Herbert,
You assert that no use of Madison's statement can be believed because of the

fact that one event which can't be "proven" thereby making the whole of his 
testimony unfit because it is the word of a "proven liar". You say the same 
about the newspaper reporter Callendar who was paid by Jefferson to publish 
lies about the incumbernt president to help secure Jefferson's election. 
When Callandar point his pen at Jefferson, we are supposed to ignore all 
that he says because he is a "proven liar". (HERB COMMENT): I don't recall
calling Madison a "proven liar" and I use the term, "Campaign Lies" of
Callender because that is published reference to his publications. I just
inform the reader that his claims published in September 1802, that TJ
fathered Tom Woodson could NOT be supported by the DNA tests.
 
Now, Herbert says we must seek the TRUTH in history, but he disallows
anything that could be called "revisionist". How can we seek the truth and
yet not apply that truth in revisions of how we understand history? (HERB
COMMENT): I have no problem with any revision of history as long as the
reviser can prove, by facts, that the original claim was false. I have NO
problem with truth.....just point me toward it....NOT feely good political
correctness.
Herb

______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html