I found it hard to watch, but very interesting- and enlightening. Andrew Johnson was an asshole of epic proportions.
It wasn't- not at all. The history is what it is, and it isn't pretty, which will always be unpleasant.From watching the trailer, it looks more like modern social commentary than a documentary on Reconstruction
The trailer talks about Obama and modern times more than the Reconstruction era itself
I found it hard to watch, but very interesting- and enlightening. Andrew Johnson was an asshole of epic proportions.
Probably best to watch the full program than just commenting on the trailer.
Isn't the trailer supposed to give me a preview of the actual show?
well, like I said- it wasn'tThe trailer talks about Obama and modern times more than the Reconstruction era itself
That was my take. I watched 1st episode and said "forget about it".From watching the trailer, it looks more like modern social commentary than a documentary on Reconstruction
nitneliun says its all lies, Lincoln was a war criminal, Lee never owned slaves and anyone who says different is a brainwashed Yankee.I found it hard to watch, but very interesting- and enlightening. Andrew Johnson was an asshole of epic proportions.
NO. The trailer is designed to get you to watch the show or movie. Sometimes a trailer will contain material that isn't even in the movie or show. It reflects how the client wants to sell the movie/show.Isn't the trailer supposed to give me a preview of the actual show?
From watching the trailer, it looks more like modern social commentary than a documentary on Reconstruction
I think you meant ‘segue’. The other is the contraption you ride around on. Or just spellcheck.I have it DVR'd. I thought it looked pretty good.
Somewhat of a segway anyone watching Les Mis. on PBS?
Dominic West (TV's Wire fame) is playing Jean Valjean.
So far I like it. I've never seen any other version since I hate most musicals.
you do?Wonder why you’d say something like that*
His own papers show Lee owned slaves of his own before the Civil War, as late as the 1850s, and he considered buying more even after that. He used his wife's slaves as personal servants during the Civil War. His attitude toward slaves is not much different from that typical of the southerner in his day.His wife did but he controlled the estate’s operations and he was terrible at it like his old man. His late father in-law specifically granted freedom to the estates slaves but because Bobby was such a horrible business man he had that portion of the Will nullified or delayed until the estate became solvent and of course it never did.
Could you please elaborate on the second paragraph? I am interested in the basis for that opinion. Thanks.Ok, he owned slaves (primarily body servants) but the bulk of his wealth was his wife’s...and I agree with ur assertions of his racial attitudes.
Grant/Lincoln should have arrested the entire command structure. Allowing them to walk Scott free was a mistake we are paying for many times over.
Maybe it is just me, but I always felt that Sherman took it easy on the south.
The destruction should have been more complete.
It was great for the Americans to rebuild for them.
It is unfortunate that they still don't realize the forgiveness they received.
Yes, it's just you.
Who is "they" in your reality? Do you think 100% of the south was for the war and wanted their homes destroyed?
Are you pro carpet bombing Iran and murdering everyone?
LdN
They, were traitors. They invaded our country. They killed hundreds of thousands of americans.
When Iran invades our country and kills hundreds of thousands of us, then sure, lets carpet bomb them.
You probably forgot about this little war we call the Revolutionary War. We are traitors GreggK. We killed thousands of our fellow British citizens.
Are you OK carpet bombing yourself? Perhaps you can get on the horn and call Mother England to ask that be done.
I feel bad for your neighbors... many were probably anti Revolution.
LdN
You obviously haven’t studied much history. Our recounting of history is riddled with politics and bias. Not saying it was or wasn’t in this case, but anyone who simply accepts “history” at face value is a fool.It wasn't- not at all. The history is what it is, and it isn't pretty, which will always be unpleasant.
Oh brother.They, were traitors. They invaded our country. They killed hundreds of thousands of americans. They, tried to destroy our union. Sherman took it easy on them. It is unforunate they still don't realize the mercy shown.
When Iran invades our country and kills hundreds of thousands of us, then sure, lets carpet bomb them.
Yes, it's just you.
Who is "they" in your reality? Do you think 100% of the south was for the war and wanted their homes destroyed?
Are you pro carpet bombing Iran and murdering everyone?
LdN
You probably forgot about this little war we call the Revolutionary War. We are traitors GreggK. We killed thousands of our fellow British citizens.
Are you OK carpet bombing yourself? Perhaps you can get on the horn and call Mother England to ask that be done.
I feel bad for your neighbors... many were probably anti Revolution.
LdN
Let me guess based on his previous posts:Interesting, so what is the real unpoliticized history of the Civil War/Reconstruction era?