"Sarah Palin Gets The 2nd Amendment And Paul Revere’s Ride Wrong"

[East_TN_Patriot]

Sarah Palin Gets The 2nd Amendment And Paul Revere's Ride Wrong

[Guest mosinon]

anyone who speaks in public will, on occasion, slip up. Smart folks learn from this and stay away from topics they aren't all that familiar with. History seems to be something Sarah should stay away from. That and questions about what she reads.

She really needs better handlers to be viable.

[1gewehr]

OK, listened to Palin's speech. She didn't say anything inaccurate. The British WERE going to Lexington and Concord to seize American arms. Specifically, several small cannon and powder stores. After the warnings given by riders from Boston, those stores were moved further away.

Nowhere did she reference the 2nd Amendment.

Again, rather than make Palin look stupid, the press just makes themselves look ignorant.

[LagerHead]

OK, listened to Palin's speech. She didn't say anything inaccurate. The British WERE going to Lexington and Concord to seize American arms. Specifically, several small cannon and powder stores. After the warnings given by riders from Boston, those stores were moved further away.

Nowhere did she reference the 2nd Amendment.

Again, rather than make Palin look stupid, the press just makes themselves look ignorant.

That's not totally true. Most people will be ignorant of that fact. That being the case they will think Palin is wrong, thereby making her look stupid in the eyes of the general public. Unfortunate but true. Hell I knew that and forgot about it while reading the story. Good point though.

[VolunteerGuns]

OK, listened to Palin's speech. She didn't say anything inaccurate. The British WERE going to Lexington and Concord to seize American arms. Specifically, several small cannon and powder stores. After the warnings given by riders from Boston, those stores were moved further away.

Nowhere did she reference the 2nd Amendment.

Again, rather than make Palin look stupid, the press just makes themselves look ignorant.

This.

[mav]

Another display of the media's animus for Palin. I remember the deafening silence from the media when Obama talked about going to 57 states with 3 to go. Everytime I read or hear some elitist or beltway-type criticize Palin for whatever it just makes me like her more.

[Guest Gunbunnie]

I did not hear anything that was wrong in her statement.

[Textennian]

Another display of the media's animus for Palin. I remember the deafening silence from the media when Obama talked about going to 57 states with 3 to go. Everytime I read or hear some elitist or beltway-type criticize Palin for whatever it just makes me like her more.

+1. I love her more each day.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Guest 6.8 AR]

That reporter looked really stupid after watching the video, but that's her job. She is

paid to discredit enemies of socialism. I didn't hear anything wrong with Sarah's statement, either.

It was impromptu, not from a teleprompter.

[JG55]

So Now All These People Will Apologize to Sarah Palin About Paul Revere, Right?

As with most people, I simply took at face value the popular version that Paul Revere warned that the British were coming, the British were coming.

Not having any real reason to look into it any deeper, Sarah Palin's statement that Revere warned the British that the colonial militias were waiting seemed odd.

But it appears that the popular version is not complete.

In fact, as pointed out at Conservatives4Palin, Revere did in fact tell the British that the colonial militias, who had been alerted, were waiting for them. Here is the original historical text written by Revere (spelling in original, bold added):

I observed a Wood at a Small distance, & made for that. When I got there, out Started Six officers, on Horse back,and orderd me to dismount;-one of them, who appeared to have the command, examined me, where I came from,& what my Name Was? I told him. it was Revere, he asked if it was Paul? I told him yes He asked me if I was an express? I answered in the afirmative. He demanded what time I left Boston?

I told him; and aded, that their troops had catched aground in passing the River, and that There would be five hundred Americans there in a short time, for I had alarmed the Country all the way up.

He imediately rode towards those who stoppd us, when all five of them came down upon a full gallop; one of them, whom I afterwards found to be Major Mitchel, of the 5th Regiment, Clapped his pistol to my head, called me by name, & told me he was going to ask me some questions, & if I did not give him true answers, he would blow my brains out. He then asked me similar questions to those above. He then orderd me to mount my Horse, after searching me for arms

Palin's short statement on the video was less than clear; that sometimes happens but the part of the statement which has people screaming -- that Revere warned the British that the colonial militias were waiting -- appears to be true.

I've learned something new today, about Paul Revere.

The leading lights of the left-blogosphere have made fools of themselves, as have people who are not of the left-blogosphere. I presume they all will be apologizing.

Update: Aaron Worthing at Patterico has a round-up of all the hyperventilated left-blogospheric reaction, including by Think Progress, which writes:

It’s hard to imagine why Revere would warn the British of anything, or why he’d do it with bells and gun shots.

This account in "Paul Revere's Ride" by David Hackett Fischer (Oxford University Press 1994), may be of interest to Think Progress and all the others laughing because they purport to be so much better informed than Palin:

"A townsman remembered that 'repeated gunshots, the beating of drums and the ringing of bells filled the air.'.... Along the North Shore of Massachusetts, church bells began to toll and the heavy beat of drums could be heard for many miles in the night air."

It's available on Google Books.

Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion: So Now All These People Will Apologize to Sarah Palin About Paul Revere, Right?

[East_TN_Patriot]

Boston Herald: Experts Back Sarah Palin's Historical Account

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/view/2011_0606you_betcha_she_was_right_experts_back_palins_historical_account/

[dlm37015]

i think palin would be great for this country but will never get the ghance to lead it. both parties are scared to death of her wouldnt a cain -palin ticket be nice

[Guest HvyMtl]

Ok. She is struck with Biden Syndrome. She got it wrong. She never thought of that little known part where, held by the British, Revere partially told some info.

Now, I hear she is claiming the question was a "gotcha media" type. Um. No.

Basically put, if she handled it like this: I was just really excited, enjoying the kind people, enjoying the history, and enjoying where I was, I got facts wrong. Sorry. And the story would end quickly.

Instead, she has not done so. Proclaiming, she was right, even when wrong, is not a good character flaw to have when in the Office of the Presidency. We have had too much of that character flaw already.

[East_TN_Patriot]

One of my Facebook friends asked me what I think of Palin. Here is my response:

I can't stand the woman because she is all empty rhetoric with no substance. She is the Republican version of Barack Obama. She just talks about "hope and change" in right-wing terms. She has no concrete plans or proposals to deal with any social issues. She has no concrete experience at anything except as mayor of a small town and partial term as governor that she quit because she couldn't take the pressure. That's it. She has no meaningful education except a BS in journalism that took her almost a decade to earn after switching to half a dozen schools. It took me 8 to get my BS degree, but I was working full-time and stayed at the same school. It took me over 4 to get my MS degree, but I was working full-time and stayed at the same school. Palin did neither. She didn't even work on the school newspaper. She's definitely no better than someone who spent some time as a "community organizer" and a partial term as US Senator.

What scares me is that the vast majority of the right-wing voters who criticize Obama as being an empty shirt who was elected only because he gave good speeches are the exact same voters who are lapping up Palin's empty speeches and have no sense that they are caught up in the same cult of personality that Obama voters got caught up in. Mark my words, if that woman gets elected POTUS we'll be in worse shape than we started.

Even a stopped clock is right twice per day. Palin got it right because she knew just enough to keep from being blatantly incorrect, and in my mind her lack of articulation on the topic is evidence. Either way, as I alluded to above, there are plenty of other issues to worry about regarding Palin without worrying about her thoughts on Paul Revere.

[Mike.357]

kinda funny but I had thought from reading I have done on the American revolution that part of the reason Revere made the ride was to not only warn patriots to move their powder but also to warn the British that militias were banding and coming for a fight in hopes the British would back off a bit.

[greenego]

1. I heard a historian on NPR (I was driving to Atlanta scanning the radio channels) agree with her. He said she basically got it right. If it was on NPR, has to be right.
   

[Mark@Sea]

She was right, and the MSM was wrong - as were a bunch of leftie bloggers...

Doesn't matter, though. Too many people bought the hype, and either their hatred or ignorance won't let them see what is actually there. "There are none so blind as those who will not see".

You have to be able to see through the labels - those applied by others, and those claimed by some - to what the facts are.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

i think palin would be great for this country but will never get the ghance to lead it. both parties are scared to death of her wouldnt a cain -palin ticket be nice

Now a Cain-Paul ticket, just MIGHT get some traction....

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Either you like her or you don't. Talking about her

time to get a degree or whether she has the credentials

to hold office infers that you or I know what those

qualifications are. If you want what the founders

desired, a "citizen controlled" government with

some experience, rather than that "professional"

governance we have now, she or someone like

Cain are the ones. How's the professor in the

White House working out? The Socialist?

I can't say for certain but I am beginning to think

you might not like the fact that a President can

also wear a skirt. Some also have bought hook,

line and sinker what the media has said.

I don't know whether Palin would be a good prez,

but considering the competition, I would take her as

one of the acceptable choices any time. Cain, also.

Bloviate on!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Guest bkelm18]

One of my Facebook friends asked me what I think of Palin. Here is my response:

Even a stopped clock is right twice per day. Palin got it right because she knew just enough to keep from being blatantly incorrect, and in my mind her lack of articulation on the topic is evidence. Either way, as I alluded to above, there are plenty of other issues to worry about regarding Palin without worrying about her thoughts on Paul Revere.

IMO she would be as useless as Obama in office. She's just one set of talking points followed by another given to her by her handlers. Honestly, in the past couple years of watching her, I've really never seen her say or do much anything of substance other than spew whatever the right wingers want to hear her say.

[East_TN_Patriot]

I can't say for certain but I am beginning to think

you might not like the fact that a President can

also wear a skirt.

Really? Where in any of this have I made ANY suggestion that I have an issue with her gender? Point to ANYTHING. You can't unless you do exactly what you did here and just conjure up some random BS in order to try and score a point. I couldn't care less if she is a woman. I was hoping that Condi Rice would run (GASP! THE HORROR! NOT JUST A WOMAN! BUT A BLACK WOMAN!). Palin has gotten to where she is because she gives good speeches, and just like Obama, her random unscripted comments come off like gibberish. I also don't think that education alone is enough for anyone, but when you chalk up the fact that she her education is minimal, her non-public work experience is virtually non-existent and consisted of zero administrative or supervisory duties, and her political experience is even less impressive than Obummer, that should tell you something. I actually really like Herman Cain. He has plenty of business experience and actually has made some clear proposals on how to deal with our rancid economy and national problems. Palin has not. I look for experience and substance behind rhetoric. Palin has neither. If you like her, fine, have at it. It's your right as an American, just like it's my right to think that she's a dim-wit.

As an aside, it's interesting... Obama supporters say if you don't like Obama, you're a racist; Palin supporters say that if you don't like Palin, you're sexist. Of course, Palin supporters would never actually admit to stooping to the same drivel of the left.

I can't say for certain, but I am beginning to think you might not like the fact that someone is showing that the right-wing messiah is actually an empty talking head.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Oh, I think I'll just let it go. Credentials are great

for some, but our greatest presidents didn't come

from Hahvard. Actually our worst ones probably

had the most letters behind their names.

The professional president need not apply. We've

had enough social experimentation.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Guest adamoxtwo]

Really? Where in any of this have I made ANY suggestion that I have an issue with her gender? Point to ANYTHING. You can't unless you do exactly what you did here and just conjure up some random BS in order to try and score a point. I couldn't care less if she is a woman. I was hoping that Condi Rice would run (GASP! THE HORROR! NOT JUST A WOMAN! BUT A BLACK WOMAN!). Palin has gotten to where she is because she gives good speeches, and just like Obama, her random unscripted comments come off like gibberish. I also don't think that education alone is enough for anyone, but when you chalk up the fact that she her education is minimal, her non-public work experience is virtually non-existent and consisted of zero administrative or supervisory duties, and her political experience is even less impressive than Obummer, that should tell you something. I actually really like Herman Cain. He has plenty of business experience and actually has made some clear proposals on how to deal with our rancid economy and national problems. Palin has not. I look for experience and substance behind rhetoric. Palin has neither. If you like her, fine, have at it. It's your right as an American, just like it's my right to think that she's a dim-wit.

As an aside, it's interesting... Obama supporters say if you don't like Obama, you're a racist; Palin supporters say that if you don't like Palin, you're sexist. Of course, Palin supporters would never actually admit to stooping to the same drivel of the left.

I can't say for certain, but I am beginning to think you might not like the fact that someone is showing that the right-wing messiah is actually an empty talking head.

I would vote for Rice in a heartbeat! I agree 100% We need some one to believe in who can make the tough decisions and not blame everyone else for their mistakes. The need integrity first and foremost and they need to be genuinely good people. I know it's hard to say that because there isn't that many of them left in the world today but that is going to be the only thing that gets this country out of the weeds.

[East_TN_Patriot]

Oh, I think I'll just let it go. Credentials are great

for some, but our greatest presidents didn't come

from Hahvard. Actually our worst ones probably

had the most letters behind their names.

The professional president need not apply. We've

had enough social experimentation.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do you even actually READ people's posts or do you just make it a habit to cherry pick extremely minimal parts of a response and twist it into something that isn't remotely close to what was originally said?

So, you are completely comfortable with handing the job of POTUS to anyone regardless of their experience or credentials just as long as they they talk a good game? Whatever....

Edited June 7, 2011 by East_TN_Patriot

[DocZombie]

Ok. She is struck with Biden Syndrome. She got it wrong. She never thought of that little known part where, held by the British, Revere partially told some info.

Now, I hear she is claiming the question was a "gotcha media" type. Um. No.

Basically put, if she handled it like this: I was just really excited, enjoying the kind people, enjoying the history, and enjoying where I was, I got facts wrong. Sorry. And the story would end quickly.

Instead, she has not done so. Proclaiming, she was right, even when wrong, is not a good character flaw to have when in the Office of the Presidency. We have had too much of that character flaw already.

The story NEVER ends for the liberal media when a conservative is involved.....................