Posted on 11/28/2012 2:03:03 PM PST by NKP_Vet
Steven Spielberg’s film LINCOLN clearly takes the politically correct, Northern view of Lincoln and wraps it up in the shroud of the moral fight against slavery. Thus, it decides mostly to focus on Lincoln’s fight in January 1865 to pass the Thirteenth Amendment, which outlawed slavery in the United States and its territories. Though the portrayal of this fight has its nuances, it doesn’t include the extensive evidence suggesting that Lincoln could be an ambitious, secretive tyrant. It also excludes such facts that, just before the Civil War began, President Lincoln had actually expressed support for a Thirteenth Amendment to perpetuate slavery, which had just been passed under his predecessor to encourage Southern states to stay in the Union. Sadly, LINCOLN also contains a surprising amount of anachronistic foul language and a surprising lack of uplifting religious references.
(Excerpt) Read more at movieguide.org ...
Regret having paid to see this movie. Felt like a barrage of subliminal propaganda. May as well have made a movie about the passage of the ACA.
What was it propagandizing?
“What was it propagandizing?”
I got the impression that the movie was a subliminal hit against “conservatives” who oppose the current president’s “progressive” agenda. Something about it rubbed me the wrong way. Maybe it was the presence of Sally Field who annoys the hell out of me.
She was horrible and the worst thing about it.
Almost on cue, Rahm Emanuel yesterday liked Obama with Lincoln.
I bet he likes Casablanca and The Godfather as well. In any case many American films, and political themed ones like ‘Mr. Smith Goes to Washington’, have the ‘Lone Crusader’ theme.
“Lincoln stayed at my ancestor’s plantation and gave my ancestor a special dispensation to use use slaves in Illinois, rented from Kentucky slave owners, for the purpose of mining salt to provide the Union Army.”
Lincoln and my ancestors lived in Spencer County Indiana, when they from childhood to early adulthood.
My ancestor (g,g,g g uncle) later wrote that Abe wasn’t that good a shot.
Wrote it in “The Journal of Priddy Meeks” 1795 - 1886
The Lincoln movie was excellent.
That is what the movie is really all about.
Spielberg used century-and-a-half-old events as a coded analogue for current events. Most here are fooled by his unfavorable treatment of Democrats. The viewer is lead to look through that feint to equate Obama with Lincoln.
The implication is that Obama, like Lincoln, should be given authority to take draconian action to save the Union through expanded Federal state powers, such as ObamaCare.
Far from seeing Spielberg's intent for what it was, numerous FR threads come alive with the customary litany of Southern grievances and Dixiecrat discussions. Meanwhile, Spielberg has communicated the subliminal message to the low-information citizen, like Obama's middle finger to his temple, and cognitive biases close the door to further discussion.
My current technique is to throw in a grenade to re-start their neurons. In this case it is: "Did you know that Martin Luther King was a Republican?" Then we discuss Jim Crow legislation, Robert Byrd, etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.