Since you admit that you never watched the series, your revue lacks context. The movie mirrors the series and it does it very well indeed. You much have watched a different movie than I did because I thought its pacing was very true to the series and the story.
I really object to your using a movie revue to hawk your political opinions. If I wanted them, I'd read the opinion page. The entire second paragraph has no relevance to the actual movie but is you tooting your own horn. Do you ever ask "what would Roger Ebert do"? If you did, you would edit your opinions out of the revue. I did appreciate the movie part of the revue and will wait for it to show up on TV. Thanks for saving me some $$
Jim Sanchez
Cogent argument but it neglects to mention a couple of things. First, the great emancipation proclamation ONLY freed slaves in the confederate states. Second, the issue of the rights of states to secceed from the union was a hugh issue at the constitutional convention and several states only agreed to sign if the succession right was implicitly recognized.
Just because the "states rights" issue has been used to justify a number of evil things - I grew up in the south during the great civil rights battles of the 60s - does not mean that states have NO rights.
I guess the senators actually read the recent study that indicated that banning texting did NOTHING to reduce automobile deaths. The bill was indeed another "feel good" measure that would give cops another "chore" at the expense of our liberties. There are already laws against distracted driving so what is the real problem - there isn't one.
Recent Comments
Jim Sanchez
Just because the "states rights" issue has been used to justify a number of evil things - I grew up in the south during the great civil rights battles of the 60s - does not mean that states have NO rights.