Forbes columnist derides D'Souza's Forbes attack on Obama

Blog ››› ››› ERIC BOEHLERT

As I suspected, there's dissension within the Forbes ranks over the widely controversial, and widely condemned, Obama attack piece that recently graced the magazine's cover.

When I asked late last week why there was a deafening silence from inside Forbes about the piece, it was because it just didn't make sense that professional journalists who work for the glossy mag would possibly be okay with being associated with such a rank piece of misguided partisan propaganda. And worse, being associated with an error-filled article that so thoroughly embarrassed the magazine.

I understand Editor-in-Chief Steve Forbes finally came forward Friday afternoon and defended the D'Souza article, claiming it represented great journalism. But politically, Forbes really had no choice but to back the nasty, get-Obama article. Others who work for the magazine are under no such partisan restraints and we're now getting a glimpse into their disdain for D'Souza's work.

For instance, take this money quote from Forbes columnist Shikha Dalmia, writing on the magazine's web site [emphasis added]:

Writers these days are supposed to cultivate a niche, and D'Souza seems to have homesteaded the intellectual goofiness spot all for himself.

And then she lowers the boom:

Gingrich aside, many commentators have already pointed out the factual problems with many of D'Souza's claims. One involves a $2 billion loan that the administration handed via the Export-Import bank to encourage off-shore drilling in Brazil. "He is funding Brazilian exploration so that the oil can stay in Brazil," D'Souza rails. This is a foolish decision, no doubt, but one that was unanimously endorsed by the bank's five board members, none of whom were Obama appointees.

But there is a problem more basic than factual inaccuracies with D'Souza's thesis. If Obama were seriously motivated by a moral desire to protect poor countries from being ruined by excessive American consumption then his biggest priority would be to rein in this consumption. But that is the exact opposite of what he has done since assuming office. His entire economic agenda is one big and desperate attempt to boost American consumption.

And again:

What is even more unsettling than D'Souza's unsubstantiated ideological accusations against Obama are his gratuitous digs at polygamy in Obama's family. He plays this up repeatedly. What is the point of this except to remind Americans that Obama is a Muslim – the most dreaded of "others"?

Good for Dalmia. Meanwhile, I'd sure love to hear Steve Forbes explain again how the D'Souza piece represented "terrific journalism."

He's wrong. The article was a train wreck. And even people who write for Forbes know that to be true.

Dinesh D'Souza, Steve Forbes
We've changed our commenting system to Disqus.
Instructions for signing up and claiming your comment history are located here.
Updated rules for commenting are here.