Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

"Lincoln" Is Now Helping The Republican Party

Just like with "The Iron Lady," now people have a great view of the Republican party, and how the Democratic party was always racist. This is what American audiences are leaving the theater with after seeing this film. You can call bullshit now, but come back in two weeks, and you'll be eating your words. We're going to be hearing about this film, and how Republicans freed the slaves from now until the Oscars.

These movies do more damage than good.

Thank god this film was released AFTER the election.

"Lincoln" has re-branded the Republican image. Thanks to the movie, Republicans are now promoting "it" and "honest Abe" as the face of the modern Republican party. They no longer need Reagan. Abe is now a front for them to hide behind. They've done this with Thatcher already, spouting how her (and their) conservatism beat the Soviets. They've already named their organizations after her now. Thanks Meryl!

Americans are uneducated. This Disney-fied bullshit works on them.

by Anonymousreply 7611/18/2012

I knew some moron would come to this conclusion eventually and post it on the Datalounge.

by Anonymousreply 111/17/2012

"The Iron Lady" did precisely NOTHING for the Conservative Party except to remind people what a heartless bunch of baboons they were (and are)

by Anonymousreply 211/17/2012

I prefer to think that Americans are smarter than you give us credit for, OP. The repugs in today's political climate are far removed from the republicans who had more benign motives back in Lincoln's day.

by Anonymousreply 311/17/2012

So the movie doesn't point out that Lincoln only freed the slaves so that they could come and fight on the side of the North in the Civil War? He was perfectly happy for them to remain slaves until that need became pressing, content for slavery to "die out" over time.

by Anonymousreply 411/17/2012

[quote]Just like with "The Iron Lady," now people have a great view of the Republican party, and how the Democratic party was always racist.

This might just fuck with their current understanding of reality.

by Anonymousreply 511/17/2012

You can't blame Meryl for anything.

Her only interest was in portraying a complex character on the screen. The film never deifies Thatcher, anyway.

No, it's not critical of her either. But it was never intended as a political film, and must be viewed on its own terms.

by Anonymousreply 611/17/2012

I didn't know British coal miners had it so bad! There's blood on your hands, Mrs. Thatcher!

by Anonymousreply 811/17/2012

I'm not too worried. For a minute, I was wary of the enormous success of "The Book of Mormon" and the "Twilight" movies because I thought it would make Mormonism palatable to Americans and thus make Romney electable, but that didn't happen. And I don't see this happening with "Lincoln," either.

by Anonymousreply 911/17/2012

OP, they portrayed Lincoln more as Buffy with a wang and a shotgun axe.

The scene where he conscripts all the available silver would put most Republicans off their feed.

Plus, his black friend was smoking hot.

by Anonymousreply 1011/17/2012

Well, R10 has managed to out-stupid OP.

by Anonymousreply 1111/17/2012

I did not change my viewpoint of Margaret Thatcher after seeing Iron Lady. It pretty much reinforced how she shit all over the working class in England. Most people nowadays know the shift in both parties from the time of the Civil War. They ones that don't, don't even know who the Vice President is, so it doesn't make a difference anyway.

by Anonymousreply 1211/17/2012

R11, which 2012 Lincoln movie do you think the majority of Republicans would watch?

by Anonymousreply 1311/17/2012

Screenplay by an award-winning New York gay Jew, whose last play title included the words "socialist, "homosexual," and "intelligent." A real rallying call for the Tea Party.

by Anonymousreply 1411/17/2012

Those with an agenda will spin a movie any way they want to promote their cause. Fundies advocate avoiding Twilight and Harry Potter movies, as they claim it legitimizes "the dark side." At least the LDS PR gave a diplomatic response to "The Book of Mormon," agreeing that it is designed as entertainment.

by Anonymousreply 1511/17/2012

I wish they showed Abe sharing that bed!

by Anonymousreply 1611/17/2012

[quote]Just like with "The Iron Lady," now people have a great view of the Republican party, and how the Democratic party was always racist.

I would like to nominate this as the stupidest sentence ever written on Datalounge.

by Anonymousreply 1711/17/2012

You're right. I see that The Republican Party will take the slogan into 2014. Vote for us. We ended slavery - 150 years ago.

by Anonymousreply 1811/17/2012

Do some reading, dears. The North was far from enthusiastic about abolishing slavery leading up to Civil War. Many Northerners, including Dems, were the merchant class and knew they needed the cotton from the South for their factories to make clothes. There were other goods in the agricultural South needed for products in the North as well. They paid lip service to freeing the slaves but feared the consequences for industry in the North. You will also learn that black 'oral histories' revealed they were shocked at how much prejudice slaves that escaped to the North experienced once they reached northern cities.

Lincoln -- though he once actually supported the movement that believed the solution to slavery was to ship blacks back to Africa rather than let them become free citizens and remain a part of US society --changed and he and his Republican party were the leaders in saving the Union and ending slavery.

by Anonymousreply 1911/17/2012

"he and his Republican party were the leaders in saving the Union and ending slavery."

True enough--the critical point being that "his" Republican party has nothing to do with the ignorant buffoon referring to themselves as Republicans today.

by Anonymousreply 2011/17/2012

Bullshit.

There, I'm calling it.

At a time when some of the country's biggest Republicans are demanding that their party change from the party of stupid, no one is going to look at Lincoln for anything other than the fact that Republicans were not always stupid, but later became idiots, and now have to switch.

What are you suggesting, OP? That it doesn't help for people to be aware that the GOP was the party of Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt and not always the party of Eric Cantor and Rick Santorum? No, it helps. It helps the GOP and it also helps the country.

by Anonymousreply 2111/17/2012

I did read an article about a month ago about a Republican who used - we are the party that ended slavery - as a campaign point. I think it was in Ohio, and it might have been at the state or local level.

So many things from this election would have been Onion articles even four years ago.

by Anonymousreply 2211/17/2012

[quote]Just like with "The Iron Lady," now people have a great view of the Republican party, and how the Democratic party was always racist.

What an idiotic statement. OP's sweeping generalization gives the voting public no credit at all for discerning the differences between the Republican party at its inception and its present-day incarnation filled with fools and bigots. Yet, he somehow thinks that people who apparently are this stupid will allow this information to influence their voting choices.

(1) The "people" collectively have the attention span of a flea. It is unlikely that this movie would influence voters in a week or month, let alone in two or four years.

(2) Without being told, most Americans would be hard pressed to identify with any precision when the Civil War actually occurred (April 1861 - April 1865) or when Lincoln was President (March 1861 - April 1865). It is highly unlikely that they are going to make the leap that events that occurred in the middle of the 19th century are somehow relevant to the modern Republican party.

(3) How is it possible that the purportedly "always racist" Democratic party is somehow now being led by the first black President?

There are many things for the OP to worry about. This should not be one of them.

by Anonymousreply 2311/17/2012

Yes, because no one will notice how the party of Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and Eisenhower has become the party of Allen West, Todd Akin, and Sarah Palin.

by Anonymousreply 2411/17/2012

The average Republican voter, your straight, white NASCAR dad, can't even remember his kids names, their birth dates or his wedding anniversary.

What the hell makes anyone think they'd remember that the man responsible for eliminating slavery was a Republican. Hell, most of them don't even know who Lincoln is.

by Anonymousreply 2511/17/2012

The 'Southern Strategy' changed all that, OP. The Republicans may have been the party that freed the slaves, but a hundred years later, they became the party that disenfranchised them. Something they STILL try to do today.

by Anonymousreply 2611/17/2012

OP, is this based on anything besides the fevered delusions in your head? STFU.

by Anonymousreply 2711/17/2012

Well I'd wish they'd go back to being THAT Republican Party.

by Anonymousreply 2811/17/2012

Today's Republicans are to Lincoln what Godfather 3 is to the first two.

by Anonymousreply 2911/17/2012

And BTW Teddy Roosevelt was no one to look up to in my opinion. He was for imperialism and a huge racist. His ideas of Asia were disgusting. He was disgusting.

by Anonymousreply 3011/17/2012

It is not as if the Republicans want to be like they use to be.

NC has a Republican Governor and Legislature for the first time in over a hundred years.

The last time they had this much power:

"They raised corporate taxes, increased appropriations for state teachers colleges and charitable institutions, encouraged town and county leaders to create special tax districts in support of public schools, and capped interest rates at 6 percent in order to give relief to hard-working debtors pinched by the Depression of 1893.

by Anonymousreply 3211/17/2012

R29 wins the Datalounge.

by Anonymousreply 3311/17/2012

I can't believe some of you are actually reducing yourself to arguing about this is terms like the idiot at r34 is.

In the 1860s, the Republican Party was dominated by a socially progressive wing and supported a strong federal government over state sovereignty. The Democratic Party supported state sovereignty and was dominated by social and political reactionaries. Gradually, America changed enough so that 150 years later the two parties pretty much believe in exactly the opposite of what they used to believe in. That's all that needs to be said about this. Anything else like "Today's GOP wouldn't free the slaves" is ad hominem reasoning.

by Anonymousreply 3511/17/2012

R35, what do you think voter suppression is about? What do you think an asshole in Maine claiming "dozens of black people voted, so there's fraud" is about? What do you think the rightwing whining about "traditional America" being gone is about?

It's about domination. It's about entitlement. We're not merely talking about states' rights here. We're talking about a party that has tried to take away the right to vote from certain people... to the point of lying about the extent of voter fraud.

by Anonymousreply 3611/17/2012

EVERYONE knows the Republican party USED to be the liberal party. NICE TRY!!!

by Anonymousreply 3711/17/2012

Someone want to explain R37's point?

Sweetheart, we all know what the GOP once was, and we know who they are now. The contrast is too stark to not know they're not who they once were.

by Anonymousreply 3811/17/2012

OP is probably the same person who swore that the Ayn Rand movie they came out with a few months ago would destroy Obama's chances in November.

by Anonymousreply 3911/17/2012

Amy Sedaris would be perfect for an Ayn Rand biopic.

by Anonymousreply 4011/17/2012

Lincoln was a RHINO!

by Anonymousreply 4111/17/2012

[quote]It's about domination. It's about entitlement.

DEMOCRACY IS ABOUT DOMINATION AND ENTITLEMENT. Did you not watch the fucking movie or were you too busy refreshing Daily Kos every three minutes?

by Anonymousreply 4211/17/2012

A few things, I love how stupid people are in this thread. Of course Lincoln is not a modern day Republican. No shit, Sherlock. That's not the point. The American electorate doesn't understand this. They know nothing of history. To the person who said that the American voter is smarter than to fall for this crap, are you new to America? They buy the Reagan revisionist history.

"Lincoln" will help the Republican party. It's already started, and people have changed their views on Thatcher, especially the younger generation in the UK who were children when she was in power. They see her as a stoic woman who wouldn't back down.

Americans are now seeing the Democratic Party as racist, completely misunderstanding how the two parties switched sides. Republicans have been trying to push this crap for decades, and now thanks to Spielberg, they have a film "proving it" and propagandizing the masses.

The Oscar win will be a win for the Republican Party - the ones who freed the slaves.

Honestly, many of you are too damn dumb to understand how this shit works, or don't want to believe it will work. Why do you think Fox Noise is the #1 cable news channel in the country? Media propaganda works wonders, and the American public eats it up, even though reality around them tells a different story.

Republicans still pull the Grand Dragon card, Senator Robert Byrd, as proof that the Democratic Party was still filled with racists even up to a few years ago.

Oh, and btw, no one on here said that the Ayn Rand movies will change the public's perception of her. Everyone said that the films would bomb. This is Spielberg we're talking about.

by Anonymousreply 4311/17/2012

Regardless of whether or not young people in the UK have changed their views on Thatcher, it had nothing to do with The Iron Lady or Streep's performance.

If anything, it might have something to do with the overemotional vitriol some of the press still show for an old woman. As much as she fucked up many people's lives, the media just stops short of asking for her to be hanged, and do it with a disgusting amount of glee that any young person who wasn't around at the time can't empathize with.

by Anonymousreply 4411/17/2012

[quote]Helping The Republican Party

Helping them do what? Feel better about themselves? Fox News may be #1, but this country still elected Barack Obama to a second term.

by Anonymousreply 4511/17/2012

Yes, people are TOO stupid to understand history so let's not make any art of any kind that might confuse them.

I assume that's the OP's point. How fascist of you!

by Anonymousreply 4611/17/2012

If it helps the Republican party to regain their soul, then what the hell is wrong with that?

Not that I'm optimistic it will have that effect, OP.... much less that it will have a negative impact on progress because the Republicans will be "helped."

by Anonymousreply 4711/17/2012

White Southerners enslaved people. They instinctively aligned with whatever party was supporting oppression. When Democrats championed equality, Southerners became Republican.

by Anonymousreply 4811/17/2012

[quote]Republicans still pull the Grand Dragon card, Senator Robert Byrd, as proof that the Democratic Party was still filled with racists even up to a few years ago.

Moron, he wasn't a *practicing* member of the Klan "a few years ago."

by Anonymousreply 4911/17/2012

Read your history. The democrats blocked every bill involving civil rights and anti lynching up until the 1960's. LBJs civil rights bill would have been defeated without Everett Dirkson and Illinois Republican. Hard to believe we lived in a country where blacks were treated so badly.

by Anonymousreply 5011/17/2012

OP, a lot has happened in the last 150 years. . .

by Anonymousreply 5111/17/2012

I honestly believe r43 is the world's stupidest person.

by Anonymousreply 5211/17/2012

That's the point, R50: Things have changed... since 1960 - 52 years ago.

Why on earth would black people support the present day GOP? Why would anyone who isn't Mitt Romney or Dick Cheney or a Koch or Trump or a Limbaugh?

by Anonymousreply 5311/17/2012

Remember that history (along with everything else except obedience and having a "good attitude") is badly taught in the US, so many people are going to get their knowledge about Lincoln from this film. Remember when that happened with Stone's "JFK"?

So we'll see what happens.

by Anonymousreply 5411/17/2012

My pussy stinks!

by Anonymousreply 5611/17/2012

Yes history is badly taught so let's not make accurate historical films. Too confusing.

Why not make a version of Lincoln where he's a Democratic? Problem solved.

by Anonymousreply 5711/17/2012

LOL R57 some of the people here would rather have no history taught at all if it doesn't neatly adhere to a contemporary partisan agenda.

These people are just as bad as the Republicans.

by Anonymousreply 5811/17/2012

That was the Republican party of 150 years ago. Every racist knows the film does NOT represent them.

by Anonymousreply 5911/17/2012

[quote]Lincoln was a RHINO!

That was more me. And I prefer Ruebenesque.

by Anonymousreply 6011/17/2012

Most dixie flag displaying southerners still consider the south the good guys of the Civil War. State rights and all. It's true the democratic party has ugly origins, but it came into its own in the 20th century with the new deal and the great society and the civil rights act of 64 and the voting rights act. When Johnson signed the civil rights voting act he said, "We've lost the south for a generation." It turned out to be longer. Post 64, if you were a racist you were a Republican.

by Anonymousreply 6111/17/2012

The party of Lincoln is no more. It hasn't been so for several decades. It's now the party that opposed the Martin Luther King holiday, the party that keeps trying to get the Voting Rights Act ended, and the party of Strom Thurmond, Trent Lott, and other segregationists.

by Anonymousreply 6211/17/2012

[quote]Americans are uneducated.

And you're living proof, OP.

Lincoln WAS a Republican. But 99.999999% of us know the Republican party was extremely different in 1864 from what it is today.

by Anonymousreply 6311/17/2012

AS IF Romney voters are going to see a Daniel Day-Lewis movie!

by Anonymousreply 6511/17/2012

Or recall it in a week.

by Anonymousreply 6611/17/2012

Democrats started the KKK

by Anonymousreply 6811/17/2012

OP needs to STEP AWAY FROM The COMPUTER!

REALLY, for at least one, or two, days.

by Anonymousreply 6911/17/2012

Only an idiot would view the parties of today as the same parties during the time of Lincoln lol. I mean you can't praise or blame the current ones for something done in the past.

by Anonymousreply 7011/18/2012

r44 - wrong in almost every way.

by Anonymousreply 7211/18/2012

Jeez, R67, I'm sure if you sent Romney an email, he'd invite you for Thanksgiving. You and he could sit in the family room and discuss your version of reality.

by Anonymousreply 7411/18/2012

I love the smell of Freeper trolls in the morning.

Smells like... sad.

by Anonymousreply 7511/18/2012

See the film

by Anonymousreply 7611/18/2012
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.