Palin beats the LameStream Media again

Posted by: Barthélemy Barbancourt

Tagged in: Untagged 

Experts back Sarah Palin’s historical account

You betcha she was right!

Sarah Palin yesterday insisted her claim at the Old North Church last week that Paul Revere “warned the British” during his famed 1775 ride — remarks that Democrats and the media roundly ridiculed — is actually historically accurate. And local historians are backing her up.

In fact, Revere’s own account of the ride in a 1798 letter seems to back up Palin’s claim. Revere describes how after his capture by British officers, he warned them “there would be five hundred Americans there in a short time for I had alarmed the Country all the way up.”

Boston University history professor Brendan McConville said, “Basically when Paul Revere was stopped by the British, he did say to them, ‘Look, there is a mobilization going on that you’ll be confronting,’ and the British are aware as they’re marching down the countryside, they hear church bells ringing — she was right about that — and warning shots being fired. That’s accurate.”

When will the media admit that Palin is far smarter than they are?

Trackback(0)
Comments (16)add comment
Ed Salden
...
written by Ed Salden , June 06, 2011

Blind pig finds truffle.


Ed Salden
...
written by Ed Salden , June 06, 2011

Smarter than the media? Who would brag about that? I have a cat that's smarter than the media.

He's smarter than Palin, too.



Elmer
sure...
written by Elmer , June 06, 2011

Palin has the kind of nuanced mind that distinguishes a deliberate warning of militia leaders about British troops moving across the Charles River, from an accidental warning of British soldiers that militias could respond to the march of those soldiers (as if they couldn't imagine that). It's a lot like Bachmann's geographical subtlety with Concord NH vs Concord MA. Mental flexibility is important.


Elmer
meanwhile
written by Elmer , June 06, 2011

The brilliant Rep Tony "Boner" Weiner is now crying at a press conference on national TV. God has blessed us with fine buffoons.


Woody
...
written by Woody , June 06, 2011

I guess Sarah Palin getting something right is reason to yell from the highest hilltop. Congratulations Sarah you done well.


Sequel
...
written by Sequel , June 06, 2011

I've never understood the fixation of hate for Palin.
For some nothing can be said about her that is not an insult.



Sequel
...
written by Sequel , June 06, 2011

Personal insults. Never policy disputes, just cheap shots at her and her children.


Elmer
not an insult
written by Elmer , June 06, 2011

I'm not going to insult her. I'm disappointed that she hasn't taken the time since '08 to even get familiar with the Parson Weems-Whig history stories of the country. She does not appear to be up on basic facts and her policy statements sound like slogans. She may be a good mother and have a sharp mind, but she seems hollow to me (and many others). She also seems to be an ordinary opportunistic politician. I think we deserve better candidates.


Woody
Bingo Elmer
written by Woody , June 06, 2011

You hit the nail on the head. In the event we get the 3 AM phone call inquiring into Paul Reveres revolutionary communiques then shes our gal! Run Sarah run!!!


Nobody
...
written by Nobody , June 06, 2011

Elmer you miss the point. Sara seems real and stresses common sence. People Hated RR too. He had those qualitys also.




Elmer
real?
written by Elmer , June 06, 2011

Nobody, you and I are probably seeing her in different lights. I don't think she's genuine (resigning from the governorship in the interest of her family, then going on book tours, and stump tours presumably to be with "tha kids, ya know", "sellin' lotsa books, ya know"). She seems shallow to me, and that impression is reinforced almost every time she opens her mouth. Sorry.

Don't get a woody, Woody. I think she's as incompetent as Obama.

How about that Weiner, though? Think he'll get a fair shake? Or will the Ethics Committee grill him?



 tim-The Dyslexic Blogger
...
written by tim-The Dyslexic Blogger , June 07, 2011

na I think they will roast him or maybe boil him


Woody
Don't get a woody Woody?
written by Woody , June 07, 2011

Geez Elmer thanks (LOL). The big difference between Sarah Palin and Obama is whether or not the populace believes she is qualified to be President. A recent poll, from Rasmussen no less, indicates that less than 30 percent of the general public believes she is qualified to be President. Obamas numbers are much higher. I don't think the Republican party will let the tea party hijack the Presidential nomination the way they did some of the 2010 Senate races.


Sequel
...
written by Sequel , June 07, 2011

I don't think she'll run. What does that mean about her being too stupid to run?


Woody
...
written by Woody , June 07, 2011

Maybe she'll be smart enough to realize she has no chance. Our country and the Republican party deserve a stronger candidate.


Barry
To: real?
written by Barry , June 08, 2011

I love when people talk about Palin resigning from her governership but seem to have a large blind spot for Obama who quit the senate. He spent enough time there to vote present and have a few cups of coffee right??



Write comment
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy