“Again, the concept is just stupid and D’Souza is an imbecile. The fact that he is Anti American while at it just adds to it.”
What I go from “2016” was that D’Souza considered Obama to have been profoundly influenced by anti-colonial views while growing up and that this influence explains Obama’s tendency to want to diminish the power and influence of the United States. D’Souza’s arguments were well reasoned and compelling.
I dispute the term the use of the term “imbecile” in this discussion, at least with regards to D’Souza.
Obama has been using the same liberal playbook every liberal has since Wilson.
If Hillary had become President, the policies would have been the *exact* same. Not because of some stupid anti colonial view, but because of the stupidity of liberalism and their awful policies in America.
Obama was successfully able to do what Bill wasn’t with both regards to health care and our international standing
There is 0 logic in D’Souza’s thesis.
“What I go from “2016” was that D’Souza considered Obama to have been profoundly influenced by anti-colonial views while growing up and that this influence explains Obama’s tendency to want to diminish the power and influence of the United States. D’Souza’s arguments were well reasoned and compelling.”
This was my take on D’Souza’s “America” too.
As far as our founding fathers, my take is that they would have been perfectly happy to be part of the British empire if the hadn’t been oppressed by the crown. No taxation without representation. They believe that Britain was oppressing the colonies purely on the fact of where they had been born. They considered themselves to be British subjects until the oppression became more than they could bear.