MovieChat Forums > 2016: Obama's America (2012) Discussion > The director is a proven liar and convic...

The director is a proven liar and convicted felon

posted 10 years ago by AlarmedGibbon
9 replies | jump to latest

Anyone who saw this movie should be aware, the director Dinesh D'Souza is a proven liar and convicted felon. He told lies to the Federal Election Commission, and committed a serious crime.

The judge in the case even had to scold Dinesh for attempting to “deflect and minimize the seriousness of his crime". Hopefully no one on this board will commit the same error.

Lots of conservatives went and saw this film. Perhaps they shouldn't be trusting liars like Dinesh D'Souza so much.

[–] herbsuperb 10 years ago

proven liar

Barack Obama said, many times, "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan". Proven lie.

convicted felon

Granted, Obama was never convicted. But he admitted to doing cocaine, the possession of which is a felony in most states, even in VERY small quantities.

Just sayin'. What's your point? Do his lies and felonious conduct somehow make his WORK less valid than President Obama's? Are you REALLY all that worked up over the FEC thing? Come on. Tell us. What's really on your mind, because it's not that.

[–] BadSurge 10 years ago

What a load of apologist BS.

"That guy may be a lying, criminal scumbag, but I'll believe every word he says, cos I don't like Obama."

Genius.

[–] herbsuperb 10 years ago

"That guy may be a lying, criminal scumbag, but I'll believe every word he says, cos I don't like Obama."

Genius.

Uh. Not really. That's actually a really unhealthy attitude. What imbecile said that? I suspect you are lying, so I'll give you a chance to explain yourself before I simply consider you a dishonest liar.

[–] BadSurge 10 years ago

That was a pretty desperate response.

I'm paraphrasing you, obviously.
Admittedly, I may have misinterpreted your point.
But, thus far, I don't think I have.

You did, after all, compare his felonies (things like lying to the FEC and campaign finance fraud) to a young Obama trying cocaine.
The discrepancy between those examples is wide.

His lies make his work less valid when he promotes his tripe under the pretenses that he values the truth.
If he's lying all the time in his personal life, who is he to trust regarding the truth?
I would just assume it's his version of the truth, since he lied before.

And I don't even trust Obama.

http://www.imdb.com/list/YU6USnpUaJ8/

[–] herbsuperb 10 years ago

And I don't even trust Obama.

That's nice. But my initial comments weren't directed at you, were they?

The discrepancy between those examples is wide.

Not really. You have to be one stupid piece of **** to **** around with cocaine. I hate junkies. Kill them all and the world will be a FAR better place. I don't like people stupid enough to risk all the horrendous things that drug addiction can bring just to 'get high'. Shows really poor judgment, and no such person should be President of the United States.

Honestly, who cares what D'Souza does? He impacts FAR fewer people than the President does. I didn't see his movie. Most people didn't. Campaign Finance Fraud shows a flagrant disregard for the law (as does cocaine use while it is feloneous) and an obvious political zealotry that is unhealthy (another obvious Obama sin). But it's clearly a partisan film, and the only reason to attack it as the OP did is to prop up 'your side'. His side is likely Obama and the Democrats, who are guilty of far more than what D'Souza has done. So I'm simply pointing out the rank hypocrisy, as should always be done. Then you opened your mouth with inane babble, and twisted my words in a very dishonest way. Don't do that. You don't need to. If you take issue with what I've said, address it like a grown up, or not at all. I'm sure I've offended your delicate sensibilities now, so no matter what merit may exist in what I've said, your future responses will not focus on or even acknowledge it. It is now about you against me. I've seen it before and it never leads anywhere worth going to. Your fault, not mine. So if you wanna play, perhaps we'll play. But it will probably be exceedingly boring and useless. Do as you will.

[–] BadSurge 10 years ago

Sure, let's murder anyone who's tried cocaine. That isn't psychotic.

"I'm sure I've offended your delicate sensibilities now, so no matter what merit may exist in what I've said, your future responses will not focus on or even acknowledge it."

It's pretty ironic seeing that statement in such a long, convoluted, and vitriolic response.

If he was a musician, or athlete, or chef, or whatever it wouldn't matter as much that he's a criminal liar. Documentaries, by definition, deal with facts.

The idea of getting facts from a known lying, felonious criminal that takes advantage of the government he claims to care about seems counter-productive.

Having an issue with this film doesn't denote partisanship. It does with the OP, who mentions conservatives in his post.
I have no partisanship, no "side" to prop up.
I just don't get news from O'Reilly, Williams, or any other liar. Especially a criminal.

Where is your murderous rage for those whom take advantage of others? Or do you reserve your blind fury for petty criminals exclusively?

[–] herbsuperb 10 years ago

Sure, let's murder anyone who's tried cocaine. That isn't psychotic.

I know. Who said it was?

Kidding. I know your being sarcastic, I just think we could clear away a LOT of dangerous, unproductive, and disreputable human garbage by focusing attentions that way. Good riddance. World is grossly overpopulated as it is. Clean living makes people far more productive. Clear heads do great things. Junkies end up on government assistance in exchange for their vote, which they care nothing about. Whores to the democrats, and at my expense no less. **** junkies. Yes, kill them with great vigor. The world would benefit a great deal.

If he was a musician, or athlete, or chef, or whatever it wouldn't matter as much that he's a criminal liar. Documentaries, by definition, deal with facts.

As should a President. Nay, as MUST a President. That's my point on this thread. Always has been. If the OP is so concerned about lying, he should have FAR bigger fish to fry than what's his face.

I have no partisanship, no "side" to prop up.

So? What's your point? I never addressed you to begin with. I was addressing the OP, and now you've entered the fray, and you seem to insist on taking my criticisms of the OP onto yourself, when I did no such thing. I did not mean 'your side' as in YOURS specifically. If you misunderstood, then that should clear it up.

Having an issue with this film doesn't denote partisanship. It does with the OP

Which is who I was addressing my remarks to, so his/her views are all that matters in that regard.

Where is your murderous rage for those whom take advantage of others?

Depends on what they did. There are many ways to 'take advantage' of somebody. Some are worse than others. What exactly are you referring to?

I just don't get news from O'Reilly, Williams, or any other liar.

So you get it from a whole other set of liars I guess. Birds of a feather I suppose. Care to make a cogent point? I'm still waiting to hear one from you. If you've nothing to say, then by all means stop talking. My point is that calling out D'Souza as a 'liar' and 'criminal' when it is so obviously coming from a standpoint of blind partisanship is grossly hypocritical, and provided an illustrative example to back up that assertion. Point made. Do you have a counter-point of any kind? Better question, does the cowardly OP have such a counter-point to make? There is a horrific level of ignorance and stupidity on both sides. I'd wager you'll agree with me on that. So accusing only one side of it is simply stupid and wretchedly dishonest. I deplore stupidity and dishonesty, and called it out. Have you anything to add?

[–] BadSurge 10 years ago

You talk about cogent points, but defend a liar by accusing a different person of being a liar-- Rock solid defense, by the way-- then tell me you don't care about partisanship despite whining at me that the only reason to "attack" the partisan film is to prop up "your side".

Are you intentionally being a hypocrite and an idiot, or is this an accident?

[–] loungelizard5000 9 years ago

Bush was known to be a Coke head and drunk back in the day. Plus his wife killed a guy with her car. Probably drunk. So there's that. But this sorry excuse for a documentary is BEYOND rediculous.