so what we recommend is being able to insure an advance against preexisting conditions so that if you have to pay a higher premium you've got insurance that pays a higher premium. but also we need affordable insurance. we don't have that today, don't have it under obamacare. you should build a take it with you from job to job. >> the employer system, is it time for it to not be the system? >> i believe in free markets allowing employers choose what they need to do. let's have a level playing field. but no less a never say make it illegal for the employer to buy for employees the insurance they can take for the next job. way to abolish laws, turn things around and encourage affordable and sirens. >> what is the argument in favor of having it divided by states? >> i can't think of any arguments that i find persuasive. you had to notify insurance across state lines.

and so this is just silliness. the only people the benefit of the special-interest pacs into your health insurance plan, their special coverage is and that's not benefiting you. this is benefiting special interests. >> "priceless: curing the healthcare crisis" is the name of the book, the new book in 2012. and john goodman is the author. this is what tv on c-span 2. >> dinesh d'souza presents his thoughts on when a second term for the obama administration would look like. the author contends the policies would greatly reduce america's global influence. it's about an hour's time. [applause] [cheers and applause] >> thank you. please sit down.

i am excited and thrilled to be here with barack obama in this election year. i think we are dealing with one of the most mysterious and odd figures ever to occupy the oval office. a few days ago, i received a phone call. i didn't recognize the area code in the phone call was actually from kenya. and i answered it and it is actually george obama, the president's half brother. he's the youngest son of barack obama senior. and he said dinesh, i'm calling because my 2-year-old son is in the hospital. he is a serious chest condition i wondered if he'd be willing to help me. i said are you at the hospital, george craxi said yes.

a subtle hand the phone to the nurse. so he did and the nurse confirmed that george's son is sick with a chest infection. so i told george or asendin $1000 by western union. but before i hung up the phone i say george, isn't there anybody else who can ask? why are you calling me? [laughter] and he said no. he said dinesh, this is the line that killed me. you're like a brother to me. and i thought to myself, here is a young man who is the half-brother of the president of the united states. barack obama is not only a multimillionaire, produced the most powerful man in the world. and yet his half brother can't call him in a time of need and the same half brother is living in a six by 10 hut slum dog

millionaire style in their room a slump of nairobi. he has to walk through sewage to get to the nearest street. so this is a guy that they not just in poverty, but you have to say in third world poverty. so what is going on here? the simple explanation is that barack obama is a hypocrite. he has made the idea that we have obligations to our fellow man the centerpiece of his reelection campaign. one of his favorite lines, which he recently uttered at the national prayer breakfast as we are our brothers keepers. and my film, 2016. by the way, the film is coming to michigan. you should look at our website 2016 the movie.com. [applause]

but in the film, i asked george that. i say george, obama says we are our brothers keeper. you are his brother. what has he done to keep you? harborview and make george says go ask him. so hypocrisy would seem to be the natural explanation. but by the way, george is not an isolated case. barack obama has been and from his father's sister, not counting immediate family. this is the closest living relative. as we speak, she is selling coal on the streets of a small village in kenya. she has no teeth and wants to get dentures, but doesn't have the money. obama hasn't contributed a penny to help her either. in 2006, obama went to his hometown of clavell over his father grew up at the local school there they were so excited he was coming to rename the school, barack obama school. obama toured the school with all

kinds of celebrities and the prime minister of kenya. obama said i'm going to provide books and facilities. you don't have sanitation. in the proper water supply. i'm going to look after you. the school send multiple requests and lenders send reminders with absolutely no help forthcoming from obama. so once again, the simple explanation is were just dealing with a guy that doesn't live at his own standard. but i went to suggest there's actually a deeper mystery than that. something else is going on. and here we get the heart of the ideological mystery of barack obama. who is this guy a? and true semi, both on the left in the right there's enough for to fit obama into american history. he's a civil rights guy. he's a martin luther king guy. he's a progressive. and even among conservatives to get kind of the same thing, an

effort to shoehorn obama into some idea of american history. i want to argue that that attempt very often at worst obama's own history, his own story. one of the most striking aspects of the film is we actually use obama's own voice. i kind of got the idea for the film. it was surfing amazon i noticed upon the hybrid his own book and audio books. it's quite a striking the because when you listen to obama, for example he does multiple accidents. he does blacks, whites, men, women and they realize he was obama telling his own story. so i got the idea of keeping up with a hollywood guy. i was lucky to find gerald mullen, kind of a closet conservative in hollywood, longtime partners steven spielberg, producer of twister interested buyer, hook,

schindler's list. so the advantages this film is not like a tv documentary. it's like out of africa. it's shot in hawaii, chicago, new york, london, in the outcome indonesia, kenya and it raises the curtain on barack obama on who this guy is in his underlying compass. where does the actually want to take america? the puzzle with obama's return to understand conventional democratic categories. for example, obama will block in restricted and regulated will join in america were tempted to say, well yeah, he's kind of an environmentalist. kind of another al gore. he was worried a gore's words they have a fever. global warming.

the family watch obama closely, we've realized it's not right because while obama's pocket will join in america, he is promoting in other countries. he threw the export import bank is billions of dollars in taxpayer money to brazil, to colombia and to mexico to drill for oil. so then you have a deeper mystery. why is obama for oil joined over they are, but not over here? what's really going on? when we turn to tax is an dad, we find kind of the same thing. obama seems to be spending many promiscuously, racking up the national debt. by the way, the highest bush deficit in one year was under 500 billion. and bush is a big spender. the lowest obama deficit is a trillion dollars. so obama, presumably in the next

four years if he's reelected, he'll add 5 trillion more. at that point america would be $20 trillion in debt, $20 trillion in debt. one half of that debt added by one man. so from george washington to george w. bush, 10, trillion dollars under obama in eight years 10 more. and the danger that is america now wouldn't be facing decline. america would be facing collapse. so again, one thing for a rich country to spend irresponsibly rack up the credit card, but any responsible person can see you reaching the point where someone will come and take away your car and furniture mtv in-house. so why would you keep spending in that way, even when you're approaching the point? what possible logic could that have?

anemone look on the international scene, you see some extremely troubling developments that are equally mysterious. obama says we have to prevent genocide and uses force against libya. a number of people killed by gadhafi at that point was about 250. meanwhile, over a period of any month, tens of thousands of people have been killed in syria and obama absolutely refuses to use force. what explains what he intervenes before us over here, but not over there? obama has been active in egypt and pushing on the power. not only that, but now that there's a power struggle going on in the military. the obama administration is intervening on the side and that's when the egyptian military better turn over power to the muslim brotherhood were going to cut off military aid. so obama can save him a champion

of democracy. these people were freely elected and yet it, a year earlier in 2009 but there were massive them into squared and iran calling for democracy, the end of the mola, for election, obama flatly refused to support the democrat. he said we've got to stay out of it. it's a big debate going on in iran. or let them settle it and it was settled with the mole is basically beating of protesters and that was that. again, why is obama intervening here and not they are. as far as i can tell, no explanation. so here to get obama, it's not enough to look at the things he's doing. you kind of have to dig a little and see why he's doing them. what is the underlying single standard that can unravel obama's apparent double

standards? i think we get a clue from us and we actually could obama spazzed. obama's dream is quite clearly not the american dream, at least not as understood are the founders. it is not even martin luther king's dream. theme of my film and my new book called the "obama's america" is the dream from his father. the title of obama's autobiography. but his father who grew up in kenya, who is a third world guide, an anti-american guy, by his own kind of socialist committee was also you might see an anti-colonialist. his father was actually absent for most of obama slave. but i didn't realize when i first started writing about this was the enormous impact of obama's mother. obama's mother is presented by

obama as the wave breaker from kansas, kind of the all-american girl. but she was actually quite a radical. she was a sort of 60s girl before the 60s. and she wanted to marry a third world anti-american guy. found one, barack obama. he divorced her and she went looking for another third world anti-american guy and found one again, an indonesian guy named lolo sipura. the point about obama's father was dead even in the absence of the father, the mother cultivated in young obama does reverend. your father is a mythic figure. kind of like you might compare to mandela or gandhi, a great freedom fighter. now in reality, barack obama was not bad. he was either philandering at harvard or driving drunk in kenya. he ultimately killed a man in a truck driving accident.

so this is not the real barack obama senior. but this is the idea cultivated in obama's mind. interest only when obama got older, he realized that his dad was not like that. his sister told him, where he revering this great data bars? he actually was not the guy you think he was and obama has sort of a crisis. one of the pivotal themes in our film is when obama goes to his father's grave. ..

in not going to find madison and jefferson on mentalist. these are the guys that obama sought out. did not pump into the ministry. it's quite a group. in hawaii the former communist frank marshall davis. at columbia the palestinian radical, a member of the palestine national council described by commentary magazine is a professor of tear. at harvard law school, brazilian socialist roberto. by the way, this is a guy who has called for russia, china, india, and brazil to hang upon the united states. he says for the premiere goal right now, in the american

hegemony. in other words, bring american down. number two, three, four, five, and six need the team of. the sky left harvard in the 90's to join the socialist kaufman of brazil. he was too radical for them, so they threw him out. now he's back at harvard received fit right in. then obama went on to hitch up with a domestic terrorist. then jeremiah right. some of these were his buddies. these are the people who obama saw as surrogate fathers, people who could teach him chapter and verse of the intercolonial ideology. what was this ideology to make the key to understanding intercolonial some is that

wealth is seen as the product of theft. the key intercolonial idea is, how the rich countries become rich? why the people live better in britain and germany in america than they do in rio de janeiro or jakarta? answer, the west invaded and occupied and looted taking on a stuffed. so wealth in this view is not ironed. it's got the result of creativity or initiative. it's basically the result of piracy. in 1965 barack obama's sr. of an article in the east african journal talking about what a country does when you have all these rich people at the top. he mentions a bunch of solutions, with one of them is very high tax rates. theoretically there is nothing that can stop government from taxing 100 percent of income. 100 percent tax rates. you might say, well, anyone who

is familiar with economics and of this is nuts. why would anyone propose it? once you plug in the underlying intercolonial idea it actually makes sense. if you can to my house and stole all my furniture, the proper tax review, 100 percent because it's not your furniture. if wealth is seen as appropriated and the is nothing wrong with the government using all its power to take it back. let's fast-forward to obama's recent comments. you didn't build that. not you. its society. society created the wealth. it doesn't belong to you. an authorization for the government to seize, confiscate. the government is not taking from you. it was not used to begin with.

so all the conservative arguments about incentives don't a letter. the question, how you deal with these? you don't provide them with incentives. you punish them. take away their ill gotten gains . the second part of anticolonialism quite apart from the ndf theft is also the idea that america and american power is very bad for the world. in other words, america is not a force of freedom but actually a force of exploitation. if you look at the door movement of obama's policies, domestic and foreign policies, they're kind of linked. domestically he is expanding the power of the state. internationally he is shrinking will contract with the power of the unit since. so it's this is his motion. expanding state power locally and he is reducing america's power in the world.

why would he support will doing abroad? does nothing to do with environmentalism. i don't believe he could care whether the earth is getting hotter or colder. he doesn't know. what he's attempting is a global energy redistribution. he's trying to make sure that the previously, as countries have more energy so they can grow faster and is putting the expense on what he sees to be economizer which is to say us. why is obama promiscuously spending money as if the deficit to matter? it's very obvious that if the republicans did not have the congress he will spend more. the reason he's doing it is because he is using debt as a way to settle america's colonial that. in other words, the idea is that america knows the world big-time, trillions of dollars.

obama nancy can't possibly propose a foreign-aid program. even democrats would not vote for that much caviling. think about how a debt achieves the same results. if our children and grandchildren are saddled with trillions of dollars of debt they have to pay it back. a good deal of that is owed by the kuwaitis, the saudis, the chinese. that becomes a form of global redistribution. now consider their spring. why is obama intervening over here but not over there? to dictators of been kicked out. a whole bunch of dictators still in place. holding on to power in syria. so what does khadafy in the park have in common? to some degree there allied with united states.

now, fug. admitted, but since 2002 he was a relatively well-behaved mubarak was our biggest ally in the region. they're out. his in? the sun is a deadly enemy, supporter of hezbollah. in fact, close allies of ron. to have the temerity to suggest that obama is actually, is trying to destroy the country? well, here's what he's trying to do. he's trying to reduce america's footprint in the middle east in the world because it thinks we have been stepping a. hal? the way he does that is by undermining america's allies in

allowing our enemies to gain strength. he has, for example, them virtually nothing significant to blocker on from getting a nuclear bomb. meanwhile he is slashing america's nuclear arsenal. when he came to power america had 5,000 warheads. now by the start treaty we're down to 1500. obama has asked the pentagon to steady ticking is down to three and the warheads. then he goes around saying he dreams of world free of nuclear weapons. kind of a nice dream the idea, but here's the problem, china is building and modernizing its armed arsenal. in reality while he acted kids streamed the only country whose it clear weapons he can actually reduce tourism. why?

is doing it to level the nuclear planning field he is essentially slashing america's nuclear arsenals of that taken in the era of american superiority where america is clearly dominant. he's trying to restore the world before colonialism china, india, the arab islamic world, the civilizations of the americas. it was a multiple world without a single superpower like america . i believe obama wants us to go back to them hold. where does this leave us? think one of the powerful things about our phone is it shows obama's the agenda and his own words. it links them to his actions and it shows what the likely next move is going to be a number of key areas.

ultimately you can understand where he's going. we have not even seen the real obama. we'll see him only in a second term. a first term president is tethered to public opinion, has to maintain -- maintain constituencies. in the second term began, of the closet colombians of. at think we're facing a very interesting challenge which is does america want to go this way? obama is not a traditional democrat. i'm sure if you went to bill clinton or carry your door and set is a sure -- a good thing for america to be number one? of course it is. just one normal country like finland or greece or somalia at the grade dining table of nations.

in my view that his goal. it is not that he hates america. he is fundamentally looking at it through globalize. what is trying to do is right the ship of the world that he sees as being wrong side of 500 years ever since columbus set out. this age of european superiority in now american superiority, obama like to see that and. can you imagine if one man could do that in the years. sure, america would be a lot poorer, weaker, ceased to be a special country. the american passport would have no greater worth around the world. america's currency would not be anything special, and a lot of americans would despise obama. at that point he would really care. he will have achieved almost single-handedly would no one has been and will to do before. no roman emperor could have single and of the brockton the

roman empire. people talk about ending the british empire, it took too destructive world wars to do that. in 2016 as he gets ready to clean as office whenever his reputation and america, if he can achieve his goals he will ultimately be vindicated by the small voice in his own head that says, well time. thank you very much. [applause]

>> i believe we have a few minutes for questions. the questions in the audience. we have been roaming microphones. >> first off, want to say i really enjoyed the best example of figuring out what he does with dennis. my question is, i know your document is about two dozen 16, but if they're is a god in heaven what you think you will try to do to further the dreams from his father? >> the question is what would obama the to do in a second term . my earlier book was published in to dozens and. it covered about 15 months of

the obama presidency. it advanced the ball. about obama, there was not enough that he did that could prove or disprove the theory the new book is able to look at the full four years and also begin to look forward. to answer your question briefly, i think if we look forward, if i were obama and iphone trying to achieve a shrinking of america's footprint in the world, how would i do? first of all, i would be very focused on the problem of the state of israel. israel in my view and obama's view is a little colonial powers sitting on muslim land. the people fighting from the point of view maecenas freedom fighters. this helps to explain why he is wrongly perceived as a secret

muslim. he seems really sympathetic to muslim gia is fighting against americans in israel. i think the reason he supports them is he sees the has occupied people pushing up the occupiers. what question, how do i remove the state of israel. it's not enough to give the west bank and gaza. israel itself is sitting on muslim land. the first challenge. al and how he can do that. the second challenge is in the believes there are three important countries. since 1979 egypt has been in the hands of the radical moslems. i'm sorry, iran has been the hand of the radical muslims but

there were unsuccessful in the revolution. for 25 years it was just iran. egypt is on its way into the radical islamic orbit. that leads to my mind one country, saudi arabia. if i were obama i would demand that the saudi royal family put itself on the ballot against the muslim brotherhood. we support democracy. you have to be democrats. put your name on the ballot and let us see who wins. kind of obvious who would win that election. if that happens the radical muslims control the tripod that three significant countries in the region. we begin to move closer to a prospect that i call the united states of islam which is the unification of the middle east under a single power, and the restoration after 500 years of islam as a global power.

these are some of the very important. end of this amount of the conjecturing. and talking about things that have already happened and what the logical next up would be. >> well will 2016 be available on dvd? before the election? >> yes. the film is currently as of now and 130 theaters. what to say it's doing really well. in the top ten films and american. focus is a country on politics. the film will remain in theaters to september but to my be the first week of october, and we will have one month after that to do

the 80's, home box office, various other formats. television. the dvd will be the last four weeks leading up to the election >> a wonderful speech, wonderful program. what you think is in obama's college records that he has been sealed off and his work record and what is he have a selective service card from connecticut when he never lived in connecticut? part two, what you think his relationship this to the biblical antichrist? >> obama -- their tends to be a lot of emphasis on the controversy with obama. interestingly obama took the s.a.t. to get in the college.

his s.a.t. scores on known. at columbia his grades in gpa air on no pin he took the law school emissions test to get into harvard law school. his score is unknown. the new york times one to interview people who knew him when he was a student at columbia. but even his classmates, people may have room with him or janitors to clinch his apartment. they could not find a single person alive who knew him. he flatly refused to provide any such information. obama recently named to grow by who dated him, claims that she was the girlfriend that he refers to in his own book, but the stories don't match. and when maraniss went to obama obama said, have fostered or friends which is interesting because none of them have come forward. no journalist has ever

interviewed one. so this is a man with many black holes in his biography. and i think this is the result, when we are doing our film we would be in hawaii, indonesia, talk to people who are related to the obama's, knew his dad, mom, has mobs thesis adviser and ask them, well, when were you last interviewed and there were light, we have never been interviewed. incredibly this is the biggest story in america and it is being truly uncovered, not covered in the mainstream press. a little bit of a scandal, i think. it's not give our democratic politics. not just the liberal media. pretty tough on clinton and carter. and other factions going on. not only to not cover him, but incriminating information services, to squelch it and

discredit the people who are bring it out. that gives you a little preview of the kind of reaction you can expect is our film goes national thank you. let's go to the next question. >> each of us knows people that would not come here. each of those those people that you could not even have a logical discussion about the contents of this whole seminar. each of us in this room is probably going to go see this movie. [applause] the people who -- [applause] to you think the people who are not here, the people the refused to talk about it will go to this movie? >> the question is about really how you get independence into the theater. the answer to this will seem a little paradoxical. independence by and large don't go to see political films.

docudramas, however well made. the way to make the film succeeds is actually for conservatives to get a look because of the film is a massive success among conservatives the liberals will start screaming. when they start screaming, i don't know if you saw a couple of days seal was on pierce morgan. and if you looked at him he had a very constipated look on his face for a whole half-hour. he was muttering. his basic question was, you can't say that. you can't possibly believe that. liberal indignation is actually written right into our marketing strategy. [applause] but the point being, when independence here that everyone is talking about this, of going to be voting in a few months,

the go see the film. that is how you get them into the theater. even if you have like-minded friends, it is important for our conservative, don't make it in the theater, really important that our film to well in order to generate the kind of debate and have the kind of reach that we need half. >> what really baffles me, as much as we to know about obama, at least some of us and based upon your research and other books that have been published, how on the liberal civil to the keep all this up as they -- a conservative mentioned anything about his birth certificates will where he attended college, we have every reason to believe he did. there must be tremendous money

that has been sponsoring obama like the chosen to save the world won. his gun away, i don't want to use the word murder, but his gun away with was impossible few years ago. >> i think with soros and obama in dealing with to meteor's better coming from to for places with happen to be firing in the same direction. i don't think obama is a fan. he represents european anti-americanism, european distain and discussed with the sort of a new barbaric country at the top of the world. a kind of familiar european condescension and i think animus toward america. obama's animus is coming from a

different shore. third world anti-americanism those based in the into colonial atmosphere of the 60's and 70's. into colonialism in europe, but here's the big year -- difference. third row and the collins was and is based on range. while those two and a sector actually a different emotion. is this living in a different direction. that's the point. with obama it's not that he is upon of someone. the key is he has a secret weapon. his secret weapon, his secret weapon is that he is able to offer white america is certificate of racial absolution . [applause] this is not because -- simply by virtue of being an

african-american president, by virtue of being a special kind of african-american president, not jesse jackson, not al sharpton. obama allows people to feel really good about supporting him. and so you think about a guy like chris matthews. and in 25 years ago and debated in. he's pretty hard. the chip o'neill's chief of staff would hang around. you notice when he talks about obama he becomes absurdly effeminate. he talks about thrills running down his leg. he embarrasses himself and his family. the reason he does that is, it's nothing to do with obama. he simply basking in his own wonderfulness. he's basically patting himself on the back and saying i am such a morally admirable person that

i can vote for barack obama. there is a sort of incredible power the sea in the mainstream media in which it is seen as morally important for the united states and them to succeed. that is part of the reason why you have this media support. >> as an extension of what i said earlier, i thought we had a constitution and the congress that would make it impossible for a man like obama to become president of the united states, let alone keep his job for a second term. by that i mean he uses executive orders to do what he wants to do congress is not -- i realize conservative still control both houses, but he's gotten away with a lot of stuff that would not be permissible in our constitution. and yet congress has been unable to block it.

>> i want to move on to to bring in more questions. go ahead, sir. >> you mentioned that obama uses the tool of debt to redistribute the wealth of the united states. i am wondering, i read a lot about that literature in gold and silver and how the federal reserve the way it works, do you envision, based on your understanding him that he will use the tool of hyperinflation to destroy the americans middle-class? >> the question is about debt and inflation van, you print money in the value what's already out there. when i was thinking about my book "obama's america," was wrestling with this and thinking if obama has these policies, they're going to not only hurt the rich, but they're actually

going to hurt a lot of ordinary americans. and even poor americans. quite frankly if so printing money rich people don't generally have the money in cash poor people more likely to have dollar bills the going to drop in value to, in effect, $0.50. why would he do this if it would hurt the middle class, the port tonight and it occurred to me, the middle class and the poor are not poor by world standards. in other words if -- we talk about the 1%. new york is just outside occupy wall street. and the get these guys. they're thinking of in america. if you apply a global standard, if you make $20,000 a year you're wealthy.

bottom-line very often talking about obama we have to resist the kind of rhetoric you hear all over television which is, obama does not realize the confiscatory taxation will not help the economy. he's not trying to. obama doesn't realize that they're not our friend. welcome the official russian nuclear-weapons this will not inspire them to do the same. >> i believe he already knows that. he's out trying to motivate them. he's trying to do what he's doing. even as conservatives who think obama is trying to do x but is getting why. i'm saying no. obama is not getting results opposite to what he intends. he intends the results he's getting. [applause]

>> good afternoon. welcome to michigan. adelle want to put you on the spot. donate $60.2 thousand. please next time you ask for money at it in there. conservatives tended dig in their own pockets and solve problems. liberals tend to look at the deficit. >> is doing a day, and with your permission of buy tickets to the film and given to some young people who might not otherwise go off. >> what types of changes in his administration or in his cabinet , what types of changes to you see happening that would

help them achieve this goal? godspeed. >> i think obama has had to come in his personnel appointments, the a little bit cautious in the first term, partly because he was new, he needed to figure out to operate in an effort. and so he started with some clinton people. he realized pretty soon that the clinton people were trying to block him. they were trying to block cam because their traditional democrats. so if you look in bob woodward's book he talks about the fact that again and again and -- by the way, the issue is not that america get out. the intention was always to get out. is the peculiar way obama operates. for example, he will say -- he will open up secret negotiations with the taliban. we are trying to find it could tell a ban. interestingly, these have yet to

surface. apparently the obama people are doing business with them. the point being that his approach is again and again opposed by hillary clinton, opposed by the defense department, opposed by key people around him. this is why the whole idea that he is a big fat bumbler is not true. he has actually redefined the citizens relationship with the government, redefined our foreign policy, sharper footprint in the world. he has achieved more in one term and just about any democrat since fdr from his point of view from our point of view we see in is not doing the things that we want and we think is foolish, but he doesn't intend to do those things. by his own standard he is succeeding spectacularly and we can expect him to succeed even more in second term if he gets one. >> christianity talk christopher

hichens, a definitely want to want to get off topic, but i'm curious, i you going to be continuing with that? is this a transition given our unstable future? >> the question as a little bit about my second career. i am the president of the liberal arts college, the king's college, a christian college. i sort of have 1 foot in two worlds. i read about politics, and i have been doing for 25 years. i'm a secular writer, but in the last few years i have been taking on many of the leading you atheists around the country in debating them on campuses. christopher hichens was my most formidable opponent and obviously a it was some months ago. i'm still doing three or four of those years. i feel it keeps the -- it keeps is thinking about the big questions that remain really important.

but my intention now and certainly over the next several months this focused very much on obama. i realized, i did not address the question about the antichrist. someone like a mosquito in a nudist colony to buy not sure where to begin with the one. [applause] go ahead. >> thank you for coming here today to miss again. there are some people who will. you have had a comment about the possibility in eight years of a single person destroying america i agree with you. i think that if reagan was known as a great communicator, obama's legacy will be the great destroyer. the truth of what you say, it took years to build the towers and a couple of hours to knock them down. it's harder to build in the strike. but at any rate you made a

comment in 2016 when obama claims out his desk, my thing is, he is so hateful of our constitution that what makes you think we will ever have elections after that or that he will do away with term limits? >> the question is about obama and, once again, does he hate america? i think he subscribes to an ideology that once a very different american. in the late 19th century there was a debate in britain. britain was then at the peak of its influence between israeli and his opponent william gladstone the but the issue of empire. is really said to the british what makes us great is we are world power. what makes us great is that we have the largest economy in the world. we matter.

this is what defines british britain's. he said no. he said i am for -- and this was his phrase, langland. we should give up this empire. we should go back to our small plots of land to micro power petunias, attends our flexible guard and the content. interestingly he could not realize his own vision. it took two world wars to bring down the british empire. across the span of time i think we did hear. obama believes in little america , and by that he means a smaller economy, smaller american role in the world. he says this in directly. we are 5% of the world population, but we use 25 percent of the world's resources and energy and oil. what do you think?

we are consuming beyond their share. he would like us to 85% of the world's food and where 5% of the world's ) pop. obama implicitly set forward his standard. and it's not racial reparations. its global reparations. i think that's are realizable goal in the years. remember, america has only been the world's sole superpower for 20 years. a super parses world war ii, so this american air could actually come to an end by 2016. quite honestly, if it does, obama has nothing left to do. maybe he just wants to enjoy the trappings of power, but he will have actually achieved his goal, if i'm correct that that is actually his goal. yes. >> was wondering what your thoughts are about one president obama authorized the military

action that ultimately killed osama bin lawson? do you think it was political reasons or other considerations a work? >> obama in his book, the audacity of hope makes a very interesting observation. he says he is no achievements. think about that. he starting to liberals. he sang, he was a good guy. he was a true nationalists, true freedom fighter, trying to push the french and then the americans out of the amount. obama is not -- osama is not a freedom fighter in the same sense. he is not defending his own country against american occupation. he is joining with a bunch of gangsters to come and knock down

our buildings and different country. show from his obama's -- from his point of view it's an important distinction. their freedom fighters. giving constitutional rights, closedown guantanamo, it might to a citizen's. in london, their gangsters. italy explains why he would use force against the line while remaining oddly solicitous toward moslem jihad lease in occupied territory. >> my name is daniel. i'm returning veteran from afghanistan. [applause] >> thank you. my question is regarding a

drawdown in afghanistan and the total drawdown of forces worldwide and also the force as a whole, the u.s. military. to you feel that he wants to dismantle the u.s. military it or is there some other reason behind it? >> when the question is of the military and the resources, when obama is asked about the military and the military cuts, he says we cannot afford it. and. >> a necessary evil. >> right. i agree. what i'm trying to say is he suggests, we are in a budget crisis. he doesn't feel that way about of the domestic spending. he is letting every other division grow. this gives you a sense of his priorities. the truth is if you want to slash nuclear weapons, you can't, but you have to increase conventional forces because

think about it. china can put 80 to 100 million people on the battlefield. we can't. we rely on technology and superior force to counter that kind of -- the chinese invasion. we don't need nuclear weapons, but we need to be able to put boots on the ground, ships, planes. so conventional forces are costlier than nuclear bombs. yet, what obama is doing is, again, with disregard for all of these trade-offs that have been known for decades to may slashing the military, he is also traumatically drawing down our nuclear forces. so what is going on? i think obama's strategy is the opposite. peace through weakness. and to put it even more sharply, historically if reagan deserves some credit for the dissolution of the soviet empire, it may be that obama will have to get some

historical credit for helping to produce the united states of islam. >> two quick questions. i have heard some rumblings that things are not looking good for his reelection. he will impose martial law. your thoughts? two, god forbid if he does get reelected, what can we do to stop him from being as down? >> first question is about martial law. i think -- i won't speculate on that sort of thing. i think we have plenty to go on with what he's actually doing. we can assess the things that he has done, and we can infer what the next steps might be. if he is reelected, i think that those of us to believe in a different dream, an immigrant, so i love america. i believe in the american dream. to me the great paradox is that

i am a third world guy who has embraced america. obama is an american-born guy he is embracing a third world ideology. so we have actually traveled opposite paths. and while it is true that it is easier to pull a fence down and to build one of, i do think that there is enormous resilience in the american people. the american people were so down, they voted for him in the first place. no. first of all, he did not disclose to the west. a lot of people voted their best ideals with obama. they basically said that this is a symbol of america getting beyond its racial past. it would be great to have a president who looks like obama and represents what he represents. he knew that, and he was able to use that sort of hidden power. but i think now four years later this is part of the message of our fell.

four years ago we didn't know obama. now we do. so now the real decision making power is not in his hands were my hands. it's in the hands of the american people. >> hi. i am stan and is from this area, alumnus of the king college, and i wanted thank you for what you are doing for king's college and also what you doing for this nation. my question to you is, how can we as parents and grandparents help our families and our friends think right when it comes to our country and what they can do to make sure that we keep our country, that -- >> the question is how do we get people to think hard about these issues in america? sometimes i am talking to these christian students.

in making arguments they tend to the resort and appeal to the bible. and i say, wait. think for a moment. it used to be 50 years ago that america was a christian culture and you could appeal reflexively , you could appeal to the ten commandments and everyone kind of agree that was a good way to live. everyone kind of agree that the bible is authoritative. wait a minute. now we are living much the and secular culture. that consensus is somewhat dissolved. if you're going to make arguments about a marriage or any other subject, it's not a point to be enough to quote from the book of leviticus of the gospel of matthew. you need to have a different language to get through to people who don't share your assumptions. why am i saying this? exactly the same thing is true with modern american conservatism. conservatism was once the native language of american politics. because of some dramatic shifts

in our culture accelerated by obama, that language is now unfamiliar and strikes people as a certain kind of insider baseball talk. so it is really important, again, if you want to reach across the aisle or reach out to the middle to find a conservative language that does not rely on a certain kind of and, @booktv house cliche. you can't say stuff like obama is against freedom because actually, he is for a certain type of freedom. he may be against economic freedom, but he is certainly far greater sexual freedom. in other words, what kind of freedom are we talking about the we want to advance? again, will we understand what in the room, not necessarily understand the larger society. one way we help our young people think about these questions is to return to first principles. [applause]

>> that seems to be a nice segue my question. when i here hard-core democrats speak a liberals, they have their own sense of righteousness . they have a true sense of justice. it's just very different from ours. they have a real set of core principles. our country has come so far. the church is utterly confused. the biblical world you. i find it is actually easier for me to talk to someone in the secular world. can you comment on the role of pastors of the church in america when i look at -- if we just had unity amongst ourselves we can take back this country. [applause] >> i do think that the pastor in

some ways today is in a difficult position. study the bible. sitting in their own pews are lots of people who are engineers, scientists, reading about the god particle. this is not something that pastors know anything about. so they a disconnected from the great explosion of knowledge in the world, brain science, astrophysics, but also in economics. i think that there is an important task to be done in the importing that kind of knowledge, of educating the pastures or creating church structures were not pastor's can come and and address the ways in which the logical issues. relate. otherwise you're basically creating christians on sunday

and secular people the rest of the week. the broader point of want to make politically this this. i don't think that this election is about a normal liberal conservative debate. obama is not a traditional liberal. liberals want to redistribute income in america. you're a bigger liberal to the degree you want to redistribute more. obama wants to realign america in the world. that is a different agenda completely. and i think for me through the film and my book exposing that agenda is the way of challenging obama in his own constituency. even african-americans have taking devastating economic losses. they hang with because they think he's one of us. he is our champion. one of the things you see in the film, we don't argue this point. as you follow the film, you are in hawaii, indonesia, pakistan,

kenya. you suddenly realize, this is not the segregationists of. this guy has had a very different history. why does and obama seem to care about the. >> reporter: typical answer, he's too cerebral. very professorial. he thinks that. his focus is on pulling down the rich. you don't need another theory. bottom line, with obama you are dealing with a new kind of guy. now, there is no question in my book, my film, they will attack us and say, why are you doing all of this? when i was on c-span a couple

years ago to jonathan alter says in america we don't judge people by what their fathers believed. i said, well, yes. reagan did write a book called dreams for my father. obama has made his multiculturalism, his history, has passed, his story the centerpiece of who he is. never once has he said, oh, i did some crazy things and i was in my 20's and 30's, but i'm way over that now. that was like a ted kennedy moment, but i matured. to this day he has ask questions and says, go read my book. i wrote a 400 page book. obama claims is passed, claims this multicultural history, and all we're saying is, let's examine just how multi-cultural it really is and what these influences really are. let's just not read his book by

saying, oh, here's a funny named multi-cultural guy. this guy, a dangerous revolutionary and used to blow up bridges and tried to bomb the pentagon. this guy, the destruction of israel so that once you can actually put a story together that in no way has not been told , and nothing that is what people are responding to our film with such a force of revelation, it is not because we are masters booths. it is because the story has come in a way, not been told and is a story that very much needs to be told. thank you very much. appreciate it. thank you. [applause] >> for more information, visit the authors website dinesh d'souza dot com. >> the fact is, in our world which is often remarkably stifling when it comes to thinking about writing about politics, the national security state, what used to be called

foreign policy but that is now more accurately thought of as global military policy, we definitely need some guys, even when they're very, very small. we need people willing to try to step back, ready to try to make the way out of the massive trees and actually take into the woods. my book the united states of year is really what one guy in such a room could produce in a year of reading, writing, talking, and doing my best to consider an american world and the absurdities in a that are accepted as ordinary all the. as those of you who know, i've write myself and i like to run long framework style pieces of the site by others despite what everyone thinks about brevity, attention spans, and the internet. before we talk, i'm going to read you to pieces from the book . both, however, the shorter side. the first is really my thoughts about skies and rooms. i brought it back in march 2010,

well before our military was out and just after the supreme court issued its citizens united decision, but before it was utterly clear that the floodgates had been opened so wide that what might be called politics of the rich in america would soon become simply american politics. i called it on being a critic of the world stage for us. in march 2010 to i wrote about a group of abundance and warrior journalists eager not to see the u.s. military leave a rock. that piece appeared on the op-ed page of the los angeles times and in a longer version. and then it began wandering the media world. one of its stops curiously enough was the military newspaper stars and stripes. the military man came this e-mail response. read your article. when was the last time you visited there. a critique. fifty will chosen words, so much

more effective than the usual long angry men as i get. it interested me. after all, as i've wrote back i was then a 65 year-old guy who had never been anywhere near and undoubtedly never would be. i have to assume that my e-mailing has spent time there possibly more than once and disagreed with my assessments. first ten experience is not to be taken lightly. what do i know? only the reporting i have been able to read from thousands of miles away or analysis found on the blocks of experts. on the other hand, even from thousands of miles away i was one of many who could see enough by early 2003 to go into the streets in demonstrate against an onrushing disaster of an invasion that a lot of people to radically far more knowledgeable than any of us considered just of the cat's meow, the cakewalk of the new century. it is true that i have never

stroll down a street in baghdad war room body, and that is a deficit. if you want to write about the american experience. it is also true that i have not spent hours sipping tea with iraqi tribal leaders are been inside the green zone are stepped foot on even one of the vast american bases that the pentagon's private contractors built in that country. nor did that stop me from writing regularly about what i called and still call americas and drops when most of the people who visited those bases did not consider places with 20-mile parameters multiple bus lines, texas, familiar fast food franchises, military guards command who knows what else to be particularly noteworthy structures on the landscape and so with rare exceptions. and certainly no expert. on probably a little soggy, and i have never seen the tigris and euphrates rivers. on the other hand, it does occur to me that a whole raft of american pundits, government

officials and military types who have done all the above, spent some unpleasant personal or at least in the american version of the same could not have arrived at dumber conclusions after these last many years. first and experience, valuable as it may be for reporters but the "washington post" and the new york times, patrick cockburn of the british independent cannot be the be all and end all either. sometimes being far away, not just from the middle east, but washington and all the thinking that goes on there, from a visibly claustrophobic world of american global policymaking has its advantages. sometimes being out of it experience chilly speaking allows you to open your eyes and take in the larger shape of things, which is often the obvious, even if little noted. i cannot help thinking about a friend of mine who's up close and personal take on u.s. military commanders in afghanistan was that they were trapped in an american made box incapable of seeing beyond its