Posted on 07/30/2013 7:15:08 AM PDT by NotYourAverageDhimmi
Conservatives are grabbing popcorn and lining up to catch a new historical drama with modern connections.
“Copperhead,” the new film from director Ron Maxwell, focuses on the Northern opponents of the American Civil War and stars Billy Campbell, Angus MacFadyen and Peter Fonda.
At least one conservative — Richard Viguerie, chairman of ConservativeHQ.com — emailed his audience to tell it about the movie “that every conservative needs to see.”
“[W]hile Copperhead is about the Civil War, believe me, it will hit close to home for every conservative fighting to preserve our Constitution and our American way of life,” Viguerie wrote. “Because Copperhead is about standing up for faith, for America, and for what’s right, just like you and I are doing today. In fact, I’ve never seen a movie with more references to the Constitution, or a movie that better sums up our current fight to stand up for American values and get our nation back on track.”
The movie, which is based on the novel by Harold Frederic, follows Abner Beech, a New York farmer who doesn’t consider himself a Yankee, and is against slavery and war in general.
Asked about whether he sees his film as conservative, Maxwell told POLITICO, “I think if ‘Copperhead’ has any relevance at all, in addition to illuminating a time and place from our common heritage, it’s as a cinematic meditation on the price of dissent. I’ve never thought of dissent as a political act belonging to the right or left. It’s an act of liberty, expression of the rights of a free person — free not just in law but free from the confines and pressures of the tyranny of the majority.”
Maxwell said while the concept of dissent is as “old as time,” in the U.S., “it’s protected in the Constitution.”
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
That may be the one stupidest thing I have ever heard on FR. Congratulations.
As to the Morrell Tariff of 1861, which only had a chance of passing after the Southern delegation left Congress, I don't see your point.
Are you saying that Norther Shipping interests reliant of foreign trade wanted high tariffs? That northern textile mills reliant on southern cotton wanted trade cut off? That northern bankers who had lent hundreds of millions to southern planters didn't want to be repaid? And even northern iron mills in Pennsylvania who most benefited from high tariffs rates on British pig iron wanted to close their markets in the south on manufactured goods?
You lost me somewhere.
Going to war was not a good thing for anyone, except possibly the slaves. And even that is open to debate.
It is merely a recognition that the homosexual lobby picks out good people, and then tries to rebrand them as homosexual to make homosexuality less reprehensible by association.
If you don’t know that, well, welcome to marketing 101.
There is a wider wicked alliance than just homosexuals. It’s not like there is a “Gay” Satan and then an Everything Else Satan.
Of course. That is why Russia has anti-homosexual laws.
Because Satan spends time in conflict with himself.
Incidentally, and maybe this is my own hobby horse (but it gallops pretty good when tested) the word “homosexual” is almost a misnomer (”gay” definitely is sugar coating the turd) because God made humans with, yes, sexual meaning that don’t have to do just with the reproductive parts. They are package deals, the man and the woman, and both have high honor and both have fortes. THERE IS NOTHING “HOMOSEXUAL” ABOUT MALE BONDING... in particular. It’s not rocket science... it’s the introduction of evil in actual perverted acts that tend to be violent (notably buggery today) that makes the relationship a paean to Satan rather than to God the Father.
I don’t get what you’re getting at?
Russia today has enough idea of holiness to know this is Bad Juju....
But it is interesting how the Neo-Confederates can cover all the bases. On this very thread, I have discussed Pea-Ridges claims that Lincoln was just a tool of evil Northern Capitalists, and then you claiming that Lincoln was the evil Communist and a puppet of Karl Marx.
I wish you guys would huddle up and just pick one conspiracy at a time.
Hollywood has done it with Jesus. We shouldn't be surprised when the wack jobs do it with anyone else.
I'd say a little more than "contempt and enmity". He told than flat out, that if they persisted, he would personally lead to Army to South Carolina and hang the ring leaders from the nearest tree. That included John C. Calhoun who had been Jackson's vice president.
Calhoun and the others wisely backed down because they knew damn well that Jackson would have hung them. No doubt about it. If you crossed Andy Jackson, one of you were going to die, and it probably wasn't going to be Andy.
I use a different route to get to the same place.
Human evolution occurred in part among other apes. Bonobos and Chimpanzees have a common ancestor, and that common ancestor has common ancestors with humans. Bonobos in particular have an active and uninhibited sex life, but have little motivation for highly productive behavior, as sex is always available. Because of that, these animals are limited to lush regions where survival without highly productive behavior is possible.
Part of the reason why humans have achieved civilization is because men need to demonstrate a capability for productive behavior to become suitable candidates for mating. Women needed to be virtuous and chaste so their husbands could take advantage of opportunities to be productive.
Honor comes both from a need and expectation for women to have virtue and chastity when their men were off hunting, and men to respect for others pair-bonds if left behind or differently assigned.
The principles of survival were codified in conventional morality.
To the extent that society provides supports so that highly productive behavior provides no advantage, to that extent we can expect human behavior and morality to regress to the bonobo and chimpanzee standard.
I guess I expect better from our FRiends.
I understand that Karl Marx said that Lincoln’s statement that “The face that grows the corn should have a place at the table to eat the corn” was the essence of communism.
That doesn’t mean that Lincoln, Karl Marx were evil. The basic notion of fairness is a good thing, and bad people use good ideas as cover all the time. That is why a single quote from someone should never be considered conclusive evidence of their virtue or sin. Good people often make mistakes, and bad people often lie.
All the facts in the world about Saint Abraham will not change the minds of Lincoln cultists. It’s a brainwashing that starts from the first minute they attend school and start learning how Saint Abraham “saved the country”. LOL.
I have yet to see you post any facts.
OK let’s indulge the idea that the currently expounded evolution story is how the entities actually physically formed.
One would have to ask if the nature that was given can do it, itself. We’re not seeing it churn out new creatures on its own now. (There’s some fascinating mutations in germs that remain germs. Darwin why did you go on light duty?)
Another problem I see here about “morality” is that even morality is not a complete thought system. Can morality tell you if you should forgive someone who breaches morality, and if so under what circumstances? The question becomes impossibly complex unless... there is a caring Watchman. With a plan.
(If I am talking past what you’re getting at I apologize. On second read it looks not like you’re particularly stumping for Darwinism as an explain-all but rather noting that if men won’t act like men, they will find themselves acting like animals. I do differ with Darwinism as an explain-all, it’s like saying all a gardener needs is a hoe and pruning shears... hey, who plowed the garden and how? who planted it and how?)
(FWIW I stay away from even semi-evolutionism when regards the creature that is called human. That does not appear an appropriate treatment for this domain. This has nothing to do with Darwin. It has to do with holiness - wholeness - and evil.)
Most FReepers can do the basic math. A couple have some few problems and then there are those who insist that 2+2=5 no matter how many times they are showed the truth. It’s kinda fun to mock the more belligerent among them but the rest are to be pitied.
Other homos are a very COMMON source of lies about historical personages indulging in buggery. They are not the ONLY source of such lies.
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.