Lincoln as Radical

Hanns Trefousse (The Radical Republicans: Lincoln's Vanguard for Racial Justice) long argued (admiringly) that Lincoln was neither conservative nor moderate - that he was a Radical dissimulator who used and misled men like Seward, McClellan, and others.

Here comes a new book:
Richard Striner takes deadly aim at some of the more vicious myths that have become almost axiomatically accepted in many circles concerning the outlook of President Abraham Lincoln: that Lincoln was a "moderate" and a "pragmatist" on the issue of slavery eradication; and that Lincoln was more concerned about saving the Union than abolishing slavery, and would have maintained the latter to keep the former.
The reviewer outlines a controversy:
Striner acknowledges his debt to authors Henry Jaffa, William Miller, LaWanda Cox, and James McPherson, who recently published works debunking some of the Lincoln myths; he also refutes recent detractors including David Herbert Donald, TV journalist Ken Burns, historian Barbara Fields, Gore Vidal, Lerone Bennett, Jr., and others.
Meanwhile, in the public arena, James McPherson seems to be intervening in the national policy arena. The current Administration argues a "Lincoln-based defense" of its war powers interpretation. McPherson credits Lincoln with "inventing" war powers.
Renowned Civil War historian James McPherson will deliver a lecture titled "Abraham Lincoln's Invention of Presidential War Powers" ...
Not that that's a bad thing. But more heartache for Lincoln venerators?

(Rick Beard, speak to us! Allay our concerns!)