Honest Abe?

How does history get edited over time? During my Civil War Civil Liberties project research I stumbled upon an intriguing answer to this ever-present American Studies question. The example is Abraham Lincoln. Honest Abe is widely regarded as one of our nation's greatest presidents. His story, or perhaps one version of his story, has been taught to us repetitively during our upbringing especially here in the "Land of Lincoln". I remember Lincoln's life story going something like this: he is born in a log cabin, defiantly learns to read, never tells a lie, out-debates some guy named Douglass, becomes President, beats the Confederacy, gives the Gettysburg Address, frees the slaves, and is shot in an opera house. Most every American's view of Abraham Lincoln is that the man could do no wrong; that he was the ultimate advocate of fairness and freedom. But upon looking closely at the 16th presidents' time in office it's clear this is not the case.
I offer to you as evidence Lincoln's Letter to Erastus Corning and Others. In which he defends his earlier suspension of the right of habeas corpus in order to silence the voice of the Confederacy by detaining Clement Vallandigham without trial. While it's not shocking to learn that for all his accomplishments in the advancements of the rights of the American people Lincoln made mistakes under the pressure of civil war, what I find disturbing is that none of his shortcomings are mentioned in a typical overview of the president. Given the current issues involving habeas corpus and Guantanamo Bay Lincoln's example seems like it would give a perfect historical perspective to the ongoing debate.