Reply With Quote
Isn't that what other directors like Michael Moore does, express his opinion?
Looks like it bothers you a great deal in that case.
LOL...
That's the big lie?
An opinion?
Do you even know what the end of story is?
Isn't that what other directors like Michael Moore does, express his opinion?
Looks like it bothers you a great deal in that case.
This is where "2016: Obama’s America" switches into high polemic/propaganda mode. In the final third or so of the film, the filmmakers opine that Obama shares his father’s more radical political beliefs. As evidence, they point to many of his admitted political mentors, including the late communist journalist Frank Marshall Davis, the liberation theology minister, Jeremiah Wright, the late anti-Israel/Western academic Edward Said, unrepentent ’60s terrorist-turned-academic Bill Ayers, and others. As a result, the film argues that President Obama wants to significantly reduce the U.S.’s influence within the world while increasing the influence of nations that he believes have suffered or been held back economically or militarily due to U.S. and western dominance. To argue his case, D’Souza interviews conservative scholars, including Shelby Steele and Daniel Pipes. He also interviews several leftist academics who echo the anti-colonial views that he believes Obama learned from his father and mentors.
It's not that complicated... if Barry wanted to do that, he had full control of Congress to do so... these 4 years are simply a much better barometer of who Barry is... IMO
OMG...
What Moore does is flat out like about facts.
There are no lies in 2016. I challenge you to watch it and point any out I missed.
2016 was a movie made for you and Yoni. It's only obvious you'll like it. We understand.
And because of someone elses take on it, you know the facts.
The Frank Davis is the one that surprised me. We all know he had dealings with these people, more than just knowing them.
I know where not to seek "the truth" from.
Thanks for confirming that's exactly what the movie portrays... I can't agree with D'Souza's futurology however, in light of the past 4 years... as I've said before, complete disconnect.
Well, I find it ironic that you are so informed of something you didn't see. You read other peoples propaganda, then call it propaganda.
Hilarious.
I didn't say it was full of lies. But I know it's going to take selective information and make lofty assumptions meant to give people like you a comforting scare that helps to justify the hours you spend every day convincing yourselves that the Other Team is destroying the country and you're on the side who can see them for what they are.
Yeah, and so does the prime time lineup on Fox "News." At least it's free.And, do entaries inform.
It's a movie... synopsis weren't invented with this film, tbh
How often are the film critics and synopses correct?
What's hilarious is that you guys so desperately need validation from non-conservatives... There's obviously some part of you that knows you spent money on partisan bubblegum but you think if a few liberals say "You know, it was actually pretty decent and made a lot of good points," you can convince yourself that this is somehow different than your average liberal do entary that you guys so hyperbolically railed against back when Michael Moore was still relevant.
Are you saying the things that Obama writes in his books referring to Davis, are incorrect?
Are you saying that Obama is lying?
It's not that at all.
I find it childish that we conservatives will actually watch works by the likes of Moore, but that liberals are afraid to watch conservative works. Especially when one has actually do entary components, and Moore's is all based of twisted facts, where he uses facts and doesn't flat out lie.
criticism and synopsis are two different things...
Yes, but both are limited and colored by the person writing it.
Spot on... what's clear is that it worked exceptionally well with it's intended audience... D'Souza certainly deserves credit for that.
synopsis are a description. They don't intend to provide any 'color'.
Whose fault is that?
The next Moore movie I watch will be the first one, tbh
Do you realize that the synopsis you read does not say that this information was taken out of Obama's own books?
Obama himself was the reader you the audio versions of his books. They play that audio as well.
None of this was made up.
Yet they do. Often by conveniently leaving out facts.
My previous quote was a critique, not a synopsis.
Synopsis for the movie are available too, in the usual movie places, and I've read them too.
I'm not discussing this with you. You apparently can't distinguish between synopsis and critique.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
