Sarah Palin 2, liberals who don’t know much about history, 0
In which the dumb snowbilly outwits her betters, for a second time:
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.”
Palin insisted yesterday on Fox News Sunday she was right: “Part of his ride was to warn the British that were already there. That, hey, you’re not going to succeed. You’re not going to take American arms.” …
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.”
Patrick Leehey of the Paul Revere House said Revere was probably bluffing his British captors, but reluctantly conceded that it could be construed as Revere warning the British.
Back in October, Palin drew fire from the left for tweeting to Tea Partiers to “not to party like it’s 1773 yet.” Kos retweeted her, mocking and sneering. The left went nuts, hectoring Palin and calling her stupid — when a very quick check of the historical record proved her right: The Boston Tea Party did in fact take place in 1773.
When will the lefties learn not to mess with Palin’s understanding of history? Half past never, I’d say. It’s not like their leader, Markos Moulitsas, actually knows anything himself. He doesn’t even know the difference between Dallas and Austin.
As for Sarah Palin, underestimate her at your peril.
I suspect the Palin knows exactly what she is doing. She finds an obscure fact, quotes it and then watches the MSM and the Dummycrats fall over themselves to tell everybody how stupid she is. She is laughing at the ignorance of the “smartest people in the room.”
Unfortunately, it’s very easy to smear Palin and have the smear stick in a nation of ignoramuses. The ignorant masses will never know she was telling the truth. The brain dead masses just watch leibowitz, colbert, the View, the feed they get from yahoo or whatever on their iphones, the 5:00 tv news, etc. The lie is accepted as truth and endlessly repeated.
You left out the money quotes from the article, which continues:
“I suppose you could say that,” Leehey said. “But I don’t know if that’s really what Mrs. Palin was referring to.”
McConville said he also is not convinced that Palin’s remarks reflect scholarship.
“I would call her lucky in her comments,” McConville said.
Those two comments speak volumes about the intellectual honesty and academic integrity of the the two liberal scholars and seekers after truth, justice, and [anything but] the American Way ™.
The history professor strikes me as being suspicious and dismayed that Mrs Palin might have learned some history; you know, the truth of What Happened. Does he have so little confidence in his colleague’s ability to successfully teach American History?
Bryan – Now convince the Palin critics at Commentary Contentions (an otherwise fine blog).
I still come back to the quote by the guy who thinks she got lucky in that her contention turned out to be true. If you look at the context of what she said, she was essentially making an argument against gun control, and in favor of freedom. Those things were issues during the Revolution, and the British expedition to Lexington and Concord was launched with the intention of seizing a stock of gunpowder and a couple of cannon that the Colonials had acquired. Paul Revere did indeed warn the British that if they tried to take those arms they’d be met by 500 minutemen, apparently in an attempt to intimidate them. It didn’t work; the commander of the column reinforced his advanced guard, so that they overran the minuteman group in Lexington very easily.
However, the takeaway from this, as far as I’m concerned, is that the academics will admit she’s technically right, but they’ll try and insinuate (or just say out loud in one case) that she got lucky, because she’s too stupid to actually have her history right deliberately.
Revere told his British captors that they would meet 500 militia ready to fight.
Palin paraphrased it into the modern vernacular: “It’s (the fight is) on!”
This is a 100% accurate translation.
Anyone who thinks she did not know what happened, or was confused, or got a lucky hit, is deluding himself about this woman.
BTW, I do not think she baits them intentionally. I don’t think she planned this at all. She was just cheerleading America. I think she just goes about her business, just be’s herself, a happy-go-lucky person, and they just destroy themselves trying to destroy her. They just cannot help themselves. It is the nature of evil to carry the seeds of its own destruction.
Maybe they are right about her being Caribou Barbie, but the light they shine on her to reveal her as such bounces of her shiny self and reflects back to reveal them, not her. It may be that she defeats them with her simple innocence. They cannot withstand the resultant juxtaposition. Well, I guess there are worse ways to do it, and maybe none better. God works in mysterious ways.
Hey, we linked to you on this one on The Periscope Post. Hit us back with a link some time soon!
http://www.periscopepost.com/2011/06/did-sarah-palin-really-re-write-paule-reveres-famous-midnight-ride/