1. He is actually a very bright guy with a wealth of historical and cultural knowledge.
2. He is quite the controversialist.
3. He is a very traditional and very faithful Roman Catholic (he attends the same Mass I do every Sunday).
4. I had one daughter attend a once a week class in American History with Dr. Fleming. I attended as well and felt free to pepper him with disagreements particularly as to developments after 1880 or so. He was a reasonably good sport about my vigorous disagreements before his students.
5. He is a major paleoconservative figure and ruins the Rockford Institute. As a conservative of the New Right, I disagree with him on matters of foreign policy and some domestic issues as well. I have never doubted the sincerity of his beliefs or that he is a principled fellow.
6. His objections to Lincoln's conduct of the War Between the States are well thought out and ought to be given consideration by conservatives generally.
7. Dr. Fleming's political views would be rather unpopular on FR other than among the Paulistinians but he certainly has the courage of his convictions. He probably despises Obozo but his reasons differ from those of many other conservatives.
Though I have given him plenty of reason not to like me personally, he never fails to have a kind word for me at Church and so he may be said to refuse to allow differences to affect the relationship between gentlemen. That is a rare quality nowadays and ought to be encouraged.
I found this snippet in Mr. Fleming's article quite accurately reflects his article:
"I simply do not know."
According to your response, Mr. Fleming does seem like a thoughtful person. I am, however, somewhat dismayed at the direction of his doubts as to whom is to blame for the attack on Pearl Harbor. As learned as he seems, it appears that he should well know where the blame lies.