Sunday, June 5, 2011

Sarah Palin knows more about Paul Revere than....the media!

Once again, Sarah Palin has shown that the knee-jerk reaction of the lamestream media is to assume she doesn't know what she's talking about.

To whit:
Patterico's Pontifications:

I barely have to write the post this time. Did you hear? Sarah Palin is sooooo stupid. She believed that Paul Revere warned the British.
Think Progress sniffs:

As Mediaite’s Frances Martel notes, Palin’s version “wasn’t exactly the official History Channel rendition.” It’s hard to imagine why Revere would warn the British of anything, or why he’d do it with bells and gun shots.

And as you can see, so did Frances Martel. So did Nicole Belle of the eponymous Crooks and Liars:

Can we all just breathe a collective sigh of relief that this is not the person one heartbeat away from the Oval Office?

And Gawker:

Perhaps we should all brush up on our history of such events should we ever get trapped like this, but this may include some inaccuracies. Revere did not warn the British army.

Greg Sergeant:

Everyone has already had a grand old time mocking this video of Sarah Palin bungling her Paul Revere history, but I actually think it amounts to quite an eloquent statement. It’s as eloquent an argument as anyone could make that this woman really should not be treated by any of us as anything resembling a presidential candidate until it’s absolutely necessary — which is to say, until she actually runs for president.

And another two-fer, Steve Benen quoting another:

In case anyone needs a refresher, Tim Murphy explained, “This is actually the opposite of everything Paul Revere did.”

And Digby:

How can it possibly be that even one person in this country considers this person qualified for the presidency.

And I will break the embargo on linking to Politico, to quote Ben Smith:

Palin makes Bachmann look like Longfellow

Joe Gandelman, of the Moderate Voice:

DRAT! Why did I spend so much time studying history at Amity High School in Woodbridge, Connecticut when I could have made up my own version and gotten away with it.

Kathy from Comments from Left Field:

The news would be if she said anything about American history or foreign policy or ANYthing that made sense, right?


Sidebar: You know where I am going with this, right? Right?


BooMan, who admits he doesn’t really remember very much of the history:

Paul Revere did not warn the British about anything.

Talking Points Memo’s Eric Lach:

Sarah Palin Offers Novel Take On Paul Revere’s Ride

Rick Ungar of Forbes Magazine:

While I had been led to believe that Revere’s historic ride was actually for the purpose of warning our forefathers that the British were coming, it turns out that his midnight ride, complete with ringing bells and warning shots, was really all about letting the English know that we were armed.

Andrew Malcolm of the LA Times just calls it a gaffe. The Hill writes:

She makes history come alive, doesn’t she?

ABC’s The Note’s Sheila Marikar:

Perhaps this week’s lesson in the annals of American history was necessary for Sarah Palin.

USA Today:

Sarah Palin apparently flubbed details of Paul Revere’s famous midnight ride when she visited Boston yesterday.

The former Alaska governor, who may or may not be running for the GOP presidential nomination, thought Revere was warning the British army during the Revolutionary War.


Sarah Palin treated her audience to a little American history (“little” being the operative word)

Alan Colmes sniggered. And Dennis DiClaudio writes:

Suck on that, history teachers! That’s how you tell a story about this great land that is called America! You may say that that’s pretty much the exact opposite of what actually happened in real life, but I say that you’re a not-real American and a possible traitor (and maybe a future tenant of Gitmo).


I think that is just about everyone.

And gosh, isn’t that funny how stupid she is. Aren’t all those liberals clearly her superior in both intelligence and knowledge?

Um, really, you know where this is going right?

Well, Professor Jacobson points out that she was right. Paul Revere did warn the British.

Oh, and I saved New York Magazine’s Dan Amira’s snit for last because it is now so ironic:

Many Americans think they have a solid understanding of the country’s founding. No taxation without representation, tea party, Boston Massacre, George Washington, all that jazz. But, not surprisingly, Über-patriot Sarah Palin knows more than the average American. In fact, she may have more expertise on the subject than anybody else. For example, yesterday she revealed some heretofore unknown facts about Paul Revere’s midnight ride. Did you know that he was actually warning the British, through the repeated ringin’ of bells?

But if you have been following this blog long enough, you know I already wrote the post months ago. As I said here:

To pre-judge a person is to literally “judge before.” Before what? Before it is appropriate, before you have all the facts. Of course normally we think of prejudice as being based on specific traits. Racial prejudice is to judge a man by his skin color, rather than getting enough facts to judge him as an individual. But it can be based on anything.

Take for instance, Sarah Palin. Liberals have convinced themselves that Palin is a moron. So when Sarah Palin told a crowd of Tea Partiers that it was too soon to “party like its 1773” liberals freaked out. OMG, she is so stupid. Doesn’t she know the American Revolution was in 1776? As well documented by Cuffy Meigs, Markos Moulitsas, Gwen Ifil (who moderated Palin’s debate with Joe Biden) and others mocked her in that fashion.

One guy, Steve Paulo showed enough introspection to wonder “WTF happened in 1773?!” Well, hey, I was a history major, but I couldn’t rattle off every event of any year, 1773 or otherwise. But I can google. As of this moment the first link I get is this. You only have to page down once to discover that in December of that year was the original Boston Tea Party. You know, the event that the Tea Party is self-consciously invoking with its very name? Yeah, that one.

This is frankly a textbook case of someone believing their own propaganda. They have spent the last few years convincing themselves that Palin is stupid and uneducated and they have forgotten that this simply isn’t true. She isn’t dumb. She’s just a down-to-earth woman with a funny accent. And if you keep acting like she is dumb, you’re going to keep making yourself look stupid.

[Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.]


  1. I never thought Palin's accent was funny at all--it sounds quite normal to me. But, then isn't all prejudice merely something in the eye of the beholder? There is nothing wrong with her--and a lot wrong with some of her critics.

  2. Palin is sooo much better and much more knowledgeable than her lib hater journalists that have proven that they are clueless about history. I love how she makes them look like idiots.