Give me dirt on D'SOUZA for deflating local TeaBaggers at their "2016" movie party

[UTUSN]

The local radio TeaBaggers are throwing a party at a showing of the Dinesh D'SOUZA "Triumph of the Will" style propaganda movie. One of them is a standard wingnut less than full blown 'Bagger. He has swallowed whole all of the basic Rethug official line, such as all of the many/changing reasons that Shrub-CHEENEE passed out justifying the Iraq Attack, all of the official lies before and after. His partner is a 'Bagger all the way. They were on the radio going on about how this movie was the first REAL "journalism" about OBAMA, that the media had never vetted him at all, that D'SOUZA is a "mainstream Conservative" not a wingnut hack.

What I know about D'SOUZA is from David BROCK's Blinded by the Right, that he is one of Laura INGRAHAM's old boyfriends, that he and she at Dartmouth were neck deep in wingnut dirty tricks, would Out, harass, and bully Gay students, that INGRAHAM and her group would mock persons with disabilities, that INGRAHAM would get zonked out of her mind and was known to crawl on hands and knees across barroom floors and to hold a loaded gun to the temple of at least one dude who dumped her.

Give me whatever there is on D'SOUZA, his absurd beliefs, is he a Creationist? Gossip or policy, whatever. I might even type up flyers and dumpt them at the 'Bagger party.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. D'Souza is a creationist (at least, an intelligent-designer).

But that would only elevate him in the eyes of the teabaggers.

He's also anti-feminist, an ardent neocon, thinks the atrocities of Abu Ghraib were the fault of liberals, used to be Catholic, now is an evangelical, and is pretty much everything you'd expect of a guy doing a hit job on Obama.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinesh_D%27Souza

But all those things will make the 'baggers love him more.

[UTUSN]

2. Thanks & you're right, it all will just validate him to them. Yeah, I had looked at the Wiki n/t

[The Magistrate]

3. Try This Link, Sir: A Splendid Demolition Job In 'The Weekly Standard'

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/roots-lunacy_508809.html?page=1

[UTUSN]

6. and from the Weakly Standard, no less!1 Excellent, thanks!1 n/t

[Octafish]

4. D'Souza's a Moonie

From a friend:

D’Souza and Rev. Moon

Posted by Ed Brayton on May 26, 2008

There’s an interesting story about Dinesh D’Souza and Rev. Moon in John Gorenfeld’s new book Bad Moon Rising. During Moon’s stay in prison in the early 80s, the Unification Church began a massive PR campaign to resurrect his reputation, particularly among Christian churches and conservative leaders. Kits were sent out to thousands of churches, ministers and organizations that urged them to view Moon’s imprisonment on tax evasion charges as an attack on religious freedom by secular humanists.

At the time, Dinesh D’Souza was a young scholar at the Heritage Foundation and he wrote an article for Policy Review, the house journal of the Foundation, about Moon and his involvement with so many prominent conservative leaders. He interviewed a large number of conservatives about Moon. The article was titled On Moon’s Planet: The Theology and Politics of the Unification Church.

He noted that a number of prominent conservative individuals and organizations had accepted Moon’s money over the years. But he also noted, “Others keep their distance but are not willing to say so publicly. One reason is a reluctance to embarrass friends at the Washington Times.” He told Eric Alterman:

What I can’t figure out is whether Moon is trying to purchase respectability for his theology, or whether he wants to jettison his theology in order to purchase respectability for himself.

It seems that D’Souza has managed to get over his discomfort over taking money from Moon, however. In May 2007, while promoting his book that claims that liberalism is to blame for provoking the Islamic terrorists, he was paid to speak at an event in Washington DC sponsored by the Universal Peace Federation and the Washington Times Foundation. All of a sudden, he claims total ignorance. “I know almost nothing about Moon,” he told Gorenfeld in an email. Right.

SOURCE: http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2008/05/26/dsouza-and-rev-moon/

Give 'em the Truth, UTUSN. They'll think it's Hell. Then, they wake up.



Share on emailMore »





http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2008/05/26/dsouza-and-rev-moon/

[UTUSN]

5. Thanks for this and all the amazing work you do, friend Oct n/t

[UTUSN]

7. UPDATE: My e-mails to the radio wingnut and his reply and mine.

I forwarded the input in this thread, so thanks.

************ WHAT I SAID ******

Knowing how well you are uninformed and how you swallow the marching orders of the officical Rethug party (remember how you swallowed every weekly “reason” for the Iraq Attack that Shrub-CHEENEE put out?), I challenge you to even read these two bits about D’SOUZA, and the first one is from the Weekly Standard, which you have previously cited as respectable (ha). It’s a wingnut rag, and you have cited Fred BARNES as a respectable columnist, ha.

You just mentioned having done “a little bit of research,” which is always insufficient and WRONG. Try starting with your basic Wiki bio of D’SOUZA that mentions his Creationist junk. Somebody on the ‘net said that “(Besides Creationism) He's also anti-feminist, an ardent neocon, thinks the atrocities of Abu Ghraib were the fault of liberals, used to be Catholic, now is an evangelical, and is pretty much everything you'd expect of a guy doing a hit job on Obama. But all those things will make the 'baggers love him more.”

Right now you’ve got a turd reading out of the Newsweek “OBAMA Must Go” crap. Do you even mention that it was written by a McCAIN (crashed FIVE planes) campaign employee from ‘08? What gives that any weight of any sort? Besides that you know Newsweek is not your father’s Newsweek, it’s Tina BROWN’s.

(Name), you know I’ve given you the benefit of assumption of decency before. You are convincing me you are really shameless. Is getting your radio spot really worth this lowness?

********* WHAT HE REPLIED **********

“I'm right in the middle of the show but what made the Newsweek piece noticed is that it appeared in Newsweek and because Tina Brown is no Republican partisan. I read the piece and did not think it was anything out of the ordinary EXCEPT that it appeared there. she is no friend of the GOP. I will be working the (D'SOUZA) movie tomorrow night. It's my job. I will give the movie a fair hearing or watching.

"I like to think of myself as fair minded and I really think I am but I also have a point of view and don't like the Obama administration or a good many of his policies. I think the Affordable Care Act will sink the country. I don't like the ever-larger government that he's building and that will have to be built to do the Affordable Care Act. I don't like the Democratic Party's drive for 'fairness' in taxation because that doesn't mean anything except screw the rich because they have too much money. Neither they nor the GOP have addressed the decline of the middle in America and I'm not sure what I would do but I don know that taxing the rich more merely because they are rich won't improve the lot of the middle class a bit. And I got that last bit from Michael Tomasky who writes for the Daily Beast.”

************** WHAT I REPLIED *********

1. You have every right to defend or ward off being personally attacked by me, but this is not an apology from me. Ever since LIMBOsevic made politics Scorched Earth (again; it has been this way before, Father COUGHLIN, etc.) the rancor on both sides has been a fact: You do know, don’t you, that a totally serious coup was plotted by your guys against FDR, don’t you? And that your side has been on the foot-dragging side of every piece of social change or legislation that improved things for most people.

2. As for your being fair minded, specifically regarding your considering D’SOUZA’s book/movie, I fully get that. When something becomes a topic in current events/politics, I give it a viewing, too: Mel GIBSON’s The Passion of the Christ. I want to know what things are about, what I think about it, whether what people are saying gibes or not. And you often do a little Devil’s Advocate thing semi-correcting the course of your stooge TeaBagger (but not much, and it doesn’t “take”). I will someday look at the D’SOUZA trash in some way that I’m not financially supporting it.

3. My point is that you can’t have it both ways: You and Stooge talking about being reporters and “journalism” while repeating, putting out there, a torrent of propaganda. You’ve said before that you don’t agree with a lot of what you hear on your side of things, the extremes of LIMBOsevic and the unwatchable Fox & Friends. To any reasonable person PROPAGANDA, just blind talking points, is repulsive. I told you before that I found OLBERMANN and Ed SHULTZ and SHARPTON to be unwatchable to me. I can’t stand being told JUNK even, or especially, when it is supposed to be on my side.
So for you and Stooge to nag and rag the same old crap is repulsive and this week was the first in a long time that I listened to you.

4. As for Tina BROWN and Newsweek, it wasn’t her politics that I was referring to if she has any. I wasn’t saying she is a wingnut operative as I do say D’SOUZA is. She is a sensationalist, attention whore first and foremost and has run her various projects into the ground. That the only thing you thought was remarkable about the “OBAMA Must Go” piece was that it APPEARED IN NEWSWEEK is what my point was about, that this version of Newsweek is nothing like the news magazine it used to be, so that it should NOT be remarkable as a setting for a sensational headline, Rethug or otherwise. BROWN has been snatching attention with cheap ass covers for months. You don’t claim her for your team and neither do I. You were still giving the headline the burnishing of the Newsweek brand that doesn’t exist anymore.
Taking you at your word that there was nothing remarkable about the article, THAT should have been your “reporter’s” angle: Saying, “Oh, look, this headline in Newsweek is just for shock value because Newsweek is now nearly a tabloid and because the article is written by a McCAIN campaign guy so it’s not surprising.” You could even add, “I agree with what the article says, but that’s because we’re on the same side.” Instead you just said “Newsweek” and “WOW”.

5. I detest the “reporters’” game that it’s more fun to cover exciting races in politics, that assholes like Shrub or RYAN or whomever are built up just for the entertainment value to “journalists.” So just hearing you, Stooge, and your TeaBagger callers yuk it up or play constantly the “Ain’t It Awful” game is repulsive. And to the people who predictably say that it’s my choice just not to listen to assholes like you guys, I need to keep up with what you are up to.

6. Some of my friends and family have said I’m rude and harsh to you who sound so civil. Yes, I am. It’s not about OBAMA or any other individual to me. OBAMA or Hillary or whomever just happen to be occupying the spaces for now. It’s about which party/direction is, in the broadest brush way, for the common good of the most and most needful people as opposed to a narrow class. And your party’s direction is inimical to mine, and it’s not a game, so rudeness and harshness is what enemies deal in.

************* END OF EXCHANGE, UP TO NOW **********