Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

VANITY: Why isn't the Left attacking 2016? (More than it is already...)
9/6/2012 | WileyC

Posted on 09/06/2012 7:52:45 AM PDT by WileyC

It goes without saying that the Left absolutely hates Dinesh's blockbuster, 2016. And those who do mention it, do so with a vitriol they once only reserved for the Bush clan. The real question is why aren't all of them jumping on the bashwagon?

The only plausible explanation is that they realize that any publicity can only help the movie... and the movie's narrative. Unlike individuals, who can have their reputations and popularity tarnished by repeated attacks, this bit of cinema only shines brighter the more attention they draw to it. By keeping the tone scholarly and conversational, D'Souza effectively prevents quotes or snippets from being taken out of context and used in attacks.

Given that it is relatively immune to anything except 'foaming at the mouth' attacks, and even those assaults would only drive more people to the theater, liberals are hoping to ignore it to death. Unfortunately for them, the Uncertain Middle (the ones who watch both CNN and FOX) might be intrigued by what they are hearing and pony up their $9-$16 to see it firsthand.

I'd tell them to save their money but I want the theaters to continue to fill up for awhile longer. The reason I say this is that I strongly suspect he will push this to DVD and possibly to even free distribution sometime before November.

P.S. A relative asked my fourteen year-old daughter what movie she wanted to see, she picked 2016. I'm so proud of her! (This is the vanity portion of my post, ha!)


TOPICS: TV/Movies
KEYWORDS: 2016; dsouza; obama

1 posted on 09/06/2012 7:52:50 AM PDT by WileyC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: WileyC

Because it would open the subject of Obama’s murky past to further public debate, which is the LAST thing he wants.

D’Souza is on record as hoping that the Left WOULD attack his film as a means of sparking this discussion.


2 posted on 09/06/2012 7:57:24 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WileyC

I’ll tell you something about this movie that surprised me. I live in Chicago, in a neighborhood that has become trendy and full of liberals in the last ten years or so. Right next to my house is a arthouse-type movie theatre that usually plays all the hot new independent and foreign films that appeal to this demographic. They have had all the Michael Moore documentaries, first run. Last week, I noticed that they were now playing 2016.

I’m not sure how to explain that, except maybe they are hurting for business and willing to try anything. Otherwise, I can only imagine that enough liberals want to see the movie that they demanded it be shown.


3 posted on 09/06/2012 7:58:35 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WileyC

It IS curious, isn’t it.
I was thinking that if the facts presented in the book/movie are untrue, that the author could be sued for libel, yet there is no lawsuit.
Curious.


4 posted on 09/06/2012 8:00:50 AM PDT by kimchi lover ("I can see November from Wisconsin")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WileyC

In 2008, there was a successful blackout on any discussion of Obama’s ties to Reverend Wright and Bill Ayers (which our “champion” McCain went along with), so clearly the Libs think that they can do the same thing if they ignore 2016.


5 posted on 09/06/2012 8:01:11 AM PDT by Unam Sanctam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WileyC

Because attacking it keeps it in the news.


6 posted on 09/06/2012 8:07:08 AM PDT by nuconvert ( Khomeini promised change too // Hail, Chairman O)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WileyC
For decades, so-called "progressives," especially media "progressives," have ignored that which might shine the light of truth on the deliberate agenda to "transform" America from its constitutional foundations in liberty to just another of the collectivist/redistributionist regimes!

And, for decades, it worked!

Now that the bold Obama agenda is playing out, and the disastrous consequences of their arrogant extra-constitutional policies are being seen and felt, that tactic won't work as well.

Technology has outstripped their ability to censor.

7 posted on 09/06/2012 8:08:00 AM PDT by loveliberty2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WileyC
It's called "Selective Cognizance". They are so horrified by what they're heard about it that they are in denial of it's existence.

In the back of their confused, fragile little minds they can hear their mommies saying "just ignore it, it will go away"...

8 posted on 09/06/2012 8:11:42 AM PDT by Kenton (I love the smell of the Democrat flop sweat in the morning. it smells like... VICTORY!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

Saw this Unofficial announcement: 2016: Obama’s America added the US DVD release date of October 16, 2012


9 posted on 09/06/2012 8:13:19 AM PDT by asinclair (Using the favorite form of Liberal media...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: WileyC
. . . and pony up their $9-$16 to see it firsthand.

There's a 3-D version?

10 posted on 09/06/2012 8:14:43 AM PDT by sportutegrl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sportutegrl

Going to see a movie without popcorn and a drink is unheard-of in my household. =)


11 posted on 09/06/2012 8:25:36 AM PDT by WileyC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

This movie is right out of their playbook, and they know the more you complain about it, the more people see it.

Actually very smart to ignore it. Michael Moore LOVES IT when conservatives make jokes about him....more cash.


12 posted on 09/06/2012 8:40:24 AM PDT by Crimson Elephant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog
The truth is easy to defend but hard to attack.

And, I'd guess that the Left doesn't want to open up this particular can of worms. Engaging in a debate would be a bad move for them.

13 posted on 09/06/2012 8:43:43 AM PDT by wbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: WileyC

D’Souza brilliantly took religion and nationality off the table as topics and focused solely on Obama’s life experience.

One can’t argue who was their mother, father or mentors...


14 posted on 09/06/2012 9:05:45 AM PDT by TSgt (The only reason I have one in the chamber at all times, is because it is impossible to have two in.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WileyC

I haven’t seen it, but a friend told me he thought 2016 did not go far enough against Obama. Thoughts?


15 posted on 09/06/2012 9:16:36 AM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WileyC

Why are they not attacking this movie? Because they are letting GOP pundits do so. In two weeks, in the Washington Examiner - a free paper from the Washington Times - two GOP pundits have lambasted it, one referring to the author as the rights Michael Moore. Once again, we eat our own.


16 posted on 09/06/2012 9:27:13 AM PDT by 7thson (I've got a seat at the big conference table! I'm gonna paint my logo on it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WileyC
Why isn't the Left attacking 2016? (More than it is already...)

Because attacks would draw more attention to the movie. 2016 hasn't gotten anything close to the promotion and hype from the MSM and Hollywood that Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 got - why would the Left want to change that?
17 posted on 09/06/2012 9:27:13 AM PDT by AnotherUnixGeek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WileyC

Why isn’t the Left attacking 2016? (More than it is already...)

Because its true.


18 posted on 09/06/2012 9:37:23 AM PDT by barmag25
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: montag813
I saw it on Monday along with 3 other friends. The fact that it was civil and used Obama’s own words on how he intends to destroy the United States is powerful.

Americans need to believe what Obama is saying - the Dreams from his Father - a man he met only once - demonstrate his hate for the US in a way that cannot be mistaken.
Most of what is in the movie we have seen over the past four years - put together in this format it is powerful and frightening.

By not being a rabid Michael Moore - D’Souza created a though provoking movie that would be very helpful in not reelecting Obama.

At the end the audience which was 3/4 full at the first showing stood and applauded!

19 posted on 09/06/2012 9:46:41 AM PDT by jeeperz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: montag813
I haven’t seen it, but a friend told me he thought 2016 did not go far enough against Obama. Thoughts?

Having read "The Roots of Obama's Rage" before seeing the movie, I think it's important to do both: see the movie and read the book. The movie is 89 minutes long which suggests to me they were aiming for 90 minutes max - and that's just not long enough. There are several loose ends in the movie (such as Obama's attitude toward the space program) that might flash past a viewer that hasn't read the book.

On the other side, the visuals are so powerful that it makes the movie a "must see" if you can.

20 posted on 09/06/2012 10:37:01 AM PDT by Da Bilge Troll (Defeatism is not a winning strategy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: WileyC

,,,,,, simply put ,,,, it would just create more people to be curious and perhaps want to see it . Don’t say anything and maybe it will go away .

THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM SYNDROM .


21 posted on 09/06/2012 11:02:06 AM PDT by Lionheartusa1 (-: Socialism is the equal distribution of misery :-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WileyC

I saw the movie and was disappointed and frustrated. The background music overpowered the narrative and made it hard to understand for long segments. Much of the time the narration was a mere mumble under the music out of which I could pick a few words. One would think that a video editor on a PC could have rebalanced the sound easily enough.


22 posted on 09/06/2012 11:35:25 AM PDT by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's Economics In One Lesson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WileyC

The movie ran the risk of getting one tiny thing incorrect, the media would have trumped it up to discredit the entire thing. The media could not find anything, or anything to spin; apparently.

Remember the Clinton era Whitehouse security manager who wrote a book? He apparently made minor factual errors and the whole expose’ was effectively discredited.


23 posted on 09/06/2012 12:44:19 PM PDT by cicero2k
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: montag813

This was my reaction too when I first saw the film. There is so much that he has done in office. The 900 executive orders that take over the role of Congress, the grabs of power hidden in the legislation he has rammed through, there’s so much. Some of it not simple enough for a movie, maybe that’s why.


24 posted on 09/06/2012 1:16:22 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: WileyC

Although I didn’t watch it (don’t have HBO) I noticed that D’Souza was on Bill Maher last night.

I’ll never understand why any conservative would accept an invitation to Maher’s show.


25 posted on 09/06/2012 5:00:41 PM PDT by hattend (Firearms and ammunition...the only growing industries under the Obama regime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson