• 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 does not bother me in the least that any of you make fun of Palin or any other politician. No. It is your inability to recognize that Palin actually got the story right. Paul Revere, in his own memorandum, said essentially the same thing as Palin.

FALSE -- He was captured when he spoke to the British.

Palin didn't know what the hell she was talking about. She's an idiot.
 
2. Part of his ride was that he told a bunch of British soldiers that they were going to fail.

when you are reduced to arguing semantics in order to make someone else look stupid, all that happens is you end up looking petty and desperate.

Re: 2 - did he tell them by ringing bells and firing shots. WE BOTH KNOW that the answer to that is no.

And yes. The bolded bit is true, and certainly applies to you and everyone who has been arguing for days now that she was right.
 
FALSE.



FALSE AGAIN.

DOUBLE FAIL.

Unless you mean the part of his ride when he was captured...
:lamo:lamo:lamo

Exactly. He wasn't riding to tell them ANYTHING. He wouldn't have had to ride anywhere. They were right there, he just had to go find them and tell them.
 
Really? And he warned the British of by ringing bells, did he? :roll:

"He who warned the British that they weren't going to be taking away our arms by ringing those bells" ~ Sara "The Quitter" Palin

Actually, the way that sentence is phrased, it kind of looks like the British were going to be ringing bells in order to take away "our" arms and Revere explained that ringing bells wasn't an effective way to disarm a populace.
 
Really? And he warned the British of by ringing bells, did he? :roll:

"He who warned the British that they weren't going to be taking away our arms by ringing those bells" ~ Sara "The Quitter" Palin

When you look at what she said, then look at the historical facts, she's right. Historians have already pointed that out.

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.”

This is looking worse and worse for the Palin haters all the time.
 
2. Part of his ride was that he told a bunch of British soldiers that they were going to fail.
Please, that's not what she said. It's sad that people have to alter her words to make them correct since obviously, she flubbed.

She did not say part of his ride "was that he warned" the British; she said, part of his ride "was to warn" the British. Not true. No part of his ride was to warn the British.
 
Holy tits billy this is one of the stupidest threads in DP history.
 
Please, that's not what she said. It's sad that people have to alter her words to make them correct since obviously, she flubbed.

She did not say part of his ride "was that he warned" the British; she said, part of his ride "was to warn" the British. Not true. No part of his ride was to warn the British.

I think ya'll need to let this go. You're starting to look very silly.
 
Guaranteed to continue until the blinders are removed, amirite!?

Love you all, but the fact that his turned into a full blown media war and debate over this **** is a national embarrassment in my opinion.

The newspapers shouldn't be filled with stories of what Palinn said, it should be filled with informing the public about the up coming debt ceiling vote, what it means to the country, and what we can do to turn this spending trend around.

But instead, what are we focusing on?

Anthonys Wiener, Palins Gaff...

****.
 
Love you all, but the fact that his turned into a full blown media war and debate over this **** is a national embarrassment in my opinion.

The newspapers shouldn't be filled with stories of what Palinn said, it should be filled with informing the public about the up coming debt ceiling vote, what it means to the country, and what we can do to turn this spending trend around.

But instead, what are we focusing on?

Anthonys Wiener, Palins Gaff...

****.

Unfortunately, one is related to the other. The real embarrasment is that we keep putting charismatic morons in office. That's why everything gets ****ed up.
 
When you look at what she said, then look at the historical facts, she's right. Historians have already pointed that out.
Not a single historian has said Revere was ringing any bells when he was captured. They are in agreement that he lied to the British verbally (no bells) by telling them he "alarmed the country all the way up." So no, when she said Paul Revere warned the British with bells, she is dead wrong.

"He who warned the British that they weren't going to be taking away our arms by ringing those bells" ~ Sarah "The Quitter" Palin
 
I think ya'll need to let this go. You're starting to look very silly.
Why on Earth would I ever care what a Conservative thinks of me?
 
Yes, it's turned into a pissing contest. This just happens to be the first time I've ever seen somebody (Sheik) not give up no matter how many times anybody attempts to twist the truth, and frankly I'm enjoying the fact that he continues to speak his truth no matter how many times anybody comes back at him. Nobody wants to give an inch? That's fine. Until he gets bored, they're stuck with him.

All the other ****? Hasn't changed for years, and won't. This is an outlet, pure and simple.
 
Yes, it's turned into a pissing contest. This just happens to be the first time I've ever seen somebody (Sheik) not give up no matter how many times anybody attempts to twist the truth, and frankly I'm enjoying the fact that he continues to speak his truth no matter how many times anybody comes back at him. Nobody wants to give an inch? That's fine. Until he gets bored, they're stuck with him.

All the other ****? Hasn't changed for years, and won't. This is an outlet, pure and simple.

Wiener already gave too many...
 
I was quoting directly out of Paul Revere's account. And yes, the Brits were after the leaders and the armaments.

and Paul Revere went off to warn those Brits who were after American armaments that they couldn't have them, and did so by riding through town ringing bells and firing shots.

not to warn the rebels that the British army had arrived.

Really? Do you truly believe in the mutability of the past?
 
That is not a valid comparison. Palin's gaffes are constant and continually display her shallow grasp of almost anything she talks about.

Nice try but it is valid when a sitting president is to stupid to know what year it is. He also does not know hom many states there are. Obama has had his share of gaffes
 
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.

Source: American Revolution
 
Somethign interesting from NPR of all places...

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

BLOCK: We are going to fact-check Palin's Paul Revere history now with Robert Allison. He's chair of the history department at Suffolk University in Boston.

Professor Allison, welcome to the program.

Professor ROBERT ALLISON (Chairman, History Department, Suffolk University): Thanks, Melissa.

BLOCK: And let's review Paul Revere's midnight ride, April 18, 1775. He's going to Lexington, Massachusetts. And according to Sarah Palin, he's riding his horse through town sending warning shots and ringing those bells. True?

Prof. ALLISON: Well, he's not firing warning shots. He is telling people so that they can ring bells to alert others. What he's doing is going from house to house, knocking on doors of members of the Committees of Safety saying the regulars are out. That is, he knew that General Gage was sending troops out to Lexington and Concord, really Concord, to seize the weapons being stockpiled there, but also perhaps to arrest John Hancock and Samuel Adams, leaders of the Continental Congress, who were staying in the town of Lexington.

BLOCK: 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. I mean, and she may be pushing it too far to say this is a Second Amendment case. Of course, neither the Second Amendment nor the Constitution was in anyone's mind at the time. But the British objective was to get the arms that were stockpiled in Concord.

BLOCK: So you think basically, on the whole, Sarah Palin got her history right.

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.
 
Back
Top Bottom