Actually, I’d like to know how D’Souza thinks



Will writes from Washington, D.C. (well, Arlington, Virginia). You can reach him at willblogcorrespondence at gmail dot com.

Related Post Roulette

28 Responses

  1. Avatar ThatPirateGuy says:

    As someone who has been in this guys cross hairs and seen his debates on religious topics, I can assure you that he has no need to make sense or stick to facts. He strikes me as the definition of a bullshit artist. He doesn’t actually care if what he is saying is true or not, he just wants you to think he is smart and right.Report

  2. Avatar Christian says:

    Dinesh D’Souza is truly bizarre. I am amazed that he was published.Report

  3. Avatar North says:

    It was a jawdropping article. I’d always thought he was so thoughtful and honest and then he plops down this ball of rank dishonesty wrapped about with idiocy.Report

  4. Avatar Bernard says:

    To really put the interview in context, it should be pointed out that K-Lo was the NR scribe conducting the interview. I’m startled she didn’t shoehorn some idolatrous praise to the Pope in there somehow.Report

  5. Avatar Robert Cheeks says:

    Hey, I’m the one who said Imam Barry was a cultural Muslim and a Kenyan Marxist and its Dinesh that racks in the money on the talking head circuit…whas up wid dat?Report

  6. Avatar MFarmer says:

    I think D’Souza is saying that Obama has a natural sympathy for those in occupied or exploited countries, not that he will ail to execute the war — he has to execute the war, but that doesn’t mean he isn’t sympathetic with the resisters. It’s not strange that Obama was influenced by the ideas of his father and mother and views much of America’s past as exploitative of third world countries — many on the left believe that who didn’t even have the parental influence. It’s not strange that America could elect a president with socialist tendencies — the left is open about socialist ideas, and the ideas are being bandied about everywhere, especially among unions.Report

    • Avatar North says:

      @MFarmer, Mike have you read D’Souza’s article? He’s making enormous leaps and truely outlandish claims. Considerably more wackadoodle than what you’re suggesting here.Report

      • Avatar ThatPirateGuy says:


        I don’t blame Mike for not reading the article. That was wise decision as he only gets so many year, days, hours, and minutes on this earth. Why spend it reading something D’souza wrote?

        It is for that exact reason that I will never finish reading Atlas Shrugged and I won’t start and of her other books either.Report

      • Avatar MFarmer says:

        I watched him explain his book the other night in detail. It’s plausible. I’m not saying it’s true, but it’s wackadoodle — what in the article do you reject as impossibly, wackadoodily crazy, specifically?Report

        • Avatar silentbeep says:


          Everything. The whole thing is “wackadoodle.”Report

        • Avatar North says:

          D’Souza asserts that Obama’s administration underwrote and supported offshore drilling in Brazil but not in America. In actuality the support he cites was issued by the Export-Import Bank which at the time of the decision was five member board, 3 republicans 2 democrats, all appointed by…. President Bush!

          D’souza asserts that Obama’s June 15th speech regarding the oil spill focused not on cleanup strategies but rather on railing about America’s proportional consumption of the worlds oil.
          In doing so D’souza seemed to have missed the first 2/3rds of the damn speech which were all about cleanup and on top of that D’souza got his numbers so wrong that even Forbes prostrate fact checkers had to issue a correction.

          D’souza asserts in the article that Obama was solely responsible for TARP and has forbidden the Banks from paying TARP funds back in order to keep a leash on them. This of course ignores the original author of TARP (which Obama did admittedly vote in favor of in the Senate) Bush and ignores the fact that as of now over half of the funds have been paid back by the very banks Obama is supposedly preventing from paying back.

          Frankly there’s damn little to consider not insane or incorrect in the article, especially when he goes winging off into lala-land by holding quotes from Obama’s book to his forehead and thus coming to some intuitive understanding of the motives and thoughts in Obama’s head.Report

          • Avatar MFarmer says:

            You know what — I’ll drop this for right now, because if there are pertinent facts regarding Obama’s influences and ideology, they will be revealed, and we can all decide for ourselves. I believe America elected someone they knew little about, and I blame the media for not doing its job. If I’m wrong about Obama, I will be one of the first to apologize. It’s useless to argue at this point, because there’s too much hyperbole and defense. The facts will be revealed and then I’ll make a final judgement. What might seem plausible could be false — who knows?Report

  7. Avatar valdemar says:

    From a British POV, it’s quite clear that Obama is pissed off about the Scottish (not British) government’s decision. But then, it’s also clear that Obama is a moderate conservative and the Tea Party etc are bigoted know-nothing loons. Perhaps distance lends perspective in such cases.Report

  8. Avatar Mike Schilling says:

    Shouldn’t somebody be asking D’Souza these questions?

    No, they should be ignoring him completely. His 15 minutes were up decades ago.Report