Death of a Nation review

gooddad409 · 2018-08-08T20:29:08.194Z

No offence but opinions from the left don’t mean spit to me.

theduke · 2018-08-08T20:53:34.532Z

If it’s political validation you’re seeking, I’d suggest:

IMDb

The Birth of a Nation (1915) - IMDb

The Birth of a Nation: Directed by D.W. Griffith. With Lillian Gish, Mae Marsh, Henry B. Walthall, Miriam Cooper. The Stoneman family finds its friendship with the Camerons affected by the Civil War, both fighting in opposite armies. The development...

gooddad409 · 2018-08-08T20:58:56.649Z

You can suggest any number of foolish things and still be wrong.

gooddad409 · 2018-08-08T21:01:52.421Z

Is that the movie Democrat Wilson showed in the WH?

theduke · 2018-08-08T21:09:06.273Z

gooddad409:

Is that the movie Democrat Wilson showed in the WH?

Yes, Wilson was a raging racist, He was a pres. of high ideals but low principals.

This was also the time when the Repubs had a very LARGE liberal wing.

TheDoctorIsIn · 2018-08-08T21:12:35.018Z

margaretms2:

Well, yes and no.

But you appear to be assuming that his target audience would be liberals, who would be inflamed or angry. Yeah, we get to snark. But that’s not who’s going to see his films, anymore than they were the audience for the recent Atlas Shrugged movies. This is about preaching to the choir, no?

It is preaching to the choir, of course- it’s meant to inflame and enrage the choir against all the conspiracies and boogeyman they already believe in to an extent.

It’s the same way attack ads during political campaigns work - they’re not targeting undecideds, negative ads turn off undecideds. The target audience are the people who would already be voting for you - it’s a way to inflame their passions so they’ll actually go out and vote on E-day.

I agree with the rest of your post.

gooddad409 · 2018-08-08T21:13:02.891Z

theduke:

gooddad409:

Is that the movie Democrat Wilson showed in the WH?

Yes, Wilson was a raging racist, He was a pres. of high ideals but low principals.

This was also the time when the Repubs had a very LARGE liberal wing.

Ah the rewriting of history. So predictable.

theduke · 2018-08-08T21:17:05.823Z

gooddad409:

theduke:

gooddad409:

Is that the movie Democrat Wilson showed in the WH?

Yes, Wilson was a raging racist, He was a pres. of high ideals but low principals.

This was also the time when the Repubs had a very LARGE liberal wing.

Ah the rewriting of history. So predictable.

There’s no rewriting history, that’s fact, something you appear to have a big problem with. I guess you’re like a 20 something with little historical background of that era.

gooddad409 · 2018-08-08T21:22:50.766Z

No matter how many times a false narrative of history is presented it is still false.

theduke · 2018-08-08T21:25:19.032Z

gooddad409:

No matter how many times a false narrative of history is presented it is still false.

Do you have ANYTHING to back-up that it’s a false narrative.

gooddad409 · 2018-08-08T21:33:38.170Z

There is plenty but to what end? Any number of times the truth has been presented and those who advance the rewriting of history just dismiss it out of hand with zero consideration.

theduke · 2018-08-08T21:38:48.178Z

Now you’re just deflecting.

Do you have ANYTHING to back-up your clam that what I said is a false narrative. You have yet to produce ANY facts.

gooddad409 · 2018-08-08T21:41:26.931Z

You have yet to produce anything other than a false narrative. If you really want to educate yourself you can begin with some of the writings of Professor Carol Swain on the subject.

theduke · 2018-08-08T21:47:21.293Z

gooddad409:

You have yet to produce anything other than a false narrative. If you really want to educate yourself you can begin with some of the writings of Professor Carol Swain on the subject.

What EXACTLY has been my false narrative?

Sorry, I don’t do your research.

bootz · 2018-08-08T22:45:14.756Z

D’Souza mentions the film in his movie. In reference to Wilson and the KKK

bootz · 2018-08-08T22:50:17.140Z

progressives have been rewriting history since 1887. it is a better description to say presenting different interpretations of events.

just imagine in the supreme court there are many split decisions on the same body of evidence. You would think most cases would be 9 to 0 but they are not.

does being in the minority make one wrong and being in the majority make one right. or does it have nothing to do with anything but being in the minority or majority.

bootz · 2018-08-08T22:51:53.061Z

it is actually just an alternative point of view to stimulate non talking point discussion. To some Lincoln is a hero, to others he is a villain. there is no definitive answer.

TommyLucchese · 2018-08-09T01:39:00.093Z

Call_me_Ishmael:

But Goebbels heard it from an old hooker

Thanks for stopping by to deliver a bunch of total gibberish I guess.

TheDoctorIsIn · 2018-08-10T00:11:23.995Z

No, it’s not. It’s not “just” an alternative point of view - it’s an overtly hostile “alternative” (read: false) point of view, designed to further degrade the entire concept of “discussion”.

bootz · 2018-08-10T19:28:16.382Z

we are talking, black shirts, brown shirts, and ANTIFA and you call posting on a forum hostile. Some have argued what is left and what is right. The world has know dictators throughout history. The notion of liberty is less well represented.

Freedom of the press is not found in states run by tyrants. in most cases the right to vote is not found. or rather it is taken away.

so in all cases of tyrants the government is powerful, whether they be fascists or communists. In free states the government is less powerful.