Skip to comments.Burns Uses 'Prohibition' To Bash Conservatives, Ignores Prohibitionist On Set--Mika
Posted on 09/29/2011 7:13:41 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
If Ken Burns ever decides to stop making documentaries, he could always go into comedy . . .
On today's Morning Joe, Burns claimed he was non-political, despite repeatedly attempting to draw parallels between Prohibition, the subject of his current film, and themes in current conservatism, particularly immigration. At the same time, Burns ignored the modern-day prohibitionist sitting right across the table from him--Mika Brzezinski--the neo-Carrie Nation who would ban everything from cigarettes to soft drinks, transfats to fast food.
View the video here.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
Ken Burns bashes conservatives using his new movie, Prohibition. Ignores fact he is being interviewed by modern-day prohibitionist, Mika Brzezinski. Ping to Today show list.
I have never heard of Ken Burns.
In fairness, he has created some great documentaries:
Yes, he has. I loved the Civil War documentary he did in the 90s.
Too bad he’s a flaming lib.
Consider yourself lucky. He does long winded, 58 part documentaries that only PBS will bother with. Just in case anyone believed a word out of this Commie Pinkos mouth about being non political, this is from his Wiki page.
Burns is a longtime supporter of the Democratic Party, with almost $40,000 in political donations. In 2008, the Democratic National Committee chose Burns to produce the introductory video for Senator Edward Kennedy's August 2008 speech to the Democratic National Convention, a video described by Politico as a "Burns-crafted tribute casting him [Kennedy] as the modern Ulysses bringing his party home to port." In endorsing Barack Obama for the U.S. presidency in December 2007, Burns compared Obama to Abraham Lincoln. He plans to be a regular contributor to Keith Olbermann's Countdown show on Current TV.
Actually, its surprising that Burns, who has shown himself a capable historian, would associate Prohibition with American conservatism. The 18th Amendment was part of the Progressive agenda, right there amid the other “Progressive Era amendments”: income tax, direct election of senators and women’s suffrage.
I can do without the rest of Burns’ documentaries. Even they keep hammering on race — witness his stupid comments today.
Prohibition was a HUGE “progressive” cause.
The mentality behind Prohibition was Progressive: The State enforces a ban on something that they feel will reduce crime and misfortune associated with it. It also entailed the state becoming incredibly Draconian to make sure you weren’t making, selling, or buying it. If that wasn’t enough, another reason was being pushed that it would make life better for women when you crack down via Prohibition on the alcoholic husbands. Similar to how some think that banning speech or hate crimes legislation reduces all general hate in America, when what makes a bigger difference is whether or not some kid is indoctrinated in the gangster mentality or not.
Ken Burns is just confused...
His Civil War Documentary was perhaps his best by a long shot. It was great because it was primarily just storytelling.
>Prohibition was a HUGE progressive cause<
Bingo. The very root cause of libtardism is CONTROL. And people wonder why leftards have a hard-on for commie dictators.
I loved “The Old Negro Space Program” myself.
*** And even it was marred by the constant drumbeat about slavery. Yes, the primary issue as to why The War of Northern Aggression was fought, ***
I believe the Civil War came about because of financial matters, and slavery was a “throw in”, a way to raise passions, and garner support.
The primary motivating factor, as I was taught, is that the North needed the South’s cotton for it’s textile mills. But the South wanted to sell to England because England was paying a much better price for the cotton.
The other factors matter, and aren’t small. State’s rights and slavery were big, but the economics were the primary motivating factor.
Prohbition is alive and well. It’s called The Drug War, didn’t require a Consitutional Amendment, and will never end. To stretch the correllary to anything BUT the Drug War is pure bullshit.
I loved The Old Negro Space Program myself.
“Don't throw away your Confederate money boys, the South shall rise again!”
Yes, he has, but HIS best, academy award worthy role is as a ‘non-partisan.’
“Don't throw away your Confederate money boys, the South shall rise again!”
This is certainly true. How he could tie to to anything else boggles the mind. It proves he had an agenda in mind rather than rational analysis.
You younger people....look it up.
Don’t throw away your Confederate money boys, the South shall rise again!
I’m a Yankee, there’s no doubt, but my blood lines are hillbilly, which is right next door to being a southerner. :)
I sympathize with the South’s view of things. I support state’s rights. I think the USA should be, what it was meant to be, an association of 50 separate countries for mutual economic and defense benefit.
Yes, the Civil War documentary was great. It was marred by giving too much attention to the one Black Studies (or whatever) lady who ranted and raved, and added little about actual history. However she was a small enough part that you could enjoy the scope of the rest of it, and the rest was very good.
I also watched his WW II one, and it was spotty at best. It wasn’t really about the war. It was, surprise, about race relations during the war, with that minor war thing as a backdrop. I watched the whole thing, but honestly, World at War is infinitely better .
I might have a copy of the same text book.
The one in my library is from the late 1950s.
It is one of the funniest things I have seen on YouTube.
The woman in “The Civil War” is Barbara Fields; she’s a professor of history at Columbia. I agree, she is annoying. Every time I watch the episodes she’s in, I press mute when her face appears. She’s an especially unpleasant contrast to the great Shelby Foote.
In “The War,” they interview a black man who tells a story of how he wanted to join the service and go fight, but some racially motivated incident discouraged him, so he didn’t. I remember seeing that and thinking, “And the point of this is what?”
If Ken Burns did a series on the race to the moon he’d find a race angle.
I would like to find a copy...can’t recall the book title...do you know, plus an ISBN number and publisher perhaps? I took Virginia history during 1967-68 at intermediate school (junior high). Could be the same text, or perhaps a later edition.
I’ll try to remember to get the information from that book this evening and send it to you.
I am always surprised when some freeper proudly claims ignorance of some well-known historic or social figure.
Didn’t say I was proud. Just said I never heard of him. I don’t watch many documentaries. Don’t make a big deal out of it. There are a lot of actors, singers, and entertainers I haven’t heard of, either. So what?
Well, his documentaries on The Civil War were frequent and fairly common material on both TV on PBS as well as material for students in schools by teachers who were covering that portion of American History in their lesson. That’s the only surprise the other Freeper has, the documentary of the Civil War by him is fairly commonplace.
I sympathize with the Souths view of things. I support states rights. I think the USA should be, what it was meant to be, an association of 50 separate countries for mutual economic and defense benefit.
In terms of states’ rights, I agree, the idea of there being a degree of sovereignty among states is not a bad thing, especially looking at the problems associated with Prohibition, the need to probe extensively into people to find if he/she was an offender, and the bias of both the police and federal agents in the enforcement of the law. Again, there are duties such as The Common Defense and hierarchy in law enforcement, but personally, the federalization of the Prohibition act was a problem on so many levels.
Perhaps I’ve seen it and didn’t know who did it.