Historians agree: Palin was right about Revere

posted at 9:25 am on June 6, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

One if by land, and two if by sea … and then what?  According to historians interviewed by the Boston Herald, Paul Revere then warned the British not to challenge a roused and armed populace.  That came as news to many observers who had rushed to criticize Sarah Palin for her response to a gotcha question at the Old North Church:

Sarah Palin yesterday insisted her claim at the Old North Church last week that Paul Revere “warned the British” during his famed 1775 ride — remarks that Democrats and the media roundly ridiculed — is actually historically accurate. And local historians are backing her up.

Palin prompted howls of partisan derision when she said on Boston’s Freedom Trail that Revere “warned the British that they weren’t going to be taking away our arms by ringing those bells and making sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be secure and we were going to be free.”

The first to dispute Palin’s critics was … Paul Revere himself.  In his own account of the ride, written twenty-three years later, Revere recounts how the British captured him, and how he attempted to dissuade the British from advancing.  Revere warned that he had roused the local militias and that there would soon be 500 or more armed citizens coming together to repel the British.

A Boston University history professor told the Herald that Revere did indeed warn the British as well as the Americans earlier in his ride:

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.”

Of course, Revere wasn’t planning on getting captured.  He and others riding to the alarm (William Dawes and Samuel Prescott) wanted to warn John Hancock and Samuel Adams of British action first, and rouse the militia second.  Dawes and Prescott managed to elude the British and complete the mission, but Revere was captured.  Furthermore, his warnings sufficiently rattled the British that they let him go — but without his horse.  He returned on foot to Lexington, where he managed to hide a trunk with Hancock’s letters to keep it from being captured, but missed the battle.

Andrew Malcolm notes the “faux gaffe” and gives a history of such in the media:

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.

In 1999, the hapless former journalist, who should have known to make a better word choice, told CNN that in Congress he “took the initiative in creating the Internet.”

Democrat Gore never used the word “invented.” That was part of another willful misinterpretation that fit expectations of Gore’s boasts and was gleefully spread by opponents as further proof of his unseemly hubris. It lives on to this day.

Perhaps you remember how one day during a photo op President George H.W. Bush was overheard asking a store checkout clerk how this price scanner thing worked?

That quote was immediately transmitted as proof of how disconnected that Republican chief executive was, that he had no knowledge of something as ordinary as a checkout scanner.

The fact is, asking such inane and often obvious questions as “what are you doing here?” is a bipartisan ploy used by politicians to fill the awkward time void they are hanging around someone working while photographers snap their photos several hundred times.

Frankly, I had forgotten much of the history of Revere’s ride until this incident, and I had to look it up for myself to recall what Palin meant by her response.  Tom Burnam covered it succinctly and accurately in his indispensable Dictionary of Misinformation, a book I have had on my shelf for more than 30 years.  If all people know of Revere is Longfellow’s poem, which is what the reaction to Palin’s remarks seem to show, then they know far less than they think.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 9

It’s a shame the MSM didn’t use half of the time and energy fact checking Obama’s Statue of Liberty history rewrite as they used laughing at Palin’s factual Paul Revere history.

mizflame98 on June 6, 2011 at 10:01 AM

Well, I’m sure glad it ONLY takes a 14 paragraph explanation to let us know what Sarah REALLY meant. Ed, please be on hand to explain what Sarah REALLY means when she hits the west and tells us about the Louisiana Purchase, Oregon Trail, and Louis & Clark.

csdeven on June 6, 2011 at 9:59 AM

It’s LEWIS and Clark, idiot.

fossten on June 6, 2011 at 10:01 AM

Wait. . . the media don’t know what they’re talking about? Why didn’t somebody tell me?

Pablo Snooze on June 6, 2011 at 10:01 AM

I know more about your history than 50% of your population. And that’s truly pathetic.

Dave Rywall on June 6, 2011 at 9:56 AM

Elitist much?

Is this some kind of “slam” on Americans? What – Canadians are now SUPERIOR to Americans? LOL – without America you guys would be speaking Russian – and learning more about Russian history than about American history.

Bank that – your pathetic military isn’t capable of defending your own nation.

HondaV65 on June 6, 2011 at 10:01 AM

fossten on June 6, 2011 at 9:54 AM

…are you implying that the great communicator Obama gets all “wee weed” up………

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTVjab2cHgk&feature=related

Baxter Greene on June 6, 2011 at 10:01 AM

In the initial interview, Palin said Revere warned the British by “ringing those bells and shooting those shots” ( (neither of which he did — he lit candles and spoke to people directly) on his ride… uh, so no, she was not referring to Revere telling the British about a large rebel force waiting for them after he was capture.

If that’s not enough, when wallace asked to admit she goofed, she said that the british were here for seven years already and part of revere’s ride was meant to warn the British, despite the fact that the lamp-lighting method was chosen specifically so he would not alert the british already there that American forces were gathering to challenge the coming troops.

What’s scary is that there’s a small part of this country who think a person like Palin–someone who would distort history rather than admit she made a mistake–is suitable for the presidency.

Tom_Shipley on June 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM

So Sarah Palin’s getting history correct is to be trashed, yet The Whine’s trashing of an American product, the Jeep Wrangler, to those who actually make it, is to be praised? Sorry, I haven’t fallen through the rabbit hole, though Goebbels does appreciate your efforts.

rbj on June 6, 2011 at 9:50 AM

The issue is not whether she got the history right or wrong, it is how she presented it. People thought she got it wrong (myself included) not because it was actually wrong, but because of the way she answered the question. Her answer did not make much sense and it wasn’t until further examination of what she actually said, bit by bit, that you realize that technically she was correct. But you didn’t get that from her, because SHE. DIDN’T. MAKE. SENSE.

It is like she just strings random words together. I realize she does this because she is talking to the “average” American (because she has shown she can speak coherently), but the average American doesn’t talk like that….stringing words together in a sing-song-y way. Doesn’t she have a degree in communications? I wish she would use it.

ramrants on June 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM

csdeven on June 6, 2011 at 9:59 AM

Being wrong hurts don’t it?

It feels better if you’re man enough to admit your mistakes – just sayin’

HondaV65 on June 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM

Why can’t she just take her lumps for f”ing up and move on.

Dave Rywall on June 6, 2011 at 9:33 AM

Because the press is doing its best to destroy her personally?

Palin to the American press is like Israel to the Palestinians. If she lays down her weapons, she’ll be obliterated in short order.

philwynk on June 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM

What’s scary is that there’s a small large part of this country who think a person like Palin Obama –someone who would distort history can’t count how many states we have in the union rather than admit she made a mistake–is suitable for the presidency.

Tom_Shipley on June 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM

FIFY

fossten on June 6, 2011 at 10:03 AM

ramrants on June 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM

LOL – maybe she should have used a teleprompter.

She was right – and those of us with BRAINS said so all along.

Just admit you were wrong on the matter and move on.

HondaV65 on June 6, 2011 at 10:03 AM

I know more about your history than 50% of your population. And that’s truly pathetic.

Dave Rywall on June 6, 2011 at 9:56 AM

You don’t know sh!t Dave….

You are stupid enough to come on a post where Palin is being vindicated by Historians, and the Historical record,to claim that she is still wrong.

This is not a sign of intelligence….it a drop dead case of severe stupidity……

Baxter Greene on June 6, 2011 at 10:04 AM

The issue is not whether she got the history right or wrong, it is how she presented it. People thought she got it wrong (myself included) not because it was actually wrong, but because of the way she answered the question. Her answer did not make much sense and it wasn’t until further examination of what she actually said, bit by bit, that you realize that technically she was correct. But you didn’t get that from her, because SHE. DIDN’T. MAKE. SENSE.

It is like she just strings random words together. I realize she does this because she is talking to the “average” American (because she has shown she can speak coherently), but the average American doesn’t talk like that….stringing words together in a sing-song-y way. Doesn’t she have a degree in communications? I wish she would use it.

Palin is right and I’m wrong, but I still hate her so it’s her fault somehow.

ramrants on June 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM

FIFY

fossten on June 6, 2011 at 10:04 AM

I know more about your history than 50% of your population. And that’s truly pathetic.

Dave Rywall on June 6, 2011 at 9:56 AM

Professor Rywall’s U.S. History Classes—$19.95!

(and for another $5 you get a free “I’m an idiot” coffee mug)

Rovin on June 6, 2011 at 10:04 AM

I know more about your history than 50% of your population. And that’s truly pathetic.

Dave Rywall on June 6, 2011 at 9:56 AM

Really ?? Tell us, who’s buried at the Tomb of The Unknown Soldier ??

Jerome Horwitz on June 6, 2011 at 10:04 AM

Does anybody even know what the “gotcha” question that lead to the Revere answer was?

YYZ on June 6, 2011 at 10:04 AM

What – Canadians are now SUPERIOR to Americans?

No, just Dave Rywall.

aengus on June 6, 2011 at 10:04 AM

csdeven on June 6, 2011 at 9:59 AM

It’s LEWIS and Clark, idiot.

fossten on June 6, 2011 at 10:01 AM

ROFLMAO

idesign on June 6, 2011 at 10:05 AM

Well, I’m sure glad it ONLY takes a 14 paragraph explanation to let us know what Sarah REALLY meant. Ed, please be on hand to explain what Sarah REALLY means when she hits the west and tells us about the Louisiana Purchase, Oregon Trail, and Louis & Clark.

csdeven on June 6, 2011 at 9:59 AM

Dude, quit while you’re behind.

JeffWeimer on June 6, 2011 at 10:05 AM

Dave –

I am quite proficient in reading English. The communication difficulty arises with your amateurish attempts to write a coherent post.

kingsjester on June 6, 2011 at 10:06 AM

Instead of whining and complaining, the media should make good use of their time tailing the Palin bus tour and meet some of those park rangers who will educate them on American history.

They might learn something.

perries on June 6, 2011 at 10:06 AM

Does anybody even know what the “gotcha” question that lead led to the Revere answer was?

YYZ on June 6, 2011 at 10:04 AM

Typo fail.

Warning: Due to the excessive number of ‘coherency cops’ out today, all typos and grammatical errors will be strictly mocked.

fossten on June 6, 2011 at 10:06 AM

Sarah should’ve sent the media a press release of the complete story of Paul Revere’s ride. It’s obvious they’re a lazy bunch of hoodlums.

SouthernGent on June 6, 2011 at 10:06 AM

What’s not scary is Tom_Shipley telling us what scares him. If he were a cartoon (which he isn’t, but just barely), he’d be furiously biting all his fingernails at once and sending them everywhere.

Jim Treacher on June 6, 2011 at 10:06 AM

Ramrants went a lot further than most Palin skeptics. And he wasn’t being a jacka$$ about it, imo, despite the “but…”

Anyway, I think it’s interesting that Palin’s purpose, ostensibly at least, was to highlight the historical places along the east coast and remind and educate people about them. Now we have several days with people scouring all sources about Paul Revere. Many of us found out new information.

So, uhm….mission accomplished?

Dongemaharu on June 6, 2011 at 10:06 AM

JeffWeimer on June 6, 2011 at 10:05 AM
he won’t 15 pages of blather, believe me

djohn669 on June 6, 2011 at 10:06 AM

csdeven on June 6, 2011 at 9:59 AM

Umm every child knows how to spell lewis and clark in 2nd grade.

I would ask if you are an american, but someone might call me a racist.

upinak on June 6, 2011 at 10:07 AM

Well, I’m sure glad it ONLY takes a 14 paragraph explanation to let us know what Sarah REALLY meant. Ed, please be on hand to explain what Sarah REALLY means when she hits the west and tells us about the Louisiana Purchase, Oregon Trail, and Louis & Clark.

csdeven on June 6, 2011 at 9:59 AM

She meant what she said. It took you and yours many PAGES to demonstrate that you didn’t know what you were talking about.

littleguy on June 6, 2011 at 10:07 AM

—–
I know more about your history than 50% of your population. And that’s truly pathetic.

Dave Rywall on June 6, 2011 at 9:56 AM

What’s truly pathetic is Canada is so boring you must come to US message boards for action.

mizflame98 on June 6, 2011 at 10:07 AM

I stand corrected, I said she got the Paul Revere stuff wrong. I was going by what I heard her say in real time (I didn’t see a clip of it, I watched it in real time on CNN) and it didn’t really make much sense.

While I will say that I was incorrect that Palin got the history wrong, I still say she muddle the explanation…which I think is part of her problem. Even when she does get information correct, the way she presents information makes it appear that she is wrong. You have to actually analyze and revisit what she says in order to try and figure out what she is actually saying. If she would speak in a more coherent manner, this wouldn’t be a problem.

ramrants on June 6, 2011 at 9:30 AM

Shorter ramrants: Ok, so Palin was right … this time. But she was still wrong!!!

tom on June 6, 2011 at 10:07 AM

What’s not scary is Tom_Shipley telling us what scares him. If he were a cartoon (which he isn’t, but just barely), he’d be furiously biting all his fingernails at once and sending them everywhere.

Jim Treacher on June 6, 2011 at 10:06 AM

He makes Lebron James look calm.

fossten on June 6, 2011 at 10:07 AM

Our Trolls and reality are taking divergent paths…

kingsjester on June 6, 2011 at 10:08 AM

While I will say that I was incorrect that Palin got the history wrong, I still say she muddle the explanation

ramrants on June 6, 2011 at 9:30 AM

Palin can trip over her words like Bush I, Bush II, Quayle, Eisenhower, heck, maybe even George Washington for all we know. For some people that’s a deal-breaker as it shows she’s stupid. To me it shows no such thing and means nothing. To me, expressing yourself eloquently (Sarah is more clear, simple, and forceful, than eloquent) is the icing on the cake. All I care about is the cake. With the eloquent Obama, we got all icing, spread over a cake of a free-spending leftist. How’s that working out for ya.

Paul-Cincy on June 6, 2011 at 10:08 AM

Typo fail.
Warning: Due to the excessive number of ‘coherency cops’ out today, all typos and grammatical errors will be strictly mocked.

Oh, aren’t you precious.

YYZ on June 6, 2011 at 10:08 AM

Well, I’m sure glad it ONLY takes a 14 paragraph explanation to let us know what Sarah REALLY meant.

csdeven on June 6, 2011 at 9:59 AM

Yes, and it is taking ramrants 2 pages of posts to ‘explain’ that, even though she was correct and he was wrong, it’s still Sarah’s fault or something.

fossten on June 6, 2011 at 10:09 AM

Yeah, I bet she’d be real appreciative to receive US History lessons from a Canadian.

mizflame98 on June 6, 2011 at 9:55 AM
—–
I know more about your history than 50% of your population. And that’s truly pathetic.

Dave Rywall on June 6, 2011 at 9:56 AM

And with all of that wealth of history you supposedly hold, Sarah Palin still proved you wrong. Congratulations.

mizflame98 on June 6, 2011 at 10:10 AM

Oh, aren’t you precious.

YYZ on June 6, 2011 at 10:08 AM

Yes, stick to the short, single-syllable words. Of course, ‘led’ can trip up any kindergartener, so…

fossten on June 6, 2011 at 10:10 AM

What’s scary is that there’s a small part of this country who think a person like Palin–someone who would distort history rather than admit she made a mistake–is suitable for the presidency.

Tom_Shipley on June 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM

What’s scary is that liberals are so obsessed with destroying someone, that they can’t admit they were wrong when Historians from all corners and Historical data show them to be wrong.
Probably why liberals like shipley believe that scientist who manipulate and falsify data,whose predictions fail to come true and refuse to show their work concerning Global Warming fearmongering, have somehow proven their point.

Facts don’t matter to liberals…only the narrative.

Baxter Greene on June 6, 2011 at 10:10 AM

Jim Treacher on June 6, 2011 at 10:06 AM

Jim, let me ask you: Do you think Palin’s account of the ride is factually correct?

Tom_Shipley on June 6, 2011 at 10:11 AM

mizflame98 on June 6, 2011 at 10:10 AM

I think dave forgot her dad.. is a teacher.

upinak on June 6, 2011 at 10:11 AM

She’s not befuddled by “gotcha” questions. She’s got the knowledge but she doesn’t (yet) have the correct communication tool. She speaks in conversational English comprised of colloquialisms, parentheticals, and the big assumption of a common communication base with her audience. We all use conversational English and most of the time it works for us because we are talking with friends who give us “a little slack.” I respect her a great deal but even I wince when I hear her speak because I know she is giving her critics ammo with this informal speaking mode.

itsacookbook on June 6, 2011 at 10:11 AM

Shorter Dave Rywall: I’m an idiot who likes to make myself feel better by ridiculing people who are smarter and more accomplished than I am.

Sorry Dave. ramrants at least contributes to actual discussions.

tom on June 6, 2011 at 10:11 AM

ramrants on June 6, 2011 at 9:30 AM

what a maroon!! your saying its HER fault you dont realize what she said was correct?? so you knew that revere had given a warning to the british and just didnt realize thats what she was trying to convey? i call BS on that buddy boy!

chasdal on June 6, 2011 at 10:12 AM

I bet Palin knew that most everyone else didn’t know.

Sly grizzly!

Shy Guy on June 6, 2011 at 10:12 AM

Tom_Shipley on June 6, 2011 at 10:11 AM

RUN AWAY! RUN AWAY!!!

Jim Treacher on June 6, 2011 at 10:12 AM

Sarah was right on another account as well. The media is lazy. They just proved it again when all they had to do was read a little American history before writing their story. This would have worked before the election if they had found out about the Won’s BC, passport applications, grades, and unsavory associations, but they were lazy then, too.

Kissmygrits on June 6, 2011 at 9:47 AM

Let’s not forget that Palin’s point of touring the US in a bus is to remind Americans about its history. That the media got it wrong in ridiculing Palin over her supposed ignorance of the facts relating to Paul Revere has played brilliantly into her goal of reminding and educating people about our history. Well played, I say. Well played!

glennbo on June 6, 2011 at 10:13 AM

Palin can trip over her words like Bush I, Bush II, Quayle, Eisenhower, heck, maybe even George Washington for all we know. For some people that’s a deal-breaker as it shows she’s stupid. To me it shows no such thing and means nothing. To me, expressing yourself eloquently (Sarah is more clear, simple, and forceful, than eloquent) is the icing on the cake. All I care about is the cake. With the eloquent Obama, we got all icing, spread over a cake of a free-spending leftist. How’s that working out for ya.

Paul-Cincy on June 6, 2011 at 10:08 AM

Ever see a professional actor do an impromptu interview?

How about Alec Baldwin’s debut doing talk radio? Ever hear that disaster?

fossten on June 6, 2011 at 10:13 AM

LOL – maybe she should have used a teleprompter.

She was right – and those of us with BRAINS said so all along.

Just admit you were wrong on the matter and move on.

HondaV65 on June 6, 2011 at 10:03 AM

No, because I’m not wrong. If she had spoken in a more coherent manner, where people could understand her, no one would have thought she got it wrong. I thought she got it wrong because I didn’t understand what she was saying. And if you are being honest, you would admit her explanation was a hot mess.

And she could run over a small child, throw it on her grill and eat it for dinner and you would still defend her. She can do no wrong as far as you are concerned.

I defend Sarah when she deserves defending and will criticize her when she deserves criticizing. I want her to succeed because she drives liberals nuts, but I don’t drink the Palin Kool-aid.

ramrants on June 6, 2011 at 10:14 AM

What’s scary is that there’s a small part of this country who think a person like Palin–someone who would distort history rather than admit she made a mistake–is suitable for the presidency.

Tom_Shipley on June 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM

Thanks for giving us a glimpse into your mind. Twisting reality rather than admitting you’re wrong? Something tells me you have a working knowledge of this tactic! And I don’t mean second hand. I mean first hand, baby. I mean YOU.

Paul-Cincy on June 6, 2011 at 10:14 AM

Longfellow is one of my favorite poets I love “Hiawatha”

When the Media tries to smear Palin’s lack of historical knowledge, they remember her parents are TEACHERS right? I have seen them on the bus tour so they just ignored their daughter’s education while educating other people’s children?

Sarah Palin is right, they are the Lame Stream Media. All they do is look for a sound byte to attack/smear her with, because that’s what they do – attack/smear conservatives.

Tina Fey said that she could see Russia from her house not Sarah Palin, and the Media repeated it , to confuse the public as if it was something Sarah Palin said ,they never corrected public perception. I am glad they being shown for the low lives they are chasing her tour bus around the country.

Corporate Media Suxs!

Dr Evil on June 6, 2011 at 10:14 AM

ramrants on June 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM

So she talks in shorthand. It’s not my fault if you can’t understand her. I can. Camille Paglia, who is not her political ally, enjoys her speaking style. I’ve lived all over this country and there are many speaking styles. The ones who look down on her are East Coast elitists, and those who aspire to be East Coast elitists. Substantively, Sarah Palin is correct. That’s much more important.

rbj on June 6, 2011 at 10:14 AM

She’s not befuddled by “gotcha” questions.

BTW, here’s the “gotcha” questions (as Palin puts it).

“What have you been doing during your visit in Boston?”

Tom_Shipley on June 6, 2011 at 10:16 AM

They thought she was wrong because they didn’t understand her. If she would speak coherently all the time (like she did in the Wallace interview), she wouldn’t have this problem.

ramrants on June 6, 2011 at 9:45 AM

You should at least know that this is NOT why they thought she was wrong. The thought she was wrong because they think she’s always wrong, and stupid. It’s the natural wages of misunderestimating somebody.

Which is why I can confidently predict that we’ll see more of people mocking her for saying something stupid because their own ignorance, and wind up with egg on their faces because she was actually right.

But cheer up. Once in a while, she’s going to be wrong, if only due to the law of averages.

tom on June 6, 2011 at 10:16 AM

What’s scary is that there’s a small part of this country who think a person like Palin–someone who would distort history rather than admit she made a mistake–is suitable for the presidency.

Tom_Shipley on June 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM

What color is the sky in your world? Plaid?

JeffWeimer on June 6, 2011 at 10:16 AM

It’s a shame the MSM didn’t use half of the time and energy fact checking Obama’s Statue of Liberty history rewrite as they used laughing at Palin’s factual Paul Revere history.

mizflame98 on June 6, 2011 at 10:01 AM

Yeah. That was quite a kerfuffle. The press went on and on about Obama’s lack of knowledge and rewriting of history, again…

Wait. No, they didn’t. He was given a big ole pass as usual.

Fallon on June 6, 2011 at 10:17 AM

No, because I’m not wrong. If she had spoken in a more coherent manner, where people could understand her, no one would have thought she got it wrong.

ramrants on June 6, 2011 at 10:14 AM

…so it’s Palin’s fault you can’t understand English????
The jokes write themselves here.

I had no problem at all understanding what she said.
Neither did all the Historians backing her up right now.

The problem lies in your mind….not in Palin’s speaking performance.

Baxter Greene on June 6, 2011 at 10:17 AM

But please stay on her wagon. It assures an Obama re-election.

Dave Rywall on June 6, 2011 at 9:41 AM

In 2008, the GOP stayed on the bumbling and inept McCain’s wagon and were handed a defeat by a community organizer.
That, it appears, was supposed to be okay because the party bigwigs are hellbent on nominating MCCAIN 2 (another RINO).

These we-know-what-is-best-for-you leaders have joined the media/Dems to deride every conservative that stands a chance of being nominated as a polarizing dumbass who will ENSURE OBAMA’S RE-ELECTION!

To all this, I say so what? How worse is a Palin candidacy going to be any worse than nominating the emasculated RINOs who never seem to sit out an election cycle? They fight to obtain the nomination by using the age-old ploy (I am electable) and then proceed to fold like cheap suits in the general and get walloped over and over again.

How about a history lesson? How many non-polarizing play-it-safe McCain-like candidates have won the White House for the GOP in the last few decades? I can only count George HW Bush, who rode to election on Reagan’s coattails and then proceeded to lose the White House to Clinton.

So I say, why not give Palin her chance? She can do no worse than Romney or the rest. Because mark my words, at least she stands a better chance with an energized base and independents who are mad with the Obama government. Romney and his ilk, not so much – THEY are the sure failures!

TheRightMan on June 6, 2011 at 10:17 AM

I stand corrected

ramrants on June 6, 2011 at 9:30 AM

No, because I’m not wrong.

ramrants on June 6, 2011 at 10:14 AM

I defend Sarah when she deserves defending

ramrants on June 6, 2011 at 10:14 AM

Somebody’s incoherent all right.

fossten on June 6, 2011 at 10:18 AM

What’s scary is that there’s a small part of this country who think a person like Palin–someone who would distort history rather than admit she made a mistake–is suitable for the presidency.

Tom_Shipley on June 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM

What’s scary to me is that there’s a huge segment of the population of this country that finds inconsequential nonsense like this sufficient basis for dismissing Palin as presidential material, but somehow finds rampant sociopathy (a la Bill Clinton) or utter hostility to the notion of Constitutionally limited government (a la Barack Obama) to be acceptable in a President. It’s like their moral priorities are inverted: a President can be a complete moral sewer, hate America, and manifest the most totalitarian impulses imaginable, but God help them if they happen to get a tiny detail of history wrong in a public appearance.

philwynk on June 6, 2011 at 10:18 AM

Jim Treacher on June 6, 2011 at 10:12 AM

You make absolutely zero sense. I’m not running away from anything. You said I’m acting like a cartoon character. I asked you a direct question, which you chose not to answer. So, you’re the one running away.

Again, I’ll ask you: Do you believe that Palin’s account of Revere’s ride is factually correct?

Tom_Shipley on June 6, 2011 at 10:18 AM

Well, I’m sure glad it ONLY takes a 14 paragraph explanation to let us know what Sarah REALLY meant. Ed, please be on hand to explain what Sarah REALLY means when she hits the west and tells us about the Louisiana Purchase, Oregon Trail, and Louis & Clark.

csdeven on June 6, 2011 at 9:59 AM

Doctor, heal thyself.

It’s LEWIS and Clark, idiot.

fossten on June 6, 2011 at 10:01 AM

LOL! PWN3D!

mizflame98 on June 6, 2011 at 10:18 AM

Economy is shambles, Stimulus a bust, housing still crashing, unemployment still at 9%, Recover Summer II a joke, Left offers no plan on the deficit or debt, no plan on Medicare, wars added and/or expanded, middle east falling apart… so all the trolls have is a gaffe that isn’t a gaffe to hang onto.

Very thin… but desperate times call for desperate measures.

mankai on June 6, 2011 at 10:18 AM

What’s scary is that there’s a small part of this country who think a person like Palin–someone who would distort history rather than admit she made a mistake–is suitable for the presidency.

Tom_Shipley on June 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM

What’s REALLY scary is that an even larger part of the country thinks Obama is suitable for something more than handing out walking-around money.

pseudoforce on June 6, 2011 at 10:19 AM

Palin can trip over her words like Bush I, Bush II, Quayle, Eisenhower, heck, maybe even George Washington for all we know. For some people that’s a deal-breaker as it shows she’s stupid. To me it shows no such thing and means nothing. To me, expressing yourself eloquently (Sarah is more clear, simple, and forceful, than eloquent) is the icing on the cake. All I care about is the cake. With the eloquent Obama, we got all icing, spread over a cake of a free-spending leftist. How’s that working out for ya.

Paul-Cincy on June 6, 2011 at 10:08 AM

I disagree. I think Obama is a bumbling idiot most of the time, but he is better able to recover from it than Palin. I don’t buy the whole of him being this great intellect. I think he is of average intelligence that has a little bit of knowledge in a few things. I think Palin is actually smarter than him. If he doesn’t have his teleprompter to read from, he is as incoherent as Palin.

ramrants on June 6, 2011 at 10:19 AM

This is hilarious. The New England lefties have been wrong TWICE in “correcting” Palin on revolutionary history. First with the Boston massacre dates, now with this.

The best part is that most of the libtards LIVE in the areas that she has talked about and they can’t even get their facts straight. Something must be wrong with the public education in the northern half of the 57 states (as well as Canada, but we don’t talk about them).

darclon on June 6, 2011 at 10:19 AM

You live in Canada. There’s a reason you’re so enamored with our culture and we know nothing of yours.

Esthier on June 6, 2011 at 9:55 AM

Nice smackdown!

Gang-of-One on June 6, 2011 at 10:20 AM

Again, I’ll ask you: Do you believe that Palin’s account of Revere’s ride is factually correct?

Tom_Shipley on June 6, 2011 at 10:18 AM

That’s the point of this post, isn’t it? Face it, you’ve got nothing. Again.

pseudoforce on June 6, 2011 at 10:20 AM

Again, I’ll ask you: Do you believe that Palin’s account of Revere’s ride is factually correct?

Tom_Shipley on June 6, 2011 at 10:18 AM

Do you assert that the professors cited in this article are wrong?

fossten on June 6, 2011 at 10:20 AM

philwynk on June 6, 2011 at 10:18 AM

I don’t think it’s inconsequential that a political leader is willing to claim that Paul Revere’s ride was meant to warn the British instead of admitting that she misspoke. Because of her, there are kids out there who believe a false account of history.

Tom_Shipley on June 6, 2011 at 10:20 AM

Tom_Shipley on June 6, 2011 at 10:18 AM

Dude … you have no credibility. You voted for, and continue to defend an anti-American radical.

darwin on June 6, 2011 at 10:20 AM

I think dave forgot her dad.. is a teacher.

upinak on June 6, 2011 at 10:11 AM

And her brother if I’m not mistaken.

mizflame98 on June 6, 2011 at 10:21 AM

ummm, I’m a SHE not a HE.

ramrants on June 6, 2011 at 10:21 AM

I disagree. I think Obama is a bumbling idiot most of the time, but he is better able to recover from it than Palin.

ramrants on June 6, 2011 at 10:19 AM

Why do you suppose that is?

fossten on June 6, 2011 at 10:21 AM

Well, I’m sure glad it ONLY takes a 14 paragraph explanation to let us know what Sarah REALLY meant. Ed, please be on hand to explain what Sarah REALLY means when she hits the west and tells us about the Louisiana Purchase, Oregon Trail, and Louis & Clark.

csdeven on June 6, 2011 at 9:59 AM

Bwahahaha!

Can you tell us about the Hunter-Dunbar expedition while your pontificating on your soapbox?

darclon on June 6, 2011 at 10:22 AM

“Historians” – The Boston Herald interviewed 2 people. TWO - that’s it. Hardly representative of all “historians.”

Then again, the Boston Herald is not known for its investigative journalism.

cornfedbubba on June 6, 2011 at 10:22 AM

ummm, I’m a SHE not a HE.

ramrants on June 6, 2011 at 10:21 AM

My, aren’t you indignant. How are we supposed to know that?

Oh, and now your hatred for Palin makes more sense. Let me guess – she’s prettier and more popular than you, isn’t she?

fossten on June 6, 2011 at 10:22 AM

Do you assert that the professors cited in this article are wrong?

The professors are correct in that Revere warned the British after he was capture. But Palin’s statement and her defense of it make it clear that she believes Revere’s RIDE was meant to warn the British. It was not. In fact, they took measures so that the British would not be altered to his warning of the colonists.

Tom_Shipley on June 6, 2011 at 10:22 AM

Because of her, there are kids out there who believe a false account of history.

Tom_Shipley on June 6, 2011 at 10:20 AM

Today’s teachers unions like to concentrate on “social justice, “global warming”, and what a wonderful system communism is. I doubt kids are even taught true American history.

darwin on June 6, 2011 at 10:23 AM

“Historians” – The Boston Herald interviewed 2 people. TWO – that’s it. Hardly representative of all “historians.”

Then again, the Boston Herald is not known for its investigative journalism.

cornfedbubba on June 6, 2011 at 10:22 AM

Double ad hominem fail.

Present your evidence or go to logical flaw jail.

fossten on June 6, 2011 at 10:23 AM

I don’t think it’s inconsequential that a political leader is willing to claim that Paul Revere’s ride was meant to warn the British instead of admitting that she misspoke. Because of her, there are kids out there who believe a false account of history.

Tom_Shipley on June 6, 2011 at 10:20 AM

Has Obama ever admitted his mistake with his idiotic “profit and earnings ratio” remark? Is someone that ignorant suitable for the presidency?

pseudoforce on June 6, 2011 at 10:23 AM

I bet Palin knew that most everyone else didn’t know.

Sly grizzly!

Shy Guy on June 6, 2011 at 10:12 AM

It’s entirely possible “The Boston Herald” Not exactly a conservative paper – the only ones with cahonees to rain on the LSM dunce parade. A LIBERAL PAPER: uh wait a minute actually Palin is correct. Who knew Sarah Palin was paying attention to the Historical Sites she’s trying to promote with her American Bus Tour…go figure Palin is actually doing what she is telling people she is doing. The Lame Stream Media is confused, it must be some kind of stunt, because that’s what they have been “conditioned” to expect from Politicians -stunts.

I am reminded of something Les Grossman said, in Tropic Thunder, a nut-less chimpanzee could do the job, insert: of a media bunny….No really a nut-less chimpanzee.

Palin/Grossman 2012!

Dr Evil on June 6, 2011 at 10:24 AM

Sarah Palin was so right about Revere that her supporters tried to go and edit Revere’s wikipedia entry to make it match her statements.

cornfedbubba on June 6, 2011 at 10:24 AM

The professors are correct in that Revere warned the British after he was capture. But Palin’s statement and her defense of it make it clear that she believes Revere’s RIDE was meant to warn the British. It was not. In fact, they took measures so that the British would not be altered to his warning of the colonists.

Tom_Shipley on June 6, 2011 at 10:22 AM

“Make it clear” denotes that she actually said it. Show me the quote. Otherwise you will have to amend your accusation to read, “possibly implies.”

fossten on June 6, 2011 at 10:24 AM

darwin on June 6, 2011 at 10:20 AM

Dude, why don’t you debate the matter at hand instead of throwing out non sequiturs. I’ll ask you… do you believe Palin’s account of Revere’s ride and her defense of it to Wallace) are factually correct?

Tom_Shipley on June 6, 2011 at 10:24 AM

Boom! Taste my nightstick.

Kafir on June 6, 2011 at 10:25 AM

I gotta say, as an 90′s public school child, I can successfully say I genuinely learned something from Sarah Palin.

NoStoppingUs on June 6, 2011 at 10:25 AM

Tom_Shipley on June 6, 2011 at 10:18 AM

Brave, brave Tom Shipley, he bravely ran away…

Jim Treacher on June 6, 2011 at 10:25 AM

cornfedbubba on June 6, 2011 at 10:24 AM

What part of Ed’s article are you having trouble comprehending? She was right.

Kleenex?

kingsjester on June 6, 2011 at 10:25 AM

I defend Sarah when she deserves defending and will criticize her when she deserves criticizing. I want her to succeed because she drives liberals nuts, but I don’t drink the Palin Kool-aid.

ramrants on June 6, 2011 at 10:14 AM

Your instinct to jump on palin every time the media invent a new smear is telling.

So what if she could be wrong a couple of times , everyone else are too. No one is perfect.
But you guys jump instantly on Palin without thinking.
That’s sick, the envy is obvious.

the_nile on June 6, 2011 at 10:25 AM

“You know what? I didn’t mess up about Paul Revere,’’ said Palin, a paid Fox News contributor and possible GOP presidential candidate. “Part of his ride was to warn the British that we’re already there. That, hey, you’re not going to succeed. You’re not going to take American arms.’’

Tom_Shipley on June 6, 2011 at 10:26 AM

I disagree. I think Obama is a bumbling idiot most of the time, but he is better able to recover from it than Palin.

ramrants on June 6, 2011 at 10:19 AM

Why do you suppose that is?

fossten on June 6, 2011 at 10:21 AM

Because you’ve got O-Bots like Tom_Shipley there who wouldn’t bee too upset if Obama started habitually talking about the little green men who are dancing on the end of his nose. On the other hand, there are those allegedly on “our side” who are really really eager to tear Palin apart if she so much as splits an infinitive.

pseudoforce on June 6, 2011 at 10:27 AM

She would ruin that if she ran and lost the Presidency…

RedSoxNation on June 6, 2011 at 9:57 AM

If.

NaCly dog on June 6, 2011 at 10:27 AM

Dude, why don’t you debate the matter at hand instead of throwing out non sequiturs. I’ll ask you… do you believe Palin’s account of Revere’s ride and her defense of it to Wallace) are factually correct?

Tom_Shipley on June 6, 2011 at 10:24 AM

I’m not qualified to judge it … however, there is a growing chorus of qualified people who say that yes, it is.

Take your beef to them, not me.

Additionally, I stick to my valid comment that you have ZERO credibility.

darwin on June 6, 2011 at 10:28 AM

LOL! Revere didn’t ride with bells to warn the Brits not to take our guns, which is exactly what Palin said he did.

This spin is unreal.

She was right about him warning the Brits, but the way she said it was not accurate at all.

nickj116 on June 6, 2011 at 10:28 AM

I disagree. I think Obama is a bumbling idiot most of the time, but he is better able to recover from it than Palin.

ramrants on June 6, 2011 at 10:19 AM

OK, lets analyze this:
Sarah Palin answers a history question factual, even though she stumbles over the words. She’s surrounded by a crowd, signing autographs, and is quite distracted. Result? The media makes her out to be an idiot that doesn’t know her history even though historians states she’s right.
Now…
Barack Obama gives an immigration speech and while reading a teleprompter he gives a revisionist history on the Statue of Liberty and Emma Lazarus. Result? He’s considered an inspirational speaker by the media.
The moral of this story is:
He doesn’t need to worry about recovering from his gaffes when you have the Ministry of Information (MSM) in his pocket.

mizflame98 on June 6, 2011 at 10:28 AM

It doesn’t matter if she was right anymore…any response is wrong. I saw something where they said Palin sticks to story in weak response.

This was her Senator Blutarski moment in the eyes of the media.

tomas on June 6, 2011 at 10:28 AM

darclon on June 6, 2011 at 10:22 AM

The point is…

Would SARAH get it?

Hmmmm?

csdeven on June 6, 2011 at 10:29 AM

Democrat Gore never used the word “invented.” That was part of another willful misinterpretation that fit expectations of Gore’s boasts and was gleefully spread by opponents as further proof of his unseemly hubris. It lives on to this day.

I’ve never really gotten this defense (or why people actually do say invented instead of created). To create is a bit more than to invent. I get what Gore meant, but it’s not his critics’ fault that he’s been wildly mocked. He claimed to have created the internet. I don’t really see that as any better than having claimed to have invented it.

Esthier on June 6, 2011 at 9:51 AM

They’re technically correct, but really missing the bigger point: that Al Gore made a ridiculous attempt to inflate his role in creating the internet, and has been deservedly mocked for it.

tom on June 6, 2011 at 10:29 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 9