Posted on 06/15/2014 7:53:52 PM PDT by Nachum
If the questionable legal charges levied against Dinesh D’Souza by Obama’s Justice Department for exceeding campaign finance laws were to quiet his criticism of the President, it is not working. Yet, one gathers from D’Souza that he sees these charges as one more of the shameless ways this President is using the instruments of the state to attack his critics. With a new book, “America: Imagine a World Without Her” and a movie, “America,” coming on July 2, D’Souza is a man with a message and he is on fire. His movie “2016” brought in 8 million viewers. His new movie,
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
The list, Ping
Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list
Lo-fos, union tools, free stuff grabbers, don’t care. They’re in it for the short haul.
The only person standing between Obama and his well-deserved Impeachment is crybaby Speaker of the House, John Boehner, PERIOD.
CALL YOUR THEATER and bug them about getting this movie from July 4th..!
You can also email.
My city was NOT on the list…! >:(
http://demandamerica.com/sign.php
Recently I heard D’Souza on the radio and he said he was sure Obama was a “nice and good man” but is wrecking the country. I was very disappointed in D’Souza for saying that. In fact, it disgusted me.
What would you have him say?
I guess what D’Sousa said can be disappointing, if what you want to hear are a string of insults a mile long towards the President that makes your heart leap for joy and cause one to pump one’s arms while shouting, “Yeah, yeah!”. :)
However that approach generally causes those that you want to hear the message, and learn, to shut out the messenger and not hear a thing.
Exactly, nothing wrong with being ‘cordial’. Otherwise people will tune him out.
What would you have him say?
“Obama’s policies and actions indicate a person with not good intentions for the best interests and good of the United States”.
I would prefer to call him an “evil SOB bent on destroying the country he hates”.
“Obama’s policies and actions indicate a person with not good intentions for the best interests and good of the United States”.
And he’s right. I understand that you might want to use a stronger language, but that would only result in the shutting of ears that we need to hear.
Than how about this?:
“Obama’s policies and actions indicate a person with not good intentions for the best interests and good of the United States”.
Certainly, the decorum isn’t necessary, but it’s usually a meaningless way to gain a larger audience. When referencing a political adversary, it’s backhanded mockery afaic.
When referencing a political adversary, it’s backhanded mockery afaic.
—
I have no idea what that means.
That’s what you wrote he said, so I don’t see the change. You and I can use the words traitor or enemy, because we know who he us, but to those whose eyes aren’t yet open, a message has to be crafted that can slip by defenses that have built up defending him.
Considering the DOJ went after him so heavy handed, it’s my guess D’Souza has been very effective in his messaging.
That’s what you wrote he said, so I don’t see the change.
If you can’t see the change, I’m sorry. Saying that he doesn’t have good intentions or the best interests of the US is a lot different than saying he’s a good and nice man.
Ever notice that every Senate Republican is a “good friend” to Harry Reid?
And every Dem is a good friend to John McCain.
You didn’t clarify what you said.
D’Souza is patronizing the Left.
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.