• 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

Paul Revere was the name of Mike D's horse. Gosh, don't you people know anything?
 
Give us some examples of the gaffes you claim she made.

She doesn't make GAFFES, per say--that means we believe she knows better and just misspoke. Palin has become known for revealing a stunning lack of knowledge on a number of topics, then, after looking like an idiot, she doubles-down and defends her idiotic statements.
 
She doesn't make GAFFES, per say--that means we believe she knows better and just misspoke. Palin has become known for revealing a stunning lack of knowledge on a number of topics, then, after looking like an idiot, she doubles-down and defends her idiotic statements.

Post some examples. Obviosuly, this isn't one of them.
 
Paul Revere
Revolutionary War Figure



APDST...are you from America?

I think technically he's right.

Paul Revere's ride was April 18, 1775.

The Battles of Lexington and Concord were the first military engagements of the American Revolutionary War, and they were fought on April 19, 1775... the next day.
 
I think technically he's right.

Paul Revere's ride was April 18, 1775.

The Battles of Lexington and Concord were the first military engagements of the American Revolutionary War, and they were fought on April 19, 1775... the next day.

Not technically...really. It came as somewhat of a surprise to everyone that a shootin' war was fixing to start.

On the evening of the 19th, both parties were like, "mother****er! this is for real".
 
You realize that the war didn't actually begin until 19 April. Yes?

It wasn't a, "time of war".

The British weren't, "attacking, invading, assaulting, etc.".

Yes, I'm from America and I've very knowledgable in American history, especially military history. Your premise, is wrong.

Sorry, you're argument doesn't fly. That's a very poor attempt to side-step what was indeed the fact that The British military engaged colonist, which was considered an act of war.

Please drop the ploy to use a very minor technicality in point. Just because the declaration wasn't formal for another 11 days...the fight was on.

It was an act of war so much so that it was called:

American Revolution
Battle of Lexington and Concord (April 8, 1775)


Massachusetts had been preparing for war with England and this included training troops and stockpiling weapons and ammunition at Concord. When the British found out about this, he ordered troops to seize these supplies before Americans could use them against the English Army. As the British began to move their troops, the Americans found out that the British planned on destroying the weapons as Concord. The famous "Midnight Ride of Paul Revere" was the warning that Bostonians sent to Concord. In fact, Paul Revere never actually completed his ride as he was captured before arriving at Concord. His cousin William Dawes actually completed the ride and gave the warning.

By the next morning, the Americans had managed to gather together 70 "Minutemen" (soldiers who could be ready on a moment's notice) at Lexington (roughly halfway between Boston and Concord) where they were to face off against 700 trained British soldiers. Clearly, the odds were against the Americans. When the British arrived at Lexington, they ordered the Americans to step aside and cease any resistence. No-one knows who actually fired the first shot, but when the shooting began the British struck down 18 Americans (8 killed) and moved on towards Concord as the Americans fled.

At this point, the Battle of Lexington and Concord turned to the Americans advantage. Throughout the countryside, Americans sprang to action and began to use guerrilla tactics against the British Army as it traveled in a straight line towards Concord. The British were using tactics that had worked well in Europe. In these battles, soldiers wore bright, distinctive uniforms to make them clearly identifiable by their commanders. They would march in straight line formations and maintained a regular, steady fire at an opponent. However, these tactics did not work in America.

The highlighted in the quote above...generally happens when there are opposing factions who are armed. It makes war or battle go a hell of a lot smoother if one side can confiscate the other side's weapons.

Palin is a very ignorant person. She has repeated shown herself to be. The above event HAD NOTHING to do with the 2nd Amendment and to even imply that is beyond ignorant.
 
Sorry, you're argument doesn't fly. That's a very poor attempt to side-step what was indeed the fact that The British military engaged colonist, which was considered an act of war.

Please drop the ploy to use a very minor technicality in point. Just because the declaration wasn't formal for another 11 days...the fight was on.

It was an act of war so much so that it was called:

American Revolution


The highlighted in the quote above...generally happens when there are opposing factions who are armed. It makes war or battle go a hell of a lot smoother if one side can confiscate the other side's weapons.

Palin is a very ignorant person. She has repeated shown herself to be. The above event HAD NOTHING to do with the 2nd Amendment and to even imply that is beyond ignorant.


You need to seriously check your source. The battle of Lexington and Concord didn't take place until 19 April. The British landed on the evening of 18 April.

You can't call Palin ignorant, if you claim that Lexington and Concord was fought on 8 April.
 
It was an act of war so much so that it was called:

American Revolution
Battle of Lexington and Concord (April 8, 1775)


I think your source is incorrect on the date of the Lexington and Concord battle.

The Battle of Concord Lexington
Date: 19th April 1775

Battle of Concord
War for Independence, April 19, 1775

Lexington and Concord
First shots fired between American and British troops, on April 19, 1775.

Department of Military Science - Battle of Lexington and Concord
At midnight on the 19th of April the British column, consisting of 650-900 troops left Boston, crossed the Charles River, followed closely by the alarm rider Paul Revere. As the British marched towards Concord, the entire countryside had been alerted to their presence, and rebel militia was deployed to meet them.

The American Revolution - (The Battles of Lexington and Concord )
Wednesday, April 19, 1775

I think your source meant 18th, not 8th... which would still be incorrect.
 
You need to seriously check your source. The battle of Lexington and Concord didn't take place until 19 April. The British landed on the evening of 18 April.

You can't call Palin ignorant, if you claim that Lexington and Concord was fought on 8 April.

LEXINGTON AND CONCORD, BATTLES OF. On the evening of 18 April 1775 the British military governor of Massachusetts sent out from Boston a detachment of about 700 regular troops to destroy military stores collected by the colonists at Concord. Detecting the plan, the Whigs in Boston sent out Paul Revere and William Dawes with warnings.

Typo, Dude...typo. April 18 minus the one..."thus the typo...April 8th.

If you want a source that doesn't contain a typo....

http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/battles_of_Lexington_and_Concord.aspx


You're using obvious semantics to make your point...and its just not working.
 
Last edited:
Was he ringing bells and shooting off guns?

both of those were traditional methods to call up the militia; it wouldn't surprise me in the least, though I couldn't say one way or the other off the top of my head. :) I admit, I don't know as much about the ride as Sara Palin apparently does - I had no idea he'd been captured until this controversy.
 
The highlighted in the quote above...generally happens when there are opposing factions who are armed. It makes war or battle go a hell of a lot smoother if one side can confiscate the other side's weapons.

Palin is a very ignorant person. She has repeated shown herself to be. The above event HAD NOTHING to do with the 2nd Amendment and to even imply that is beyond ignorant.

your two points do not follow. in particular it is very common for both sides to arm and inrease their defenses when conflict seems iminent.

Palin is absolutely right that the spark that lit the fire was the British attempt to sieze civilian owned weaponry. methinks you are buying into the hackery.
 
Typo, Dude...typo. April 18 minus the one..."thus the typo...April 8th.

If you want a source that doesn't contain a typo....

battles of Lexington and Concord Facts, information, pictures | Encyclopedia.com articles about battles of Lexington and Concord


You're using obvious semantics to make your point...and its just not working.

Ok, I'll buy the typo. But, you're still wrong. L&C didn't go down until the 19th. Before you proclaim soneone else's ignorance, make sure you get your dates right.
 
Ok, I'll buy the typo. But, you're still wrong. L&C didn't go down until the 19th. Before you proclaim soneone else's ignorance, make sure you get your dates right.

Again...semantics. What a difference a day makes. Just 24 little hours. The Paul Revere, William Dawes ride was on the eve on April 18th...just hours away from being April 19th.

Then...

At sunrise on 19 April, the detachment found a part of the minuteman company already assembled on the Lexington green. At the command of British Major John Pitcairn, the regulars fired and cleared the ground. Eight Americans were killed and 10 were wounded. The regulars marched for Concord after a short delay.

The facts are the facts. Everything was in motion. The last source I posted with the CORRECT DATE...clearly said exactly what happened. The Brits wanted to confiscate the weapons that Mass had stockpile...while waiting for the Brits to hit.

That event had no relationship to the 2nd Amendment motive. Palin's assessment of the night Paul Revere did his ride...and the reason for it...bull****, total bullsh**. And you know it.

And, BTW...I'm not claiming that L&C went down on the 19th. That's not at all the point of the BS that Palin tried to lay on everybody.

If would really help if you got honest about what Palin said vs the facts.
 
The facts are the facts. Everything was in motion. The last source I posted with the CORRECT DATE...clearly said exactly what happened. The Brits wanted to confiscate the weapons that Mass had stockpile...while waiting for the Brits to hit.

That event had no relationship to the 2nd Amendment motive.

it suddenly occurs to me. Do you know why they wrote the 2nd Amendment? Are you aware of what the 2nd Amendment is.

If would really help if you got honest about what Palin said vs the facts.

:lamo
 
:shrug: bachmann was incorrect.


unlike Palin.
 
Again...semantics. What a difference a day makes. Just 24 little hours. The Paul Revere, William Dawes ride was on the eve on April 18th...just hours away from being April 19th.

Did AQ attack us on September 11, or September 10? I mean, it's only a day...right?

The difference is, the facts. Chronology and historical facts go hand in hand.





The facts are the facts. Everything was in motion. The last source I posted with the CORRECT DATE...clearly said exactly what happened. The Brits wanted to confiscate the weapons that Mass had stockpile...while waiting for the Brits to hit.

That event had no relationship to the 2nd Amendment motive. Palin's assessment of the night Paul Revere did his ride...and the reason for it...bull****, total bullsh**. And you know it.

And, BTW...I'm not claiming that L&C went down on the 19th. That's not at all the point of the BS that Palin tried to lay on everybody.

If would really help if you got honest about what Palin said vs the facts.

It would help if you simply got your facts straight. You're blowing the hell out of the Palin haters's argument.
 
Did AQ attack us on September 11, or September 10? I mean, it's only a day...right?

The difference is, the facts. Chronology and historical facts go hand in hand.

It would help if you simply got your facts straight. You're blowing the hell out of the Palin haters's argument.

On April 18th...They knew the British were coming... America/New York didn't know on Sept 10th what destined to happen on Sept 11th.

Taking away the enemies weapons is a part of reducing war hazards. Right or Wrong? There was NOTHING that happened that was related to 2nd Amendment issues....NOTHING "as Palin claimed".

Palin doesn't have a clue. She'll never have a clue.
 
On April 18th...They knew the British were coming... America/New York didn't know on Sept 10th what destined to happen on Sept 11th.

Taking away the enemies weapons is a part of reducing war hazards. Right or Wrong? There was NOTHING that happened that was related to 2nd Amendment issues....NOTHING "as Palin claimed".

Palin doesn't have a clue. She'll never have a clue.

You totally blow the date and the events of those dates...and Palin is the one that doesn't have a clue?
 
You totally blow the date and the events of those dates...and Palin is the one that doesn't have a clue?

There can't be too clueless people in the world? Just because one person doesn't know something, doesn't mean by default the other person is correct. It is possible for both individuals to be wrong. I can't understand how you can defy such obvious facts about the world like "two people can both be wrong in a disagreement, therefore proving one wrong doesn't make the other correct." Its mind boggling.

Its just a ****ing gaffe, leave it at that, I can't believe how much energy people send on this kind of arguing, its entirely meaningless just a way for people to expend energy and feed their ego by insulting a few people over the internet. Whatever "side" you are is meaningless, its the same motivation on both sides.
 
You totally blow the date and the events of those dates...and Palin is the one that doesn't have a clue?

Uh, speaking of dates. When was the Bill of Rights ratified? And when did Revere/Dawes make their ride? Talk about a date spread.

Your playing these events over a difference of a few hours... and it has no relevance to your argument.

Yes...on April 18th...The Whigs in Mass clearly knew what was coming down the pike with the 700 Brit soldiers getting ready to pounce. Yes Mass had been stockpiling weapons...and yes, the Brits found out. And yes, like all good military campaigns, you do whatever you can to reduce your risk, which includes confiscating the weapons stockpile. And Yes...Paul Revere and William Dawes were sent to warn of the coming of the Brits.

With the above said...Palin's story...as she told it...had NOTHING to do with the 2nd Amendment. Paul Revere and Dawes weren't making their famous ride to protect the colonist 2nd Amendment Rights.

AND WISEONE is right...that said, I'm through. We have to agree to disagree.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom