You can certainly shut those comments down by listing the newspapers. I won't even ask for all 300; 150 will do.
No doubt that Neely is a devout Lincoln apologist who went out of his way to place the Lincoln administration in the most favorable light.
And there we have it. You quote Neely without ever having read any of his works, and once it's pointed out to you that he doesn't in fact support your claims he becomes a "Lincoln apologist". Not surprising.
>>Kalamata wrote: “Your comments are not surprising.”
>>DoodleDawg wrote: “You can certainly shut those comments down by listing the newspapers. I won’t even ask for all 300; 150 will do.”
I am not your research assistant. Do your own leg work, or trust in the scholars. Those are your choices.
*****************
>>Kalamata wrote: “No doubt that Neely is a devout Lincoln apologist who went out of his way to place the Lincoln administration in the most favorable light.”
>>DoodleDawg wrote: “And there we have it. You quote Neely without ever having read any of his works, and once it’s pointed out to you that he doesn’t in fact support your claims he becomes a “Lincoln apologist”. Not surprising.”
I HAVE read some of his books, and his research DOES support my understanding of those times. The fact that he is a Lincoln apologist comes from his “interpretation” of the data, which includes bending-over backwards to give Lincoln’s legacy the benefit of the doubt in virtually every case. He even attempt’s to place the Grant and Sheridan horror show in the Shenandoah Valley in a good light (See: The Shenandoah Valley: Sheridan And Scorched Earth, in Mark E. Neely Jr., “The Civil War and the Limits of Destruction.” Harvard University Press, 2007, Chapter 4)
But since you are also a Lincoln apologist, Neely’s bias may be beyond your ability to ‘observe’.
Mr. Kalamata