-
Pick Obama’s Brain
May 16, 2013 | 61 comments
-
Remembering Herb Romerstein
May 10, 2013 | 5 comments
-
Obama’s Planned Parenthood Love Fest
April 29, 2013 | 69 comments
-
Happy Earth Day… and Lenin Day
April 22, 2013 | 33 comments
-
Bill Casey’s Centennial
April 5, 2013 | 69 comments
The Obama Watch
Obama the Colonialist?
His views on the matter are crystal-clear. So why so much liberal denial?
A friend emailed me a recent review of Dinesh D’Souza’s blockbuster film, 2016: Obama’s America, which is now the second largest-grossing political documentary of all-time. The review was done by an AP writer. My friend found it interesting that of all the criticisms made by the reviewer, there was no mention of Frank Marshall Davis — the literal (no exaggeration) card-carrying communist who was a mentor to a young Obama in Hawaii, and whom I briefly discuss with D’Souza in the film. I’m not surprised. My book on Davis, The Communist: Frank Marshall Davis, The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s Mentor, made the New York Times bestseller list, but I still haven’t received a single inquiry from anyone in the mainstream press — proof that I have my facts right.
Speaking of facts, the title of the AP review was “FACT CHECK: ‘Anti-colonial’ Obama not Plausible.” I disagree with several of the criticisms made by the reviewer, but I’d like to focus more generally on the claim in the headline, which is being advanced by liberals generally as a chief criticism of D’Souza’s film.
Is an “‘anti-colonial’ Obama not plausible?” Hardly.
In Dreams from My Father, the focus of the D’Souza film, Obama uses words like “colonial,” “colonialism,” or “neocolonialism” 17 times, plus associated words like “imperialism” (among others) three times. Phrases used in the book (sometimes by people Obama quotes) include “colonial administration,” “colonial West,” “white colonials,” “serving the interests of neo-colonialism,” and even a line about Christian missionaries bringing not religion but (allegedly) colonialism. In Dreams from My Father, Obama talks about arriving at Occidental College in 1979, just after getting bitter parting advice from Frank Marshall Davis on “the American way and all that sh-t.” There, at Occidental, Obama recalls: “At night, in the dorms, we discussed neocolonialism, Franz Fanon, Eurocentrism.” In that one sentence are multiple powerful/synonymous anti-colonial references, especially to Fanon, who was a militantly anti-colonial writer.
Those are simply Obama anti-colonial references in Dreams from My Father, far from the only source that could be entered into this conversation. There’s also the whole ongoing controversy over things like President Obama removing the Churchill bust from the Oval Office, which D’Souza mentions in the film. To the extent that such an action was an Obama statement against Churchill, D’Souza is certainly justified in linking the action to anti-colonial views by Obama. Churchill was a colonialist.
Generally speaking, however, it shouldn’t surprise anyone — especially liberals — that Barack Obama would be anti-colonial. Why wouldn’t he be? What’s up with liberals on this? I attended the same universities and lectures they have for the past 30 years. Anti-colonialism and American imperialism were the daily dogma. We were indoctrinated with those views. The political left is vehemently anti-colonial. Everyone knows that. Why wouldn’t Barack Obama be anti-colonial, especially given his upbringing? Why the defensiveness by liberals? Do liberals want Obama to be pro-colonial?
This would be like conservatives getting upset at claims that Ronald Reagan was anti-communist.
My only addendum to this conversation on Obama’s anti-colonialism relates to its sources. As noted, in D’Souza’s movie I talk about Frank Marshall Davis, Obama’s mentor. (See Paul Kengor’s cover feature on Davis in the current American Spectator.) Davis met with Obama a lot. How often? We don’t know. I’ve been told everything from a few times to weekly, the latter of which I cannot confirm. David Maraniss contends that Obama and Davis met upwards of 15 times — surely a conservative estimate that is nonetheless 15 times the number of times that Obama met with his Kenyan father, the inspiration for the title of his memoirs; that is, his Dreams.
As I document at great length, Davis was not only flagrantly pro-communist but flagrantly anti-colonialist. For instance, Davis attacked Winston Churchill and Harry Truman — Westerners opposing Stalin — as colonialists, not to mention imperialists, fascists, and racists. He vilified the Marshall Plan as “white imperialism” and “colonial slavery.” He wrote of the Marshall Plan, “I have watched with growing shame for my America as our leaders have used our golden riches to re-enslave the yellow and brown and black peoples of the world.”
I scanned Davis’s 1949-50 writings for the Honolulu Record, the Communist Party newspaper he wrote for. Colonialism dominated his writings. The word “colonial” or “colonialism” is used 17 times in those columns (ironically, the same number as Obama’s references in Dreams from My Father).
Did Obama get his colonial views from Frank Marshall Davis as much (if not more) than his father? That’s plausible. And we could get some of these answers if mainstream media sources like the AP — which have access to Obama that the likes of D’Souza and I don’t — would simply ask the president an occasional hard question about his upbringing; that is, an occasional fact-check.
To the contrary, that task is apparently left to conservatives. For doing so, we get fact-checked.
About the Author
Paul Kengor is professor of political science and executive director of The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College. He is author of the new book The Communist: Frank Marshall Davis, The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s Mentor. His other books include The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism and Dupes: How America’s Adversaries Have Manipulated Progressives for a Century.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (51) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Paul Kengor
More Articles From The Obama Watch
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/10/03/obama-the-colonialist
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Albert Constantine Jr.| 10.3.12 @ 7:25AM
Conservatives find themselves frequently fact-checked because facts are a critical part of our narrative, where we tend to try to start to deal with the world as it is, as opposed to how we would prefer it to be (Transform America, Workers’ Paradise, etc.).
Von Mises Jr| 10.3.12 @ 7:32AM
I read Mr. Kengor's articles at AT and commend him on his fine work. But I think we get suckered into liberal paradigms and need to step back.
Hannah Arendt's "The Origins of Totalitarianism" takes one through a tour of the past statist regimes. From the Roman Empire and Crusades, through Imperialism, colonialism, mercantilism, pan-movements in Europe to the USSR and Nazism; conquest and exploitation have been a product of the statist regimes.
Obama is seeking Marxist "One World Government" while he attacks across the Middle East with drone strikes and invaded Libya while claiming he is some kind of anti-colonial pacifist. I don't think so. It is more logical to conclude that today's liberals (whom are actually socialist with a make-up job) are all in for colonialism. They want to redistribute American and European wealth to the Middle East, Africa and any other wretched spot on earth so that they can rule the entire earth.
If the left was really anti-colonial, why are we still in Iraq and Afghanistan? Why did we invade Libya? Why are we injecting ourselves in Egypt causing regime change? Why all the billions in foreign aid?
Mises taught division of labor and free trade. Conservatives and Libertarians wish to trade with, not pillage or colonize other countries.
It is the socialist that keep starting wars or refusing to give them up.
TLP| 10.3.12 @ 8:55AM
Will ya look at that?
The Gang's all here.
I read Von Mises Jr's piece, and commend him on his fine work. However, I must disagree on his Disertations on why the World is on Fire, and who is to blame.
This has nothing to do with Trade. It has nothing to do with Colonialism. This is about Conquering and Subjugation.
The Muslim's Grandfather was never Tortured by the British. Neither was his Aids Riddled Alcoholic Muslim Father, his make believe Amalgam Girlfriend, or the Guys at the Harvard Law Review that he propositioned for Gay Sex.
None of them was Tortured by the British.
He is, after all - The One they've been waiting for. "They" being The Dark Armies of The End Times.
We're told that THE ONE will come upon the Scene, at a time of World Wide Catastrophe. That's exactly what he did. He came on to the scene, right after a World Wide Economic Crises, that Threatened the Civilized World.
His entire life, he has been Immersed in Evil. Mentored by Evil. Surrounded by Evil.
He was Raised on the teachings of a God of Murder in the Mosques and Schools that Preach Murder, and Teach Murder.
He has INTENTIONALLY Murdered Hundreds of Innocent Mexicans, in an effort to Disarm Law Abiding US Citizens.
He said NOTHING while Iran Murdered it's people, in the Streets, and Does Nothing, while Assad BUTCHERS the Syrian People by the Thousands.
TLP| 10.3.12 @ 9:15AM
And yet, we're supposed to believe that he waged his Illegal War on Libya, because Khaddafi had killed about 150 of his people?
He throws Mubarek to the Wolves ala Jimmy Carter and the Shah. And, lo and behold, we got the same result. A Radical Islamist State, bent on Domination.
Israel is hopelessly Surrounded, Outmanned and Outgunned. Their only hope has always been The U.S. that hope is gone, now, with this Son of the Father - Abu Hussain - Sitting on the Throne of the World's most Powerful Christian Nation, and Israel's only chance to Survive.
Did you see that Creature on YouTube? That is who he seeks out. These are His People. The Rabble. The Scum. Life's Lowest Common Denominator. He's reaching out to Sexual Freaks, the Sodomites, and those who would Murder their Children inside their womb. The Drug Addled, the Convicts, Perverts and the Pedophiles. He seeks to Rally the Worst of the Worst, for one last chance at an Unholy Caliphate, with Israel going first. Then Europe. And, then The United States.
Look at all of the Breadcrumbs that have been scattered all over the landscape, for everyone to see.
You need to think beyond the regular parameters.
And, you need to remember your Lord of the Rings.
THEY ARE COMING.
Von Mises Jr| 10.3.12 @ 10:19AM
I do not disagree that we see great evil in DC and among a large swath of the population.
My point is that if you follow who the colonialist, mercantilist, imperialist, Soviets and Nazis over time, these are the leftist/statist. The leftist throughout the Democrat Party and some NeoCon RINO's are the ones that are tyrannical and despotic, yet they try to claim that they are the ones that oppose war and aggression.
If you read Hayek's "War and Socialism" or Rothbards "War Collectivism," they not only explain (as did Mises) that socialism leads to war, but that socialist love war since once they centrally consolidate to a war economy, they argue that it worked so well that we should continue it in peacetime.
It is another way of creating a crisis to do things one could not otherwise do.
Al Adab| 10.3.12 @ 11:41AM
When a government makes foreign policy and public policy based on wishful thinking and delusions about our national enemies this is the result. Here we have a situation quite similar to that facing Carter in 1979 yet of course going unreported and unexamined by the American press and public. The determination to COEXIST ( bumper sticker of note) has brought us to this sad state. It is not, we might note, US citizens burning Egyptian and Libyan embassies or rioting over anti-Christian films ( a red herring BTW) but rather dedicated enemies of this nation making war. It should be treated as such.
Boar Hunter| 10.3.12 @ 12:59PM
What do you think Obama's motivation was for turning control of the Middle East over to power over to the Muslim Brotherhood?
TLP| 10.3.12 @ 1:59PM
I just told you.
DRed| 10.3.12 @ 12:01PM
Which was the school that taught murder again? Was it Public School #1 or the St. Francis of Assisi school?
Or is it that you're a liar and an idiot?
Von Mises Jr| 10.3.12 @ 1:47PM
And where did you learn this great knowledge and insight, D'Redful Communist? Green Eggs and Ham? Alice in Wonderland? We need references.
TLP| 10.3.12 @ 2:04PM
He's a Fckng Liar, and he knows it.
When I asked him why a Son of an Atheist Communist Mother and a Muslim Marxist Father, who was Adopted by a Muslim Stepfather in the Largest Muslim Country in the World would go to a Catholic School?
His answer was: "I have no idea."
The only TRUTH that has come out of his Stupid Mouth, since he got here.
Ignore him.
He's nobody.
DRed| 10.3.12 @ 2:27PM
Why would I know why Obama's mother and step-father sent him to a Catholic school? All I do know is that he did. I keep asking you why you repeatedly lie about this, and you always duck the question. You know you're just going to repeat this same bullshit tomorrow, or the next day because it fits your cozy little narrative. And then you morons wonder why Americans don't feel the same way you do about Obama.
DRed| 10.3.12 @ 2:44PM
Insight? I don't think it's particularly insightful to say that a guy who went to a Catholic school went to a Catholic school.
If, say, you ran a google search for "obama jakarta and st. francis" you'd get over a million results. Maybe you should start there. I don't want to tell you what to think, but I think you'll find that Obama spent 1st, 2nd and 3rd grade in Catholic School. Apparently, I'm a fucking liar for pointing this out.
Von Mises Jr| 10.3.12 @ 2:55PM
You sure you didn't Google Jerkoff instead of Jakarta? You got to use both hands when typing.
DRed| 10.3.12 @ 2:58PM
Yes, I am sure. So-what did you find out? Where did Obama go to school in second grade?
DRed| 10.3.12 @ 4:24PM
And. . .crickets.
Von Mises Jr| 10.3.12 @ 4:39PM
Perhaps just an idiot. But I am guessing you are also a liar. It comes with the package with socialist and Islamist.
DRed| 10.3.12 @ 5:08PM
uh, okay. Be that as it may, where did Obama go to school in the second grade? Simple question.
TLP| 10.3.12 @ 5:25PM
You are a Fckng Liar, and you know it.
And now, everybody knows it.
DRed| 10.3.12 @ 5:36PM
Yes, I'm sure your inability to answer a simple question demonstrates clearly to everyone that I'm a liar. How about answering my question? It seems to difficult for Von Mises the lesser, but between you and me he's not very bright. It took him something like six months to figure out the plural form of socialist. I don't think you're dumb, though. So where did the president go to school in second grade?
DRed| 10.3.12 @ 5:41PM
whoops-I meant to say 'too difficult'.
TLP| 10.3.12 @ 6:03PM
Give it up.
DRed| 10.3.12 @ 6:10PM
Hey, look who can't answer a simple question! Why, Timmy-you know how to use google, right? It couldn't be because the answer to the question reveals that you're full of shit, could it?
Bob K| 10.3.12 @ 12:38PM
Because it is about Oil!
It began over Oil.
It has continued over Oil.
It is still over Oil.
It will continue over Oil.
It will end over Oil.
Skippy| 10.3.12 @ 2:04PM
In what way?
Be 'splainin' yo'self.
Bob K| 10.3.12 @ 8:26PM
Do you think we would be over there "spreading democracy" for all these years if oil was not involved?
Albert Constantine Jr.| 10.3.12 @ 8:08PM
Mr. K, thank you for reminding me that I need to schedule an oil change for my wife's car.
C. Vernon Crisler | 10.3.12 @ 8:27AM
There is good colonialism and bad colonialism, a distinction the left cannot seem to make.
Good colonialism is the founding of the American colonies. Good colonialism is all about freedom.
Bad colonialism is simply when a nation wants its colonies to be little more than means to its own further enrichment or to pay off its debts -- can you say George Grenville?
nathan| 10.3.12 @ 8:32AM
Maybe BHO got his anti colonial feelings from James Michener? Read the book "Hawaii" sometime. One of the most memorable lines in the book was about the missionaries. "They went out to do good and they did well indeed." Having grown up in Hawaii I'm quite sure BHO is familiar with the book and what Michener was talking about. He need look no further about the "blessings" of colonialism than his home state. Ask the local people there at the time they got invaded how they felt about the "noble" colonials.
And once and for bloody all can we quit talking about the Churchill bust? I for one am delighted he removed it. Churchill was a ghastly racist committed to an empire that had no legal, moral, or ethical reason for existance. He was directly responsible for the deaths of 2-3 million people during the east Bengal famine of '42-'43. You have picture ships filled with food from Australia passing by India on their way to just sit at anchor in the Med for an operation that he knew the Americans would never green light while Indians were literally starving to death. During the famine Churchill asked if Gandhi had died and was most disappointed when told he hadn't. Avery his secretary for Indian affairs wrote in his diary published long after everyone was safety dead that Churchill was no different than Hitler (certainly where the famine was concerned) and deserved to be in the dock at Nuremburg. So yes by all means remove the bust of this most ghastly man. LONG overdue.
C. Vernon Crisler | 10.3.12 @ 8:40AM
I, too, lived in Hawaii, but all the anti-colonialism didn't start until the post-1960s era, when far left attitudes began to infect a people who had formerly been nice to Americans. Remember, just a few years before, Hawaii wanted to become a State, and succeeded.
nathan| 10.3.12 @ 10:35AM
Sir with all due respect, your perspective is that of the white colonists? At the time that the Americans invaded, and there's no other word for it, Hawaii, did the native polynesian inhabitants, being there first, want to be invaded? There are no indications that they were overjoyed at the thought of having their culture, their way of life, and everything else subordinated to the interlopers.
"Conservatives" today scream about the threat that muslims pose to this country, about the "borg" like menace they represent, how, given a chance they will assimilate us, they will impose sharia on us. Tell me sir, and the rest of you, are they any different than those colonists who invaded Hawaii for just the most noble of reasons (really just to make their fortunes and exploit the place like all imperialists do) and were the natives then any different than you today in resisting the outsiders who had no moral or ethical right to take what wasn't theirs in the first place? Are you not in some sense today, them? How does it feel to be on the other side as you feel someone try to colonize YOU?
C. Vernon Crisler | 10.3.12 @ 10:51AM
Americans did not "invade" Hawaii. You want to know the real reason for all this anti-colonialist whining? Here it is, greed:
From Wikipedia: "Proponents of [Hawaiian] sovereignty assume that if they can show that American presence at the time of the 1893 Revolution was unjust then it follows that the United States owes enormous reparations in cash and land to Hawaiians."
Al Adab| 10.3.12 @ 11:35AM
Independence for Hawaii. The dollar will go much further in their then third world economy; all the better for tourists. Besides, the US won't be sending so much money there to prop them up and keep those military bases funding their economy.
C. Vernon Crisler | 10.3.12 @ 8:46AM
Not good to dump on missionaries. Mark Twain, despite his ridicule, still praised the missionaries.
Crassus| 10.3.12 @ 10:22AM
It's been hip to dump on missionaries since the days of W. Somerset Maugham and "Rain."
nathan| 10.3.12 @ 10:48AM
The great commandmant, prime directive if you will, for ALL Christians, first and foremost, is what folks, repeat after me "Go into the world and preach the gospel". Christ made it clear before He left that it's not enough for YOU to get home (your home being in heaven after you become a Christian not on earth) but to assist others in getting there too by doing FOR others what someone did for you and that is exposing them to the saving message of Christ.
To the extent that missionaries, domestic or foreign do that, great. In countries like Pakistan and Afghanistan they do so at great personal risk to themselves.
Michener if you read the book and the context of the quote was referring to those missionaries who moved off the message as some do now and then. They can be as human as anyone else. They got out to Hawaii and elsewhere for that matter, saw that there was money to be made in ranching, you name it and abandoned their calling. If they want to fine, but it discredited the work of the other missionaries.
Michener was like Uris, in writing historical fiction he broadly did his homework. The Bridge At Andau, documenting the Hungarian uprising remains one of his best works.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 10.3.12 @ 8:55AM
"Having grown up in Hawaii I'm quite sure BHO is familiar with the book and what Michener was talking about. He need look no further about the "blessings" of colonialism than his home state. Ask the local people there at the time they got invaded how they felt about the "noble" colonials."
As the son of a Kenyan and a Kansan, would not Obama qualify as a colonial in Hawaii (no matter how Polynesian he might wish to appear, or how "Asian" he might attempt to classify the geography)?
nathan| 10.3.12 @ 10:40AM
Not disagreeing with you. (smile) But at some point you probably have to accept the as is? We're probably not for example going to return Texas to Mexico and if we were to return it anyone we would give it to the native Indians who were there first anyway.
But also, this gets a "little" complicated. Take CA north of San Diego. By most accounts, it was virtually uninhabited at the time of the Spanish. No one there, thank you it now belongs to us.
Pecos Pete| 10.3.12 @ 10:54AM
There were a few native americans. Let's give CA back to them.
Bob K| 10.3.12 @ 8:37PM
So far so good Nathan but Mexico is now in the process of taking back California and Texas--with our apparent consent. In fact, Robert D. Kaplan, who has an article here today about the debate has a chapter in his new book, "The Revenge of Geography" about just this. See the last chapter (15): "Braudel, Mexico and Grand Strategy."
Crassus| 10.3.12 @ 10:21AM
Funny you should mention James Michener. He once said that Reagan and Bush were racists because they cut taxes (this was before Bush's infamous tax deal that got him thrown out of office). I never read another word the guy wrote after I read that quote.
Who Knows?| 10.3.12 @ 10:27AM
“In this age of scientific materialism, doubt is the only certainty and the only substance of mind. Therefore, people in this age are profoundly crippled in their ability to grasp matters of higher certainty or to relate to subtler mental and physical processes. Likewise, they have been wounded in the root wherein we are naturally moved toward Truth (rather than what is merely and temporarily factual or true).” Da Free John, “Nirvanasara”, page 57
While this book is subtitled “Radical Transcendentalism And The Introduction Of Advaitayana Buddhism”, maybe we should apply this insight about “doubt” to even secular life. Especially politics!
Oh, what a mess humanity has made of “Truth”.
Remember the infamous divide, between those who were computer literate and those who were not? Gotta get computers into schools, so poor blacks can catch up.
Well, despite our scientific materialism age, who can DOUBT that the divide is as bad as ever, and growing, when it comes to truth? We are living in a world untied to commonly held truths, as DOUBT rules us all, while it permeates society.
How do you play tetherball, when the ball is untethered?
Yes, DOUBTS and suspicion are the prevalent moods.
Oh well, wonder always finds its way to sparkle. Wonders will NEVER cease.
Of this I have NO DOUBT.
Perfectly certain.
Kwan| 10.3.12 @ 12:36PM
The left knows that a majority of Americans will not support their agenda, therefore it must be forced upon the citizenry the way ObamaCare was. To achieve the fairness, redistribution of wealth, and equality the left tells us must take place, an authoritarian central government must supplant our current form of government. In other words turn over the country to a bunch of Marxist psychopaths, and forget about anything called the citizen's rights, so they can force upon us some vague and dubious agenda called "social justice".
RCV| 10.3.12 @ 2:23PM
The majority of Americans elected Obama and the Democrats, whose main electoral policy was health care reform. The Affordable Care Act was passed by a majority of both houses of Congress -- the People's elected representatives -- and signed by its elected President. This is called representative government. Sorry, but you lost the last election, and will likely lose the upcoming one as well.
Skippy| 10.3.12 @ 2:40PM
Visualize a nation of "No".
How ya' gonna keep us down on the plantation,
after we've seen...the death panels?
Defiance and resistance isn't just for leftists anymore.
When(the productive) 53% of us won't pay our taxes, whatever will the takers do then?
If you were frustrated with House Republicans before, imagine a few million of them telling Prince Bambo to stuff it where the choom don't burn.
Even if you takers win, it will be pyrrhic.
You can redistribute the contents of an empty piggybank and call it "Obama money".
RCV| 10.3.12 @ 4:10PM
Do just as you please, Skippy. The country will be just fine without you.
RCV| 10.3.12 @ 2:20PM
Tom Paine would be astonished to learn that it is now a sin in America to be "anti-colonial"!
sotto voce| 10.3.12 @ 4:23PM
Professor Kengor is right that D'Souza's documentary exposes the strong influence of FMD over the young Obama. What makes the documentary so powerful is that it's based on Obama's own words from "Dreams of My Father", words that clearly show the vacuum created by his father's desertion was filled by people who held a panoply of radical beliefs. As I watched the film I came to the conclusion that Obama's mother was much more important to his radical indoctrination than his absent father. I'm currently holding my nose and reading "The Audacity of Hope", which is only reinforcing my perception that Ann Dunham's progressive radicalism laid the foundation for Obama's skewed world view.
Kwan| 10.3.12 @ 6:33PM
Redbox will begin renting 2016: Obama's America on October 16th. If you haven't seen it rent it for yourself or a friend. I believe they only charge $1.00 + tax.
pigdog| 10.3.12 @ 7:45PM
Professor Kengor's reference to "Franz Fanon" is correct. That is, Kengor correctly quotes Obama, who had misspelled Fanon's first name, in "Dreams from My Father."
neilmaccallister| 10.4.12 @ 2:32AM
Yes, Obama is a colonialist.
See wikipedia: "Colonialism is a set of unequal relationships between the metropolis -- the 'mother city' -- and the colony, and between the colonists and the indigenous population."
In this case, the 'mother city' is Washington D.C., the 'colonies' are the Federal outposts in each of the 50 States, and the 'indigenous population' is us - the American people.
That includes 'Indians', too!