-
Farewell to the Spectator
December 16, 2011 | 8 comments
-
Tentative Praise for Ryan’s New Bipartisan Medicare Plan
December 15, 2011 | 3 comments
-
The Day Ahead: Thursday, December 15
December 15, 2011 | 0 comments
-
Examiner for Romney, National Review Against Gingrich
December 14, 2011 | 39 comments
-
Paul Ryan to Introduce New Medicare Plan with Democrat Ron Wyden
December 14, 2011 | 4 comments
The Spectacle Blog
There’s a lot not to like in Dinesh D’Souza’s National Review interview, in which he defends his new book and Forbes piece which both make the case that Barack Obama is motivated by some kind of secret anti-colonialist ideology. Among a number of other statements that, I’m sorry to say, verged on conspiracy theory, this remark stood out:
D’SOUZA: Ramesh Ponnuru and others say Obama is a conventional liberal. But conventional liberals don’t come out for the release of the Lockerbie bomber. Conventional liberals don’t return the bust of Winston Churchill from the Oval Office. Conventional liberals don’t block oil drilling in America while subsidizing oil drilling in Brazil. Conventional liberals don’t try to turn the space agency NASA into a Muslim-outreach program.
My anti-colonial theory beautifully explains all these facts…. plug in the anti-colonial theory and you can explain the facts; remove it and Obama’s behavior becomes almost impossibly difficult to account for.
There are two problems here. The first is that this line of reasoning is fallacious at a very basic level. You would hope that a reasonable person would come to that realization before using such logic as the basis for a book.
The other is that each of the “facts” D’Souza finds so troubling and bewildering — most of which are not real facts — are not related to the real-life bad things that Obama is doing. It’s worrying that someone as influential as Newt Gingrich would invoke D’Souza’s thesis as his basis for opposing Obama when Obama is promoting so many disastrous policies, none of which you need to dig through his background to find out. There really is no need to profile Obama’s mentality or motivation to know that he has a lot of bad ideas.
And if you really wanted to know about Obama’s background, the place to start would not be an apocalyptic reading of inconsequential and half-true stories from his presidency or poignant memories of his youth taken from his autobiographies — that way lies madness. Instead it would be a review of his personal history and career as a politician. As far as I know, there is only one such non-fawning book, and it is The Case Against Barack Obama by David Freddoso. It’s now ancient history, but with D’Souza’s new book it’s worth revisiting an interview I did with Freddoso when his book came out:
DF: Senator Obama votes for bills like the farm bill. He votes for a bridge to nowhere, and ethanol. He votes for and supports, generally, all the special-interest, corrupt systemic arrangements, where corporations are taking the taxpayer for a ride. Senator Obama is an avid supporter for all of these kinds of things, which is something I document in the book. He voted for ethanol twice, then went back and did his land deal with Tony Rezko on the same day: June 15, 2005.
All of these things form a broad pattern. It’s not as if he does these things on occasion — when he endorses the Cook County machine politician in the election it’s not an isolated incident; it’s something he’s done consistently. He attached himself in Springfield at the hip with Emil Jones, the state senate majority leader, who represents precisely this kind of politics.
I believe that very few politicians from either party can claim to be reformers, because reformers usually lose elections. That’s something Senator Obama knows and understands. He has never acted as a reformer because he doesn’t want to lose elections. He wants to win, and so he sides with the winners, who are in Chicago some really bad people who are not interested in the common good, who definitely put their own interest in front of the public good. Throughout his career Senator Obama has put his parochial interests ahead of the common good.
View all comments (23) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Joseph Lawler
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/10/06/on-obamas-worldview
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 6.18.13
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
Kenny| 10.6.10 @ 5:08PM
I'm with Dinesh D'Souza.
And anyway, who are you, Mr. Lawler, to condem all conspiracy theories?
From day one, Barack Hussein Obama struck me as more a Third World transplant than anything else. He may have been born in Hawaii but his soul is not in America, and just about everything he has done since assuming the presidency bears this out.
Alan Brooks| 10.6.10 @ 7:10PM
I met Dinesh D'Souza, twice. The first time he was aggressive; the second time, before the Surge, he was contrite, asking for unity in the face of the insurgency. He appears to be a first class thinker who doesn't have enough control of his emotions, so he bends to the wind.
Not dodgy or dishonest, just not stable enough to be an asian WFB.
Nancy| 10.7.10 @ 11:23AM
I agree with you Kenny. I don't think Mr. Obama has his heart in the US bests interest at all. I truly believe he is a 'sheep in wolfs' clothing. Nothing he has done so far has enhanced the United States standing in the world or at home in any way. Just my opinino.
Steve| 10.7.10 @ 2:22PM
I believe you meant to say, 'wolf in sheep's clothing'?
Andrew Keirns| 10.6.10 @ 5:11PM
OK -- I'll admit I have flawed logic right up front. Would it help if Dinesh had said something to the effect that if someone holds an anti-colonial viewpoint, that person would likely come out for the release of the Lockerbie bomber; return the bust of Winston Churchill from the Oval Office; block oil drilling in America while subsidizing oil drilling in Brazil; and turn the space agency NASA into a Muslim-outreach program?
Maybe Dinesh should have said Barack hates America as it has been; and that Barack wants to re-shape America according to Barack's view of America as it should be.
My sense is that with either approach -- or the original approach he took in the National Review interview -- Dinesh shows that Barack's foundation is indeed a 'real-life bad thing' that Obama is doing.
Alan Brooks| 10.6.10 @ 7:13PM
America IS a bad nation, merely better than the almost all the rest.
Perhaps you ought to read more about Churchill's ethics-- they were higher than most peoples'-- including Americans'.
Alan Brooks| 10.6.10 @ 7:17PM
"merely better than the almost all the rest"
...oops, that didn't come out right (must have been the 'socialist' school I went to).
Do over: America is better than almost any other nation- but such is a negative reflection on human nature.
Protect and Defend| 10.6.10 @ 5:53PM
first order of business when the Republicans win the House and Senate back, will be to impeach Obama for failure to carry out his sworn oath to protect the United states from all enimies, foreign and domestic.
Allowing illegal aliens to invade our country, without so much as declaring them domestic terrorist, is proof enough to begin impeach articles.
The latest victim is the 8 year old girl found alive luckily, but too late unfortunately. she was molested during the period between the time the illegal scum kidnapped her, and the brave man who pulled his truck in front of the wetback, thus saving the girls life, most likely.
These southern border cockroaches keep coming, bankrupting the nation with their anchor brats, and their dopers.
Drugs, disease, debt, and derelicts all.
So the next republican congress should bring up bill after bill, and let Obama veto them. Then in 2012, we can finally rid Washington of enablers of crime and criminals.
This is all my opinion, in case the Socialist Storm Troopers come calling.
DRed| 10.6.10 @ 5:55PM
Technically, his oath is to protect the constitution.
Bob S| 10.7.10 @ 3:46PM
Protect.... and defend.
Protect and Defend| 10.6.10 @ 5:55PM
Sorry for all the mis-spelled wording.
But the little girl who was kidnapped and molested, and barely escaped death has me so mad i am typing while furious.
Ken (Old Texican)| 10.6.10 @ 7:00PM
Joseph,
You are going to love my new novel, "Texas Said No!"
Mr. Obama will be impeached and disgraced before his first term is completed.
Who cares any more about his personal demons?
He has broken his oath.
Steve| 10.8.10 @ 9:51AM
Ken – if you're serious about your new book, where can I find it?
BTW – I, too, have long said Ø will not finish his full term. Many people must have incriminating info / documents, and sooner or later someone will have an ax to grind, documents will 'leak' out, and then the accusations and finger-pointing will begin. I can't wait. I have popcorn ready.
kingsmill| 10.6.10 @ 7:11PM
I suppose Paul Kengor is also a conspiracy theorist.
His new book "Dupes: How America's Adversaries Have Manipulated Progressives for a Century" outlines chapter and verse of the Communist party career of Frank Marshall Davis, a mentor of BHO.
D'Souza is correct in highlighting "anti-colonial" theory as an influence on BHO. It is not the only influence but it is an important part of Obama's Leftist worldview.
Rich Rostrom| 10.6.10 @ 8:53PM
Obama did not "come out for the release of the Lockerbie bomber". I've read the State Deparatment's letter. It's here: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/.....145142.htm
It says the U.S. "is not prepared to support Megrahi's release on compassionate release or bail..." and "maintains its view that... it would be most appropriate for Megrahi to remain imprisoned for the entirety of his sentence."
Furthermore, "if... Megrahi must be released... from Scottish custody, the U.S. position is that conditional release on compassionate grounds would be a far preferable alternative to prisoner transfer, which we strongly oppose." That is, Megrahi should not be returned to Libya.
Again, the U.S. "[is] not able to endorse the early release of Megrahi under any scenario..."; but if he was to be released, "any such release should only come after the results of independent and comprehensive medical exams clearly establishing that Megrahi's life expectancy is less than three months" and he should be required to remain in Scotland.
The Obamacrats have done many awful and stupid things, but this was not one of them.
jeane hopkins| 10.7.10 @ 12:50AM
You people are really nuts. Whatever you may want other people to think you cannot ignore the fact that his mother was a white american. You cannot and will not write his legacy no matter how hard you try.
Lazy jack | 10.7.10 @ 8:33AM
Obama's view on his American people, and for contrast, some other leaders:
It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.
Barack Obama
A nation's culture resides in the hearts and in the soul of its people.
Mohandas Gandhi
People might not get all they work for in this world, but they must certainly work for all they get.
Frederick Douglass
You'll be free or die!
Harriet Tubman
We really do not need others to tell us about the President's world view. His own words are more than enough. Find almost any other great leader, big or small, and you will find the depth you thought you were voting for in 2008.
Lazy Jack
For more:
www.thanksforthelaughs.wordpress.com
Steve B | 10.7.10 @ 1:31PM
While sometimes interesting, speculations about motive remain just that - speculations. Motivation resides inside peoples heads, and is something people are most likely to lie about.
Nonetheless, the left loves to attribute bad motives to their opponents as a way of discrediting their arguments without actually having to address them.
IMHO if you want to discuss motivation, you have to be ruthlessly honest and introspective. As in, "I think this could be his motivation because I can see it in myself in similar circumstances."
D'Souza appears to do this in his thesis, though this doesn't explain Obama's like-minded supporters.
Jim S| 10.7.10 @ 1:40PM
D'Sousa isn't the first to see the colonial experience in Obama. L. E. Ikenga wrote about this over a year ago at the American Thinker. She describes Obama as a typical African colonial politician.
AntiLawler| 10.7.10 @ 3:09PM
Rubbish, Lawler. Utter Rubbish.
D'Souza made perfect sense to me and I find nothing ominous in Newt's quoting him. (I find it more ominous that more people don't find Newt's arguments obvious and clear.) Claiming that someone's argument is fallacious without explaining the fallacy is a fallacy in itself, or should be. I've most often encountered that tactic from severely blindered intellects with vested interests in the conclusions of their own syllogisms.
Monte| 10.8.10 @ 8:06AM
I agree with AntiLawler - very well stated!
D'Souza has a very keen intellect, as evidenced by this large body of work - who is the Lawler character? Never heard of him, and likely won't hear of him again!