Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Film is likely to fuel a battle of the Alamo
San Antonio Express-News ^ | 03/21/2004 | Amy Dorsett

Posted on 03/21/2004 8:17:06 PM PST by SwinneySwitch

Davy Crockett: U.S. congressman, legend in his own time, venerated hero of the Alamo who lost his life after Mexican troops overran the now fabled fort.

His final words?

"I'm a screamer."

That's according to Walt Disney Studios, whose new film, "The Alamo," premieres in San Antonio next Saturday.

The real shocker might be what comes next: the execution of Crockett by Mexican soldiers, a movie scene that's sure to be seen as sacrilege by rabid Alamophiles who like to imagine the myth-shrouded "Lion of the West" going down fighting.

Noted Alamo author Frank Thompson has seen people come to blows over how Crockett died, so dearly do they hold his memory.

With the film's release and the publication of its companion book—complete with glossy photos from the movie and dialogue from the screenplay — the controversy is almost certain to flare anew.

According to "The Alamo: The Illustrated Story of the Epic Film"—written by Thompson, with a foreword by film director John Lee Hancock — Crockett surveys the Alamo grounds after the battle and sees a Mexican soldier wearing his vest, another holding his fiddle.

Crockett chuckles wryly. Then, despite looking down the gun barrels of men ready to execute him, he proceeds to sass his captors.

"If the general here will have his men put down their weapons and peacefully assemble, I will take you to Gen. (Sam) Houston and try my best to get him to spare most of your lives," Crockett quips.

Then he adds:

"That said, Sam's a might prickly, so no promises."

Infuriated, Gen. Antonio López de Santa Anna orders his men to kill Crockett by hacking him with swords.

That's when Crockett, played by Billy Bob Thornton, utters the screamer line.

'Absolute watershed'

"This is an absolute watershed in Alamo film history," said Linda Salvucci, an associate history professor at Trinity University who teaches a class called "Remember the Alamo: Myth, Mystery and History." Of the final line, however, she said: "It just seems like such an anachronism — that choice of words — I can't imagine him saying he's a screamer."

Stephen Hardin, a professor of Texas and American history at Victoria College and a consultant for the film, explained the context of being a "screamer" in the 19th century.

"I don't think people are necessarily going to get this, but in the 19th century, being a screamer meant, 'I'm an important person, I'm a stud, I'm a person to be reckoned with,'" he explained. "It doesn't mean he's screaming like a girl."

No other major Hollywood production has portrayed Crockett's end as an execution.

Some historians have, however.

The manner in which Crockett died has been debated since the diary of José Enrique de la Peña, a lieutenant in the Mexican Army at the battle, was translated into English in the 1970s.

The execution episode in de la Peña's memoirs caused a controversy that has roiled for 30 years. Historians dispute whether the diary is authentic and reliable.

The English translation was completed by Carmen Perry, director of the Daughters of the Republic of Texas Library at the Alamo. When the translation was published in 1975, Perry received threats from people who thought she was dishonoring Crockett.

Three years later, Dan Kilgore wrote a book examining the execution theory called "How did Davy Die?" Kilgore received death threats.

Trinity University can't keep Kilgore's book in its regular stacks, because it gets defaced. It's kept under lock and key with rare books.

Some think that if Crockett was captured and executed his heroic status would be degraded.

"You're dealing with a very touchy topic. You're messing with people's fantasies," said noted Alamo author Stephen Harrigan, who did minor consulting work and script revision for the film. "Somehow people twist the idea of execution to surrender and from there it's a short step to 'he lost his nerve' or gave up.

"There's no question that he's no less dead for having been executed as having gone down fighting — there's no reason to think any less of Crockett. But people are so deeply invested in this cherished notion of Crockett going down fighting that it's hard to shake it out of people's heads. And I don't know that it should be shaken out."

Legendary figure

A larger-than-life figure even in his time, Crockett's legend was stoked for generations by images of him swinging his musket against insurmountable odds. The former Tennessee congressman in the coonskin cap arrived at the Alamo with volunteers in February 1836 to help defend the fortress against the advancing Mexican army.

Along with William Travis and James Bowie, Crockett was among the most famous of the "Texian" defenders who held the Alamo for 13 days until it fell to about 4,000 Mexican troops the morning of March 6.

Harrigan, who wrote "The Gates of the Alamo," doesn't buy into the execution theory — and he's not the only respected Alamo historian in that camp.

"The evidence that he was executed was too slight," Harrigan said. "There are several documents that seem to support Crockett was executed, but there's plenty of room for scholarly dispute."

Bruce Winders, curator for the Alamo, said there's no doubt that Texian fighters were executed after the battle, but he doesn't believe that Crockett was among them.

"I am unconvinced he was executed, but I don't rule out the possibility," Winders said, adding he's not surprised the film used the execution theory. "In the evolution of the modern Alamo story, I don't see how they could have done it any other way."

Heroic either way

Thompson said he doesn't understand the hoopla over how Crockett died.

"Even if you believe de la Peña, he clearly says he died without humbling himself," said Thompson. "It's so weird to me that people get so incensed about something we don't know or will never know. It strikes me as being silly at best and deranged at worst."

Native Texan and Dallas resident Jerry Phillips, who spent a recent rainy afternoon touring the Alamo, agrees.

"The fact they were here is what's important," said Phillips, 61. "The people who died here contributed to our freedom."

Hardin clearly is frustrated by the debate over how Crockett met his end — he believes the question is more emotional than historical.

"The sacrifice is undiminished. He gave his life for a cause he believes in," Hardin said.

"For goodness sakes, isn't that enough?"

------------------------------------------------------------------------------- adorsett@express-news.net


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: alamo; crockett; davycrockett; disney; sanantonio; texas; thealamo
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061 next last
To: SwinneySwitch
This is just an attempt to piss on an AMERICAN hero.

Imagine if someone re-wrote history and made a movie about Martin Luther King Jr. in which his last words were "I'm just a stupid n-----"

Or if someone re-wrote the Bible so the last thing Jesus ever said was "hey, I can see my house from here"

It's stupid and it's vile.

21 posted on 03/21/2004 10:17:27 PM PST by xm177e2 (Stalinists, Maoists, Ba'athists, Pacifists: Why are they always on the same side?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dr_lew
Wayne and Crockett both have a "manly" chin and prominant nose. Thorton has a small chin and a weak nose.


22 posted on 03/21/2004 10:40:37 PM PST by Reagan Man (The choice is clear. Reelect BUSH-CHENEY !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
"Crockett, played by Billy Bob Thornton"

Casting Thornton as Crockett is clever, if your object is deconstruction.

It seems to me that I see that a lot. You can reduce a historical figure in stature just by casting a wuss or a scumbag or an idiot to play him.

For instance, Rick Moranis is so thoroughly typecast as a nerd that casting him to play *anyone* would be an insult.

In Pearl Harbor they picked Alec Baldwin to play Jimmy Doolittle. Thought I'd hurl. In Gettysburg, picking Martin Sheen to play R.E. Lee was a stroke of PC malice fer shure.

It seems clear to me that the choice of Thornton is a deliberate insult to Crockett and an attack on his stature.
23 posted on 03/21/2004 10:40:56 PM PST by dsc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
Conceded. Wayne's a pretty good match, actually.
24 posted on 03/21/2004 10:49:10 PM PST by dr_lew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: SwinneySwitch
I have not seen any post that considers the relationship of the Disney films of the late 1950's and Disney television of the 1960's and, their effect on the attitudes of the BOOMERS.

Please remember that Fess Parker (a very fine gentleman) played Davy Crockett in the film and then went on to portray Daniel Boone in the DISNEY television series.

SUBMITTED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION


I suggest that in the minds of the boomer generation who, were the first generation to grow up with "television" that we as a group have a "programmed" vision of reality.

What if we leave the final report in the hands of archaeologists and forensics scientists?

What if they determine that the end of his life was not as Walt Disney had depicted?

It does not matter! The Alamo is symbolic of the Texan's fight for Independance, the separate individuals; all legendary frontiersmen, obviously felt this cause was important otherwise, they would not have been at the Alamo!

I suspect Davy had no idea he would end up DEAD after this affair!
25 posted on 03/21/2004 10:59:28 PM PST by phxsparks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dsc
What would you expect from Hollywood, a "patriotic" movie?

I knew the minute I heard that Silly Slob Thorten was cast as Crockett that this movie was a wash...
26 posted on 03/21/2004 11:06:20 PM PST by Veracious Poet (Cash cows are sacred in America...GOT MILKED???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: phxsparks
I suspect Davy had no idea he would end up DEAD after this affair!

Well, going into it, I think that's clear. Yet, he was a man who had faced death many times, and seen many close to him fall. I am confident he did not quail.

I read for the first time, within the last year, _A Narrative of the Life of David Crockett, written by Himself_, and I was quite taken by it. It was written just before his fateful departure for Texas, and even through the filter of an editor it is a striking mixture of naivte, savvy, honesty, concealment, braggadocio, and forthrightness, but above all, greatness of character shines through. I was a convert.

He was elected judge of a county or counties in western Tennesee early in his political career, and bragged that he passed judgement solely on his own perception, being entirely innocent of any legal training whatsoever. This made me yearn for the days of Solomon ... and Davey Crockett!

27 posted on 03/21/2004 11:34:17 PM PST by dr_lew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
I'm with you Ben. Davy kilt a bar when he was three.

Plus, he was King Of The Wild Frontier.

28 posted on 03/22/2004 4:34:19 AM PST by battlegearboat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: dr_lew; Reagan Man
Not Yours To Give
by Col. David Crockett
US Representative from Tennesee

Originally published in "The Life of Colonel David Crockett," by Edward Sylvester Ellis (1840 - 1916)



One day in the House of Representatives a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support. The speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose:

"Mr. Speaker -- I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the suffering of the living, if there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has not the power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member on this floor knows it."

"We have the right as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I never heard that the government was in arrears to him."

"Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much money of our own as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week's pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks."

He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously as was generally supposed, and as no doubt it would but for that speech, it received but few votes, and of course was lost.

Later, when asked by a friend why he had opposed the appropriation, Crockett gave this explanation:

Several years ago I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some members of Congress, when our attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown. It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into a hack and drove over as fast as we could. In spite of all that could be done, many houses were burned and many families made houseless, and besides, some of them had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I saw so many children suffering, I felt that something ought to be done for them. The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their relief. We put aside all other business and rushed it through as soon as it could be done.

The next summer, when it began to be time to think about election, I concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no opposition there but, as the election was some time off, I did not know what might turn up. When riding one day in a part of my district in which I was more of a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that we should meet as he came up, I spoke to the man. He replied politely, but as I thought, rather coldly.

I began: "Well friend, I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates and..."

"Yes I know you; you are Colonel Crockett. I have seen you once before, and voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out electioneering now, but you had better not waste your time or mine, I shall not vote for you again."

This was a sockdolger...I begged him tell me what was the matter.

"Well Colonel, it is hardly worthwhile to waste time or words upon it. I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in the honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me. But I beg your pardon for expressing it that way. I did not intend to avail myself of the privilege of the constituent to speak plainly to a candidate for the purpose of insulting you or wounding you."

"I intend by it only to say that your understanding of the Constitution is very different from mine; and I will say to you what but for my rudeness, I should not have said, that I believe you to be honest. But an understanding of the Constitution different from mine I cannot overlook, because the Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred, and rigidly observed in all its provisions. The man who wields power and misinterprets it is the more dangerous the honest he is."

"I admit the truth of all you say, but there must be some mistake."

"Though I live in the backwoods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings of Congress. My papers say you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by fire in Georgetown. Is that true?"

"Well my friend; I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just the same as I did."

"It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be entrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means."

"What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government. So you see that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he."

"If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right to give at all; and as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity."

"'Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this country as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by each contributing one week's pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of wealthy men around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life."

"The congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditably; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from necessity of giving what was not yours to give. The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution.'

"'So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you."

I tell you I felt streaked. I saw if I should have opposition, and this man should go to talking in that district, I was a gone fawn-skin. I could not answer him, and the fact is, I was so fully convinced that he was right I did not want to. But I must satisfy him, and I said to him:

"Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it, and thought I had studied it fully. I have heard many speeches in Congress about the powers of Congress, but what you have said here at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I ever heard. If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote; and if you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law I wish I may be shot."

He laughingly replied; "Yes, Colonel, you have sworn to that once before, but I will trust you again upon one condition. You are convinced that your vote was wrong. Your acknowledgment of it will do more good than beating you for it. If, as you go around the district, you will tell people about this vote, and that you are satisfied it was wrong, I will not only vote for you, but will do what I can to keep down opposition, and perhaps, I may exert some little influence in that way."

"If I don't," said I, "I wish I may be shot; and to convince you that I am in earnest in what I say I will come back this way in a week or ten days, and if you will get up a gathering of people, I will make a speech to them. Get up a barbecue, and I will pay for it."

"No, Colonel, we are not rich people in this section but we have plenty of provisions to contribute for a barbecue, and some to spare for those who have none. The push of crops will be over in a few days, and we can then afford a day for a barbecue. This is Thursday; I will see to getting it up on Saturday week. Come to my house on Friday, and we will go together, and I promise you a very respectable crowd to see and hear you."

"'Well I will be here. But one thing more before I say good-bye. I must know your name."

"'My name is Bunce."

"'Not Horatio Bunce?"

"'Yes"

"'Well, Mr. Bunce, I never saw you before, though you say you have seen me, but I know you very well. I am glad I have met you, and very proud that I may hope to have you for my friend."

It was one of the luckiest hits of my life that I met him. He mingled but little with the public, but was widely known for his remarkable intelligence, and for a heart brim-full and running over with kindness and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. He was the oracle of the whole country around him, and his fame had extended far beyond the circle of his immediate acquaintance. Though I had never met him, before, I had heard much of him, and but for this meeting it is very likely I should have had opposition, and had been beaten. One thing is very certain, no man could now stand up in that district under such a vote.

At the appointed time I was at his house, having told our conversation to every crowd I had met, and to every man I stayed all night with, and I found that it gave the people an interest and confidence in me stronger than I had ever seen manifested before.

Though I was considerably fatigued when I reached his house, and, under ordinary circumstances, should have gone early to bed, I kept him up until midnight talking about the principles and affairs of government, and got more real, true knowledge of them than I had got in all my life before.

I have known and seen much of him since, for I respect him - no, that is not the word - I reverence and love him more than any living man, and I go to see him two or three times every year; and I will tell you, sir, if every one who professes to be a Christian lived and acted and enjoyed it as he does, the religion of Christ would take the world by storm.

But to return to my story. The next morning we went to the barbecue and, to my surprise, found about a thousand men there. I met a good many whom I had not known before, and they and my friend introduced me around until I had got pretty well acquainted -- at least, they all knew me.

In due time notice was given that I would speak to them. They gathered up around a stand that had been erected. I opened my speech by saying:

"Fellow citizens - I present myself before you today feeling like a new man. My eyes have lately been opened to truths which ignorance or prejudice or both had heretofore hidden from my view. I feel that I can today offer you the ability to render you more valuable service than I have ever been able to render before. I am here today more for the purpose of acknowledging my error than to seek your votes. That I should make this acknowledgment is due to myself as well as to you. Whether you will vote for me is a matter for your consideration only.

I went on to tell them about the fire and my vote for the appropriation and then told them why I was satisfied it was wrong. I closed by saying:

"And now, fellow citizens, it remains only for me to tell you that the most of the speech you have listened to with so much interest was simply a repetition of the arguments by which your neighbor, Mr. Bunce, convinced me of my error. It is the best speech I ever made in my life, but he is entitled to the credit for it. And now I hope he is satisfied with his convert and that he will get up here and tell you so."

He came up to the stand and said:

"Fellow citizens -- it affords me great pleasure to comply with the request of Colonel Crockett. I have always considered him a thoroughly honest man, and I am satisfied that he will faithfully perform all that he has promised you today."

He went down, and there went up from that crowd such a shout for Davy Crockett as his name never called forth before.

I am not much given to tears, but I was taken with a choking then and felt some big drops rolling down my cheeks. And I tell you now that the remembrance of those few words spoken by such a man, and the honest, hearty shout they produced, is worth more to me than all the honors I have received and all the reputation I have ever made, or ever shall make, as a member of Congress.

"Now, sir," concluded Crockett, "you know why I made that speech yesterday. There is one thing which I will call to your attention, you remember that I proposed to give a week's pay. There are in that House many very wealthy men -- men who think nothing of spending a week's pay, or a dozen of them, for a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it. Some of those same men made beautiful speeches upon the great debt of gratitude which the country owed the deceased -- a debt which could not be paid by money -- and the insignificance and worthlessness of money, particularly so insignificant a sum as $20,000 when weighed against the honor of the nation. Yet not one of them responded to my proposition. Money with them is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it."



29 posted on 03/22/2004 6:15:07 AM PST by eddie willers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

I believe "screamer" is a common 19th century slang term for mountain lion or cougar. Guess we should just be glad they didn't use some other slang term for felis concolor : "Painter" (confusing*), catamount ("Did he say he's a catamite!?!?").

*corruption of'panther', of course.

30 posted on 03/22/2004 6:25:00 AM PST by kaylar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot
Words change meaing with time. Ever come across "returns" in Revolutionary War accounts? Today this word means "coming back". In the 18th Century "returns" mean a list or roster of troops as well.

How about "well-regulated militia"? Today it means well-controlled. In the 18th Century, it meant well-trained.

So its very possible "screamer" in the early 1800's meant something very different from what it conjures up today.

(How about "gay"?? I remember when it just meant carefree and happy instead of perverted.)
31 posted on 03/22/2004 6:57:58 AM PST by ZULU (God Bless Senator Joe McCarthy!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
Don't know this guy, but in the outtakes, they have him made up to look amazingly like Crockett did.
32 posted on 03/22/2004 6:59:15 AM PST by ZULU (God Bless Senator Joe McCarthy!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers
Crockett and his companions were real fighters - real human tigers. When they said they were half an alligator and half a mountain lion, or whatever, they meant it.

I can believe Crockett did sass his murderers, if he was captured alive ( and I RESENT the word "executed". They were massacred or murdered if captured alive by that beast Santa Ana.)
33 posted on 03/22/2004 7:01:28 AM PST by ZULU (God Bless Senator Joe McCarthy!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Porterville

NO TEXAN should buy a ticket to a Ron Howard/Disney sacrilege of the Alamo. I'm sure they will portray Santa Anna as Thomas Jefferson! Do not let them make a dime in Texas.
34 posted on 03/22/2004 7:01:43 AM PST by kittymyrib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: xm177e2
"This is just an attempt to piss on an AMERICAN hero."

Depends on how they present it. Personally, I can't believe Crockett or a significant number of other defenders woould have surrendered to the butcher Santa Ana. Would you? Didn't he massacre a number of Americans at Goliad before the Alamo battle?

I still think Corckett went down fighting, swinging his rifle butt around and slashing away with a bowie knife.

But if he didn't and WAS captured, I'm sure he was overwhelmed by numbers and taken against his will and he sassed the damn Mexicans and they murdered him.
35 posted on 03/22/2004 7:05:01 AM PST by ZULU (God Bless Senator Joe McCarthy!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: SwinneySwitch
Bump
To read later
36 posted on 03/22/2004 7:05:25 AM PST by Fiddlstix (This Space Available for Rent or Lease by the Day, Week, or Month. Reasonable Rates. Inquire within.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dsc
"In Gettysburg, picking Martin Sheen to play R.E. Lee was a stroke of PC malice fer shure."

Couldn't even watch that. Check out Duval though as Robert E. Lee. He was perfect in my book.
37 posted on 03/22/2004 7:06:12 AM PST by ZULU (God Bless Senator Joe McCarthy!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: dr_lew
Crockett was a man of outstanding integrity and courage. I believe he started out as a Jackson man and then was defeated when he opposed Jackson's "ethnic extermination or deprotation" policies east of the Mississippi River towards American Indians.
38 posted on 03/22/2004 7:08:31 AM PST by ZULU (God Bless Senator Joe McCarthy!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers
Too bad we can dig up that Bunce feller and run him for office.
39 posted on 03/22/2004 7:12:32 AM PST by ZULU (God Bless Senator Joe McCarthy!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ZULU
Crockett was a man of outstanding integrity and courage. I believe he started out as a Jackson man and then was defeated when he opposed Jackson's "ethnic extermination or deportation" policies east of the Mississippi River towards American Indians.

Correct. I am just now reading a book about the Georgia Gold Rush of the 1830's and it mentions how Crockett was defeated for standing up against Jackson (D-TN) and for the Cherokees.

After his defeat he uttered his famous line: "You all can all go to hell, I'm going to Texas."

40 posted on 03/22/2004 7:30:39 AM PST by eddie willers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson