You know how Sarah Palin said Paul Revere warned the British? Well, he did. Now, who looks stupid?

You may have heard recently something about that Sarah Palin telling a reporter that Paul Revere warned the British on his famous rousing revolutionary ride.

Now, that so many Americans have wallowed in their smug confirmation that Palin is an idiot unqualified for anything but repeating sixth-grade history, how far, wide and fast do you think the contradictory news will spread that the former governor of Alaska was indeed correct?

That the Republican non-candidate, in fact, knew more about the actual facts of Revere's midnight ride than all those idiots unknowingly revealing their own ignorance by laughing at her faux faux pas? How secretly embarrassing this must be, to be forced to face that you're dumber than the reputed dummy.

As it happens, though, such phenomena are regular occurrences in American politics, reminding consumers of news to be wary when some fresh story seems to fit contemporary assumptions so absolutely perfectly.

The well-known fable is Revere's late-night ride to warn fellow revolutionaries that....

...the British were coming. Less known, obviously, is the rest of the evening's events in which Revere was captured by said redcoats and did indeed defiantly warn them of the awakened militia awaiting their arrival ahead and of the American Revolution's inevitable victory.

Palin knew this. The on-scene reporters did not and ran off like Revere to alert the world to Palin's latest mis-speak, which wasn't.

Like a number of famous faux gaffes in American politics, the facts of the situation no longer really matter.

The initial impression was eagerly grabbed by so many, starting with the reporter and millions of others gleefully sharing the story that reinforced their beliefs and/or desires.

This phenomenon is actually not a new one in American politics, although its immediate spread is obviously hastened by the Internet. Speaking of which, Al Gore did not invent it. Nor did he claim to, as often as you've heard otherwise.

In 1999, the hapless former journalist, who should have known to make a better word choice, told CNN that in Congress he "took the initiative in creating the Internet."

Democrat Gore never used the word "invented." That was part of another willful misinterpretation that fit expectations of Gore's boasts and was gleefully spread by opponents as further proof of his unseemly hubris. It lives on to this day.

Perhaps you remember how one day during a photo op President George H.W. Bush was overheard asking a store checkout clerk how this price scanner thing worked?

That quote was immediately transmitted as proof of how disconnected that Republican chief executive was, that he had no knowledge of something as ordinary as a checkout scanner.

The fact is, asking such inane and often obvious questions as "what are you doing here?" is a bipartisan ploy used by politicians to fill the awkward time void they are hanging around someone working while photographers snap their photos several hundred times.

President Obama likely said much the same thing last Friday in that Toledo Chrysler plant when for the benefit of nearby photographers he feigned interest watching assembly-line worker Anthony Davis install a dashboard instrument panel. (See photo below)

A classic example of this faux faux pas was in 1992 when Vice President Dan Quayle agreed to participate in a New Jersey classroom spelling bee.

Working from a placard, Quayle corrected one sixth-grader by telling him to add an "e" to "potato." Journalists gleefully noted the spelling misteak. And Quayle's dunce hat was glued in place.

Trouble is, that mis-spelled placard was actually written out by the classroom teacher herself, either through her own ignorance or, a few suspect, some sly political set-up. Quayle knew he hadn't written it and thought the error was the point of the lesson.

And because the classroom spelling bit was a last-minute addition, aides who would have foreseen the everlasting damage of their boss inexplicably adding a mistake to a student's work did not know what the placard said. Quayle subsequently forbade them from explaining the error to the media, for fear of embarrassing the teacher.

One of the immutable laws of public communications in politics and other fields is, if you have to explain something, you lose. Seeking to explain you were for something before being against it simply digs a deeper hole.

This time the mistake for Palin, who used to be accused of dodging reporters' questions, was bothering to answer such an amateur media gotcha question in a noisy, moving crowd. Better would have been a simple dismissive and cheery, "You're kidding, right?" Such are the ongoing lessons for primary candidates. Which she isn't now, of course.

Early in a previous race for the Republican presidential nomination almost 12 years ago, then Texas Gov. George W. Bush was in a jammed New Hampshire airport meeting room, answering questions from local media. Apropos of nothing, one reporter (perhaps prompted by an opponent's camp) asked Bush his pre-written gotcha: Name the new president of Pakistan.

Obviously, Pervez Musharraf had nothing to do with New Hampshire issues and is similar to some Democratic candidates flubbing the name of Russia's then prime minister during 2008 debates (Dmitry Medvedev).

Bush didn't know the Pakistani leader's name that day and looked clumsy attempting to answer. He could have brushed it away by instantly asking the reporter some arcane political who's-who, laughing off their mutual ignorance and quickly taking the next question. But he didn't and took media lumps for several days.

As everyone now knows, such a splashy gaffe can effectively doom any chance a candidate has of winning two terms in the White House.

Related:

Sarah Palin plays the media like a violin; They'll try to get even

Piper Palin shares her Mom's hot/cold attitude toward the media

Mitt Romney leads in Iowa poll, Sarah Palin comes in second, Ron Paul falls to 7th

-- Andrew Malcolm

Don't forget to follow The Ticket via Twitter alerts of each new Ticket item. Or click this: @latimestot. Our Facebook Like page is over here. We're also available on Kindle. Use the ReTweet buttons above to share any item with family and friends.

Photos: Jonathan Ernst / Reuters; Gary Hershorn / Reuters; Jeff Kowalsky / EPA (Obama at Chrysler, June 3).

Comments

[Adam Perdona]

"I took the initiative in creating the Internet" cannot be foreshortened to "I invented the Internet"? That was not a willful misinterpretation, but a reasonable paraphrase.

[Dor]

Palin didn't want to talk about some dead guy; she wanted to talk about herself. And that garbled word-salad that tumbled out of her mouth makes it clear that she has no respect for history or facts, she was just trying to make some sort of connection with Revere and the 'Palin Brand' thus, in Palin History, somehow Paul Revere became some sort of NRA spokeperson and illustration of 'Palinism' rather than what he was --- a man who set out at risk to himself to warn the colonials that the British were coming.
The woman is a malignant narcissist.

[Rembot]

Your headline-grabbing article is a weakly-supported attempt to enter the media circus about Palin's pathetic attempts to mutter her way out of a direct historical question. Revere's purpose was to warn the British? That's like saying Francis Gary Powers was flying over the Soviet Union to warn the Soviets that the U.S. was flying spy missions over the Soviet Union. I sincerely doubt Palin had any knowledge of the detailed facts of Revere's ride and its intended goal. Your article backfilled her lame response with esoteric facts twisted to support her wild and erroneous answer, all in hopes of getting a lot of web media play for your story. And since we are all busily discussing your article here, it is indeed "Mission Accomplished" for the LATimes.

[vinylcam]

It's kind of funny to read all the posts from people who are naive enough to believe that Sarah Palin is stupid or ignorant. One reason is that invariably, they are people who are essentially, if not functionally, illiterate. Their spelling and grammar are befitting that of a 2nd grader - at best. These cretins have no high level knowledge or understanding of anything, much less an informed opinion, so they rely on 'information sources' that bolster their pre-conceived notions about virtually everything. Typical comment from one of them (in a voice which is a cross between Igor and Tattoo and Butt Head), "Yeah, Yeah, Sarah Palin is an Idiot, yeah she's real stooopid, heh-heh-heh".

The first time you entertain a thought, is the last moment you are a liberal.

[Alex]

"Journalists gleefully noted the spelling misteak."
Perhaps if more attention was paid to proofing articles, there wouldn't be so many mistakes.
The fundamental issue regarding Palin is that she spends a signifcant portion of her time pretending to be informed, but continues to make significant errors: for example, she claimed that Alaska handles 20% of America's energy, when it comprises approximately 2.6%.
Once again, Palin has proved that she has no business being in charge of a tourbus, let alone the US.
Palin specifically said he was riding to warn the British. While he may have told them that the militia was armed and waiting, his intention was to maintain secrecy during the stage of his alert.
What Malcom has done is precisely what the rest of the media does: twisting the facts to fit his own interpretation of events.

[Brian Stroup]

Um... that's not what she said. Now who looks stupid?

Sarah Palin AND Andrew Malcolm.

But that's nothing new.

[What the?]

Talk about selective journalism. Dude, spin this any way you want but I'll put my History Degree up against Sarah Palin ANYTIME.

[Robert]

Palin said "He who warned, uh, the British that they weren't going to be taking away our arms uh 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 and we were going to be armed."

And that has no relation to what the author of this article is saying.

[Harry]

Weren't all the people living in the Colonies at that time British citizens ?

[A]

I'm sure she meant warn OF the British. Either way, she has accomplished more as Governor of Alaska than Obama ever has. She also knows the difference between Memorial Day and Veteren's Day, and can pronounce Corpsman....

[Janna Kriens]

Andrew Malcolm, do you feel any shame at all? You know as well as I know what she wanted to say -- but couldn't -- due to her ignorance. That she got the story partly right, if, you take into account the events that took place after his famous ride, is pure luck.

[Preflyte]

When asking Palin what she reads, or what she was doing in Boston, is called a "Gotcha" question, because she can't even answer correctly something that simple, that means she is stupid.

It's not a gaffe. Not a set-up. Not a conspiracy.

Palin is stupid. Really. Just plain stupid. Meaning lacking or marked by lack of intellectual acuity.

She is also cunning. Which is not the same as intelligent; it's a substitute for smarts. It's devious, deceptive, sneaky, deceitful, crafty, vindictive, and sly like a fox. But not intelligent.

Those who defend her stupidity by re-writing history have a lot to answer for.

[Lt Scrounge]

Actually considering that the colonists WERE British, Revere was riding to warn the British, just not the guys wearing bright red jackets.

For those who have never been taught the truth about the war for independence, until the surrender of Cornwallis at Yorktown, both sides were British subjects. The signers of the Declaration of Independence were committing an act of treason and would've been executed had the colonists lost the war. George Washington was a British army officer as was Benedict Arnold. Both were successful when they rebelled against their government (the British Monarchy) but because Arnold returned to working for that government, he is considered a traitor while Washington (who was commanding an army of rebels) is considered a hero. Had the colonists lost the war, history would've depicted both men in the exactly opposite light.

History can be a funny thing. Human nature doesn't change. Those who don't learn the lessons that history has to offer, are destined to repeat the mistakes of their predecessors. Why else do you think the US Military has its officers read Sun Tzu's "The Art of War", a 2500 yr old text on military operations? Weapons may change, but the principles behind how to conduct military operations never change.

[Chuck]

Please tell me that the spelling mistake in the following line was an intentional use of irony: "Working from a placard, Quayle corrected one sixth-grader by telling him to add an "e" to "potato." Journalists gleefully noted the spelling misteak."

The fact that Paul Revere was captured and "warned" the British is understandable. What is not understood is her first incomprehensible and incohesive statement about bells, warning shots and that he rode to warn the British.

[CrPolk]

I nominate the La Times to be the new Ministry of Truth, since they seem so bent on rewriting history. Palin was a like deer caught in the headlights when that softball was lobbed at her and she clearly dropped it. Now I hear her supporters are trying to rewrite the Wikipedia article on Paul Revere to make her look better! But she just keeps "ringin' those bells" god bless her! I know she made some strong statements against the president and about supporting Israel but does the owner of the Times have to be this transparent? Leave the yellow journalism to the Murdoch rags.

[Ben]

Palin's wiring between mouth and brain is faulty. When interpreting Palin's intentions, it's best not to assume she is speaking literally, because she often tries to draw a loose narritive along a talking point, yet her extemporaneous speech ability is poor. So we are often left going, huh? Here is the correct interpretation of her words.
She was attempting to say that Revere's midnight ride accompanied by bells and shots served as a warning to the British that the revolutionaries were armed, and ready for a fight - just like the Republicans are ready for a fight in Nov 2012, blah blah.
Whether the Britsh were actually able to hear those shots, nor that this was not the purpose of the ride, is not relevant in her mind. Historical accuracy is for professors, historical parables are for politians.

[Karl]

This writer wrote misteak instead of mistake. You really have to question the intelligence of the writer on this article

[Dave Lucas]

Americans! We're great at making something out of nothing, time after time after time! LOL!

[Bryan]

"She is still and idiot."
"Posted by: me | June 06, 2011 at 04:25 AM"

I love you, me.

[DTK404]

You know how Andrew Malcolm said Sarah Palin was right about Paul Revere? Well, he did. Now, who looks stupid? Still Sarah Palin. And Andrew Malcolm. We here in this office haven't seen this much spin since we threw the cotton candy machine into the tilt-a-whirl at the state fair. I would have thought such a nuanced view of history could be conveyed without stammering and a serious scholar of the life of Paul Revere would be ready with such information at a moment's notice. It's obviously bedside reading for the non-non-faux-faux candidate. I would think a scholar would give the answer everybody knows ("The British are coming!") and then spice things up with a surprise ("Paul Revere was also captured and warned the British about the colonists' army.") It's true though, I see what's wrong with this. Everyone was British back them! Even the Chinese! Now, who looks stupid? The heat must have got to her. Me too, maybe. Or maybe it's all the natural gas blowing down from Alaska. But considering her other appearances, perhaps public speaking isn't her thing and we should forgive her for it. We should forgive a potential presidential nominee the inability to clearly answer direct questions.

[Matt Miller]

the author of this article didn't do their homework. What do y'all think; should we as Americans create a department of journalistic ethics and integrity so that the media will stop peddling this crap; or would that in effect create a department of propaganda, would it be constitutional?

[Doc]

Since when is kind of being coincidentally correct the same as knowing what you're talking about? I'm not saying that Palin is an idiot; but everyone should owe up to when they are incorrect and/or misquoted. She is constantly in the media and under public scrutiny, so if ever she is misinterpreted or misquoted or in the wrong - she should simply take the appropriate steps to clarify/correct these follies and put an end to it. Trying to justify these mishaps only fuels the fire.

[Attic Wit]

The author of this article is trying real hard to save Palin from looking stupid...but it's a huge stretch! Nice try....but you're not fooling anyone!

[Attic Wit]

The author of this article is trying real hard to justify Palin's incorrect statements...but it's a huge stretch...nice Try!

[jdm]

Palin said the reason for Paul Revere's ride was to warn the British. She also mentioned "warning shots" and "bells." All of that was wrong. NOW who looks stupid?

[Greg]

What all of you seem to forget is that until we actually broke away from Great Britain all residents of the Colonies were British citizens. Now, we all know that is not the point. This is clearly a case of someone mispeaking (like when candidate Obama said he'd visited 57 states and had one more to go) that is being made into something much bigger than what it is. So, to those of you who are saying that this "proves" Palin is an idiot, she was EXACTLY correct. Paul Revere warned British citizens. For those of you who find all the hubub amusing, remember that laughter is the best medicine!

[Joseph]

A lot of the commenters I think missed the point of the article. It wasn't to defend Palin. It was to point out that politicians make flubs and gaffes all the time, and sometimes these are blown out of proportion in ways that are quite distorted. If we recorded ourselves speaking all day, we would notice that we make little gaffes all the time. I'm a philosophy professor and can assure that I make stupid mistakes in front of my students occasionally. In fact, once I was visiting my mom's elementary school class and when a student asked my age, I accidentally told the student the wrong number. When I told them my birth year, a student did some quick math and realized I must have misspoken, which was embarrassing. But it happens.

If you don't like Palin, that's one thing. I don't like her because of her political views and her lack of experience. But don't pretend that the little mistakes that she, just like all of us, makes are any proof of something.

[Owkrender]

...the British were coming. Less known, obviously, is the rest of the evening's events in which Revere was captured by said redcoats and did indeed defiantly warn them of the awakened militia awaiting their arrival ahead and of the American Revolution's inevitable victory.

Palin's whacky point was that PR warned the British that the revolutionary forces were armed, and that they surely would not allow themselves to be dis-armed. All thanks to an as yet non existent 2nd Amendment.

[Patrick]

"Do you know how many dedicated leftists are going to spit up their coffee into their plates when they read it?"

Answer none...because she is A. Still wrong. and B. has made similar mistakes in the past.

[Patrick]

"how stupid is so successful."

Want to test that theory in the next election and see if Palin wins?

Yes puh-lease.

[Mike Charles]

I feel sorry for Mr. Malcolm who feels it is his job to clean up after the half term Gov. The woman had it all wrong and if he feels that he can rewrite history every time Palin makes mistake, then he needs lots of pens, ink and help.

[ron]

Who is "Andrew Malcom"? Certainly not a reporter of news.. Even the most cursory fact check on your opinion piece will find it more full of holes than a wheel of swiss cheese..

This is a classic example on Palin's part of "say what you mean" not, "mean what you say" She has even (predictably) mangled her own defense...

Palin said "Part of his ride was to warn the British," she said. "I know my American history."

The facts as written by Paul Revere in recollection of the events do not support in any way that his mission/ride was in part to warn the British...

Did he get captured? Yes..Did he tell the British the patriots were prepared? Yes..

Did he set out to warn the British?.. No...

Whoever Andrew's editor is should take responsibility and correct this for the public record...

[Mike Gorbell]

Far more disturbing than Palin's response are the number of illiterate comments here. I wonder what has happened to our schools?

[dmzrn]

For someone who is deemed irrelevant, the left sure is paying a lot of attention to Palin.

Smell the fear.

[Roger]

Palin is dumb and this writer is dumber. Nice try putting me in my place - now I know I'm smarter than Sarah Palin and the staff of the L.A. Times.

[ED CARTER]

I am surprised how forgiving I can be. I have been considering dropping the Times because of it's one sided coverage of many things in general & Sarah Palin in particular. This is the 3rd article in a week that is treating her fairly. Did you grow a conscience or did you look at your falling circulation? Either way congrats on growing a fair bone & I'll keep my subscription

[Bill Wood]

Andrew Malcolm is a political blogger for the L.A. Times, where his job is to craft every story in such a way that maximizes its chances of getting linked to by Matt Drudge. He is the primary editor of the Times' Top of the Ticket blog, which does not advertise itself as a conservative blog. But editor Malcolm is a former Laura Bush press aide and contributor Jimmy Orr was the "E-Communications Director" for the Bush White House.

Malcolm's snide disdain for every living liberal politician and media member would probably be no big deal if it weren't for the fact that he's the editor of an ostensibly objective L.A. Times news blog, not some punk writing for the Weekly Standard or BigGovernment.com. Malcolm notoriously finds poll numbers newsworthy only when they're good for Republicans. He's a reliable Sarah Palin apologist. But, again, his biggest crime -- besides his official portrait -- is that the Times allows him to masquerade as a regular news blogger instead of your bog-standard right-wing crank.

[KochToolin]

“He who warned, uh, the, 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, uh, we were gonna be secure and we were gonna be free and we were gonna be armed.”

History. Learn it.

[James]

WOW Talk about a defender stretching the .. wait this dude is just stretching, there is no truth in his lame defense of a statement that was factually wrong. That Mr. journalist is a period statement. There is no "but" to wrong.

[Lester Revere]

Of course, your defense of her gaffe is also wrong on facts, but what can you expect in an increasingly uneducated America?

[unclesmrgol]

Here's her words:"…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."

Here's Paul Revere's own words: "When we had got into the Road they formed a circle, and ordered the prisoners in the center, & to lead me in the front. We rid towards Lexington, a quick pace; They very often insulted me calling me Rebel &c. &c. after we had got about a mile, I was given to the Serjant to lead, he was Ordered to take out his pistol, (he rode with a hanger,) and if I ran, to execute the major's sentence; When we got within about half a mile of the meeting house, we heard a gun fired; the major asked me what it was for, I told him to alarm the country; he ordered the four prisoners to dismount, they did, then one of the officers dismounted and cutt the bridles, and saddles, off the Horses, & drove them away, and told the men they might go about their business; I asked the Major to dismiss me, he said he would carry me, lett the consequence be what it will.

He then Ordered us to march, when we got within sight of the meeting House, we heard a Volley of guns fired, as I supposed at the tavern, as an alarm; the major ordered us to halt, he asked me how for it was to Cambridge, and many more questions, which I answered: he then asked the Serjant, if his horse was tired, he said yes; he Ordered him to take my horse; I dismounted, the Serjant mounted my horse; they cutt the Bridles & Saddle & of the Serjants horse, & rode off, down the road.

I then went to the house where I left Adams and Hancock, and told them what had happined, their friends advised them to go out of the way; I went with them, about two miles across road: after resting myself I sett off with another man to go back to the Tavern; to enquire the News; when we go there, we were told the troops were, within two miles. We went into the Tavern to git a Trunk of papers, belonging to Col. Hancock, before we left the House, I saw the ministerial Troops from the Chamber window, we made haste, & had to pass thro' our Militia, who were on a green behind the meeting house, to the number as I supposed, about 50 or 60. I went thro them; as I passed I heard the commanding officer speake to his men to this purpose, lett the troops pass by, & don't molest them, without They begin first.'

[Whittster]

This woman is no idiot. If she was an idiot, she'd have her own show on MSNBC.

[Hillary Tanoff]

Sarah Palin's account of history was, in fact, wrong. Yes it is true that Revere somewhat warned the British. However, the mission of his ride was to warn other revolutionaries. It was only after he was caught that he somewhat taunted the British, boasting that the revolutionaries were going to be victorious. Palin portrays this as his mission, when really, he would not have warned the British if he had not been caught. Many experts, who have studied the following document and the letters that Paul Revere had written about his ride, agree that Palin had misinterpreted history. Paul Revere's ride was not to warn the British.

http://www.masshist.org/database/img-viewer.php?item_id=98&img_step=1&tpc=&pid=&mode=transcript&tpc=&pid=#page1

[DET]

For those who still insist Sarah Palin's an idiot, the facts of the ride (which are in many respects quite different from what we've been led to believe in Longfellow's poem, itself written more than 85 years later) will not matter. Unless one is a professional historian or at least a history geek, their understanding of the events is not likely to be any greater than Sarah's was. She may have fumbled on some details, but she still knows more about it than do most of the posters here, including me.

And let's not forget a certain political figure who thought that 200 years was 20 centuries, and that Arkansas was closer to Illinois than Kentucky is.

[Liam]

Obama's just as big of an idiot then. How many states did he visit on the campaign trail? 57? With one more still to go?

[Mutunus]

Revere told the British after he was captured? Sounds like he spilled the beans to me.

[Josh]

"What have you seen so far today, and what are you going to take away from your visit?" - wow, that's quite the 'gotcha' question.

[Diane F.]

This is an argument without water and does not compare to things like the Gore/Internet issue. She clearly relayed her story that he was riding and ringing bells to warn the British. This is wrong. He did warn the British after he was captured (you know, like a Hah, you may have gotten me but my friends are still out there and they will get you). So one of two things happened - she got it completely wrong and after the fact her spin doctors told her how to fix it or she was fed the whole story as a PR stunt and mixed it up and combined it since she doesn't really know it, she was just repeating it. Either way she is too dumb to do anything important.

[Glenn Truitt]

This is an excellent opportunity to apply Occam's Razor to the two possible explanations. Because either (a) Sarah Palin, in an apparently off-handed remark to a "gotcha" question, referenced some obtuse ancillary fact related to the nationally revered (pun intended) heroism and valor of one of our Founding Fathers, with regard to the interpretation of what happened FOLLOWING his famous ride, in a brilliantly disguised attempt to educate all of US about what we might have NOT KNOWN about this storied event - OR (b) she's a fool with a limited and cursory (at best) understanding of what she's talking about, regurgitating talking points and trying to twist otherwise widely known historical facts to address her misguided 2nd Amendment agenda. Now REALLY, what's the more likely explanation?

[Josh]

"What have you seen so far today, and what are you going to take away from your visit?" - So this is what constitutes a 'gotcha' question in today's media?