The Wit & Wisdom of Dinesh D'Souza

He fascinates me, because he seems like such an incredibly bad thinker in really basic ways. And yet obviously he's not actually dumb, and so it's interesting to try and divine what kinds of self-deception and willful wrongness are leading him to his most mixed-up conclusions. And I almost feel bad for him when some of the planks of his logic seem like they could be part of something genuinely interesting. (E.g., I actually don't think it's stupid to say that the Sunni/Shia conflict isn't so much theological as cultural -- the word "religion" doesn't make that fine distinction -- if you're able to draw any genuinely helpful conclusions from that.)

oh there's no point arguing is there? anyway, good thread.

xposts

but isn't there a final turn where he actually argues that a true-blue square-jawed rosary-carrying spartan america could and should eventually make COMMON CAUSE with the jihadis to wipe out secularists and other losers?? the slate review said as much. treasonous, frankly.

Geoff I don't think he argues that Moral America would ally with terrorists -- more that whatever bridge of International Traditional Values gets built here would marginalize the left. (Which isn't necessarily treasonous, wanting to marginalize and defeat your socio-political opponents.) But I'm giving him the credit of actually trying to sort out his arguments for him here, and pretend they're not just an incoherent mess of railing in all directions. (The funniest bit, really, is that thing so many academics do where he pretends like academic leftists have anything to do with anything he's talking about -- seriously, like TOM FRANK is part of the culture of moral depravity being critiqued by terrorists shaking their heads over back issues of The Baffler.)

The “domestic insurgents” who, in D’Souza’s view, constitute the cultural left want “America to be a shining beacon of global depravity, a kind of Gomorrah on a Hill.”

Oh and bin Laden sent hidden messages to the Left in those 2004 videotapes and McCarthy was "largely right."

For the brave, here's the first chapter of the book.

xp: He names TF on his list of "enemies at home"

Michael Moore’s radical ideology — the insurgents are the Minutemen, they are the freedom fighters, and they will prevail! — has now come to center stage, where it is guiding the actions of the Democratic leadership.

a lot of anti-american feeling IS in a tabloid/vulgar/paranoid/cultural mode, akin to britain's ongoing paedo freakout or, well, america's hatred of muslims. flip thru memri.org for a little while, and yeah, a lot of people do "hate our freedoms" insofar as they have a big problem with a crazy-ass nation filled with trannies, jews, shaved vaginas, fad psychology, collagen injections, etc, etc, etc. this position is not a caricature.

...and it's simultaneously the country producing cadre after cadre of bible-carrying GI's with unstoppable hardware showing up anywhere there's a resource worth having or a gov't threatening "instability" of any kind! you can't point to just one half of the mix (the one you don't like, either) to explain the situation.

So the Righteous will be Saved and the rest of us get nuked. What's the problem?

what a bozo

http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/6559/gaymarriage6as.png

In Iraq we’re getting into a religious war that’s lasted for centuries. This theory, espoused among others by John Murtha, holds that the Sunni and Shia are fighting in Iraq because these two groups have been fighting everywhere since the seventh century. So who wants to get into the middle of an ancient conflict that shows no signs of abating? This would seem to be an argument for America to get out of a religious quarrel that it has no way to settle, and that shows no sign of abating.

But the Shia-Sunni conflict in Iraq is not a religious conflict.

See how he did that? The main point behind Murtha's reasoning is that this is a deep-seeded cultural conflict that we've waded into the middle of. But by making the heart of his argument the statement that the Sunni-Shiite conflict is religious, D'Souza can refute it without admitting that he's wrong. It's a nice bit of Sophistry. He continues:

How do I know that? Because there are no substantial religious differences between the Shia and the Sunni.

Which is a subjective and suspicious (at best) statement that the townhall.com readers will never question.

Finally:

And these two groups have not been fighting for centuries. In fact, they haven’t been fighting at all.

Which is flatly untrue. In any case, he'd still be wrong even if he had these facts right (which he doesn't) - because even if the conflict in Iraq isn't religious or centuries-old, it's been going on since Saddam took power nearly 40 years ago, which is long enough for these tensions to heat up. He keeps obscuring the central issues at play, which works if your goal is to confuse a bunch of ignorant right-wingers, but it fails utterly as a history lesson or a rebuttal to any policy suggestions for Iraq.

Um is he kidding?

I’m not suggesting that Clinton did not want to protect America from Bin Laden.

Oh yeah, and Ken Starr puts in an appearance, too.

...Rather, D’Souza raises the alarm that the anti-religious, sexual liberationist, anti-natalist and feminist thrust of American foreign, cultural, and free-speech global Internet policies threaten and estrange all the traditional cultures of the third world, whether Muslim or Christian, Hindu or Buddhist. Poor people cannot afford the epidemics, abortions and divorces of Hollywood liberalism, and uphold a monotheist God as the foundation of their moral codes and worthy of respect.

The American global cultural campaign pushes a billion non-militant Muslims to condone the jihad and thus threatens the existence of Israel and the survival of vulnerable American cities like New York. Perhaps your readers would be intrigued with a discussion of the argument rather than anathemas against its expression. To call the book McCarthyite and a “national scandal” will neither stop the jihad nor save Israel in a nuclear age.

I'm sure the Hindus and Buddhists mentioned there have some thoughts about that.

Who the hell is George Gilder and why he be so crazzzy?

FUCK YOU!!!!!!!!

1. It wasn't any of these people (or ANY leftists) that got us involved in this retarded war.
2. How do any of these people have any control over whether the USA "loses" in Iraq? Bush doesn't even pay attention to the 3/4 of the American people who want out of Iraq, let alone luminaries of the left.
3. Can any of these numbskulls fucking get it through their thick skulls that MAYBE, the way to "win" the WOT is not through violence and torture? That running around the middle east and threatening and slaughtering people is not a way to win friends and influence people? Seriously! Why is this common-sense argument so hard to grasp?
4. Is there anything more pointless than arguing with this fuckwit in a posting he will never read?

x-post - from the ridiculous .

xp

Perhaps your readers would be intrigued with a discussion of the argument rather than anathemas against its expression. To call the book McCarthyite and a “national scandal” will neither stop the jihad nor save Israel in a nuclear age.

we have both the simplistic obfuscation and fear-mongering in the 2nd sentence, and an appropriation of the other side's languge in the 1st. Please, please, you liberals should use your pussy "debating" ways to truly find out if liberals are america haters and the cause of the worst domestic terror attack evar.

He helped found the Discovery Institute with Bruce Chapman. The organization started as a moderate group which aimed to privatize and modernize Seattle's transit systems but it later became the leading think tank of the intelligent design movement, with Gilder penning many articles in favor of ID and opposing the theory of evolution.

: "I do think that writing about technology and picking stocks is a very powerful and edifying discipline," he said. "It requires you to have a purchase on reality that is much more rigorous than the average evolutionary biologist has or the average free-floating technology writer has."

WSJ: "I do think that writing about technology and picking stocks is a very powerful and edifying discipline," he said. "It requires you to have a purchase on reality that is much more rigorous than the average evolutionary biologist has or the average free-floating technology writer has."

Well you know, after the part where Kyra Sedgwick lost her baby in the car accident, Campbell Scott got really interested in the fate of the unborn, and eventually wound up having a bit of a religious conversion.

imagining the cognitive gymnastics it must take to be both a techno-utopian and an intelligent design fanatic is giving me a headache

Rethinking Abu Ghraib
By Dinesh D'Souza
Monday, February 26, 2007

...Most Muslims did not view it as a torture story at all. Muslims were not outraged at the interrogation techniques used by the American military, which are quite mild by Arab standards. Moreover, many Muslims realized that the most of the torture scenes in the photographs—the hooded man with his arms outstretched, the prisoner with wires attached to his limbs—were staged. This was simulated torture, not real torture.

[...]

Lynndie England and Charles Graner were two wretched individuals from Red America who were trying to act out the fantasies of Blue America. Casting aside all traditional notions of decency, propriety and morality, they simply lived by the code of self-fulfillment. If it feels good, it must be right. This was bohemianism, West Virginia-style.

At some level, the cultural left recognized this, which is why most of its comments about Abu Ghraib assiduously avoided the issue of sexual deviancy. The left’s embarrassment on this matter seems to have drawn on class prejudice. For some liberals, soldiers like Graner and England were poor white trash getting into trouble again. Of course if Graner and England were professors at an elite liberal arts college, their videotaped orgies might easily have become the envy of academia. If they were artists staging these pictures in a loft in Soho they could have been hailed as pioneers and encouraged by leftist admirers to apply for a grant from the National Endowment for the Arts.

But being low-life Appalachians, Graner and England inspired none of these elevated thoughts. Instead, liberals moved opportunistically to attack the military and discredit its prisoner interrogation policies—even though these polices had nothing to do with what actually happened...

At one point Berkowitz accuses me of holding that “the cultural left presents a threat to America as grave as that posed by radical Islam.” What? The Left is as dangerous to America as al Qaeda, the radical mullahs in Iran, the jihadist insurgents in Iraq, and the worldwide network of radical Islam? Nowhere do I say this, and I challenge Berkowitz to substantiate his allegation. My point is that the cultural Left, through its well-documented policies and its values projected abroad, is greatly strengthening the position of radical Islam. The two groups, I write, work in a kind of scissors motion, each prong operating separately, but moving toward the common end of defeating Bush’s war in Iraq. Yet Berkowitz accuses me of equating the danger posed by the Left and the Islamic radicals, as if I’m weighing one against the other.

Very witty:

Although D’Souza has been married for 20 years to his wife, Dixie, in South Carolina he was with a young woman, Denise Odie Joseph II, and introduced her to at least three people as his fiancée.

Finally, near 11 p.m., event organizer Tony Beam escorted D’Souza and Joseph to the nearby Comfort Suites. Beam noted that they checked in together and were apparently sharing a room for the night in the sold-out hotel. The next morning, around 6 a.m., Beam arrived back at the hotel and called up to D’Souza’s room. “We’ll be down in 10 minutes,” D’Souza told Beam. D’Souza and Joseph came down together, and Beam took them to the airport.

The next day another conference organizer, Alex McFarland, distressed by D’Souza’s behavior, confronted him in a telephone conversation. D’Souza admitted he shared a room with his fiancée but said “nothing happened.” When I called D’Souza, he confirmed that he was indeed engaged to Joseph, but did not explain how he could be engaged to one woman while still married to another. When asked when he had filed for divorce from his wife, Dixie, D’Souza answered, “Recently.”

According to San Diego County (Calif.) Superior Court records, D’Souza filed for divorce only on Oct. 4, the day I spoke with him. Under California law, that starts the clock on a six-month waiting period for divorce. D’Souza on Oct. 4 told me his marriage was “over,” said he “is sure Denise is the one for me,” and said he had “done nothing wrong.”

The episode is a strange twist in D’Souza’s otherwise meteoric rise in the evangelical world. He developed a reputation among evangelicals with a string of best-sellers, including The Roots of Obama’s Rage, which spawned a movie, Obama: 2016, which has now grossed more than $30 million. He broke into the Christian conference and megachurch market in 2007 with the release of a book that year, What’s So Great About Christianity.

D’Souza now receives speaking fees sometimes in excess of $10,000 from Christian groups, putting him in the top tier of Christian speakers. In 2010 he became president of The King’s College, New York City, which is supported by Campus Crusade for Christ, now called Cru. At that time he moved from California to New York, with his wife staying in California.

D’Souza said King’s board chairman Andy Mills has known about his marital trouble for at least two years. Mills confirmed that through a spokesman, Mark DeMoss, who added that Mills was “hopeful about restoration and both he [D’Souza] and Andy were praying to that end.” DeMoss said The King’s College board met by conference call to begin “looking into the situation.” D’Souza participated in a portion of that call, DeMoss said. Following that meeting, on Oct. 15, D’Souza wrote in a text message to me: “I have decided to suspend the engagement.”

I'm surprised more people aren't saying something about this one!

i just saw this. absolutely priceless.

speaking of "king of the trolls"...

buzzfeed has the lucky lady of course

http://www.buzzfeed.com/rosiegray/other-woman-in-dinesh-dsouza-affair-is-a-dsouza

if you google the "young woman"s name, you get her picture and fb profile. She looks pretty young.

ha xp

D'Souza's America

Denise liked Nine Inch Nails.
September 18th

The Three Types of Liberal Pests You Find in Your Own Backyard, by Denise:

http://tinyurl.com/9nko4lg

she sounds like a real gem i wish them both the best

They do seem made for each other, why condemn their obvious true love?

Her whole existence is flawed, but Dinesh brings her closer to god.

Vom.

now you're down in it ned

btw chick looks like a dude in anne coulter drag which is probably the point

World, a publication that strives to "report bad news because Christ's grace becomes most meaningful when we're aware of sin,"

Plenty to keep them busy

When asked when he had filed for divorce from his wife, Dixie, D’Souza answered, “Recently.”

Reminds me of the scene in Snow White when she asks the seven dwarfs when they last washed their hands. "Recently!"

how is this a scandal, really? right-wing evangelicals forgive almost anything if you say you've been born again/touched by the hand of god/raised them a lot of money/etc.

although the "you're asking me if i already filed for divorce.... yeah... hmmm....i'll get right on that...." is kind of LOL.

"you have to file for that?"

Well that first link is from World mag, v. much an evangelical publication, and it sounds like there were people who pretty much flat out told him from the get-go he was not exactly in a state of grace.

Ha, related to which:

http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/108694/the-right-wing-rivalry-behind-dinesh-dsouzas-sex-scandal

And with guns a-blazin'!

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/10/17/2016-obama-america-film-maker-am-not-having-affair/

I sought out advice about whether it is legal to be engaged prior to being divorced and I was informed that it is.

"Hey, you, is this legal?"

"Uh, maybe?"

"Great, thanks!"

This has more of a back-and-forth, with the author of the original article responding in turn:

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2012/october-web-only/dinesh-dsouza-denies-infidelity.html

Hahaha okay that article has an AMAZING bit:

When CT asked D'Souza directly for his response to charges of infidelity, he responded: "It's absolutely not the case, um, that, um, that, um, um, you know, it's.... Look, the issue here is that World is attributing to me an admission that I never made—is attributing to me a quotation that I never said. That to me is the problem. … They are just claiming based upon my non-assertion that I did something that I didn't do."

Haha that's gold.

play on, playa

um, that, um, that, um, um, you know, it's....

That's making a Pharcyde song go through my head.

"The approach in the article ... is a clear effort to destroy me and my career," D'Souza said. "To me, that is a kind of viciousness masquerading as righteousness"

an "approach" he is ah intimately familiar with. of course he probably considers karma a pagan concept

More here: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2012/10/17/no-no-no-we-were-fine-with-the-racism-but-the-adultery-is-upsetting/

But D’Souza wasn’t embraced by the evangelical tribe just because he affirms the creeds and C.S. Lewis. What made CT and King’s College and the rest of mainstream evangelicalism decide that D’Souza was one of us was his political history — a former policy aide in the Reagan White House, D’Souza is fiercely opposed to abortion, gay rights, feminism and progressive taxation.

As Sarah Posner said, “D’Souza’s … rise in the evangelical world is due in no small part to his conspiracy-minded claims about President Obama’s ‘Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior.’”

Yes, conspiratorial warnings about Africans and anti-colonialism contributed to D’Souza’s legitimacy among evangelicals.

ha m coleman that's a good catch

'You can't fire me, I quit!' Or something like that.

Related:

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2012/october-web-only/dinesh-dsouza-resigns-as-president-of-kings-college.html

enjoying this so much

Loving how d'Souza was all 'libel!' and CT went back to the principals in the original story who said, "Nope, World reported it accurately."

the things we do for love

also all these people hate each other so much it's amazing

Narcissism of VERY small differences...

enjoying this so much

― there is no dana, only (goole), Thursday, October 18, 2012 5:26 PM (10 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post

otm

x2

don't really give a f who he's sleeping with but this is pretty delightful, x3

caption this:

http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/.a/6a00d834515c2369e2017d3c11a2ef970c-500wi

I would but:

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/big-love-king-s-college-dsouzas-mistress-was-also-married

SERIOUS LOLs here.

HAHAHAHA

unbelievable. and yet, not.

She also called herself a “strong believer in the concept of Republican Motherhood.”

a strong believer in something you made up

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/sites/default/files/joseph-desk.png

let's talk about this photo

"Hey, you, is this legal?"

"Uh, maybe?"

"Great, thanks!"

― Ned Raggett, Wednesday, October 17, 2012 11:33 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

to be fair, it probably is legal. I mean "engaged" isn't really a legal status, so I don't see why it would be illegal to be engaged while still legally married.

on her desk is Of Love and Lust by Theodore Rowwrr.

that's an interesting question

xp

xxpost -- Given my newest link there, they decided it takes two to tango on that front.

"Oh you're married too! Let's get engaged!"

can't find it online but d'souza's description of himself and his unsufferable republican pals and their 'hilarious prank days' in college is one of the most (inadvertently) uproarious things i've ever read.

would it be too liberal-smug to suggest that these peoples' lifetime ensconcement in the 'straight and narrow' has left them totally unable to think or behave honorably when life gets actually dicey?

i do think there's a kind of blindered moral narcissism at play, yes

if that's what you mean

well yeah

but more that if you have a whole career+lifestyle+ideology built on sexual and moral purity, when desire takes over you're actually less able to deal with it within those rules.

idk, maybe not. there's a whole angle of hero-worship here that a 'normal' affair doesn't have.

(We developed) a guerrilla strategy that was as effective as it was fun. Where do I start? I don't know. Conduct a survey to find out how many professors in the religion department believe in God. Distribute a pamphlet titled "Feminist Thought" that is made up of blank pages. Establish a Society for Creative Homophobia. Prepare a freshman course guide that lists your college's best, and worst, professors. Publish Maya Angelou's poems alongside a bunch of meaningless doggerel and see whether anyone can tell the difference. Put a picture of death-row inmate Mumia Abu-Jamal on your Web site and instruct people who think he deserves capital punishment to click a button and electrocute him on-line. Whew, I better stop with these suggestions before I get too carried away.

(Jeffrey) Hart was exactly the opposite of the conservative stereotype. He wore a long raccoon coast around campus, and he smoked long pipes with curvaceous stems. He sometimes wore buttons that said things as "Soak the Poor. In his office was a pincher-like device that he explained was for the purpose of "pinching women you don't want to touch".

I remember some of those early dinners at the Hart farmhouse. We drank South American wine and listened to recordings of Ernest Hemingway and F.Scott Fitzgerald, and of Robert Frost reading his poems, and Nixon speeches, and comedian Rich Little doing his Nixon imitation, and George C.Scott delivering the opening speech in Patton, and some of Winston Churchill's orations, and the music from the BBC version of Evelyn Waugh's Brideshead Revisited. There was an ethos here, and a sensibility, and it conveyed to me something about conservatism that I had never suspected. Here was a conservatism that was alive, that was engaged with art, music, and literature; that was at the same time ironic, lighthearted, and fun.

dying

"God has a mighty future for Dinesh, but there are some things he has to go through first"

when i see someone in a long raccoon coat smoking a meerschaum the first thing i think is "bolshevik"

In his office was a pincher-like device that he explained was for the purpose of "pinching women you don't want to touch".

Um...

wtf@ rich little in their conservative pantheon. acknowledging that Nixon was a self parody?

i love that this is supposed to demonstrate that conservatives have a rich and storied aesthetic pantheon in which they luxuriate when they get together but then nah it really is just patton and brideshead revisited

we even watched south park! some of em, anyway.

Anyway, an interesting bit -- while this is hardly polished, this post from Ms. Joseph a few months back goes into huge detail calling out Jihadwatch types as hatemongers. She even calls them Taliban equivalents!

http://smartgirlpolitics.ning.com/profiles/blogs/jihad-watch-this-robert-spencer-and-all-your-cronies-too-the

http://www.dineshdsouza.com/archives/news/response-to-world-magazine/

Ultimately this is not just about Olasky or even World magazine. It is also about how we Christians are supposed to behave with one another. And the secular world is watching.

And laughing.

Probably should amend that a small group of secular bloggers and message board posters are watching and laughing. The rest of the world doesn't give a shit about what Dinesh does with his free time.

Oh Dinesh, when it rains, it pours:

One lawsuit, filed in San Diego Superior Court over the past week, contends that Dinesh D’Souza, a conservative author, activist and Rancho Santa Fe resident who was one of three executive producers of the film, has tried to wrest control of the company away from two partners and violated an agreement among them.

A separate lawsuit from a group of investors in the film says that D’Souza breached their agreement with him by writing a best-selling book that drew heavily on the film and not sharing the profits with them, as they claim he was obligated to do.

The plaintiffs in each of the suits are seeking temporary restraining orders against D’Souza to get him to follow what they say are the terms of the agreements and stop exceeding his authority. Court hearings were scheduled for Tuesday but were postponed after lawyers for D’Souza objected to the judges who were assigned to hear them. The cases were then transferred to other judges and are expected to be heard this morning.

You know, there just aren't enough Nelson laughs.

http://politicker.com/2014/01/dinesh-dsouza-indicted-for-campaign-finance-fraud/

whoa

It's so stupidly petty too! It's amazing! Basically he got other people to contribute to Wendy Long's go-nowhere Senate campaign against Gillebrand in 2012 and then reimbursed them so he could evade contribution limits. It wasn't even that much too! You'd think after Citizens United he could have done something else.

"Let's see, I'll do something illegal on a cheap level in a campaign that's going to fail anyway, so I'm doubly throwing my money away and exposing myself to the law." Good job, guy.

have the cancervatives made a martyr of him yet? i mean, surely the arrest is payback for this, amirite?

http://www.amazon.com/Obamas-America-Unmaking-American-Dream/dp/1596987782

Yeah but read upthread. After the whole adultery thing he REALLY burned a lot of bridges, and the whole start of this thread talked about how the National Review en masse went "You are too goddamn goofy even for us." He has his supporters but I suspect a lot of the reaction will be similarly incredulous and mocking.

my heart bleeds for poor dinesh

D’Souza’s co-producer in “2016” Gerald Molen told FoxNews.com he believes the charges are politically motivated and D’Souza is being singled out by federal authorities for a “selective prosecution.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/23/conservative-filmmaker-behind-anti-obama-documentary-indicted-for-violating/

So it turns out that the only thing D'Souza's done in a while before the indictment was this.

http://www.dineshdsouza.com/archives/news/dsouza-introduces-fliptree-christmashome-com/

Use coupon FRIENDOFDINESH at checkout to receive an additional $50 off current tree price. Only one coupon per tree purchase.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/01/24/this-is-like-nazi-germany-dsouza-allies-see-con/197729

D’Souza’s co-producer in “2016” Gerald Molen told FoxNews.com he believes the charges are politically motivated and D’Souza is being singled out by federal authorities for a “selective guilty plea.”

fixed

the funny part about that link is how outsized a belief in their own influence they must have to think they constitute any kind of "threat" to the established order. quite a self-serving case of paranoia.

The Grand Unified Theory of Dinesh!

http://gawker.com/did-dinesh-d-souza-use-his-mistress-to-break-campaign-l-1509310440

"...though it’s not clear why Louis Joseph, a doctor who lives in Michigan, would risk donating an illegal sum of money to an out-of-state candidate publicly supported by the man with whom his wife was cuckholding him."

I try to use "cuckold" at least a month

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/dinesh-dsouzas-america-trailer-released-674121

In America, D'Souza -- who wrote and produced the film -- makes the claim that 1960s radical leftism is more or less indistinguishable from current mainstream liberalism, a doctrine that he says preaches the United States is the product of "stealing and plunder" from Native Americans, Mexicans and African-American slaves.

"I want to take this progressive, leftist critique head on," D'Souza says in the trailer. The movie will include re-creations of some of the major events in American history.

with finger puppets

And a kick line

Meanwhile:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2014/01/27/ted_cruz_wants_you_to_know_that_the_government_might_be_targeting_dinesh.html

http://photos.vanityfair.com/2015/04/09/5526a246c55e0f53330befdc_dinesh-dsouza-campaign-finance-fraud-obama.jpg

Stealing America: What My Experience with Criminal Gangs Taught Me about Obama, Hillary, and the Democratic Party

In the fall of 2014, outspoken author and filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza found himself hauled into federal court for improperly donating money to an old friend’s Senate campaign. D’Souza pleaded guilty and was sentenced to eight months in a state-run confinement center. There he lived among hardened criminals—drug dealers, thieves, gangbangers, rapists, and murderers. Now the bestselling author explains how this experience not only changed his life, but fundamentally transformed his view of his adopted country.

Previously, D’Souza had seen America through the eyes of a grateful immigrant who became successful by applying and defending conservative principles. Again and again, D’Souza made the case that America is an exceptional nation, fundamentally fair and just. In book after book, he argued against liberalism as though it were a genuine movement of ideas capable of being engaged and refuted.

But his prolonged exposure to the criminal underclass provided an eye-opening education in American realities. In the view of hardened criminals, D’Souza learned, America is anything but fair and just. Instead, it is a jungle in which various armed gangs face off against one another, with the biggest and most powerful gangs inhabiting the federal government. As for American liberalism, it is not a movement of ideas at all but a series of scams and cons aimed at nothing less than stealing the entire wealth of the nation, built up over more than two centuries: the total value of the homes, the lifelong savings of the people, the assets of every industry, and all the funds allocated to health and education and every other service, both public and private. “The thieves I am speaking about want all of it.”

And who are the leading figures in this historically ambitious scam that has turned the federal government into a vast and unprecedented shakedown scheme? Why, none other than Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton – the current leaders of the Democratic Party. This pair of smooth-talking con artists, trained in the methods of radical activist Saul Alinsky, have taken his crude but effective political shakedown techniques to a level even he never dreamed of.

As the nation approaches a crucial election in 2016, Stealing America is an urgent wakeup call for all Americans who want to prevent this theft from being completed by eight more years of Democratic rule.

he should rly write fan fiction

This was totally reading as his allegiance-swapping story until the point was revealed as...Obama and Clinton still suck?

also hrc is trained by alinsky is radical politics, that was an interesting twist, didnt see it coming

*in rad pol

whats the deal with this guy

Peter Sobczynski (from RogerEbert.com):

“Hillary’s America” may well be the single dumbest documentary that I have ever seen in my life—nearly two hours of poisonous bluster and anti-historical rhetoric that comes across like the desperate ravings of someone trying to make a few more bucks by rehashing the same nonsense before his gravy train finally leaves town. The closest thing I can compare it to are the strange and highly speculative documentaries that Sunn Classics used to crank out in the late Seventies—movies that breathlessly promised viewers that they would reveal the existence of life after death or the Bermuda Triangle or Noah’s Ark but only gave people clumsy reenactments, interviews with highly dubious experts and wild speculation without ever actually offering any of the concrete proof that they promised.

And from the AV Club:

That a film already busy with historical reenactments, interviews, and conspiracizing of the wildest sort should end with three consecutive musical numbers suggests a kind of vaudeville structure to D’Souza’s work. As the MC of this show, D’Souza places himself in the unwise position of sometimes having to act: The film’s prologue finds him incarcerated in a detention house, where a charismatic inmate, Roc (Corey Cotten), explains for him how crime works, and how the government is the biggest criminal of all. D’Souza’s facial expression never varies from sour nonplussed; complex emotions aren’t a possibility. There is a shot in one of the final montages, amid all the farms and fields, of D’Souza standing in a sunset-lit prairie, looking like a Terrence Malick outtake. This determinedly uncharismatic figure has now made himself the star of three consistently lunatic productions; this attempt to give himself a moment of poetry is one of Hillary’s America’s final and biggest inadvertent laughs.

http://www.newsweek.com/judge-orders-dsouza-receive-psychological-counseling-353554

judge berman getting cute there imo. can't shrink away ideology

Dinesh now penning paeans to Nazi sex practices, a development that doesn't really surprise anyone

https://twitter.com/spookperson/status/902257553026965504

Have you been told that the Nazis were uptight moral puritans? Coming tomorrow--my Oped on the Nazis as bohemian sexual revolutionaries pic.twitter.com/KGvWxrTSfa

— Dinesh D'Souza (@DineshDSouza) August 28, 2017

iow, Nazis as hypocrites, posing as moral puritans, just like at least a half dozen mega-famous evangelical preachers exposed as such in the past couple of decades?

all of whom afterward came crying to their followers citing repentance and asking for forgiveness?

Adults 1, kids 0 https://t.co/24iqKtnTxy

— Dinesh D'Souza (@DineshDSouza) February 20, 2018

Worst news since their parents told them to get summer jobs https://t.co/Vg3mXYvb4c

— Dinesh D'Souza (@DineshDSouza) February 20, 2018

Motherfucker ain’t got hit by a bus yet; what a pity

grown-up behaviour: insulting gun massacre survivors on social media

kids get slaughtered while dinesh d'souza still walks the earth

there is no god

Pardoned.

kids get slaughtered while dinesh d'souza still walks the earth

there is no god

gabbneb is that you?

You went to a less distinguished college than I did. You weren’t a Stanford U scholar as I was. What makes you more “informed” than I am?

— Dinesh D'Souza (@DineshDSouza) August 13, 2018

looool

an Elite, get him!

If he passed with really good grades, then why isn't he spending his time helping struggling businesses?

Good to see that even Stanford U scholars are willing to make time to school-shame Twitter randos.

Dinesh somehow has all the worst properties of both Trumpites and NeverTrumpers. He’s both extremely racist and unconcerned with intellectual honesty AND a credential-fetishizing nerd who longs for mainstream validation. A primetime asshole.

— Adam H. Johnson (@adamjohnsonNYC) August 15, 2018

self-clowning oven

This is actually the correct pronunciation. Most Americans say it wrong. Thailand is pronounced phonetically. It’s “Thighland,” not “Tai-land.” https://t.co/kiQI7FveEM

— Dinesh D'Souza (@DineshDSouza) August 6, 2020