yes he has some good points but overall it sounds like whining
Of course, it’s Bush’s fault.
Good read!
Miss this, and you miss the whitewash. This documentary is an implicit whitewash. It relies on an assumption, namely, that we are not dealing in 2012 with a single political administration, which began in January 2001. Sadly, we are.
By tracing the start of the budgetary nightmare to 2001 and the Bush administration, North jumps the shark. The fiscal insanity began long, long before Bush.
Clearly still scratching my head why our former president never appeared at the Republican convention. I've never seen anything like it. My liberal co-workers joke about it at work.
He is the guy in charge .... why keep shifting the blame? Bush screwed up and now Obama screws up even worse. They are both screw ups! Obama knew what he was getting into and fought really hard to get the job. His promises and results did not happen. Get rid of him and give someone else a shot. Thats about all we can do for now. If you or I screw up at work, do we get to blame the last guy? No .... WE GET FIRED!
He misses the point of the documentary , which is the psyche of the engineer now driving this runnaway truck. Romney will try, successfully or not,to put the brakes on. Obama will press the pedal to the metal, until it comes to the inevitable bend on the road.
People forget that FDR’s New Deal, was more or less merely a continuation of policies already enacted under Hoover.
Just as Obama merely continued Bush’s policies for the most part.
Yes, but WHAT HE IS LEAVING OUT is that while he blames President Bush, he admits that DEMOCRATS in House and Congress pushed these bills through.
Many propositions in this article are absolutely correct. I haven’t seen the movie, but I did read and promote “The Roots of Obama’s Rage”. I totally agree with the book. Everyone (almost) ignores the fact that Bush’s last two years of his second term were dominated by a National Socialist Democrat Party Congress, which resisted Bush’s attempts to control Fanny May and Freddie Mack, leading to the meltdown which was caused by fast-food affirmative action home loan LAWS.
D’Souza was NOT dead wrong, he was dead on regarding what was in the book. I will have to respond more later, it’s getting too late for me now.
Regardless of how BAD Bush was.... he is NOT a Moslem influenced foreigner who has anti-american and anti-colonialism as the root motive for his actions. The Neo-cons are jerks and corrupt as hell, but they ARE still Americans. D’Souza IS right about that.
Public service had become Public? Serve US!
You really have to be stuck on stupid to think that Obama is just a continuation of the George W. Bush regime. The differences are greater than any two administrations in American history.
Never a fan of Bush, but if you look at Bush’s first four years where he had to deal with the recession he inherited and 9/11 and two wars simultaneously, he still never ran up $1.5 trillion deficits a year like Obama.
If he wants to attack Bush for prescription drug entitlements, no child left behind, amnesty for illegals and other left-wing compassionate conservative BS, that is his right, but that doesn’t mean Obama isn’t responsible for his own record.
Why do people always compare presidents?
Presidents are responsible for their own records.
Just because Bush sucked, Obama doesn’t get a pass for sucking worse.
Is he counting the expansion of Medicaid at the state level or merely looking at the federal spending side?
Once we are rid of Obama in the White House, we can get back to blaming Bush, and maybe with Ryan in the picture, we can start fixing things. While it is the “economy stupid,” there is much more about Obama that makes him dangerous, not the least of which is the fact the media won’t investigate him. We need to dethrone the media god.
"Does Obama really hate America?" (Duh! Does a bear **** in the woods?)
http://www.wnd.com/2012/09/does-obama-really-hate-america/?cat_orig=us
Dinesh D’Souza found in the United States a land of opportunity: Free from India’s repressive caste system, here was a nation where the native of Mumbai could determine his own destiny, a land where a poor boy could actually improve his lot in life through education and hard work. To him, it was like being loosed from the chains of bondage.
Could this anti-colonialist loathing for the wealthy nations of the West explain Obama’s apology tours? His odd choice in the first 40 days of his administration to return to England a bust of Winston Churchill, the man who crushed Kenya’s Mau Mau independence uprising in the 1950s and allegedly was responsible for torturing Obama’s grandfather? His State Department’s policy-reversing urging of negotiations between Argentina and the U.K. over the fate of the Falkland Islands?
And since Barack Obama Sr. was an anti-colonialist in the extreme, whose radical rhetoric made D’Souza’s pop’s pale in comparison, could those same views have penetrated the perspective of Obama Jr., author of “Dreams from My Father”?
These mind-bending questions presented in D’Souza’s surprise hit movie “2016: Obama’s America” suggest Obama’s political opponents may have been looking at him all wrong – rather than a leftwing socialist, the movie suggests, Obama could simply be a closet anti-colonialist.
“I was trying to fit Obama into American history,” the movie explains, “instead of into his own history.”
Oh, but there’s nothing “simple” about having an anti-colonialist in the Oval Office.
If D’Souza is right that Obama has concealed a raging anti-colonialist worldview in a false cloak of Ivy-league liberalism, then many of the Internet’s wildest rumors could prove legitimate: Obama actually would want to see the U.S. economy crumble; his budget cuts and nuclear reduction drive really would be at attempt to undermine the U.S. as a world superpower; his push for global warming initiatives really could be just a way of forcing developed countries to pay undeveloped nations billions in reparations; and … well, really … he would hate America.
As Daniel Pipes, founder of the Middle East Forum said in an interview in the film, “[Obama] doesn’t want the influence of the U.S. to expand, and that’s a strange thing for a U.S. president.”
As the movie points out, anti-colonialism in the White House would dramatically affect a president’s foreign policy: He would show sympathy for the Palestinians, for example, as the poor neighbors to Israeli “occupiers”; he would show animosity toward the British Empire; he would seek to redistribute the wealth and power of Western nations around the world; he would resent any superpower and weaken it militarily.
Economically, he would increase his country’s indebtedness to the rest of the world, stop the U.S. from developing natural resources – like oil, for example – and encourage, say, South American nations to drill instead. He might even demand the U.S. stop leading the world in, say, space exploration, and build up the scientific communities of third world nations instead.
Of course, as “2016: Obama’s America” points out, Obama has already done all these things.