Interesting observation, and I’ll withhold judgment on SA the man. I never met him, although one of my colleagues from NO did, and found him very ambitious and self-absorbed. On the other hand, I’ve known a LOT of historians from that generation who are/were very supportive of the WW II generation soldiers, romanticize D-Day, etc., but who otherwise were big-time libs. They never seem to connect the anti-freedom of Hitler with the corruption and decay and anti-freedom of Clinton and Obama.
I never met him either. My father's friend (and our old auto mechanic) was interviewed by Ambrose. He said his "stuff" was never incorporated into any of the books Ambrose wrote, but sent the veteran a letter thanking him for the interview, saying it helped shore up the "framework" of the book or something like that. Ambrose also gave the veteran a copy of Ambrose's book "Pegasus Bridge" for his trouble.
The veteran told my dad he thought Ambrose was earnest, but a bit two faced. I think your term "ambitious" best describes him.
I’ve known a LOT of historians from that generation who are/were very supportive of the WW II generation soldiers, romanticize D-Day, etc., but who otherwise were big-time libs. They never seem to connect the anti-freedom of Hitler with the corruption and decay and anti-freedom of Clinton and Obama.
My dad was a Korea vet, and Depression baby. He loved FDR, and still does today. He was a union man, and Democrat through and through all his life (and still is). Yet, he never made the connection either between Hitler, Stalin, and the Left of today.
It is sort of like holding up a mirror to someones face, and showing it to them. Instead of gazing directly at the image of their face, they look at the images in the background reflected behind the mirror, and refuse to look directly at their own visage.