[vetvetdoug]

DiLorenzo merely pulled together the information that was already in print from a variety of primary historical sources. Unlike McPherson, who uses quotes and information from openly biased sources that further his personal agenda, DiLorenzo formed a hypothesis and put forward primary data that bolstered the thesis; much to the chagrin of the Lincoln cannonizers. Now that the Rubicon has been crossed writing the true history of Lincoln we shall see much more truth and find Lincoln in a not so positive light.

[drjimmy]

Now that the Rubicon has been crossed writing the true history of Lincoln we shall see much more truth and find Lincoln in a not so positive light.
Enjoy your circle jerk. You Lincoln haters have been pushing your bile for a long time now, and yet I don't see much of a movement to take him off Mt. Rushmore.

[Ditto]

DiLorenzo formed a hypothesis and put forward primary data that bolstered the thesis;

LOL. Make that 'manufactured the data' and I'll agree with you. He basically did the same kind of 'research' that the anti-gun nut down at Emory got canned for. Mis-quotes, out-of-context snip of words, leaps of logic, and totally ignoring primary sources that prove his "thesis" to be silly.