In order to download Charlie Rose podcasts to iTunes for transfer to an iPod, you must have iTunes installed. If you do, please click the following link to download the podcast for this interview:
itpc://www.charlierose.com/view/itunes/12778
Otherwise, close this window to continue viewing.
Close
Page 1 of 1
Page 1 of 1
SharkswithfrikingLazers 04/23/2013 10:02 PM Report
Great, great writing.
Best movie of 2012 (Argo sold the story down the river for commercialism--see Ken Taylor interview).
Doris, Tony and Steven--quick make another movie.
MrVjillarston 02/17/2013 05:03 AM Report
Spelling corrections: My apology.
The statement "if we continue down this path of psychotic individualism.." is logically incompatible with "..you didn't build that..". Either building something in the past was individual, or it was not; or there was a misstep here with the president's vision of past building.
MrVjillarston 02/17/2013 04:59 AM Report
The statement "if we continue down this path of psychotic individualism.." is logically imcompatible with "..you didn't build that..". Either building something in the past was individual, or it was not; or there was a mistep here with the president's opinion of building something.
SharkswithfrikingLazers 02/16/2013 03:24 AM Report
One of his over arching themes is Evolution vs Revolution.
Evolution is the lower energy requirement.
Revolution takes lots of anger and energy plus being physically fit rather than obese.
SharkswithfrikingLazers 02/16/2013 03:20 AM Report
We are told Karl Marx said Lincoln changed the Civil War to a Revolution.
Marx and Engels argued that Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation and the North’s arming of Black soldiers transformed the Civil War from a purely constitutional war to preserve the country with slavery intact, into a revolutionary war.
They did not characterize the Civil War as a socialist revolutionary war, but they believed that it advanced the cause of all workers, both white and Black, by destroying chattel slavery.
The revolution armed former slaves, destroyed the horrendous institution of slavery without compensation to the slave-owners, and opened the way for a struggle between the working class and the capitalist class.
SharkswithfrikingLazers 02/16/2013 03:14 AM Report
We are told that Lincoln took Tad into dangerous territory to Richmond so what kind of father was he?
Lincoln felt enslaved as a child since his own father sent him to work for neighbors to pay debt. Lincoln eventually left his father and never spoke to him again.
So what kind of father was Lincoln--one that was better than his own father.
SharkswithfrikingLazers 02/16/2013 03:09 AM Report
He tells us that Doris is a tremendously passionate person.
Yes Doris is the herstorian, the mstorian we love because she is the Aunt Bee, the Marian Cunningham, the June Cleaver of History.
Herstory from Doris is sweet and warm like breast milk.
SharkswithfrikingLazers 02/16/2013 03:06 AM Report
Lincoln wrote an essay DENYING the divinity of the Holy Bible and never joined a church but he knows the power of religion and uses it to help win the Presidency.
(Yes, he was a politician though not one we would have today.)
SharkswithfrikingLazers 02/16/2013 03:04 AM Report
Lincoln might be considered a Racist.
In 1862 he said Blacks are far removed from equality with the White race. So better for both races to be separated.
His plan for them was to be deported to Panama to a place like Monroe's Liberia.
(Yes, he did play politics too to keep the border states.)
SharkswithfrikingLazers 02/16/2013 03:01 AM Report
Tony told us he is a gay man.
He did not tells us Lincoln Slept with Men (documented evidence with three men and one of them as President in a 34 room mansion (no need to share a bed here),
1) Billy Green, slept with him on a narrow cot,
2) Joshua Speed, slept with him for four years,
3) David Derrickson, an Army Officer, slept with him at the Presidential Retreat in 1862--together went to church services, theater and became a bro-mance, (daughter of a Supreme Court Justice gossips about this)
(Indeed, much power over men from Ol' Abe. Tony was a wise choice.)
Cornan 02/15/2013 10:56 PM Report
I really like the phrase "psychotic individualism" in reference to the most extreme right wing beliefs. Indeed, the human race will not be able to solve the great problems that face us (most of which we have created ourselves) with such attitudes.
Dasein 02/15/2013 05:48 PM Report
Lincoln-the first in a long line of terrorist presidents, culminating(perhaps) is the present one.
REMant 02/15/2013 12:22 PM Report
Lincoln ran as a Whig, and, unlike Madison and most of the Jeffersonians and Jacksonians, believed in "improvements," but he believed like Jefferson and perhaps the majority of the country, that the races could not live together, not even in new free states, and supported efforts to ship them elsewhere. It could be argued that any feeling for the slaves he had was merely philanthropic, tho perhaps he viewed colonization as an expeditious means to defuse the issue. Many slave owners even before the Revolution, like Jefferson himself, were opposed to slavery, but at a loss for the remedy.
Conservatives see the Revolution as the defining moment in American history, while liberals, who may well be seen as the heirs of the abolitionists, see it as the Civil War, some going so far as to rewrite the Revolution as such a civil war or see the former as brought to fruition by the latter. But the Democrats were the party of free trade and sound money in the North, as well as South (as much as the northern contingent wanted to industrialize), while the Whigs were mercantilists and their successors remained so (tho the GOP ended up rejecting paper money).
It was an important issue in the Constitutional convention, and thereafter, despite the GOP's roots in free soil and labor, and as important as slavery in the break up of the union. It might be said the Civil War was New England's revenge for the War of 1812, if not the Revolution. The lowering of tariffs in 1857 and the subsequent financial crisis impacted sentiment in the north as much as the Dred Scott decision, in an association not unlike today's. The Republican Party platform promised increasing tariffs, and opposed only the extension of slavery, which the president reiterated at his inaugural.
While it was unfortunate that Liberalism found itself saddled with slavery, it is revealing that abolitionism was tied up with mercantilism, and a reform-minded authoritarian heroism, still evident in ppl like Kushner, something George Forgie pointed out in his psychobiography some years ago, and Weldon intimated. In this regard viewers might like to consider the relationship of Lincoln to the Founders as discussed by Madison biographer, Drew McCoy: Lincoln and the Founding Fathers: A Reconsideration, online here: http://quod.lib.umich.edu/j/jala/2629860.0016.103?rgn=main;view=fulltext Altho I don't entirely agree with his conclusions, and he was unaware of Lincoln's support for colonization.
Prosecuting the southern states for seceding had scarce any constitutional basis and probably set back real freedom for the Negroes 50-75 years. (Since Taney made the same argument as Salmon Chase, I wonder what kind of president Chase might have made. One thing that's obvious about this period is that little more attention was paid to the Constitution then, than it is now.)
Discussion of the Constitution and criticism of reform motives, which used to be prevalent has all but disappeared from books and scholarly journals in the past 30-40 years, which I believe can only be seen as a response to this country's decline over the same period, treating ourselves now as if in Babylonian Captivity.
Lincoln clearly exhibited more appreciation for the Bible than the law of the land. He was, according to those who knew him well, always ambitious, but he was the nominee no one really wanted, chosen largely because he was from the west, and can be seen as divisive a figure in his own party as in the country as a whole, which, to its credit, the film brings out.
Tad was retarded. There is an article by Richard Wightman Fox on the Richmond trip in a recent issue of the Journal of the Abraham Lincoln Assn: http://quod.lib.umich.edu/j/jala/2629860.0033.203/--death-shock-to-chivalry-and-a-mortal-wound-to-cas te?rgn=main;view=fulltext Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr relates that he had to pull Lincoln down from a parapet when visiting one of the forts surrounding the capital to keep him from being shot.
I'll stick by my earlier remarks. The script, on any terms, is a travesty, and it's not even good moviemaking. Kushner's clearly a propagandist (tho thankfully not for the Israeli treatment of Palestinians); Spielberg, a master only of schlock and schmaltz.
It doesn't appear to have even accomplished its objective of rallying the troops. As AP reported recently: "Nancy Zwiers was genuinely psyched to see 'Lincoln,' but something happened between the ticket purchase and the credits. Off screen, that is. 'Yes, I fell asleep,' confessed the 54-year-old marketing executive in Long Beach, Calif. 'I only have two clear memories of the movie: a bunch of old white guys sitting around talking and Sally Field in a perpetual state of angst.'"