The Palin Apologists Strike Back!

Breaking my vow of ignoring any news concerning Palin, this one shared
by someone at work caught my attention.

http://blogs.forbes.com/rickungar/2011/06/04/the-palin-apologists-strike-back/

Rick Ungar
THE POLICY PAGE

The Palin Apologists Strike Back!

Jun. 4 2011 - 3:43 pm

Following the Sarah Palin playbook of never admitting error, the
ex-governor’s minions are busy flooding the Internet with ’proof’ that
Palin did not misspeak when suggesting that Paul Revere warned the
British that they would not be taking arms from the colonists during
his ride where he, apparently, rung bells and fired muskets.

The effort to back up Palin is based on taking bits and pieces of
facts surrounding the historic event that, when cut and pasted
together, work to make Palin look a little less befuddled than her
actual statement would indicate.

While I give them credit for the effort, I’m afraid that – to any
rational person – it is a lost cause.

Let’s set the historic record straight.

The first meme being pushed by the Palin acolytes is that Paul Revere
did, indeed, warn the British as to the troop levels of colonists
awaiting them.

Not true.

What is true is that Revere was briefly captured (along with two
others who managed to quickly escape) and held by the British while on
his now legendary ride. With a pistol aimed at his chest, and then his
head, Revere was forced to answer the questions put to him. He
answered by lying to his British captors, misleading them by
overstating the number of armed colonists awaiting the arrival of the
Regulars in an effort to give the enemy pause and confuse their
mission.

As made clear via Revere’s own letter setting forth the story of the
event (which is making the rounds of the conservative blogosphere),
and through any number of historic accounts, at no time did Revere
warn his captors of anything, or make any rousing speeches as to how
they would not be getting their hands on the colonists’ guns as
suggested by Gov. Palin.

Revere did what any good patriot would do in that circumstance – he
lied to the enemy to aid and protect his compatriots. Thus, when
Palin’s legion of defenders suggest that Revere warned the enemy ,
they are suggesting that he sold out his side.

Any American should be distressed at this effort to paint Paul Revere
as less of a patriot – all in the name of defending Sarah Palin’s
ridiculous remark.

To be clear, I do not believe that Governor Palin, in any way
whatsoever, sought to impugn Mr. Revere’s good reputation. It is her
supporters who are pushing the argument that she was accurate in her
statement by suggesting that Revere warned the British by telling them
about his ride and the militia troop strength. These are the people
who, in their zeal to protect their leader, are making a hero of the
Revolution into a traitor.

The next bit of fractured fairy tale being peddled by the Palinistas
suggests that while Revere may not have been literally motivated by
his desire to protect the colonists’ right to bear arms, this is what
it was all really about so no big deal that Palin didn’t get it
exactly right.

Wrong again.

First off, Revere’s mission took place at the behest of Dr. Joseph
Warren, a Boston leader of the revolutionary cause, for the purpose of
warning Samuel Adams and John Hancock – who were staying at the
Hancock home – that the British soliders were likely coming to arrest
them and that they would do well to get out of the house before they
were taken.

Further, while it is absolutely true that the British did have their
eye on the gunpowder stockpiles at Concord, Revere’s mission had
absolutely zero to do with this. He was all about getting to Adams and
Hancock while passing the word along the way of the coming arrival of
the British Regulars. Thus, using this bit of history to find some
basis in Palin’s remark that, “He who warned the British that they
weren’t going to be taking away our arms….” is as absurd as the
original statement and only serves to further highlight the same.

Finally, the apologists are pushing the story that Palin wasn’t
altogether wrong about the whole bells and musket- firing thing.

Giving the Governor the benefit of the doubt, I suspect what Palin has
done is take the story of Israel Bissell and garble it up with the
Paul Revere adventure to come up with the imagery that would bolster
her point.

Bissell is an unsung hero of the Revolutionary War who, independent of
Paul Revere, had been sent to warn the colonists that the war had
begun. Bissell accomplished his mission by riding into towns, ringing
the church bell and firing his musket to get the attention of the
residents so that he could pass along his message.

Which brings us to the real point.

The one thing the Palin defenders might well be right about is that
Governor Palin was not involved in a ‘gaffe’ at all.

Rather, there are two more likely explanations.

The first is that Palin, who had attended a presentation dealing with
these topics just prior to her statement, could not manage to focus
during the entire presentation and only got bits and pieces. She then
put the parts that she remembered together to come up with her
interpretation of events.

But I don’t think that this is what happened at all as I suspect Palin
is fully capable of focusing on the lecture.

I think that, in typical Sarah Palin form, she took the more colorful
parts of a number of stories and threw them all together to support
her narrative that the start of the Revolutionary War was all about
the colonists right to bear arms. She wasn’t going to let the details
of history get in the way of a good story where she could string a
bunch of words and bits and pieces of disconnected stories together to
reach her intended, “it’s all about the guns” message.

I fully support Governor Palin’s right to pursue her right to bear
arms message. But does she really need to mangle our history in the
effort to do so?

One final note in response to the many who have sent emails
excoriating me for not, in the earlier piece I wrote on this subject,
pointing out President Obama’s gaffes- despite the fact that the piece
had nothing to do with President Obama.

Many politicians, of all political parties, make mistakes in speeches.
That would certainly include the President and, even more certainly,
the Vice-President.

But what they all tend to have in common is that, once the mistake is
brought to their attention, they apologize for their error and set the
record straight.

I can only think of two politicians on the scene today who do otherwise.

Michele Bachmann simply clams up after some of her super-goofs and
moves on, preferring to rely on the flub being forgotten when the news
cycle passes.

Sarah Palin, on the other hand, likes to double-down and dig the hole
deeper. Not only does she not apologize for mistakes, she drags it out
by defending the errors and encouraging her followers to do the same.
She knows that her people believe pretty much anything she says so
accuracy is not a high priority to her.

If this is acceptable to you –fine.

Personally, I would prefer our supposed leaders expose the public to
actual history rather than the version that suits their political
message.

-- 
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot