My
review of/exasperated sigh
of Dinesh D’Souza’s book
The Roots of Obama’s Rage
included the optimistic point that D’Souza’s lousy books usually inspire a backlash that hurts his cause. Maybe this is a sign of the shifting zeitgeist, because that’s not happening yet. Media Matters catches
Glenn Beck buying the thesis
:
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 anti-colonialism. It is – it’s liberation theology, which is also in a way anti-colonialism. It’s Marxism in its roots. And when you understand these things, all of a sudden everything makes sense. … 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.
He hated his father! People, the man’s memoir has been on sale for 15 years, and he had his much love for his drunk of a father as Ronald Reagan had for his drunk of a father. And in those moments when he was deepest in his cups, I don’t even think Barack Obama, Sr would have confused liberation theology and anti-colonialism. (They emerged around the same time, but liberation theology was a product of Catholic countries in South America that had thrown off their colonial powers a century earlier.)
Ralph Reed, fresh off his comeback conference, makes another endorsement :
Some people are saying that Michael Steele endorsed the article, too, although
I don’t see it
– I read this as genuine confusion. The Beck endorsement matters, though; I’m struggling to imagine, say, an article in 2002 about George W. Bush being a puppet of Likud winning wide acceptance with liberal elites.
