Yes, the rise in corporate power had roots in the gearing up for the Civil War. Abraham Lincoln was a Whig, a supporter of government aid to expanding industry - to "internal improvements" that supported the growth of business. He was an early capitalist, not one who wanted to preserve some rural paradise.

It is very hard to answer the oft-posed questions about how Abraham Lincoln would respond to some current condition. My favorite story on that count is that the late great Lincoln scholar Don Fehrebacher was asked, during the struggles over bussing for racial balance a few years ago, what Lincoln would say about "bussing" and he thought awhile and then answered : "what Lincoln would say would be: "What's a bus?"

Abraham Lincoln had a deep realism; he did not deceive or mislead himself, but faced the world he had to deal with as it really is. At the same time, he had a striking moral intelligence, and a confidence in the working of his own mind and conscience.

I do not think you can fault Abraham Lincoln for picking generals that did not work out, because, as he said to John Hay when he went back to George B. McClellan in the fall of 62, we have to work with what we have.

The situation Abraham Lincoln faced was unique. In his view, the United States was threatened with destruction, ruin, overthrow, perishing - all words that he used - which is not the case for any other president, including the current one - Barack Obama.

Abraham Lincoln did not contend that his actions were immune from Congressional correction; on the contrary, he specifically said he was acting beyond the present provisions in the expectation that congress would retroactively approve, which they did. He did not say anything like Richard Nixon: if the president does it is legal.

The US did not have any big supply of good generals in Civil War, and some it did have went with the rebels. If Robert E.Lee had stayed with his country the story would have been different.