Sadly, the editorial they ‘retracted’ showed more sense and bravery than the current editors display. The Gettysburg Address was meant to have, and did have, a political purpose with which the publishers at the time disagreed. To dismiss their legitimate concerns as the product of strong drink displays not only historical ignorance, but lack of empathy.
Lincoln’s detractors may have been cynical, but their heirs seem to be foolish and heartless.
Really? I see a lot of abuse of Lincoln and the war, but not much serious discussion of ideas or specific policies. I understand that they felt emotional about the war, but if the paper had taken the high road back in 1863, maybe the current editors wouldn't feel the need to retract now.