As I have noted before, these people are trapped in a Gommorah Syndrome where they argue as if with God that the [whatever] be spared [our criticism] if even one little child is eventually led to a future enjoyment of [what they imagine to be] history.
Now, Allen Guelzo has written a movie review that is a study in equivocation that allows him to conclude his review with a reaction of [qualified] "joy."
Perhaps Lincoln scholars are so used to patting each other on the back that they lack the chops to lower the boom on bad product.
Take a look at this, by Guelzo, and again, compare it to Foner's succinct criticism of the project.
And while you're at it, amuse yourselves with this.
In publishing Guelzo's review, the Daily Beast only had to get two facts right: his name and his occupation. But somehow, they made him out to be a "Civil War historian."
Please don't compare Lincoln scholars to Civil War historians. They don't rate nearly that high. As blighted as our little corner of the nonfiction world may be...
p.s. After you tire of Guelzo's studied ambiguity, may I recommend a Nation of Islam review of the movie?
Spielberg is the master of American propaganda, and there is no one since the notorious director D.W. Griffith who has more successfully exported to the world a utopian vision of America as a Caucasian paradise.The baristas call that "robusto."