O'Reilly's new Lincoln book banned from Ford's Theather

The title doesn't even fit what he says the book is about--Lincoln's leadership qualities. A few months back, he more than seemed to be implying in his on air mentions of it that he had "cracked the case" in terms of who was or was not involved. If he had to back-pedal on that, then he should have changed the title.
 
The title doesn't even fit what he says the book is about--Lincoln's leadership qualities. A few months back, he more than seemed to be implying in his on air mentions of it that he had "cracked the case" in terms of who was or was not involved. If he had to back-pedal on that, then he should have changed the title.

According to the article, O'Reilly basically sets-up Mary Surratt as an innocent railroaded by the government (and is wrong on most of the details of her captivity). If that's what he considers research, I'm not optimistic about the book as a whole. I admit to glancing through the book the other day but it would take something major to make me buy it since I find O'Reilly to be obnoxious.

R
 
No footnotes nor primary sources doesn't speak well of O'Reilly's research. The Stanton theory was discredited decades ago.
 
No footnotes nor primary sources doesn't speak well of O'Reilly's research. The Stanton theory was discredited decades ago.
But Stanton may have inadvertently caused the assasination of Lincoln by his involvement with Ulric Dahlgren.
 
Banned???

Not true. The book is on sale and available at Fords Theater bookshop and is NOT, nor ever has been banned.

However, a reviewer for the official National Park Service bookstore at Ford’s Theater recommended that Bill O’Reilly’s new book about the Lincoln assassination not be sold at the historic site “because of the lack of documentation and the factual errors within the publication". However, the powers to be decided to put it on sale where you can pick it up today.
 
O'Reilly's name recognition gets him to places no other writer could reach. I doubt if he has done any research of his own.

Mulejack
He is a heavy reader and a history buff as well as being a teacher in his career. I wouldn't think that he is an ignorant individual as many would like to believe. Left wingers hate him and conservatives like his program. I believe the book to be an interesting read and food for thought.
 
Banned???

Not true. The book is on sale and available at Fords Theater bookshop and is NOT, nor ever has been banned.

However, a reviewer for the official National Park Service bookstore at Ford’s Theater recommended that Bill O’Reilly’s new book about the Lincoln assassination not be sold at the historic site “because of the lack of documentation and the factual errors within the publication". However, the powers to be decided to put it on sale where you can pick it up today.

The book is on sale in the upstairs gift shop run by the contractor but not in the main gift shop in the basement.
 
I doubt if O'Reilly is concerned about the book being banned at Ford's Theater. More controversy = more publicity = more sales.
 
There's no doubt Right Wingers will love and defend evrything Oreilly writes. You gotta love his interviews where he waggs his finger at those he disagrees with. He hails from Levitown Long Island where finger wagging is their national past time.

Muejack
 
Here's one of the errors-

Chapter 15
“The two warriors will never meet again.”

Fact comment:
On April 10, 1865 Generals Lee and Grant met a second time at Appomattox Court House, Virginia. At that second meeting General Lee requested that his men be given evidence that they were paroled prisoners - to protect them from arrest or harassment. 28,231 parole passes were issued to Confederates.

So he should have wrote: "After Appomattox (or "April 10, 1865"), the two warriors would never meet again."

Nit-picky.

Here's another error-

Chapter 19
“After it (Ford’s Theatre) was burned to the ground in 1863 . . . . . . . “
http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...lincoln-book/2011/11/12/gIQAC604FN_story.html

According to this NPS website it burned to the ground in December 1861 and was rebuilt in 1863-
http://www.nps.gov/nr/travel/wash/dc38.htm

Again, nit-picky.
 
Here's one of the errors-

Chapter 15
“The two warriors will never meet again.”

Fact comment:
On April 10, 1865 Generals Lee and Grant met a second time at Appomattox Court House, Virginia. At that second meeting General Lee requested that his men be given evidence that they were paroled prisoners - to protect them from arrest or harassment. 28,231 parole passes were issued to Confederates.

So he should have wrote: "After Appomattox (or "April 10, 1865"), the two warriors would never meet again."

Nit-picky.

From the article, what he wrote about Mary Surratt and her treatment was factually wrong. Some of it was nit-picky but there are some pretty serious errors in there as well.

R
 
In the Amazon page for the book, under Reviews, in the Discussion, major errors in the book are listed.
 
From the article, what he wrote about Mary Surratt and her treatment was factually wrong. Some of it was nit-picky but there are some pretty serious errors in there as well.

R


What some call nit picky, others call factual incorrect and poorly researched. He/They say(s) it was the second night of the run of the play at Ford's theater when it was was the eighth night. Said Mary Surrrat was held in a cell aboard the USS Montauk when she was not. How many "nit picks" are needed?
 
Back
Top