Suppose, hypothetically, that some American group wanted to put an American cultural center in downtown Hiroshima. What do you think would be the likely media reaction?

I keep waiting for somebody to bring up the new AMC Series "Rubicon." If you haven't seen it, it's the Truther Universe version of 24, but it does give a fascinating peek into its writers' world views.

Given that left-wing anti-Iraq movies have pretty uniformly bombed at the box office, I wonder how far this show will continue...

I don't agree that the Republican bashing is entirely gratuitous, within the movie's own terms. In one of the early scenes, the Julie character states that Julia Child was the catalyst for significant changes in American culture. The Republican bashing is partly to draw a contrast between American culture in the early 50s and American culture now.

Of course, I agree that this is a dumb premise if you're trying to write a film that makes money.

By all means let us clear things up.

You quote from Lincoln's reply to Stephen Douglas in the first Lincoln Douglas debate at Ottowa, Illinois. Two sentences later, Lincoln goes on to say,

"... I hold that notwithstanding all this, there is no reason in the world why the negro is not entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I hold that he is as much entitled to these as the white man. I agree with Judge Douglas that he is not my equal in many respects -- certainly not in color, perhaps not in moral or intellectual endowment. But in the right to eat the bread, without leave of anybody else, which his own hand earns, he is my equal and the equal of Judge Douglas, and the equal of every living man."

I believe the last sentence is the important piece, not the excerpt you have quoted.

I take Lincoln's position on the slave power conspiracy to be tolerably well elaborated in the "house divided" address. (http://showcase.netins.net/web/creative/lincoln/speeches/house.htm).

You do not specify the senate resolution which you cite, but this has no bearing on the slave power conspiracy. Lincoln's stated position on slavery during the secession crisis was that he would not interfere with slavery in those states where it was established but he would oppose extension of slavery into any of the U.S. territories (not organized as states). The seceding states took this as casus belli. The primary stated war aim of the Union was not to end slavery but to suppress the armed rebellion started by the army of the Confederate states at Fort Sumter.

Regarding the percentage of slaveholders, I do not accept in principle that a group must necessarily be large to be powerful. However, working from raw figures, the Census of 1860 gives 393,975 (an over-count to an uncertain extent) to 8,039,000 white inhabitants of the slave states, which is 4.9% of the population. If we reduce the denominator by taking it as male inhabitants, that should double the percentage to 9.8%. If we assume the fraction of white male inhabitants over the age of 18 equals 75% (a guess; however, the Census of 1860 estimates that 20% of the population consist of white men between 18 and 45), then the percentage rises to 13.4%.

All of these numbers are somewhat arbitrary, but so is your 3.5%. I have heard in the past that 25% of Southern farms had at least one slave, but I can't source the figure.

Regarding your comments on President Roosevelt I generally agree, but I think that Roosevelt's malevolently inept domestic policy is a more important charge against him than his foreign policy.

I agree with your sentiments about President Coolidge, but I don't see how you can construe them as an instance of principles over party.

While I agree with you that eliminating the Electoral College is a bad idea, I don't accept your conclusion that such a change would necessarily increase the power of the coastal states.

However, I do believe that the 17th Amendment should be repealed and elections to the U.S. Senate should be returned to state legislatures.

Honestly, it's always been hard for me to develop a rooting interest in this particular case. See this clip at 5:35.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xjRJ4noK6I&NR...

One more point I would add: at some point voters have an obligation to punish misbehavior at the polls. I wonder how many people appearing in this clip voted against President Obama on account of misconduct by the Obama campaign. If you're not willing to do this, then complaints are largely useless hand wringing.

General?? I thought that was a doorman's uniform.

You left out "..., and gave away free beer." from your first sentence.

What, in your opinion, is the most important point that Continetti has omitted?

What, in your opinion, is the most important point that Continetti takes out of context?