• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Sarah Palin: Paul Revere's Ride to Protect the Second Amendment

Hey, checkout what conservapedia.com has to say [this hour] about Paul Revere...
Paul Revere (1734-1818) was a silversmith in colonial America who was very active in Boston-area revolutionary groups such as the Sons of Liberty. He is famous for riding from Boston to Lexington, Massachusetts with William Dawes on the night of April 18, 1775 ringing bells to warn the British that colonists would exercise their natural right to bear arms. This also served to warn the minutemen the British were coming. Revere was captured before he could reach Concord, but managed to escape. His midnight ride was immortalized by a poem by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow.[1]

Paul Revere - Conservapedia
No mention of the two lanterns in the church steeple ... no mention of why Paul Revere actually rode to Lexington (to warn Samuel Adams and John Hancock that the British army was on their way to arrest them) ... but interestingly enough, it does mention somethings which did not occur; such as Paul Revere ringing bells ... or warning the British that colonists would exercise their natural right to bear arms.

While it's amusing to see that Conservatives have their own version of history, it also serves to explain why some Conservatives like Sarah "The Quitter" Palin are so ignorant of it.

Conservapedia... I'm not familiar with it. Is it something like Little Green Footballs, or is it more like the Onion?

Surely, no one actually takes it seriously, do they?
 
I'll be sure to do a count next time, regardless I think people are far to serious about this. Even the Obama 57 state thing really is a joke, I mean come on!

You mean the Obama supporters didn't try to change the Liberapedia to record that there are actually 57 states? Surely, there could have been some (admittedly far out, but no more so than the revision of the history of Paul Revere) way to claim that there really are that many.

After all, maybe some day there will be.

What, no "Liberapedia"? If there is a "conservapedia," why not a liberapedia as well?
 
Interesting that you left out the "sort of" part. I find it interesting how people are willing to stretch things just to make her right. She messed up and that's it. It's not a big deal, so let's move on instead of pointing fingers, feigning outrage or making up excuses.

You mean how people will lie and omit facts to condemn her
 
Interesting that you left out the "sort of" part. I find it interesting how people are willing to stretch things just to make her right. She messed up and that's it. It's not a big deal, so let's move on instead of pointing fingers, feigning outrage or making up excuses.

She was closer to correct than the deniers.
 
You mean how people will lie and omit facts to condemn her

Are you saying that Palin has never made a gaffe and it is, instead, people lying and omitting facts to condemn her?
 

An opinion piece, you mean?

She ****ed up. Big whoop. Move on.

If she was right in her assessment, why are her supporters trying to change the Wikipedia entry on Paul Revere? Why did they change the Conservapedia entry on Paul Revere? While one could argue that she is somewhat correct, it's a very skewed stance. Why not just own up to your mistake? I think people would have more respect for her if she did that.
 
She was closer to correct than the deniers.

How so? I don't recall the people criticizing her for this having a skewed assessment of the Paul Revere story.
 
Well... this just might be called the 2011 Palin Makes the Left Look Stupid Tour.

Experts back Sarah Palin’s historical account
You betcha she was right!

Boston University history professor Brendan McConville said, “Basically when Paul Revere was stopped by the British, he did say to them, ‘Look, there is a mobilization going on that you’ll be confronting,’ and the British are aware as they’re marching down the countryside, they hear church bells ringing — she was right about that — and warning shots being fired. That’s accurate.”
Experts back Sarah Palin’s historical account - BostonHerald.com

.
 
Well... this just might be called the 2011 Palin Makes the Left Look Stupid Tour.



.


It's almost embarrassing to watch, really.
 
It's almost embarrassing to watch, really.

Oh, I am sure it is. It must be brutal to watch someone so dumb have the journ-O-lists and Palin hating Left exposed as a bunch of mindless ninnies.
 
Well... this just might be called the 2011 Palin Makes the Left Look Stupid Tour.



.


The point of the mission was not to warn the British as palin thinks.
 
The point of the mission was not to warn the British as palin thinks.

Ahhhhhhhhh, now the Leftists know what Palin thinks. What she says is not enough.
Do you know what a battle hardened Weiner thinks too?

Why is http://winstoncreative.com/ acct. suspended? Too much Weiner?

.
 
Last edited:
Ahhhhhhhhh, now the Leftists know what Palin thinks. Do you know what a battle hardened Weiner thinks too?

.


No, she said it herself that part of the mission was to warn the British. And defend herself on that.
 
Palin muddled up a story from the American Revolution. She has muddled up quite a few things, so it isn't surprising that she had Paul Revere ringing bells and warning the British soldiers that they couldn't have American guns. It's pretty obvious she wanted to make her statement into some kind of pro Second Amendment rant, and messed it up because of that pesky immutability of the past.

It is the spectacle of Palin supporters trying to revise history that is particularly entertaining.
 
Ahhhhhhhhh, now the Leftists know what Palin thinks. What she says is not enough.
Do you know what a battle hardened Weiner thinks too?

Why is Account Suspended acct. suspended? Too much Weiner?

.

Moderator's Warning:
This thread is not about Weiner or individual poster's websites. Stay on topic.
 
There were no bells, he had lanterns. This was not about them taking our guns, it was about them arresting independence leaders. Why the hell are guys even trying to defend her?
 
Palin muddled up a story from the American Revolution. She has muddled up quite a few things, so it isn't surprising that she had Paul Revere ringing bells and warning the British soldiers that they couldn't have American guns. It's pretty obvious she wanted to make her statement into some kind of pro Second Amendment rant, and messed it up because of that pesky immutability of the past.

It is the spectacle of Palin supporters trying to revise history that is particularly entertaining.

Proves she is not stupid & has an agenda!
 
I really found it funny her people edited conservapedia and are attempting to change wiki.
 
Proves she is not stupid & has an agenda!

She's not stupid, or at least I don't think so. She's managed to make a pile of money off of keeping herself in the limelight. That takes some intelligence.

Is her agenda to make her supporters stand reason on its head to claim she was right all along, or is it to continue to make money by drawing attention to herself?

If it's the former, then that says something about her supporters. If the latter, then she is in a class with Lady GaGa, who is someone else who is intelligent, but shouldn't ever be in the Oval Office.
 
There were no bells, he had lanterns. This was not about them taking our guns, it was about them arresting independence leaders. Why the hell are guys even trying to defend her?

It was about both, actually.
 
Ya'll are aware that the mission of that British force was to disarm the local militia. Right?

It would be very hard to argue that opposing that mission wasn't supporting the right to keep and bear arms.

Looks like Sarah knows more about history than...well...just about everyone on this thread.

But, hey, don't let historical facts get in the way of partisan hackery.

I love it. All THEY know is the stupid poem and they're going to attack her for accuracy :lol:

....and they attack her because she's sooooo uninformed! :lamo


and Haymarket - you claim to have taught American history: you should know better ;)


The well-known fable is Revere's late-night ride to warn fellow revolutionaries that....

...the British were coming. Less known, obviously, is the rest of the evening's events in which Revere was captured by said redcoats and did indeed defiantly warn them of the awakened militia awaiting their arrival ahead and of the American Revolution's inevitable victory.
Palin knew this. The on-scene reporters did not and ran off like Revere to alert the world to Palin's latest mis-speak, which wasn't.

Like a number of famous faux gaffes in American politics, the facts of the situation no longer really matter.

The initial impression was eagerly grabbed by so many, starting with the reporter and millions of others gleefully sharing the story that reinforced their beliefs and/or desires.

This phenomenon is actually not a new one in American politics, although its immediate spread is obviously hastened by the Internet. Speaking of which, Al Gore did not invent it. Nor did he claim to, as often as you've heard otherwise...

A classic example of this faux faux pas was in 1992 when Vice President Dan Quayle agreed to participate in a New Jersey classroom spelling bee.

Working from a placard, Quayle corrected one sixth-grader by telling him to add an "e" to "potato." Journalists gleefully noted the spelling misteak. And Quayle's dunce hat was glued in place.

Trouble is, that mis-spelled placard was actually written out by the classroom teacher herself, either through her own ignorance or, a few suspect, some sly political set-up. Quayle knew he hadn't written it and thought the error was the point of the lesson.

And because the classroom spelling bit was a last-minute addition, aides who would have foreseen the everlasting damage of their boss inexplicably adding a mistake to a student's work did not know what the placard said. Quayle subsequently forbade them from explaining the error to the media, for fear of embarrassing the teacher....

Early in a previous race for the Republican presidential nomination almost 12 years ago, then Texas Gov. George W. Bush was in a jammed New Hampshire airport meeting room, answering questions from local media. Apropos of nothing, one reporter (perhaps prompted by an opponent's camp) asked Bush his pre-written gotcha: Name the new president of Pakistan.

Obviously, Pervez Musharraf had nothing to do with New Hampshire issues and is similar to some Democratic candidates flubbing the name of Russia's then prime minister during 2008 debates (Dmitry Medvedev).

Bush didn't know the Pakistani leader's name that day and looked clumsy attempting to answer. He could have brushed it away by instantly asking the reporter some arcane political who's-who, laughing off their mutual ignorance and quickly taking the next question. But he didn't and took media lumps for several days.

As everyone now knows, such a splashy gaffe can effectively doom any chance a candidate has of winning two terms in the White House.
 
Wait, are you now supporting the wisdom and education of "elitists"? I think I get it, they are not elitists when YOU agree with them. Brilliant.:roll:

When have I ever said anything about, "educated eltists"?

I have a great idea: hows about you provide us with primary source documentation that proves this historian wrong? Take your time gathering your research. look forward to your results. As always, thanks in advance.
 
Back
Top Bottom