Does Stephen King have a theory about Dresden too?
Actually, Vonnegut would be a more reliable source, at least he was an eye-witness.
Usually the Washington Post - and even the Wall Street journal review books for general interest - and Publishers Weekly mostly for any monograph's ability to sell, but even they couldn't help themselves calling the work "absurd revisionism"
When you have a work like "The New Dealers' War" and only one historian in North America has bothered to review it, it is usually because his sourcing is generally thought to be sh-- and any academic library would only buy it for specialized collections for things like case studies in revisionism, or literary crackpots that occaisionally publish contrary histories to sell. Or some old academic drills to disabuse claims of facts in review exercises (something that sadly, few profs assign any more).
If there was any upside to any of this, Tom's post was probably one of the best I have ever seen. Too bad you skipped the Diary of Anne Frank in 4th grade and went right to this sh--.