And people don't really take that into consideration, how important it was to get the message out, not only externally to foreign powers, but also internally.

Well, and it's also, it, it gives a purpose for the war, 'cause remember, I say this a lot, but the, the action, the events of April, May 1775, and even in June, you know, all the way up through the Olive Branch Petition, where the Con- where Congress says, "Hey, King George, you know, we could, I don't know, maybe come to an agreement, patch these things up," all of this is not, there's no, there's no widespread movement saying, "Oh, yes, we are going to be a united and independent American entity." And that is what the declaration is doing.

It is taking this thing that was probably so far outside people's minds in April of 1775 and making it a reality, you know, rapidly.

That is, you know, one, really just one year and a few months from, from the beginning of hostilities to a full movement for independence.

And yes, it shores up one side.

It also creates a very firm dividing line down the middle.

Either you are for independence, or you are not, and if you're not for independence, you are with the enemy.

[musical sting]

What sets this man apart? As you say, as much a political leader as a military commander, right? Especially in this situation.

I think what makes Eisenhower so fascinating is prior to World War II, he has not commanded any troops in combat.

He spends World War I running a tank school at Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, Camp Colt.

He will not go overseas.

So he hasn't had this formative... piece of schooling and combat tutelage that almost all of his peers have.

He is a guy, though, who is smart.

He gets picked up repeatedly when MacArthur, when Douglas MacArthur is the army chief of staff.

Why was his legacy questioned? Why is it? And what in your mind redeems him?