Have nothing to do with the [evil] things that people do, things that belong to the darkness. Instead, bring them out to the light... [For] when all things are brought out into the light, then their true nature is clearly revealed...

-Ephesians 5:11-13

Tag Archives: Saul Alinsky

Judicial Watch: Soros Using U.S. Funds to Help Overthrow Macedonian Government

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Friday, April 21, 2017:

Saul Alinsky

Saul Alinsky

As part of its investigation into just how American taxpayer monies are being used by George Soros’ groups to infiltrate Macedonia’s conservative government, Judicial Watch on Wednesday filed suit against the U.S. Department of State (DOS) and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).

Judicial Watch, a conservative non-partisan government watchdog group, said in its suit that USAID, working with radical elements inside the DOS (left over from the Obama administration), have disbursed $5 million to

Keep Reading…

The New Attorney General Supports Local Police in Contrast to the Former AG, Who Worked to Assimilate Them

This article was published by the McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Wednesday, April 5, 2017:

English: A fully modern Police Box in Baltimor...

A fully modern Police Box in Baltimore, Maryland based on the British concept. The box is located on North Charles Street near Penn Station and contains a climate controlled workspace with an exterior emergency phone.

Revolutionary historians know all about the Hegelian Dialectic and its postulate that human beings can be driven to take a certain course of action by offering an argument (thesis), a counter-argument (antithesis), and a final resolution (synthesis). If one can control both sides of the conversation, the outcome is certain.

Take, for example, the death of Freddie Gary in 2015 in Baltimore. The details remain sketchy even today about exactly how he died in the back of the police van, but his death served the purpose of the communists.

Keep Reading…

Is Obama’s New Home the “Nerve Center” for Anti-Trump Resistance?

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, March 6, 2017:

Is former president Barack Obama’s new home in D.C.’s posh Kalorama neighborhood the “nerve center” for the anti-Trump resistance? Leon Wagener thinks so, and his story, originally published by the British tabloid the Daily Mail on March 1, gained national attention. Quoting “a family friend” of the Obamas, Wagener wrote that “Obama’s goal is to oust Trump from the presidency either by forcing his resignation or through his impeachment,” splicing together a series of quotes elicited from this “friend”:

Keep Reading…

Who is Running OFA and the Indivisible Project, and Where?

This article was published by The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Monday, March 6, 2017:

English: Barack Obama delivers a speech at the...

In the beginning OFA stood for Obama for America, a fundraising effort during Obama’s first presidential run in 2008. After his inauguration it changed its name to Organizing for America and was housed inside the Democratic National Committee, which essentially controlled it. Now that Obama is out of office it has changed its name once again, to Organizing for Action, and its actual physical location and control center is unknown. It’s driving an attempt that has never been tried before: to thwart the programs of the new administration through political action, usually non-violent but occasionally violent.

OFA (the latest version) trains leftist organizers in the radical street tactics taught by leftist Saul Alinsky in his Rules for Radicals (and dedicated, by the way,

Keep Reading…

Saul Alinsky’s Influence in Washington is Already Being Reduced by Trump

This article was published by The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Friday, December 30, 2016:  

Français : Logo SEIU

One of Saul Alinsky’s rules, perhaps the most vicious, is this:

The means-and-ends moralists, constantly obsessed with the ethics of the means used by the Have-Nots against the Haves, should search themselves as to their real political position. In fact, they are passive – but real – allies of the Haves. The most unethical of all means is the non-use of any means.

In other words, anything goes if the end merits it.

This is what has driven the Service Employees International Union – the SEIU – for years. Whatever means used to achieve a given end are acceptable. This is what Kenneth Gladney learned the hard way in 2009 when he was peaceably protesting ObamaCare. At a St. Louis town hall meeting, four SEIU thugs surrounded him and taught him the lesson:

Keep Reading…

SEIU to Cut Its Budget by Nearly a Third

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, December 29, 2016:  

Glenn Beck

Glenn Beck’s “Tree of Revolution” – See SEIU in upper left

A private memo issued to all Service Employees International Union (SEIU) staff and obtained by Bloomberg shows the union is cutting its budget by $100 million — nearly a third of the union’s operating budget — along with severe cuts in staff starting the first of the year.

Wrote Mary Kay Henry, SEIU president:

Keep Reading…

Saul, Hillary, and Gun Confiscation

This article was published by The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Wednesday, July 27, 2016:  

Saul Alinsky

Saul Alinsky

Wikipedia softly proclaims Saul Alinsky as the “founder of modern community organizing,” who used his “organizing skills” to “improve the living conditions of poor communities.” Alinsky, however, was more than that. Much more. A closer look (see sources below) reveals a Marxist whose goal was to enable fellow travelers in their attempts to destroy capitalism in the United States and replace it with communism. From his Rules for Radicals, Alinsky states:

Keep Reading…

Undercover Video Confirms Hillary’s Strategy to Ban All Firearms

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, July 26, 2016:  

Rules for Radicals

The first 57 seconds of James O’Keefe’s latest undercover video interview, of a Clinton delegate from California, confirms what many have long suspected: Hillary Clinton’s real goal of complete and total confiscation of all firearms from every American citizen is being hidden behind benign and persuasive phrases such as “common sense gun control” and “protect our families,” etc.

It also reveals what happens when the “useful idiot” in the video learns that she has been exposed for what she is: a mouthpiece for the movement to disarm America and ultimately turn it into a totalitarian state.

Most importantly it reveals

Keep Reading…

White Police Involved in Jamar Clark Shooting Won’t Be Charged

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, April 4, 2016:  

Hennepin County (Minnesota) Attorney General Mike Freeman told the press last Wednesday that the two officers involved in the November 15 shooting of Jamar Clark will not face criminal charges. Federal and internal department investigations into the incident continue.

On the evening of November 15, Clark attacked his former girlfriend to the point where paramedics were called. When Clark attempted to interfere with the EMTs,

Keep Reading…

Review: America: Imagine a World Without Her (book and film)

This review first appeared at TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, July 24, 2014:

Statue of Liberty

Dinesh D’Souza’s movie America: Imagine the World Without Her, co-produced and directed by John Sullivan and Gerald Molen, is based on his book with the same title and, like his previous offering, 2016: Obama’s America, is filled with nuggets of pure gold. However, just like his previous effort, it takes some effort to mine them and to separate them from the iron pyrite — fools’ gold — that often misleads and distracts the reader and viewer.

His book was released in early June and its initial popularity was unintentionally enhanced by Costco’s decision to pull the book from its stores followed by its awkward reversal to restore it to those same stores. D’Souza’s first film was the second-highest grossing political documentary of all time, while his present effort, released over Independence Day weekend, is already in seventh place, and climbing.

His distractions begin with his title. At no time in either his book or his movie does he answer the question of how the world would look without America’s influence. His first chapter is inaccurately titled as well: Suicide of a Nation. A suicide is self-inflicted, a deliberate purposeful effort to end one’s life. This title assumes that the average American is deliberately immolating his country by ignoring his responsibility as an informed voter in a constitutional republic.

D’Souza quickly corrects that initial idea, however, by focusing his attention on both the myths and the machinations of the disciples of destruction who are deliberately weakening the country by deceiving those voters. D’Souza might have titled his book America: Imagine a World Without Saul Alinsky and Howard Zinn, but that probably wouldn’t have garnered the audience or the coveted A+ rating it received from CinemaScope.

There are other difficulties that need to be exposed before this review can begin in earnest. Underlying D’Souza’s work is the assumption that Progressives want to punish America for its alleged theft: for its stealing of land from Mexico and Native Americans, for its eternal meddling in the Middle East to secure its oil, for its co-opting of the labor from its slaves in the 19th century, for its looting of resources from poor countries around the world. At no time, however, does D’Souza acknowledge the real purpose behind efforts to bring down America’s standard of living: to comfortably submerge the United States into the New World Order. There is no mention of the influence of foundations such as Ford, Carnegie, or Rockefeller. The world-government-promoting Council on Foreign Relations garners not a single reference in either the book or the movie. Thus, the “punishment” meme is a distraction away from the Progressives’ real intentions.

D’Souza repeats the myth that the Civil War was fought primarily to end slavery, and that Obama absorbed most of his colonialist-oppressive worldview from his father, when instead it came from hard-core communist Frank Marshall Davis. D’Souza claims that America is the “first country in history to be based on invention and trade” without any explanation as to why. He fails to explain the vital and fundamental roles the rule of law, enforcement of contracts, private property, and especially that of a limited government that allowed people to write their own ticket to their futures.

That being said, there is much useful for those involved in the freedom fight, including responses to claims made by Progressives that America is guilty of massive theft and needs to be punished. Early on he makes clear his intentions and purposes:

I intend to turn the progressive critique on its head. [Progressives] are not on the side of the ordinary citizen, because their policies lead to stagnation, impoverishment, indebtedness, and decline — all in evidence today.

It is progressives who rely on government seizure and bureaucratic conquest to achieve their goals and increase their power….

I intend to blow the whistle on these people, starting with Obama and continuing with Hillary Clinton and the whole progressive menagerie.

For instance, he rebuts the claims that America stole vast territory from native Americans without remuneration or guilt:

The Indians have gotten a bad deal. At the same time, we should be clear about what the alternatives are.… You say, “Give us back the Black Hills,” You point out that there is uranium and other minerals in those hills, and now that land is worth a fortune. Once again, no Indian tribe knew how to mine uranium and no Indian tribe knew what to do with uranium if they had it.

Other Americans have added value to the Black Hills by figuring out how to tap its resources, and now the Indians want the land back so they can take advantage of what others have figured out how to do.

He dismisses claims that America stole Mexican territory:

After the [Mexican-American War ended in 1848], the United States immediately recognized as valid the property rights of Mexicans who were now part of U.S. territory. The change was not in any individual’s land ownership but in the fact that people who were once Mexicans now became Americans.

While progressives deplore American aggression … what we do know is that the vast majority of Mexicans who ended up on the American side of the border, following the Mexican War, never attempted to return to Mexico. And neither have their descendants.

His response on the big screen is even more convincing, showing that following the war the United States essentially owned all of Mexico, but gave half of it back. It also paid $15 million to the government of Mexico and assumed some $3 million of debt that government owed to American citizens. So much for colonialism, according to D’Souza.

As far as slavery is concerned, D’Souza was equally candid:

Did America owe something to the slaves whose labor had been stolen? … That debt … is best discharged through memory, because the slaves are dead and their descendants are better off as a consequence of their ancestors being hauled from Africa to America.

He enlists the help of Muhammad Ali to make his point. As D’Souza noted in both his book and movie, following one of his most famous fights in the 1970s held in Zaire, Ali was asked: “Champ, what did you think of Africa?” Said Ali: “Thank God my granddaddy got on that boat!”

D’Souza also makes a compelling point by bringing to light some history that Progressives ignore: that there were black slave owners oppressing their slaves in addition to white owners.

He successfully enlists the help in both his book and the film of Alexis de Tocqueville, who highlighted his astonishment as he observed the American experiment in person in the early 1800s. He noted that people considered themselves equal to everyone else, that it was a voluntary society where people helped other people, and no one ran to the government for assistance. De Tocqueville considered the Christian religion as foundational to political freedom while noting that slavery degrades the work ethic: It makes slave owners lazy, as well as the slaves, as neither has the incentive to engage in work.

Another of D’Souza’s nuggets is his revelation that the first female millionaire in the United States was black: Sarah Breedlove, otherwise known as Madam C. J. Walker, the founder of Madam C. J. Walker Manufacturing Company, a maker of beauty and hair products for black women. In a lengthy clip, D’Souza had a black actress play the part of Breedlove in encouraging other black women to get involved in her company. It was something right out of an Amway recruiting presentation! Over and over again, Breedlove, born a slave but emancipated in 1865, reiterated the American promise: Given the opportunity, anyone in America can make their own future.

D’Souza spent the balance of the 100-minute long film exposing two of the prime movers behind the Progressive lies, Howard Zinn and Saul Alinsky. Zinn, a hard-core communist, authored A Peoples’ History of the United States which has sold more than two million copies and is required reading at colleges across the land. Zinn described his goal in writing it elsewhere as “not a revolution in the classical sense of a seizure of power, but rather from people beginning to take power from within the institutions.”

D’Souza outed Saul Alinsky in two riveting revelations. The first of these was Alinsky’s devotion to Lucifer as the first radical, dedicating his book Rules for Radicals to him:

Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins — or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom — Lucifer

The second was D’Souza’s revelation that Alinsky was mentored in his youth by Frank Nitti, best known as Al Capone’s “enforcer” and later the front man for the Chicago Outfit following Capone’s incarceration. Alinsky learned firsthand from Nitti just how extortion worked thanks to Nitti’s vast experience in prostitution, gambling, control of labor unions, and blackmailing of the Hollywood film industry.

D’Souza traced the links in his film from Zinn and Alinsky to Obama and Hillary Clinton. Unfortunately the flow charts briefly shown on the screen weren’t reproduced in his book, but his intention is clear: Obama is a disciple of Alinsky who was a disciple of Nitti, all of whom are disciples of the Great Deceiver Himself.

For those not involved in the freedom fight, the book and the movie on which it is based might be a bit much to digest in one sitting. Happily, evidence and proof is available not only in the copious notes provided by D’Souza for each chapter, but also from The John Birch Society (jbs.org).

In this reviewer’s opinion D’Souza has created a good work, despite its flaws, and will help those long involved in that fight with new insights, new revelations, and new responses to old tired charges that America was built on theft.

 

Keep Reading…

D’Souza Should have Named it America: Imagine a World Without Zinn and Alinsky

This article was first published at The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Wednesday, July 23, 2014:

Saul Alinsky

Saul Alinsky

After viewing the movie and reading the book entitled America: Imagine a World without Her, one is inclined to suggest a new title. For starters, D’Souza, the author and producer of his first film 2016: Obama’s America, never explains what the world would look like without America’s presence. That is left up to the reader and viewer. He starts off badly, as well, naming his first chapter Suicide of Nation. This presumes that American citizens are doing themselves in deliberately, with malice aforethought.

But, as D’Souza shortly points out, that is hardly the case. There are evil forces afoot attempting to

Keep Reading…

Obama’s New Budget Raises Taxes and Increases the National Debt

OBAMA: COMMUNIST PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

(Photo credit: SS&SS)

This article first appeared at the McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Monday, April 29, 2014:

The Congressional Budget Office, in introducing its latest analysis of President Obama’s proposed budget, could just as easily have quoted Robert Welch, the founder of the John Birch Society, who said back in 1974 that the future would bring:

Keep Reading…

Congressional Budget Office Confirms Obama’s Continuing Attack on the Middle Class

Saul Alinsky

Saul Alinsky (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Robert Klein, a nationally renowned accountant who has written widely on taxes for many respected journals, was astonished to learn how much the taxes on his wealthy clients jumped just in the last year:

For [my] clients in the 39.6% tax bracket … their average federal income tax liability was $436,000, $51,000 greater than their 2012 tax liability … an average increase [of] 13.3%…

 

In summary, if you were in the 39.6% tax bracket in 2013, the 4.5% increase in your tax bracket, combined with additional income-tax liability resulting from additional tax on Medicare wages, a loss of itemized and personal exemption deductions, a 5% surcharge on long-term capital gains and qualified dividends, and the 3.8% tax on net investment income, reduced your spendable income considerably.

 

The damage was [even] greater for those subject to state income tax to the extent that unfavorable state tax law changes took effect in 2013.

Keep Reading…

Reaping the Whirlwind: the Colorado Model and Gun Control

On Monday, February 18th, the Democrat-controlled Colorado House of Representatives passed all four gun control bills over an out-numbered Republican minority’s noisy and occasionally emotional protests.

Keep Reading…

Hillary’s Last Hurrah

aids2012_DSC_0404

aids2012_DSC_0404 (Photo credit: Michael Fleshman)

And none too soon, either. Her performance, if you could call it that, was appalling. She looked haggard, she behaved abominably, she was coarse, rude, vindictive – in other words, the old Hillary that we used to know and loathe.

Wesley Pruden, writing in the Washington Times, reminded us of those good old days:

The “old” Hillary Rodham Clinton emerged yesterday in the congressional hearings about what happened in Benghazi, and it’s the Hillary image that’s likely to last.

Pressed for the first time to answer sharp public questioning about her part in the episode, she grew angry and combative, more like the Hillary who screamed vulgarities and threw lamps at her husband at the White House than a smooth and accommodating  secretary of state.

I remember reading an expose of the Clinton years by a member of the secret service who was forced to attend to and watch over the Clintons in the White House. She was a first class witch. No wonder Willie cheated!

But with the passage of time, those

Keep Reading…

Don’t Bother Seeing 2016: Obama’s America?

I lost an hour and a half of my life Sunday at a matinee showing of the sleeper-hit documentary “2016: Obama’s America.” But I kept the stub for tax purposes, and you get to read this column. With luck, we’ll both end up just slightly worse off for the experience.

President Barack Obama and Speaker of the Hous...

President Barack Obama and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi at the US Capitol. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Gene Healy is a VP at Cato, one of my favorite think tanks, but I think he has successfully missed the main point of the movie: Obama is a mystery, and D’Souza is trying to figure it out.

Healy uses the rhetorical device of belittlement to misdirect the conversation:

D’Souza, “2016’s” narrator, stresses his commonalities with the president: born the same year, both with third-world parentage, both steeped in an anticolonial tradition. “I get it,” D’Souza assures us, which is why he alone has the secret decoder ring that can explain Obama’s positions on the war on terror, Israel, the Falkland Islands and much else besides.

This even applies to Obamacare:

Then there was the health care bill” D’Souza segues. But who needs a decoder ring to explain why, like every Democratic president of the post-WWII era save Jimmy Carter, Barack Obama pushed for universal health insurance? Does “anticolonialism” explain Obama’s embrace of a plan cooked up in a conservative think tank and first implemented by his 2012 Republican opponent?

This is misdirection of the first order. Just because Obama (more accurately, Nancy Pelosi and her thuggery) got Obamacare passed by Congress when other presidents couldn’t, doesn’t diminish the impact of it on

Keep Reading…

Obama Honors Cesar Chavez, Naturally

Duncan West speaking with Cesar Chavez. The De...

Cesar Chavez (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

CNN reported that President Obama has dedicated a monument to Cesar Chavez:

Describing it as a “day that has been a long time coming,” President Barack Obama made modern history Monday by announcing the creation of a monument to honor the late labor and civil rights activist Cesar Chavez…

The president spoke at a ceremony in Keene, California, on land known as Nuestra Senora Reina de la Paz, where, from the 1970s until the early ’90s, Chavez lived and led his farm worker movement.

Decades ago, Obama said, when Chavez began his farm worker movement, “no one seemed to care about the invisible farm workers who picked the nation’s food — bent down in the beating sun, living in poverty, cheated by growers, abandoned in old age, unable to demand even the most basic rights.”

“Cesar cared,” the president said. “In his own peaceful and eloquent way he made other people care too.” Chavez’s organized labor marches and other protests, including a boycott of table grapes, led to “some of the first farm worker contracts in history,” Obama said. “Let us honor his memory, but most importantly let us live up to his example.”

Obama wasn’t alone in singing Chavez’ praises. Joining the chorus was Ken Salazar, Obama’s Secretary of the Interior and former Senator and State’s Attorney General from Colorado. Salazar called Chavez “one of the heroes of the 20th Century.”

Of course he would. Let’s look for a quick moment at Chavez’ background, courtesy of

Keep Reading…

What Makes Obama Tick?

A FRAUD THROUGH AND THROUGH

(Photo credit: SS&SS)

After hitting No. 2 on the New York Times’ best-seller list in early September, “Obama’s America: Unmaking the American Dream” author Dinesh D’Souza was asked why he was surprised at the success of both his book and the movie based on it: “2016: Obama’s America”. He said: “It shows a real hunger for information on Obama. There’s a sense [that] we haven’t got the full story on this guy.”

The official narrative is that President Barack Obama is a graduate of Harvard Law, the first African-American president, whose father is from Kenya and his mother from Kansas. As D’Souza takes great pains to point out, the official narrative hides an enormous amount of background from view. D’Souza exposes some of that background and then claims that Obama adopted his father’s “anti-colonialism” – the doctrine which Argentine Marxist revolutionary Che Guevara called “a world system, the last stage of capitalism [which] must be defeated in a world confrontation” – which maintains that the West, primarily America, got rich by invading, occupying and looting poor countries to obtain their mineral wealth. As D’Souza noted in Forbes magazine in September 2010:

Barack Obama, Sr.

Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

From a very young age and through his formative years, Obama learned to see America as a force for global domination and destruction. He came to view America’s military as an instrument of neocolonial occupation.

He adopted his father’s position that capitalism and free markets are code words for economic plunder. Obama grew to perceive the rich as an oppressive class, a kind of neocolonial power within America.

In his worldview, profits are a measure of how effectively you have ripped off the rest of society, and America’s power in the world is a measure of how selfishly it consumes the globe’s resources and how ruthlessly it bullies and dominates the rest of the planet

As a result, Obama seeks “a smaller America, a poorer America, an America unable to exert its will, an America…in decline so that others might rise…America needs to be taken down a notch.”

There are at least two problems with D’Souza’s thesis: one, Obama never

Keep Reading…

Is the “2016” Movie Impacting the Election?

Valerie Richardson – Impact of ‘2016’ on 2012 presidential race uncertain

As of last weekend, “2016” had grossed more than $30 million, making it the second-highest-grossing political documentary and fifth-highest documentary of all time. It appears poised to climb still higher, given that it continues to play on 1,876 screens after opening in wide release Aug. 24, according to Box Office Mojo.

I hope you’ve had a chance to see the movie “2016: Obama’s America.” I have, and previously reviewed it.

That doesn’t mean that I thought the movie was accurate or profound. What I found remarkable, and still do, is the number of people seeing it. They are hungry for information about the president. They know they’ve been kept in the dark about his past. And that’s a good thing. D’Souza admits it:

There is a hunger for information about Obama. Americans feel that they don’t have the full story and the film supplies the missing pieces.

Well, not exactly. My editor at The New American has asked me to do a lengthy piece for the print magazine on “What Makes Obama Tick.” That’s a working title only. But what I’ve found is that D’Souza’s basic premise – that Obama is reflecting the ideology of his dead father – is wrong. Obama is no “anti-colonialist.” He is the worst type of “neo-colonialist” in that he wants to put everyone in the country back on the plantation.

But the movie does get a lot of things right, especially his “founding fathers” – communist revolutionaries and liberation theologians. Nothing was said about George Soros, unfortunately, or Saul Alinsky. So there are some gaping holes in understanding the real Obama.

But this misses the point. Millions of people are going to see this movie. And that is confirming their suspicion that something is amiss. What comes across is that he shouldn’t be reelected.

The reviewers don’t like it. (Big surprise.) But the viewers who paid money to see it, loved it:

Only three of 14 “major critics” listed on the Rotten Tomatoes website gave the film a positive review, with reviewers describing it as everything from “a vicious, larger-than-life racist lie” to “deeply boring.”

On the other hand, 77 percent of moviegoers gave it a positive rating.

Obama’s America: 2016 Movie Review

Recently released in Texas and now being presented at some 400 theaters across the country, conservative scholar Dinesh D’Souza has, with the help of Gerald Molen (“Schindler’s List”) and John Sullivan, produced a documentary in “2016” which persuasively projects a frightening future for America: emaciated in military power, weakened financially, with diminished allies such as Israel in a world increasingly dangerous and threatening.

D’Souza starts out by proving his status not as an ideologue but as a patriot with roots in India who loves the opportunities this country has given him that would scarcely be possible back home. He persuades his audience that he only seeks to understand how a man like Obama, with so many similarities (born in the same year, married in the same year, attended Ivy League schools at the same time) could come out with such a different, even radical, point of view about America.

Based on his two books about Obama (“The Roots of Obama’s Rage” and “Obama’s America”) D’Souza concentrates on Obama’s autobiography, “Dreams From My Father” and begins with the thesis that because it is not entitled “Dreams OF My Father” it provides an essential clue into that thinking: that Obama has internalized the anti-colonial ideology of a man he scarcely knew.

D’Souza said, “One of the themes in the movie is the anti-colonial goal of downsizing America in the name of global justice. So the core idea here is that America has become a rogue nation in the world and also that America enjoys a standard of living that is unconscionably high compared to the rest of the world. So anti-colonialism is a program of global reparations…It’s reparations for global injustice. Obama’s goal is to shrink America.”

There are significant gaps in the movie that cry out for remedy and explanation. First, there is a persuasive argument put forth by

Keep Reading…

Many of the articles on Light from the Right first appeared on either The New American or the McAlvany Intelligence Advisor.
Copyright © 2018 Bob Adelmann