There are 554 comments.

1. Member
   philo

   @philo

   8:43 AM EDT ⋅ Mar 10, 2019

   Steve C. (View Comment): My personal favorites are The Soul of Battle and Carnage and Culture.

   I second that motion.

2. Member
   Western Chauvinist

   @WesternChauvinist

   

   9:00 AM EDT ⋅ Mar 10, 2019

   philo (View Comment):

   Steve C. (View Comment): My personal favorites are The Soul of Battle and Carnage and Culture.

   I second that motion.

   The Soul of Battle was great. I haven’t gotten around to Carnage and Culture, but it’s on my list. Pretty much anything VDH writes is on my list. It could be his grocery list…

3. Inactive
   Jim Beck

   @JimBeck

   12:49 PM EDT ⋅ Mar 10, 2019

   For those not familiar with VDH,

   Here is the Wikipedia page:

   https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victor_Davis_Hanson

   Any conservative will find enough there to inspire their curiosity!  The Wiki information is vast.  His personal background is unmatched the balance between his life as an academic and his life in Fresno in a five generation home with grape and now almond orchards gives him a world view greater than anyone else in this world of conservative thought.   In Fresno we don’t care about your degrees they mean nothing can you weld.

   Books:  “Carnage and Culture” 2001, how Western culture has benefited its armies over time

                  “Mexifornia” 2003, how immigration has changed California and its effects on US citizens and immigrants.  This was my first intro to VDH.  He has Hispanic folks in his family, and lives in an area where Hispanics have become maybe the majority.  He has also taught at the college level to students in California from all backgrounds.

                 “Ripples of Battle” 2003 How the results of battle are impossible to predict, ie Shiloh saves Sherman and Sherman saves Lincoln

                   “The Second World Wars” Unlike any other book on war I’ve read, great.

   If you are lucky enough to have never read anything by VDH, you have a lot of great reading to look forward to, he is not like anyone else you will read.

4. Member
   Henry Racette

   @HenryRacette

   Post author

   1:42 PM EDT ⋅ Mar 10, 2019

   I’m going to eschew the reviews until I’ve read the book. I received it today.

5. Member
   Steve C.

   @user_531302

   3:56 PM EDT ⋅ Mar 10, 2019

   There are many conservatives who use the punchline, “That’s how you got Trump.”

   Hanson explains WHY we got Trump.

6. Coolidge
   Roderic Fabian

   @rhfabian

   5:28 PM EDT ⋅ Mar 10, 2019

   Jon1979 (View Comment):

   I think it’s a combination of an intense distaste for Trump, sparked by his personality and actions before he was president, combined with the fact that nobody is listening to them after he was elected.

   Yes.  The strong emotional reaction (NOKD!!!) is what determines their opinion of Trump.  All else is rationalization, which becomes more and more incoherent.

   Politics is about what government policies we live under, not about whether the POTUS makes us feel all warm and fluffy inside or creases his pant legs the way we do.

7. Inactive
   Joshua Bissey

   @TheSockMonkey

   6:37 AM EDT ⋅ Mar 11, 2019

   Henry Racette (View Comment):

   I’m going to eschew the reviews until I’ve read the book.

   Now that’s an approach that might just be crazy enough to work.

8. Inactive
   Joshua Bissey

   @TheSockMonkey

   6:54 AM EDT ⋅ Mar 11, 2019

   HeavyWater (View Comment):

   Here is an excerpt from The Bulwark’s review of “Sophistry in the Service of Evil.”

   The single episode involving Trump and race that Hanson explores in any depth is the 2016 Judge Curiel affair. During the presidential campaign, Trump baldly stated that a sitting federal judge born in the United States to immigrant parents could not be impartial in a fraud case against him. “We are building a wall. He’s a Mexican,” were Trump’s precise words. Paul Ryan called Trump’s remarks “a textbook definition of a racist comment.” Hanson, without mentioning Ryan’s judgment, begs to differ. He acknowledges that Trump was “likely wrong” in holding the view that Judge Curiel harbored some innate bias. But Trump, he continues, was merely “clumsy in his phraseology” and, moreover, his identification of the American-born judge as Mexican was actually “correct,” explaining that there is never a “commensurate outcry about identifying Swedish Americans as ‘Swedes’ or using ‘the Irish’ for Irish Americans.”

   It’s an interesting review, though I don’t agree with all of it.

   He seems to be complaining that Hanson didn’t spend enough time on Trump’s alleged racism. But why would he? After all, the book is called, “The Case for Trump,” not, “The Case Against Trump.”

9. Coolidge
   TBA

   @RobtGilsdorf

   10:14 AM EDT ⋅ Mar 11, 2019

   Joshua Bissey (View Comment):

   Henry Racette (View Comment):

   I’m going to eschew the reviews until I’ve read the book.

   Now that’s an approach that might just be crazy enough to work.

   “Sentence first, verdict afterwards.” – the Queen of Hearts 

10. Coolidge
    TBA

    @RobtGilsdorf

    10:16 AM EDT ⋅ Mar 11, 2019

    Joshua Bissey (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Here is an excerpt from The Bulwark’s review of “Sophistry in the Service of Evil.”

    The single episode involving Trump and race that Hanson explores in any depth is the 2016 Judge Curiel affair. During the presidential campaign, Trump baldly stated that a sitting federal judge born in the United States to immigrant parents could not be impartial in a fraud case against him. “We are building a wall. He’s a Mexican,” were Trump’s precise words. Paul Ryan called Trump’s remarks “a textbook definition of a racist comment.” Hanson, without mentioning Ryan’s judgment, begs to differ. He acknowledges that Trump was “likely wrong” in holding the view that Judge Curiel harbored some innate bias. But Trump, he continues, was merely “clumsy in his phraseology” and, moreover, his identification of the American-born judge as Mexican was actually “correct,” explaining that there is never a “commensurate outcry about identifying Swedish Americans as ‘Swedes’ or using ‘the Irish’ for Irish Americans.”

    It’s an interesting review, though I don’t agree with all of it.

    He seems to be complaining that Hanson didn’t spend enough time on Trump’s alleged racism. But why would he? After all, the book is called, “The Case for Trump,” not, “The Case Against Trump.”

    I wonder how short would book reviews would become if an editor removed every line that could be boiled down to, ‘well, that’s not the way I would have written it.’ 

11. Member
    Mark Camp

    @MarkCamp

    11:16 AM EDT ⋅ Mar 11, 2019

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    I’m going to eschew the reviews until I’ve read the book. I received it today.

    I’m going to eschew looking at this Comment until it’s repeated.

    Then…yep, you guessed it.

    I’m going to view the re-eschews.

12. Member
    Steve C.

    @user_531302

    2:32 PM EDT ⋅ Mar 12, 2019

    Steve C. (View Comment):
    Before 9/11, he was relatively unknown, toiling in the vineyards of Ancient Greek history.

    Was this too subtle? Or am I guilty, as my wife often says, “You’re amusing yourself.”

    

13. Coolidge
    TBA

    @RobtGilsdorf

    5:12 PM EDT ⋅ Mar 12, 2019

    Steve C. (View Comment):

    Steve C. (View Comment):
    Before 9/11, he was relatively unknown, toiling in the vineyards of Ancient Greek history.

    Was this too subtle? Or am I guilty, as my wife often says, “You’re amusing yourself.”

    

    Oh. Amusing. Right. 

14. Coolidge
    indymb

    @indymb

    1:12 PM EDT ⋅ Mar 25, 2019

    I’m in the middle of Audible version of “The Case for Trump,” and it is excellent. It re-explains to those who didn’t read “The Art of the Deal” how President Trump operates and how events created the unsung voter blocks that carried him over the top in the Electoral Colleage. [Sidenote for those with TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome]: Would you pay my taxpayer share of the $30+ million Muller+team ran through?]