A more common criticism of Carlin is that he is not thorough. That isn't a shot at him, usually (though a couple of the historians I know aren't big on his sour

A more common criticism of Carlin is that he is not thorough. That isn't a shot at him, usually (though a couple of the historians I know aren't big on his sources), but a lot of that is the format he's decided to go with--when you are limited to mere hours, you're going to necessarily be shallow about things.