News The midnight ride of Sarah Palin.

[Jimmy Snyder]

My liberal teachers always told me that Paul Revere rode from Boston toward Lexington and Concord to warn the minutemen that the British were coming. Boy did they ever get it wrong. What actually happened was this. Paul was coming home from a tea party in Boston when he overheard the British regulars talking about capturing the weapons stores of the minutemen. Paul, patriot though he was, was not the sharpest knife in the chadelier. He got up on his horse and rode away from Boston where the British were, toward Lexington where the minutemen were, with the purpose of warning the British, who were coming to take away the minutemen's weapons, that the minutemen had weapons. Got that? Good, because the next part gets confusing. The minutemen themselves were in a hurry to get the Constitution approved and amended so that they could have second amendment rights. That's why they kept ringing the Liberty Bell. When the British ... Did I mention that everyone in this story was British and that Revere was an insurgent as well as a patriot? When the British heard that bell, or bells as they used to say in those days before arithmetic, they knew that Revere was right. Or they would have known except that Revere, who was doing his best to avoid detection by the British, was captured before he could complete his ride. Therefor was able to warn them as he had planned. Unfortunately, they let him go so he was able to continue on to Lexington. When he got there, there weren't any British to warn. In his embarrasment and confusion he blurted out to the minutemen that the British were coming. Actually, what he said was that the regulars were coming, remember everyone was British at that time. This incidental detail has been blown out of all proportion and paraded around as it if were the purpose of his ride by Longfellow and the mainstream liberal press in order to take away our right to bear arms.

 

[phinds]

Sigh ... morons make SUCH easy targets. You should stop making fun of the mentally handicapped.

 

[Borek]

What have you overdosed, Jimmy?

 

[turbo]

Jimmy, you forgot to say that Revere had to ride all the way to NH, where Concord and Lexington are actually located.

Palin/Bachman! What a ticket!

 

[WhoWee]

Jimmy, you forgot to say that Revere had to ride all the way to NH, where Concord and Lexington are actually located.

Palin/Bachman! What a ticket!

What does Bachman have to do with this tale of twisted words?

 

[turbo]

What does Bachman have to do with this tale of twisted words?

Bachman is a Revolutionary War scholar just like Palin, and when she visited NH, she went on about how the very first shots of the Rev War were fired in that great state. Hey! NH, MA... Easy to mix them up if you never paid attention in history class.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theticket/20110313/pl_yblog_theticket/michele-bachmann-makes-an-embarrassing-flub-in-nh

 

[WhoWee]

Bachman is a Revolutionary War scholar just like Palin, and when she visited NH, she went on about how the very first shots of the Rev War were fired in that great state. Hey! NH, MA... Easy to mix them up if you never paid attention in history class.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theticket/20110313/pl_yblog_theticket/michele-bachmann-makes-an-embarrassing-flub-in-nh

At least she has a sense of humor?
"Bachmann later took to her Facebook page to defend the flub. "So I misplaced the battles Concord and Lexington by saying they were in New Hampshire. It was my mistake," she wrote. "And by the way... That will be the last time I borrow President Obama's teleprompter!""

 

[Evo]

I guess Borek didn't hear about Palin's midnight ride.

Palin had this to say.

He who warned the British that they weren't going to be taking away our arms by ringing those bells and, um, making sure as he's riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that, uh, we were going to be secure and we were going to be free.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20110603/od_yblog_upshot/palin-flubs-explanation-of-paul-reveres-ride

People have been vandalizing wikipedia to change the story to match Palin's.

 

[turbo]

I guess Borek didn't hear about Palin's midnight ride.

With Paul ringing bells and firing warning shots to warn the British troops that they couldn't take our guns away? What a great grasp of our history! She and Bachmann should compete to see if they are smarter than 5th-graders.

 

[arildno]

Judging by the title of the thread, I thought Mrs Palin had made a quick trip to..Jerusalem.
Apparently, I was wrong.

 

[Borek]

I guess Borek didn't hear about Palin's midnight ride.

Yep. These things rarely make headlines here. And vice versa - I guess you have never heard about Palikot and swine head, even if everyone here have seen it on TV.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

Jimmy, you forgot to say that Revere had to ride all the way to NH, where Concord and Lexington are actually located.

Palin/Bachman! What a ticket!

As a youngster, I was told how the British lined up like ten pins with their bright red coats and bright white crosshairs and allowed the minutemen to fire at them from behind rocks and trees and that's why we won the battle. When I took the tour of the battleground, the tour guide gave me a different story. The muskets of those days were hopelessly inaccurate. The only effective way to use it was to fire off a volley and hope against hope to hit something. Then assuming you had time, reload and fire again. They lined up one row kneeling in front for the first volley and another row standing behind for the second. For the most part, that was it for the fire power, the rest was bayonettes and hand to hand. I was told that if you were fired at from sufficiently far away, you could catch the ball in your hand without injury. Single shots fired by individuals were ineffective.

Concord is also the home of Ralph Waldo Emerson and his friend David Thoreau and the location of Walden Pond. If you have a chance to get there, I recommend it and that you take the tour. Just remember, it's in the one in Mass, not NH.

 

[turbo]

Yep. These things rarely make headlines here. And vice versa - I guess you have never heard about Palikot and swine head, even if everyone here have seen it on TV.

Paul Revere's ride was immortalized by Longfellow in a verse form that makes it pretty easy to remember the salient points of the story.

http://poetry.eserver.org/paul-revere.html

 

[WhoWee]

With Paul ringing bells and firing warning shots to warn the British troops that they couldn't take our guns away? What a great grasp of our history! She and Bachmann should compete to see if they are smarter than 5th-graders.

Again with Bachman? Let's hope she gets to debate Biden this time - maybe he can explain how FDR addressed the nation after the 1929 crash.

 

[Evo]

Does anyone else find it frightening that people wanting to be President and are top contenders, no less, have the educational equivelant of a hamster?

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

What have you overdosed, Jimmy?

Here is a famous photograph of Revere racing toward Lexington. You can see a farmer, awakened by the racket, running toward Revere to tell him that the British are back in Boston and he's going the wrong way if he wants to warn them. If you look carefully you can almost hear the bells in the church tower. One bell if Paul lands in the sea, and two if on the opposite shore he be.

http://arthistory.about.com/od/educator_parent_resources/ig/picturing_america/pa_neh_05.htm"

 

[turbo]

The muskets of those days were hopelessly inaccurate. The only effective way to use it was to fire off a volley and hope against hope to hit something. Then assuming you had time, reload and fire again. They lined up one row kneeling in front for the first volley and another row standing behind for the second. For the most part, that was it for the fire power, the rest was bayonettes and hand to hand. I was told that if you were fired at from sufficiently far away, you could catch the ball in your hand without injury. Single shots fired by individuals were ineffective.

The colonists were using British-made Brown Bess Muskets from their militia armories, so they were about as well-armed as the British regulars. And yes, it was ranked firing in volleys, much the same as the bulk of the fighting in the Civil War.

 

[WhoWee]

Does anyone else find it frightening that people wanting to be President and are top contenders, no less, have the educational equivelant of a hamster?

I can't imagine anyone actually wanting to run for President.

 

[turbo]

Does anyone else find it frightening that people wanting to be President and are top contenders, no less, have the educational equivelant of a hamster?

My wife is terrified that we have enough ignorant voters to give them a real shot at it. After all, we ended up with a Tea Party governor who is busy trying to dismantle some of the real gains we have made over the years, like banning billboards on our highways and instating a bottle bill that requires deposits on beverage bottles and cans. Our roadsides looked like crap before those laws were passed.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

They lined up one row kneeling in front for the first volley and another row standing behind for the second.

Sorry, of course not. A single volley from the two rows.

 

[Evo]

Here is a famous photograph of Revere racing toward Lexington. You can see a farmer, awakened by the racket, running toward Revere to tell him that the British are back in Boston and he's going the wrong way if he wants to warn them. If you look carefully you can almost hear the bells in the church tower. One bell if Paul lands in the sea, and two if on the opposite shore he be.

http://arthistory.about.com/od/educator_parent_resources/ig/picturing_america/pa_neh_05.htm"

Ahahahaha.

 

[dlgoff]

Does anyone else find it frightening that people wanting to be President and are top contenders, no less, have the educational equivelant of a hamster?

You don't know how much. Maybe turbo has a point...be a wining contestant on http://www.5thgradertvshow.com/" and become a president.

Note: I linked the program just in case Sarah is viewing this. Just being helpful.

 

[BobG]

Actually, I can understand some of Palin's comments. She'd just visited some historic sites regarding Revere's ride and she seemed to be repeating whatever random snippets of information that slipped through during an event where her main focus was on cameras and reporters instead of what the tour guides were saying. While Revere's ride wasn't intended to warn the British, the rest of the alert system (bells, lanterns, other riders, etc) would have made it obvious to the British that the secret march out of Boston was secret no longer (but secrecy was never the intent of the alert system).

I just don't understand why she tried to defend her comments the way she did later on after listening to her own comments. She should have a) not rambled aimlessly about something she hadn't listened to very well or b) at least corrected her first version to the correct version with perhaps even an admission that she was little distracted during the tour.

And, she should be careful how she defines the intent of Second Amendment rights. Both her initial comments and her follow-up comments sound like the intent of the Second Amendment was to protect the militia's weapons stores in Concord vs to protect individual gun rights, since getting the heavy weapons that the British believed were stored in Concord was one of the goals of the march.

 

[WhoWee]

She should have laughed and said something to the effect of "you know what I mean - it's been a long day" and made lite of it - rather than defend the statement.

 

[Vanadium 50]

I don't think that would have helped. If you remember the whole North Korea/South Korea thing, she corrected herself immediately (as in the next sentence) afterwards - but that correction never seemed to be mentioned, and when the audio was circulated, it was cut right before the correction.

 

[turbo]

She should have laughed and said something to the effect of "you know what I mean - it's been a long day" and made lite of it - rather than defend the statement.

She made it much worse for herself by claiming that someone shouted out a "gotcha" question. She was simply asked about historical sites that she had visited in the Boston area, then she launched into her fantasy about Paul Revere ringing bells and firing warning shots to alert the British. Revere, Dawes, and Prescott were actually quite circumspect, to avoid alerting Loyalists and British patrols, though they were eventually all captured.

 

[daveb]

Does anyone else find it frightening that people wanting to be President and are top contenders, no less, have the educational equivelant of a hamster?

Really? Do we actually have to resort to strawmen arguments and start denigrating the noble hamster now?

 

[Averagesupernova]

And to think that when I saw the title of this thread I thought it meant a different kind of midnight ride of Sarah Palin. I can't decide which is worse, the fact that Sarah Palin actually thinks she is up for the job or the number of voters who think she is up for the job.

 

[KingNothing]

Really? Do we actually have to resort to strawmen arguments and start denigrating the noble hamster now?

To see this sort of species-ism on these boards is appalling. And the mods do nothing about it!

 

[turbo]

To see this sort of species-ism on these boards is appalling. And the mods do nothing about it!

It is pretty insulting to hamsters to see such comparisons being made. They are pretty friendly and smart for rodents. My cousin's daughter got a hamster-ball for her pet for Christmas, and he was happily charging all over the house soon after. Hamsters learn pretty fast.

 

[dlgoff]

And to think that when I saw the title of this thread I thought it meant a different kind of midnight ride of Sarah Palin.

Oh. You're bad.

 

[WhoWee]

And to think that when I saw the title of this thread I thought it meant a different kind of midnight ride of Sarah Palin. I can't decide which is worse, the fact that Sarah Palin actually thinks she is up for the job or the number of voters who think she is up for the job.

Actually, I think it's driving the Left crazy to know that all of the attacks on Palin will only serve to keep her in the news - free to attack the President at will on the economy and his policies. She is free to influence elections - and make a ton of money doing it. I think she's having a great time and regardless of what she says (IMO) the people who like her will continue to like her and the people who don't - won't.

 

[turbo]

Actually, I think it's driving the Left crazy to know that all of the attacks on Palin will only serve to keep her in the news - free to attack the President at will on the economy and his policies. She is free to influence elections - and make a ton of money doing it. I think she's having a great time and regardless of what she says (IMO) the people who like her will continue to like her and the people who don't - won't.

Sarah Palin is no more effectual than the Kardashian sisters. Famous for being famous and attracting press means nothing. Kim's butt is better than Sarah's AND Kim has s $2M engagement ring. What's Sarah's come-back? The media need to start ignoring camera-hogs that have no intellect or content.

 

[drankin]

She's my favorite Ameerican.

 

[WhoWee]

Sarah Palin is no more effectual than the Kardashian sisters. Famous for being famous and attracting press means nothing. Kim's butt is better than Sarah's AND Kim has s $2M engagement ring. What's Sarah's come-back? The media need to start ignoring camera-hogs that have no intellect or content.

Like I said - it drives them crazy - IMO.

 

[KingNothing]

regardless of what she says (IMO) the people who like her will continue to like her and the people who don't - won't.

...and this is why we can't have nice things.

 

[lisab]

Like I said - it drives them crazy - IMO.

Actually it's more of an embarrassment. Not sure if you're aware, but she gets a *lot* of coverage in the foreign press. Egads, just what we need to add to the caricature of Americans so much of the world already believes !

 

[WhoWee]

Actually it's more of an embarrassment. Not sure if you're aware, but she gets a *lot* of coverage in the foreign press. Egads, just what we need to add to the caricature of Americans so much of the world already believes !

Let's be honest - the foreign press dislikes her because she is unapologetic of American leadership for the past 100 years - and would like it to continue (IMO).

 

[mege]

People say stupid things all the time, what she is wrong about is harmless fluff. It's not like she's basing a policy decision on the history of the specifics of the Revolutionary War (see then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi expounding on the 500 million Americans that will lose their jobs because of not passing the stimulus). That mistake barely got any attention and it was made on the house floor!

Point being - everyone makes mistakes, why do we focus on fluff-mistakes for entertainment in the first place? Also, why is it worse for a conservative to make a mistake than a liberal? Can you imagine what would have happened in the media if President Bush signed the http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obama-signs-westminster-abbey-guest-book-using-2008-date/ ?

The media focus and hypocrasy that glows around stories like the Palin-Revere misspeak is upsetting.

 

[drankin]

People say stupid things all the time, what she is wrong about is harmless fluff. It's not like she's basing a policy decision on the history of the specifics of the Revolutionary War (see then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi expounding on the 500 million Americans that will lose their jobs because of not passing the stimulus). That mistake barely got any attention and it was made on the house floor!

Point being - everyone makes mistakes, why do we focus on fluff-mistakes for entertainment in the first place? Also, why is it worse for a conservative to make a mistake than a liberal? Can you imagine what would have happened in the media if President Bush signed the http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obama-signs-westminster-abbey-guest-book-using-2008-date/ ?

The media focus and hypocrasy that glows around stories like the Palin-Revere misspeak is upsetting.

There you go again. Pointing out the obvious and making sense and stuff. :)

 

[ideasrule]

I don't think that would have helped. If you remember the whole North Korea/South Korea thing, she corrected herself immediately (as in the next sentence) afterwards - but that correction never seemed to be mentioned, and when the audio was circulated, it was cut right before the correction.

You're misrepresenting the situation. It was Glenn Beck who corrected Palin, not Palin herself, and that was after she made the same mistake two times. See here:

I'm willing to pass this off as a brain fart, but that doesn't change the fact that she made a stupid mistake and didn't correct herself.

Point being - everyone makes mistakes, why do we focus on fluff-mistakes for entertainment in the first place?

Some mistakes are simply interesting slips of the tongue, and don't necessarily imply anything about the intelligence of the speaker. Others, like Palin's comments about the Midnight Ride, show a serious lack of understanding that's very worrying for somebody running for president.

Also, why is it worse for a conservative to make a mistake than a liberal? Can you imagine what would have happened in the media if President Bush signed the royal guest book with the wrong year?

That's hardly a fair comparison because Bush is widely considered one of the worst presidents of all time. Regardless, if Bush had signed using the wrong year, I would consider it evidence that he's not a perfect robot, not evidence that he's unfit to be president. I've often put the current year as my birthdate, so it's not a difficult mistake to make.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Some mistakes are simply interesting slips of the tongue, and don't necessarily imply anything about the intelligence of the speaker. Others, like Palin's comments about the Midnight Ride, show a serious lack of understanding that's very worrying for somebody running for president.

There is no defense for Palin's many idiotic comments.

She isn't running for President. And even if she did, she has no chance of getting elected. Her chance has already come and gone, thank goodness!

 

[drankin]

There is no defense for Palin's many idiotic comments.

She isn't running for President. And even if she did, she has no chance of getting elected. Her chance has already come and gone, thank goodness!

I'm not so sure. Obama got elected.

 

[turbo]

I'm not so sure. Obama got elected.

Are you equating Obama's election with the idiocy of Sarah Palin? He's a Constitutional scholar and professor with a strong grasp of history. Palin's only claim to fame is that McCain was ignorant enough to take her on as a running-mate.

If McCain had chosen Bill Cohen or maybe Colin Powell, he would be president of the US today, IMO. Hillary Clinton had a lot of baggage and Obama was largely unknown, so I think McCain would have been a shoo-in if he had a running mate that had a track record or a public record and more than a couple firing brain-cells.

Instead, McCain picked a self-absorbed clothes-horse who self-destructed when Katy Couric asked softball questions, like what periodicals do you read. That was really sad.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

People do make mistakes all the time. The more you say, the more mistakes you make. And if you are in the public eye, your mistakes get amplified. It is surprising to me that Palin would miss on a lay-up question like who is Paul Revere, but taken in isolation that mistake wouldn't sway my opinion of her. The problem is that she defended the mistake because of a technicallity. This was a disservice to herself and more importantly to the children of the country. Teachers have enough trouble as it is, they don't need this extra headache. I would suggest to Sarah that she make a video for use in schools and explain who Paul Revere was. No apologies, no mention of the mistake, just a little history video. She would gain points for free with that one.

 

[mege]

People do make mistakes all the time. The more you say, the more mistakes you make. And if you are in the public eye, your mistakes get amplified. It is surprising to me that Palin would miss on a lay-up question like who is Paul Revere, but taken in isolation that mistake wouldn't sway my opinion of her. The problem is that she defended the mistake because of a technicallity. This was a disservice to herself and more importantly to the children of the country. Teachers have enough trouble as it is, they don't need this extra headache. I would suggest to Sarah that she make a video for use in schools and explain who Paul Revere was. No apologies, no mention of the mistake, just a little history video. She would gain points for free with that one.

The children of the country? If they're getting history lessons from any politician or public figure, then we're in trouble. SNL's Celebrity Jeopardy is funny because it's true.

I think Palin defending her mistake was more offensive towards the media than actually trying to defend herself. She could say that the sky was blue and there'd still be a major story "SARAH PALIN SAYS CLOUDS DON'T EXIST" so she can't win either way. While I know she's not a valid Presidential candidate (she's already in too deep of a media-hole), I think she has done a lot of good for the Republican party. There are a lot of conservative young women that do use her openness as a model, and do learn from her mistakes. Palin has put a relatively youthful family face, warts and all, on politics. While it's hard for die-hard collectivists to see these as positives: Palin is honest and very straight-forward, isn't that really what we want in our politicians when it comes down to it? Whenever I ask my Democrat friends what it is about Palin that incites them so much all I get back is grumbling "omg, how can you like her at all?" as if anything Palin is ad hoc negative without any real reasons (maybe a "she's so dumb" thrown in there).

As an aside: I still don't think we've seen the Republican Presidental nominee make headlines yet. The VP Candidate may be someone in the spotlight now, but in the 24/7 news coverage this is just too much time for the eggs to fly. Did you even know who President Obama was before April 2008 or so?

 

[mege]

Are you equating Obama's election with the idiocy of Sarah Palin? He's a Constitutional scholar and professor with a strong grasp of history. Palin's only claim to fame is that McCain was ignorant enough to take her on as a running-mate.

If McCain had chosen Bill Cohen or maybe Colin Powell, he would be president of the US today, IMO. Hillary Clinton had a lot of baggage and Obama was largely unknown, so I think McCain would have been a shoo-in if he had a running mate that had a track record or a public record and more than a couple firing brain-cells.

Instead, McCain picked a self-absorbed clothes-horse who self-destructed when Katy Couric asked softball questions, like what periodicals do you read. That was really sad.

Claiming Sarah Palin is inexperienced in government has no warrant. She was one of the most well liked governors in the country and has been in public service for almost 20 years now, executive positions for most of that. President Obama only got elected to the federal Senate because Jack Ryan (by most accounts a huge favorite) pulled out - Obama was really just a body on the ballot until Ryan withdrew months before the election. Palin's book Going Rogue actually has a good explanation about her Vice Presidental selection. I highly suggest reading it, esspecially if you feel the need to make ad hominem attacks against her.

On President Obama as a 'constitutional scholar' - I would be really interested in his papers while he was at Columbia and Harvard. Too bad they're all locked away. Also, he was a part time faculty instructor, not a Professor.

Some mistakes are simply interesting slips of the tongue, and don't necessarily imply anything about the intelligence of the speaker. Others, like Palin's comments about the Midnight Ride, show a serious lack of understanding that's very worrying for somebody running for president.

I don't think anyone seriously puts her in contention for the Presidency except for MSNBC, only so they can keep on pounding the negative portrayal of her. In conservative circles, she's respected a bit, but people understand she's too much of a lightning rod.

That's hardly a fair comparison because Bush is widely considered one of the worst presidents of all time. Regardless, if Bush had signed using the wrong year, I would consider it evidence that he's not a perfect robot, not evidence that he's unfit to be president. I've often put the current year as my birthdate, so it's not a difficult mistake to make.

Why isn't the comparison fair? They're both Presidents and calling President Bush one of the worst is highly ambiguous. Very few Presidents leave office with high approval ratings. Heck, President Bush even got re-elected (with a popular majority, even)! Also, if he's so bad - why does President Obama keep on extending his policies like Tax Cuts, NCLB, etc?

But the point still is - why would the media treat them differently about the same thing? (to the original discussion in the thread) There are lots of gaffes by President Obama and other leftist politicians that get overlooked by the media. This Palin 'story' is just an example of twisting a knife for fun.

 

[hillzagold]

Mege, you bring up that wrong year thing a lot, as if it matters at all. No one would ever make more than half a joke if Bush pronounced a name wrong, and no one would ever make more than half a joke if Obama wrote the wrong year. Because we're actual people, we realize that these mistakes don't reflect on what kind of people they are. But if Bush, Obama, Palin, or anybody else said anything as dumb as what Palin's been saying, we know why. She didn't make a mistake, she didn't get hit by a 'gotcha' question ("What have you seen so far today, and what are you going to take away from your visit?"). She's just an idiot trying to convince us she's not an idiot.

She could say that the sky was blue and there'd still be a major story "SARAH PALIN SAYS CLOUDS DON'T EXIST" so she can't win either way.

That...Sure that would happen, you go ahead and think that.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

The children of the country? If they're getting history lessons from any politician or public figure, then we're in trouble.

Unfortunately, it has percolated. So that while Palin is the ultimate source of the misinformation, the kids may not necessarily hear it directly from her. There are people now determined to rewrite history. That is not Palin's fault, but is a fact that simply cannot be ignored. I don't see any downside to her making a video and setting the record straight.

 

[mege]

Unfortunately, it has percolated. So that while Palin is the ultimate source of the misinformation, the kids may not necessarily hear it directly from her. There are people now determined to rewrite history. That is not Palin's fault, but is a fact that simply cannot be ignored. I don't see any downside to her making a video and setting the record straight.

That is, http://www.nas.org/polimage.cfm?doc_Id=1983&size_code=Doc").