That’s Right Nate

Thoughts from a right thinker.

Boycott America: The Story of Us

with 37 comments

I was very excited to see another alternative in the wasteland that is Sunday night television.  Sure the Pacific is great, but HBO follows it with Treme, which for a story of New Orleans seems very much obsessed with New Orleans music to the point of ignoring all that looting that went on post Katrina and I am sure still goes on today.  When the History Channel began running commercials for America: The Story of Us, I was understandably excited.   There is no country whose story I would rather hear about than our own and there is none that would make for more gripping television.

I did of course have to check this afternoon to make sure this wasn’t some liberal propaganda that would show the United States to be the greatest evil on the planet.  I did a quick google search and was shocked and appalled to find out that this movie was nothing more than liberal claptrap directed by liberal nut job Rob Reiner and stars fellow liberals Michelle Pfeiffer and Bruce Willis.   Perhaps, what I found most offensive was that Reiner was going to tell the story of America not from the eyes of a veteran of Valley Forge, but from a self-indulgent couple going through a divorce.

For a cable channel billing themselves as the History Channel, they should know that divorce wasn’t even legal through most of our country’s history.  I believe my daughter would be far happier today if that ruling still was in effect and her cow of a mother couldn’t legally divorce me just to shack up with her personal trainer, but I digress.

I have heard that some things like the visual effects of the musket fire in slow motion were interesting, but no clever visuals can distract from liberal Reiner’s attempt to view America through the eyes of a modern day couple instead of from our founding fathers who would not have put up with our current socialist government.  I am calling on you gentle readers to boycott this trash.   This is not the America I love so well.

Advertisements

Written by thatsrightnate

April 25, 2010 at 9:48 pm

37 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. I was very excited to hear of this program but when it opened with obama, a man who has spent his life associating with the haters of America, I changed the channel. Of course this can man is making this video frre for schools to further indictrinate the little kiddies with the lies of the left.

    Lydia

    April 25, 2010 at 10:03 pm

  2. I was very excited to hear of this program but when it opened with obama, a man who has spent his life associating with the haters of America, I changed the channel. Of course this con man is making this video free for schools to further indoctrinate the little kiddies with the lies of the left.

    Lydia

    April 25, 2010 at 10:04 pm

  3. Thank you for posting. You obviously feel very impassioned to post this twice. All I can say is what do you expect from Reiner. Even before he was a director he was Meathead in All in the Family.

    thatsrightnate

    April 25, 2010 at 10:11 pm

  4. I’m so grateful to find that someone else shares my views of this series. I’m sure there will be more that will come forward to boycott this series.
    I was so excited for this series to start… then Obama has the audacity to show his socialist face to start off the entire thing! This series if it was to be told factually as it should, bringing in the core foundation of values that created this country would have spawned more patriots of this country. Instead, as I watched the opening episode, I found that it leaves that entire foundation out. From leaving John Winthrop and his views of civilization completely out of the story to discreetly throwing in some complete B.S. about Washington recruiting a Prussian military officer who was supposedly gay I immediately saw through this episode to what it truly is: The forefront of Liberal propaganda aimed at slowly changing our history and heritage as Americans.
    I’ve studied and have a passion for American history, this series is far from it. Will someone show me what I can do to get the word out to others of how this series is prostituting American history to a liberal social movement?! Please respond and let me know!

    Jordon

    April 25, 2010 at 11:49 pm

  5. The best way to get the word out is to write to the history channel. I’d also make sure that any of your friends who might not reallize that they’ve been exposed to liberal proselytizing know that this came from the brain of Rob Reiner.

    thatsrightnate

    April 26, 2010 at 5:44 am

  6. Isn’t it ironic that we’re on the verge of a revolution now and our president has the audacity of introducing this film. If the History Channel is accurate in the future I believe it will show Obama to be the worst president this country has ever had.

    tommyZ

    April 26, 2010 at 11:13 am

  7. I swear I learn more history from Glen Beck then I ever learned on history chanel. I wasn’t aware he introduced this. What kind of message is this sending to kids about the sanctity of marriage? Not to ruin all 12 parts for anybody, but they clearly are getting divorced in the end.

    thatsrightnate

    April 26, 2010 at 12:29 pm

  8. I love American history and was excited to see this as an upcoming series on the History channel — however it turned me off that Obama did the opening. The way in which he states that today’s present generation can write a new chapter makes me feel that he doesn’t much care for the past ones. I turned the channel and waited for him to finish. I had no idea (but should have known) that there would be a liberal bias — but it became evident pretty quickly. It really peeved me when they had to interject that the Prussian general who came to our aid and assisted George Washington — von Strueben (hope I remember the correct spelling on that name) was GAY! I really don’t think in that day and time that our militia men nor General Washington would have stood for that. I researched it on-line and find that even biographers find that fact to be INCONCLUSIVE!! So why in the world did they need to include that!?!?LOL

    Pam

    April 26, 2010 at 3:22 pm

  9. I am a professor of history at Texas. While there is no conclusive proof that von Stueben was homosexual, such behavior was accepted by colonial Americans (even Puritans) under two conditions. One, the man involved had to come from the upper strata of society, as von Stueben did. Two, to be acceptable, the man had to be the penetrator, the top. The other man, the “invert” being penetrated — in taking the traditional woman’s role — was the one who was considered deviant. George Washington accepted many things you might not tolerate, such as cutting the feet off his slaves who tried to run away. Or, after a losing battle, ordering a general whipping of all his slaves to make him feel better. Luckily, historians have conclusive proof of this written in Washington’s letters, diaries, and military reports.

    Mary

    April 26, 2010 at 5:55 pm

  10. I’ve been researching the topic since watching the episode last night and I can’t find any CREDIBLE source or CREDIBLE evidence that suggests van Strueben was gay or that it was an acceptable practice. From what I can see is that it was something that happened very rarely and when it did happen no one talked about it.

    Jordon

    April 26, 2010 at 6:04 pm

  11. Please Mary, we prefer to avoid this sort of smutty talk on this forum. You can feel free to promote your liberal lies, but please clean up the language. George Washington would most assuredly not put up with a homosexual in the ranks, but the point is moot as homosexuality didn’t come along until the 1960s. Yes Von Steuben was disgraced in 1776 when he was accused of improper sexual conduct with young boys, but what does that prove? Look how many Catholic priests have been accused of the exact same behavior.

    thatsrightnate

    April 26, 2010 at 6:29 pm

  12. Jordon, Maybe you’d have better luck researching the general if you spelled his names correctly. I’d suggest you look at books by Richard Godbeer or John D’Emilio and Estelle Freidman. Generally speaking, professionally trained historians are more accurate sources than google.

    Mary

    April 26, 2010 at 6:52 pm

  13. Poor sentence structure for a proffesor. As for those authors–especially Friedman–well we are just reading what we want to believe now aren’t we. I would suggest ignoring Mary as she’s clearly a troll, wasting time to play her game would be rather futile.

    chronos

    May 3, 2010 at 12:59 am

  14. Friedman is a professor of History at Stanford, one of the most conservative institutions in this country.

    Mary

    May 3, 2010 at 4:02 am

  15. Also, your sentence should read

    “Poor sentence structure, for a professor.”

    Mary

    May 3, 2010 at 4:02 am

  16. Tytt

    chronos

    May 3, 2010 at 7:48 pm

  17. Ty for proving my point. ^_^

    chronos

    May 3, 2010 at 7:49 pm

  18. Well played chronos. Your point is very clearly made I’m sure.

    thatsrightnate

    May 3, 2010 at 8:37 pm

  19. Well, I thought it was interesting that the story pointed out that the manual for combat that Von Strueben had written for George Washingtons men is still used today. So despite whether he was or wasnt gay, he was forced from his prior position and Mr. Washington felt it was necessary to employ his talents to “WHIP” the men into shape. Where would America be if it was not for a man with a checkered past to come to America and help us. Speaking of checkered pasts, we should all look at our own before we go shooting off our mouths about things we don’t understand or which frightens us. Nate, what rock are you living under, “but the point is moot as homosexuality didn’t come along until the 1960s”. SO, before 1960’s what was it.

    Wallyg

    May 6, 2010 at 11:32 am

  20. As a Texan, I believe that any friskiness between men prior to the 1960s, was the natural curiosity of well-bred youth at the nation’s finest single-sex academies, or the natural desire for women experienced by heroic Texans prepared to die for their country either here or on the battlefields of Europe. Homosexuality did not begin until the “cool” kids and dopers of the 1960s sought a way to shock the fabric of our lives.

    Steve

    May 6, 2010 at 1:11 pm

  21. lmao@this! god forbid you put an ounce of truth in your hard head! You dont want to admit that your nation is not perfect in every way. Sorry that you choose to ignore truth and choose to believe whatever you want. Public schools teach our children lies because stupid ignorant parents like you will complain. That is why they have to relearn real history later when they move out and realize their parents are pure frauds!!!

    guy

    May 7, 2010 at 4:06 pm

  22. I’m sorry Gee that we are not ze French who have a proud history of eating cheese and surrendering. Wally–before the 1960s homosexuality was unknown in the United States.

    thatsrightnate

    May 7, 2010 at 6:49 pm

  23. Well, Nate, it appears your text book is flawed. Homosexuality has been around alot longer then the 1960’s, So keep buring your head in the sand and hearing only what you want. And making up your own diluted theories. No wonder our country is so messed up with people like you pushing their agendas. God help us all in the end.

    Wallyg1747

    May 8, 2010 at 2:03 pm

  24. Lucky for your wife it is legal today.

    thatsrightnateisanidiot

    May 11, 2010 at 9:16 am

  25. Your ex-wife that is. HA HA

    thatsrightnateisanidiot

    May 11, 2010 at 9:17 am

  26. That’s a low blow.

    thatsrightnate

    May 11, 2010 at 9:12 pm

  27. I was very excited to see the president of our great country open this up.

    cheesezits

    May 24, 2010 at 3:16 pm

  28. Bruce Willis was totally unconvincing.

    thatsrightnate

    May 24, 2010 at 9:11 pm

  29. As a student of American history I, like many others, was excited to see the History Channel produce a series on ‘us’. I have attempted to watch this series several times and never made it through an episode. I realize that every generation adds a new spin and interpretation to ‘history’ but this is far too policized for me. I went to college with very left students who see nothing wrong at all with communism even when faced examples of the failure and inequality associated with it. This type of propaganda deeply scares me because it is directed at the grade schools, who are only exposed to this asqued interoperation. The focus is heavily left, black, and self-indulging (we were not the first into space), whilst leaving out and skipping over the wars, technology, and other events that affected out transformation into the USA. By the way, I do realize no history is free of bias, however, this is overly done. Additionally, in the brief encounter I had with this series there are two known white collar criminals speaking on behalf of ‘us’, being Martha Stewart for illegal trading and Al Sharpton for unpaid taxes (really, lets have out kids/grandkids idolize criminals).

    Katie

    June 2, 2010 at 11:02 pm

  30. See I had major problems with the movie, but I didn’t think it was too black. I guess that’s because both Bruce Willis and Michelle Pfeiffer are white.

    thatsrightnate

    June 3, 2010 at 5:51 am

  31. The best historical series about America are by Ken Burns–such as his civil war series. Even his baseball series tells more about the American psyche than today’s celebrities trying to ‘revise’ history.

    Watcher

    May 22, 2011 at 3:33 pm

  32. I cannot believe some of you thought this was liberal. I was not expecting objectivity but to provide so little coverage of the poor indigenous population who were killed/forced off their land was surprising.

    I can understand pride of American achievements but the show had a weird balance of chest beating arrogance and momentary sorrow for some of the darker parts of US history. Nobody even questioned the Hiroshima/Nagasaki nuclear bombs which killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, no mention either of Japanese Americans who were removed from their homes in the states.

    Being British, American history has not been a big part of my education but it has been fascinating to learn about the pioneers. The show mentioned freedom a lot but it seems that for a long time that was only available to a select group.

    Thomas

    May 24, 2011 at 6:56 pm

  33. I love your neutral feelings about divorce. I’m sure that comment about your ex-wife was just a colorful metaphor and nothing more! Ha ha.

    I’m just watching some of this show now, its about the Civil War. I have a hard time to watch this propaganda. And this modern era text book history of what happened. Its sad to think how many youth are learning from this show, and how many of our youth are being educated with a history that is not really aligned with what happened. They get actors and special effects to spice it up to really drive their version of history into the young gullible minds. Its very disheartening and extremely troubling to know this.

    They are teaching that the Civil War was about slavery and nothing else. That President Lincoln’s ambitions were to end slavery, and that was his platform to get elected.

    Are they truly conspiring to alter history or do they really believe their edition and are, in their eyes, innocently telling the story, as they knew it? Ignorance is no excuse, so there should be a penalty for such lies. But it raises the question, is the History channel in on it too? I think it is, there are many leftist suggestive items in many of the shows on the History channel.

    Its too bad. I wish real, honest, true history had an outlet as well. That way it has a chance to be learned and can reach millions the was the History channel can. Being on the Internet is great and cannot be discounted, but a majority of real history hardly gets a fraction of the audience that these cable channels get.

    Why can’t an honest person get a channel to put up shows that tell the real history?

    Eduard Tieseler

    September 3, 2011 at 2:23 pm

  34. As someone said above, nothing!

    jocuri

    November 8, 2011 at 3:12 pm

  35. After meeting various companies I found this amazing company called Innovative Solution. I have got my website on first page of Google within 3 months at very affordable price. I would recommend http://www.InnovativeSolution.co.uk for cheap Online Marketing.

    refugioowen49

    December 28, 2011 at 3:01 am

  36. Nice post, thank you!

    sudo

    February 17, 2012 at 12:23 pm

  37. Its Pleasure to realize your blog.The above articles is relatively extraordinary, and I extremely enjoyed reading your blog and points that you expressed. I incredibly like to glimpse back on a typical basis,post additional during the topic.Thanks for sharingkeep writing!!!

    komunitas blogger

    March 31, 2012 at 2:14 am


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: