In trying to understand how our president thinks, I did some Internet research -- usually a dire error in attempting to understand anything of importance -- but did come across an interesting Forbes article by Dinesh D'Souza, probably from the time he was in production of his movie, 2016, Obama's America. In it, he plainly states some ideas about Obama that, now four years later, make even more sense. D'Souza goes on to list several of the events of 2009-10 that seemed to support National Review's characterization of the president, but followed that up with an explanation of why they are inadequate if not wrong, why people continue to be too superficial in seeing Obama in that light, and why the truth is far more complex and far more dire for America's future. For one, such an opinion of Obama fails to see him for who he really is. As in his film 2016, D'Souza details the president's father's sociopolitical ideology, which is anticolonialism. Briefly, the concept is that the former colonized nations of the world, even though now independent, are still under the thumb, socially and economically, and are manipulated from abroad by powerful corporate and plutocratic elites. These forces of what is called "neocolonialism" oppress not only Third World people but also citizens in their own countries. That is, the people in the countries of the "corporatists" and plutocrats are equally oppressed. That means, among others, us. According to the "anti-neocolonialists" the solution is to resist and overthrow the oppressors. Such was the anticolonial ideology of Barack Obama Sr. and many in his generation. It is a pervasive, hostile and anti-western theory among many Third-Worlders. It leads directly to socialism, or terrorism, one or the other. This is Obama Jr.'s own economic theory and policy in the U.S., is it not? Yet virtually no media outlet has reported on Obama Sr.'s work in African economics since either Obama's identity became well-known. Obama has found support among American academics for Obama Sr.'s theories. Tthe late Palestinian scholar Edward Said -- who was one of Obama’s teachers at Columbia University -- wrote in Culture and Imperialism, “The United States has replaced the earlier great empires and is the dominant outside force.” The key to consideration of Obama's foreign policy is also tied to his anti-colonialist upbringing and sociopolitical concepts. As most anti-colonialists do, the president sees American "imperialism" as going berserk. The Soviets once held the U.S. imperialistic desires in check, according to the anti-colonialist, but since the end of the Cold War, they've been unabated. Therefore, it appears to me that the president has instituted a two-pronged attack on what he insists is American "imperialism." One, he has adopted the excessive taxation and wealth redistribution concepts of his father. Two, he is attempting to reconstitute the Cold War by taking advantage of an old-line Soviet apparatchik in power in Russia and letting him have his way in revitalizing the old Soviet bloc, without so much as an indignant reproach over Ukraine, a total lack of followup to Bush's holding Russia in check in Georgia, and refusing to challenge China in the East in its own hegemonic efforts toward Taiwan, Japan and the Koreas. That explains supporting off-shore drilling in Brazil but not the Gulf of Mexico. It explains his support of cap-and-trade and carbon taxes. Neither has anything to do with "global warming" or the environment, but everything to do with reduce through penalization America's carbon consumption, so that other nations -- "undeveloped nations" -- will have more. His efforts to stiffly regulate investment banks and healthcare are not related to nationalization of those businesses and industries. Instead, it follows exactly his efforts to "decolonize" the U.S. He opts to force banks to go through a litmus test before being "allowed" to pay back government loans so he can maintain control over them. He views insurance companies as legalized racketeers but forced government oversight will keep them in control. All of this ignores the realities of the world today. Truly, Obama is the last anticolonialist. Colonialism is a dead issue as proven by the emerging economies of Brazil, India, China, Indonesia. Obama fights a battle that was not won so much as it became unnecessary. They have solved their internal issues of backwardness and are exploiting their labor advantage and growing much faster than the U.S. If America is going to remain on top, we have to compete in an increasingly tough environment. Instead, we are governed by a man dedicated to the ideals of his father. If that isn't frightening to you, I have to question either your sanity or your "aliveness." You're either insane or dead. Then again, you could be an anticolonialist liberal, in which case Obama isn't the last one.