Replies

Lincoln is about as good a proof of Darwinian fantasies as ever existed. Even Marx, as a correspondent for the London Times, upon observing the awkward Lincoln at a White House social function, said that he resembled nothing so much as an orangutan.

This would seem to be more a product of your fantasies than Darwinian. Karl Marx never set foot in the U.S., and he was never a correspondent for The Times. The Times correspondent in the U.S. at the time of the Southern rebellion and the Lincoln Administration would have been William Howard Russell.

Marx's book of his observations north and south is/was (in bad condition as early as 1968) in the reserve stacks of the New Haven Public Library. AND, of course, you are still wrong as to Lincoln and virtually all things relating to the Second War for Independence.

If I were going to invent on this subject, on a conservative website, it would have made more sense to suggest that Lincoln was the apple of Marx's eye. The actual fact was that even Marx had no use for Lincoln.

Revise your sentence to insert "a London Times correspondent" for "the London Times correspondent."

If the correspondent to whom you refer was surnamed Russell, he was probably the son of Lord Russell and therefore an unlikely press agent for Lincoln as well. Either Lord Russell or, more likely, Lord Palmerston then owned the London Times. Neither Lord Russell nor Lord Palmerston (Tory MPs who took turns as PM and Foreign Secretary during the Second War for Independence) were particular fans of Abraham Lincoln. It took Prince Albert of Coburg, Victoria's hubby, on his death bed to dissuade Palmerston and Russell of recognizing the Confederacy solely on the question of slavery, but not before the British laird Shipyards built and launched the magnificent Confederate rams Alabama and Tennessee.

What were your credentials as a conservative, if any??????