Obama’s America: 2016 The Movie

[michaelskis]

***Mods please wait for the poll before combining this with any other thread. ****

I am thinking about going to see Obama’s America: 2016 at one of the theaters this weekend. Originally, I was not planning on seeing it thinking that it was just a far right wing propaganda piece, but a friend, who is a political independent, said that it was worth seeing.

I have read over many of the reviews and one common theme is that many of the more liberal reporters hate it, but none of the reviews that I have read are able to point to anything that is actually false. They do say that it is one sided and that some of the associations are a bit of a stretch, but thus far it appears that it is all true. However some say it is only half truths.

So poses the question, have you watched Obama’s America 2016? If so, what did you think of it?

[Tide]

It is showing on one theater in the region. I would like to see it, if I have time (family you know).

It's listed under the horror flicks right?

But seriously, there is so much we don't know about this guy and we may never know.

[hilldweller]

IMO the whole premise of the movie is stupid. We know Obama pretty well at this point.

[Blide]

I have no intention of seeing it. Everything I've heard about it points to it being political propaganda. The whole premise that Obama's father had a significant influence on his governing style seems absurd to me considering he didn't even know the guy.

All this talk about how Obama must be "different" due to his upbringing seems almost xenophobic to me. Trying to use this to explain Obama's motivations is pure conjecture and has little basis in actual fact. Sure, there may be things people don't know about Obama but at this point much of it just seems like people grasping at straws.

Anyway, an AP fact checker definitely had issue with the documentary. Unsurprisingly the guy twisted or omitted some facts to support his narrative.

[michaelskis]

I have no intention of seeing it. Everything I've heard about it points to it being political propaganda. The whole premise that Obama's father had a significant influence on his governing style seems absurd to me considering he didn't even know the guy.

All this talk about how Obama must be "different" due to his upbringing seems almost xenophobic to me. Trying to use this to explain Obama's motivations is pure conjecture and has little basis in actual fact. Sure, there may be things people don't know Obama but at this point much of it just seems like people grasping at straws.

Anyway, an AP fact checker definitely had issue with the documentary. Unsurprisingly the guy twisted or omitted some facts to support his narrative.

That is what I thought too. But as my independent friend pointed out that he idolized his father and painted a picture based on written letters back and forth. But allegedly in the movie, his brother points out that the President never knew about his father’s drinking problems or other issues.

As for the AP story, it was written by Beth Fouhy. If you Google her other work, she appears to be as biased as this movie, if not more so given the number of anti-republican and pro-democrat articles that she has written.

I also think it is interesting that you are able to gather all that personal opinion from a movie that you have not watched.

[imaplanner]

As was pointed out, the AP fact check found the movie to be terribly free of any actual facts and was basically just an overtly racist propaganda piece. The whole idea that Obama hate America because he has an internal conflict over being half white and half black is pretty darn disgusting mskis.

[Raf]

As a person of color I sometimes i say it in my head, but never say it out loud, but hence I will say here because, well it's cyberspace and movies like these make me think:

Why don't you just be honest with yourself and just say, I don't like the man because he is black, i.e. a different skin color than me.

Of course my conservative father had an influence on me, yet, so did learning, so does my job, so does interacting with people. I call BS.

[Blide]

I also think it is interesting that you are able to gather all that personal opinion from a movie that you have not watched.

A summary was enough for me. I'm not going to waste my time on a documentary where it's trying to justify some inconsequential fringe belief.

Perhaps I'm a bit bias but I also take personal issue with the whole documentary's premise. As someone who grew up largely without my father in the picture, the idea that Obama's ideology was shaped by his father's absence is just absurd to me. They may share certain personality traits and mannerisms but ideology is something entirely different. Kids' ideologies are often quite different than their parents for a variety of different reasons and it's likely the same here. To suggest otherwise is making a huge leap.

If this guy was making the argument that Obama's father's absence influenced Obama's life in some fashion, I would have no issue. That's not the argument being made though. He's essentially making the argument that Obama harbors anti-American sentiments due to his father. There's no evidence of this being the case though.

In all honesty, nothing I've ever seen or heard from Obama indicates he's anything more than a center-left politician. All this stuff about how he's anti-American is kind of offensive when you consider a substantial portion of the American electorate shares views similar to Obama's. Just because you disagree with him or his positions doesn't make him any less American.

[wahday]

One of the things that really gets me, and which is evidently a strong theme that runs through the movie, is this idea of an “anti-colonialist” position. The assertion, made by many right wing pundits, is that Obama has such a stance and also that it is bad for America. Maybe I don’t fully understand this position, but wasn’t Colonialism generally a bad thing? Isn’t that why it crumbled? Is Dinesh saying that we should have a president with a “pro-colonialist” attitude? Do they even understand what that means?

In my (non-planning) graduate work I focused on East African history and have a Certificate in African Studies. I spent a good deal focusing on the transition of local governmental forms from the pre-colonial era, through the colonial period and into modern Africa. Some of the greatest writing about political movements and social justice came out of the end of the colonial era in Africa (primarily the 1960s) and Kenya in particular was a major producer of such thinking. Nelson Mandela read and was directly inspired by the works of Ngugi wa Thiongo, a jailed, anti-colonialist Kenyan, for example. Nelson Mandela was certainly an anti-colonialist. He was also a great man and one of my lifetime’s greatest figures for freedom and self-determination.

What the hell is wrong with throwing off the chains of oppression? Was the overthrow of Apartheid, another example of colonialism, not a good thing? Are the roots of America not part and parcel with ending colonialism? Isn’t a huge part of our global narrative the support of self-determination by people and the encouragement of throwing off the shackles of oppression? So, why is Obama being educated about and even potentially inspired by an “anti-colonial” attitude a bad thing?

And if YOUR father was part of such a movement to free your nation from control by another country (and African colonialism was particularly cruel, denying Africans participation in the democratic reforms enjoyed by Europe during this period and making them decidedly ill-prepared for the vacuum left by European withdrawal) wouldn’t you want to know about him too? That’s kind of a big deal. My father was involved in the early days of the space program and went to west Africa to get the chimps from whom HAM the space chimp was chosen. Does that make me anti-chimp? Or a supporter of colonialism because the country was French Cameroon at the time? This whole guilt-by-association stuff is really tiresome.

For me, this falls into the same category as saying Obama is a Muslim. Its one of those weird, double layered insults one isn’t sure how to respond to. Firstly, he is not a Muslim and never has been. But the bigger question should be, why does that have any bearing in the first place? It is not illegal to be Muslim and its perfectly legal to run for president as one. These are assertions that play on fear and a lack of knowledge and understanding. And I find it very distasteful.

So, uh, no, I won't be going to see this movie.

[Otis]

Haven't seen it and won't see it. I make a point of avoiding political propaganda of all stripes, and I certainly will not pay to see such propaganda.

[Maister]

Haven't seen it and won't see it. I make a point of avoiding political propaganda of all stripes, and I certainly will not pay to see such propaganda.

Likewise.

I've never seen Michael Moore's 'Sicko', for example, yet I'm confident enough in my assessment of his films to date, that I can comfortably categorize it (in my own mind) under the heading of propaganda. Just about any time where you see reviews/commentary falling along politically polarized lines - "this is the gospel"/"this is a pack of lies" you can pretty well bet it's straightforward propaganda and that appears to be the case here.

[ColoGI]

Haven't seen it and won't see it. I make a point of avoiding political propaganda of all stripes, and I certainly will not pay to see such propaganda.

+1.

[michaelskis]

wahday, thank you for your extensive and insightful post. I appreciate you sharing your viewpoint of anti-colonialism in Africa and I think you bring up some very interesting points.


On a similar topic, has anyone read Dreams From My Father? It would be interesting to see how the movie and this book compare.

[ofos]

Doubt that I'll see it, even if someone else pays for the ticket, although I know a lot of people who will. I'm a staunch independent so I follow the credo of "Make up my own mind, vote my conscience, and don't discuss it with others." There are enough conflicts in life without debating politics or religion.

[Whose Yur Planner]

Haven't seen it and won't see it. I make a point of avoiding political propaganda of all stripes, and I certainly will not pay to see such propaganda.

Add me to this as well. Movies are expensive enough to see. Why would I waste my time and money to see this? As for your other question,no I've not read Obama's book and don't plan to. Like Otis and Maister said, I try to avoid the political propaganda.

[Planit]

How can you make a documentary on something that hasn't happened yet?

When you 'document' something aren't you relating to something that has happened?

[Blide]

How can you make a documentary on something that hasn't happened yet?

Didn't you know the world is ending on December 21st of this year? I saw a documentary on the History Channel about it so it must be true!

[kjel]

As a person of color I sometimes i say it in my head, but never say it out loud, but hence I will say here because, well it's cyberspace and movies like these make me think:

Why don't you just be honest with yourself and just say, I don't like the man because he is black, i.e. a different skin color than me.

Of course my conservative father had an influence on me, yet, so did learning, so does my job, so does interacting with people. I call BS.

Yup.

[ofos]

Question: How many of you who won't watch this, did see Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 911? Just curious as to whether beliefs about not watching political "documentaries" extend to both sides of the political spectrum. I didn't/wouldn't watch either.

[Maister]

Question: How many of you who won't watch this, did see Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 911? Just curious as to whether beliefs about not watching political "documentaries" extend to both sides of the political spectrum. I didn't/wouldn't watch either.

I'm an equal opportunity 'don't waste time with propaganda' kinda guy. I didn't watch that 9/11 conspiracy theory bs either.

[Planit]

Didn't watch either and don't plan on watching either. IMHO these are propoganda pieces.

[michaelskis]

Question: How many of you who won't watch this, did see Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 911? Just curious as to whether beliefs about not watching political "documentaries" extend to both sides of the political spectrum. I didn't/wouldn't watch either.

I did watch Fahrenheit 911 because I knew that it would be wrong for me to call it junk if I had not watched it. Turns out it was not total junk and there are bits of truth in it. However the information presented in it followed Sturgeon's Law.

I decided that not only will I go and see Obama's America: 2016 The Movie, I am also going to read “Dreams from My Father” and “Audacity of Hope.”

[Blide]

With a lot of these political documentaries, there is some truth to them but they make conclusions that don't need to be made. Like Fahrenheit 911, there are definitely some inconsistencies with the official 911 story but in no way do I think it's some vast government conspiracy. The same is true for this Obama documentary.

I tend to steer clear of politically oriented documentaries since they tend to be pretty one sided.

[Otis]

Question: How many of you who won't watch this, did see Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 911? Just curious as to whether beliefs about not watching political "documentaries" extend to both sides of the political spectrum. I didn't/wouldn't watch either.

As I said, I avoid political propaganda of all stripes. BS is BS no matter the source. I have never seen a Michael Moore movie on any subject, and never will.

[Maister]

I did watch Fahrenheit 911 because I knew that it would be wrong for me to call it junk if I had not watched it. Turns out it was not total junk and there are bits of truth in it. However the information presented in it followed Sturgeon's Law.

I decided that not only will I go and see Obama's America: 2016 The Movie, I am also going to read “Dreams from My Father” and “Audacity of Hope.”

I think we can see where you are headed with this - you wish to assert that if one has not seen/read/witnessed [fill in blank] they do not have the right to claim they posess an informed opinion on [fill in blank]. Is thatr it? If we were immortals and could read every book, interview thousands of eye witnesses, or watch every movie it might be possible to buy into such a thing. The trouble is, we have only so many hours in a lifetime and we are compelled to make judgements on a whole variety of things based on what amounts to incomplete knowlege. We make conclusions all the time based on our relative familiarity or unfamiliarity with a subject and as a result have to rely on a certain intellectual classification or concision (typically based on the source). Let me give you an example - I have never sat down and read Mein Kampf. The book is undoubtedly chock full of 'facts', yet based on my knowlege and impressions of WW2 history from a variety of other sources I quite comfortable I posess an adequate understanding of Hitler's actions, motives and mindset to conclude that the book is political propaganda. Similarly just because one has not not seen 'Obama's America 2016' does not mean they have uninformed opinions about it's subject matter.