It's no surprise that LewRockwell.Com is still beating on Lincoln.

But this linked review is a cut below even their usual 'we're pro-Confederacy yet still insist we're libertarian' nuttiness.

A quick glance shows a fatal flaw in the very first paragraph.

It is well known that, in an effort to promote compromise, a constitutional amendment was proposed in Congress that forever forbade interference with slavery in states where it already existed. Lincoln referred to the proposal, the Corwin Amendment, in his First Inaugural, stating that he was not opposed to the amendment, since it merely made explicit the existing constitutional arrangement regarding slavery. Of course, Lincoln was here characteristically mendacious; nothing in the constitution prior to the amendment prohibited amendments to end slavery.

There is no mendaciousness or even obfuscation to be found here on Lincoln's part. Lincoln never said the Constitution permitted the federal government to end slavery- absent an amendment to so empower it, and he points out that the Corwin amendment makes that explicit. Is the writer unaware of the fact the Constitution did at the the time prohibit the national government from interfering with the institution of slavery within a state?

And Lincoln made repetitively clear that of the two goals, ending slavery and preserving the Union, that preserving the Union was of more importance to him. He acted in accordance with both those goals and their stated relative importance to him. Where does this person imagine they find an inconsistency? They'll find none related in the quote above.

Generally, if it involves either Lincoln or the Confederacy, the thinking found on LewRockwell.Com is of like poor quality.