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 7 8 9

DSchoen on June 6, 2011 at 6:31 PM

Yes – The Shot Heard Round The World. It was missing from my child’s high school U.S. History text book. I looked for it. I had to explain it to her myself. Imagine the folks who put our text books together leaving out something that significant.

Dr Evil on June 6, 2011 at 7:17 PM

The question

aengus on June 6, 2011 at 7:21 PM

Considering that with the poem there are 4 versions of what happened that night.
3 of those 4 versions come from Revere himself.

If you claim one version is true there is a 75% chance your wrong. Conflating 2 of the stories means you have 50% chance of being right and a 50% chance being wrong.

Well, that certainly puts things into perspective. If that’s true, what the hell are we fighting about?

The good thing about this story is how many people looked this up? Will teachers across America use this as a spark to get kids to research history. If that happens the value is un-messurable.

DSchoen on June 6, 2011 at 7:07 PM

Indeed.

Aitch748 on June 6, 2011 at 7:21 PM

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

Wow!
Okay, so she was historically accurate. But it takes massive leaps of logic to believe she is historically accurate because it proves those who criticized her are “historically Inaccurate”.
And she should just take her lumps for f”ing up and move on.

Is that basically your point?

f”ing up is proving her critic wrong?

Dave, how old are you, 12?
Seriously Dave are you an idiot?

DSchoen on June 6, 2011 at 7:21 PM

Seriously Dave are you an idiot?

DSchoen on June 6, 2011 at 7:21 PM

No- He’s just Canadian

Dr Evil on June 6, 2011 at 7:30 PM

Please see my post at 9:37. Asking Sarah a question about something she has chosen to highlight is NOT a gotcha question.
ramrants on June 6, 2011 at 9:39 AM

When your dealing with “historically ignorant elite” every question is a gotcha question.

Please note how all the “historically ignorant” have to claim the wording, phrasing was somehow wrong and that’s why they didn’t understand what she said.

Truly pathetic.

DSchoen on June 6, 2011 at 7:31 PM

Seriously Dave are you an idiot?

DSchoen on June 6, 2011 at 7:21 PM

No- He’s just Canadian

Dr Evil on June 6, 2011 at 7:30 PM

That’s no excuse.

tom on June 6, 2011 at 7:31 PM

#799 comment, I just don’t know if we are going to make this thread go to 1,000.

We could really use a concern troll, Canadian troll optional GRIN.

Dr Evil on June 6, 2011 at 7:32 PM

We’re going to see this kind of thing happen over and over again. It’s classic, really: they think she’s an idiot, so they mock her for saying stupid things … that just happen to be historically accurate … so they invent some other excuse for why she’s still wrong.

They could avoid embarrassing themselves by admitting that, whether or not they think she should be president, she’s not stupid. But they just can’t admit that.

Look at all the people doubling down on how she’s wrong, even though she’s not. One says it’s her own fault for not being clearer. Another says she just got lucky. Another nitpicks the words to try to argue that she was claiming it was Paul Revere who was personally shooting and ringing bells, and all to warn the British.

What’s really more likely: that she was claiming Paul Revere was ringing church bells as he rode, or that the church bells were being rung because he had warned the colonists, though not by Revere personally?

tom on June 6, 2011 at 7:44 PM

I’ll also add my take to the folly of the writers/commenters stating arrogantly “but the 2nd Amendment wasn’t in existence yet!” referring to the “armed” part:

Er, the 2nd Amendment came about BECAUSE the Minutemen, etc. were armed and thus able to rebel. This pivotal truth of American colonial history is enshrined in our constitution as a safeguard for a free citizenry.

Straining at gnats, swallowing camels etc.

cs89 on June 6, 2011 at 7:50 PM

NRO (The Bastian of Conservatives that they are) found a scholar to disagree and determine Palin got it wrong.

If NRO would only work that hard to find information on Obama….

portlandon on June 6, 2011 at 7:52 PM

I want to see if I understand this correctly. A woman on vacation with her kids is asked a question, which she factually answered, although possibly out of sheer luck because in all likelyhood she mispoke.

Meanwhile President Pepetual Vacation claims we have 57 states (Zionist!!), screws up a toast to the Queen of England, commits our Armed Forces to yet another “kinetic action” – under the command of a foreign entity no less – and all the “mainstream media” can do is to attack the woman on vacation endlessly?

Am I understanding this correctly?!?

KMC1 on June 6, 2011 at 7:53 PM

That’s no excuse.

tom on June 6, 2011 at 7:31 PM

It is if you are also a Newfie.

katy the mean old lady on June 6, 2011 at 7:58 PM

Am I understanding this correctly?!?

KMC1 on June 6, 2011 at 7:53 PM

Don’t forget the O-ministration locked a reporter in a closet, and the reporter said “No big deal.”

But the Reporters following Palin complained that she made them have to urinate outside.

portlandon on June 6, 2011 at 7:59 PM

If NRO would only work that hard to find information on Obama….

portlandon on June 6, 2011 at 7:52 PM

Lol. National Rino Online vet Obama? Please, if Palin wins the nomination, they’ll be shilling for him.

Kataklysmic on June 6, 2011 at 8:03 PM

Don’t forget the O-ministration locked a reporter in a closet, and the reporter said “No big deal.”

But the Reporters following Palin complained that she made them have to urinate outside.

portlandon on June 6, 2011 at 7:59 PM

That is f’n hilarious.

How would these same people react if Todd Palin had locked a WaPo or NYT reporter in a closet?

I would actually love to see that happen just to have the comparisons. Also, they would probably deserve it.

Brian1972 on June 6, 2011 at 8:22 PM

If NRO would only work that hard to find information on Obama….

portlandon on June 6, 2011 at 7:52 PM

Lol. National Rino Online vet Obama? Please, if Palin wins the nomination, they’ll be shilling for him.

Kataklysmic on June 6, 2011 at 8:03 PM

I have to say, in the 2008 campaign NRO was publishing regular posts from Stanley Kurtz, whose research later beacame the book Radical in Chief, which I hear is good.

The rest of the media wouldn’t talk about it, and when Stanley was on a local talk radio program in Chicago there was an organized effort to disrupt the program with a flood of liberal callers.

They did feature his work heavily before the election, and since the book has come out I have seen him at the Corner rather frequently.

Brian1972 on June 6, 2011 at 8:27 PM

Brian1972 on June 6, 2011 at 8:27 PM

Yeah, my comment was sarcastic. Of course NRO still does some good things. I love Johan Goldberg and some of the others there, but I think it is a far cry from what is was under Bill Buckley. The problem I see them facing is the same one I see with Krauthammer, Will, et al: they’re becoming so entrenched in conventional “Palin is stupid” wisdom that they will be too proud to back her if she wins the nomination.

Kataklysmic on June 6, 2011 at 8:37 PM

I remember csdeven a few years ago defending Romney putting his dog on the roof of his station wagon. He just couldn’t admit that it was poor judgement to do so, eventhough the dog was so stressed it got diarrhea. He thought it was perfectly acceptable to spray the dog off and put it back on the roof of the car.

Rose on June 6, 2011 at 9:00 PM

Rose on June 6, 2011 at 9:00 PM

Is Romney really Chevy Chase?

Dr Evil on June 6, 2011 at 9:10 PM

The problem I see them facing is the same one I see with Krauthammer, Will, et al: they’re becoming so entrenched in conventional “Palin is stupid” wisdom that they will be too proud to back her if she wins the nomination.

Kataklysmic on June 6, 2011 at 8:37 PM

The fact is they are not entrenched in this wisdom. They are muckraking just like the TPM so as to make sure Sarah’s unfavorables remain high. Their whole argument against Sarah hinges on her her high unfavorable ratings and hence to keep them low they’ll join in the muckraking by the LSM. I mean I don’t remember them eagerly tposting about Michelle Bachmann’s bloopers or George Bush’s bloopers like this.

promachus on June 6, 2011 at 9:18 PM

Kataklysmic on June 6, 2011 at 8:37 PM

Funny, because Dr. K just said that she is very smart the other night on BOR. Oh well, soldier on.

KRAUTHAMMER: …and the class of hoitys that I represent here. It’s not that — you said in the introduction the rap on her is that she isn’t smart. That is not so. She is very smart. And adept. Great political instincts. And is a star. The problem with her, I think, is that she is not schooled. I don’t mean she didn’t go to the right schools. I mean when you get into policy, beyond instincts — I like her political instincts. I like her political overall view of the world. But when it comes to policies, she’s had two and a half years to school herself, and she hasn’t. And that’s a problem. You want a president who will be able to not have to learn on the job. We’ve already had that..

MJBrutus on June 6, 2011 at 10:39 PM

You want a president who will be able to not have to learn on the job. We’ve already had that..

MJBrutus on June 6, 2011 at 10:39 PM

What Presidential candidate after winning the election, hasn’t had to learn on the job? Is Krauthammer saying that Bill Clinton, George W Bush or God Forbid Jimmy Carter, would all be better suited to run for President in 2012, because they have had on the job experience? I think of the 3 mentioned only Jimmy Carter is eligible for another term as President – he only served one term. After FDR had 4 terms as President, the rules were changed to limit holding the office of President to two terms.

What Krauthammer said sounds good but upon reflection doesn’t really make sense. Otherwise no one who isn’t an incumbent could be reelected, because of lack of previous on the job experience. When the incumbent’s second term was up no one else would be eligible, they couldn’t meet Dr Krauthammer’s standard. If he is making the case that the next Presidential candidate should have some kind of “executive’ experience, Sarah Palin was the Mayor of Wassila, and Governor of Alaska. – that’s called executive experience. If Dr Krauthammer wants to keep ignoring the elephant in the room that’s his business.

Dr Evil on June 6, 2011 at 11:17 PM

MJBrutus on June 6, 2011 at 10:39 PM

I don’t know, Bruti. I am familiar with that quote and it sounded a lot more like damning with faint praise to me. Khammer wasn’t on board for the Reagan r3volution and he seems pretty primed to miss the boat with Palin as well.

Kataklysmic on June 6, 2011 at 11:24 PM

and all the “mainstream media” can do is to attack the woman on vacation endlessly?

Am I understanding this correctly?!?

KMC1 on June 6, 2011 at 7:53 PM

Yep. That about covers it.

csdeven on June 6, 2011 at 11:43 PM

It wasn’t just what she said.

She looked like she should be in a straight jacket.

Continuing to make excuses for her is not helping the country.

No other politician would be allowed to go on camera looking like a lunatick and have people line up to make excuses for her.

petunia on June 7, 2011 at 12:01 AM

petunia on June 7, 2011 at 12:01 AM

Part of the problem is that right now, she is on a family vacation, inspired by her husband, and may–or may not–be a politician.

I do agree that she sometimes is too accessible to establish an aura of Presidentiality. (Accessibilty is a great mom trait.)But only little people require such aloofness in their Presidents.

rwenger43 on June 7, 2011 at 12:17 AM

NRO (The Bastian of Conservatives that they are) found a scholar to disagree and determine Palin got it wrong.

If NRO would only work that hard to find information on Obama….

portlandon on June 6, 2011 at 7:52 PM

Wow, NRO really stepped in it this time. Judging by the response to that article, readers are pretty ticked off. I would have thought that National Review had more Establishment Republicans, but it seems like Palin supporters are the overwhelming majority.

I like this response:

I’ll see your book and raise you with the defining scholarly book on the topic – “Paul Revere’s Ride” by the Brandeis historian David Hackett Fischer.

“Mitchell repeated Paul Revere’s warning that 500 New England men were mustering in Lexington. He told of the alarm bells and signal guns, and the volley of musket-fire near the Green….Others also remembered with vivid clarity this electrifying instant when they halted on the road, and Paul Revere’s warning reached them through the mouth of this highly excited captor, Major Mitchell.”

“warning”? “alarm bells and signal guns”? Fischer goes in to describe how the British regulars not only heard lots of bells and warning shots…but we’re freaked-out by them. Most of the soldiers did not know what the mission was about and suspected it was another training exercise. All of a sudden they’re being told of Revere’s warning, surrounded by bells and shots, and faced with the realization they were going in to combat.

Palin wins…again.

Norwegian on June 7, 2011 at 12:22 AM

Palin did her homework and her lock-step detractors didn’t. Nothing more complicated than that.

The PDSers continue to stumble over themselves.

viking01 on June 7, 2011 at 12:25 AM

It is just too weird that it has taken 4 days and several different explanations from other people to tell us what Sarah really meant. Her story was so convoluted that we even have historians at odds with what Palin REALLY meant.

Well, whatever was REALLY in her head, this is her fault. If she were more disciplined with her speech, this would be a non issue. All she has done is reinforced her supporters view that she is a genius and reinforced her skeptics view that she isn’t ready to led the country. And as of today, 63% will never vote for her. Irrespective of her supporters assertions that she has proven how much more clever she is than most, they are in the 37% and what they think does not matter. Sarah will succeed or fail on the indie vote.

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 12:36 AM

It is just too weird that it has taken 4 days and several different explanations from other people to tell us what Sarah really meant. Her story was so convoluted that we even have historians at odds with what Palin REALLY meant.

Well, whatever was REALLY in her head, this is her fault. If she were more disciplined with her speech, this would be a non issue. All she has done is reinforced her supporters view that she is a genius and reinforced her skeptics view that she isn’t ready to led the country. And as of today, 63% will never vote for her. Irrespective of her supporters assertions that she has proven how much more clever she is than most, they are in the 37% and what they think does not matter. Sarah will succeed or fail on the indie vote.

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 12:36 AM

Rick Santorum is that you? Why are you up so late at night trolling in Palin threads? Shouldn’t you be running a campaign instead?

promachus on June 7, 2011 at 12:40 AM

Why are you up so late at night trolling in Palin threads? Shouldn’t you be running a campaign instead?

promachus on June 7, 2011 at 12:40 AM

So now talking about the thread topic is trolling. You have used that word so often and in the wrong circumstance that it has no meaning when you use it.

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 12:46 AM

She looked like she should be in a straight jacket.

Continuing to make excuses for her is not helping the country.

No other politician would be allowed to go on camera looking like a lunatick and have people line up to make excuses for her.

petunia on June 7, 2011 at 12:01 AM

I see you got out of yours again…

Gohawgs on June 7, 2011 at 12:58 AM

Gohawgs on June 7, 2011 at 12:58 AM

There are ticks on the moon.

slickwillie2001 on June 7, 2011 at 1:00 AM

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 12:36 AM

The LSM has again been shown to be less than knowledgable and prone to a rush to judgement versus what we (used to) expect from them…Last week, Andrea Mitchell simply didn’t do her job and aired an incomplete and inaccurate report regarding Palin’s invitation at the DC rally. When it was shown that her report was wrong, msnbc and other “news” outlets continued to report wrong information. This week, it’s not knowing the difference between a poem based on historical facts and the actual historical facts themselves.

Next, we may have a pitched discussion of the Charge of the Light Brigade…Ride Boley, ride…

Gohawgs on June 7, 2011 at 1:09 AM

There are ticks on the moon.

slickwillie2001 on June 7, 2011 at 1:00 AM

Looks to me as though there are tics in Washington (State)…

Gohawgs on June 7, 2011 at 1:11 AM

It is just too weird that it has taken 4 days and several different explanations from other people to tell us what Sarah really meant.

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 12:36 AM

Sadly for you and yours, we understood her clearly. She was right; you were wrong — and still remain wrong inspite of all attempts to school you. Next time you should check your facts before you jump head first to a false conclusion. I say should, but I’m confident you won’t. In fact, I’m certain that you will continue on with your ridiculous assertions regardless of all evidence to the contrary. Much to our amusement, I must say. So carry on. Carry on.

littleguy on June 7, 2011 at 1:12 AM

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 12:46 AM

But whya re you here at all trolling or answering? Don’t you have a campaign to run, Rick?

promachus on June 7, 2011 at 1:12 AM

She looked like she should be in a straight jacket.

petunia on June 7, 2011 at 12:01 AM

Now you’re just being pathetic. I know others had given you this advice, but please seek help now.

littleguy on June 7, 2011 at 1:25 AM

If people like you weren’t so obsessed with trying to make her look stupid, this would be a non issue.

blink on June 7, 2011 at 1:05 AM

The same could be said as well for people like you who are obsessed with making her out to be the greatest political thinker to ever walk the planet in the history of mankind.

JFS61 on June 7, 2011 at 2:15 AM

she was an idiot before the stupid original statement, she was an idiot when she tried to further explain her idiotic original statement, and she remains an idiot even after those who stretch the truth of historic facts to somehow meet her original idiotic post.

The best solution for the Palin problem would be for her to run for President and get her parties nomination … finally then after losing the race by an historic blowout, she might just go away and we can all go back to trying to solve problems with serious people in both parties working together.

She has indeed found something she can do without quitting … being stupid.

Monkei on June 7, 2011 at 2:24 AM

Monkei on June 7, 2011 at 2:24 AM

Are you a Mittens supporter? Then you should hide in that bunker where your guy is going to hide.

promachus on June 7, 2011 at 2:27 AM

The best solution for the Palin problem would be for her to run for President and get her parties nomination … finally then after losing the race by an historic blowout, she might just go away and we can all go back to trying to solve problems with serious people in both parties working together.

Monkei on June 7, 2011 at 2:24 AM

Sound like a solid plan. Make sure you do your part to help bring it to fruition by voting for her in the primary.

Kataklysmic on June 7, 2011 at 2:38 AM

Monkei on June 7, 2011 at 2:24 AM

Are you a Mittens supporter? Then you should hide in that bunker where your guy is going to hide.

promachus on June 7, 2011 at 2:27 AM

No, I believe this is an idiot freakazoid leftist from way back at Captain’s Quarters.

That’s right, I remember you poo flinger.

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 6:18 AM

“He who warned, uh, the British that they weren’t going to be taking away our arms uh 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 and we were going to be armed.” Palin’s words, June 2, 2011

HE (Paul Revere, Paul de Revoire)
WHO
WARNED (Paul) “Revere served for years as the principal rider for Boston’s Committee of Safety” Encyclopedia Britannica, v. 10, p.8;
“In the year 1773 I was imployed by the Select men of the Town of Boston to carry the Account of the Destruction of the Tea to New-York; and afterwards, 1774, to Carry their dispatches to New-York and Philadelphia for Calling a Congress; and afterwards to Congress, several times. In the Fall of 1774 & Winter of 1775 I was one of upwards of thirty, cheifly mechanics, who formed our selves in to a Committeefor the purpose of watching the Movements of the British Soldiers, and gaining every intelegence of the movements of the Tories. We held our meetings at the Green-Dragon Tavern. We were so carefull that our meetings should be kept Secret; that every time we met, every person swore upon the Bible, that they would not discover any of our transactions, But to Messrs. Hancock, Adams, Doctors Warren, Church, & one or two more.” Col. Revere’s Letter – A Letter from Col. Paul Revere to the Corresponding
Secretary Jeremy Belknap
UH
THE BRITISH “I observed a Wood at a Small distance, & made for that. When I got there, out Started Six (British) officers, on Horse back, and orderd me to dismount;-one of them, who appeared to have the command, examined me, where I came from,& what my Name Was? I told him. it was Revere, he asked if it was Paul? I told him yes He asked me if I was an express? I answered in the afirmative. He demanded what time I left Boston? I told him; and added, that their troops had catched aground in passing the River, and that There would be five hundred Americans there in a short time, for I had alarmed the Country all the way up. He imediately rode towards those who stopped us, when all five of them came down upon a full gallop; one of them, whom I afterwards found to be Major Mitchel, of the 5th Regiment, Clapped his pistol to my head, called me by name, & told me he was going to ask me some questions, & if I did not give him true answers, he would blow my brains out. He then asked me similar questions to those above. He then orderd me to mount my Horse, after searching me for arms” Col. Revere’s Letter – A Letter from Col. Paul Revere to the Corresponding Secretary Jeremy Belknap
THAT THEY the British, Paul Revere would not have cried The British are coming! during his famous midnight ride. In those days, colonists were all British. If he uttered anything, it was more likely The Regulars are out! British soldiers were known as Regulars, Redcoats or Lobsterbacks. http://www.thefreedomtrail.org
WEREN”T GOING TO BE
TAKING On April 16, 1775 (Revere) rode to nearby Concord to urge the patriots to move their military stores, which were endangered by pending British troop movements. Encyclopedia Britannica, v. 10, p.8;
AWAY British were confiscating colonial arms.
OUR minutemen, whigs, Committee of Safety, Sons of Liberty
ARMS “on the night of preceeding the 19th of April instant, a body of the King’s troops, under the command of Colonel Smith, were seceretly landed at Cambridge, with an apparent design to take or destroy the military and other stores provided for the defense of this colony, and depositied at Concord” From an account written by Joseph Warren, April 26, 1775, president of the Masachusetts Provincal Congress. Annals of America, v.2, p. 325
For many months before Paul Revere made his ride, tension between the Colonists and British Troops had been on the rise, both in the city and in surrounding towns. The Royal Government (the British government in Massachusetts) wanted to ensure that troops would be able to secure the colony in case of rebellion. Orders went out to confiscate weapons that the Colonists had been storing throughout the countryside.
Several parties of British troops had been sent up the coast to confiscate ammunition in Salem and parts of what is now New Hampshire. In both of those cases, Paul Revere and other riders who were members of the Sons of Liberty, alerted the townspeople of the movement of British troops well before those troops could reach their destinations. The munitions were successfully hidden and the British troops were humiliated.
http://www.oldnorth.com/histor
British had been confiscating small personal arms in the city of Boston all the while.
UH
BY RINGING THOSE BELLS “A townsman remembered that ‘repeated gunshots, the beating of drums and the ringing of bells filled the air.’…. Along the North Shore of Massachusetts, church bells began to toll and the heavy beat of drums could be heard for many miles in the night air.” from Paul Revere’s Ride by David Hackett Fischer
In addition to other express riders delivering messages, bells, drums, alarm guns, bonfires and a trumpet were used for rapid communication from town to town, notifying the rebels in dozens of eastern Massachusetts villages that they should muster their militias because the regulars in numbers greater than 500 were leaving Boston, with possible hostile intentions. This system was so effective that people in towns 25 miles (40 km) from Boston were aware of the army’s movements while they were still unloading boats in Cambridge. Fischer
AND
MAKING SURE
AS HE”S RIDING HIS HORSE “Revere was ordered to dismount…. Suddenly they returned to Revere, and ordered him to mount.” Fischer. Revere was mounted, then dismounted for most of the interchange with the Regulars, then remounted. The horse in question was “Brown Beauty, Deacon Larkin’s splendid horse had served him nobly that night.” who was likely ridden to death by the Regulars after they took it.
THROUGH TOWN Riding through present-day Somerville, Medford, and Arlington. Before the night was over as many as 40 riders were out sounding the alarm which included bells, drums abd gunshots
TO SEND THOSE as riders passed through towns a clamor of drums, gunshots and bells warned citizens
WARNING SHOTS “Trull rose from his bed and took up his musket. Still in his nightdress, he fired three times from his bedroom window. This was a signal previously arranged with the milita commander in the nrighboring town of Dracut” Fischer (or)
“He rode directly to the house of Captain Isaac Hall, commander of Medford’s minutemen, who instantly triggered the town’s alarm system. A Townsman remembered that “repeated gunshots, the beating of drums, and the ringing of bells filled the air.” Fischer
AND BELLS “Hannah Winthrop, who lived near Harvard Yard, remembered that she was awakened by “beat of drum and ringing bell”, a few hours before dawn. These were drums and bells that British Regulars themselves had begun to hear with growing concern, as the hurried on their way.” Fischer
THAT WE WERE
GOING TO BE SECURE “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to SECURE these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.” from The Declaration of Independence
See also the list of grievances in the Declaration of Independence
“Sometimes though, there are people and events in life that try to take away these rights. So, men create governments in order to “secure” or protect their rights. The government derives its power from the “consent of the governed.” This means that the people who are being ruled over have a right to choose how their government functions. If the government tries to do things without the people’s consent, then that would be unjust. Notice that the signers did not think that a government, such as that of Great Britain, had the right to tell people what to do, or to dictate to people how they should live. Nor did they believe that a government existed for supplying people’s needs or solely for the building up of its own self. They believed that governments should be allowed to exist only to protect their God given rights.”http://www.revolutionary-war-and-beyond.com/purpose-of-declaration-of-independence.html
AND GOING TO BE FREE “These are the times that try men’s souls: The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated.”
Thomas Paine, The Crisis, December 23, 1776
AND WE WERE
GOING TO BE ARMED Assembly, Faneuil Hall, Massachusetts Colony, September 12-13, 1768:

“Upon a Motion made and seconded, the following vote was passed by a very greta Majority, viz. whereas, by an Act of Parliament, of the first of King William and Queen Mary, it is declared, that the Subjects being Protestants, may have arms for their Defence; It is the Opinion of this town, that the said Declaration is founded in Nature, Reason and sound Policy, and is well adapted for the necessary Defence of the Community. And Forasmuch, as by a good and wholesome Law of this Province, every listed Soldier and other Householder (except Troopers, who by Law are otherwise to be provided) shall always be provided with a well fix’d Firelock, Musket, Accouterments and Ammunition, as in said Law particularly mentioned, to the Satisfaction of the Commission Officers of the Company; and as there is at this Time prevailing Apprehension, in the Minds of many, of an approaching War with France: In order that the Inhabitants of this Town may be prepared in Case of Sudden Danger: voted, that those of the Inhabitants, who may at present be unprovided, be and hereby are requested duly to observe the said Law at this Time.”
Boston Chronicle, September 19, 1768

” 6) As firearms have been manufactured in several parts of this colony, we do recommend the use of such, in preference to any imported. And we do recommend the making of gunlocks, and furniture (ie. gunstocks) and other locks, with other articles in the iron way. 7) We do also ernestly recommend the making of saltpeter, as an article of vast importance to be encouraged, as may be directed hereafter. 8) That gunpowder is also an article of such importancethat every man among us who loves his country must wish the establishment of manufactories for that purpose, and, as there are the ruins of several powder mills, and sundry persons among us who are acquainted with that business, we do heartily recommend its encouragement by repairing one or more of said mills, or erecting others, and renewing said business as soon as possible. Resolutions adopted by Massachusetts Provincal Congress, December 8, 1774

In a letter to Lord Dartmouth from General Gage, summer 1774, Gage said” In Worcester (Massachusetts) they keep no terms; openly threatening resistance by arms; have been purchasing arms, preparing them; casting balls; and providing powder.” “By (1774) the providence swarmed with thousands of what were called “minute men, i.e. to be ready at a minutes warning with a fortnight’s provision and ammunition and arms”
The Minute Men, J. Galvin, 1967

Viator on June 7, 2011 at 7:35 AM

Wow NPR get’s it right, and the NRO get’s it wrong…maybe we need to think twice about pulling the plug on NPR. It’s a sad thing when a Soros funded outfit is better at fact checking than the supposedly conservative publication. Maybe George Soros should buy the NRO\

Dr Evil on June 7, 2011 at 8:20 AM

If people like you weren’t so obsessed with trying to make her look stupid, this would be a non issue.

blink on June 7, 2011 at 1:05 AM

So a possible presidential candidate botches the telling of an important historical event, and when people discuss it, it is being obsessed?

Had Sarah just come out and given a plausible explanation, this wouldn’t be happening.

Better yet, had she simply got it right, this wouldn’t be happening.

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 8:25 AM

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.

I don’t recall Sarah Palin mentioning the Second Amendment here at all, this is an inference they are making to imply she doesn’t know when the Constitution was written without actually saying it.

This was interesting too:

Are there other historians, Professor, whom you’ve talked with who say you’re being entirely too charitable towards Sarah Palin here, and she really did misread American…

Prof. ALLISON: I haven’t talked to many – well, I don’t know. I mean, I haven’t talked to too many historians today. And, you know, Sarah Palin is a lightning rod. I just was thinking about how many times, you know, I’ve spoken about Paul Revere. I’ve organized events about the American Revolution. No one ever pays any attention. Suddenly, Sarah Palin comes to town, makes an off-the-cuff remark about what she learned, and suddenly, you’re calling me to find out what I think about Paul Revere and the American Revolution.

It’s a great honor to talk to you, Melissa.

(Soundbite of laughter)

Prof. ALLISON: I wish it didn’t take Sarah Palin coming to town to bring us together.

BLOCK: Well, we’ll have to do this again sometime.

Prof. ALLISON: I hope so.

BLOCK: Professor Allison, thanks so much.

Prof. ALLISON: Thanks. Take care.

Seems like to me, Sarah Palin has pleased this History professor by getting some previously non-existent attention drawn to his favorite subject.

Mission Accomplished, Governor Palin.

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 8:29 AM

It’s made it’s way from Coast to Coast Now.

Pigs Fly Through a Frozen Hell: LA Times Admits Sarah Palin was Right About Paul Revere

Dr Evil on June 7, 2011 at 8:29 AM

littleguy on June 7, 2011 at 1:12 AM

She got it right in the same context that Germany bombed Pearl Harbor. She had all the facts, but botched up the telling of the story. She will never be a serious candidate with the 63% until she can demonstrate that she wont botch up her dealings with a foreign ally or enemy. Look at Obama….the Marxist traitor is always acting like a fool when he meets with foreign powers. No one respects him.

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 8:30 AM

Better yet, had she simply got it right, this wouldn’t be happening.

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 8:25 AM

So you disagree with Professor Allison of Suffolk University in Boston who organizes events about Paul Revere all the time?

He said this on NPR of all places:

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.

I mean, who is the more authoritative source here, man?

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 8:32 AM

Prof. ALLISON: Yeah. She was making a Second Amendment case.

No she didn’t.

I don’t recall Sarah Palin mentioning the Second Amendment here at all, this is an inference they are making to imply she doesn’t know when the Constitution was written without actually saying it.

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 8:29 AM

You are right, she didn’t mention the second amendment. But this guy thinks she did and you’re going to use him as a authority to insist that Sarah got it right? Clearly this guy didn’t hear Sarah’s comments or he, like most people, are trying to figure out exactly what the heck she was talking about.

Sarah could end all of these kinds of speculations if she would just cease screwing up this kind of easy stuff.

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 8:35 AM

She got it right in the same context that Germany bombed Pearl Harbor. She had all the facts, but botched up the telling of the story. She will never be a serious candidate with the 63% until she can demonstrate that she wont botch up her dealings with a foreign ally or enemy. Look at Obama….the Marxist traitor is always acting like a fool when he meets with foreign powers. No one respects him.

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 8:30 AM

My goodness, you are one stubborn son of a gun, aren’t you?

Watch her interview on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace.

It was excellent, she was right on the money on the substance and her personal charm was on full wattage as well.

She keeps doing that, along with meeting people face to face like on this tour, your favorite poll numbers will be a-changin’.

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 8:35 AM

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 8:35 AM

I explained that already.

You think you know the story of Revere better than this Professor of History at Suffolk University in Boston who organizes Paul Revere events all the time?

I don’t. You have an obvious agenda here, he is being fair about her comments.

I’ll go with what he said, and what she told Chris Wallace Sunday when she defended herself on this.

You are sounding much closer to Andrew Sullivan than I think you may want to.

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 8:39 AM

I mean, who is the more authoritative source here, man?

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 8:32 AM

If you want to believe that guy, go right ahead. Sarah’s problem is that even guys like this are saying things like “She basically got it right”, and “But remember, she’s a politician, not a historian”. Using the lowest common denominator to justify her gaffs is not a winning strategy. Just as comparing her to Obama isn’t.

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 8:45 AM

Watch her interview on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace.

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 8:35 AM

She was better during the first part, but she did drop into that convoluted use of different adjectives to describe the same noun like she always does. It sounds disjointed. It’s like she has a list of adjectives she needs to use and she just mashes them into her comments. If I can find the interview, I’ll link the comments.

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 8:48 AM

Using the lowest common denominator to justify her gaffs is not a winning strategy. Just as comparing her to Obama isn’t.

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 8:45 AM

That isn’t what I’m doing.

I am not in charge of her strategy, she is.

What is a winning strategy is for her to continue doing what she did along this bus tour, meeting people who are not waiting for her to cheer or protest, talking to them about their concerns, and doing what she did Sunday on Fox.

I think that is what her strategery is.

She is such a talented retail politicker that she can win Iowa doing what she is doing already, just focused there.

This will blow over and she will still be standing, like she has always done.

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 8:50 AM

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 8:39 AM

It’s a game the MSM plays, and the trolls pick up on it, and disseminate it on the blogs. Perception trumps Reality. But not this time, they got their D1cks caught in the door. It gone out from sea to shining sea. The dinosaur media has lost a lot of influence.

Dr Evil on June 7, 2011 at 8:51 AM

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 8:39 AM

This professor is making excuses for her because she is “only a politician”. And any professor who says politicians shouldn’t be historians is being nice or is a dope. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. We need our politicians to be historically accurate.

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 8:52 AM

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 8:48 AM

I’ve seen it twice already.

You are nitpicking her to death at this point.

She was great, Wallace even said so after when the panel came on.

Didn’t bother him how she chose to use adjectives.

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 8:52 AM

This professor is making excuses for her because she is “only a politician”. And any professor who says politicians shouldn’t be historians is being nice or is a dope. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. We need our politicians to be historically accurate.

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 8:52 AM

So now a Boston history Professor is on NPR making excuses for her?

I agree with him, not you. Sorry, no sale.

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 8:53 AM

What is a winning strategy is for her to continue doing what she did along this bus tour, meeting people

Yep. But she needs to discipline her message and stop messing up like this.

This will blow over and she will still be standing, like she has always done.

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 8:50 AM

I’m sure of it. But she wont run and if she’s not careful, her role as king/queen maker will be damaged.

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 8:54 AM

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 8:54 AM

I think she is already running, just hasn’t quite reached the strategic jump in point.

The preparations have been ongoing for a long time, at least a year.

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 8:57 AM

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 8:52 AM

That’s the Meme, make Palin appear stupid. If you can’t prove what she said was stupid, assert that she sounded stupid making an accurate statement. It’s really simple, but no one is playing. Outlets like the Boston Herald, East Coast – LA Times, West Coast and that conservative bastion NPR , and all points in between have backed up Sarah Palin. The LSM and the troll brigades, don’t have any more spit, for their spit balls LOL!

Dr Evil on June 7, 2011 at 8:58 AM

Dr Evil on June 7, 2011 at 8:58 AM

Yeah, if you are a conservative and a Boston History Professor and freakin NPR are being more fair to another conservative than you are, along with the LAT and so forth, you should re-evaluate your position.

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 9:04 AM

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 8:52 AM

“This sinking ship we are on will be drowning in debt”

This is a perfect example. There is no need to use the verb “drowning” when she used the word “sinking” in the context she used it in. It is redundant. Is it a fatal flaw in and of itself? No, but it sounds disjointed, and when you add that to her Paul Revere gaff (and other gaffs), it shows a real lack of communicating skills. This would be disastrous when trying to explain ones position to others.

And she isn’t going to have respected professors running around this country and the world explaining what Sarah REALLY meant.

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 9:06 AM

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 9:06 AM

Good grief, put the chew toy down and let your jaws rest a while.

I do not find a problem with this in any way.

She communicates very well most of the time, no one is perfect however.

Her speeches are great, she commands a room like few others can.
One on one she is fantastic with people, even people who are not predisposed to support her.

You seem to relish ignoring all this in order to dwell on things that are minor in comparison.

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 9:15 AM

(Bill) O’Reilly: “Now I’m going to stick up for the Governor because I know something about Paul Revere, I actually have his signature. He DID tell the British, you better knock it off, you better not try to seize the guns, because if you do there is going to be a big problem which off course ensued. So we’ll give her the benefit of the doubt as we try to do with everybody, Bernie.”

Viator on June 7, 2011 at 9:19 AM

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 9:04 AM

There are two tiers. The bomb throwers, they get their narrative, and run with it. They will saturate the 24/7 media cycle with what’s ever sensational. They don’t let facts get in their way – they are selling perception. SEE Obama’s brand won marketing product of the year when he won the Presidency. That’s all the media does “Marketing” I don’t call them news outlets, because they really aren’t reporting, they are selling a point of view. There is another tier the academics, they will usually back up the spin, but when faced with inconvertible facts – they won’t back up the mud slingers. The reason is their reputation. When you read what Dr Allison stated, he wishes that it wouldn’t take Sarah Palin, to get people interested in their country’s history. How can someone like Dr Allison come out and state she’s wrong when he is teaching the same thing Palin stated? He can’t, and he won’t. The LSM went to the academic “Well” hoping to get some support and validation, and their bucket came up empty :) Media puppets don’t care if they look stupid, but academia does, it’s how they make their sheckles. Their reputations are more important to them than scoring cheap political points.

Dr Evil on June 7, 2011 at 10:05 AM

littleguy on June 7, 2011 at 1:12 AM

She got it right in the same context that Germany bombed Pearl Harbor. She had all the facts, but botched up the telling of the story.

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 8:30 AM

So, she “all the facts”, but didn’t assemble them to your liking? That’s your only beef? This is the thing that’s going to devastate her career and ruin the party forever should she be nominated??? You know, it’s morning (again) — it might be time for you to stop and smell to coffee.

littleguy on June 7, 2011 at 10:11 AM

Still no love for Israel Bissel.

fusionaddict on June 7, 2011 at 10:17 AM

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 9:06 AM

Good grief, put the chew toy down and let your jaws rest a while.

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 9:15 AM

My daughter an I were taking a hike before work this morning and she started doing the csdeven thing to someone whose very existence seems to bug her.

So I warned her about the dangers of obsessive hatred, how the very first thing you lose is the ability to see the landscape around you and to be aware and think critically. Kinda like a fighter pilot who becomes so focused on the target that he loses sense of what is going on around him. Some aviation historians theorize that this effect killed the Red Baron.

A healthy person will put the chew toy down – csdeven and associates cannot. They are beyond the point of no return where their hate fuels their mental being and nothing will cure them short of the destruction of their target.

This cripples the csdevens and confers power to the target. This effect accounts for the continuing rise in power of Sarah Palin and the inverse effect on her enemies.

My daughter got the lesson. Thanks, cs!

Cricket624 on June 7, 2011 at 10:30 AM

You are sounding much closer to Andrew Sullivan than I think you may want to.

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 8:39 AM

It wants to be Andrew Sullivan in the worst way, and it is succeeding.

It would try to get away with Trig Trutherism and Letterman’s statutory rape jokes if it knew it could do so without being banned from HA.

ebrown2 on June 7, 2011 at 10:49 AM

A healthy person will put the chew toy down – csdeven and associates cannot. They are beyond the point of no return where their hate fuels their mental being and nothing will cure them short of the destruction of their target.

This cripples the csdevens and confers power to the target. This effect accounts for the continuing rise in power of Sarah Palin and the inverse effect on her enemies.

My daughter got the lesson. Thanks, cs!

Cricket624 on June 7, 2011 at 10:30 AM

Well said!

ebrown2 on June 7, 2011 at 10:51 AM

Ann Coulter explains the behavior as French Revolution Model vs American Revolution Model. It’s important for people to remember that college professors are teaching from the French Revolution Model.

I think the attack on Sarah Palin over her answer about Paul Revere, proves Ann Coulter’s point. The Leftist Media appears to be ignorant of the facts of the American Revolution, except in poetry – that captures the sensational aspects of Paul Revere’s Ride.

Ann Coulter on the ‘Liberal Mob’ of the American Left

Video from her appearance on ABC discussing her new book Demonic. Which is fascinating, they added excerpts from her book in the article above. This one is going to be a best seller.

Taste: “Although the left in America is widely recognized as hysterical, unreasonable, and clueless, the “root cause” of these traits has generally been neglected. More than a century ago, Gustave Le Bon perfectly captured the liberal psychological profile in his 1896 book, “The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind.” Le Bon — a French physician, scientist, and social psychologist — was the first to identify the phenomenon of mass psychology. His groundbreaking book “The Crowd” paints a disturbing picture of the behavior of mobs. Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini used his book to learn how to incite a mob. Our liberals could have been Le Bon’s study subjects.”

Dr Evil on June 7, 2011 at 11:19 AM

Ann Coulter Republicans follow the American Revolution. Democrats follow the French Revolution – Left’s behavioral model, Inciting Mobs, Group Think.

“Everything else changes, but mobs are always the same. A mob is an irrational, childlike, often violent organism that derives its energy from the group. Intoxicated by messianic goals, the promise of instant gratification, and adrenaline-pumping exhortations, mobs create mayhem, chaos, and destruction, leaving a smoldering heap of wreckage for their leaders to climb to power.”

James Carville is warning of imminent civil unrest if the economy doesn’t improve. The Democrat’s understand their base all too well. Viva La Revolution.

Dr Evil on June 7, 2011 at 11:30 AM

It wasn’t just what she said.

She looked like she should be in a straight jacket.

Continuing to make excuses for her is not helping the country.

No other politician would be allowed to go on camera looking like a lunatick and have people line up to make excuses for her.

petunia on June 7, 2011 at 12:01 AM
Oh boy, petunia has the double D’s today – delusional and
dumbass

Amjean on June 7, 2011 at 2:26 PM

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 8:52 AM

“This sinking ship we are on will be drowning in debt”

This is a perfect example. There is no need to use the verb “drowning” when she used the word “sinking” in the context she used it in. It is redundant. Is it a fatal flaw in and of itself? No, but it sounds disjointed, and when you add that to her Paul Revere gaff (and other gaffs), it shows a real lack of communicating skills. This would be disastrous when trying to explain ones position to others.

And she isn’t going to have respected professors running around this country and the world explaining what Sarah REALLY meant.

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 9:06 AM
She reaches more people if she uses different adjectives.
With the liberal dumbing down of America, many people may
not know the definition of the first word, so Palin adds
another to help the dumbasses out. You should get this.

Amjean on June 7, 2011 at 2:32 PM

Her speeches are great, she commands a room like few others can.

Brian1972 on June 7, 2011 at 9:15 AM

That is your opinion. 63% do not agree.

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 3:16 PM

Amjean on June 7, 2011 at 2:32 PM

Palin is also trying to convey excitement by her choice of words and tone – we live in a great country with a brave beginning. It’s not chance that turned us into a super power, and world leader.

Dr Evil on June 7, 2011 at 3:51 PM

I remember my history teacher, Mrs. Reese, telling just that story in about 1968.

Mr. Grump on June 7, 2011 at 3:54 PM

That is your opinion. 63% do not agree.

csdeven on June 7, 2011 at 3:16 PM

That wasn’t the poll question, was it now? So, not only is that your opinion, you are also full of it.

littleguy on June 7, 2011 at 5:32 PM

That wasn’t the poll question, was it now? So, not only is that your opinion, you are also full of it.

littleguy on June 7, 2011 at 5:32 PM

You should have read him when Fred Thompson was running, he was worse…just very, very obsessed, really strange.
He obsessed over Obama BC also, claiming that the short form BC from Hawaii was even illegal for driving…he gets carried away, not quite “right” if you get my drift.

right2bright on June 7, 2011 at 9:37 PM

Sarah had just heard the docent’s lecture. Easy. The “interviewers” had not. The critics never will.

Keep on plucking that chicken.

Caststeel on June 8, 2011 at 12:34 AM

Comment pages: 1 7 8 9