• 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

It's frightening to think that this bimbo could have been one heartbeat away from being president. Not only is it frightening but it is telling. McCain wanted a dummy just like when Pappy Bush had Dan Quayle and "President" Cheney had Shrub.
 
Do you think Obama doesn't know what year it is or do you think he had a brain fart when he wrote 2008?

I heard Michelle gave him this the next day...

brain_fart_mug-p1687629389207143752opcc_400.jpg
 
Yet another update on Conservapedia where they have reverted their entry on Paul Revere to what it was pre-Palin's mangling of events...

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 to warn the minutemen that British troops led by General Thomas Gage were invading. 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] [2]

Paul Revere - Conservapedia

Interestingly eonough, in the talk page, the Conservative who removed Palin's perspectiive had this to say...

Is it acceptable to have totally fabricated history on conservapedia, just because it differs from the "liberal version of the events"? Here is what Revere said *himself* about his ride: "On Tuesday evening, the 18th, it was observed, that a number of Soldiers were marching towards the bottom of the Common. About 10 o'Clock, Dr. Warren Sent in great haste for me, and beged that I would imediately Set off for Lexington, where Messrs. Hancock & Adams were, and acquaint them of the Movement, and that it was thought they were the objets."

He set out to warn Hancock and Adams, not to affirm the 2nd amendment rights against BigGovernment. Don't we look like fools if we just make things up?

Is Paul Revere really the hill on which we want to tussle over political ideology? I reverted it back to the 2009 entry because it seems silly to sacrifice legitimate history in the name of politics.


Talk:paul Revere - Conservapedia

Note: "liberal version of the events" = reality (which is what they reverted their page back to).
 
Somethign interesting from NPR of all places...

How Accurate Were Palin's Paul Revere Comments? : NPR

It's funny how Palin can completely twist the facts and still have people not only believe her...but having academics supporting her story...such as Profession Allison.

Not even in Palin's comments about that particular event of Paul Revere's ride is she make a sensible 2nd Amendment case. The stockpiling of weapons was also being done by the British.

Were American colonist trying to protect the British's 2nd Amendment rights on American soil? Of course not. WHY?

IT WAS WARTIME! Opposing sides are protecting their troops and interests by eliminating their opponents weapon arsenals. Gezzz!

Palin is ignorant as hell about a lot of things, but she is truly a Servant when it come to spinning political issues.

Palin's story is as ridiculous as claims by fundamentalist Christians that dinosaurs walked with humans.
 
It's funny how Palin can completely twist the facts and still have people not only believe her...but having academics supporting her story...such as Profession Allison.

Not even in Palin's comments about that particular event of Paul Revere's ride is she make a sensible 2nd Amendment case. The stockpiling of weapons was also being done by the British.

Were American colonist trying to protect the British's 2nd Amendment rights on American soil? Of course not. WHY?

IT WAS WARTIME! Opposing sides are protecting their troops and interests by eliminating their opponents weapon arsenals. Gezzz!

Palin is ignorant as hell about a lot of things, but she is truly a Servant when it come to spinning political issues.

Palin's story is as ridiculous as claims by fundamentalist Christians that dinosaurs walked with humans.

As the professor pointed out, the idea of 2nd amendmet is certainly ridiculous. However, as the professor also pointed out, the British were indeed to be going after the weapons stored in Concord, in addition to possibly arresting Adams and Hancock.

Sure, she's a ditz. But people are making this way bigger than it should be.
 
As the professor pointed out, the idea of 2nd amendmet is certainly ridiculous. However, as the professor also pointed out, the British were indeed to be going after the weapons stored in Concord, in addition to possibly arresting Adams and Hancock.

Sure, she's a ditz. But people are making this way bigger than it should be.

Well, she helps. Much like that Weiner fellow help make his story bigger than it was.
 
As the professor pointed out, the idea of 2nd amendmet is certainly ridiculous. However, as the professor also pointed out, the British were indeed to be going after the weapons stored in Concord, in addition to possibly arresting Adams and Hancock.

Sure, she's a ditz. But people are making this way bigger than it should be.

Again...going after weapons during wartime is what opponents do.

In my humble opinion....

If there was an invasion "today" by a foreign or domestic enemy...and that enemy was trying to take over an arsenal...you can bet you ass that that a call to arms by a patriot wouldn't be about the 2nd Amendment. It would be about the preservation of our nation - it's people, resources, and treasure.

And Palin is a ditz...but the professor was propping Palin up:

And Sarah Palin also was saying there that Paul Revere's message to the British in his warning was: you're not going to take American arms. You know, basically a Second Amendment argument, even though the Second Amendment didn't exist then.

Prof. ALLISON: Yeah. She was making a Second Amendment case. But, in fact, the British were going out to Concord to seize colonists' arms, the weapons that the Massachusetts Provincial Congress was stockpiling there.

So, yeah, she is right in that
 
Prof. ALLISON: Well, yeah, she did. And remember, she is a politician. She's not an historian. And God help us when historians start acting like politicians, and I suppose when politicians start writing history

Well, we somewhat already had that for the former and a tiny bit on the latter. His name was Arthur Schlesinger Jr for the former, and Woodrow Wilson, or perhaps Patrick Buchanon for the latter. I agree in sentiment.
 
Last edited:
It's funny how Palin can completely twist the facts and still have people not only believe her...but having academics supporting her story...such as Profession Allison.

Not even in Palin's comments about that particular event of Paul Revere's ride is she make a sensible 2nd Amendment case. The stockpiling of weapons was also being done by the British.

Were American colonist trying to protect the British's 2nd Amendment rights on American soil? Of course not. WHY?

IT WAS WARTIME! Opposing sides are protecting their troops and interests by eliminating their opponents weapon arsenals. Gezzz!

Palin is ignorant as hell about a lot of things, but she is truly a Servant when it come to spinning political issues.

Palin's story is as ridiculous as claims by fundamentalist Christians that dinosaurs walked with humans.

Wait - what?
 
Wait - what?

You didn't know about the human/dinosaur story? It seems that the real reason there aren't any dinosaurs any more is that they became "serpents" after the fall of Adam, and so had to eat the dust of the Earth.

Surely, you've heard about the dust eating ex dinosaurs? It's recorded in the same place where Paul Revere rode off to warn the British that they couldn't take our guns away, where we find that the moon landing was faked, that Bush was behind 9/11, where high flying jet planes are spraying us with chemicals, and global warming is a hoax. Let's see, did I leave anything out of that? Oh, the aliens who actually were behind the Kennedy assassination.
 
Quote Originally Posted by Removable Mind View Post
It's funny how Palin can completely twist the facts and still have people not only believe her...but having academics supporting her story...such as Profession Allison.

Not even in Palin's comments about that particular event of Paul Revere's ride is she make a sensible 2nd Amendment case. The stockpiling of weapons was also being done by the British.

Were American colonist trying to protect the British's 2nd Amendment rights on American soil? Of course not. WHY?

IT WAS WARTIME! Opposing sides are protecting their troops and interests by eliminating their opponents weapon arsenals. Gezzz!

Palin is ignorant as hell about a lot of things, but she is truly a Servant when it come to spinning political issues.

Palin's story is as ridiculous as claims by fundamentalist Christians that dinosaurs walked with humans.

Wait - what?

Wait...what...what?
 
Removable Mind said:
Palin's story is as ridiculous as claims by fundamentalist Christians that dinosaurs walked with humans.

Wait - what?
Again, if you want to know what twisted reality some Conservatives reside in, look no further than Conservapedia.com ...
History of dinosuars

Creation science asserts that the biblical account, that dinosaurs were created on day 6 of creation[3] approximately 6,000 years ago, along with other land animals, and therefore co-existed with humans, thus debunking the Theory of Evolution and the beliefs of evolutionary scientists about the age of the earth.

Creation science shows that dinosaurs lived in harmony with other animals, (probably including in the Garden of Eden) eating only plants[4]; that pairs of each dinosaur kind were taken onto Noah's Ark during the Great Flood and were preserved from drowning[5]; that many of the fossilized dinosaur bones originated during the mass killing of the Flood[6]; and that possibly some descendants of those dinosaurs taken aboard the Ark are still around today.[7]

Archaeological, fossil, and documentary evidence supports the logical conclusion that dinosaurs co-existed with mankind until at least relatively recent times.

Dinosaur - Conservapedia



MSN-Emoticon-crazy-016.gif
. . . . . . . . . .
MSN-Emoticon-crazy-016.gif
. . . . . . . . . .
MSN-Emoticon-crazy-016.gif
 
As the professor pointed out, the idea of 2nd amendmet is certainly ridiculous. However, as the professor also pointed out, the British were indeed to be going after the weapons stored in Concord, in addition to possibly arresting Adams and Hancock.

Sure, she's a ditz. But people are making this way bigger than it should be.

And if she'd just say "Oops" and have a laugh at herself once in a while, she could kill the stories about her that she doesn't like.

Someone is giving her really bad advice with way too much frequency.
 
You didn't know about the human/dinosaur story? It seems that the real reason there aren't any dinosaurs any more is that they became "serpents" after the fall of Adam, and so had to eat the dust of the Earth.

Surely, you've heard about the dust eating ex dinosaurs? It's recorded in the same place where Paul Revere rode off to warn the British that they couldn't take our guns away, where we find that the moon landing was faked, that Bush was behind 9/11, where high flying jet planes are spraying us with chemicals, and global warming is a hoax. Let's see, did I leave anything out of that? Oh, the aliens who actually were behind the Kennedy assassination.

Well, derp! I mean, who DIDN'T know about the aliens behind the Kennedy assassination. You think you're so smart. WhyIoughtta. etc.
 
Again, if you want to know what twisted reality some Conservatives reside in, look no further than Conservapedia.com ...
History of dinosuars

Creation science asserts that the biblical account, that dinosaurs were created on day 6 of creation[3] approximately 6,000 years ago, along with other land animals, and therefore co-existed with humans, thus debunking the Theory of Evolution and the beliefs of evolutionary scientists about the age of the earth.

Creation science shows that dinosaurs lived in harmony with other animals, (probably including in the Garden of Eden) eating only plants[4]; that pairs of each dinosaur kind were taken onto Noah's Ark during the Great Flood and were preserved from drowning[5]; that many of the fossilized dinosaur bones originated during the mass killing of the Flood[6]; and that possibly some descendants of those dinosaurs taken aboard the Ark are still around today.[7]

Archaeological, fossil, and documentary evidence supports the logical conclusion that dinosaurs co-existed with mankind until at least relatively recent times.

Dinosaur - Conservapedia



MSN-Emoticon-crazy-016.gif
. . . . . . . . . .
MSN-Emoticon-crazy-016.gif
. . . . . . . . . .
MSN-Emoticon-crazy-016.gif

emphasis mine.

BTW, you're unfairly and innacurately giving the impression that the entire entry you linked to is of the same opinion as the minority the word SOME describes. Anyone who goes to the link and actually looks at the page will find that the vast majority of it does NOT hold with the opinions of the minority 'creationist' conservatives.

For example, this section describes the generally accepted extinction even theory...
Extinction:
According to evolutionists, close to 65 million years ago, at the end of the Cretaceous period, and the beginning of what is called the Tertiary period, an event occurred which has come to be known as the K-T Event. This event would have obliterated most life on Earth, plunging the world into something that would now be likened to global nuclear winter, through which few extant species could survive. Although these scientists dispute the nature of the K-T Event (selecting among any number of catastrophes that could have caused the significant global cooling that resulted), most find that the claimed K-T Event was caused by the collision of a massive asteroid with the Earth, the dust and debris from which would have shrouded the sky for thousands of years, cooling Earth considerably.[33] According to this view, the dinosaurs did not survive this cataclysm.[34] A layer of rock containing high concentrations of Iridium, a metal that is extremely rare on earth but common in asteroids, is said to be due to the vaporization and then fall of dust from the meteorite's impact, and its compression within the subsequent geological record.[35]The evidence of a large impact crater can be found in rocks of the Yucatán Peninsula of the supposed age of this layer.[36] [37] Creationists assert that the assumptions underpinning the methods used by modern geologists are incorrect, and even though the validity of a large impact is accepted, this does not consitute proof that the impact caused the extinction of the dinosaurs—although the abundance of dinosaur fossils in rocks found higher in the rock layers than the impact is drastically less than their abundance in rocks lower down.

Essentially, this page is not a description of what Conservatives believe. It is a description of what some 'creationist' conservatives believe. It also shows what most 'evolutionist' conservatives believe.

The linked page is simply stating what the two 'competing' sides believe, without actually taking a stronger position on one that the other.
 
She certainly has been better coached, and speaks much better than before... but it is difficult to hide how utterly stupid she really is.

Sure she did. Are you going to go against the Director of the Paul Revere House... but that would be silly...

"Revere's assignment that night was to go to Lexington to warn Samuel Adams and John Hancock that British troops were moving in that direction from Boston," explained Kristin Peszka, director of interpretation and visitor's services at the Paul Revere House, which Palin visited Thursday.

It was an extremely complicated situation which she sort of regurgitated in a garbled way," Boston University's Brendan McConville said.

"He didn't warn the British," said James Giblin, author of "The Many Rides of Paul Revere." "That's her most obvious blooper."

To the source: In a 1798 letter, Revere wrote that after being captured by British officers during the midnight ride, he told them "there would be five hundred Americans there in a short time for I had alarmed the Country all the way up." Does that mean he warned the British? Not exactly.

"He wasn't really warning the British when he was a captive," said "Rides of Paul Revere" author Giblin. "He was just, in a way, boasting about the capabilities of Americans. 'You don't know what you're going to be up against,' etc. He was playing the patriot even there. He did maybe inflate the American strength, but that was to throw the British off guard. He was propagandizing, really."


Sarah Palin's Account of Paul Revere's Midnight Ride Gets Shot Down by Historians - ABC News


You think she's stupid, because the media has told you to think she is stupid. I bet you think Hirohito was on the Missouri and sign the surrender, too.
 
Ooooh! Since when does a blogger trump an actual historian? :lamo

When that "actual historian" is actually not a historian, but a lawyer and law professor, and the commentary piece cited is really just passing on information from that lawyers blog.

In truth, it was just one blogger vs another blogger.
 
BTW, you're unfairly and innacurately giving the impression that the entire entry you linked to is of the same opinion as the minority the word SOME describes.
I wasn't about to paste their entire page here. Someone mentioned the ridiculous notion some believe about dinosaurs walking with man and I expanded on that by showing the relevant portion from a Conservapedia.com page.
 
Ooooh! Since when does a blogger trump an actual historian? :lamo
That was in response to a Conservative who posted an op/ed and it was an instrument in highlighting the ridiculousness of referencing an op/ed as fact.

Still waiting for an answer, btw ...

Do you think Obama doesn't know what year it is or do you think he had a brain fart when he wrote 2008
 
And if she'd just say "Oops" and have a laugh at herself once in a while, she could kill the stories about her that she doesn't like.

Someone is giving her really bad advice with way too much frequency.

FFG...

Bad advice indeedy!

And I totally agree that if she could put aside her ego and just own up that she's capable of making mistakes...she'd definitely kill stories. But I guess that she sees negative press as better than no press.

For Palin to say, "OOOoops!" would be a Utopian gesture. But her usual responses to her ****ups are much more like all of the politicians who caught in acts of indiscretion and cry, whine, and claiming they have been victimized.
 
I wasn't about to paste their entire page here. Someone mentioned the ridiculous notion some believe about dinosaurs walking with man and I expanded on that by showing the relevant portion from a Conservapedia.com page.

Understood. However your post painted the page as being mostly about or in agreement with that mistaken notion. I was simply pointing out that was not the case.
 
Back
Top Bottom