Skip to comments.'2016: Obama's America' filmmaker--I am not having an affair
Posted on 10/18/2012 5:13:46 AM PDT by lowbridge
A recent article in World magazine gives the false impression that I, a married man, had an affair with a woman Denise Joseph at a Christian conference in Charlotte, N.C. The article alleges that I shared a hotel room with her and introduced her as my fiancé. Finally it states that I filed for divorce only on the day I was confronted about my conduct by intrepid reporter Warren Smith. Here are the facts:
1. My wife Dixie and I have been separated for two years. Dixie approached me and demanded this [a separation] before I came to Kings College to become its president in late August 2010. I informed the chairman of the college about this at the time. I also informed the reporter who wrote the World article, Warren Smith, but he deliberately left it out of his piece, even though it is entirely relevant to the context.
2. I met Denise three months ago. We are not and have not been having an affair. Nor did we share a hotel room in Charlotte. Smith did not even ask me about this. Instead, Smith apparently deployed conference organizer Alex McFarland to call and raise the issue with me.
I clearly told McFarland that Denise and I stayed in separate rooms. McFarland knew he didnt have what he wanted, because he subsequently called me back and asked me again. I realized McFarland may be fronting for Smith, so I told him I didnt have any further comment. Im not sure whether McFarland is lying or Smith is lying, but one of them made up the quotation attributed to me that we stayed in the same room but nothing happened. This is pure libel.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
The left share many traits with radical Islam, including justifying the telling of lies in order to push their agenda.
Film must have hit a nerve with someone.
Seems like a pretty straightforward answer.
A word of encouragment...
Just hang in there...
... This is the verrry P.O.'d lib-lefties striking back at you.
They cannot answer or refute the excellent scholarship and production of "2016"----
SOOOOOoooo....it gets personal...
Dinesh and Dixie!!! ONLY in AMERICA!!!
Saul Alinsky’s disciples in Chicago always discredited Obama’s opponents by character assassination. He is definitely a post turtle for the Communist movement in America.
Conservatives should be wise to these tactics by now and not over-react by throwing good men under the bus when these attacks are made by the Left and published by their media enablers.
“Film must have hit a nerve with someone.”
That might be the understatement of the year.
OK, I accept all these explanations, and the writer is a jerk with a vendetta. But getting engaged to someone you’ve only known for three months while you’re still technically married is very unwise. And tacky in the extreme. Being surprised that other Christians are taken aback by this is naive.
Alrighty then, I interviewed 0b0z0 and found out that, according to this picture, 0h0m0 stayed with Gibbs and Axelrod in the same conference room for a threesome.
0h0m0 said “nothing happened” and that s/he is already seperated from Reggie.
There was no mention of the Wookie.
How do you like them apples, commies?
The victim of a common double standard. Affairs and sexual immorality are resume enhancers with liberals, but a conservative is called upon to defend his reputation in painful detail.
I agree completely with all your points.
“OK, I accept all these explanations”
I don’t. As a Chrisian you promise till death do us part. No where do you say unless I decide to change my mind. Couples under extreme circumstances may seperate but that does not allow them to marry another person. I speak from experience.
Just curious, how would you react/respond if it were you?
Ignore it and let the charges stand unanswered?
Respond like he did and be accused of acting like a “wounded naif?”
Seriously, how would you have him handle it?
Are you suggesting that Christianity forbids divorce?
I’m referring to his contention that he did not realize that being “engaged” while still married would be frowned upon in the milieu in which he operates. This is an intelligent and educated man; I’ve been reading his stuff since the 80s. He’s been active in evangelical/nondenominational Christianity for decades. Either he is being deliberately obtuse, or he’s so befuddled by the new young romance that his common sense went missing.
Traditionally, Christianity has allowed for separations - even permanent ones - but not remarriage afterwards.
“Are you suggesting that Christianity forbids divorce?”
I am suggesting that if you divorce you are forbidden to marry someone else...you know that pesky phrase “Till death do we part”
You need to mark out a very specific time that you want to call “tradition” in order for that to be true.
What if “til death do we part” is not one of the vows?
How about forsaking all others as long as we both shall live? I am not the Judge, I just try to obey the laws. I told you my interpretation of the law but you will have to stand before the Judge yourself.
Saul Alinsky should also be in that poster with Larry,Mo and curly.
But my honest question remains: How would you have responded?
Please explain what you would have said and how, or are you suggesting he should not have responded at all?
I don't have Alinksy in the album....
I kinda like this one...
You might appreciate this one, also....
I suspect that you are a vile and bitter creature.
Different marriage vows are very common now. The vows you may have taken don’t apply to others. Get over it.
I wouldn’t be surprised if he also claims to have no idea why his wife wanted a separation.
So...why exactly did his wife want a separation? I don’t know and I suspect you don’t either.
He was separated from his ex for two years. I’d say his first marriage was pretty much over.
Since I haven’t started a new relationship without ending my marriage, I don’t know what I would say under the circumstances. I think it’s fine for him to give more accurate facts, if the other writer’s claims were incorrect. I also think it’s disingenuous for him to say he never considered anyone would find his actions inappropriate.
I don’t know. Never said I did.
Marriage is a covenent, an agreement. If one side breaks the covenent the other is no longer bound.
Jesus said divorce is allowed in the instance of infedility.
We don’t know the circumstances that led to the split. Should we simply assume its his fault? Afterall, according to the liberal pop culture, all men are pigs and idiots (last sentence is intended as sarcasm).
This is the sort of red herring attack on an individual that appeals to people whose prime joy is gossiping about the faults of other people. But it appeals not in the least to decent people, who know how to mind their own business.
Once again, the Left appeals to all that is base in the human character, to protect a truly base demagogue..
gutter journalism breeds gutter politicians and ‘journalists’ aka jihadist mediaites
Jeez, mel. Now that image will be in my mind for the rest of the day! LOL!!
14 posted on Thu Oct 18 2012 08:13:57 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time) by Truth29: “Since politics is now a 24/7 blood sport, the reporter and the editor should now be investigated and attacked legally and in the media wherever possible.”
World Magazine is not by any stretch of the imagination a liberal publication. World Magazine is a conservative Christian magazine, definitely on the right wing even of conservative Christian politics, and its editor, Dr. Marvin Olasky, and founding publisher, Joel Belz, are both elders in the Presbyterian Church in America.
Here's the link to the World Magazine article so we know what we're talking about:
I agree that this looks like President Obama’s past “MO” of attacks on his critics. Some might argue this is an Obama story “planted” in a conservative Christian magazine to “launder” the accusation. I've seen that done before, and I've personally been “used” by Democrats to attack fellow Republicans and sometimes fellow conservative Christian Republicans when I was given stuff that I couldn't ignore without being accused of covering them up.
However, we can't credibly say that.
In fact, if anything “smells” about this, it might be that the editor, Dr. Marvin Olasky, resigned from D’Souza’s college a while ago for reasons that were not widely explained in public at the time. At most, maybe someone could argue this is an internal fight based on revenge between World Magazine and Kings College. However, my read of this is that the questionable relationship between D’Souza and this young woman had been known for some time in circles of that college, and World Magazine showed great restraint in not publishing what was being discussed until D’Souza started escorting this woman around in public at conservative Christian venues. It could no longer be ignored at that point.
Divorces, separations, and marriage breakdowns happen in Christian circles. Christian leaders are under tremendous pressures, and I believe they're complicated by Satanic attacks.
When these things happen, we have to follow biblical standards. D’Souza was raised Roman Catholic and he now describes himself as a non-denominational evangelical; his (current) wife is an evangelical. Annulments are not easy in the Roman Catholic Church and I very much hope divorce is not easy in whatever church now holds D’Souza’s membership.
What we cannot do is whitewash the problems as if they don't exist.
For better or for worse, we'll know much more soon.
I did find his statement, that he was “unaware” that in christian circles it might be frowned upon to get engaged while separated but not divorced, to be off-putting. At first, I thought maybe he wasn’t a christian, and was simply noting that he would have taken christian mores into account if he understood them.
But clearly he is a christian, in some sense. So I just wonder what circles he has been running in, that it was a surprise to him.
BTW, I actually don’t have a problem with engagement before divorce. Engagement isn’t particularly “christian”, it is simply a state of pre-marriage, one that doesn’t mean so much as it used to mean, or meant in religious contexts. The fact that they have broken off the engagement shows how this isn’t a biblical meaning of the word “engagement”.
If you know when your divorce is scheduled to be completed, I see no problem with planning your next wedding before you hit that date.
I also oppose divorce, but if the other person asked for the divorce, there isn’t a lot you can do about it. And since we have no clue as to the circumstances, it hardly seems reasonable to me to speculate as to whether he was responsible.
I'm a Catholic convert. I'm also divorced (not my choice!) The chances are that I can never remarry unless, God forbid, my ex-husband were to die pretty soon. So be it; I accept and understand that and thank God for His will, whatever it is and no matter how hard, sad, and lonely it has been. But Protestants do not believe as you and I do, and I don't expect them to make the choices we do. Many Protestants believe that if a spouse commits adultery, or if an unbelieving spouse departs, they are free to remarry. I disagree, but I do not judge them harshly because they are acting according to their light.
LOL Many many years ago I separated from my first husband and filed for divorce. Between the separation and divorce he suggested an engagement between him and this other woman. When I went over there to get my things there were greeting cards everywhere to him from her expressing some little endearment. Sixty days after our divorce they married and I guess still are as I have never looked back. Hope they are still married and best of luck.
“I think its fine for him to give more accurate facts, if the other writers claims were incorrect.”
Indeed, he did.
“I also think its disingenuous for him to say he never considered anyone would find his actions inappropriate.”
So, if I understand you correctly, he did well by responding, whereas his statement about becoming engaged before formally divorced is your concern and prompted the “wounded naif” accusation.
Upon review, in my view, I disagree with your accusation that “the wounded naif act was a little weak.”
Appreciate the exchange.
Agreeing to disagree is fine with me, too. It's what one expects.
All human beings share some traits. They like to speculate and gossip.
They see a married man traveling and spending a lot of time with a woman not his wife and they draw conclusions and spread them around. That's unfortunate, but it's human nature.
Do you really think leftists and radical Islamicists were hanging out in Spartanburg, SC spreading lies about Dinesh?
Maybe it was just ordinary people drawing ordinary conclusions -- true or false -- based on what they saw.
“What we cannot do is whitewash the problems as if they don’t exist.”
Thanks for setting the record straight regarding the source of the article. I admit I assumed it was the left looking for a way to indirectly diminish the credibility of the movie.
Regarding the relationship with the young woman etc., I don’t think that failing to do what’s right in life is a small matter, but I’m personally way too far from being in a position to judge him. The first thing that comes to my mind in any separation or divorce situation, in which abuse isn’t an issue, is that it is very sad. I wish everyone could make it work once they enter their vows. Divorce is generally one of life’s biggest losses and hurts. If he and his wife are only separated, I hope that somehow they can still make it work.
Where does he say he’s engaged? In one thread (or report on a thread), he said specifically that he was not having an affair, and he was not engaged to this lady! This is in a recent article from Oct. 17th! He said that some writer gave that impression, and it was false! He said that the writer said that he introduced her as his fiance, and she wasn’t? I’m honestly confused! Unless he suddenly turned around and admitted it today?
I trust World Magazine's staff. If they screwed up, they'll investigate and apologize, with the reporter being disciplined.
Precisely because of that, I think it's clear **SOMETHING** happened, and whatever happened was very unwise for someone who has put himself into the limelight like Dinesh D’Souza.
Right now my guess is we're dealing with a window into a very troubled marriage. Maybe Dinesh D’Souza will wake up and fix the mess before it's too late. If he doesn't, he's going to be permanently damaged in conservative Christian circles, and seriously damaged in the broader conservative movement.
Unfortunately for him, his private problems have now gone very public and that makes them much harder to solve.
The least that can be said is it looks like he said and did some very unwise things.
People at that level of politics can be expected to know better. When they don't, it's a likely indicator of much more serious issues.
We don't need Bill Clinton issues in the GOP.
This article by Christianity Today largely confirms the original World Magazine report but also includes some troubling comments about the future direction of the college.
This is not good. It looks as if D’Souza will not be the only casualty of this situation — the college itself may end up losing its Christian activist mission.
We'll all know more soon.
Dinesh D’Souza Resigns as President of The King's College
School may now shift from his emphasis on conservative politics.
By Melissa Steffan [posted 10/18/2012 11:58AM]
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.