Sarah Palin’s Paul Revere “Gaffe”

It’s of the same quality as Sarah Palin’s “party like it’s 1773” “gaffe.” Just prior to the 2010 election, Sarah Palin, “dumb” as she is, told a TEA Party crowd not to party like it’s 1773 just yet, and the lamestream media and the Liberals (redundant, I know) went wild. Sarah didn’t know her US History! She didn’t know it was 1776! What an utter maroon! While one Liberal asked “is there something special about 1773” that’s as far as he took it, because his intent was clearly to mock the “ignorance” of Sarah Palin.

That didn’t turn out so well. She was talking to a TEA Party crowd. The TEA Party harkens back to the original, the Boston Tea Party, which it so happens took place in — you guessed it — 1773. Sarah Palin, the wise and well-informed teacher, set a trap for the Liberals and the Press (redundancy), snared her “game,” and taught people about a very important date in US History all at the same time. What did the media do after they found out they had been caught in a trap of their own making? What they always do when they gaffe: memory-holed it.

How many knew the Boston Tea Party took place in 1773 before Sarah Palin’s statement? How many know the Boston Tea Party took place in 1773 now?

“Let’s hide the fact Sarah Palin, that stupid chillbilly, knew more about historical events surrounding the Tea Party than we did and catch her making another(!) mistake regarding US History. Oh! Paul Revere! She stepped in it big time there! Let’s all point and laugh at her for that one. Surely that one won’t come back to bite us in the backside!”

Yes, the Liberals and the Media (redundancy) thought “we’ve got you this time” (cue sinister Star Wars theme music), and they went after her hard, in their usual derisively mocking tone. Surely, Palin’s claim about Revere’s ride and his warning the British and those bells and those gunshots had to be completely wrong. Surely, this time Sarah was wrong about history. Surely, this wouldn’t come back to bite the Liberals in the posterior.

You’d think, right? After all, Longfellow told all there is to tell about Paul Revere, right? Wrong. As Ed Morrissey shows:

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.

Professor William A Jacobson wrote:

In fact, as pointed out at Conservatives4Palin, Revere did in fact tell the British that the colonial militias, who had been alerted, were waiting for them. Here is the original historical text written by Revere (spelling in original, bold added):

I observed a Wood at a Small distance, & made for that. When I got there, out Started Six 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 aded, 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 stoppd 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

Palin’s short statement on the video was less than clear; that sometimes happens but the part of the statement which has people screaming — that Revere warned the British that the colonial militias were waiting — appears to be true.

I’ve learned something new today, about Paul Revere.

The leading lights of the left-blogosphere have made fools of themselves, as have people who are not of the left-blogosphere. I presume they all will be apologizing.

He’s certainly mistaken in his “presumption.” But he was only being sarcastic, of course, since the Left will do and has done what always does: to the memory hole!

Aaron Worthing has an incomplete run-down on the people who mindlessly mocked Sarah Palin, not even trying to find out if she was actually right. Because they “know” they’re smart and she’s just dumb.

Think Progress, Frances Martel at Mediaite, Crooks and Liars, Gawker, Greg Sergeant, Steve Benen, Tim Murphy, Digby, Ben Smith at Politico (I refuse to link to Politico if I can help it), Comments from Left Field, BooMan, Talking Points Memo, Rick Ungar at Forbes Magazine, the Los Angeles Times, The Hill, ABC, USA Today, Salon, Alan Colmes, Dennis DiClaudio, New York Magazine. That’s just an incomplete listing of all the people who laughed at Sarah Palin’s supposedly false statement concerning Paul Revere. Let me add to the list. Iowa Liberal, Delaware Liberal.

Now that the historical record, Paul Revere himself, and historians alike agree Sarah Palin was right about Paul Revere warning the British, all those above linked folks will be in a hurry to retract their hate-filled attacks, right? Nah, they’ll either double-down on their falsehoods or they’ll memory-hole their statements. Because they cannot bring themselves to admit that once again, the schooled, knowledgeable, wise and wily teacher Sarah Palin set a trap for them and they stepped right in it. They have to continue on in Teh Narrative and ignore the facts.
_________
Cross-Post

154 Comments

  1. Because they cannot bring themselves to admit that once again, the schooled, knowledgeable, wise and wily teacher Sarah Palin set a trap for them and they stepped right in it.

    The medication has worn off again, we see.

  2. It’s also interesting to see other liars attempting to write this twaddle into Wikipedia

  3. Look at that, the Kiwi who knows next to nothing about US History tries to thread-jack in an effort to memory-hole the fact the blithering and blathering Left was wrong yet again and Sarah Palin was right yet again and made the lamestream media look like fools yet again.

  4. Palin’s exact quote:

    “He [Revere] who warned uh, the British that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms, uh by ringing those bells, and um, makin’ sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed.”

    So, according to your cite, when exactly did Revere warn the British “that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms”?

    Yeah – she’s a genius as much as you’re an honest man. Positively brilliant, JH.

  5. What part of “History professors agree Sarah Palin was right” do you not get, Pho? What part of Paul Revere’s own words do you not understand, Pho?

    I never said Palin is a genius, but if she’s as intelligent as I am honest, she’s one of the smartest people to have ever lived, so there’s that.

  6. What part of “History professors agree Sarah Palin was right” do you not get, Pho? What part of Paul Revere’s own words do you not understand, Pho?

    Palin’s exact quote:

    “He [Revere] who warned uh, the British that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms, uh by ringing those bells, and um, makin’ sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed.”

    So, according to your cite, when exactly did Revere warn the British “that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms”?

  7. Pho, if you took the time to actually try to educate yourself before spouting off, you wouldn’t look so much like the fool you are. Just sayin’.

  8. But you are indeed helping to make my point. Sarah Palin was right and the Liberals and media (same difference) was wrong. Again. But the Liberals and media (same difference) won’t bother admitting they were bested again by Sarah Palin because the Liberals and the media (same difference) have an active hate on for her. Admitting she was right, again, and they were wrong, again, would destroy Teh Narrative and they can’t let that happen, so “to heck with the truth” is their SOP.

  9. So naggy tries a different thread-jack tactic: introduction of an irrelevant Twilight Zone clip, while saying, in essence “do you really want to defend Conservatives against lie-filled, hate-filled Leftist attacks?” Yes, naggy, I really do want to defend Conservatives against lie-filled, hate-filled attacks, because “all that is required for evil to succeed is for good men to say nothing.”

  10. http://bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/view.bg?articleid=1343353

    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.

    In fact, Revere’s own account of the ride in a 1798 letter seems to back up Palin’s claim. Revere describes how after his capture by British officers, he warned them “there would be five hundred Americans there in a short time for I had alarmed the Country all the way up.”

    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.

  11. In fact, Revere’s own account of the ride in a 1798 letter seems to back up Palin’s claim. Revere describes how after his capture by British officers, he warned them “there would be five hundred Americans there in a short time for I had alarmed the Country all the way up.”

    Palin’s exact quote:

    “He [Revere] who warned uh, the British that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms, uh by ringing those bells, and um, makin’ sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed.”

    So, according to your cite, when exactly did Revere warn the British “that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms”?

  12. hilarious post – so desperate to believe in Sarah Palin that it’ll make the most laughable assertions – please keep it coming, it’s kind of sad but still more funny than sad.

  13. http://factcheck.org/2011/06/palins-twist-on-paul-revere/

    In Palin’s defense, it’s true that American rebels had stored arms and gunpowder at Concord, and that British Gen. Thomas Gage not only had orders to arrest the leaders, but had decided to seize and destroy those arms. Alerted by Revere, American militia members confronted the British at the battles of Lexington and Concord, the first armed encounters of the Revolutionary War.

    Enjoy dissecting Palin’s quote for all its worth. But cripes, she’s at LEAST as accurate as our current commander-in-chief in terms of knowing history …

  14. And the hits keep on coming. The Leftists cannot for the life of them admit Sarah Palin was right again and they were wrong again. Once again Sarah gets their goat. Once again Sarah bested them. And it’ll keep happening.

    No doubt she’ll never get the votes of the Socialists, Liberals and Media (redundancy), but she doesn’t need those votes anyway. Right now what’s happening is a lot of schadenfreude on the Conservative side, mocking the historically illiterate Left, more of the public learning more American History, more of the public learning Sarah actually does know stuff.

    But more important than that, more people are beginning to surrender their “electability” Abilene Paradox (look it up). The General doesn’t come before the Primary but the Primary before the General, and Sarah’s scoring big points.

  15. The Leftists cannot for the life of them admit Sarah Palin was right again and they were wrong again

    Palin’s exact quote:

    “He [Revere] who warned uh, the British that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms, uh by ringing those bells, and um, makin’ sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed.”

    So, according to your cite, when exactly did Revere warn the British “that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms”?

  16. From Hube’s link:

    Sarah Palin’s much-ridiculed story of Paul Revere isn’t entirely wrong, but it’s badly twisted. Revere didn’t ring bells or fire shots, and he was riding to warn two fellow rebels that the British were coming to arrest them, not to warn the British “that they weren’t going to be taking away our arms.”
    […]
    So how does Palin’s version compare with, say, Paul Revere’s? Not very well.
    […]
    Revere didn’t mention firing any shots or ringing any bells, and neither does the account given by the Paul Revere House in its brief history, “The Real Story of Paul Revere’s Ride.”
    […]
    It’s true that shots were fired and bells were rung, but not by Revere.
    […]
    It’s also true that Revere spoke to British officers — though that was by no means his intent. He was seized by a British patrol before he got to Concord. Revere, under questioning, told British officers that 500 Americans were coming to confront them.
    […]
    The British later released Revere, after taking the horse he had been riding. But Revere makes no mention of specifically “warning” the British against trying to seize arms. In fact, the Americans moved most of the arms before Gen. Gage’s troops could find them.

    The Leftists cannot for the life of them admit Sarah Palin was right again and they were wrong again

    Palin’s exact quote:

    “He [Revere] who warned uh, the British that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms, uh by ringing those bells, and um, makin’ sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed.”

    So, according to your cite, when exactly did Revere warn the British “that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms”?

  17. So, vanguard, being the blind squirrel you are, when are you ever going to find a nut? But it’s cute how you attack Sarah for being right yet again while you folks were wrong yet again. Your PDS is strong.

  18. Hube, if the Leftists actually bother to read those 2008 articles, they’ll try to accuse you of tu quoque instead of, you know, pointing out the difference between someone who knows her history (Palin) and someone who makes up history as he goes along (Obama).

  19. Hube, if the Leftists actually bother to read those 2008 articles, they’ll try to accuse you of tu quoque instead of, you know, pointing out the difference between someone who knows her history (Palin) and someone who makes up history as he goes along (Obama).

    That, or … racism!

  20. I wonder why our resident Leftists are sneering at professors and historians for stating the fact Sarah Palin was right. According to blu, doesn’t that make our resident Leftists fascists or something? After all, they’re sneering at academia.

  21. I wonder why our resident Leftists are sneering at professors and historians for stating the fact Sarah Palin was right.

    Palin’s exact quote:

    “He [Revere] who warned uh, the British that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms, uh by ringing those bells, and um, makin’ sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed.”

    So, according to your cite, when exactly did Revere warn the British “that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms”?

    You know, the longer you are unable to adress a simple direct question, the more we laugh at you. Predictably blind, JH.

  22. Aaaaaand…:

    Experts Dispute Sarah Palin’s Midnight Ride Account, Agree Paul Revere Did Not Warn the British

    Sarah Palin said that Paul Revere warned the British during his midnight ride in 1775. Historians beg to differ.

    “He didn’t warn the British,” said James Giblin, author of “The Many Rides of Paul Revere.” “That’s her most obvious blooper.”
    […]
    Experts agree that warning the British — Revere was an American patriot, remember, he was against the folks across the pond — was not crucial to the midnight ride.

    “Revere’s assignment that night was to go to Lexington to warn Samuel Adams and John Hancock that British troops were moving in that direction from Boston,” explained Kristin Peszka, director of interpretation and visitor’s services at the Paul Revere House, which Palin visited Thursday. (Peszka noted that Palin offered her convoluted account before touring the historic site.)

    “People did ring bells that night,” she added. “It was a common way of alerting people to come out. But Revere was not the person ringing the bells.”

  23. Sarah Palin got it right.

    Palin’s exact quote:

    “He [Revere] who warned uh, the British that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms, uh by ringing those bells, and um, makin’ sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed.”

    So, according to your cite, when exactly did Revere warn the British “that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms”?

  24. A historian, a professor even, going on NPR with an interviewer who was working hard to get him to say Sarah was wrong about something of what she said, anything really, and he didn’t back down. The college professor-historian said, on NPR, that Sarah was right.

    Who to believe… some Kiwi who thought Thomas Jefferson wrote the US Constitution or a US professor of history? Gee, Wally, that’s a difficult one. Maybe we should ask Eddie or Lumpy.

  25. Good lord, this is pathetic. Nothing but sheer cultish faith could convince anybody that Sarah Palin knew about some obscure text that had to be dug up after the fact that had a few words that could be vaguely cconnected to her sputtering word salad.
    At the absolute best, one could only conclude that Sarah Palin was accidentally kind of somewhere near the truth.

    Yet when one goes back and looks at her words, they describe Paul Revere warning the British by ringing bells that they wouldn’t be seizing our arms, not that he was captured and told them in person that he had alerted the Americans. One can only rearrange her words, drawing lines between hers and ones that appear in more accurate descriptions and claim the two are the same. British, warn, arms won’t be seized, etc.

    This is an after-the-fact defense that doesn’t hold water. The stupid notion that Palin actually masterminded some devious trap that she sprung on teh wicked librul media is beyond the pale.

    “Revere’s quote does technically get her off the hook. Of course, if you believe that this minor incident in the story of the ride is what she was thinking of when she answered the question then you are probably among the minority of Americans who think she deserves to be trusted with nuclear weapons. … Whenever pressed by an interviewer who is not there to puff her, she stumbles and usually blunders. The fact that some of her gaffes can wind up being rationalized in some manner does not justify the pretense that she is [a] person of substance,” – Jonathan S. Tobin.

    And that’s coming from a Republican. Only crazy juice could convince one Palin had any idea what she was talking about at the time. The revelation later that her diatribe was tangentially related to little-known things that happened isn’t something that she can claim credit for, and it’s weak credit at that.

    Face it, Hitchcock, Palin is a moron, and stories like this get attention because every time she opens her mouth more stupid pours out. You guys can keep whining when otherwise intelligent people make flubs like Obama saying Auschwitz instead of Buchenwald, but you’re unable to face the fact that Palin has never been able to say anything at all that demonstrates deep intelligence.

    If Dick Cheney said something like that, it would look like a slip because no matter how evil I may think the guy to be, I’d never claim he was actually stupid. Incompetent, perhaps, but certainly not a dullard.

    As Hitchcock has proven time and time again, he will swallow absolutely anything based on the slightest pretext if it justifies his partisan crookedness. Surveyor scopes, White House insurrections, his burden of proof is “somebody on the internet is willing to type what I think.”

  26. The college professor-historian said, on NPR, that Sarah was right.

    Alas, your college professor, much like you, evaded the question and didn’t address what the reporter actually asked. Unlike you, this doesn’t indicate dishonesty.

    Palin’s exact quote:

    “He [Revere] who warned uh, the British that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms, uh by ringing those bells, and um, makin’ sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed.”

    So, according to your cite, when exactly did Revere warn the British “that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms”?

  27. There’s whistler proving my point some more. Sarah was right but that wasn’t her fault? What a bunch of goofs you PDSers are. Historians said Palin was right. Paul Revere’s words said Palin was right. And Palin “accidented” into being right? Or Palin and the historians and Paul Revere were all wrong? You clowns truly are helping the Conservative cause with your wild-eyed and wrong claims.

  28. Historians said Palin was right. Paul Revere’s words said Palin was right. And Palin “accidented” into being right? Or Palin and the historians and Paul Revere were all wrong?

    Or you are wildly grasping at straws while everyone can see you avoiding a simple direct question. Who exactly do you think you’re fooling?

    Palin’s exact quote:

    “He [Revere] who warned uh, the British that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms, uh by ringing those bells, and um, makin’ sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed.”

    So, according to your cite, when exactly did Revere warn the British “that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms”?

    [retrieved from moderation – pH]

  29. “So, according to your cite, when exactly did Revere warn the British “that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms”?”

    It is crystal clear to all but the politically dense that Sarah Palin misspoke. This is just one more example that this woman makes things up as she goes. That so many would hang on her words is just one more astounding development in modern day American politics, a development that does not speak well of us at all in my view!

  30. It is crystal clear to all but the politically dense that Sarah Palin misspoke. This is just one more example that this woman makes things up as she goes. That so many would hang on her words is just one more astounding development in modern day American politics, a development that does not speak well of us at all in my view!

    Indeed! So go tell the MSM for dwelling on it, and at the same time ask them why they didn’t bother to hang on The Messiah’s arguably bigger gaffes as noted by the links above. And if Palin is “politically dense,” that must make Obama … “politically retarded?

  31. Hitchcock: Palin is an idiot who lucked herself into saying something that had similar words to an obscure historical moment that had to be dug up after the fact (yet her version still mangled his actual ride). I know your cultish gullibility forces you to swear she’s a master genius who planned it all along, but all sane people know she was making it up as she went along.

    I’m reminded of so recently when you guys were right there to tell us that Michelle Bachman was right, the founding fathers did indeed not rest until slavery was no more! To invoke Orwell is to beat a dead horse. Newspeak is the norm.

    [retrieved from moderation – pH]

  32. Hitchcock: Palin is an idiot who lucked herself into saying something that had similar words to an obscure historical moment that had to be dug up after the fact

    She’s still better at history than The Messiah, however.

    [retrieved from moderation – pH]

  33. “She’s still better at history than The Messiah, however.”

    And you say that with a straight face, Hube?

    No, you cannot!

  34. And you say that with a straight face, Hube?

    No, you cannot!

    Did and am doing. Still. And citations are above (since you probably didn’t see them and/or ignored them).

  35. Face it, Hitchcock, Palin is a moron

    She’s a former governor and you’re a what?

  36. PS Changing the subject completely …

    So much for the claim that Weiner was set up by conservatives. Pho, are you ready to apologize now?

  37. “Pho, endlessly repeating yourself just makes you look like an idiot.”

    No, Eric, the idiots are the political partisans who will not face the reality of her statement. That couldn’t be you, could it? Just askin’!

  38. Perry, why are you mocking professors and historians? Professors and historians said she was right about the history, Perry. So why are you mocking professors and historians? Blu said that is a sure sign of fascism. So why are you being a fascist, Perry?

  39. Perry, I purposefully embedded NPR’s “All Things Considered” just for you. The interviewer tried hard to get the History Professor to say Sarah Palin was wrong. On NPR. And the History Professor refused, saying Palin was right instead. ON NPR. So, why are you mocking academia? Why are you mocking professors of history?

  40. John, PiaToR has asked you the same question a number of times. Why have you not stepped up and answered it? Speaks volumes!

  41. Perry, who should I believe? A Kiwi who thought Thomas Jefferson wrote the US Constitution or History Professors at US Universities? I note you have chosen to believe a Kiwi who has shown a complete lack of US History knowledge over actual History Professors who actually know stuff. There is no reason you should do that other than your pure unadulterated hatred of Sarah Palin. You accused her of “making stuff up” which is your euphemism for lying when History Professors, including a History Professor on your beloved NPR, said Sarah was right.

    Again, Perry, why are you mocking US History Professors? Why are you mocking academia? Blu said that sort of thing is a sure sign of fascism, so why are you being fascist?

  42. John, this has nothing at all to do with my believing PiaToR or mocking anyone. PiaToR quoted Palin, then asked about one of her statements in the quote. Now you are playing the great diversion game. Speaks volumes.

    Simply answer the question!

    PS: I don’t hate Sarah Palin!

  43. John, this has nothing at all to do with my believing PiaToR

    That’s quite right, Perry – I’m not asking anyone to believe me. Everyone can see that. I’m asking a simple direct questioning – and when our personally bellgerant JH tries to switch it to “belief” or paints it as “PiaToR vs historians”, it’s plainly obvious he’s evading that simple question.

    Palin’s exact quote:

    “He [Revere] who warned uh, the British that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms, uh by ringing those bells, and um, makin’ sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed.”

    So, according to your cite, when exactly did Revere warn the British “that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms”?

  44. Hube, hope you love that uphill battle trying to get anybody to believe Palin is smarter than Obama. Oh, you got Hitchcock sold, for sure. But then there are people interested in reality, where Palin went to five colleges and Obama was president of the Harvard Law Review.

    Nobody is going to speak 100% correct their entire life, but you’re positing a few exceptions in Obama’s history versus just the latest example from Palin, who has never, ever offered any evidence of intelligence, or honesty for that matter.

    Plus I resent the idea that anybody jumbling words together like that should be given the benefit of the doubt.

    Plenty of Republicans have bemoaned Palin spending the past three years raking in celebrity bucks and doing phony reality shows instead of beefing up her knowledge. The fact that you’re running cover for the moron wing of your party should inspire some shame in you.

  45. What is so sad is that there are people from both sides of this issue actually wasting valuable energy typing their view points for and against an IDIOT. Maybe the world would be better served working on constructive solutions to the real problems we face.

    [retrieved from moderation – pH]

  46. Hube, hope you love that uphill battle trying to get anybody to believe Palin is smarter than Obama. Oh, you got Hitchcock sold, for sure. But then there are people interested in reality, where Palin went to five colleges and Obama was president of the Harvard Law Review.

    I’m just comparing statements about history here. And Palin comes out on top, easily. Oh, and where are Obama’s college grades, Wheeler? What’s he hiding?

    Sorry, dolt, but you’re just another sheep sold on the “progressive” conventional wisdom that Democrats are smarter than Republicans … merely b/c people who agree with you constantly tell you that. Too bad, for example, that George Bush had better college grades than Al Gore. Oh, and don’t forget how you nimrods mercilessly laughed at poor James Stockdale, Ross Perot’s running mate in 1992. So he was a lousy public speaker … yet, he had a PhD in philosophy. Bet he was smarter than The Messiah, too.

  47. Speaking of uphill battles, Wheeler, good luck with that battle convincing people that Obama is the greatest president in our lifetime.

    LMAO!!

  48. I’m just comparing statements about history here. And Palin comes out on top, easily.

    That quote again:

    “He [Revere] who warned uh, the British that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms, uh by ringing those bells, and um, makin’ sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed.”

    Oh yeah, a real genius there.

  49. Perry, let me ‘splain it for you in simple terms so maybe even you can understand.

    Historians and history professors (people who actually study history and teach history) said Sarah Palin was right. That means what Sarah Palin said was not wrong; what Sarah Palin said was right. The NPR interviewer tried real hard to get the history professor (that’s someone who knows and teaches history) to say Sarah screwed up. The history professor (that guy that stands in front of a bunch of college students and teaches the history) refused to say Sarah screwed up and instead said Sarah was right.

    It really doesn’t matter what Pho (that’s the person from New Zealand who has proven more than once he doesn’t know US history) brings because the history professors (the people who studied and teach history in colleges) said Sarah Palin was right. If they said Sarah Palin was right, they meant Sarah Palin was right. Not just “not wrong” but actually right.

    Do you understand, yet, Perry? The people who actually spent many years studying history and teaching history said Sarah Palin was right and people who know jack squat about history have accused her of being wrong. It’s the people, like Pho and the media, who know jack squat about history who are very wrong — again — and it’s Sarah Palin who is quite right — again. And soon, I expect, it’ll be time to “party like it’s 1773” all over again.

  50. Historians and history professors (people who actually study history and teach history) said Sarah Palin was right.

    Palin’s exact quote:

    “He [Revere] who warned uh, the British that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms, uh by ringing those bells, and um, makin’ sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed.”

    So, according to your cite, when exactly did Revere warn the British “that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms”?

  51. By the way, we note your continued retreat to an argument from authority when cornered and shown to be supporting foolishness.

    The vast majority of climate scientists support a theory of anthropogenic climate change. So, given your vast respect for authority,… ?

    Perverse behaviour, JH.

    [released from moderation – pH]

  52. John, you are continuing to refuse to answer PiaToR’s question. Do you think we the people don’t notice this? All your other stuff are redirections away from that one simple question. Please answer it!

  53. Perry, the historians already answered the question. Palin was right. The historians already answered the question. Palin was right. It doesn’t matter how many times some idiot from New Zealand asks a question that has already been answered. Palin was right.

    But you sure do show your double-standard quite well. You are refusing to acknowledge the fact that experts on the subject have already vindicated Sarah Palin, even an expert appearing on NPR, because of your abject hatred of Sarah Palin.

    There has been a lot of misogyny in the Leftosphere, the lamestream media, and among the Ruling Class Republicans (no Conservatives, they) in their attacks on Sarah Palin. That is very well in evidence.

    You just can’t get around the fact that the very experts you expect people to go to, the academics, have come out and said Sarah Palin was right. Why can’t you face up to the fact that the experts have vindicated her? Is it because you’re a misogynist? Could be.

  54. It doesn’t matter how many times some idiot from New Zealand asks a question that has already been answered.

    Wingnut evasion tactic 101 – avoid answering a direct question again and again, and then, at some later stage, start claiming “it has already been answered”.

    We all know that our perpetual bailer, JH, hasn’t addressed this question. And for him to come out and claim he has not only demonstrates just how dishonest he is, but also demonstrates just how desperate he is.

    Once again:

    Palin’s exact quote:

    “He [Revere] who warned uh, the British that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms, uh by ringing those bells, and um, makin’ sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed.”

    So, according to your cite, when exactly did Revere warn the British “that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms”?

    [retrieved from moderation – pH]

  55. Hube: What an empty hat. Your great citations of Obama’s ignorance involved him mixing up Auschwitz and Buchenwald, and making a statement about Hugo Chavez without any clear indication of how Chavez being elected in ’98 invalidated what Obama said.

    We’re left with the utterly implausible suggestion that Palin actually had a damn clue what she was rambling about, given that it took four days of rightwinger Dick Tracys combing through the records to find something that was close enough to vaguely resemble the words she sputtered out. On that, you grade Palin as having superior knowledge to Obama, “easily,” while excluding all other history of the two individuals. So you can’t even pass your own rigged test, but you want to act cocky with me?

    And I explained my rationale behind Obama being the best president of my lifetime. You had no response that I saw, at least for several days. Did you follow up? Please let me know. I’d like to see some evidence that you can do more than bray.

  56. Hmm, Hitchcock apparently isn’t able to actually rationalize any of this himself, and seems to think screaming HISTORIANS SAID PALIN WAS RIGHT will do by itself. Except it isn’t that easy:

    “”When I heard this, I groaned,” Joel Miller, author of “The Revolutionary Paul Revere,” wrote in a post on The National Review’s website.
    “From Revere’s own account, it’s clear that he didn’t fire a shot, he didn’t ring a bell, and he didn’t intend to warn the British of anything.””

    Others have poked holes in that interpretation, pointing out Palin’s original remarks seem to suggest Revere was bravely defending the Second Amendment to the U.S. constitution, also known as the right to bear arms. That amendment did not come into existence until 16 years after Revere’s ride.
    Miller also pointed out that Revere travelled in silence in a secret mission to alert John Hancock and Samuel Adams that they were in danger — and was most certainly not ringing bells and firing shots to warn the British that they weren’t going to be successful in any attempt to take American arms.

    My problem is that every attempt to defend Palin simply isolates words from her rambling and says things like, well, he did warn the British…or well, the British did want to seize arms…there was ringing of bells…yet when you look at what she actually said and what that describes, it’s nothing like what actually happened.

    And again, there is only pure comedy in thinking Palin knows something that her propagandists had to spend four days researching to dig up as being halfway similar to what she sputtered.

    But defending idiots seems to be a finely honed practice among the GOP, what with your Dubyas and Bachmans and various other fools you insist on foisting upon us. Do you guys ever wonder why there are no stories like this about people like, say, Condoleeza Rice or Dick Cheney? Because people know those folks are intelligent people with great reservoirs of knowledge, however misguided they may be.

    Hell, as if it takes a liberal to think Palin is an idiot.

    “I am going to Sudan in July and hope to stop in England on the way. I am just hoping Mrs. Thatcher is well enough to see me as I so admire her,” Palin told Britain’s Sunday Times in an article titled “Reloaded and on a Mrs. T mission: the Palins are coming to Britain!”

    But the woman affectionately dubbed the Iron Lady isn’t interested in meeting with Sarah Barracuda during the hockey mom’s trip.

    “Lady Thatcher will not be seeing Sarah Palin. That would be belittling for Margaret. Sarah Palin is nuts,” an unnamed “ally” told the Guardian.

    [retrieved from moderation – pH]

  57. BTW, this is what Sarah Palin calls a gotcha question: “So, what have you seen so far today and what are you going to take away from your visit?” Hilarious how she tried to claim she was right, yet still had it in her to blame the person asking her the question.

    As I believe Jon Stewart said, just because question got ya doesn’t make it a gotcha question. For Sarah Palin, “How’s your day today?” is a gotcha question.

    Oh, and you know who else thinks Palin is an idiot? Fox News Chief Roger Ailes. But you guys keep scooping that water with yer thimbles there.

    [retrieved from moderation – pH]

  58. Pingback: Watcher of Weasels » Watcher’s Council Nominations: Erections Have Consequences Edition

  59. Pingback: Watcher’s Council Nominations: Erections Have Consequences Edition | Virginia Right!

  60. “You just can’t get around the fact that the very experts you expect people to go to, the academics, have come out and said Sarah Palin was right. Why can’t you face up to the fact that the experts have vindicated her? Is it because you’re a misogynist? Could be.”

    John, there is simply nothing else to say to you on this matter, other than what has already been said, most recently by PiaToR’s unanswered question to you, and by the well researched and articulated words of Henry Whistler. You are too stubborn to back down to accept the overwhelming evidence presented here that Sarah Palin misspoke, revealing her ignorance of the details of Paul Revere’s ride, revealing that she once again retreated into making stuff up. You need to clear your head of the partisan nonsense that you permit to enter it, which you then spit right back out without critical thinking being put into the mix.

  61. Perry, there really is no getting through to you, is there? You are totally incapable of admitting that the History Professors who said Sarah Palin was right completely blew your blatant hypocritical Palin Derangement Syndrome out of the water. What is it about the History Professors said Sarah Palin was not only “not wrong” but was actually right do you not get, Perry?

    And why is it that when something is broadcast on NPR from an expert, that you are so derisive of the expert on NPR that said something you, who are not an expert, don’t like? Isn’t it you who so boldly proclaimed NPR such a great place for information? Why the total hypocrisy on your part, Perry? Jeromy is no historian, as is plainly seen.

  62. Bout the only thing I can figure, since Sarah Palin has been proven time and time again — by the experts — that she was right is the Leftist misogyny.

  63. You will never bridge any gaps, Perry, so long as you keep sticking your fingers in your ears, going “lalalalala can’t hear you!” when the obvious truth is staring you in the face.

  64. Hube: What an empty hat. Your great citations of Obama’s ignorance involved him mixing up Auschwitz and Buchenwald, and making a statement about Hugo Chavez without any clear indication of how Chavez being elected in ’98 invalidated what Obama said.

    IOW, “empty hat” means “You’re destroying my ingrained dogma, now stop it, dammit.”

    BTW, you forgot about the Japanese “the bomb” on Pearl Harbor.

    So, we have Sarah Palin being essentially correct in her Paul Revere statement — which makes her a moron, yet Barack Obama isn’t even close in numerous statements of his, yet he is a genius. You dolts are so freakin’ pathetic the entertainment is genuinely first-rate.

    And I explained my rationale behind Obama being the best president of my lifetime.

    And I explained why you should be in a strait jacket for that inane remark.

  65. Hitch: Perry wants to “bridge gaps” only so that people can walk to his side of the gap. If they want to walk to the other side, he’ll detonate the explosives he put under the bridge.

  66. “Bout the only thing I can figure, since Sarah Palin has been proven time and time again — by the experts — that she was right is the Leftist misogyny.”

    Leftist misogyny? Yes, John, I guess that must be it. Good thinking!!!

  67. So, we have Sarah Palin being essentially correct in her Paul Revere statement — which makes her a moron, yet Barack Obama isn’t even close in numerous statements of his, yet he is a genius. You dolts are so freakin’ pathetic the entertainment is genuinely first-rate.

    And I explained my rationale behind Obama being the best president of my lifetime.

    And I explained why you should be in a strait jacket for that inane remark.

    This is the way that Hube admits that he was wrong! Take note of his oft repeated meme on here!! :)

  68. Leftist misogyny? Yes, John, I guess that must be it. Good thinking!!!

    It’s certainly a much better explanation that what you cretins are offering.

  69. This is the way that Hube admits that he was wrong! Take note of his oft repeated meme on here!!

    Right. Says the guy whose name appears in a thesaurus as a synonym for “wrong.”

  70. There is a heck of a lot more Leftist misogyny toward Sarah Palin than there is Rightist raaaaacism toward Obama, the worst President in US history (beating out Jimmy Carter for the position, which was no easy task), but you go ahead and keep your blinders on, dishonest gap-builder.

  71. Hube: Well, my dad always said simple minds are easily entertained.

    I guess you’re just going to ignore most of what I say and repeat yourself as wingers usually rely on, but I’m interested by your claim that you responded to my explanation why Obama is the best president of my lifetime. You claim you responded? Please refresh my memory with a link or a restatement. I sure hope it’s something more substantial than the line about him only being president two and a half years.

    If you want real comedy, look no further than your fellows here claiming Dubya was #2. Then again, even placing Reagan at 1 is a bit of a sick joke.

  72. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/obama-in-command-br-the-rolling-stone-interview-20100928?print=true

    Btw, there’s an interview with Obama speaking extemporaneously at length and in depth. You can read it to see something Sarah Palin is incapable of doing.

    But you go on, Hube, comparing a couple Obama mistakes over the years with one passage of Palin’s that is at best tangentially related to real events, unbeknownst to her, ignoring the greater record. Really great method there…

  73. I agree, GWB is not the second-best President ever. He’s middlin’. And Reagan wasn’t the best President ever. Just the best President in the last 80 years or so. Obama is the worst President ever, barely beating out Carter, but Obama still has a year and a half to greatly increase the distance between the two worst Presidents ever. If not for ’94, Clinton would be in that short list. But Clinton commandeered Republican positions to claim as his own in his Triangulation process, which made him much better for the US than Carter or Obama (but in an obviously and typically dishonest fashion). Obama’s far too radical an ideologue to Triangulate.

    But I do like how Jeromy ignores the experts to continue with Teh Narrative with zero regard for the histo-facts — Revere’s own words, the historical record, actual expert historians’ words (which are backed up by facts). It really is typical of the Leftists to ignore all the facts to continue their propaganda, because without propaganda, 80 percent of the American public would reject everything the Leftists have to say.

  74. I finally figured out why both John and Hube are so defensive of Sarah Palin: They are exactly like her – stubborn! From Fox News Sunday, look here:

    “”Fox’s Chris Wallace: You realized that you messed up about Paul Revere, don’t you?

    Palin: You know what? I didn’t mess up about Paul Revere. Here is what Paul Revere did. He warned the Americans that the British were coming, the British were coming, and they were going to try take our arms and we got to make sure that we were protecting ourselves and shoring up all of ammunitions and our firearms so that they couldn’t take it. But remember that the British had already been there, many soldiers for seven years in that area. And part of Paul Revere’s ride — and it wasn’t just one ride — he was a courier, he was a messenger. 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. You are not going to beat our own well-armed persons, individual, private militia that we have. He did warn the British. And in a shout-out, gotcha type of question that was asked of me, I answered candidly. And I know my American history.”

    The referenced cite gives all the historically known details of the Revere ride, including verifying some of what Palin said. I think it represents a fair judgment!

  75. Obama speaking extemporaneously? I’ve ummmm seen ahhh that train wreck uhhh I’ve seen that ummm that I’ve train wreck uhhhh I’ve seen uhhhh it’s been a long 72 hours I’ve seen uhhh ahhh ummmm what I mean to say ummmm but I don’t speak Austrian in the nation of Europe.

    POTUS without TOTUS is a complete disaster. Palin off the cuff is a far more informed and far better speaker than Obama could ever wish to be.

    Funny how the chillbilly keeps getting things right — obscure things like stuff that used to be taught in schools but no longer is — while Obama keeps getting things wrong. Talk about making things up as you go, that’s Obama in a nutshell. And the Leftists still can’t come up with a historical reference Palin made that was wrong.

  76. Btw, there’s an interview with Obama speaking extemporaneously at length and in depth. You can read it to see something Sarah Palin is incapable of doing.

    Gee, a print interview. Nah, that couldn’t possibly have been edited at all or anything. Just take a cursory gander of Mr. Teleprompter when he doesn’t have that electronic device handy.

    Hube: Well, my dad always said simple minds are easily entertained.

    Then obviously he and you are perfect targets for shows like Jerry Springer and Maury.

  77. Perry, you link PuffHo? Seriously, dude, that’s barely better than Kos or Medea Mutters (both of which couldn’t tell the truth if their livelihoods depended on it). I not only linked NPR, but I embedded audio of NPR (a place you so proudly declared top-notch) which showed very clearly Palin was right.

    I also linked a whole bunch of Leftist sites that I said would never retract their false accusations but would either memory-hole it (as they did with the “party like it’s 1773” lamestream media gaffe) or double-down on their falsehoods (as you Leftists here are doing). Because none of you are even capable of admitting Sarah Palin was right once again (as the experts have proven) and you folks were wrong once again (as the experts have proven).

    Face it, Perry, anyone to the right of Scott Brown is an extremist to you. Even Mitt Romney is an extremist to you. You’re so far gone in your radical Leftist dogma that you can’t see past the end of your own nose.

  78. Holy smokes. You guys really are drinking undiluted Limbaugh juice around here, aren’t you? It’s like you almost believe what you’re saying.

    Hitchcock, I showed you a historian who disagreed and pointed out many problems in Palin’s account, and I’ve argued with the reasoning of the historians you cite giving her a pass. You, on the other hand, have responded by repeating yourself. Seems to be popular around here lately.

    Look, we can all see the historical material being analyzed here, it’s not beyond layman comprehension (like, say advanced climate science). Even Hube’s link points out several discrepancies, as Phoe has quoted without serious response. Paul Revere’s mission was to warn rebels of capture and he alerted houses via stealth. He was captured and told the Brits they were going to face roused American forces. Palin’s version has some words that link up with that, excusing a shift in the meaning of “warn,” but makes serious errors in chronology, method, and emphasis.

    Palin, in her doubling down, suggests that Revere’s purpose was to warn the British. Revere certainly did not intend to be captured by the British!

    I’m happy to give experts their due, but I’m also free to take issue with their reasoning. If all you have left, Hitchcock, is the argument from authority, when historians disagree, then you don’t have anything.

    [retrieved from moderation -pH]

  79. Hube: yeah, you are an empty hat. Dismissing the interview because it’s in print? What bovine feces, as it is put around here. You have to exert way to much energy to keep your ridiculous hypothesis afloat. I guess you didn’t see Obama’s healthcare showdown against a roomful of Republicans where he manhandled them so badly that they called it an ambush and swore never to get caught in front of the cameras like that again.

    If you want to pretend you’re serious, Hube, I’ll gladly take you down. I’m guessing I’ll get more vapid snark.

  80. What about the time Obama omitted the phrase “Endowed by their Creator” when quoting the Declaration of Independence? Either he didn’t know it was supposed to be there, in which case he’s an idiot, or he did know and deliberately left it out, which is even worse.

    [retrieved from moderation – pH]

  81. what with your Dubyas and Bachmans

    By “Dubya” do you mean George W Bush, who went to Yale and Harvard? That Dubya??

  82. But I do like how Jeromy ignores the experts to continue with Teh Narrative with zero regard for the histo-facts — Revere’s own words,

    Palin’s exact quote:

    “He [Revere] who warned uh, the British that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms, uh by ringing those bells, and um, makin’ sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed.”

    Please cite Revere’s exact words showing when exactly he warned the British “that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms”?

  83. Why do none of these blogs claiming Sarah was right ever provide her exact words?

    Saying that the British were warned is oblivious to what else Sarah said, about bells ringing and gunshots. The obvious implication of what Sarah actually said, is that Revere, Pitman, et al, deliberately set out to warn the British army. Since Revere’s, Pitman’s, et al, purpose was to avoid British patrols and keep their mission secret it seems pretty obvious that it is absolutely moronic to believe that they would advertize their trip in such a manner. Of course, Sarah is far from the brightest bulb in the pack.

  84. Of course, Sarah is far from the brightest bulb in the pack.

    Oh, she’s a genius compared to the people defending her statements as accurate…

  85. Oh, she’s a genius compared to the people defending her statements as accurate…

    Hmm. Can’t argue with that.

  86. SteveS, why do all these Leftists claiming Sarah Palin was wrong never accept the historical record, Paul Revere’s words, historians, History Professors as rebuttal evidence to the Leftist proof of ignorance?

    How hard is it for you Leftists to admit that you were wrong yet again and Sarah Palin was right yet again, given the historical record proves she was right, Paul Revere’s words prove she was right, historians have declared she was right, History Professors declared she was right? It’s like the Left has a vested interest in never allowing the fact Sarah Palin was right to get out to the public. I wonder why it is that the Left has to keep up with the deceitful propaganda. Is it the misogyny that is ever-present when the Left meets a Conservative and independent woman?

  87. @John Hitchcock: You know nothing about me except for two posts I’ve made. How do you know I’m a leftist? Because I disagree with you on one subject? Are all “conservatives” in lock-step on every issue?

    Nonetheless let’s *objectively* look at the facts. Here are Sarah’s actual words:

    “He, uh, uh, warned the British that they weren’t going to be taking away our arms. By ringing those bells and, uh, um, making sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were, uh, gonna be secure and were gonna be free.”

    The only “fact” here is “warned the British.” And, my personal opinion, is that by stringing enough words together she happened to get lucky. Revere’s “warning” to the British occurred after he’d ridden through Lexington and was on his way to Concord. His “warning” was given to a single British patrol and under threat of death.

    Then. To add insult to injury, here’s Sarah defending her statement to Chris Wallace:

    “You know what? I didn’t mess up about Paul Revere. Here’s what Paul Revere did. He warned the Americans that the British were coming, the British were coming and they were gonna try to take our arms. We gotta make sure that, um, we were protectin’ ourselves and, um, showing up all of our ammunitions and our firearms so they couldn’t take it. But remember that the British had already been there many soldiers for seven years in that area and part of Paul Revere’s ride and it wasn’t just one ride. He was a courier, he was a messenger, part of his ride was to warn the British that were already there, that, hey, you’re not gonna succeed. You’re not gonna take American arms…”

    Besides being nearly incoherent, this account isn’t anything like her original statement. It does nothing to vindicate the accuracy of her original statement and digs the hole deeper. Of course, at the time the “Americans” called themselves “British” or “Colonists” not Americans. And, of course, none of the riders that night, not even Revere, said, “The British are coming! The British are coming!” Nobody was ringing bells and no shots were fired until the British main force reached Lexington.

    Do Palin’s looks render her supporters deaf?

    Oh, and I’m not a “leftist.” But I have this peculiar regard for facts rather than a particular ideology. I know it’s weird.

    [released from moderation – pH]

  88. SteveS, why do all these Leftists claiming Sarah Palin was wrong never accept the historical record, Paul Revere’s words,

    Palin’s exact quote:

    “He [Revere] who warned uh, the British that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms, uh by ringing those bells, and um, makin’ sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed.”

    Please cite Revere’s exact words showing when exactly he warned the British “that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms”?

  89. Hitchcock’s tank is dry. He keeps appealing to authority when counterarguments from other authorities are cited. The guy knows nothing but to keep repeating himself. Kind of sad for a guy who devotes such lip service to logic.

  90. Pingback: The Watcher’s Council Nominations: Erections Have Consequences Edition | Maggie's Notebook

  91. More for Hube, though I think his tank is dry too:

    Obama starts taking questions from Republicans twenty minutes in. Sarah Palin considers any journalist asking questions to be an enemy out to destroy her with traps like, “So, what have you seen so far today and what are you going to take away from your visit?” I’m pretty sure the questions Republicans hit Obama with are a bit tougher. Just imagine Palin daring to take questions from a room full of Democrats! And that his answers are more intelligent, complex, and structured than anything Palin has ever managed to string together.

    This just strikes me as trying to prove to somebody that the sky is blue. If the person won’t accept it, you just have to realize that you’re dealing with somebody refusing to approach reality, and that all future words are futile. The teleprompter stuff makes for a good crack, but it simply doesn’t hold up to Obama’s numerous off-the-cuff speaking moments where he’s displayed notable clarity and depth of response.

    But like I said, Hube is running out of gas. That’s what happens when you choose a ridiculous proposition to defend. Attitude only gets you so far.

  92. Yes, John H and Hube have run dry, but will never admit that they got this wrong. It’s not in there genes. In spite of their attitude, and in spite of the well articulated facts by Henry and now SteveS, here’s more:

    Sarah Palin is a fraud with charisma – and enough political support to effectively hold the Republican Party hostage. She is ridiculous and dangerous in equal measure.

    Palin is certain about everything and knows about nothing. The only true facts are those she recognizes; other facts, when cited to contradict her private truth, are deemed politically motivated. History books are nothing more than weapons used by her enemies in their incessant attacks, their pitiful attempts to play “gotcha”.

    In her view, she does not make mistakes. Therefore,it may surprise your to learn, this is who Paul Revere was:

    “He who warned the Bitish 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”

    Utter, complete nonsense.

    The purpose of Revere’s midnight ride was to warn townspeople and patriot leaders that British troops were approaching. He didn’t ring any bells or fire any warning shots; the prearranged signal involved hanging lanterns in the steeple of the Old North Church, one if the roadcoats were approaching by land and two if by sea.”

    And typical of Palin (and John H and Hube), who make no mistakes, ever, Palin doubled down on Fox News Sunday to Chris Wallace whose smirk indicated he could not believe what he was hearing.

    Incidentally, the quoted piece is by a very well known journalist, whose identity I hesitate to reveal, knowing that if revealed John H and Hube would proceed to attack the messenger, a typical ploy of theirs. Or Hube will come up with another of his flawed moral equivalence statements attacking the other side rather than to respond to the exact point made.

  93. From the above quote:

    “Palin is certain about everything …. The only true facts are those she recognizes; other facts, when cited to contradict her private truth, are deemed politically motivated.

    In her view, she does not make mistakes.”

    Besides Palin, which regular on this blog do these words describe?

    You got that right!

  94. Henry, there has been no President in my lifetime, including John Kennedy, who could speak to policy details extemporaneously like Obama does, as evidenced by this video of his participation in the Republican House Caucus! Thanks for putting that up.

  95. Henry, there has been no President in my lifetime, including John Kennedy, who could speak to policy details extemporaneously like Obama does, as evidenced by this video of his participation in the Republican House Caucus!

    Well, duh. When you spend most of your life in a state delusion, WTF do you expect?

  96. If you want to pretend you’re serious, Hube, I’ll gladly take you down. I’m guessing I’ll get more vapid snark.

    Gee, what a tough husky Iowa Neanderthal. Face it — one who honestly believes Obama is the greatest president in our lifetime is only deserving of vapid snark. If even that, you pathetic cretin.

    Now go live up to daddy’s insightful statement and go watch “Maury.”

  97. you have to love how when Sarah Palin makes an ass of herself it’s so completely embarrassing to her defenders that they will literally put hours of their day aside, for days at a time, to pretend that 99% of the world doesn’t know she made an ass of herself. if the Sarah Palin Fan Club is even 50% as kind to their children as they are to Sarah P., then they must have some magnificently spoiled kids & God bless ’em all.

  98. you have to love how when Sarah Palin makes an ass of herself it’s so completely embarrassing to her defenders that they will literally put hours of their day aside, for days at a time, to pretend that 99% of the world doesn’t know she made an ass of herself. if the Sarah Palin Fan Club is even 50% as kind to their children as they are to Sarah P., then they must have some magnificently spoiled kids & God bless ‘em all.

    Palin defenders have learned well from Messiah defenders.

  99. You have to love how the Palin-haters keep on keepin’ on despite their total fisking. Palin-haters have never, under any circumstances, ever, let the facts get in their way as they are proven wrong time and time and time again. They mock her, find out they were stupid-wrong (party like it’s 1773), memory-hole their stupidity, or double-down on their stupidity, and move on to more stupidity.

    Here’s the deal, folks. 20 percent of the US voters are Liberal. 20 percent. Those 20 percent will never vote for a squish, let alone a Conservative. When those 20 percent (the vast majority of the lamestream media are part of that 20 percent) squeal and spread their hate and foolishness, the 42 percent who call themselves Conservative and a portion of the 36 percent who call themselves moderate take notice. And that’s the very reason why Conservatives want Liberals to keep talking: the Liberals do the Conservatives’ work for them. The more the Liberals show their true nature and their true lack of knowledge and their true lack of logic, the more the people see the Liberals for the abject fools they are.

    So yes, Liberals, keep talking. You make our job that much easier.

  100. Just imagine Palin daring to take questions from a room full of Democrats!

    he beat Biden in a debate (Granted, this wasn’t exactly going up against the varsity squad).

    Indeed, a president can be judged in part by who he chooses as VP, as his 2nd in command. Bush chose Cheney, who everyone acknowledges as smart, Obama picked Bided, arguably the dumbest man in the Senate.

  101. he teleprompter stuff makes for a good crack, but it simply doesn’t hold up to Obama’s numerous off-the-cuff speaking moments where he’s displayed notable clarity and depth of response.

    Is that the Obama who put in place the Stimulus, a huge waste of money that did no good at all and exploded the deficit?

    Of course, Obama may not be stupid per se. He may just be blinded by ideology. Which is probably worse.

    Needless to say, Palin wouldn’t have made such an enormous error in judgment.

  102. Just imagine Palin taking questions in a room full of Democrats? She did that when she went to Long Island. And she ruled the place, getting numerous ovations. Seriously, folks, try to keep up with the facts. There is video. Over an hour, uncut. It’s been publicly available on the internet for quite some time now. I’m wanting to say it’s been online for a year. Her One Nation Bus Tour, she had reporters actually run out of questions to ask her as she answered question after question after question from non-FOX reporters.

    This whole “she’s afraid to face oppositional media” meme is absolutely false, as she has proven time and time again. This whole “she refuses to discuss real issues” meme is absolutely false, as she has proven time and time again. But the Liberals and Ruling Class Republicans will stick to their foolishness. And I hope they do. All the faster they lose their grip on the mewling public as the public’s eyes continue to be opened to the Big Government power-brokers.

  103. hey while we’re here can some of Sarah P’s #1 fans tell me they believe that quitting your job mid-term is an honorable and great thing to do that speaks well of her character? can use laffs today.

  104. Hitchcock: I notice you are no longer following up on Palin’s Revere mistakes and have decided to simply declare her right and move on. In reality-land, that means you’ve given up reason and are resorting to repetition.

    Also, feel free to provide resources for your claims that Palin has been open with the non-Fox press. Had she ever held an open press conference? Or did you just see a clip of one dude saying he has no more questions?

    Eric: The stimulus was one third tax cuts and contributed little to the deficit. Why do you make these things up?

  105. As virtually all things from Hitchcock are ridiculously false, I looked up her comparable appearance in front of, we are told, a room full of Democrats. Keep in mind, this is supposed to compare to Obama standing in front of a too room full
    of Republican politicians grilling him.

    Palin’s appearance? Paid. At a country club. In front of business leaders. A NYT article merely says “many” are Democrats.

    Not quite the same, Hitchcock.

  106. Eric: The stimulus was one third tax cuts and contributed little to the deficit. Why do you make these things up?

    Keep telling yourself that.

    And if it didn’t add to the deficit, then why did the deficit explode that year? Even if you are right about the taxes (I never saw any) then the other two thirds came from deficit spending.

  107. Anyone who believes Porkulus didn’t add to the deficit is an absolute fool who knows absolutely zero about politics, economics, history, facts. Likely, anyone who believes Porkulus didn’t add to the deficit will never under any circumstances be swayed by actual facts as that person is hopelessly chained to Big Government Socialism and impervious to logic, facts, truth in the “Death to America as the Founders and Framers wanted it” demands of Obama and his sycophants in the media, Medea Mutters, Kos, AFP, OfA, Soros-fed factions. They are absolutely lost causes, easily being the left half of the 20 percent of Americans who declare they’re Liberals. But their opinions really don’t matter, other than to galvanize the positions of sane people against them.

  108. Jeromy, Palin did not make mistakes regarding Paul Revere. Your absolute ignorance of the facts and your absolute demand to allow you to be absolutely ignorant of the facts remains standing. You are a fool. And you are far less intelligent and far less informed than my daughter. Sarah Palin was right. Paul Revere’s words say Sarah Palin was right. The historical record says Sarah Palin was right. Historians and History Professors say Sarah Palin was right.

    I don’t need to repetitively repeat myself against history-deprived Palin-haters such as those linked in my article (note the Palin-hating radical leftist histo-fact-ignoring site Iowa Liberal is linked in the article) for my position to remain the same and for my position to remain firmly grounded in histo-facts.

    Jeromy is a fool who demands his right to ignore the facts in order for him to be allowed to continually attack a woman who has the facts on her side. That good enough for you, Jeromy?

  109. Let me make myself clear. My daughter’s ACT and ASVAB scores are clearly lower than mine. And her scores in both are very clearly in the top quintile. The authors at Iowa Liberal are less intelligent and less informed than my daughter. Pho and Perry are less intelligent and less informed than the Iowa Liberal authors. After repeatedly showing the proof to those four and the drive-bys, there comes a time when I need to quit responding to the idiotic uninformed fools and let my statements stand up against their idiotic, foolish, history-rejecting ass-ertions.

  110. All that cascade of crazy, and only to prove my point: given that I have provided historians who sharply disagree with Hitchcock’s cited historians, Hitchcock simply repeating over and over again that he’s right instead of engaging in the details illustrates that his argument rests on sand, and the he is incapable of properly defending it. Nowhere in that spewage was there a new point for me to address, and nowhere was there a response to the points I have made. Translation? Hitchcock’s goose is cooked.

    As for the ranting about his daughter’s ACT scores, well, I start to wonder about how morally I’m behaving in provoking somebody as mentally unstable as Hitchcock. I’d hate for this meltdown to affect somebody in real life. Why do right-wingers insist I keep pummeling them rather than risk fessing up and admitting error?

  111. “And if it didn’t add to the deficit, then why did the deficit explode that year? Even if you are right about the taxes (I never saw any) then the other two thirds came from deficit spending.”

    First, he is right about the taxes, Eric. They were given out by lowering the withholding rate. In other words, you did not have to wait until filing your taxes in order to experience the tax cut.

    Secondly, the deficit “exploded”, I believe, because of the TARP, the stimulus, and putting the Bush off-budget spending for two wars and Medicare Part D on the books where they belonged. Dems made themselves accountable for Republican fiscal frivolity. Republicans forget oh so easily in their desire to place blame elsewhere other than on themselves!

  112. Secondly, the deficit “exploded”, I believe, because of the TARP, the stimulus, and putting the Bush off-budget spending for two wars and Medicare Part D on the books where they belonged.

    Funny how TARP, the bailout of AIG and Medicare Part D always get swept under the rug. One does get mentioned with enthusiasm is the GM bailout and that’s only because they’ve all convinced themselves that it was Obama’s idea. Remember the long blog posts lamenting “Government Motors” complete with Photoshopped hammer and sickle logos? Never mind the fact that AIG, a company that produces nothing, received nearly twice the bailout cash and continues to operate via taxpayer funds despite numerous reports of waste and fraud. The key difference is that General Motors has a workforce that is partially unionized (a democratized workplace) so it must therefore be vilified and ultimately dismantled.

  113. Jeromy, Palin did not make mistakes regarding Paul Revere

    To remind people again, Palin’s exact quote:

    “He [Revere] who warned uh, the British that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms, uh by ringing those bells, and um, makin’ sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed.”

    When exactly did Revere warn the British “that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms”?

  114. As for the ranting about his daughter’s ACT scores, well, I start to wonder about how morally I’m behaving in provoking somebody as mentally unstable as Hitchcock.

    Well, there’s two ways of looking at that:

    – If he ends up institutionalised, it would be better for him.

    – But if you see a news story about some unemployed loser shooting up a McDonalds screaming “I’m smart and my daughter is smart, so suck it liberal losers!”, you might start feeling guilty.

    But, then again, I don’t think they have the Internet in prison, so even that last scenario has its good points.

  115. Pingback: Bookworm Room » What I’m reading right now from the Watcher’s Council

  116. Secondly, the deficit “exploded”, I believe, because of the TARP, the stimulus, and putting the Bush off-budget spending for two wars and Medicare Part D on the books where they belonged

    Well, the Stimulus was $787 billion dollars, so that was a huge budget buster all by itself.

  117. Why do right-wingers insist I keep pummeling them rather than risk fessing up and admitting error?

    Do you admit error?

  118. No Eric. They never admit an error. Leftists are perfect in every way. That’s why we have a great economy today! Perry, Pho< Whistler< Mike G. Are the guys that are th undisbuitable people who know ecconomincs. (sorry, my eyes are ot good now). The non-business, non-owners, non-entrepreneurs are the guys that should run our economy. Sure, kinda like Obama charge? Wow, what a windfall for all of us.
    How's that workin' out for US? And hows it workin out for you guys? Idiots! Obama is the death of Ametrica. Pho loves it (that's why he promotes it ) , I don't. Commie, pinko. mmarxist pieces of shit!!!!!!!

    (and after re-reading this post, I let it sit as I wrote it.)

  119. Yeah, Perry has no interest in being honest or admitting Sarah Palin knows more about history than does he. That’s okay, since Perry is busily building the gap.

  120. Pingback: Watcher of Weasels » The Council Has Spoken!! This Week’s Watcher’s Council Results

  121. Eric: Of course. Have one to point out? I didn’t say the stimulus didn’t add to the deficit, I said it wasn’t a big contributor to the deficit. The thing about it is that it was a one-time contained expense, as opposed to other crap that just keeps piling up year after year. And given that one third of it was tax revenue (how do you not know this?), it should certainly have been more palatable to Republicans, since it was a massive compromise between what liberal economists wanted and what Republicans wanted.

    It’s funny that Hitchcock extolls Clinton for passing Republican programs. Obama passed one in particular that was Republican…the Affordable Care Act. You guys are just so nuts with Obama hatred (teleprompter talk kind of exposes you as not really interested in truth) that when Obama tried to compromise, you just scooted further to the right. Anybody looking at histo-facts, as Hitchcock likes to call them, knows it’s the same thing Republicans proposed to counter Clinton in the 90s, and the same thing Romney passed in Massachusetts as a grand free-market way to get everybody health care.

    Anyway, Hitchcock has officially gone off his rocker, repeating over and over again that he’s right without adding to the debate. Hube has checked out talking loads of vapid smack. This thread is over as far as the original point goes, Hitchcock and Hube debunked and helpless. Sorry guys, but you don’t have to rally behind horribly wrong ideas.

  122. Pingback: The Council Has Spoken!! This Week’s Watcher’s Council Results «ScrollPost.com

  123. Hitchcock and Hube debunked and helpless.

    The big burly guy from Iowa is a lot like Perry in one major respect — “he” is far-gone delusional.

    Just remember: Obama is the greatest president in our lifetime, according to this mental pygmy. That’s all you need to know.

  124. There is similarity between the Affordable Care Act and the Massachusetts health care system signed into law by Republican Mitt Romney. At least Romney has been honest enough not to disown his own state’s solution, nor speak out against the ACA, which won’t garner him much support in his own party, the party of neglect. So Jeromy/Henry is correct. Can’t change facts because you don’t like them, John H.! I know, you’ll continue to do it anyway, because that is your meme on here!

  125. I said it wasn’t a big contributor to the deficit

    At 787 billion, I’d say your definition and my definition of “Big” are awfully different.

  126. And Hitchcock and Hube just keep repeating themselves instead of forming coherent responses.

    I guess Hube thinks I should find a Republican to be the best president of my lifetime? It’s not much of a puzzler why a liberal would find the president with the most liberal accomplishments to be the best, but this seems to stump Hube.

    And Hitchcock just declares ACA NOT REPUBLICAN WHISTLER IS A LIAR without a single scrap of a fact, without even addressing the two precedents I cited.

    What do you think it is about you, Hitchcock, that I should care about your bald assertions with no supporting evidence?

  127. Pingback: NoisyRoom.net » Blog Archive » The Council Has Spoken!! This Week’s Watcher’s Council Results 06/10/11

  128. Pingback: TrevorLoudon.com: New Zeal Blog » The Council Has Spoken!! This Week’s Watcher’s Council Results 06/10/11

  129. Pingback: Watcher of Weasels Winners in Erections Have Consequences Edition | Maggie's Notebook

  130. What’s with all of the spam?

    Wingnut blogs trying to establish their own reality by referencing each other.

  131. Pingback: The Council Has Spoken!! This Week’s Watcher’s Council Results 6-10-2011 | Virginia Right!

  132. Pingback: Bookworm Room » Watcher’s Council winners for June 10

Comments are closed.