Here's what Palin terms a gothcha question. "What did you see today"..."and what did you learn?" or something very close to that. My, that is really trying to embarass her isn't it?

Originally Posted by RichieLion

DJ and Bugs; your affliction of this Sarah Palin Derangement Syndrome is almost too sad for me to be laughing about, but I can't help myself. So many words to try to malign someone who got something right and that you can't believe she actually knew something about, and so have to come up with some kind of "Steven King-ish" fantasy tale of intrigue to explain this unfathomable occurrence. Please, continue. Your stories are so much more fun than the actual mundane story of an underestimation of a person you dislike and disrespect.

Richie.

I mean this seriously, and NOT in a nasty or sarcastic way.

It's not Palin that I'm 'deranged' about. It's you. You are CLEARLY articulate and have a head on your shoulders but, for some reason, you just can't admit it when someone you follow is wrong.

Please notice that I'm not starting threads on her - I'm responding to people's comment - in this case, yours.

It's one thing to back your team in sports no matter how bad they get (and I know a lot about that having been a Red Sox fan for 30+ years before they finally won it all) - but it's another to keep backing someone who is making a fool of themselves. What's worse, you're not saying "Ok, Sarah was wrong but I still back her message" - you're saying she was RIGHT when the facts don't back it up. Even on Fox News, a friendly environment, she doubled down on it talking about Revere's ride, claiming she had the facts to back her up when, again, they DON'T - she never even mentioned the 'out' that her supporters (who were trying to edit the Wikipedia page on Paul Rever) try to use (the fact that Revere DID tell the Regulars about what was going on, but did it AFTER he was captured and was also bluffing since he didn't know what others had done). She insisted, on the clip that I saw, that telling the British was part of 'the mission'.

What's worse is she plays the Pity Card. She complained of it being a "gotcha question". Well, here's the question she was asked: "What did you see here (in Boston) and what will you take away from this visit?"

Is THAT a gotcha question?

With all that, Richie, it's YOU that I'm trying to understand. I can understand supporting her general positions, regardless of whether or not I agree with them. What I *don't* understand is why you keep insisting Palin was right about Revere. Don't you get ANY cognitive dissonance about this?

Originally Posted by djplong

Richie.

I mean this seriously, and NOT in a nasty or sarcastic way.

It's not Palin that I'm 'deranged' about. It's you. You are CLEARLY articulate and have a head on your shoulders but, for some reason, you just can't admit it when someone you follow is wrong.

Please notice that I'm not starting threads on her - I'm responding to people's comment - in this case, yours.

It's one thing to back your team in sports no matter how bad they get (and I know a lot about that having been a Red Sox fan for 30+ years before they finally won it all) - but it's another to keep backing someone who is making a fool of themselves. What's worse, you're not saying "Ok, Sarah was wrong but I still back her message" - you're saying she was RIGHT when the facts don't back it up. Even on Fox News, a friendly environment, she doubled down on it talking about Revere's ride, claiming she had the facts to back her up when, again, they DON'T - she never even mentioned the 'out' that her supporters (who were trying to edit the Wikipedia page on Paul Rever) try to use (the fact that Revere DID tell the Regulars about what was going on, but did it AFTER he was captured and was also bluffing since he didn't know what others had done). She insisted, on the clip that I saw, that telling the British was part of 'the mission'.

What's worse is she plays the Pity Card. She complained of it being a "gotcha question". Well, here's the question she was asked: "What did you see here (in Boston) and what will you take away from this visit?"

Is THAT a gotcha question?

With all that, Richie, it's YOU that I'm trying to understand. I can understand supporting her general positions, regardless of whether or not I agree with them. What I *don't* understand is why you keep insisting Palin was right about Revere. Don't you get ANY cognitive dissonance about this?

very well thought out, and spot on.

Originally Posted by waynet

Sarah Palin is everything that is wrong with America. She is an anti-intellectual soundbite who says nothing of substance. She is not very smart and proud of it......

Many of us would say that THIS guy is everything that is wrong with Washington DC. If you want to see an "anti-intellectual soundbite", this is a prime example:

http://twitter.com/#!/RepWeiner

Originally Posted by djplong

Richie.

I mean this seriously, and NOT in a nasty or sarcastic way.

It's not Palin that I'm 'deranged' about. It's you. You are CLEARLY articulate and have a head on your shoulders but, for some reason, you just can't admit it when someone you follow is wrong.

Please notice that I'm not starting threads on her - I'm responding to people's comment - in this case, yours.

It's one thing to back your team in sports no matter how bad they get (and I know a lot about that having been a Red Sox fan for 30+ years before they finally won it all) - but it's another to keep backing someone who is making a fool of themselves. What's worse, you're not saying "Ok, Sarah was wrong but I still back her message" - you're saying she was RIGHT when the facts don't back it up. Even on Fox News, a friendly environment, she doubled down on it talking about Revere's ride, claiming she had the facts to back her up when, again, they DON'T - she never even mentioned the 'out' that her supporters (who were trying to edit the Wikipedia page on Paul Rever) try to use (the fact that Revere DID tell the Regulars about what was going on, but did it AFTER he was captured and was also bluffing since he didn't know what others had done). She insisted, on the clip that I saw, that telling the British was part of 'the mission'.

What's worse is she plays the Pity Card. She complained of it being a "gotcha question". Well, here's the question she was asked: "What did you see here (in Boston) and what will you take away from this visit?"

Is THAT a gotcha question?

With all that, Richie, it's YOU that I'm trying to understand. I can understand supporting her general positions, regardless of whether or not I agree with them. What I *don't* understand is why you keep insisting Palin was right about Revere. Don't you get ANY cognitive dissonance about this?

I'm sorry you feel the way you do. But the fact is she WAS right. There's no gray area about it. She WAS right. That's all there is too it. Anything else is reaching for fathom conclusions, in my opinion; and all I can see is an irrational bias to support your findings. I can't help the way you feel, and you won't change my mind when I KNOW i'm right; so maybe it's best if we just drop it.

Ok, Ritchie.. Then just one more round so I can understand exactly where you are.

You keep insisting she was right. You pointed towards Revere's account of the ride that showed she was wrong. Which parts are you in the belief that I'm wrong?

She said that Revere was ringing bells and firing shots. False.

She said that Revere was warning the British then, later, doubled down and said warning the British was part of the mission. False. Revere only spoke to the British when he was captured.

She said he was riding through towns warning people. Well, he never made it to the first town he was supposed to go to (Lexington). That was his INTENT, but the Regulars had something to say about that. After capture, the officer cut the bridle to Revere's horse and let him go - and Revere headed back towards Boston. So, again, false.

She said it was a "gotcha" question. False.

The mission was to warn the MILITIA in Lexington and Concord that the Regulars were coming to seize the arms that were rumored (from the Regulars point of view) to be in storehouses in Lexington, Concord and other towns. What kind of idiocy would it be to have part of the mission to be warning the very people you were trying to stay ahead of?

What am I missing here? You've just kept saying she was right. About what?

[Side note - the definition of the militia, at the time, was any able-bodied person who could use a firearm - hence the need to go house to house once you got to the town]

Ya gotta watch "The Sarah Palin History Channel" sketch from Conan O'Brien on how the Constitution was signed. Farcical and funny.

Or maybe it was the Declaraton of Independence....

An NPR interview with Robert Allison, chair of the history department at Suffolk University in Boston.

..."MELISSA BLOCK, host: 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."...




http://www.npr.org/2011/06/06/137011...on-paul-revere

Originally Posted by djplong

Ok, Ritchie.. Then just one more round so I can understand exactly where you are.

You keep insisting she was right. You pointed towards Revere's account of the ride that showed she was wrong. Which parts are you in the belief that I'm wrong?

She said that Revere was ringing bells and firing shots. False.

She said that Revere was warning the British then, later, doubled down and said warning the British was part of the mission. False. Revere only spoke to the British when he was captured.

She said he was riding through towns warning people. Well, he never made it to the first town he was supposed to go to (Lexington). That was his INTENT, but the Regulars had something to say about that. After capture, the officer cut the bridle to Revere's horse and let him go - and Revere headed back towards Boston. So, again, false.

She said it was a "gotcha" question. False.

The mission was to warn the MILITIA in Lexington and Concord that the Regulars were coming to seize the arms that were rumored (from the Regulars point of view) to be in storehouses in Lexington, Concord and other towns. What kind of idiocy would it be to have part of the mission to be warning the very people you were trying to stay ahead of?

What am I missing here? You've just kept saying she was right. About what?

[Side note - the definition of the militia, at the time, was any able-bodied person who could use a firearm - hence the need to go house to house once you got to the town]

I see your post as reaching, because of a bias you have that she is, foremost, "stupid", and anything she says is based on that "fact". That coupled with the fact that she presented a historical event in a more correct context that you, who are obviously light years more intelligent than she, did not, until then, know.

On the bus tour, when she related that now famous short tale, she had a memory of the actual, and not the fanciful Longfellow inspired account, in her memory. You want to knock her for not getting every little factoid of the story in the correct connotation; that's fine. I guess you're much too brilliant to ever have gray areas in your memory of events, even if you know the meat of the memory, and cannot abide it in others.

Oh, and you're the one who's trying to come up with fanciful's "what if's" and "how could that be's" that have nothing to do with the actual events, and are only you trying to put yourself in the situation, with your brilliance, on how you would have handled the situation.

I leave you one more link you might want to read. Ohhh, and at the end you'll see where Paul Revere tells the British of the armed Colonists waiting for them. Oh my goodness, isn't that really close to what Gov. Pain said? No, can't be; because the woman is a stupid....................

http://www.paul-revere-heritage.com/midnight-ride.html

To be honest, Richie. I'm disappointed in you. I asked for specifics to try and see where you were coming from and I get almost nothing from you. There was no bias as far as Palin was concerned. The 'bias', if you want to call it that was based on what I know from studying history both in books and from living next door to it.

But, hey, you gave me a link so I checked it out.

Revere was captured.
...
The British held Revere and interrogated him with a pistol on his chest. He was asked about the plans of the militia and where they kept their ammunition. When asked where the Patriots were hiding he told them the truth and replied that they had 500 militiamen in Concord protecting them and 1500 coming. As they rode towards Concord he was told that if he tried to escape he would be shot.

Ok, I see where I got one thing wrong. He didn't start heading back towards Boston immediately until the Regulars released him when they heard the gunshots. He met up with others and headed towards Woburn, then back to Lexington to get some papers he forgot.

The link you provided showed that 'informing the British' was NOT part of the plan.

Why do you cling to this stuff? Even the links you provide refute Sarah's interpretation!

The one thing I *did* learn (or re-learn in case I forgot it) was that Revere DID give up the goods under interrogation. I wonder what Patrick Henry thought of that.

Like I said DJ, you're looking for excellence and absolutes on a memory and I don't think you can rise to your own standards.

I'm not debating your "specifics". I won't be playing by your rules here. As you wrote, Revere told the British of the Colonists plans. That's close enough for me to know that she knew more about this than you with your Google.

I suppose The Weiner would know all these history facts instantly.....Geezzzz.....

Let Palin go....It's a free country.

The American people are not as dumb as many of you think, and they can think for themselves.

We should be thankful we have the freedom for anyone who wants to to make a bid for public office!

Originally Posted by ilovetv

I suppose The Weiner would know all these history facts instantly.....Geezzzz.....

Let Palin go....It's a free country.

The American people are not as dumb as many of you think, and they can think for themselves.

We should be thankful we have the freedom for anyone who wants to to make a bid for public office!

How about that? Simple and eloquent; thank you.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=43969