[Henrietta]

"Almost all the reputable leaders of the Confederacy understood that and mourned his killing. Why do you think that was if he was a brutal tyrant as you claim? "

I blame historical revisionism.

"I don't put much credence in crackpot historians. Where does that author teach- the Biloxi Institute for the Idiotically Inclined?"

I dunno, the guy doesn't sound like a crackpot to me:

Biography of Thomas J. DiLorenzo

Thomas J. DiLorenzo is a professor of economics in the Sellinger School of Business and Management at Loyola college in Maryland. Specializing in economic history and political economy, he is the author of 11 books and over 70 articles in academic journals, and he is also widely published in such popular outlets as the Wall Street Journal, Reader's Digest, USA Today, National Review, Barron's, and numerous other national publications. He lives in Clarksville, Maryland.


Maybe these noted conservatives are crackpots, too:

Praise for The Real Lincoln, by Thomas DiLorenzo:

“DiLorenzo’s greatest contribution is to show the real reasons for which Lincoln went to war. Abolishing slavery was not one of them. Lincoln was determined to destroy the Southern states in order to remove the constraints that Southern senators and congressmen, standing in the Jeffersonian tradition, placed in the way of centralized federal power, high tariffs and subsidies to Northern industries.” —Paul Craig Roberts, former Assistant Secretary for Economic Policy, U.S. Department of the Treasury;
Chairman, Institute for Political Economy; syndicated columnist

“The Real Lincoln is a devastating critique of America’s most famous president.” —Joseph Sobran, commentator and nationally syndicated columnist

“Today’s federal government is considerably at odds with that envisioned by the framers of the Constitution. Thomas J. DiLorenzo gives an account of how this came about in The Real Lincoln.” —Walter E. Williams, Professor of Economics, George Mason University

“A peacefully negotiated secession was the best way to handle all the problems facing Americans in 1860. A war of coercion was Lincoln’s creation. It sometimes takes a century or more to bring an important historical event into perspective. The Real Lincoln does just that and leaves the reader asking, ‘Why didn’t we know this before?’” —Donald Livingston, Professor of Philosophy, Emory University

“Professor DiLorenzo has penetrated to the very heart and core of American history with a laser beam of fact and analysis.” —Clyde Wilson, Professor of History, University of South Carolina

Keep believing the myth if you want. I guess it's easier than having an open mind...

[justshutupandtakeit]

Your response to the fact that the leaders of the Confederacy recognized Lincoln's humanity and greatness makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

How can a Defender of Slaverocracy speak of an open mind with a straight face?

Appeal to authority is the last resort of a failed argument.

DiLorenzo teaches at a second-rate college and is no expert on the Civil War. I would also be very skeptical of his economic views as well since delusions in one field tend to obscure rational thought in another. If he thinks slavery was not the reason the Slavers revolted he apparently is hopelessly deluded.

Who around here claims Lincoln went to war to destroy slavery? No one.

Sobran also believes Shakespeare didn't write his plays. Thus, everything he says is carefully examined by me.

Lincoln carried out his constitutionally mandated oath and that has earned him the undying hatred of those wishing to destroy the Union.

I used to buy the mythology you wish spread when a kid in southern Arkansas but I grew up and learned how to research things to determine the truth. Maybe someday you will too.