Top of the Ticket

Political commentary from Andrew Malcolm

« Previous Post | Top of the Ticket Home | Next Post »

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

Sarah Palin

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 Paul Revere thinks about something paulreverefactsdotcomrepeating 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.Sarah Palin boards her bus 6-1-11

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 Obama watches Chrysler employee anthony davis work on assembly line 6-3-11hole.

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 () | Archives (805)

The comments to this entry are closed.

Some of you morons are completely missing the point. Why are you missing the point? Simple. You hate Sarah Palin with irrational fervor. So, you perform the equivalent of act of plugging your ears and singing "lahlahlah..I can't hear you!" like a child in primary school.I don't care for Obama, but I am fully capable of seeing petty attacks for what the are. The media is not unbiased and there is no such thing as journalistic integrity. They lie, cheat, and steal to get their agenda strengthened. Both sides do it, and you are a fool if you believe everything you read or hear on the news. This was a great article. I don't often say that. The point is that you are all lining up to be duped into these ridiculous stories because the media knows that the average idiot will let it affect their voting. They take things out of context, they plant ideas of "what if" instead of reporting the facts, they edit, slant, and scheme. Wake up.

Yes, there may be people out there that think she's..."misinformed" for the wrong reasons. But that doesn't make her any less ignorant. Are you telling me that she got more things right about the tale than she did wrong?

She kind of has a history of doing these things. People don't hate her for her looks, you know. It's a constant unawareness of, not only our country's history, but the modern world that frustrates people.

Please spare us YOUR asinine interpretation of a moron.

Thanks.


Yes..Palin was right..

But you won't see in the news Obama gaffes of the week:

1. Calling the US Naval Academy the USS Naval Academy in a PREPARED speech.

2. In same speech "... to serve as Commander-in-Chief of one of the finest fighting forces the world has ever known." One of them, huh? Are there others?


3 Chomping on gum throughout the ceremony..then playing golf for the 70th time since becoming President..

So please people..let's not allow media to control your thinking..becuz that's what they are attempting to do..

I see the "bells" and "shots" part of Revere's "ride" is obscure to some. Perhaps a wiki excerpt will help: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Revere )

"Everything Revere told his British captors had a single goal, to move the soldiers away from Lexington, where he had left Hancock and Adams. Revere had reason to believe the patrol's mission was to arrest the two Patriot leaders. He and other captives taken by the patrol were still escorted east toward Lexington, until about a half mile from Lexington they heard a gunshot. The British major demanded Revere explain the shot, and Revere replied it was a signal to "alarm the country". A few minutes later, came a flurry of shots that seemed to alarm the British captors even beyond the panic they were already in. As the group drew closer to Lexington, the town bell began to clang rapidly, to which one of the captives proclaimed to the British soldiers "The bell's a'ringing! The town's alarmed, and you're all dead men!" The British soldiers gathered and decided not to press further towards Lexington, to instead free the prisoners and to head back to warn their commanders."

Sounds like Sarah has a better handle on this than many here.

Palin said Revere warned the British not to take our weapons. That, my friend, is as stupid as it gets. And no amount of buts or ifs will change that.

An "amateur media gotcha question"? Seriously? The guy asked what she was going to take away from her visit to Boston. She volunteered the rambling, discombobulated answer entirely on her own. I'm a high school history teacher, and I can assure you that at best her answer would earn a 10% on a daily quiz. She may have been correct on the specific point that Revere gave information to the British - under interrogation at gunpoint which hardly qualifies as "warning" them - but the entirety of her answer did not demonstrate understanding of the events or of their historical significance.

Why is it that the media is so quick to jump on a Conservative/Republican for (supposedly) making a gaffe (even when--as in this case--they didn't, and it was--as usual--the media that got it wrong.) Yet when it's a Lib Democrat who sticks his foot in his mouth (like when the current dunce in the White House once said that the U.S. had 57 states), they all look the other way & hope everyone will forget about it? (And they wonder why the media is losing its audience & readership? Not to mention credibility...)

Once again Palin proves she is only as qualified as Joe Biden is to be President, Lord help us.

At the end you say such gaffes can hurt a politician's chances, and you are completely incorrect.

The media chooses whether or not report, and repeatedly report, any particular issue.

Howard Dean let out a whoop and CNN, Fox and MSNBC chose to replay that hoot 800 times the first weekend. They chose to do it. Nobody forced them to do it. They chose to end his campaign for President. Until that point, Dean was ahead in all but one state wide poll. He was beating Kerry in Massachusetts, too.[1]

The media chooses to make an issue of "gaffes" (the word used to damn Biden) or not.

[1] Not every poll ever taken had Dean in the lead, but each State which had a poll had him ahead in the most recent poll except one. I think it was Edwards ahead in North Carolina.

Bottom line: If any of you posters taught American History in middle school, and called upon Little Miss Sarah Palin to stand up and tell the rest of the class who Paul Revere was and what he did, would you accept her answer as satisfactory?

If you answered 'yes' then you're the reason why people like Palin are allowed to rise to national prominence while remaining completely ignorant of history.

It's not a matter of misspeaking or "a slip of the tongue". Her tone was that of a lecturer ("He who warned the British..." Who even talks like that in public?) and yet her answer came out sounding like some kid who didn't do the required reading for homework trying to pull something out of their behind.

Oh Sarah Palin, always putting her foot in her mouth and then stomping around trying to prove she never makes mistakes.

http://oscarandozcar.com/

Nice try Andrew, but now you're wrong as well. I do hope you print an article that states this, otherwise where is you integrity. It's such a long article, but strangely her whole quote is absent. That's grade A journalism there. I called you out on this yesterday and you were silent. Now I realize that backing her up like this makes you a bit more popular and it is the slow summer months, but you need to correct this.

Since you didn't I will add the quote. Here is Sarah Palin's quote 'He who Warned, the British that they weren't going to be taking away our arms By ringing those bells and my riding his horse through town.'
Now I will give Sarah an A for effort the way I would give any student, but you still get an F on the report for making things up.

Furthermore, Paul never talked to the British about guns, specifically. So for Palin to say he said “you won’t be taking our arms” is also not factual. The Second Amendment was not yet in existence.

More evidence that this "tour" is really just a crash-course in American History for the dullard from Wasilla: She's back to writing on her hand again.

http://www.republicansforobama.org/node/9405

btw: The above link is from a site called "Republicans For Obama". Yes, you read that right.

The only thing successfully argued in this article is that Sarah Palin needs to borrow other people's credibility to get by and the author has greatly diminished his by offering it!

Huh. I didn't hear her say the "primary intent" was to warn the British. She said he did warn the British, he did. She said he wanted to make sure America was free. He clearly did want to.

Palin was WRONG, Mr. Malcom. Your apologist screed on this woman's behalf is pathetic. Shame on you.

I love all the Liberals on here getting pissed off that someone who wasnt a HARVARD graduate attempting to educate witless reporters on history. It seems too many in the Liberal mindset are willing to rewrite history to make Sarah Palin look foolish. How sad is that.

Good grief people, don't you have anything better to do??

Who you can tell me (without time to research and in a noisy crowd while your mind is on who knows how many other things) what they learned on the 67th day of school in the 8th grade. Now. And it had better be word for word because I'm sure it was important!

No? Then zip it.

I appreciate Mr. Malcom's article about how the media often rushes to get something out and misquotes someone or does not allow a statement to appear in context and thus create a scenario that is not quite accurate. The media also often exaggerates the importance of a quote, or action, thus making more of a story out of something than actually is there. Then our politicians and talking heads take the less than accurate story and spin it further. I deplore this. Mrs. Palin's Boston misstep was not one of these.

Let's start with the idea that she was faced with a "gotcha" question. It is very true that politicians often face "gotcha" questions, and Sarah Palin seems to draw more than her share of those kinds of questions. The question she received on Thursday was not a "gotcha" question. Here is what she was asked, "What have you seen so far today [in Boston], and what are you going to take away from your visit?" Now, if there was a softball question, here was one. Answer: "We saw great American history." or "The greatness of the men who sacrificed everything to bring us freedom, men like Paul Revere."

Her answer was rambling and slightly jumbled, probably because she was not expecting it and was trying to think of something off the cuff, but still on message. The facts in her answer were mostly incorrect. I don't believe this was from any ignorance on her part, but rather because in a spontaneous moment with a drive to make certain the messages she is trying to send are heard, she stumbled a bit on accuracy.

My biggest complaint is she refuses to say, "Oops, I flubbed that one a little." I am ok, with folks making a error or two, but come on, own up to it and move on.

www.canigetawordin.com

The author of this article is INCORRECT!! Sarah Palin CLEARLY states that Paul Revere rode through town on his horse "warning the British" that they will not steal our arms. She never said that he was captured and spoke to the British then. He IN FACT did warn the towns people that the British were coming. He also DID NOT ring a bell or fire warning shots...he carried a lantern. Andrew Malcom....YOU and your editor are the true IDIOTS here for publishing garbage!!!

Mr Malcolm, nice try, but you are completely wrong about dear, misinformed Sarah.

It is idiotic to suggest that Palin knew this fact of Revere's ride (I remember hearing about his capture in 3rd grade or so) and that this is what she was alluding to when she opened her considerable pie hole.

Palin has no clue what thoughts (or what passes for thoughts) reside in her head at any given moment; she relies on apologists like the author of this poorly reasoned whitewash to respond for her failure to cogitate with any degree of accuracy or insight.

Truth is all about intention. Was it Paul Revere's intention to warn The British, or his fellow revolutionaries? Watch Sarah Palin's response, then look up the question that was asked of Mrs. Palin that that generated her Paul Revere poppycock. Sarah avenged: "In a shout-out, gotcha type of question that was asked of me . . .”
The question was "What did you learn today?" THAT’S a mainstream media "gotcha type of question?" Really? When exactly did they stop teaching history in U.S. schools? Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts. As I said before, Sarah Palin is the Paris Hilton of politics. Oops, that’s kind of an insult to Paris Hilton.

These morons who spend their time trying to smear Palin need to get a life. How about you redirect your energy at Obama and ask the important questions like, What are you doing about the economy? What about jobs? Why are we borrowing more money to give to foreign countries? Why are you trying to raise the debt ceiling when you said on the campaign trail that's stupid? Why aren't you cutting unnecessary spending? Why are you giving out waivers on healthcare to those who donated to your election campaign? It's time to pull your head out of the sand people, look at what's happening to our country and NOT allow ourselves to be distracted by the circus the MSM is trying to create with Palin.

You write: "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."

The question the reporter asked her was: "What are you going to take away from your visit?" That is not a "gotcha" question. And although the response you suggest ("You're kidding, right?") would have seemed like an odd answer, there was no reason for her to feel compelled to hold forth on Paul Revere's ride. But seeing as how she chose to offer her interpretation of that historical event, it is fair for news outlets to cover and critique it (or, in your case, defend it).

Sarah Palin needs to accept the fact that she cannot lay each and every mistake she makes at the feet of the "lamestream" media. This wasn't a trap; it was a gaffe. Learn how to say 'I messed that up' - not double down and then direct your supporters to edit the relevant Wikipedia page.

What troubles me about Sarah Palin is not her intelligence or lack thereof, it is her inability (or refusal) to acknowledge having made an honest mistake. It happens to all of us! Do us all a favor: own it and move on.

Mr. Malcolm: The fact that revere was captured and that he did warn the British that there was an organized and armed resistance ready to face them does not back up Palin's words, which were in fact a misinterpretation. If she was correct that Revere did, upon his capture, after his ride, warn the British, she's correct circumstantially. And it still doesn't make any sense of her repeated statements about "arms" which are also incorrect in the context of the political rhetoric of the time.

And before you post an article like this, you might want to reconsider the flailing attacks on unrelated political characters and incidents which both detracts and distracts from your argument. If I had hired you to write for the LA Times I would tear off your credentials in person. Stop publishing your writing.

Nice "spelling misteak" you threw in there.

But you are still wrong, as everyone else is saying. Palin very specifically said Revere went riding while ringing his bell and firing warning shot "to the British to warn them that we are here and they aren't gonna take our guns." It was not manufactured in any way except by her own willful ignorance of our countries history. It is no different than Michelle Bachmann claiming the shot heard round the world was in NH. Was that manufactured by the press?

If Palin was not flat out wrong, why go on Fox news and claim that is was a "gotcha question?" There is no such thing as a gotcha question, because if you can't see far enough to know that the way you answer a question will reflect upon your character then you are too dumb to be in a position of power anyway.

Do you even know the question she was asked?

The question was essentially, "How was your day and what will you take away from it?"

LOL!! Gotcha!! So she screws up and answers a simple question by trying to make herself look smart, and it is the presses fault she failed miserably? Give me a break. It is the presses job to ask people questions that they might have a tough time answering. It was not a gotcha question for Fox to ask Hermann Cain about the Palestinian right of return...even though he answered in an ignorant fashion (not that his answer was wrong, but he retracted it anyway).

What makes Sarah Palin different? Why can't she admit when she screws up?

Sorry Malcolm, that just won't wash. Revere did not ride off to warn the Brits with guns blazing about trying to take our arms, as Palin bizarrely claimed. He rode off to warn John Hancock and Sam Adams the Redcoats were coming to arrest them. That once captured he gamely bluffed a threat does not make Palin correct, nor did she ever mention anything of the kind. In order for you and Palin to be correct Revere - despite all his efforts to keep his ride secret and not be captured - must indeed have intended to be captured by the British just so he could make that ineffectual bluff.

So in your viewthis is a "gotcha" question: "What have you seen so far today [in Boston], and what are you going to take away from your visit?". And to this you suggest she answer "You're kidding, right?" Wow. Just how open ended and simple do the questions have to be for her to answer them without her and supporters like you feeling abused?

Can we, ALL OF US, in discussions of such folk lore remember the true fact that Israel Bissell made the LONG ride that went through 3 states. Paul was a footnote in the warnings. By the time he had spilled his guts, did it really change events that followed? WHO CARES!?!? They lost, We WON, and the cornerstone for the tale has been completely sidelined from the story. As far as Sarah, well, all the defense of her statement, imao, doesn't make up for the fact that she's still continuing the fallacy that Paul Revere made the big ride and should be remembered by us all when the man who REALLY made a difference has been lost in translation. Seems fitting I suppose. HALF of the globe was named after a mispronunciation of an Italian Navigator/Journalist's first name: Amerigo Vespucci. We so love to rip things off, get things wrong, decide it's right, and preach to the world how "right," we are. I guess Sarah fits right into Amerigo's, pardon me, AMERICA'S dream.

Palin is a very smart idiot laughing all the way to the bank. She may not be able to speak a complete sentence of more than a few words that is factual and makes sense. She may not be well educated or have a lot of brain power, but she knows how to suck every dollar out of her celebrity. That she could get a single bit of information correct during her speaking tour, does not change the fact that she gets oh so many things wrong.

Just to let you know. I am NOT and have never been a Democrat. I mistakenly voted for Palin for Alaska Governor, back before she opened her mouth so much and let us know that she really is not qualified. I am glad she left Alaska. You can have her.

This is a very, um, generous reading of Palin's clear gaff and fumble.

But by the way, in the bit about Qualye, "spelling misteak" should no doubt be "spelling mistake," yes?

Your kidding right? So Paul Revere was warning the British that the British were coming? Good GOD. To what length will the TB-ers go to spin this so their Queen of Idiocy doesn't look quite so stupid?! Facts are facts - Just check out any history book, Encyclopedia, the Paul Revere House in Boston and read his own account below.

Revere, in the most complete account he gave of his famous ride, a letter written about 1798, stated that he rode to warn fellow rebels Samuel Adams and John Hancock that the British were coming to arrest them. This transcription, Revere's spelling mistakes and all, is posted on the website of the Massachusetts Historical Society:

On Tuesday evening, the 18th, it was observed, that a number of Soldiers were marching towards the bottom of the Common. About 10 o'Clock, Dr. Warren Sent in great haste for me, and beged that I would imediately Set off for Lexington, where Messrs. Hancock & Adams were, and acquaint them of the Movement, and that it was thought they were the objets.
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."
"On the way to Lexington," states the brief history, "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!'

So stop trying to twist the facts so Palin won't look like such a Moron. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck - it's a DUCK.

Sarah Palin thinks "One if by land, Two if by Sea" was a buy 2 get one 1 free sale at Barney's.

I don't think the author is going to be out of a job with 673 comments on the story so far and almost 19,000 facebook postings. Those of you who have corrected his spelling have incorrectly misspelled words also.
Let's just accept the fact that this story is thumbs up for all the attention it's been getting.

Obama claimed he had campaigned in all 57 states. I have not met anyone past the fourth grade who could not tell you that there is 50 states in the USA. It is almost as common as knowing what town you are living in or what school you are attending.

Very, Very, Strange!

And then he is caught on film bowing to a saudi king. It does not matter who runs against him in 2012, he will lose in the biggest landslide election ever seen.

Obama hates the businesses that have supported him throughout his taxpayer funded life.

She spoke of the ride, not of the capture. She and you are both tools.

People. It's more than obvious, given a half-second of thought, that the bell ringing and warning shots are metaphoric and colorful language. Palin has set herself up as an entertainer, and at that she does very well.

What's next, someone will transcribe her account of "to arms" into "two arms"? How stupid does that make the story sound when taken literally?

America is set upon concerning themselves about "where in the world" is Sarah Palin and wondering how big a sock was stuffed in Anthony Weiner's underwear when there are matters of real substance passing us by every minute.

Snap out of it!

Loved the insertion of this in the body of the story -
quite a typo...

"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."

Paul Revere did not ride through the streets of Boston firing shots and ringing bells. He also did not "hang out" in the North church when he was a teenager. He did, however, bluff the British after he was captured. Warn means to To make aware in advance of actual or potential harm, danger, something you do to protect someone. He did not "warn" the British. If Paul Revere had warned the British (which he did not) he would have been guilty of treason.

Okay, this article is going a little too far. Yes, Revere was captured and told the British that they better not mess with the colonists, but Palin is wrong about the particulars, and Dan Quayle was an idiot, and for that matter Pres, George H.W. Bush should have known the new President of Pakistan. The leader of the "free" world isn't kept up to date on that? This article is just another attempt by the media to legitimize Palin. Sorry guys, she's not even close to presidential.

Since real history is not taught in school these days, especially American history (which is being erased by socialist indoctrination), perhaps all you so called educated libs should read "Paul Revere's Ride" by David Hackett Fischer. This book gives the whole story, the background of the riders, the plan laid long before the actual ride etc.. You probably don't know that Revere made many rides in the cause of liberty. There were elaborate plans in place to warn colonists long before the famous ride. And Paul Revere did ride to warn about the British "Regulars" who were dispatched to burn the stores of arms in Concord and seize Adams and Hancock. I think her meaning was that Revere was alerting the colonists as a way of warning the British (Regulars) not to lay a hand on the Concord store of arms.
So, read and learn before accusing another person of being stupid lest you look the fool.

you cannot be serious. We shun Education and accept normality? Mediocrity. Is this the person you want running your country. Sarah plain and tall? We have amazing people at top level universities STRIVING to learn and uplift humanity. voraciously studying the history of mankind so we wont make the same mistakes of our predecessors. Do you think Sarah Palin knows who Marcus Aurelius was? when did being stupid, become acceptable. I want the smartest most eloquent charismatic trustworthy, proven, person representing my country not someone who got a degree in journalism from Alaska. Perception is reality could you imagine what the rest of the world would think of America if we allow this "soccer mom" shooting Helpless animals from a helicopter in any elected position ever again. shrouded in ignorance, doesn't make you a good political leader, nor does it make you a good human.

Andrew, I LOVE the headline. hahaha It's awesome. Ppl are haters to begin with. Give them an room to wiggle.. and BAM. Hater-gate is a go.

"We saw where Paul Revere hung out as a teenager, which was something new to learn. &, you know, he who warned the British that they weren't going to be taking away our arms by ringing those bells & making sure, as he is riding his horse through town, to send those warning shots & bells, that we were going to be secure & we were going to be free." Sara Palin


Everyone one makes a verbal gaff now and then, but this was a bizarre mix of right wing talking points melded into a convoluted revisionist history

One wonders if Sara Palin looked more like Janet Napolitano if she would have ever won her first election, much less made it on to the national stage.

I'm a democrat, but I look forward to the day when the likes of Palin & Michele Bachmann leave the stage and the republicans field some women of substance.


All those bells and not one word about lanterns.


JIM LEHRER: What do you -- what do you make of Sarah Palin's bus tour to historic sites?

DAVID BROOKS: She's in the media business. She's in our business, except for she has a bus...So -- and so, you know, I see no evidence she's going to run. I think every second we spend on her is a second of our lives we will never have back. So, it's sort of temporary euthanasia.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/jan-june11/sandb_06-03.html

I appreciate Andrew Malcom setting the record straight on Palin in this column. Palin, in my opinion, purposely picks obscure, unconventional historical facts to snooker the media, much as she has done here. They think everything happened in 1776, so she picks a 1773 event, for example, knowing they'll print something derisive that they'll have to retract later as she transports the "dumb" label from her to them. I don't think she'll suffer - as others have - from the mythology created by the media about her alleged lack of intelligence. She now has an arsenal of factoids regarding the media's own collective stupidity to throw back at them. I'm sure she would have outed Quayle's teacher. The more important story: Perhaps opponents can hit below the belt, but the media's job is to get to the truth [as Malcom has done here], not to play gotcha. Instead the main-stream media more and more is playing partisan politics and prides itself on being the media arm of the Democratic [capital D] Party. This will ultimately - as ratings and circulation numbers show - marginalize the media. Example: I found this article through Rush Limbaugh's web site. However, thanks to this article, I feel more optimistic about the L.A. Times.

 
« | 1 2 ... 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 | »

Connect

Recommended on Facebook


Advertisement

In Case You Missed It...

About the Columnist
A veteran foreign and national correspondent, Andrew Malcolm has served on the L.A. Times Editorial Board and was a Pulitzer finalist in 2004. He is the author of 10 nonfiction books and father of four. Read more.
President Obama
Republican Politics
Democratic Politics


Categories


Archives
 



Get Alerts on Your Mobile Phone

Sign me up for the following lists: