User Reviews

This is the kind of movie that enrages or excites depending on partisan leanings, as evidenced by the helpful liberal who decided to interrupt by reminding everyone in the theater that it's "propaganda." However, I am neither a Democrat or a Republican, so I feel I have a fairly objective view of this movie.

First of all, it's absolutely fascinating. Obama came out of what seemed like nowhere with incredible charm, but most people don't know much about his life story. This movie describes the type of people and places he grew up in, and interviews experts who have an idea of what kind of thinking drives the 44th President. The subjects covered should be fairly familiar to anyone interested in politics, but the movie explores these a bit more in-depth than the talking heads on cable news, without being histrionic.

Dinesh D'Souza states that we carry elements of the past into the future, but it's also apparent that he carries unspoken assumptions into his work. If you share his assumptions, as I think many Americans do, then you'll probably find Obama's presidency more disturbing, because he doesn't fit neatly within the nationalist and individualist ideology that is typical of U.S. Presidents. D'Souza also appeals to the unconditional support for Israel and nuclear weapons. If you're outside of his assumptions, as I am, then it will be difficult to end up with his conclusions.

While I've never really trusted Obama and still don't, I came out of the film liking him a bit more, which was probably not the intended effect. In any case, it was interesting and I felt it was worth my time watching, just to get a clearer picture of the man in the White House.

I heard about this movie coming out some time ago, just before the US elections are happening, which is a perfect time for a presidential documentary. First I should say, I am not an American, I'm a Canadian, but I do have quite the interest in American politics. Also, like the vast majority of Canadians, I'm more of a Democrat. Sure, if there was a leader in the Republican field, that was far superior to the democrat candidate, then I would be fully behind the republican, but for the past few decades, I've been far more on the side of the Democrat candidates.

I found a lot of this film to be really interesting. The first half of the movie goes into who Barack Obama really is, a history of his life, and his father's life. There were so many tidbits of information that I never knew before, and it was really great to be able to find that information.

At the same time though, D'Souza, the maker of the documentary, has many scenes where he's talking about himself, and putting words into people's mouths. The direction of the title of the movie, showing what America will be like if Obama gets his second term, is hardly put forward, and when D'Souza does put forward his ideas, they really hardly make sense, and they're so extreme, that I doubt they will ever happen in the united states.

After seeing that movie, I just had to go back in time a few years, and watch Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9-11" and... oh my god... if anyone thinks, in any direction, that Obama isn't a good president, then look back just a few years and take a peak at what George Bush Jr. had done... it's freaking insane, and horrific. Looking at what has happened, I would say that Obama is the greatest president the US has had in a long, long time... perhaps going back to Ronald Reagan, perhaps even going back to Kennedy. I highly doubt that any republican would be able to beat out Obama for a second term in office, and one thing is for sure, this movie didn't make me doubt that, at all.

But one thing that D'Souza says about Obama is true. Many parts of his life up to when he got into office are quite a bit of a mystery to most people, so if you'd like to know more of the history of Obama, I highly recommend watching this movie.

'2016: OBAMA'S America': Two Stars (Out of Five)

Following the example set by Michael Moore's 2004 documentary film 'FAHRENHEIT 9/11' conservative filmmakers Dinesh D'Souza and John Sullivan attempt to sway popular opinion and win some momentum back to Mitt Romney and the Republican party but as Moore's film failed to change that election I think D'Souza and Sullivan's equally sensational film will have no effect on this election. The film is based on D'Souza's book 'The Roots of Obama's Rage' and he and Sullivan co-wrote and co-directed it while D'Souza also narrates. It attempts to predict what the world will be like in 2016 if Obama is re-elected, under D'Souza's vision of what Obama's presidency is all about. The movie is exploitative filmmaking at it's fear mongering worst but it does have some decent visuals and production values.

The film opens with D'Souza telling of his experiences coming to America, from India, as a college student and editor for the conservative magazine Policy Review. D'Souza points out similarities between he and Barack Obama while telling of Obama's family history and growing up in Hawaii without a father. D'Souza attempts to draw the conclusion that much of Barack's political motivation has been influenced by a father (Barack Obama, Sr.) he never really knew and yet still idolized. He says that our President has been attempting to "reshape-America" according to his father's anti-colonialist views as well as the influences of other political figures he had growing up including Frank Marshall Davis, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Edward Said and Robert Unger. He labels Obama as an anti-American president due to supposed anti-colonialist views (which aren't anti-American to begin with).

The film is full of factual errors and lacks proof of any kind to support much of the hypothesis the filmmakers have come up with. Like a Michael Moore film it will 'preach to the choir' that's already been won over but have little to no effect on the undecided, moderates and certainly it's primary opposers. Unlike a Michael Moore film though it's also extremely slow paced and very dry. It's also very cheesy and scored with overly dramatic and somewhat sinister sounding music at times. The production values are decent, like I said though, and the cinematography is beautiful for the most part. As a film I think it does fail to do what it sets out to do (it won't have any effect on the election) and I of course don't agree with much of the information presented in it and think most filmgoers are too smart for a film like this these days as well. I think the internet and social media will have the greatest influence on this election due to the passion of US citizens just wanting to do the right thing and share the truth. That's why I think Obama will most definitely be re-elected and I'm glad most people are smart enough to see through lies and shitty films like this.

Watch our movie review show 'MOVIE TALK' at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2PO8Dxyuuo

My teenage daughter and I decided to just "see" what this movie was about. I'm all for learning all you can about a candidate. The good, the bad the ugly. But this "movie" was just ugly. He is basically saying we are ALL responsible for EVERY person who we are exposed too, from childhood to adult years. And every person you come in contact with will affect you in ways you yourself can't see. And when one of those people says something... crazy... or is involved with something shady... then you by default are also crazy and shady. If that were true then I'd be a racist homophobic well fare moocher... none of these am I... but people I was around as a child and early adult years ARE.

If you see this movie please please remember one thing... We are not responsible for the sins of our fathers... or our pastors... or friends of our grand parents.

I only wish now I could get a refund. Wasted money and time on this

I'm not sure why this is film is labeled as a documentary. It was made in a documentary style, but it is more like "This is Spinal Tap", "A Mighty Wind", or "Best in Show" in that it is pure fantasy. Unfortunately, unlike the other mockumentaries, the humor in the film falls short and I found it very boring and tedious. For those who take D'Souza seriously, this film is designed to make you afraid. If you are afraid and fearful, then you can be controlled by the powers that be to do irrational things. Things like vote for a guy who has no interest in your well-being other than your vote. Or to listen to propaganda from Richard Murdock's corporation. The gun manufacturers have been very profitable these past four years telling folks that Obama is going to take away your guns or ban guns and other such nonsense. That Obama is quietly biding his time until his re-election and then he'll spring into action and confiscate everything. They've made a very tidy profit scaring folks. This film taps those same base fears. And uses the same logic. Obama has done none of the things in that this film claims he wants to do. Yet. Just wait until he's re-elected. Then Obama will let lose the wild beasts on you and your children. I pray for those who believe this film. It makes me sad that they are afraid. And it makes me angry that folks like D'Souza have figured out to profit from their fear.

The same as D,Souza I am a political conservative. With this said I do believe myself enough of a critical thinker to be able to decide if something like this is a hack piece, unfairly biased or lacking in credibility. I think most people know when they see something that is sensationalized for effect or made for the feeding frenzy of those of a particular ideology..myself included.

Instead of details I will just say that my expectations were exceeded and I came out more surprised than anticipated.I believe all fair minded people, regardless of party affiliation would benefit from being open minded enough to watch this movie. I thought to myself...would it be possible for anyone...even someone who is a Democrat/Liberal/Progressive...to watch this documentary and not be moved by the information presented. But then, in that same moment, I remembered the reality that this movie will be ignored by most people who identify with the political left. They will dismiss, without watching it, as a hit piece. That's a shame because I believe most citizens of this country would be disturbed after seeing this film.

A fair approach would be to see it then go about deciding for yourself.

It's a well made, well presented, truly compelling piece of work.

What you will see in this movie is a polished example of sheer propaganda. Can no one anymore offer a balanced political view without going to such extremes than to demonize and scare people into believing realities that just don't exist? Once again the Right displays their expertise in taking facts and twisting the truth into utter falsehoods. I would rather blatant lies that just confirmed their position. Taking bits and pieces of reality that lead lesser minds to illogical or fantastic conclusions while tongue is firmly planted in cheek is the worst kind of evil possible. I also like how other comments posted here start off with "I went into this movie really trying to keep an open mind" and end with "I guess Obama WILL ruin this country" like that wasn't their belief to begin with. This movie is about as believable as Spider-man. Spider-man is much better though. I would go see that instead of this garbage

That I cannot recall a serious documentary film made about a president who was still in office at the time of the film's release, at least not a film with a wide theatrical release (can we count the propaganda laden Fahrenheit 9/11?), speaks volumes about this film's importance. That no president that I have ever studied in school has been shrouded in so much mystery and controversy speaks volumes about the legitimacy of a documentary investigating who he is and what he has come from. 2016: Obama's America explores the history and influences of our current president Barack Obama, from as much an objective standpoint as I think one could take without simply saying nothing. While lacking the flashiness and polish of a Michael Moore film, director Dinesh D'Souza wisely goes straight for the facts, tossing aside all the propaganda, assumptions, theories and pretty motion graphics of more famous documentarians. How can I say "fact"? How do I know? Because much of the film explores the writings and quotes and interviews from Obama himself. It's straight from the horse's mouth. Much of it is alarming, I don't know how it could be seen any other way by anyone who loves this country. Much of it also puts away petty arguments about things that don't really matter when it's all said and done. D'Souza affirms that Obama was born in Hawaii, which I'm sure will anger some people. But there are bigger issues at stake in this film, which is about our very real state of affairs here in the United States of America. While it does naturally take a partisan stance, it is as objective as documentaries get, and should be seen by all. And if box office numbers mean anything, it is being seen by quite a few (it posted Top Ten numbers for this past weekend, and only projects to grow to more and more theaters). The film's tag-line, "Love him or hate him, you don't know him" could very well be the complete review for this film.

-Thomas Bond, TheFilmDiscussion.com

If the idea of a black man being elected President of the United States drives you absolutely crazy, and the idea that your secret agenda for your country is driven by the father who abandoned you at birth and have only seen twice in your life doesn't seem far fetched, then you will love this movie. It is propaganda of the highest form. But your money might be better spent by sending it directly to the Romney campaign, or better yet, to the NRA.

It is such a preposterous notion, so artfully argued, that you might almost believe some of it has some basis in truth. But then, unless you watch Fox News non-stop, it dawns on you that you have been seduced by a paranoid dream of Africans taking over the country. And that that is a bad thing. If you are curious about the art of propaganda but not ready to pay money for it, buy a ticket for another movie and then drop by afterward to see as much of this one as you can stomach. Me? I left really worried about how effectively it presented a completely paranoid, bizarrely contorted view of the world with so little basis in reality.

I saw this film this afternoon. I thought it was extremely well done. The producer/presenter researches Obama's biography back into his childhood (avoiding the birth certificate issue, incidentally), for the sole purpose of trying to understand who/what influences have shaped Obama into the person that he is today. Then, after going through that analysis, it briefly recaps some of the key points of his presidency thus far and shows how his actions/decisions, in light of those influences actually make total sense. I don't mean "total sense" in that I necessarily agree with them, mind you, I just mean that, with this new understanding, his actions can be seen as part of a predictable pattern. The producer then goes on to project this understanding into what he thinks would be a likely result of an Obama second term, and the results seem quite plausible to me.

I thought it was the most informative piece of journalism that I have ever seen about Obama. It was well worth the ticket price. The theater was jam-packed, but there wasn't one single sound the whole time the film was rolling. The audience was all dead quiet, rapt with attention and obviously very, very serious.

I would highly recommend that you go see it.

Obama supporters (e.g. the mainstream media) want you to believe that "2016: Obama's America" is a sensationalistic, white supremacist attack on President Barack Hussein Obama. It isn't. "2016" is a fact-based, artistically ambitious documentary, the product of an egghead intellectual, Dinesh D'Souza, who himself is a college president, and who is non-white, Indian-born, the grandson of an anti-white grandfather. D'Souza supports almost every point he makes with original material, including Obama's biography and on screen experts, including Shelby Steele, the eloquent, African American scholar, George Obama, the president's Kenyan half-brother, Kenyan villagers who knew Obama Sr. intimately, and US Comptroller General David Walker.

The film is shot in an artistically ambitious style, with lots of shaky camera work, off-center placement, explanatory animation, and depressing montages of garbage-strewn Kenyan, Indian, and Indonesian slums.

In fact, for many viewers this documentary will be entirely too cerebral and level-headed. This is not Michael Moore. It's not funny, it's not shocking, and it's less manipulative than lots of other election-year material. D'Souza never exploits his subjects with the ruthlessness of a Michael Moore. I didn't laugh, I didn't gasp, and I didn't become outraged. I mostly compared what was being said to publicly available information on the subjects discussed and I found the film – dare one say it – reasonably responsible and informative. In fact, the film's one mistake may be that it does not talk down to viewers enough. Anti- colonial theory and action will be new to many viewers. Many will simply not know who Frantz Fanon is, for example, or even Shelby Steele. These scholars could have been introduced to the viewer more slowly, carefully, and thoroughly.

Dinesh D'Souza was born in India, famous as the "Jewel in the Crown" of the British Empire. India was a hotbed of anti-colonial theorizing and activity. D'Souza inherited this from his grandfather. As such, he sees Barack Hussein Obama, Jr., through the lens of anti-colonialism. D'Souza supports this view of Obama with quotes from Obama's own work, interviews with people who know the Obama family, and scholars like Paul Kengor who has researched Obama's relationship with Frank Marshall Davis.

D'Souza argues, using Obama's own words from his memoirs, that Obama wants to fulfill his father's dream of anti-colonial political and economic action. Rich, white, Western people need to be shaken down in order to even the score with poor people of color living in formerly colonized countries like Kenya and Indonesia, and poor, exploited people of color living in Western countries.

Interestingly, the lack of economic soundness of this grudge-and-race- based politics is argued by George Obama, the president's half-brother. George makes a very interesting observation. Compare the "Asian tiger" countries to formerly colonized countries in Africa. South Korea used to be at the same economic level as Kenya. South Korea has been able to advance in a way that Kenya has not. Why is that, George asks? The unstated but implied answer: not just colonization is to blame for the poverty of some formerly colonized countries. Rather, cultural and economic differences also play a role. Rather than pursuing the kind of race-and-grudge based politics and economics that have destroyed Mugabe's Zimbabwe, exploited people could benefit from learning from countries like South Korea.

The documentary veers into speculation toward the end, stating that President Obama wants to see the US in the debt crisis it faces now. That's the film's most outrageous speculation. As the Comptroller General explains, the debt crisis is very real. That Obama desires the debt crisis is mere speculation. The film also criticizes Obama for reducing nuclear warheads and NASA. Again, that Obama has taken these steps is fact. His motivation for doing so, as presented in the film, is mere speculation.

Trashy junk for trash lovers, why do people watch junk like this is beyond me. This is not for intelligent ppl, it is a film for the narrow minded. Live love laugh life is to short for hatred.

"obama is an anti-colonialist." that was the main accusation of the film--which takes its sweet time getting to the point. ironically, our nations founding fathers were anti-colonialists, hence why they rebelled against the British, who used to be our colonizers... also thrown into the film--of course--the obligatory pro-colonialist, feel-good belief of "maybe if whites were still in control over indigenous people, they would be better off." along with some inaccuracies...

supposedly obama will do nothing to stop Iran from acquiring wmd... i guess dinesh didn't catch the news about assassinated iranian scientists, and repeated hacking of their nuclear facilities... i bet dinesh was one of those guys with the "osama loves obama" bumper sticker on his pickup truck in 2008. and lets not forget the folks who were salivating at the thought of sticking it to the hippies once wmd were found in iraq!

oh, and supposedly obama wants to sabotage the USA by getting us into debt... funny, dinesh didn't make this accusation against bush, when he set our current economic trajectory. in fact, obama has slowed the increase in government spending when compared to bush, whom dinesh probably voted for twice.

the films main message is: "let our government take care of your country." and this is coming from the guys that say government cant do anything! this movie is a tome of wisdom for its key demographic, but comes off as a comedy to the informed viewer.

Just read the review in Variety for a fair and balanced review of this piece of propaganda. That is all it is and I would encourage you to not waste your money or contribute to this drivel in any way. I find it outrageous that it is even called a "documentary". Please. It is highly irresponsible to play on the fears of their target audience and inflame them in such a way as this film seeks to do as it is released oh so transparently just before the convention and upcoming election. This is an opinion piece, although I question if this D'Souza character actually believes any of this or if he is just paid an exorbitant amount of money to make this film seem serious. I find it outrageous that theaters are even screening it. Booooooooooo. Really, D'Souza, how do you sleep at night? This is what you dedicate your life to? Sad.

The main charge here, though slickly presented, is that Obama is an anti-Colonialist. Given that so were America's founding fathers, this is a rather remarkable complaint, one that D'Souza seeks to portray as a vice rather than virtue ... but the film never bothers to point out that its creator is an apologist for Colonialism (he actually thinks it's a good thing), a political shill for the conservative end of the GOP, and an active, long-time opponent of the Democratic Party. This was meant to be a scare tactic using marketing 'spin' masked as 'analysis' to defeat Obama's re-election -- clearly, it failed miserably at that -- and its dire arguments were undermined by they events actually unfolded during Obama's second term. This is at best a highly partisan critique and at worst political propaganda ... but it certainly isn't an objective documentary. To call this a documentary is to insult real documentarians such as Ken Burns and a whole range of honest indie filmmakers.

Basically a propaganda piece using a minority to spew hateful rhetoric about a moderate, likable president who was given a raw deal.

Will appeal to 'ers (birthers etc) who hate the president. People who don't spend every waking moment hating the president will either be disturbed by this movie (because it got made) will laugh, or will be bored to tears.

PS. To the person who said this isn't propaganda unlike "inconvenient truth" "faranheit 9/11" you need to look up the definition of propaganda.

The only difference between this type of propaganda and the other two films is that the other two films have grounding in reality. Climate change has science backing it up (real science) and anyone who doesn't think that the Bush administration used 9/11 as an excuse to carry out a really far right foreign policy is being naive.

This is balanced documentary film for independent thinker. As John F. Kennedy once said, and I quote. "A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people."

This is Obama's vision for America. It talks about the people that influence his thinking. Excerpts from his memoir " Dreams from my father " were used to follow his journey from childhood to manhood. The setting goes from Hawaii; Indonesia; Kenya; United Kingdom; New York. It explains what his father's dream is all about and how it shaped his character. It shows the people that were his mentors; friends that he associates with.

It also concisely explain in detail the action that he takes which confuses a lot of pundits especially the people who truly love this country (USA) whether they're liberals or conservatives.

This is a riveting and thought-provoking movie. It shows where our country is headed. We can always agree and disagree with issues; we can even replace political majority from one party over another... but as an American; we only have one COUNTRY and it is IRREPLACEABLE.

This is a MUST-SEE movie for open-minded individual. " Love him, Hate him but Do You Really Know HIM?

In "2016: Obama's America," Dinesh D'Souza makes the case that President Barack Obama is trying to fulfill his father's anti-colonial dream of destroying America and allowing the rise of the "United States of Islam." The film is a curious mix. It includes dramatic recreations of past events (notably and repeatedly, a young Obama grieving at his father's grave), interviews (including some with friends of Obama's father), graphics (the Statute of Liberty drowning in a sea of red ink!), guest narration (by Barack Obama himself) and some of the most audacious jumps of logic this side of the Olympics.

D'Souza starts by dramatizing a conversation with a naïve white college kid who tries to ingratiate himself with D'Souza by telling him how blown away he was by the awesomeness of India, D'Souza's home country. D'Souza cuts him off, citing his country's poverty, caste system and bride burning tradition. Having thus defeating the mighty, liberal college student, he claims to have bested Jesse Jackson in a debate, when (he claims) Jackson could not name a single instance of overt racism in the US. Whether true or not, by this encounter D'Souza shows that racism is no longer a potent force in the country. He illustrates America's color-blindness with a staged scene in barroom full of blacks and whites, celebrating happily together. One of the white kids even bakes a cake for a black friend!

D'Souza then roles out a clever technique: make a true claim, but one that the audience will think is false, thus communicating the opposite of what is overtly stated. This happens at least twice in the film. Once, D'Souza states that anti-colonialists and their white liberal allies believe that western nations colonized African countries to get their wealth. Then, on a visit to Hawaii, he meets with a historian who claims that missionaries, merchants and politicians overthrew the government of Hawaii in the 19th century to allow the US to annex the islands and grab their wealth. To anyone with a modicum of education, these two claims are utterly true. D'Souza is either ignorant of these facts, or assumes that his audience will be unaware that their country participated in such skullduggery.

Early on, D'Souza claims that Obama has shut own oil drilling of US shores, but is subsidizing oil drilling in Brazil and elsewhere. He spins the short moratorium on drilling after the Deep Sea Horizons explosion as a permanent ban. The claim that the US wants Britain to give the Falklands back to Argentina is also nonsense. And claiming that Obama has "done nothing" to constrain a nuclear Iran is an outright lie.

D'Souza claims that in 2008, no one knew who Obama was. He was the great Black Messiah, embraced by whites who only wanted to participate in a historic election to raise a black man to the presidency. But Obama had already written two probing and intelligent book about himself that laid out his intellectual development and influences. His 2004 speech to the Democratic Convention brought him to the attention of a wide segment of American voters. Barack Obama was hardly unknown in 2008, especially after a grueling primary in which he and Hillary Clinton campaigned in all 50 states and debated 28 times.

The interviews with friends of Obama's father are amateurish and slanted. D'Souza wants desperately to tie the father's supposed anti-colonial rage to his son. He finds one old friend, a man whose grasp if English is rudimentary, to state that the Obama senior and junior "are one." But the man was saying only that the son was a chip off the old block – not a nuanced conclusion that the president shares his father's politics and outlook. In an interview with Obama's half-brother George, D'Souza tries to show that Obama has not done enough or his on family. But the canny Obama refuses to take the bait to denigrate his own brother. Barack has his own family to support, he says. By helping the world, he says, he helps me. Bravo!

Large sections of the movie feature Barack Obama himself, reading from his books "The Audacity of Hope" and "Dreams from My Father." This gives the impression that Obama is hanging himself with his own words. But while the words are Obama's, the wild conclusions are all D'Souza's. Obama, says D'Souza, has anti-colonial rage, somehow inherited from a man he hardly knew, to diminish America and put it at the mercy of foreigners. He wants to create a "United States of Islam" that will be a threat to the United States. This is proved because Obama supported attacks on Libya to protect its citizens, while refusing to attack Syria which is also attacking its citizens. That the geopolitics around each country are radically different matters little to D'Souza.

Nearly every one of the film's statements and conclusions is open to challenge. By the end of the film, I was dazed by its inanity and begging for it to end. It's hard to know whether D'Souza is merely partisan, or dishonest or just not very bright. His premises are shaky or wrong. His conclusions do not flow from them. "2016" is a mess of lies, half-truths, and truths presented as lies. Frankly, it says more about the author than about its subject. And it says a great deal about a citizenry that is willing to swallow whole, and without evidence, paranoid and baseless conclusions about the inner workings of the mind of what, to all outward appearances, is a man who loves his country and wants it to prosper.

After seeing how polarizing the reviews for this film were, I prepared myself for the possibility it would be akin to some radical, Michael Moore-like conspiracy theory. I was pleasantly surprised when it wasn't.

There is no doubt what side of the political spectrum Dinesh D'Souza is on, but i feel like he made sufficient effort to support his theories and conclusions with actual facts and further, he did it using President Obamas own words. His assessments are fair, though at times he seems to be reaching. D'Souza chooses snippets from Obama's book and his speeches and other documented clips selectively to support his claims, but nonetheless, the evidence is there. To be honest, it's really sort of frightening when you see it all laid out in front of you.

Bottom-line is go see the movie. Keep an open mind. And please, try not to pay much attention to some of these clearly biased, misinformed reviews and critics. If you're even slightly interested in politics, watch the film, and decide for yourself.

Four years ago, the world loved and believed in the charismatic, Barack Obama and were convinced he would be the saviour of the world. He touted hope and assured the public that change had arrived. Four years later, you have to ask, what happened and more importantly, what didn't happen and why?

As the US president stands to be re-elected for a second term, Obama 2016 examines his policies, actions and the possibility of where the US and the world might be headed. It also reveals an insight in to his little known background.

Just as Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 shocked viewers about George W. Bush and begged the question what he was doing in office, Obama 2016 is bound to spawn the same questions about the president's potential second term. Whether it's blatant propaganda, an accurate portrayal or a mixture of both, Obama 2016 is a must watch.

I decided to see this "film" simply because I was sincerely trying to see if a biased film could be made with honesty, truth, and facts. Wow....was I wrong. I cannot fathom how uneducated Americans must be to believe the garbage peddled in this film. The fear being fed to these republicans wouldn't be so frightening if they weren't so stupid. They will literally believe anything Fox or hate mongers like OReilly, Beck, Limbaugh, Coulter, and Hannity say. This isn't a film, it is a bunch of footage, interloped with horrifying music and deep voices to scare the hell out of people. The problem is, again, the republicans will eat this up because they aren't educated enough to make decisions on their own. Unless someone is telling them to be homophobic, racist, xenophobic, and just downright filthy human beings, I'd like to hope they wouldn't be. Either way, this movie is as reliable as women's rights under a republican Congress. Enough said.