“He 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.”
No, not Michele Bachmann who once claimed that the American Revolution started in Concord, New Hampshire, [not once but TWICE from a written script] and that the Founding Fathers worked tirelessly to end slavery. We thought no one could top those ignorant statements for dumb, but we've got a winner here.
The person who mouthed the quote above is SARAH PALIN, someone who's been teasing about running for
President of the United States and who has said she has a "fire in the belly," implying to FAUX NOOZ that she wants to run. The only other reference to "fire in the belly," AFAIK, would be to indigestion, but that's something she gives to other people.
My question is: Why do the media chase this know-nothing teevee personality around as though she were a serious presidential candidate? And who are the people who actually believe Palin is qualified to be president?
I agree with this assessment of Palin's gaffes and ignorance:
"Paul Revere wasn’t ringing bells or firing shots into the air. He had to quietly deliver the message that the regulars were coming to arrest John Adams and John Hancock. The story of Paul Revere screaming the British are coming has been woven into our popular culture, so I don’t fault Palin for getting that wrong, but the Second Amendment and shots being fired into the air are pure Palin propaganda.
How many of these gaffes should we allow Sarah Palin to get away with? Palin defenders and even some on the left have been claiming that pointing out yesterday that Palin called the Statue of Liberty the Statute of Liberty was petty, but these critics are, especially those on the left, usually good-natured people who don’t understand that these aren’t isolated gaffes.
Sarah Palin has absolutely no idea what she is talking about, yet she thinks she is qualified to be the President of the United States. When Palin spews her own incorrect version of history, we have a duty as Americans to correct it. As Sarah Palin considers running for president, we have a duty to report on her real words and deeds.
This isn’t picking on Palin. Those who seek fame and position themselves as presidential candidates should be held accountable for their words. This is the job that the mainstream media won’t do. Sarah Palin must be held accountable, and exposing the truth beyond what so many have been willing to sell for her.
Sarah Palin thinks Paul Revere’s ride was about the Second Amendment, and she wants to president."
What. A. Shameless. Dunce.
UPDATE
One of PE's regular commentators wrote that it was unfair to record what Palin said by including the "uhs" and the "ums," since most politicians use those speech hesitations when speaking. Fair enough. I reposted below what Palin said about Paul Revere's ride, deleting the "uhs" and "ums" and even the contractions. Unfortunately, it doesn't make what she said sound any better, and it actually appears more imbecilic:
“He who warned the British that they were not gonna be takin’ away our arms, by ringing those bells, and makin’ sure as he is 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.”
45 comments:
If you are going to include every "uh" in transcripts of her speeches, are you going to do the same for what the President says? I've heard him do this a lot to. It is indeed "picking on Palin" to do this in an inconsistent and partisan fashion.
Otherwise, yes you were making good points.
dmarks, if you read my post carefully, you'll see that I linked to where that quote came from, and copied it as I found it.
The "uhs" in her quote are NOT what makes her look stupid, it is her complete ignorance of basic American history that is so horrid in someone who hogs the media and whom the media take seriously as a presidential candidate.
She would have appeared much smarter if she had only limited her remarks to "uh, uh, uh, uh."
Let Palin continue to expose herself as an ignorant publicity seeker. She'll be down to 3% approval soon.
And 3% approval is 4% more than she deserves!
this is a great story, I have it in draft, it's another one of those WTF moments! LOL! It really is appropriate for us to keep informing the people how utterly stupid this fraud is. She is just out to make as much money as she can cuz when she says shes running she can't spend the money on her mortgage or credit car bills, ya know for those red platforms she wears. LOL! I believe more and more each day she is running, we'll soon see!
Shaw, in all fairness I don't think he wore a Bruins uniform either, though he may have sported a Sox cap under his tricorn.
Actually, Kevin, he just recently put a BROONZ uniform on and warned us Bostonians that "The Canucks are coming! The Canucks are coming!"
George Washington [in Boston's Public Garden} was seen wearing one as well.
How low has this country sunk that a woman (who betrayed Alaska's voters by quitting half way through her term of office) like Palin can grab attention any time she wants to--all by essentially doing nothing more than mouthing garbled, incoherent sound-bites or tweeting someone else's ideas.
Meanwhile serious people, like Romney, get little attention while this self-satisfied narcissist continues to play her shell game.
We are a silly country.
that sarah always good fro a laugh
I would prefer not seeing Mrs. P's face in the media, any media. Well maybe she could be on entertainment media but I don't watch that, so it's ok.
Can you imagine this twit having to debate Obama, if she gets nominated?
And, yes, it could happen. Latest polls show her tied with Romney for Republican front-runner.
"Meanwhile serious people, like Romney, get little attention..."
Well, he DOES have great hair. So we should take him seriously.
Hair today, Goon tomorrow!
A 3rd grader knows more than this dummy.
My husband never rang any bells.
Run, Sarah, run - you ignorant twit. I want you to get the nomination and I want to watch Obama chew you up and spit you out in a debate. I say "a," because you'll quit before the 2nd one.
She may run, but she will NEVER debate. You can take that to the bank!
Oh she'll debate all right. Just watch her wink her eye cause all the GOP men to see starbursts.
But seriously. Her mangling of a story every American child knows is a scandal.
How many times have we had to listen to or read how the right tried to make out Mr. Obama to be a foreigner?
There is no doubt he knows his American history.
Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann--both supposedly educated in this country--haven't any knowledge of their heritage.
Where were they born?????
Paul Revere ringing bells?
i'll be waiting to hear the apologies to Mrs. Palin from all of you when youyu find out the truth of the historical account of his ride.
Jerry said: "She may run, but she will NEVER debate. You can take that to the bank!"
She's done it before. I watched the earlier one in the company of Michael Moore, actually.
If she ran and did get anywhere, she'd do it again. But I don't think a successful Palin candidacy is likely.
Griper: You are of course referring to this?
Griper,
I live in Boston's historic North End, and at one time lived next door to Paul Revere's house which is here in the North End. Every April 18, a re-enactment of the famout ride is performed, just after a service is held in Old North Church and the lanterns are hung in the bell tower.
I can assure you that the historical record has no evidence of Mr. Revere ringing bells or making warning shots as he rode off to Lexington to warn Samuel Adams and John Hancock that the British were coming. (He did not shout that as he rode.)
Mr. Revere also did not warn the British "that they weren't gonna be takin' away our arms."
Here is the account of Paul Revere's ride from the Paul Revere house:
"On the evening of April 18, 1775, Paul Revere was sent for by Dr. Joseph Warren and instructed to ride to Lexington, Massachusetts, to warn Samuel Adams and John Hancock that British troops were marching to arrest them. After being rowed across the Charles River to Charlestown by two associates, Paul Revere borrowed a horse from his friend Deacon John Larkin. While in Charlestown, he verified that the local “Sons of Liberty” committee had seen his pre-arranged signals. (Two lanterns had been hung briefly in the bell-tower of Christ Church in Boston, indicating that troops would row “by sea” across the Charles River to Cambridge, rather than marching “by land” out Boston Neck. Revere had arranged for these signals the previous weekend, as he was afraid that he might be prevented from leaving Boston).
On the way to Lexington, Revere “alarmed” the country-side, stopping at each house, and arrived in Lexington about midnight. As he approached the house where Adams and Hancock were staying, a sentry asked that he not make so much noise. “Noise!” cried Revere, “You’ll have noise enough before long. The regulars are coming out!” After delivering his message, Revere was joined by a second rider, William Dawes, who had been sent on the same errand by a different route. Deciding on their own to continue on to Concord, Massachusetts, where weapons and supplies were hidden, Revere and Dawes were joined by a third rider, Dr. Samuel Prescott. Soon after, all three were arrested by a British patrol. Prescott escaped almost immediately, and Dawes soon after. Revere was held for some time and then released. Left without a horse, Revere returned to Lexington in time to witness part of the battle on the Lexington Green."
dmarks,
Did you carefully read that link you provided?
The text tells of how Paul Revere was questioned by the British AFTER his ride to Lexington and after he was detained. Revere's ride had nothing to do with warning the British, nor warning them about "taking away our arms." The bells and shots mentioned in the text were NOT provided by Revere but by the townspeople.
Palin deserves no apology. She deserves to be put in a corner with a dunce cap on her head.
but...but...if you toss palin's words together, they sorta, kinda sound like something close to, almost like...well some words are the same...the way it happened...really...cuz the history of revere's ride includes the words "british" "shots" "bells" "riding" "horse" "town" "warned"...so palin sorta said those words and that sorta makes her a genius...the way tossing bacon and spinach and feta cheese together makes a salad...no, really.
Shaw asked: "Did you carefully read that link you provided?"
Yeah, but it didn't convince me.
Did you really live next door to Revere's house?
Yes I did.
I used to direct tourists all the time to Revere's house and then tell them that he never came to visit me.
Now I live one street away from Paul Revere Park, or "The Prado" as it is known in the neighborhood.
I took that photo of Revere in the Bruins shirt that's on my blog's masthead.
The Prado is a lovely tree-shaded park where musicians play and hundreds of tourists trek through it to get to the Old North Church (which is in the background of the photo on my masthead). The Prado was part of an old neighborhood from colonial days. Benjamin Franklin was born in the area where the Prado now exists.
I remember that house, actually, one of the few places I remember in a couple of days of haphazard rambling around Boston.
Sarah didn't mind all the attention she got from the "lamestream" media as they followed her around on her history tour. And no one heard her complain when the NH paper featured her rather than Romney on the day he announced he's running for presidency.
I guess the "lamestream" media is okay when it's paying attention to her and no one else.
let's see, Mrs. Palin is completely ignorant of history because she "mangled a story that every American child knows is a scandal and your proof is the fact she said that Revere did the shooting and rung the bells instead of saying that the people of the town did after he alerted them of the coming of the regulars.
i consider that as a trivial part of the story, inaccurate yes, but still trivial. the fact remains that shots were fired and bells rung.
as for what actually happened i prefer reading first hand reports of what happened that night when available not second hand reports that you are using to validify your accusations of her which is an incomplete report.
as for her saying that he warned the regulars that they weren't going to take away their arms i'd agree that it was explicit but it was implicit based on why the regulars were marching into Concord. that cannot be denied.
as for your accusation that Mrs Bacchman showed her ignorance by declaring that the founding fathers worked to end slavery, i'd say i'd agree with her and that they did all that they could within the constitutional limitation placed upon the founding fathers. they were men who placed constitutional principles above the political issues.
but more important is the fact that you'd be far more believable if you held every politician to the same standards that you claim she must be held to. until then, you are only showing your political bias and prejudice.
Those constitutional limits that restricted the founding fathers from ending slavery were created by the founding fathers.
They limited themselves. That's hardly working to end slavery. It is much closer to working to preserve slavery.
Griper, the name of my blog is "Progressive Eruptions." I am a liberal and am proud of it. I admit that I have biases, as does every human being I've ever met.
I admit freely that I do not like Palin. And my reasons are because I believe she is not a serious person and is using her political fame only to enrich and promote herself. Okay. That's not illegal, but it is shameful for someone to misuse her political power only for self-aggrandizement.
I stand by my assessment that her mangled telling of the story of Paul Revere was disgraceful for someone who brags about her patriotism and love of country. Perhaps she should do more reading about the country she loves so dearly before she exposes herself again as a shallow reader of history.
It may be true that I am not fair to her--but neither was she when she shamelessly labeled parts of Mr. Obama's ACA as "death panels." You do remember, don't you, that Pulitzer Prize winning website, PolitiFact, named her "death panel" story as the biggest lie of 2009.
The difference between Palin's political biases and misrepresentations and mine is that hers do damage because they reach million of people, while my biases or misrepresentations are limited to mere dozens. What I state here on my humble little blog does not affect people's lives.
Thankfully, Palin has done herself in with her constant self-promotion and naive pronouncements on serious matters. She called the Israeli/Palestinian problem a "zoning issue."
I'll address the slavery issue and the Founding Fathers later, since I have an appointment this evening.
Shaw,
"That's not illegal, but it is shameful for someone to misuse her political power only for self-aggrandizement."
if you'd let your biases and prejudices go for just one minute you'd realize that your accusation above could apply to every politician and that includes your beloved Obama. in fact it would especially apply to everyone who has made politics a career choice in life.
and there'd be a lot of people that would say that your accusation would be more applicable to Obama than to Palin.
but the most important thing for me is the fact that by admitting your biases and unfairness you are also admitting to deliberately misleading your friends about her and i find nothing about that to be proud of. in fact i find that a shameful way (to use your own words)to convince people about her or about your political ideas.
I am one friend she is not misleading. I find her characterization of Palin spot on.
Griper,
As Jerry proved with his own words, I do not "mislead" my friends. People who come here actually use their powers of critical thinking and decide for themselves whether or not what I write is the truth.
My commenters are not sheep who read what I say and take it as gospel. They know how to think for themselves.
I don't understand why anyone feels the need to defend Palin. As Harry Truman said "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen." It is Palin's choice to stay in the political rough and tumble and play the role of a pitbull with lipstick, isn't it?
But besides her role as an unrelenting critic of the Obama administration, what exactly has she accomplished for this country?
Meanwhile Mr. Obama got rid of bin Laden, passed a health care reform bill that other presidents have failed at for decades, has been a champion for the civil rights of our gay and lesbian citizens, and helped save two of our most important corporations, GM and Chrysler.
And Palin? She tweets inane comments and posts on her facebook page, nipping at Mr. Obama's heels like an annoying chihuahua.
She's amassed millions through ghost-written books and speaking tours and now has, by anyone's definition, become a multi-millionaire elitist--since a majority of Americans are most assuredly not as fabulously wealthy as she is.
She can no longer pretend to be "one of us" as she did in her vp campaign. She's an elite, jet-setting multi-millionaire who demands special treatment and gets it wherever she travels.
She has the support of a dwindling number of Americans and there's a reason for her dismal poll numbers.
The more Americans learn about her, the more they dislike her.
And that's a fact.
To quote a famous writer "that woman is a idiot"
K. Olbermann Writer
If anyone gets near her they should hold up a sign that reads "NX11=RELOAD". Believe me she WON'T get it. Another thing why don't she visit any historical locations where Blacks and Latinos will be? We ALL know why don't we. It would be funny if she visits Castro Street in San Francisco. we ALL know what will happen DON'T WE.
I have the prefect running mate for Sarah Palin, Clayton Bigsby. They both have the same politics.
"Another thing why don't she visit any historical locations where Blacks and Latinos will be? We ALL know why don't we."
No. why? Please tell us.
palin showed up at the rolling thunder rally with a huge cross around her neck and the next day she was in new york city with a star of david around her neck.
palin the panderer
i wonder if she'd wear her star of david on a visit to dubai...isn't dubai the playground of the rich and famouns...y'know like palin?
seriously...a star of david on this woman?
@dmarks
She would get booed and have stuff thrown at her. When they "Afroturf" her she's only around "safe" Negros. She don't want to be asked questions about her anti Immigrant stance or why she was the only Alaskan governor in history to not attend Juneteenth, or ruled against a bill supporting the soldiers of the AlCan highway. She's a racist right down to her marrow. I pray she doesn't go around any minorites or Gays.
Plus, Shaw, she is a socialist, one of the most socialist governors, I mean half-governors, we have ever had. She increased taxes on oil corporations so that she could give more money to the citizens of Alaska. Sounds like transfer of wealth from the rich corporations to the poor citizens.
I am at a loss to why conservatives love her.
Conservatives love Palin because they think she drives liberals crazy, when, in fact, the more she's out there garbling talking points and skewed American history, the more we like it. Her negatives are the highest of all the possible GOP candidates.
So how does that drive a liberal crazy?
Plus, she causes certain white male Republicans to see starbursts when she winks at the camera.
LOL!
kid: Do you have any evidence that she uses the word "Negro", which is only used by racists except when it is used in a historic context such as the college fund or the baseball league/ Yet, you did.
Another way to interpret Palin’s remarks, in light of efforts by her defenders to tell the history of Revere’s ride, is that she was briefed on the whole story of Revere’s ride (or more likely Googled it from her Blackberry) and this is what she was able to remember. I find this interpretation more frightening, because it is what I would expect as an exam answer from a failing student who does not understand context or nuance. She learns a few words and concepts, and not even the important ones, and strings them together in a nonsensical narrative.
@dmarks
I was being generous when I referred to Sarah's African American support as Negro. You know what she did. The Secret Service told her to "tone it down" when she LIED about his association with "terry risks" as she calls them. SHE WAS TRYING TO GET HIM KILLED!
If Sarah WAS a real politician of the people, then why can't she talk to the press? When they picked her for VP in February they kept it quiet until the end of August. They also used the fake PUMA outrage to get her white women voters.
America has a serious problem. People on Fox call the NAACP and the Urban League terrorist organizations. the whole meme abaout "white slavery" makes me sick to my stomach.All this bull so that 2% of the country can control the other 98%.
You began with an entirely false claim of a wish for assassination and end it with a nutty conspiracy theory.
"They also used the fake PUMA outrage to get her white women voters."
In the middle you conjure up a bogus racist accusation.
And yes, you again (not Sarah Palin) used the word "Negro", which when used outside of the aforementioned historic contexts, dues gain the whiff of racism over time because it is so antiquated.
dmarks,
you better inform the "United Negro College Fund" of their racism. Also, the NAACP: "The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People."
there's nothing racist about the words "negro" or "colored"... context is everything.
perhaps you're one of those politically correct people who believe Huckleberry Finn should be banned because the word "nigger" is used in it?
using a word in its correct context (for example Twain using the word "nigger" in HF to accurately show how people referred to African-Americans in that period of American history) is not racism...banning the use of a particular word gives it more power...as examples of defanging a word of its intended insulting power you can look to gay and lesbian activists who reclaimed the word "queer"..."we're here and we're queer"...and African-American comediens who use the word "nigger" in their routines (q.v. Richard Pryor, et.al)...you seem not to understand this.
i don't think kid needs to be scolded and instructed on how to use language that has been used against him and his race all thru American history...
Observer said: "you better inform the "United Negro College Fund" of their racism."
Sorry, I already mentioned that the use of the word is completely acceptible in such historic contexts. In fact, I mentioned the college fund.
"there's nothing racist about the words "negro" or "colored"... context is everything."
No, both terms are "quaint" enough to have at least a whiff of racism.
"perhaps you're one of those politically correct people who believe Huckleberry Finn should be banned because the word "nigger" is used in it?"
No, but we should probably come down pretty hard on black and white racists who use the N-word. Dr Laura got what she deserved.
"banning the use of a particular word gives it more power"
Actually, I don't agree with banning. But those who use hate speech in a supposedly enlightened era should be called on the carpet for it.
"...and African-American comediens who use the word "nigger" in their routines (q.v. Richard Pryor, et.al)...you seem not to understand this."
They hardly defanged it. The word remains hate speech, with long fangs.
"i don't think kid needs to be scolded and instructed on how to use language that has been used against him and his race all thru American history..."
I'm no racist. If I see racist crap from someone like that I will point it out, regardless of his race.
You don't see Shaw bashing African-Americans using the N-word, or even the perversely quant and ignorant "Negro". She "gets it". Kid doesn't.
Post a Comment