Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Note On Footnotes(Lincoln Bashing)
declaration.net ^ | June 19, 2002 | Dr. Richard Ferrier

Posted on 06/20/2002 1:32:23 PM PDT by WhiskeyPapa

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last
A critique of Dr. Delusional, the League of the South shill.
1 posted on 06/20/2002 1:32:23 PM PDT by WhiskeyPapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyPapa
keep fighting the good fight
2 posted on 06/20/2002 1:44:39 PM PDT by GoreIsLove
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyPapa
I have been looking for some documentary support for the claim that Lincoln did not attempt to free the slaves immediately upon becoming president because at the time he still held a large portfolio of slave call options at the Charleston Slave Market. I would be satisfied with any written support (other than this post) with or without footnotes.

Thanks.

3 posted on 06/20/2002 1:54:15 PM PDT by ned
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyPapa
DiLorenzo, the Michael Bellesiles of Lincoln studies.
4 posted on 06/20/2002 2:01:48 PM PDT by TheDon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyPapa
I would think that your endless rants attempting to defend the ridiculous idea that the States and their Citizens are entirely subordinate to the interests of the Federal Government would have discredited Lincoln fans as much as you seem to think a couple of minor errors discredit the truth about Lincoln.
5 posted on 06/20/2002 2:26:06 PM PDT by Fish out of Water
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ned
Letter to Albert G. Hodges
6 posted on 06/20/2002 2:26:41 PM PDT by mdittmar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyPapa
Which came into existence first, the states, or the federal government? I understand Lincoln believed the latter. If true, sounds pretty delusional to me.
7 posted on 06/20/2002 2:39:33 PM PDT by slowry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: slowry
Which came into existence first, the states, or the federal government?

With the adoption by the 2nd Continental Congress of the Declaration of Independence, 13 independent British colonies became states under the US Congress.

What came first? I’d say Congress came first.

8 posted on 06/20/2002 2:51:43 PM PDT by Ditto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ditto
Yeah, that's why they had to vote the constitution into existence.
9 posted on 06/20/2002 2:54:37 PM PDT by slowry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Fish out of Water
I would think that your endless rants attempting to defend the ridiculous idea that the States and their Citizens are entirely subordinate to the interests of the Federal Government would have discredited Lincoln fans as much as you seem to think a couple of minor errors discredit the truth about Lincoln.

A "couple of minor errors?"

Good grief, that's pathetic.

10 posted on 06/20/2002 2:55:58 PM PDT by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
I agree Walt's rants are pathetic.
11 posted on 06/20/2002 3:45:05 PM PDT by Fish out of Water
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Fish out of Water
No, your Clintonian spin about DiLorenzo's inept or nonexistent scholarship was pathetic.

When DiLorenzo has Lincoln serving in the Illinois Assembly in 1857 when he didn't, that's not a "minor" error.

12 posted on 06/20/2002 3:47:12 PM PDT by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
When DiLorenzo has Lincoln serving in the Illinois Assembly in 1857 when he didn't, that's not a "minor" error.

It's especially disturbing because, apparently, he simply made it up.

Moreover, the source he used to make Lincoln a supporter of "deportation" of free blacks lacks evidence for his claim, too. Dr. D. didn't check his sources, when they fit his bias. And it turns out they were wrong.

The most comical of his errors is the citation of the words of the VA clergyman as though they were Lincoln's; the most blantanly pro-CSA of the small ones is his account of the military campaigns, and especially his claiming that the Army of the Potomac didn't get within 50 yards of the CSA lines at Fredericksburg; the deepest is that he never even notices that J.Q. Adams and Madison distinguished, as did Lincoln and nearly the whole founding tradition, legal secession and natural rights based revolution. The next deepest of his errors is a failure to distinguish perfect social and political equality from the issue of slavery. This leads him to use abolitionists against Lincoln, an to pretend that it is a great discovery of his that Lincoln's resistance to slavery was politically distinct from Phillips, Garrison, et. al., a fact known to any literate person for a century or more.

He gives no evidence for the take he wants the reader to have on the Gen. Dix/John Howard affair, he misreads David Donald, he persists in a lunatic reading of the Bank issue in the debates and in the Dred Scott speech, he misleadingly truncates a key quote on the Fugitve Slave law, he takes an historically naive and unsupported view of the possibility of peaceful emancipation, and makes a dozen or more similar slips or omissions or false insinuations.

The book is a mess.

And the more its folly is exposed, the better.

"Wide Awake" for Lincoln,

Richard F.

13 posted on 06/20/2002 4:15:48 PM PDT by rdf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Coming from someone who like Bill Clinton supports a big central government I must assume that your reference to "Clintonian spin" was intended as a compliment.
14 posted on 06/20/2002 5:02:49 PM PDT by Fish out of Water
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyPapa; rdf
Keep up the good fight!
15 posted on 06/20/2002 7:58:38 PM PDT by CounterCounterCulture
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ditto
With the adoption by the 2nd Continental Congress of the Declaration of Independence, 13 independent British colonies became states under the US Congress.

What came first? I’d say Congress came first.

So you point to the Declaration. The one that calls the states FREE and INDEPENDENT. (Wasn't it Lincoln that pretty much led the way in not referring to the United States, and instead called it Union?)

I've never heard anybody call the "Continental Congress" the "U.S. Congress" before. Did you just do that?

I believe our form of government started in 1788, that's when our Congress was put in place. Not 1776.

I'm sure you know several of the states have their own separate constitutions going back to 1776.

16 posted on 06/20/2002 9:21:46 PM PDT by slowry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: rdf
I'll take your word for it.

Lol!

Thanks for the review.

17 posted on 06/20/2002 9:26:00 PM PDT by nicollo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyPapa
Footnotes are the historian's footprints. I despise endnotes, and I loathe a book without citations.

A good, clear, up-front citation is honesty. Hiding it is the opposite.

Good post, and good work.

18 posted on 06/20/2002 9:30:39 PM PDT by nicollo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nicollo
Good post, and good work.

Thanks.

The neo-rebs need all the coals of fire they can get.

I was interested to see that DiLorenzo was a member of the League of the South, which at one time had a "humor" site linked to them that glorified John Wilkes Booth.

Walt

19 posted on 06/21/2002 5:28:38 AM PDT by WhiskeyPapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: rdf
Moreover, the source he used to make Lincoln a supporter of "deportation" of free blacks lacks evidence for his claim, too. Dr. D. didn't check his sources, when they fit his bias. And it turns out they were wrong.

Every once in a while the neo-rebs on FR will tote out this charge against Lincoln. Then they sulk when one asks for proof.

Actually, they do a lot of sulking, for various reasons.

Walt

20 posted on 06/21/2002 5:32:04 AM PDT by WhiskeyPapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson