CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Political discussions
User avatar
Ibanez
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 49814
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 5:16 pm
I am a fan of: Coastal Carolina

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby Ibanez » Tue Apr 16, 2019 1:10 pm

GannonFan wrote:
Ibanez wrote:
The musical is based off of Ron Chernow's biography (and Ron consulted on the development of the play.) Don't get me wrong, I think the musical is great. But you definitely get a sense that he's an impulsive sometime irrational person.

The play does gloss over things like Hamilton being a Tory before switching sides, or that Hamilton had been in about 10 duels before his last one (at that him and Burr had at least 1 honor dispute before the fatal one).

That and the rivalry/animosity,feud between Hamilton - Burr began way before the election of 1800 and that it wasn't until Hamilton had a hand in denying Burr' the NY governorship that the tension escalated to the point of a duel, not after the election of 1800 as implied in the show.


I thought Chernow, and even the musical, did a good job of showing him to be destructively impulsive. Chernow certainly laid that out in the book (and no one ever really sugarcoats Hamilton's ambitions during the Quasi War) and the musical puts his failings in clear display during the "Hurricane" song as well as the "Adams Administration".

As for being a Tory before becoming a Patriot, that's a bit harsh - heck, half of the Continental Congress could be labeled as Tories turned Patriots by the same token - the decision to go for Independence was never a neat and tidy one, nor quick. People "evolved" back then even before politicians like Obama "evolved" a couple of centuries later. They just didn't have a term for it yet, with Darwin being many years down the road.


I pointed the Tory thing b/c he was known to have made a few speeches in support of Britain.

And yes - the play does a good job of showing his failings. Especially when you get to the Reynolds Pamphlet.
Turns out I might be a little gay. 89Hen 11/7/17

User avatar
CID1990
Level5
Level5
Posts: 19887
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:40 am
I am a fan of: Pie
A.K.A.: CID 1990
Location: กรุงเทพมหานคร

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby CID1990 » Tue Apr 16, 2019 4:32 pm

GannonFan wrote:
CID1990 wrote:
I thought that was common knowledge about Hamilton, until that silly musical whitewashed him

Not surprising he’s the darling of the know-nothing left these days, though


Well, consider that the know-nothing left unfairly despised him and toasted his downfall and death for about the past 200 years with those annual J&J dinners, despite benefitting greatly from and even using a lot of the systems he implemented, I wouldn't begrudge him getting a little too much credit from that political segment now.


^^^ that’s true- I was going to dip into that a little but I didn’t want to go too JSO on it

But their current adulation of him should put to bed any ideas that the left doesn’t require a strong central and weak state governments to realize their goals


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"You however, are an insufferable ankle biting mental chihuahua..." - Clizzoris

User avatar
CID1990
Level5
Level5
Posts: 19887
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:40 am
I am a fan of: Pie
A.K.A.: CID 1990
Location: กรุงเทพมหานคร

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby CID1990 » Tue Apr 16, 2019 4:40 pm

Ibanez wrote:
CID1990 wrote:
I thought that was common knowledge about Hamilton, until that silly musical whitewashed him

Not surprising he’s the darling of the know-nothing left these days, though


The musical is based off of Ron Chernow's biography (and Ron consulted on the development of the play.) Don't get me wrong, I think the musical is great. But you definitely get a sense that he's an impulsive sometime irrational person.

The play does gloss over things like Hamilton being a Tory before switching sides, or that Hamilton had been in about 10 duels before his last one (at that him and Burr had at least 1 honor dispute before the fatal one).

That and the rivalry/animosity,feud between Hamilton - Burr began way before the election of 1800 and that it wasn't until Hamilton had a hand in denying Burr' the NY governorship that the tension escalated to the point of a duel, not after the election of 1800 as implied in the show.


Reading Chernow I notice a pattern of pointing out failures in his subject while simultaneously minimizing them. Grant was another good example of this- Chernow never fully places the responsibility for the corruption in his administration with Grant. You have to believe Grant the wunderkind suddenly became Grant the idiot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"You however, are an insufferable ankle biting mental chihuahua..." - Clizzoris

User avatar
Ibanez
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 49814
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 5:16 pm
I am a fan of: Coastal Carolina

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby Ibanez » Wed Apr 17, 2019 6:14 am

CID1990 wrote:
Ibanez wrote:
The musical is based off of Ron Chernow's biography (and Ron consulted on the development of the play.) Don't get me wrong, I think the musical is great. But you definitely get a sense that he's an impulsive sometime irrational person.

The play does gloss over things like Hamilton being a Tory before switching sides, or that Hamilton had been in about 10 duels before his last one (at that him and Burr had at least 1 honor dispute before the fatal one).

That and the rivalry/animosity,feud between Hamilton - Burr began way before the election of 1800 and that it wasn't until Hamilton had a hand in denying Burr' the NY governorship that the tension escalated to the point of a duel, not after the election of 1800 as implied in the show.


Reading Chernow I notice a pattern of pointing out failures in his subject while simultaneously minimizing them. Grant was another good example of this- Chernow never fully places the responsibility for the corruption in his administration with Grant. You have to believe Grant the wunderkind suddenly became Grant the idiot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You know, i'm not fully through the Grant bio but even during the Civil War chapters, you do see him gloss over his mistakes some. He'll point them out for sure, but Ron quickly moves past them.

But I would imagine all the talk of how Grant gets taken advantage of by his "friends" goes on to explain how corruption was so rampant in his administration. :twocents:
Turns out I might be a little gay. 89Hen 11/7/17

User avatar
CID1990
Level5
Level5
Posts: 19887
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:40 am
I am a fan of: Pie
A.K.A.: CID 1990
Location: กรุงเทพมหานคร

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby CID1990 » Wed Apr 17, 2019 6:37 am

Ibanez wrote:
CID1990 wrote:
Reading Chernow I notice a pattern of pointing out failures in his subject while simultaneously minimizing them. Grant was another good example of this- Chernow never fully places the responsibility for the corruption in his administration with Grant. You have to believe Grant the wunderkind suddenly became Grant the idiot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You know, i'm not fully through the Grant bio but even during the Civil War chapters, you do see him gloss over his mistakes some. He'll point them out for sure, but Ron quickly moves past them.

But I would imagine all the talk of how Grant gets taken advantage of by his "friends" goes on to explain how corruption was so rampant in his administration. :twocents:


That’s right - Grant has to be completely naive for Chernow’s narrative to work

I happen to think Grant was a brilliant military leader who also happened to be willing to turn an intentional blind eye to corruption in his government. Nobody taking Chernow at face value will get that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"You however, are an insufferable ankle biting mental chihuahua..." - Clizzoris

User avatar
Ibanez
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 49814
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 5:16 pm
I am a fan of: Coastal Carolina

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby Ibanez » Wed Apr 17, 2019 7:02 am

CID1990 wrote:
Ibanez wrote:You know, i'm not fully through the Grant bio but even during the Civil War chapters, you do see him gloss over his mistakes some. He'll point them out for sure, but Ron quickly moves past them.

But I would imagine all the talk of how Grant gets taken advantage of by his "friends" goes on to explain how corruption was so rampant in his administration. :twocents:


That’s right - Grant has to be completely naive for Chernow’s narrative to work

I happen to think Grant was a brilliant military leader who also happened to be willing to turn an intentional blind eye to corruption in his government. Nobody taking Chernow at face value will get that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think Grant was naive to a point - his background makes it understandable not excusable. If you look at how he ran the Army vs his Administration, I believe you have to conclude that he turned a blind eye in the White House. His naivete(sp?) got him in trouble and then he just ignored what he knew to be true.
Turns out I might be a little gay. 89Hen 11/7/17

User avatar
CID1990
Level5
Level5
Posts: 19887
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:40 am
I am a fan of: Pie
A.K.A.: CID 1990
Location: กรุงเทพมหานคร

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby CID1990 » Wed Apr 17, 2019 7:40 am

Ibanez wrote:
CID1990 wrote:
That’s right - Grant has to be completely naive for Chernow’s narrative to work

I happen to think Grant was a brilliant military leader who also happened to be willing to turn an intentional blind eye to corruption in his government. Nobody taking Chernow at face value will get that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think Grant was naive to a point - his background makes it understandable not excusable. If you look at how he ran the Army vs his Administration, I believe you have to conclude that he turned a blind eye in the White House. His naivete(sp?) got him in trouble and then he just ignored what he knew to be true.


It’s ironic really - the whitewashing of flawed heroes of the new left is very similar to a LOT of previous “lost cause” scholarship on Confederate military types. It is no coincidence that books like Grant attracted so much attention roughly around the same time Confederate statues were being pulled down. Hamilton and Grant, Seward, and a few others are getting the Washington and the Cherry Tree treatment.

I like reading about people with warts... everybody has them. That’s why Chernow has disappointed me more than once. He is too protective of the people he writes about. I like Grant better for the reality of who he was. Great general, sh1tty President. There’s nothing wrong with that. And Chernow’s Grant was not near the exaggeration as Chernow’s Hamilton.
"You however, are an insufferable ankle biting mental chihuahua..." - Clizzoris

User avatar
Ibanez
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 49814
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 5:16 pm
I am a fan of: Coastal Carolina

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby Ibanez » Wed Apr 17, 2019 7:47 am

CID1990 wrote:
Ibanez wrote:I think Grant was naive to a point - his background makes it understandable not excusable. If you look at how he ran the Army vs his Administration, I believe you have to conclude that he turned a blind eye in the White House. His naivete(sp?) got him in trouble and then he just ignored what he knew to be true.


It’s ironic really - the whitewashing of flawed heroes of the new left is very similar to a LOT of previous “lost cause” scholarship on Confederate military types. It is no coincidence that books like Grant attracted so much attention roughly around the same time Confederate statues were being pulled down. Hamilton and Grant, Seward, and a few others are getting the Washington and the Cherry Tree treatment.

I like reading about people with warts... everybody has them. That’s why Chernow has disappointed me more than once. He is too protective of the people he writes about. I like Grant better for the reality of who he was. Great general, sh1tty President. There’s nothing wrong with that. And Chernow’s Grant was not near the exaggeration as Chernow’s Hamilton.

What are your thoughts on david mccullough? I’m reading his book on Truman and it’s alright. I get the sense that Truman was a geeky dandy who had no business running anything.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Turns out I might be a little gay. 89Hen 11/7/17

User avatar
Chizzang
Level5
Level5
Posts: 16996
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:36 am
I am a fan of: Deflate Gate
A.K.A.: The Quasar Kid
Location: Don't call it Seattle...

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby Chizzang » Thu Apr 18, 2019 9:02 am

CID1990 wrote:
Not surprising he’s the darling of the know-nothing left these days, though


Hamilton isn't anybody's "darling"
That stupid play is as much about Hamilton as it is about Ronald Reagan
which is to say, it isn't...

Hamilton as a historical figure is now like Columbus and Jesus
90% of the information is completely out of context and largely fabricated beyond reasonable evidence

The "Darling" of the left is the Puerto Rican guy freelancing under the guise of being Hamilton

:ohno:
How would you define a Republican?
"Somebody comfortable betting that science is wrong and oil companies are right..."

User avatar
CID1990
Level5
Level5
Posts: 19887
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:40 am
I am a fan of: Pie
A.K.A.: CID 1990
Location: กรุงเทพมหานคร

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby CID1990 » Thu Apr 18, 2019 9:12 am

Chizzang wrote:
CID1990 wrote:
Not surprising he’s the darling of the know-nothing left these days, though


Hamilton isn't anybody's "darling"
That stupid play is as much about Hamilton as it is about Ronald Reagan
which is to say, it isn't...

Hamilton as a historical figure is now like Columbus and Jesus
90% of the information is completely out of context and largely fabricated beyond reasonable evidence

The "Darling" of the left is the Puerto Rican guy freelancing under the guise of being Hamilton

:ohno:


You’re out of touch on this one, bigly


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"You however, are an insufferable ankle biting mental chihuahua..." - Clizzoris

User avatar
Chizzang
Level5
Level5
Posts: 16996
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:36 am
I am a fan of: Deflate Gate
A.K.A.: The Quasar Kid
Location: Don't call it Seattle...

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby Chizzang » Thu Apr 18, 2019 9:29 am

CID1990 wrote:
Chizzang wrote:
Hamilton isn't anybody's "darling"
That stupid play is as much about Hamilton as it is about Ronald Reagan
which is to say, it isn't...

Hamilton as a historical figure is now like Columbus and Jesus
90% of the information is completely out of context and largely fabricated beyond reasonable evidence

The "Darling" of the left is the Puerto Rican guy freelancing under the guise of being Hamilton

:ohno:


You’re out of touch on this one, bigly



I need more information on that please..

:lol:

The play is a complete distortion of Hamilton the person - the guy was a salve trader
and a complete abomination of his political history

Columbus and Jesus are precisely the correct figures of comparison
as there is more bad information than actual information in circulation

So help me out here..?

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/ ... -hamilton/
How would you define a Republican?
"Somebody comfortable betting that science is wrong and oil companies are right..."

Ivytalk
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 21693
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 6:22 pm
I am a fan of: Salisbury University
Location: Dela-Where?

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby Ivytalk » Thu Apr 18, 2019 10:47 am

Chizzang wrote:
CID1990 wrote:
You’re out of touch on this one, bigly



I need more information on that please..

:lol:

The play is a complete distortion of Hamilton the person - the guy was a salve trader
and a complete abomination of his political history

Columbus and Jesus are precisely the correct figures of comparison
as there is more bad information than actual information in circulation

So help me out here..?

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/ ... -hamilton/

A salve trader? So Hamilton dealt in fine body ointments? :?
Don’t get me wrong. I am generally a fan of tax increases. — John “Bernie!” St. Onge 11/16/18

User avatar
GannonFan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 12249
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
I am a fan of: Delaware
A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby GannonFan » Thu Apr 18, 2019 10:58 am

Ibanez wrote:
CID1990 wrote:
It’s ironic really - the whitewashing of flawed heroes of the new left is very similar to a LOT of previous “lost cause” scholarship on Confederate military types. It is no coincidence that books like Grant attracted so much attention roughly around the same time Confederate statues were being pulled down. Hamilton and Grant, Seward, and a few others are getting the Washington and the Cherry Tree treatment.

I like reading about people with warts... everybody has them. That’s why Chernow has disappointed me more than once. He is too protective of the people he writes about. I like Grant better for the reality of who he was. Great general, sh1tty President. There’s nothing wrong with that. And Chernow’s Grant was not near the exaggeration as Chernow’s Hamilton.

What are your thoughts on david mccullough? I’m reading his book on Truman and it’s alright. I get the sense that Truman was a geeky dandy who had no business running anything.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That has always been my favorite biography. Sure, Truman doesn't come off as being raised and educated to be the leader of the US, especially, arguably, at its greatest ascendency on the world stage right at the culmination of WWII. But it does paint Truman as the everyday, typical American, and a guy who just went about doing his best in the job he had. I thought the characterization of the British concerning and contrasting FDR and Truman was spot on - FDR was the example of the American elite (which constituted a tiny sliver of America) where Truman was much more representative of the majority of America. And I think Truman did pretty well over his terms.
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation

User avatar
GannonFan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 12249
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
I am a fan of: Delaware
A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby GannonFan » Thu Apr 18, 2019 11:12 am

CID1990 wrote:
Ibanez wrote:You know, i'm not fully through the Grant bio but even during the Civil War chapters, you do see him gloss over his mistakes some. He'll point them out for sure, but Ron quickly moves past them.

But I would imagine all the talk of how Grant gets taken advantage of by his "friends" goes on to explain how corruption was so rampant in his administration. :twocents:


That’s right - Grant has to be completely naive for Chernow’s narrative to work

I happen to think Grant was a brilliant military leader who also happened to be willing to turn an intentional blind eye to corruption in his government. Nobody taking Chernow at face value will get that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I read "Grant" and I didn't take it entirely that way. Remember, you're viewing this from the present with all of the information we know now regarding the real bad players in Grant's administration while also viewing Grant's ability to access and know that information again through a scope of today's technology. This was 1869 America, access to information wasn't that simple and clear. And Grant was always dependent on having good people work for him. He wouldn't have been half the general he was if his confidence in Sherman and Sheridan was poorly placed, which it clearly was not. With that said, I think Chernow is pretty clear that Grant did intentionally ignore or try not to believe information that he did have. That is certainly one of the failings of Grant's Presidency in that he didn't act on information that he knew had to be true.

With the other stuff, though, I think Chernow does a great job of reminding people of the bigger things going on in the Grant Administration and his work/effort in that, namely in Reconstruction. The things he did and the extent that he tried to overcome not only the violent and determined racism in the South to keep the idea of slavery and second class citizenship alive (which you can argue the South was successful in doing for another roughly 100 years) but also the disengaged racism undermining him in the North were heroic in the face of the total amount of racism that was alive and well in 1869 America. Grant is somehow seen as a failure because Reconstruction failed, but when you consider the amount of resistance he had to go up against (and again, it wasn't until the 1950's and 1960's that we even began to see the start of the receeding of that racism) then you come away admiring what he did and tried to do more than you brand him a failure. No one would've been able to overcome the racism of the era. Lincoln's legacy is helped that he died rather than he too eventually being a failure in the face of all that racism.
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation

User avatar
Chizzang
Level5
Level5
Posts: 16996
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:36 am
I am a fan of: Deflate Gate
A.K.A.: The Quasar Kid
Location: Don't call it Seattle...

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby Chizzang » Thu Apr 18, 2019 11:15 am

Ivytalk wrote:
Chizzang wrote:
I need more information on that please..

:lol:

The play is a complete distortion of Hamilton the person - the guy was a salve trader
and a complete abomination of his political history

Columbus and Jesus are precisely the correct figures of comparison
as there is more bad information than actual information in circulation

So help me out here..?

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/ ... -hamilton/

A salve trader? So Hamilton dealt in fine body ointments? :?



:ohno:
How would you define a Republican?
"Somebody comfortable betting that science is wrong and oil companies are right..."

User avatar
GannonFan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 12249
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
I am a fan of: Delaware
A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby GannonFan » Thu Apr 18, 2019 11:32 am

Chizzang wrote:
CID1990 wrote:
You’re out of touch on this one, bigly



I need more information on that please..

:lol:

The play is a complete distortion of Hamilton the person - the guy was a salve trader
and a complete abomination of his political history

Columbus and Jesus are precisely the correct figures of comparison
as there is more bad information than actual information in circulation

So help me out here..?

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/ ... -hamilton/


No offense, but that's a lazy article you cited.

“In the sense of the Ellis Island immigrant narrative, he was not an immigrant,” she said. “He was not pro-immigrant, either.

“He was not an abolitionist,” she added. “He bought and sold slaves for his in-laws, and opposing slavery was never at the forefront of his agenda.

“He was not a champion of the little guy, like the show portrays,” she said. “He was elitist. He was in favor of having a president for life.”
...
Set amid the Revolution, the play fails to depict the central role played by slavery at that moment in history, and also neglects to mention that most of the Founding Fathers were slave owners.


First of all, he's only not an immigrant if you take the premise that to be an immigrant you had to come in during or after the Ellis Island era. Why pick that era, other than to buoy a weak point. As to not being "pro-immigrant", he wasn't technically anti-immigrant either. Rather, immigration wasn't really a big topic back then since people were going to come anyway.

Second, Hamilton was a founding member of the first and only anti-slavery organization in New York at the time and that organization ended up eliminating the import of slaves to New York and then banning slavery in all of New York state. That's abolition right there. To say he wasn't an abolitionist simply because it wasn't the most important thing on his agenda is again silly and is ignorant of all the other stuff he was doing at the time (you know, crafting how the Treasury Department would run for the next two centuries).

As for the little guy, the show doesn't portray him as a champion of the little guy at all - where does the author even get that. Was the author stuck in the line at the concessions during intermission and just assumed something?

And lastly, let's be honest, slavery was certainly the central issue in the Civil War 80 years later in America and for much of the run-up to it, but slavery was not in anyway a central issue in the Revolution itself.

If this is where Chizz is coming up with his stuff then it's pretty clear why he's out of his element here. Quick, bring up Comcast! :rofl:
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation

User avatar
Chizzang
Level5
Level5
Posts: 16996
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:36 am
I am a fan of: Deflate Gate
A.K.A.: The Quasar Kid
Location: Don't call it Seattle...

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby Chizzang » Thu Apr 18, 2019 11:40 am

GannonFan wrote:
Chizzang wrote:
I need more information on that please..

:lol:

The play is a complete distortion of Hamilton the person - the guy was a salve trader
and a complete abomination of his political history

Columbus and Jesus are precisely the correct figures of comparison
as there is more bad information than actual information in circulation

So help me out here..?

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/ ... -hamilton/


No offense, but that's a lazy article you cited.

“In the sense of the Ellis Island immigrant narrative, he was not an immigrant,” she said. “He was not pro-immigrant, either.

“He was not an abolitionist,” she added. “He bought and sold slaves for his in-laws, and opposing slavery was never at the forefront of his agenda.

“He was not a champion of the little guy, like the show portrays,” she said. “He was elitist. He was in favor of having a president for life.”
...
Set amid the Revolution, the play fails to depict the central role played by slavery at that moment in history, and also neglects to mention that most of the Founding Fathers were slave owners.


First of all, he's only not an immigrant if you take the premise that to be an immigrant you had to come in during or after the Ellis Island era. Why pick that era, other than to buoy a weak point. As to not being "pro-immigrant", he wasn't technically anti-immigrant either. Rather, immigration wasn't really a big topic back then since people were going to come anyway.

Second, Hamilton was a founding member of the first and only anti-slavery organization in New York at the time and that organization ended up eliminating the import of slaves to New York and then banning slavery in all of New York state. That's abolition right there. To say he wasn't an abolitionist simply because it wasn't the most important thing on his agenda is again silly and is ignorant of all the other stuff he was doing at the time (you know, crafting how the Treasury Department would run for the next two centuries).

As for the little guy, the show doesn't portray him as a champion of the little guy at all - where does the author even get that. Was the author stuck in the line at the concessions during intermission and just assumed something?

And lastly, let's be honest, slavery was certainly the central issue in the Civil War 80 years later in America and for much of the run-up to it, but slavery was not in anyway a central issue in the Revolution itself.

If this is where Chizz is coming up with his stuff then it's pretty clear why he's out of his element here. Quick, bring up Comcast! :rofl:


I'll just take your word for it I guess...
Okay - the Hamilton play is spot on - I was wrong

Problem solved
The left's love affair with Hamilton is based on the excellent portrayal
and historically accurate data points presented therein

:coffee:
How would you define a Republican?
"Somebody comfortable betting that science is wrong and oil companies are right..."

User avatar
GannonFan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 12249
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
I am a fan of: Delaware
A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby GannonFan » Thu Apr 18, 2019 12:18 pm

Chizzang wrote:
GannonFan wrote:
No offense, but that's a lazy article you cited.



First of all, he's only not an immigrant if you take the premise that to be an immigrant you had to come in during or after the Ellis Island era. Why pick that era, other than to buoy a weak point. As to not being "pro-immigrant", he wasn't technically anti-immigrant either. Rather, immigration wasn't really a big topic back then since people were going to come anyway.

Second, Hamilton was a founding member of the first and only anti-slavery organization in New York at the time and that organization ended up eliminating the import of slaves to New York and then banning slavery in all of New York state. That's abolition right there. To say he wasn't an abolitionist simply because it wasn't the most important thing on his agenda is again silly and is ignorant of all the other stuff he was doing at the time (you know, crafting how the Treasury Department would run for the next two centuries).

As for the little guy, the show doesn't portray him as a champion of the little guy at all - where does the author even get that. Was the author stuck in the line at the concessions during intermission and just assumed something?

And lastly, let's be honest, slavery was certainly the central issue in the Civil War 80 years later in America and for much of the run-up to it, but slavery was not in anyway a central issue in the Revolution itself.

If this is where Chizz is coming up with his stuff then it's pretty clear why he's out of his element here. Quick, bring up Comcast! :rofl:


I'll just take your word for it I guess...
Okay - the Hamilton play is spot on - I was wrong

Problem solved
The left's love affair with Hamilton is based on the excellent portrayal
and historically accurate data points presented therein

:coffee:


Have you seen the musical? Or read Chernow's book? Asking for a friend.
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation

User avatar
Chizzang
Level5
Level5
Posts: 16996
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:36 am
I am a fan of: Deflate Gate
A.K.A.: The Quasar Kid
Location: Don't call it Seattle...

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby Chizzang » Thu Apr 18, 2019 12:32 pm

GannonFan wrote:
Chizzang wrote:
I'll just take your word for it I guess...
Okay - the Hamilton play is spot on - I was wrong

Problem solved
The left's love affair with Hamilton is based on the excellent portrayal
and historically accurate data points presented therein

:coffee:


Have you seen the musical? Or read Chernow's book? Asking for a friend.


Don't need to go to the play I've read the script
https://www.allmusicals.com/lyrics/hami ... milton.htm
How would you define a Republican?
"Somebody comfortable betting that science is wrong and oil companies are right..."

User avatar
GannonFan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 12249
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
I am a fan of: Delaware
A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby GannonFan » Thu Apr 18, 2019 12:33 pm

Chizzang wrote:
GannonFan wrote:
Have you seen the musical? Or read Chernow's book? Asking for a friend.


Don't need to go to the play I've read the script
https://www.allmusicals.com/lyrics/hami ... milton.htm


Awesomesauce.
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation

User avatar
CID1990
Level5
Level5
Posts: 19887
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:40 am
I am a fan of: Pie
A.K.A.: CID 1990
Location: กรุงเทพมหานคร

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby CID1990 » Thu Apr 18, 2019 6:10 pm

Chizzang wrote:
CID1990 wrote:
You’re out of touch on this one, bigly



I need more information on that please..

:lol:

The play is a complete distortion of Hamilton the person - the guy was a salve trader
and a complete abomination of his political history

Columbus and Jesus are precisely the correct figures of comparison
as there is more bad information than actual information in circulation

So help me out here..?

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/ ... -hamilton/


You aren’t wrong about any of that^^^

I take issue with you saying that Hamilton isn’t a darling of the left right now. He is - precisely because of the distortions you talk about.

Turns out the left is just as capable of twisting history to suit as the right is

Actually I can’t wait to see Randall Park dancing and singing “Little Red Book” on stage


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"You however, are an insufferable ankle biting mental chihuahua..." - Clizzoris

houndawg
Level5
Level5
Posts: 16370
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
I am a fan of: SIU
A.K.A.: houndawg
Location: Egypt

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby houndawg » Thu Apr 18, 2019 6:18 pm

Silenoz wrote:
houndawg wrote:
Arguably the best SF novel ever written. I'm a huge Neal Stephenson fan but Canticle is a high-water mark for the ages


Reading Snow Crash right now

Also just finished Masters of Doom, which incidentally mentioned SC 4-5 times


:thumb:

SC is probably my favorite of his after Cryptonomicon, though if he's written anything since REAMDE I haven't read it
Subvert the dominant paradigm

User avatar
Chizzang
Level5
Level5
Posts: 16996
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:36 am
I am a fan of: Deflate Gate
A.K.A.: The Quasar Kid
Location: Don't call it Seattle...

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby Chizzang » Thu Apr 18, 2019 6:55 pm

CID1990 wrote:
Chizzang wrote:
I need more information on that please..

:lol:

The play is a complete distortion of Hamilton the person - the guy was a salve trader
and a complete abomination of his political history

Columbus and Jesus are precisely the correct figures of comparison
as there is more bad information than actual information in circulation

So help me out here..?

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/ ... -hamilton/


You aren’t wrong about any of that^^^

I take issue with you saying that Hamilton isn’t a darling of the left right now. He is - precisely because of the distortions you talk about.

Turns out the left is just as capable of twisting history to suit as the right is

Actually I can’t wait to see Randall Park dancing and singing “Little Red Book” on stage



My point - which I articulated poorly - is that the Left isn't in love with Hamilton
They are in love with the imaginary distorted presentation of Hamilton

The modern left would likely hate Hamilton were he alive today
probably as much as the Right would hate the actual Ronald Reagan

Human culture has a way of really beating the drum to hero worship the reconstructions of the dead
How would you define a Republican?
"Somebody comfortable betting that science is wrong and oil companies are right..."

houndawg
Level5
Level5
Posts: 16370
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
I am a fan of: SIU
A.K.A.: houndawg
Location: Egypt

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby houndawg » Thu Apr 18, 2019 7:27 pm

GannonFan wrote:
Ibanez wrote:What are your thoughts on david mccullough? I’m reading his book on Truman and it’s alright. I get the sense that Truman was a geeky dandy who had no business running anything.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That has always been my favorite biography. Sure, Truman doesn't come off as being raised and educated to be the leader of the US, especially, arguably, at its greatest ascendency on the world stage right at the culmination of WWII. But it does paint Truman as the everyday, typical American, and a guy who just went about doing his best in the job he had. I thought the characterization of the British concerning and contrasting FDR and Truman was spot on - FDR was the example of the American elite (which constituted a tiny sliver of America) where Truman was much more representative of the majority of America. And I think Truman did pretty well over his terms.


One of my neighbors was the White House photograper for the Truman admin.
Subvert the dominant paradigm

User avatar
CID1990
Level5
Level5
Posts: 19887
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:40 am
I am a fan of: Pie
A.K.A.: CID 1990
Location: กรุงเทพมหานคร

Re: CS.com Book Club: Spring 2019

Postby CID1990 » Thu Apr 18, 2019 10:39 pm

Chizzang wrote:
CID1990 wrote:
You aren’t wrong about any of that^^^

I take issue with you saying that Hamilton isn’t a darling of the left right now. He is - precisely because of the distortions you talk about.

Turns out the left is just as capable of twisting history to suit as the right is

Actually I can’t wait to see Randall Park dancing and singing “Little Red Book” on stage



My point - which I articulated poorly - is that the Left isn't in love with Hamilton
They are in love with the imaginary distorted presentation of Hamilton

The modern left would likely hate Hamilton were he alive today
probably as much as the Right would hate the actual Ronald Reagan

Human culture has a way of really beating the drum to hero worship the reconstructions of the dead


Now I'm disappointed you didn't comment on my Randall Park comment
"You however, are an insufferable ankle biting mental chihuahua..." - Clizzoris


Return to “Politics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: HI54UNI, Pwns and 38 guests