<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[The Dish]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[http://dish.andrewsullivan.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[Andrew Sullivan]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://dish.andrewsullivan.com/author/sullydish/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[An Uncompromising President,&nbsp;Ctd]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[<p><iframe frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Y08Bmsxuvk8" width="515"></iframe></p> <p>Aaron Bady&#0160;<a href="http://jacobinmag.com/2012/11/lincoln-against-the-radicals-2/">argues</a>&#0160;that, by focusing on the negotiation for the Thirteenth Amendment, the film creates an &quot;artificial sense that more is at stake in a single congressional bill than there actually was&quot;:&#0160;</p> <blockquote> <p>As Eric Foner&#0160;<a href="http://wtvr.com/2012/11/17/historian-lincoln-is-pretty-accurate/">pointed out</a>&#0160;when he was asked about the movie, if it hadn’t passed when it did, Lincoln had pledged to call Congress into special session in March; “[a]nd there, the Republicans had a two-thirds majority and would ratify in a minute…It’s not this giant crisis in the way that the film’s portraying it.”</p> </blockquote> <p>Bady goes on to complain that the film makes it seem &quot;that black people had no effect on the politics of slavery and emancipation (except insofar as they inspired the people who mattered)&quot;&#0160;&#0160;- an important nuance given that slavery was in its death throes not primarily because Lincoln ratified its end but because slaves themselves were seizing freedom.&#0160;Along those lines, historian Kate Masur <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/13/opinion/in-spielbergs-lincoln-passive-black-characters.html?_r=0">wishes</a>&#0160;the film included the throngs of fugitive slaves who fled to Washington, DC:</p>]]></html></oembed>