Marxist theory, is curious. Personally, I prefer the narcissism argument — the father didn’t give him a political cause but a neurosis.

[Agamemnon]

We haven’t had an enemy of the state in the Oval Office since Nixon, and now people will understand that we have another.

What a stupid comparison to make.

Brainwashed by public education -- or Time magazine, no doubt. Maybe tackled one too many times on the gridiron.

You couldn't possibly have any familiarity with Nixon and still write such a thing with a straight face.

[gotribe]

A dictatorship is a dictatorship, right or left.

[TChris]

You couldn't possibly have any familiarity with Nixon and still write such a thing with a straight face.

I agree with you.

...except that I hate Nixon for the EPA.

[Agamemnon]

Why Dinesh centers in on anti-colonialism in particular, as opposed to some other offshoot of Marxist theory.

He is uniquely qualified to speak on what he does the way he has. Calling Obama a Marxist doesn't make Obama's head spin. Anti-colonialism on the other hand does.

Doesn't mean that Marxism isn't what Obama is all about, but D'Souza's got his opponent where he wants them -- on the battle field of his choosing, and in an arena in which they are ill prepared to defend themselves or to be able to even put up a credible fight.

FReegards!

[Agamemnon]

A dictatorship is a dictatorship, right or left.

Nixon wasn't a dictatorship. Buy a clue.

[Agamemnon]

...except that I hate Nixon for the EPA.

And on that I'll agree with you!

[paudio]

The two explanations, 0bama being anti-colonialist and narcissist are not mutually exclusive. One refers to the ideology he embraces and the other to his personality. Both are nurtured by his environments in his youth.

Being a biracial raised by a Marxist family and went to Indonesia make 0bama's view of Marxism is rather different than, say, European or American academics. He probably very much identify himself with the conflict element of Marxism; one that is not based on class but based on other characteristics such as race, nation, and religion. The same experiences, being biracial and raised in Indonesia, also informed him that he was 'different' from others. He might have developed a self-defense mechanism to justify his differences which give rise to his narcissistic behaviors.

[BIGLOOK]

This harken's back to Ikenga's article that I'd read a year or so earlier but reprinted recently. D'Souza's a good followup. It takes former colonials to recognize this but aren't there enough descendants of colonials here to remember and recall the spirit that combined will that gave us the great nation we have?

(I've been browsing through Dennis Bloodworth's An Eye for the Dragon lately, which is bloody difficult for an American to read in an Brit's English but worth the trouble; very insightful into the mixed mindset of former colonials. It begs the question, can former colonies having gained independence form a nation state and a national identity or revert to the tribal systems and divisions they had had before? Given that it was written by a journalist but his reporting was accurate pointing to the seemingly eternal internal struggles of developing third world nations. So......round and round we go.)

Seems to me that once again we're headed for the 'Law of the Jungle' (which we've never escaped before, save briefly) and this time it's being admindinstered from Foggy Bottom against all our constitutional prohibitions and protections in place to prevent it. One by one those are being eroded in the mindset of Americans through deceptive, slanted, obfuscatory and laughingly incomprehensible media reportage daily.....whose right to do so we all hold dear?

Think I'll migrate to Vanatu, where the beaches are only being eroded in the news while everybody there knows 'It ain't so'.

[Company Man]

Sorry if this dupes any one else's comment. My favorite quote from the article:

Let me just say that if the Forbes article so upset these guys, wait until the book comes out. It may prove extremely difficult for the Obamorons to digest; perhaps it will have to be administered as a suppository.

end~quote

[Blind Eye Jones]

"The two explanations, 0bama being anti-colonialist and narcissist are not mutually exclusive."

I agree. I see the personal more as a source for the political. Perhaps if Obama's dad was a capitalism and still had the bad things befall him, Obama would turn out the same but espouse capitalism. The real spring could be the psychological that Dinesh touches on, the pleasing of the parents. But I think narcissism explains a lot as well. It is cause for almost a reinvention of Obama where he is now the friendly aggressor, the chameleon who delights in duping people to his side, who is not sincere. I almost see Obama as a tragic Hamlet figure: problems with the father (Hamlet had to deal with the ghost of his father), an actor, deceptive, problems with the mother, bookish and educated abroad for the early part of his life (foreigner), wanting to be king, etc. If there anything Obama learned from anti-colonialism, it is not to be the colony but to be the aggressor, be the imperialistic "I."

Something is rotten in the state of Denmark of "I."

[Blind Eye Jones]

“Calling Obama a Marxist doesn’t make Obama’s head spin. Anti-colonialism on the other hand does.”

Very true.