Glenn Beck: The Roots of Obama's Rage



The Roots of Obama's Rage


by Dinesh D'Souza


GLENN: I saw an article in Forbes magazine a few days ago from Dinesh D'Souza, an extraordinarily bright man, an extraordinarily I mean, a guy who has in the past I have read some of his books and has captured, I think, the feeling and love of America, like very few people can. And I'm reading this article from him in Forbes magazine and quite honestly I'm reading it and going, yes, thank you, yes, somebody really gets it, and has a better handle on it than I think anybody else out there. It is an explanation of what is going on. The one thing that we haven't done is we haven't looked at the philosophy of Barack Obama. You can't make sense of what they're, what they're doing in Washington. None of it makes sense. None of it fits into the mold of the president of the United States or Democrats or Republicans. It just doesn't make sense. And when I was on after 8/28, and I got a lot of heat for this but again it's because people don't the people on the left don't want you to hear this message. Chris Wallace said, you know, you called the president a racist, blah, blah blah. And I said, poorly stated and almost I don't remember what exactly I said to him but almost infantile in its understanding of the president. I couldn't figure out what the president was doing and I missed the fact because I hadn't really looked into him. It becomes almost an illusion of racism. And it's not racism. It's anticolonialism. It is it's liberation theology, which is also in a way anticolonialism. It's Marxism in its roots. And when you understand these things, all of a sudden everything makes sense. When you understand and we did this how long ago? Eight months ago on television. His grandfather and his father, when you understand what they were doing, you all of a sudden can see Barack Obama and where he's going.

Well, Dinesh D'Souza has a book out, The Roots of Obama's Rage. And if it is anything I haven't read it yet and Dinesh is here with us. Hi, Dinesh, how are you, sir?

D'SOUZA: Hey, Glenn. Good to be on the show.

GLENN: Good to be with you. Pat and I read this article, we were carpooling the other day and he read it out loud and we were looking back and forth and we were looking at each other going, yes, yes.

PAT: That's it!

GLENN: Thank you, Dinesh. Is that what the whole book is about?

D'SOUZA: It is. The article is a little escargot. It's a little appetizer for the book, but there's just so much more in the book. And what's interesting is people are yelling and screaming about the article but they have no idea what's coming in the book in about three weeks.

GLENN: This comes out in about three weeks?

D'SOUZA: Yeah, the book can be preordered now but it will be in the stores in three weeks.

GLENN: I have to tell you, Dinesh, I have, I have not I've read a couple of books about Barack Obama and I don't ever finish them because they never get it right. I can guarantee you I will finish this book because you're on it. You are on it.

D'SOUZA: Well, it's my world. See, the thing is I'm an immigrant to America. I grew up in India. And as a young boy anticolonialism was in the air. My father, my grandfather, this was India became independent from the British in 1947. So this idea, the anticolonialist philosophy, which is the philosophy that the greedy, rapacious West is ripping off the poor countries, the idea that America is a rogue elephant in the world stampeding across the planet, consuming resources out of its share

GLENN: Okay, hang on. Before you go on, when I read this in the article, I immediately looked at Pat and I said, this will connect with people if you say the Story of Stuff. The left, have you seen the Story of Stuff? The left has done the Story of Stuff and we went over that like 18 months ago. That America is consuming all of the world's resources, that America has stolen things from other countries. So this is not a first of all, will you deny the Birther thing?



Glenn Beck is seen here on the Insider Extreme broadcast, an exclusive feature available only to Glenn Beck Insider Extreme members. Learn more...


D'SOUZA: Absolutely.

GLENN: Okay.

D'SOUZA: The Birther thing is a diversion. See, Barack Obama was born August 4th, 1961, and he was born in Hawaii. And the reason we know this, the single best piece of evidence is that there were notices of his birth in two local newspapers.

GLENN: So you have to be

PAT: All part of the plan.

GLENN: Right.

PAT: It was all part of conspiracy.

GLENN: You have to go to a Manchurian Candidate.

PAT: You really do.

GLENN: At birth.

PAT: It's so ridiculous.

D'SOUZA: But I think what's so significant is that Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, when Newt Gingrich praised my article and praised my argument and said it was the most insightful look at Obama that he had ever seen, Gibbs, the press secretary goes, well, they are just raising the issue of where Obama was born. So this poor guy

GLENN: No.

D'SOUZA: He had evidently not read the article, I know he hasn't read the book. I actually want to send him a signed copy, one for him and one for Obama.

GLENN: I'm not sure he can read, so

D'SOUZA: I don't know about that.

GLENN: I've listened to his answers, so I'm not sure he can read.

But let me just go back here. This has nothing to do with Birthers or anything else. This doesn't have anything to do with race and that's why I said my comment, what, a year and a half ago was infantile on its understanding of Obama because that's your gut that says, wait a minute, it's about race. No, it's not. It's not about race. It is about colonialism, which is still the message of the left, that America is stealing the resources of the rest of the world.

D'SOUZA: Yeah, the problem with the race theory and the problem with so many theories about Obama is we all look at Obama and we try to in a sense project American history onto him.

GLENN: Yes.

D'SOUZA: This is done on the right, it's done on the left, but we're ignoring Obama's own history. So what's interesting is all these people yell and scream, Maureen Dowd in today's New York Times yelling and screaming implying that this is some sort of race argument and saying, where does Dinesh get all this crazy stuff. And the answer is, I'm getting it from Obama.

An interesting way to get at this is to ask what is Obama's dream. Is it the American dream? Is it Martin Luther King's dream? And the beauty is we don't have to guess. Obama tells us himself in his book. You pick it up: Dreams From My Father.

GLENN: Hang on just a second. Dreams From My Father. Not Dreams Of My Father. Dreams From My Father.

D'SOUZA: Which these

GLENN: Critical.

D'SOUZA: Right. I'm not writing about my father's dreams. I'm writing about the dream I got from my father. And who was Barack Obama, Sr.? Once we look at this and once we look a little more closely at him and some of the things he's written, by the way, which are not well known, he wrote an interesting article in the East Africa Journal in 1965 about African socialism. He lays out a bunch of themes. He talks, for example, about what's the ideal rate of taxation, what is the highest permissible rate of taxation.

GLENN: You'll love this, America.

D'SOUZA: And he comes to an interesting conclusion: 100%. Now, 100% taxation. Now, you might say this is crazy, what rational person. But look at the anticolonialist premise. The anticolonialist premise is that the rich guys got rich by ripping off the poor. So Glenn, if I got rich by coming to your house and stealing your furniture, what tax rate should be put on me? It's not my stuff. I've taken it from you unjustly.

GLENN: Right.

D'SOUZA: So no limit to, you can come and get it all back.

GLENN: Right. Now listen, if you, if you want to look at Barack Obama and make sense of his policies, you cannot. For instance, last week the federal government okayed a billion dollar loan to Mexico to drill for oil in the Gulf where we have where we've stopped drilling. Why are we loaning them a billion dollars to drill where we can't? Deep sea, I told you this about five months ago. We've made a gigantic loan to Brazil so they can go and do deep sea drilling off the coast of Brazil. What was it, twice as deep as what we had a problem with? And we shut down all of our oil rigs? Now, why would we take our money and give it to Brazil and give it to Mexico to do the things that we are telling that a president is telling us is too dangerous for the environment to do?

D'SOUZA: This is absolutely critical and in fact I think even Obama's own supporters are misunderstanding him. They think he's a conventional liberal. They think he a he like Al Gore: He thinks the planet is too hot, he thinks that energy consumption for the world is too high, he wants to decrease it across the board. But then we see no, he doesn't. He wants to decrease energy consumption by us while increasing energy availability and consumption by them. In other words, he wants to decrease the wealth of the colonizers, the rich West, and increase the availability of wealth and energy. That's why he proposes huge global transfers of wealth from the wealthy west to the rest. So this anticolonial key opens the lock. We have a lot of other arguments and they're like hammers. They bang around at Obama, they try to fit him into some theory and then there is the rage. The reason I call the book The The Roots of Obama's Rage is that this isn't ideology, this isn't something he picked up in college, flirted with as sort of a quasi Marxist. This is rooted in his own deep personal history. He's a little bit like the guy in the Schwarzenegger movie who comes home and his whole family has been massacred and he becomes a man on a mission. He's got to go back, he's got to settle scores, he's got

GLENN: See, I have to

D'SOUZA: This is Barack Obama.

GLENN: I have to tell you this is the point that we made when we stumbled on grandpa being kept in a British prison camp and then grandma telling Barack this is the story and anticolonial so you see, wait a minute, grandma grandpa was put into a camp for a while because of the British. You see that Dad left his son for this cause, then mom left his her son for this cause. His whole family has sacrificed for generations now for this cause, and somehow or another the media wants you to think that that's irrelevant. I am Abraham Lincoln said everything I am, I owe to my mother. I just told my father this weekend: Almost everything I am I owe to my father. We are a product of what we came from, good or bad.

D'SOUZA: Not only is that true in general but it is especially true of Obama. His publishers gave him a big advance and said go write a book about your life. He wrote a book about his father's life. He took his father's name. So in a sense he says himself and everybody who knows him says this. His granny, Sarah Obama, not his real granny, she's the white she's one of the other wives of his grandfather, Onyango Obama. But she says, I look at him and I see all the same things: The vision of the father is realized in the son. So the people who know Obama see this uncanny resemblance.

I'm saving stuff in the book. I don't want to talk about the grandfather because the story is so fascinating. In effect Obama ends up rejecting his grandfather. In his own book he calls him a house (expletive). He rejects his grandfather and he puts all his hopes in his father. It's a very interesting question why. His grandfather suffered more than his more than.

GLENN: Could I

D'SOUZA: By it's a fascinating psychological narrative that connects to his policies. That's what's so eye opening about it.

GLENN: Could I ask you a favor? I know you were quoting the president but please don't use that word on this program.

D'SOUZA: No, no. I mean I was just sorry. But I was just quoting.

GLENN: No, you are quoting him, I know that but please don't use it.

All right. We're going to continue here in just a second, and I want to go back to his taking his father's name because again it goes back to something that I said on this program and I got heat for and I said, this just, when you change your name, when you do that, it says something. And it's important that people understand, especially from a guy named

D'SOUZA: Named Barry.

GLENN: Named Barry going into Barack and a guy named Dinesh D'Souza, not changing his name. He could be he could be something, you know. He could be, you know, Bob Smith like people used to. There is something to be said for changing names and not changing names. And I want to get into that here in a second.

[NOTE: Transcript may have been edited to enhance readability - audio archive includes full segment as it was originally aired]

Stop trying to be right and think of the children

Mario Tama/Getty Images

All the outrage this week has mainly focused on one thing: the evil Trump administration and its minions who delight in taking children from their illegal immigrant parents and throwing them all in dungeons. Separate dungeons, mind you.

That makes for a nice, easy storyline, but the reality is less convenient. Most Americans seem to agree that separating children from their parents — even if their parents entered the US illegally — is a bad thing. But what if that mom and dad you're trying to keep the kids with aren't really the kids' parents? Believe it or not, fraud happens.

RELATED: Where were Rachel Maddow's tears for immigrant children in 2014?

While there are plenty of heartbreaking stories of parents simply seeking a chance for a better life for their children in the US, there are also corrupt, abusive human traffickers who profit from the illegal immigration trade. And sorting all of this out is no easy task.

This week, the Department of Homeland Security said that since October 2017, more than 300 children have arrived at the border with adults claiming to be their parents who turned out not to be relatives. 90 of these fraud cases came from the Rio Grande Valley sector alone.

In 2017, DHS reported 46 causes of fraudulent family claims. But there have already been 191 fraud cases in 2018.

Shouldn't we be concerned about any child that is smuggled by a human trafficker?

When Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen pointed out this 315 percent increase, the New York Times was quick to give these family fraud cases "context" by noting they make up less than one percent of the total number of illegal immigrant families apprehended at the southern border. Their implication was that Nielsen was exaggerating the numbers. Even if the number of fraud cases at the border was only 0.001 percent, shouldn't we be concerned about any child that is smuggled by a human trafficker?

This is the most infuriating part of this whole conversation this week (if you can call it a "conversation") — that both sides have an angle to defend. And while everyone's busy yelling and making their case, children are being abused.

What if we just tried, for two seconds, to love having mercy more than we love having to be right all the time?

Remember when cartoons were happy things? Each panel took you on a tiny journey, carrying you to an unexplored place. In Understanding Comics, Scott McCloud writes:

The comics creator asks us to join in a silent dance of the seen and the unseen. The visible and the invisible. This dance is unique to comics. No other artform gives so much to its audience while asking so much from them as well. This is why I think it's a mistake to see comics as a mere hybrid of the graphic arts and prose fiction. What happens between . . . panels is a kind of magic only comics can create.

When that magic is manipulated or politicized, it often devolves the artform into a baseless thing. Yesterday, Occupy Wall Street published the perfect example of low-brow deviation of the artform: A six-panel approach at satire, which imitates the instructions-panel found in the netted cubbyhole behind seats on airplanes. The cartoon is a critique of the recent news about immigrant children being separated from their parents after crossing the border. It is a step-by-step guide to murdering US Immigrations and Customs Enforcement agents.

RELATED: Cultural appropriation has jumped the shark, and everyone is noticing

The first panel shows a man shoving an infant into a cage meant for Pomeranians. The following five panels feature instructions, and include pictures of a cartoonish murder.

The panels read as follows:

  1. If an ICE agent tries to take your child at the border, don't panic.
  2. Pull your child away as quickly as possibly by force.
  3. Gently tell your child to close his/her eyes and ears so they won't witness what you are about to do.
  4. Grab the ICE agent from behind and push your knife into his chest with an upward thrust, causing the agent's sternum to break.
  5. Reach into his chest and pull out his still beating heart.
  6. Hold his bloody heart out for all other agents to see, and tell them that the same fate awaits them if they f--- with your child again.

Violent comics are nothing new. But most of the time, they remain in the realms of invented worlds — in other words, not in our own, with reference to actual people, let alone federal agents.

The mainstream media made a game of crying racism with every cartoon depiction of Obama during his presidency, as well as during his tenure as Senator, when the New Yorker, of all things, faced scrutiny for depicting him in "Muslim clothing." Life was a minefield for political cartoonists during the Obama era.

Chris Hondros/Getty Images

This year, we saw the leftist outrage regarding The Simpsons character Apu — a cartoon representation of a highly-respected, though cartoonishly-depicted, character on a cartoon show composed of cartoonishly-depicted characters.

We all remember Charlie Hebdo, which, like many outlets that have used cartoon satire to criticize Islam, faced the wrath and ire of people unable to see even the tamest representation of the prophet, Muhammad.

Interesting, isn't it? Occupy Wall Street publishes a cartoon that advocates murdering federal agents, and critics are told to lighten up. Meanwhile, the merest depiction of Muhammad has resulted in riots throughout the world, murder and terror on an unprecedented scale.

The intersection of Islam and comics is complex enough to have its own three-hour show, so we'll leave it at that, for now. Although, it is worth mentioning the commentary by satirical website The Onion, which featured a highly offensive cartoon of all the major religious figures except Muhammad. It noted:

Following the publication of the image above, in which the most cherished figures from multiple religious faiths were depicted engaging in a lascivious sex act of considerable depravity, no one was murdered, beaten, or had their lives threatened.

Of course, Occupy Wall Street is free to publish any cartoon they like. Freedom of speech, and so on—although there have been several instances in which violent cartoons were ruled to have violated the "yelling fire in a crowded theater" limitation of the First Amendment.

Posting it to Twitter is another issue — this is surely in violation of Twitter's violent content policy, but something tells me nothing will come of it. It's a funny world, isn't it? A screenshot of a receipt from Chick-fil-A causes outrage but a cartoon advocating murder gets crickets.

RELATED: Twitter mob goes ballistic over Father's Day photo of Caitlyn Jenner. Who cares?

In Understanding Comics, Scott McCloud concludes that, "Today the possibilities for comics are — as they've always been — endless. Comics offers . . . range and versatility, with all the potential imagery of film and painting plus the intimacy of the written word. And all that's needed is the desire to be heard, the will to learn, and the ability to see."

Smile, and keep moving forward.

Crude and awful as the Occupy Wall Street comic is, the best thing we can do is nod and look elsewhere for the art that will open our eyes. Let the lunatics draw what they want, let them stew in their own flawed double standards. Otherwise, we're as shallow and empty as they are, and nothing good comes of that. Smile, and keep moving forward.

Things are getting better. Show the world how to hear, how to learn, how to see.

People should start listening to Nikki Haley

ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP/Getty Images

Okay. Let's take a vote. You know, an objective, quantifiable count. How many resolutions has the UN Human Rights Council adopted condemning dictatorships? Easy. Well. How do you define "dictatorship"?

Well, one metric is the UN Human Rights Council Condemnation. How many have the United Nations issued to China, with a body count higher than a professional Call of Duty player?

Zero.

How about Venezuela, where socialism is devouring its own in the cruelest, most unsettling ways imaginable?

Zero.

And Russia, home of unsettling cruelty and rampant censorship, murder and (actual) homophobia?

Zero.

Iraq? Zero. Turkey? Iraq? Zero. Cuba? Zero. Pakistan? Zero.

RELATED: Nikki Haley just dropped some serious verbal bombs on Russia at the UN

According to UN Human Rights Council Condemnations, 2006-2016, none of these nations is as dangerous as we'd imagined. Or, rather, none of them faced a single condemnation. Meanwhile, one country in particular has faced unbelievable scrutiny and fury — you'll never guess which country.

No, it's not Somalia. It's Israel. With 68 UN Human Rights Council Condemnations! In fact, the number of total United Nations condemnations against Israel outnumbers the total of condemnations against all other countries combined. The only country that comes close is Syria, with 15.

The Trump administration withdrew from the United Nations Human Rights Council on Tuesday in protest of what it perceives as an entrenched bias against Israel and a willingness to allow notorious human rights abusers as members.

In an address to the UN Security Council on Tuesday, Nikki Haley said:

Let's remember that the Hamas terrorist organization has been inciting violence for years, long before the United States decided to move our embassy. This is what is endangering the people of Gaza. Make no mistake, Hamas is pleased with the results from yesterday... No country in this chamber would act with more restraint than Israel has.

Maybe people should start listening to Haley. Hopefully, they will. Not likely, but there's no crime in remaining hopeful.

Here's a question unique to our times: "Should I tell my father 'Happy Father's Day,' even though he (she?) is now one of my mothers?"

Father's Day was four days ago, yes, but this story is just weird enough to report on. One enjoyable line to read was this gem from Hollywood Gossip: "Cait is a woman and a transgender icon, but she is also and will always be the father of her six children."

RELATED: If Bruce was never a he and always a she, who won the men's Olympic gold in 1976?

Imagine reading that to someone ten — even five — years ago. And, honestly, there's something nice about it. But the strangeness of its having ever been written overpowers any emotional impact it might bring.

"So lucky to have you," wrote Kylie Jenner, in the Instagram caption under pre-transition pictures of Bruce Jenner.

Look. I risk sounding like a tabloid by mere dint of having even mentioned this story, but the important element is the cultural sway that's occurring. The original story was that a band of disgruntled Twitter users got outraged about the supposed "transphobic" remarks by Jenner's daughter.

But, what we should be saying is, "who the hell cares?" Who cares what one Jenner says to another — and more importantly and on a far deeper level — who cares what some anonymous Twitter user has to say?

When are we going to stop playing into the hands of the Twitter mob?

When are we going to stop playing into the hands of the Twitter mob? Because, at the moment, they've got it pretty good. They have a nifty relationship with the mainstream media: One or two Twitter users get outraged by any given thing — in this case Jenner and supposed transphobia. In return, the mainstream media use the Twitter comment as a source.

Then, a larger Twitter audience points to the article itself as proof that there's some kind of systemic justice at play. It's a closed-market currency, where the negative feedback loop of proof and evidence is composed of faulty accusations. Isn't it a hell of a time to be alive?