"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 12:37:45 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"Gunner" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 11:23:21 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

Yeah. 'Sumbitch stole all the slaves.

Did he? Thats a new one on me. Got Cites?

Read a history book instead of those right-wing blogs, Gunner. They're
turning your mind into a grilled-cheese sandwich.

--
Ed Huntress

How so? From the looks of it...you are riding a skateboard full tilt
on your ride to the Far Left fringe.

Go to a real history book and read about how Lincoln pushed the lame-duck
Congress to pass the 13th Amendment. Once he submitted the Emancipation
Proclamation, all of the border states except Kentucky fell into line and
banned slavery.

History isn't easy. You have to read accounts and interpretations from
conflicting sources to get the picture. Lincoln was the driving source
behind emancipation, ranging from the Proclamation, which was limited to
what he felt he had constitutional authority to enact, to the political
arm-twisting he did until the 13th was passed.


The Real Lincoln

by Walter E. Williams

Foreword to The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His
Agenda, and an Unnecessary War by Thomas J. DiLorenzo (Prima
Publishing, 2002, xiii + 233 pgs., $24.95). Copyright © 2002 by Thomas
J. DiLorenzo. Reprinted with permission.

snip

That's a perfect example of what I mean. You get into an argument about
Lincoln and whether he was the force behind emancipation and you bring up
DiLorenzo -- a von Mises favorite and an off-the-wall, Austrian-school
economist/historian.

Was the Civil War "unnecessary"? Of course it was. Every schoolkid knows
that. All Lincoln had to do was to allow the South to secede. Every
schoolkid knows that the point is that Lincoln did NOT allow the South to
secede.

DiLorenzo makes the stupid statement that American schoolkids are taught
that the Civil War was fought to end slavery. I doubt if any schoolkid has
been taught that for close to 50 years. Like you, he sets up strawmen and
then shoots them down. But they're his own strawmen.

DiLorenzo is known mostly through the libertarian and right-wing blogs. In
the mainstream of real historical scholarship, he's a curious sidebar -- not
for his scholarship, which is substantial, but for his interpretations,
which are consistently right-wing.

So I'm not surprised you came up with this. It fits your pattern of...er,
"scholarship." You flit your way through history, politics, and economics,
Gunner, like a one-winged jaybird.

--
Ed Huntress