Submitted by Elaine Magliaro, Guest Blogger
I’m sure most Americans are aware that former Alaska governor Sarah Palin has been on a bus tour along the east coast of the United States. What is the purpose of her tour?
Only Palin knows for sure. She did, however, provide people with her reason for taking this tour of historical places on her Sarah PAC website.
It’s interesting when (for the 100th time) reporters shout out, “Why are you traveling to historical sites? What are you trying to accomplish?” I repeat my answer, “It’s so important for Americans to learn about our past so we can clearly see our way forward in challenging times; so, we’re bringing attention to our great nation’s foundation.” When that answer isn’t what the reporters want to hear, we’ve asked them if they’ve ever visited these sites like the National Archives, Gettysburg, etc. When they confirm that they haven’t, it’s good to say, “Well, there you go. You’ll learn a lot about America today.” (They usually don’t want to hear that either!)
Last Thursday, Palin stopped in Boston for a tour of three Revolutionary War sites. She said she was “getting goose bumps’’ from all the history she was glimpsing in Boston. She added, “You’ve got to know a lot about our past in order to know how to proceed successfully into the future.’’ And thanks to Palin we’re learning history anew as she provides reporters with her version of American historical events when she speaks to them on stops along her way.
After visiting the Old North Church in Boston’s North End, she hailed Paul Revere and what he did on his “famous ride.” Here is how Palin described that event: …he who warned the British that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms, uh, by ringin’ those bells and, um, makin’ sure as he’s ridin’ his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we’re gonna be secure and we were gonna be free. And we we’re gonna be armed.
Got that? Revere warned the British! That’s news to me. And to think that I thought for decades that Paul Revere had been riding around on his horse warning certain American colonists about the British. The archivist at the Cambridge Public Library doesn’t know what really happened that fateful night either. The archivist wrote the following in a blog post: “Paul Revere and his famous midnight ride is so much a part of the collective memory of the American Revolution that it is often forgotten that Revere was just one of several men and one woman who alerted the Minutemen of the impending British advancement.”
I guess the History Channel got it wrong too. Following is what I found on the channel’s website. It includes no mention of bells.
By 1775, tensions between the American colonies and the British government had approached the breaking point, especially in Massachusetts, where Patriot leaders formed a shadow revolutionary government and trained militias to prepare for armed conflict with the British troops occupying Boston. In the spring of 1775, General Thomas Gage, the British governor of Massachusetts, received instructions from Great Britain to seize all stores of weapons and gunpowder accessible to the American insurgents. On April 18, he ordered British troops to march against Concord and Lexington.
The Boston Patriots had been preparing for such a British military action for some time, and, upon learning of the British plan, Revere and Dawes set off across the Massachusetts countryside. They took separate routes in case one of them was captured: Dawes left the city via the Boston Neck peninsula and Revere crossed the Charles River to Charlestown by boat. As the two couriers made their way, Patriots in Charlestown waited for a signal from Boston informing them of the British troop movement. As previously agreed, one lantern would be hung in the steeple of Boston’s Old North Church, the highest point in the city, if the British were marching out of the city by Boston Neck, and two lanterns would be hung if they were crossing the Charles River to Cambridge. Two lanterns were hung, and the armed Patriots set out for Lexington and Concord accordingly. Along the way, Revere and Dawes roused hundreds of Minutemen, who armed themselves and set out to oppose the British.
Tim Murphy—snarking little fellow—wrote this in an article at Mother Jones: “We don’t mean to nitpick—we just think that if you launch a major publicity tour on the subject of great moments in American history, it might make sense to brush up on the details first. We can only imagine how Palin might try to spin this: ‘Listen my children and you shall hear, of the midnight ride of Paul Revere. If the story doesn’t sound like what you read on Wikipedia, you know who to blame: the elite liberal media.’”
It’s just not fair! Tim Murphy and other members of the “lamestream media” love to make fun of Palin. I don’t understand why. She’s only trying to give us the scoop on what really happened in our country’s past—just like Representative Michelle Bachmann of Minnesota. Thank heavens we have women so well versed in American history that they can enlighten us today with their knowledge.
SOURCES
Palin hits town to pick her spots, take her shots (Boston Globe)
Just passing through (Boston Globe)
Reminding Reporters, too, of America’s Foundations (Sarah PAC)
Sarah Palin’s Reasons for Bus Tour Misguided (Yahoo)
Paul Revere’s Ride, Reimagined by Sarah Palin (Mother Jones)
The Other Paul Revere: William Dawes’ Midnight Ride through Cambridge (The Cambridge Room)
Revere and Dawes warn of British attack (History.com)
kderosa,
When is it going to dawn on you that IT DOESN’T MATTER?
Your arguments, like St. Sarah, are irrelevant. She is not going to win anything. She is a shallow and easily confused grifter who is milking her fifteen minutes of fame for all it is worth. And people like you are enabling her.
@Buddha
“I’m not quibbling because you simply have no proof nor have you met your burden of proof. That and I made no gaffe. Not even with comments pulled out of context like you were just trying. ”
Here are your historical gaffes: ““He told the patrol which had captured him that they were marching into certain death. Nothing more, nothing less.” addn ““Again – for the hard of understanding – Revere … wasn’t warning the Redcoats.””
Here’s your proof from Elijah Sanderson’s deposition (an eyewitness), Paul Revere’s (an eyewitness) deposition, and an expert historian’s interpretation of the two historic documents:
One of the prisoners, Elijah Sanderson, listened at a distance and later remembered, “I heard him speak up with energy to them.” 15 (Elijah Sanderson, Deposition, Dec. 17, 1824, in Elias Phinney, History of the Battle of Lexington, on the Morning of the 19th April, 1775 (Boston, 1825).)
“Gentlemen,” Revere told them, “you’ve missed of your aim.”
“What of our aim?” one answered in a “hard” tone. Another insisted that they were out after deserters, a frequent employment of British officers in America. “I know better,” Paul Revere boldly replied.
“I know what you are after, and have alarmed the country all the way up.”
Even as the British officers posed the questions, Paul Revere began to control the interrogation. Before the Regulars realized what had happened, the prisoner himself became the inquisitor. Paul Revere proceeded to tell his astonished captors more than they knew about their own mission. He informed them that Colonel Smith’s expedition had left Boston by boat across the Back Bay, and that “their boats had catched aground” at Lechmere Point, and that the Regulars had come ashore in Cambridge.
He also told them what he had been doing that night, and warned that he had alarmed the militia at Lexington, and their lives would be at risk if they lingered near that town. “I should have 500 men there soon,” he said, adding, “if I had not known people had been sent out to give information to the country, and time enough to get fifty miles, I would have ventured one shot from you, before I would have suffered you to have stopped me.” 16 (Revere, Draft Deposition, ca. April 24, 1775; Sanderson, Deposition, 32; Sanderson’s version of this conversation is generally consistent with Revere’s deposition, but more detailed and dramatic. Here as elsewhere, Paul Revere’s three accounts err on the side of understatement. )
Fischer, David Hackett (1995). Paul Revere’s Ride (Kindle Locations 2314-2326). Oxford University Press, USA. Kindle Edition.
That would be two eyewitness depositions, Revere’s and Sanderson’s, along with an expert historian’s interpretation of same worth of proof that 1. Revere said more than just that the British soldier were walking into certain death and that 2. it was taken as a warning, for you, moron. Thanks for playing.
Concrete minded too.
I’m not quibbling because you simply have no proof nor have you met your burden of proof. That and I made no gaffe. Not even with comments pulled out of context like you were just trying. Seriously, your skills suck and until you have proof better than an sworn deposition by Revere that states Revere did all the things Palin claimed, you are only further building evidence against yourself as being a propagandist engaged in the Big Lie tactic.
Like I’ve said earlier, it’s also expected from you. It’s a constraint on your tactical choice. You have to keep on keeping on no matter how ridiculous you look or how lacking in proof your claims that Palin was correct in light of overwhelming admissible substantive evidence in Revere’s own words showing that Palin and her defenders are incorrect. Historical revisionism is when you lie about the facts of history and that is what you are engaging in all for the sake of a woman you claim to care nothing about. In the end though, a lie is still a lie.
There is only one way out of the box you have built for yourself.
Find a a sworn deposition from Revere that says he rang bells, fired shots and warned the British “we were going to be secure and we were going to be free”.
You can bitch and moan and attempt to nitpick all you like, but until you have evidence that conforms to the above quality?
You and Palin still lose as an evidentiary matter.
I now leave you to resume beating your dead horse.
Kdrosa,
I have only unsubscribed to 3 threads on this site. This is going to be the 4th, you are undoubtedly one of the greatest fools to set foot of this earth not to realize when you are in an argument…you better figure out which fool you are arguing with….ones the fool… which one are they?
OS, that new “quote” of yours is different from your original quote, and yet you used quotation marks like you were merely repeating your original quote verbatim. So, which “quote” would you like me to respond to? The original quote or your revised quote?.
“But judge, this ticket says I was doing 89 miles per hour, but the radar recording PROVES I was doing only 87, so I am not guilty of what he charged me with and that means I don’t have to pay the fine.”
Good luck with that.
@Buddha — It’s refreshing to see that you aren’t quibbling as to your gaffe of American History. To think that Revere only warned the Bristish taht they were walking into certain death, how ridiculous.
A proven liar and propagandist – one that has spent a large amount of time defending the stupidity of a woman he supposedly cares nothing about – attempting to point out hypocrisy is in itself hypocritical.
Do you have a sworn deposition from Revere that says he rang bells, fired shots and warned the British “we were going to be secure and we were going to be free” yet?
I didn’t think so.
But please do keep coming back and beating your dead horse.
“never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong;
people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one(redacted due to your failure to use a big enough lie); repeat it frequently”The proof is in the eating of the pudding, puddin’.
@OS: “I have tried to be civil as much as people will let me, but you are doing exactly what a lot of “jailhouse lawyers” do when caught doing something illegal. Look for every comma and misspelling as if that will somehow change facts and exonerate them.”
Much like what you just tried to do with your own ahistoric statement. I’ll also note that you are now trying to change the subject, rather than to continue to argue that what you actually wrote wasn’t what you actually meant. That is also a common “jailhouse lawyer” tactic.
You said something outrageously stupid and historically wrong. You have been straining at gnats ever since to somehow prove a nonexistent point. I have taken the words you wrote and parsed it for you in terms a third grader could understand without difficulty. Let it go, it will not get better. You said it. And, you cannot unring a bell. (pun intended)
I am enjoying pointing out your blatant hypocrisy to you.
K, you are becoming tiresome. I have tried to be civil as much as people will let me, but you are doing exactly what a lot of “jailhouse lawyers” do when caught doing something illegal. Look for every comma and misspelling as if that will somehow change facts and exonerate them. You remind me of the guy who was caught speeding and the officer wrote down what looked like 89 miles per hour on the ticket. They guy said the radar record showed he was only doing 87 miles per hour, so he should not have to pay the ticket.
Sarah Palin said something outrageously stupid and historically wrong. You have been straining at gnats ever since to somehow prove a nonexistent point. Both Elaine and Buddha have taken every word she said and parsed it for you in terms a third grader could understand without difficulty. Let it go, it will not get better. She said it. and you cannot unring a bell. (pun intended)
@OS “Revere was the ONLY one who could testify as to what he did himself that night, for the whole ride.”
Here’s what you actually wrote: “He was the only one there and was the only one who knew exactly what he did.”
Now, you are arguing that what you really meant was “He was the only one there [for the entire ride] and was the only one who knew exactly what he did [for the entire ride].”
If that’s what you meant you should have written that instead of the broader statement you actually wrote. Reading in the “for the entire ride” qualifier is not mandated by the plain language of your statement or the surrounding context.
So the plain meaning of your statement in context was clearly ahistoric.
K, you did not read what I wrote, or if you did, you did not comprehend. Revere was the ONLY one who could testify as to what he did himself that night, for the whole ride. I am sure there is also an official report of the incident written by a British Army officer regarding his capture, but that is irrelevant. As for him riding through town, ringing bells, etc., Sarah pulled that out of her ‘you know what.’ Her statement is nonsense, so what is all this massive effort to defend garbage. She did not know what Revere did. That is massively obvious. As noted previously, what Revere did was explained to her by one of the Old North Church officials before she made that statement. If she had a clue, it would not have had to be explained. Once explained, she was apparently in information overload, because she got the story hopelessly garbled.
Revere was not alone when he issued his warning to his British captors. Elijah Sanderson, among others, was also detained along with Revere. We have his deposition as well as Revere’s. Sanderson’s deposition is admissible as to what transpired during the period of captivity as a first hand witness.
Therefore, your statement “He was the only one there and was the only one who knew exactly what he did” is factually inaccurate.
I do not understand your objection to my comment. Revere was the only one there who actually wrote an affidavit as to his actions. He was alone much of his ride, so yes, he was the only one who knew what he did. An affidavit is sworn testimony, and if there were reason to produce evidence in a Court of Law right now in June 2011, more than two centuries after the fact, that affidavit could be introduced the same as if Revere were on the witness stand testifying. The law regards that sworn statement as credible and reliable.
What Sarah P. said? Not so much.
744 posts, though only a few actually discuss history. Let’s see how many historical errors our fearless heroes have commited in a post and comment thread ostensibly intended to mock someone for allegedly not knowing history :
@Elaine: “Got that? Revere warned the British! That’s news to me”
@Elaine: “I guess the History Channel got it wrong too. Following is what I found on the channel’s website. It includes no mention of bells.”
@Elaine: Revere actually wrote three letters about the events of that night. I believe he wrote them more than two decades later.
@rcampbell: SHE DOESN’T KNOW THE STORY!!!!! She said Revere was riding to “…warn the British not to take our arms…” WHAT!!!!???
@Elaine: Warning the British was not the purpose of his ride, was it?
@Bob, Esq: “Paul Revere’s intent on his famous ride was not to … discuss the issue of arms.”
@Buddha: “He told the patrol which had captured him that they were marching into certain death. Nothing more, nothing less.”
@Otteray Scribe “He [Revere] was the only one there [detained by the British regulars] and was the only one who knew exactly what he did.”
@Buddha: “Again – for the hard of understanding – Revere … wasn’t warning the Redcoats.”
Now watch the moths come back to the flame.
Billy B.,
“You have spent 740 posts denigrating someone who isn’t even running for office, if she wasn’t a threat you wouldn’t care. why is she a threat to you? Worried that a bunch of people might actually like what she has to say?”
A number of us commenting on this thread responded to some ridiculous claims made by the likes of kderosa. You may like what Palin has to say, but when she spouts idiotic statements–as she did when she mangled the story of Paul Revere’s historic ride–we’ll respond. Did we denigrate Sarah Palin when we told the truth about what she said…or did the ex-governor make a fool of herself?
People may like/choose to believe what Palin has to say. They may hold her up as a heroine. That doesn’t mean that those of us who view her as a narcissistic publicity-seeker–who “mispeaks” often–shouldn’t have the right to criticize her. Why does it bother you so much that those of us who hold no value in what this woman has to say criticize her…or tell the truth about her?
“I don’t think she ever said Revere fired shots.”
Then you don’t listen or read very well. “He who warned the British that they weren’t going to be taking away our arms by ringing those bells and, um, making sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots“. Do I really need to diagram that out, rocket surgeon?
“She also looked like she was distracted.”
So what? She aspires to national office or at least a voice in the arena of national politics. She would be distracted every day by the very nature of the job. If she’s incapable of handling simple questions from a reporter because she was distracted? It says quite a bit about her lack of skills for holding national office.
“You have spent 740 posts denigrating someone who isn’t even running for office, if she wasn’t a threat you wouldn’t care. why is she a threat to you?”
Threat? Oh, no. She’s not a threat to me personally. I have clothing smarter than her. She is, however, a general threat to the body politic. She’s all form and no substance with a track record of petty personal revenge while in a state office that she quit when she thought she had entrée into an office with even more power for her to abuse – both purposefully and out of her innate stupidity.
“Worried that a bunch of people might actually like what she has to say?”
Yeah. I’m funny about caring what kind of bullshit people believe coming from politicians or political pundits. It’s not like that story hasn’t ended badly before, but then again, history doesn’t seem to be your strong suit.
“What is it about her you don’t like?”
See the above statement about her track record and general lack of substantive character.
“She is pretty much middle America-God, family and country.”
She’s petty, stupid and power mad. That’s not the middle America I know. Most middle Americans I know just want to be left alone to live their lives and they don’t begrudge others the same right. Most middle Americans I know want honest and competent politicians who do their job of representing the interests of We the People instead of servicing the narrow and venal corporate special interests that currently control national politics.
But as far as “God, family and country”? Well that’s a problem too, sport. The only correct order for those priorities in a politician are “country and family” – full stop.
God needs to be left out of it because this is not a theocratic Christian nation and the Bible isn’t one of our founding documents. The Founding Fathers went to a great deal of trouble to create the Separation of Church and State to keep it that way. Appeals to religion by or on the behalf of a politician are a red light to anyone who actually understands secular nature of the Constitution and the historically bloody and disastrous nature of theocratic states. If you want to be the leader of a politically and religiously pluralistic society like is found in America, you have to represent the interests of ALL citizens. Not just those who’ve accepted Jesus as their “savior” or whatever the politician’s religion of choice might be.
And make no mistake, Sarah Palin puts only one thing first and that’s Sarah Palin.
Based upon her cumulative actions, you’re a fool if you think otherwise.
I don’t think she ever said Revere fired shots. She did say he rang a bell so I will give you that one. But the rest is generally accurate based on the documents.
She also looked like she was distracted.
You have spent 740 posts denigrating someone who isn’t even running for office, if she wasn’t a threat you wouldn’t care. why is she a threat to you? Worried that a bunch of people might actually like what she has to say?
What is it about her you don’t like? She is pretty much middle America-God, family and country.
“Basically correct”.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Unless, of course, you mean incorrect.
Again – for the hard of understanding – Revere rang no bells, he fired no shots and he wasn’t warning the Redcoats.
The only thing Palin got “basically correct” is that at one point Revere was riding a horse.