The movie "Lincoln" two weeks too late

Seems reasonable. Are you suggesting the the Mitt Romney campaign team should have bribed Steven Spielberg to persuade him to let it be distributed before the election? Confusing the Obama voters is what they were being paid to do - sadly for him, they weren't good enough at it.

As Lincoln said, you can't fool all the voters all the time, though the Tea Party has fooled more of them than is good for the USA.

The teaching of American History is not what it used to be.

"..... the rhetoric that is used in the frequently volatile debate that takes place between conservatives and liberals. As such, a frequent retort is stating that the Democratic party, currently the party of liberals, supported slavery while Republicans sought to end it. The problem is, this implicates that these parties have remained static since the time of their founding. This simply is not true."

The roles of Democrats and Republicans have changed in the past 170+ years.

The Republicans were the liberals of 1860-1900. The Democrats were the conservatives of those same years.

hamilton

PS: I learn this is high school civics class (1970), which is no longer taught the same way. Maybe you should ask which party forced that to happen.

Devilish cunning, that Obama!

Actually, the Dems are still the slave holders, just they do it by softer means than in Lincoln's time. By playing their Santa Claus and it's hard to compete with Santa.

A cunning runt, for sure.

on

s.

nd

Scarcely a runt. Mitt Romney is clearly thicker, if no longer.

Which of course brings to mind the very old one, "What is the difference between a policemans baton and a magicians wand ??"

"The magicians wand is used for cunning stunts"

Rheilly

Indeed, since it's a well known fact that "Obama voters" are simple-minded folks and are easily confused by flashy stuff like that.

Also, too, this guy discussing the Republican "Southern Strategy" sounds

It would have confused the tea baggers. It is well known they don't like people of color.

I think you would be hard pressed to find any progressive that doesn't know about the southern strategy. In fact, it was LBJ that made the southern strategy work by pissing off the honkies in the deep south by passing civil right legislation.

So you point is what? Abe Lincoln was a decent Republican and excluding Eisenhower all that followed him were total douche bags? Yes, I can agree with that. Well except that douche bag is a bit too kind of a description.

I saw "Lincoln" today. Imperfect, but not bad. Spent the rest of the afternoon at RA :-) ...Jim Thompson

Abe Lincoln was a psychopath who enslaved white men and forced them to fight and die in a war of conquest. After Lincoln's generals lost too many battles Lincoln freed black slaves in hopes of starting an insurrection.

Eisenhower was a psychopath, an equal opportunity slaver, who enslaved people and forced them to fight and die in yet another war of conquest.

Nice guys do not fight wars. Wars are fought by psychopaths for the express purpose of using violence to take things from other people.

Lincoln wasn't directly responsible for starting the Civil War. Six of the slave states seceded and subsequently fired on Fort Sumter, which is to say that the initiative was taken by the Confederacy. Admittedly, if he had less principled and more supine, the slave states might not have seceded, but this scarcely justifies your description.

He was a professional soldier; the conscription you want to characterise as slavery was imposed by the US Congress, and the situation that forced the US into the second world war was created by politicians, not generals.

Not all soldiers are psychopaths, and perfectly respectable people fight defensive wars for perfectly respectable reasons. Once you are stuck with a war, there's not a lot of point in fighting it like nice guys, but that's another story.

The USA is known as "The Land of the Free, Because of the Brave"

Wars are necessary sometimes. Only weenies avoid war by appeasement. Obama is a weenie and, if we can't stop him, we'll soon be enslaved. ...Jim Thompson

I agree. Considerable amount of current politics was injected into it that did not ring true historically.

It's not the first time Steven Spielberg has rewritten history to accommodate his agenda. In the movie "Shindler's List" it was his anti-gun stance. He portrays the concentration camp inmates as being totally non-violent. My parents were in those camps, and after the Germans ran away, they armed themselves to the teeth. They noticed plenty of other inaccuracies, but all was tolerated because the main message of the movie was on target and fairly accurate. It's presumably the same with Lincoln movie (which I haven't seen yet).

Sensible people choose when and where they fight their wars. Appeasement is one of the tools that lets them choose.

He's a bit too enthusiastic about killing people with drones to qualify as a weenie. Jim may prefer to see members of the US army being blown up by IED's, but elected politicians are rather more averse to this kind of bravado. A little collateral damage amongst women and children who don't form part of the relevant electorate is less of a problem.

That's well-known by people who don't know.

In that vein, here's a quickie on repatriating corporate funds--

Suppose you had a shovel. You want to use it, but Joe the ditch guy asks to borrow it for a year. You loan it to Joe.

A year later, he brings it back. He profited by it--did more work, faster, finished more jobs.

You, meanwhile, were out the shovel and the gain it could've brought you. So, you ask Joe for part of his added profit. You split the benefit.

You're both better off, right?

Suppose it was money instead--you loaned Joe the money for whatever it was he needed--pick, shovel, or other. It's the same. He pays you back, with interest. That's your share.

A pile of money is the same as a pile of shovels, picks, and anything else--more versatile. It benefits everyone, amplifies productivity. But, not if it's stuck overseas, hiding from double-taxation.

miso, I'm curious... what drives your hate? Just what _is_ your problem?

And I'll bet you have NOT seen the movie. ...Jim Thompson

borrow it for a year. You loan it to Joe.

finished more jobs.

you ask Joe for part of his added profit. You split the benefit.

needed--pick, shovel, or other. It's the same. He pays you back, with interest. That's your share.

else--more versatile. It benefits everyone, amplifies productivity. But, not if it's stuck overseas, hiding from double-taxation.

Whatcha talking about? With no significant exceptions, foreign income taxes may be credited against US taxes owing, which largely eliminates double taxation.

Of course even single taxation is too much if you can get away with paying less.

See the sort of shenanigans that goes on: "Three Foreign Tax Credit Schemes are Shut Down by the IRS"

Best regards, Spehro Pefhany