No, it's not at all OK. Who's to say that the books in Greg's bibliography are the "right" books to read (besides Greg, of course)? Historians and researchers have different interpretations of their findings, which sometimes conflict with those of their peers. Letters, documents and other writings of one time can be misconstrued centuries later. Political, social and even racial affiliations can cause a writer to de-emphasize historical evidence that he finds distasteful or that conflicts with his point of view. "Reasoned conclusions" according to one person's point of view may not necessarily be reasonable.

So I'm left to wonder about the validity of Greg's bibliography and from what source it was reprinted. Given that it was reprinted by a person who draws a parallel between "hate groups" and a Civil War re-enactment group whose mission statement specifically states "The 37th Texas Cavalry shall conduct itself without any political agenda or affiliation with any other group -- we are a gathering of historians... [who conduct] painstaking research... [as well as] offer to confront the error of using the Confederacy or Confederate symbols to represent racist groups or to promote any concept of 'racial superiority' " ...it would seem that Greg's definition of "reading critically" is that he is critical of anything he reads that differs from his own opinion (which, despite his protests, appears to be "confused and misguided"). Any book he endorses might well show a similar lack of open-mindedness.

Nevertheless, I went to the www.jstor.org site that Greg mentioned, but thus far I have not found a way to access their information. However, as concerns the book that Greg specifically recommended to me (Doris Kearns Goodwin's "Team Of Rivals"), I have read elsewhere that Goodwin has a reputation tainted by substantiated claims of plagiarism; also, she worked as Lyndon Johnson's assistant during his administration, so obviously she is not politically neutral.