This well reseached and documented book helps to get through the hype of Lincoln as God to the factual Lincoln as man material. What did he say, what did he write, what did he actually believe is often quite different than the legend that has arisen around him. Despite personal prejudices of readers, all that admire or despise Lincoln should read this book so that they have a more even and rounded sense of the society in which he lived shaping the things he believed, did, and said. The man is far more interesting than the myth, and perhaps more falliable. Like most people that were made into popular legends, the legend often lost sight of the real person. ( )

This analytical study questions the motives and practices of the legendary and somewhat mythical president. Reading this volume caused this Illinois son to reconsider many of my opinions. The book brought to mind that powerful leaders often dominate the media and public opinion; their influence and supporters can often "rewrite history." Read more at a World Net Daily article http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=27225 (lj) ( )

Excellent, well-documented, thorough treatment of a very unpopular subject - the destruction by Abraham Lincoln of America as a federal republic. The author goes about a hundred pages too far, sometimes less is more, but nevertheless the evidence exists everywhere you look today.

Probably the sum total of the book can be summed up by a quote that appears on page 278, attributed to abolitionist Lysander Spooner,

All these cries of having "abolished slavery," of having "saved the country," of having "preserved the union," of establishing a "government of consent," and of "maintaining the national honor" are all gross, shameless, transparent cheats - so transparent that they ought to deceive no one. ( )

This blasts the bottom out from the myth we've all been taught. How can we continue teaching this lie and the precepts for which it paved a path? I also note many of the same points I encountered in "The South Was Right," though they are made with a better, more disciplined argument. ( )

I bought this used so that the author would not get a dime from me. Obviously written by a southern right-winger, this book is a joke. I see that lots of readers have rated this a '5'... they must all be the author's sock puppets. DiLorenzo creates so many straw men that he could furnish the entire midwest with scarecrows for the next 100 years. He continuously writes about how 'Lincoln started the war', and how Lincoln 'cleverly got the south the fire the first shot'.

DiLorenzo seems to conveniently forget LOTS of facts. He mentions Lincoln's letter to Greeley (where Lincoln states that to save the Union he would free all the slaves, none of the slaves, or free some and not others) and suggests that the Emancipation Proclamation was written after that letter. In fact, the letter was written *after* he wrote the Proclamation.
Worst of all, DiLorenzo seems to claim that Lincoln intended for the Emancipation Proclamation to instigate a slave revolt that would result in the slaughter of all the women tending the farms while their husbands were away at war. The exact opposite was true. Lincoln even put in the proclamation his hope that the freed slaves would remain law-abiding. DiLorenzo just can't seem to come up with ANY OTHER alternative explanation for why Lincoln would issue the proclamation other than that the slaves would revolt. Hmmmm. Perhaps if the slaves were no longer tending the farms then the soldiers would HAVE TO STOP FIGHTING AND GO HOME?? Ya think? That, indeed, was Lincoln's basic thinking behind the proclamation... free the slaves where they were essentially helping the Confederacy, thereby forcing young southern white men to do anything but be soldiers. That is why the proclamation was a *military necessity*.
And where does DiLorenzo get off saying that Lincoln was a dictator? Geez, Jeff Davis wielded FAR MORE dictatorial powers than Lincoln ever dreamed of. I guess that was ok.
The most amazing thing about the book is that the author seems to think that the central government should not have any power at all. States Rights and all that. I guess he doesn't like all those interstates, bridges, etc that facilitate capitalism that the author likes so much. Guess he doesn't like the military that protects this country. What an idiot.

DiLorenzo also seems to think that the Civil War wasn't about slavery. Something to do with 'states rights'. Anyone who seriously proposes that the Civil War had nothing to do with slavery does not deserve to be taken seriously themselves. While many *northerners* undoubtedly did not fight for slavery, the *south* most assuredly was fighting to retain slavery. The words 'states rights' and 'slavery' are essentially interchangeable. In 1860, 'states rights' were meaningless unless they included the right to keep slaves.
Another gripe I have is his seeming indifference to slavery. "It would have died out anyway." Shorter DiLorenzo to the slaves: "sorry about your luck". He states many times that Lincoln never tried to pay off the slave owners to avoid a costly war (that the south started). Well, dude, Lincoln DID try that (starting with Delaware), and they said 'nope... we'll keep our slaves thank you very much'.
Well, I could go on and on... The author clearly has an agenda, and that is to smear Lincoln. The facts be damned. This book is actually worth reading... if only to get a glimpse into the mind of someone who knows nothing about Lincoln, yet writes a book about him. This book reminds me greatly of a book about evolution written by Jehova's Witnesses that I bought many years ago: there was a lie, distortion or misleading statement on every single page. This book is pure garbage. ( )