D'Souza explores many facets that may affect Obama's view of the world. But his focus on the convictions of Obama's father are the centerpiece. Obama's father once wrote a passionate piece called "Problems Facing our Socialism:"
The senior Obama proposed that the state confiscate private land and raise taxes with no upper limit. In fact, he insisted that “theoretically there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income so long as the people get benefits from the government commensurate with their income which is taxed.”
D'Souza explored the anticolonial thinking behind the piece and the posited this:
Remarkably, President Obama, who knows his father’s history very well, has never mentioned his father’s article. Even more remarkably, there has been virtually no reporting on a document that seems directly relevant to what the junior Obama is doing in the White House.
This struck me as wildly relevant. Thus my post. It turns out that former House speaker Newt Gingrich also found the post to be particularly important. He described it this way to National Review's intrepid Robert Costa:
Gingrich says that D’Souza has made a “stunning insight” into Obama’s behavior — the “most profound insight I have read in the last six years about Barack Obama.”
“What if [Obama] is so outside our comprehension, that only if you understand Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior, can you begin to piece together [his actions]?” Gingrich asks. “That is the most accurate, predictive model for his behavior.”
This was enough for Gingrich to be tagged as "fueling the myth mongering that Barack Obama is not a natural-born U.S. citizen."
Now White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs has Gingrich in his sites:
And I'm sure Gibbs wasn't pleased with Gingrich's assessment of Obama's motives:
“This is a person who is fundamentally out of touch with how the world works, who happened to have played a wonderful con, as a result of which he is now president,” Gingrich tells us.
“I think he worked very hard at being a person who is normal, reasonable, moderate, bipartisan, transparent, accommodating — none of which was true,” Gingrich continues. “In the Alinksy tradition, he was being the person he needed to be in order to achieve the position he needed to achieve . . . He was authentically dishonest.”