Replies

Lincoln is more concerned with the overarching problem of evil passions of which slavery is but one

But Walt what other problems would there be in the 1830s and 1840s? I was assured this nation was plugging right along until the evil South decided to secede because of slavery and not money!!! I am completely shocked that an organization that prides itself in pointing out government waste and spending would get behind such a man as lincoln and Clay with their American System, which in every way shape and form argued that it was the government's responsibility to take care of us and build our infrastructure for us, and had done such a great job in Illinois, not to mention New York!! < /sarcasm>

Erik Root does a good job a stating what he anticipates will be the failings of the biography. I will read it and most probably agree with him.

But what I won't agree with, and its overblown inclusion in the above article festered as I read the whole thing is this:
...comprehend the Founding as well its fulfillment in Lincoln.

Now, stating that the Lincoln Presidency and all its impact was the Fulfullment of the Founding is simply diefication where it isn't warrented. Lincoln makes clear as much in the Greely letter and elsewhere. A man of his time, thrust into dealing with the Civil War by forces bigger than himself, making actions based on his stated motives, some of which had bad consequences he could not foresee for the Union that he held so paramount, does not make him and his actions the manifest destiny of the nation or its fulfillment with a Federal supremacy.

I can respect some contending that without a stronger Federal nature we couldn't have been as effective on the world stage in the 20th century...that's a reasonable claim and on a good day, might even get some grudging acceptance from me. But Fulfillment? For actions periferal to his overall battle? Hardly.

Alexander Stephens, the vice-president of the Confederacy, confirmed the predominance of the slavery issue in his Cornerstone speech:

Not only did Alexander Stepens himself repeatedly declare the so called conerstone speech a forgery fabricated by a military occupation newspaper but there's not a single witness who ever came forward to confirm that Stephens ever spoke those words. You'll have to do better than that to back your revisionist BS.

It is clear from the above speech that southern opinion of the equality of human beings changed. Slavery was not a necessary evil, but was now a positive good that God had sanctioned.
DiLorenzo fails to even acknowledge this fact and this makes his entire work questionable.
He goes further and falsifies Lincoln’s record in so many instances that this response would be more prolix if I addressed every point he misconstrued.

In the face of the preponderance of the evidence, it appears DiLorenzo’s political agenda is clouding his judgment. Ultimately, we have to wonder whether this professor considered everything before he wrote the book, or even if he understands complex political thought.

My faith in human reason is restored!

Bully for the Washington Times for publishing the truth.

Richard F.

RadioFR on NOW!

"Unspun" with AnnaZ and Mercuria!

Tonights guests...RON PAUL, GARY ALDRICH, SHEMANE NUGENT and JEFF HEAD!

ON NOW!

Click HERE to listen while you FReep!

On NOW at RadioFR!

7pm/10pm - The "Banana Republican", our own Luis Gonzalez, has a spirited interview with...none other than JACK THOMPSON!

This is a CALL IN SHOW! Talk to BATMAN JACK THOMPSON!

1-866-RadioFR! (866-723-4637)

Click HERE to listen LIVE while you FReep!