This is priceless...why is it that every 3 weeks she gets something ENTIRELY wrong, and it is the media's fault. "What do you read?" was a gotcha question? What a joke
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/0 … 71479.html
And whatever she says her apologists try to change history to make it true
Come ON people. Sarah had a verbal typo, over a truly stupid question.
Now you can tell me how Anthony Weiner is the better person.
If this was just a single little gaffe, no worries, we all do it. The problem is, Sarah has dozens and dozens of these. It seems that we are CONSTANTLY being told by the handlers of Sarah and Michelle how they "meant" to say this or that. It is like every 3 weeks man. That isn't a gaffe problem; that is a knowledge problem.
Weiner is an idiot. I really don't care who sends a picture to whom over the internet. I could care less if Boehner sent Lindsey Lohan a picture of his arse with a flower sticking out of it. BUT - man up. Don't blame the media. Don't be a little child like Weiner did. Nope...no apologies for me. The guy is an idiot. Why tweet this stuff anyway? Why not a personal email? Truly ignorant.
I'm disgusted that someone so dumb is being taken so seriously.
Can we all just agree that she's an idiot who's never studied American history and move on?
In fact, let's move on to someone who actually knows American history quite well, can quote the Constitution, knows the Federalist papers quite well, can discuss the ideas of liberty with ease, understands the limits of Executive, Congressional, Judicial and Federal powers.
Let's move on to Ron Paul.
If you really buy that, then I fear for people around you Anolinde. Riding off to warn the British that the British were coming to take our guns is ignorant. First off, he only rode a few miles...the whole thing is based off a fairy tale by Longfellow. Israel Bissell made the full ride, not Revere. Secondly, they weren't coming to take away our guns. They were coming to kill you, to put down a rebellion. That isn't taking away our guns. Could it be a part of putting down a rebellion? Yes, but then again...so is taking a pee. They have to pee while they are here putting down the rebellion. Telling the country that Revere rode off to warn the (insert here) that they were coming to take a pee, is just as correct...and not accurate. Why? Because the word "to" in her statement. That word in this context initiates singular purpose. Their purpose wasn't to take a pee, neither was it to take away our guns. They wouldn't take away gun rights, just guns of people who are pointing their guns at them. Get it? Their purpose was to put down a rebellion. Finally, you don't warn the people who captured you, while doing the warning, that they are coming. "They" are "they." If gangbangers break into your house, and you scream to your daughter upstairs to get the F out, then you aren't warning the gangbangers who hear you...they just heard you. That isn't a warning, simply a declarative statement.
Hmm ... let me try the links again. http://bostonherald.com/news/us_politic … d=1343353/
That's weird ... lemme try a different one
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washing … tish.html/
And Paul Revere's own account of events http://www.paul-revere-heritage.com/rid … ized.html/
Sorry for the many posting of links (ugh). It won't even let me preview prior to submitting http://www.paul-revere-heritage.com/rid … inal.html/
LOL .. oy. If anyone would like to read it for him/herself, try just typing it in .. dunno why links won't work when I can see it on my screen For the original version of Revere's own account, it's
http://www.paul-revere-heritage.com/rid … ginal.html
And for a modernized version, it's
http://www.paul-revere-heritage.com/rid … nized.html
You aren't understanding logic.
"when he desired me, ''to go to Lexington, and inform Mr. Samuel Adams, and the Hon. John Hancock Esq. that there was a number of soldiers, composed of light troops, and grenadiers, marching to the bottom of the common, where there was a number of boats to receive them; it was supposed that they were going to Lexington, by the way of Cambridge River, to take them, or go to Concord, to destroy the colony stores.''
That is the intent of the ride, by admission of his own words.
Warning the British wasn't the intent or purpose of the ride, and he rang no bells, fired no shots, and the British weren't coming to take away our 2nd amendment rights to have guns...they were coming to put down a rebellion.
Each pc occurred as a sidebar to the intent and purpose of each party's mission, thus ruling the statement invalid. They are circumstantial...like taking a pee, as I mentioned before.
Finally, 2 of your 3 links work. 1 posts a single ad for Tea Party Patriots, and the other is written by a known conservative blogger who used to work for Drudge. Again, this is the problem with debating conservatives. They believe anything counts as a viable resource, skirting INTENT and bias. Giving me a conservative blogger's article doesn't weigh much against the 2 history degrees on my wall across the room.
Thank God she isn't a historian then, eh? You know, I think I will side with the historians and history professors who agreed that she was essentially accurate. The thing is, I didn't think she gave the details as well as she could have, but then again, she wasn't giving a lecture. She was simply asked "what she had seen and what she'd take away from her visit" and she gave a short answer. BTW, she didn't mention anything about our 2nd amendment rights (at least those weren't the words she used). As I mentioned in another thread, Palin's purpose of this bus tour (according to her) was to highlight American history and foundations, and it seems her 2 or 3 sentences on Paul Revere all of a sudden got the whole country interested in history again. I wonder how many people googled Paul Revere to find out more about him because of this. Not a bad thing!
Revere didn't do much historically, but is attributed with quite a lot based upon the Longfellow poem. You again missed the fact that I, personally, have a B.A. and an M.A. in history, have taught history in a collegiate environment, and that the references that you used are not historians or professors, but a history club at one school who also link to the Tea Party Patriots, and a conservative blogger, oh yeah, and Palin...a moron.
BUT, if you choose to be ignorant, so be it. You support Palin obviously, so your path has already been chosen.
"I think I will side with the historians and history professors who agreed that she was essentially accurate."
Except the historians and history professors didn't say she was essentially accurate. They said, essentially, if you look at it from a certain way, and make allowances, then I guess maybe you could say she said something that wasn't completely wrong.
There's a big difference between what the historians said and "She was right."
None of these articles illustrate him "ringing bells" or "warning the British".
You're linking to sites that don't prove what you're saying.
i watched the video of the interview...it was pretty bad...she should have really just said she didn't have an answer or whatever...rather than making crap up as she went - it was so obvious that she didn't have an answer - and that's okay - just don't try if you can't....ha ha ha...can't have answers to everything
I think she would fail an open book test. As far as history, what you learn is based on where you live. I had 2 kids go through school here in Texas. They both are in college now, my daughter is going to SMU. I had told her many times she was never taught the facts about history. The schools here do not teach much about colonial times, they are taught a whole different view of the civil war. So Palin may not have been taught proper history. So when she gets those types of questions, she needs to shut up
I have noticed that most of what you learn with regards to history in pre-collegiate educations tends to be designed to make you more patriotic and nationalistic, but doesn't teach actual history in several cases...tends to be slighted towards nostalgia and fairy tales like Paul Revere's ride. The entry level survey courses in college are skimmed down but pack some actual info. The course specific upper level classes tend to be where the real info comes in...usually, they spark you to a topic and make you go scour through dozens of books on your own. I used to have to write 30 page papers almost weekly. Good times.
Palin has the Leftists and their cohorts right where she wants them. They are so damn apopleptic about her, that they are virtually ignoring everything and everyone else on the Right.
Seems to me she makes and excellent distraction for the Right to get around the Left in other ways, while they are stuck in fit mode over Palin.
Could it all be a devious plan on her part?.. hurmmm?...
by Susan Reid6 years ago
Listen my children and you will hearof the campaign ride of Palin dearRewriting history, what's the big deal?Sometimes I wonder if she's for realYes Paul rode a horseAnd he rode through the townBut here's how the...
by Holle Abee6 years ago
Do I have egg on my face? Read this - not from a conservative media outlet. It's from NPR.http://www.npr.org/2011/06/06/137011636 … aul-revere
by Poppa Blues7 years ago
http://www.americanrevolutioncenter.org … 27_web.pdfUnbelievable! What's wrong is Americans don't have a clue as to the importance of their rights, they simply take them for granted and presumably would be more...
by Bruce Bean6 years ago
Should Sarah Palin prove that Trig is her son?
by Anish Patel6 years ago
Do you think that the US is going to go into recession again?
by shayari7 years ago
Will FOX really benefit from having Sarah Palin on their network? I would think it will...disappoint their neutral viewers.
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.