D'SOUZA: Obama wants to 'redistribute wealth away from America' (VIDEO)
"2016" filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza didn’t mice words during his visit to President Obama’s home turf – Chicago – last Saturday. Playing to a sold out crowd of curious Chicagoans who gave him a standing ovation, D’Souza answered some heated questions with his usual scholarly ease.
Among them: Why doesn’t Obama seem to care about poverty and the inner city? And why is Obama funneling trillions of dollars overseas when America is in trouble at home?
D’Souza cut-to-the-chase with his responses: Obama doesn’t care about the inner city and his real goal is to redistribute wealth away from America.
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
KELLY: One of the questions you pose is: love him or **** him, you don’t really know him. As someone who is a lifelong Chicagoan, who grew up on the Southside and who knows a lot about some of the players – at least from that part of his [Obama's] life – I believe full well that if they [Chicagoans] knew – if they saw your film – they would recoil. They would not vote to elect Barack Obama.
D'SOUZA: Look at it from the point of view of somebody who likes Obama.
KELLY: OK
D'SOUZA: Let’s put aside the conservative critique of him. In the liberal camp there’s been a mystery about him for four years now. That when Obama talks about causes that are near and dear to most liberals, he seems bored. He’s talking about poverty and the inner city – if you truly listen to Obama – it’s like he’s reading from his tax return. And this has been noticed.
The liberal answer is that Obama – you’ve gotta cut him a break – he’s too cerebral. He doesn’t operate at the level of feelings. He operates at the level of Hegelian philosophy – that he’s so bright that he’s truly thinking rather than feeling. So the reason he doesn’t come across as compassionate about the inner city is that he’s relating to it at the cosmic level. OK. I have a simpler theory. The reason Obama doesn’t seem to care about the inner city is because - he doesn’t.
KELLY: Sad but true.
D'SOUZA: So from the liberal point of view – when they look at Obama – I think I mentioned this briefly about the Occupy Wall Street guys. They’re looking at the 1 and 99 percent. Their definition of liberal is - within the United States - how much do you want to redistribute. If you want to redistribute more, you are more liberal. The film is offering the idea that Obama is off that spectrum – he will redistribute but his real goal is to redistribute away from America.
Now think of what that would mean if most Democrats knew that – and actually believed he was doing that. I think that would undermine his base.
KELLY: Because as you point out in the film – even the poorest American is considered the 1 percent by world standards.
D'SOUZA: Because American barely has enough in the till to meet its obligations to retirees and union pensions. If the ordinary union guy and retiree knew that a country that already has all this debt is going to be funneling trillions to other countries and that this would decimate theirs and their own ********’s futures and from a certain ideological standpoint of view – this is the very opposite of the American ***** that - our **** should live better than we do. The anti-colonial ***** is that our **** should do worse than we do in the name of global justice.
