dagblog - Comments for "Happy Fourth of July (Boston Iced Tea Edition)"

Well, we already took him:

Barth — Tue, 05 Jul 2011 15:07:54 +0000

In reply to God, Lackey has been a mess

Well, we already took him: in Andrew Miller. There is Michael Bowden, but the media (better than the beltway boys but not by a lot), is agitating for Kevin Millwood, who has pitched well in his last five or six starts after a tough first game and bombing out with Scranton/Wilkes Barre (NYY).

John Thomase's lead Sox story in the Herald likens each Lackey start to the feeling yoy got when President GW Bush got re-elected. (The sports department is apparently immune from the poltics of the rest of the paper).

God, Lackey has been a mess

Doctor Cleveland — Tue, 05 Jul 2011 01:37:57 +0000

In reply to Whilst scoffing away, that

God, Lackey has been a mess this year. Driving your ERA up a whole run in under three innings, when he started with an ERA near 7. Who's throwing strong in Pawtucket?

Fair enough, but I'd say the

Doctor Cleveland — Tue, 05 Jul 2011 01:36:38 +0000

In reply to Happy 4th, Doc. If I may add

Fair enough, but I'd say the richest man in America was still small fry to Parliament: the wealthiest colonists were generally on a par with provincial British gentlemen.The East India Company was massive. And some local Bostonians, such as Governor Hutchinson, were East India Company shareholders.

And it's certainly true that the original Tea Party involved populist rage yoked to the interests of local elites, like Hancock. Part of my Fourth of July reading is Ray Raphael's indispensable People's History of the American Revolution, which looks at the Revolution from the common people's perspective.

Part of the story of the Revolution is what Jack Rakove calls the "revolt of the moderates," when the Tory party demonized any compromise or moderation until they drove the Franklins and Hancocks and Washingtons, the people who should have been the local representatives of the Empire, over to the rebel side. (Rakove's Revolutionaries is the other half of my holiday reading list this year.)

Thanks for the history

acanuck — Mon, 04 Jul 2011 21:38:08 +0000

In reply to Happy 4th, Doc. If I may add

Thanks for the history lessons. Hancock's flourish now makes sense. I couldn't figure out why you'd celebrate a country that refused to serve you iced tea until age 21. Then I looked it up. My own cluelessness is slowly eroding. Happy holiday.

Whilst scoffing away, that

Barth — Mon, 04 Jul 2011 20:00:49 +0000

In reply to Happy Fourth of July (Boston Iced Tea Edition)

Whilst scoffing away, that "fer sure" guy from Texas by way of Anaheim, California was coughing up buckets of runs. His wife is ill and I have sympathy for that situation, but he is not doing our country any good today.

Plus, for some reason, the Red Sox are required to wear comic softball caps and uniforms with their numbers in red. July 4 should be a day for tradition, not to sell more, funny, uniforms, but it is 2011 and a buck is a buck.

Happy 4th, Doc. If I may add

Michael Wolraich — Mon, 04 Jul 2011 17:41:03 +0000

In reply to Happy Fourth of July (Boston Iced Tea Edition)

Happy 4th, Doc. If I may add a slight clarification, the East India Company already had a monopoly on tea trade to the colonies. The Tea Act of 1773 expanded the monopoly by allowing the Company to appoint its own licensees to sell tea directly to consumers, bypassing Boston merchant houses like the House of Hancock. The East India Company then compounded the provocation by appointing American merchants with loyalist sympathies as its exclusive agents.

As a result, the Tea Act radicalized Hancock and other Boston merchants, transforming them from moderate opponents of British taxes into firebreathing rebels. Small merchants were certainly affected, but John Hancock was hardly a small merchant. His company was huge in its day with dealings in real estate, shipping, banking, and every kind of retail, all of which made John Hancock one of the richest men in America.

So basically, the Tea Act fomented the revolution by pushing Boston's staid upper classes into an alliance with rebellious mob leaders like Sam Adams.

For more details, I highly recommend American Tempest: How the Boston Tea Party Sparked a Revolution by Harlow Unger, which I've just finished reading. It's a page turner.

PS As a college freshman well under the age of 21, I once visited a comedy club in Boston. I nervously attempted to order a Long Island Ice Tea but called it a Boston Ice Tea by mistake. The waiter corrected me and fortunately did not card me, though despite my obvious cluelessness.