re-read charitably and not in a haze of beery grumpiness it's not really that pretentious, I mistook your implication of subtext for a different more anticom point and transferred my disappointment at the book into anger at you. once you explained the foreign policy interpretation you're working with, your initial comment made a lot more sense to me
re-read charitably and not in a haze of beery grumpiness it's not really that pretentious, I mistook your implication of subtext for a different more anticom point and transferred my disappointment at the book into anger at you. once you explained the foreign policy interpretation you're working with, your initial comment made a lot more sense to me
Hey, no harm, no foul. I probably should have just lead with my premise rather than bury the lede like that.