I  like Palin's gutsy approach and --almost always--  moral  clarity. And 
she is smart.
However, she seems to think that it isn't necessary to do much or any  
homework
about relevant history, major political issues, or economics. She knows  
practical
politics, reasonably well, maybe very well, but that's about it.
 
What various talking heads have said rings true to me. In 2008 she wasn't  
really
ready for the Top Job. But everyone assumed that these past couple of years 
she would get busy and study like crazy, as if she was a  student in a one 
woman 
grad school. That was how much catching up she needed to do.
 
Instead she did "other things."  Nothing wrong with those other  things, 
its just that
they all seem to be irrelevant to the presidency. Its great that she is an  
outdoors 
person and likes Alaska's wilderness and all of that. More power to her. 
But WTH does that have to do with the White House ?
 
She is, for me, a Major Disappointment. No idea who I may vote for.
Pawlenty, from the ( very ) little I have heard sounds OK, but at  the 
moment
this means almost nothing. For a while I liked Michelle Bachman, but she  
also
has Sarah Palin's problem, weak knowledge base. She is up to speed in
maybe 4 or 5 areas, but that's about it, and for the WH you need 
to know maybe 10 or 15 subject / issues  areas. Far more than 
at the  " headline level."  Some depth, por favor.
 
Gingrich once upon a time had the smarts and savoir faire, but I do  believe
those days are over. Well, maybe not, but out of the gate he has been a 
flop so far.
 
Unenthused in Oregon
Billy
 
=======================================================
 
 
 
 
 
 
message dated 6/6/2011 4:09:54 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
[email protected] writes:

This appears to be another "I can see Russia  from my house." thing. It 
will create enough controversy to hurt her and  again, it will be her own 
fault. The presidential campaign has become a  popularity beauty contest.  I 
couldn't vote for her because there  are just too many things that indicate if 
elected she would be as much  of as disaster as the last few presidents. If 
the GOP wants to run a  woman then they should get behind a responsible 
person like Kay Bailey  Hutchinson. Her "no nonsense" approach compared to the 
others in the  field is preferable. She gets my vote right out of the gate. 
Maybe the  GOP's corporate handlers think she won't do enough for them because 
it  certainly isn't a lack of experience and political know-how on her  
part.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?



---  On Mon, 6/6/11, [email protected] <[email protected]>  wrote:


From:  [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: [RC] dontcha just  love revisionist history ?
To:  [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Date:  Monday, June 6, 2011, 4:40 PM


Historical illiteracy is a wonderful thing.
Works like a charm for politicians--
 
 
WPost
06/06/2011 
 
Sarah Palin’s midnight ride, twice  over
By Glenn Kessler
 
“We saw where Paul Revere hung out as a teenager, which  was something new 
to learn. 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.” 
— Former Alaska governor Sarah Palin, June 2
 "You know what? I didn’t mess up about Paul Revere. Here  is what Paul 
Revere did. He warned the Americans that the British were  coming, the British 
were coming, and they were going to try to take  our arms and we got to make 
sure that we were protecting ourselves and  shoring up all of our 
ammunitions and our firearms so that they  couldn’t take it. But remember that 
the 
British had already been  there, many soldiers for seven years in that area. 
And part of Paul  Revere’s ride — and it wasn’t just one ride — he was a 
courier, he was  a messenger. Part of his ride was to warn the British that 
were  already there. That, hey, you’re not going to succeed. You’re not  
going to take American arms. You are not going to beat our own  well-armed 
persons, individual, private militia that we have. He did  warn the British. 
And 
in a shout-out, gotcha type of question that was  asked of me, I answered 
candidly. And I know my American history.”  
— Palin, June 5

Lots of readers have asked us to weigh in on this little  kerfuffle 
regarding Paul Revere’s 1775 ride, so we will do a quick  disentanglement of 
Palin’
s words. Over the course of two  statements, the former Alaska governor got 
some history wrong and some  history right, but she presented it in such a 
free-form manner that it  left her the butt of jokes and blogosphere 
commentary. So let’s take a  tour through her language and compare it with the 
historical  facts.

 
Palin, Take One 

“He who warned, uh, the British that they weren’t  going to be taking away 
our arms . . . ” 
Paul Revere is best known for warning prominent colonists  (who were still 
technically British citizens) that British troops were  coming to arrest 
them. As _the Web site of the Paul Revere  House_ 
(http://paulreverehouse.org/ride/real.html)  says: “On the evening of April 18, 
1775, Paul Revere  was 
sent for by Dr. Joseph Warren and instructed to ride to Lexington,  
Massachusetts, to warn Samuel Adams and John Hancock that British  troops were 
marching to arrest them.”
   (http://paulreverehouse.org/ride/real.html) However, to be charitable to 
Palin, later that  evening, Revere was arrested by a British patrol. In 
Revere’s _own account of the  incident_ 
(http://www.masshist.org/database/img-viewer.php?item_id=99&img_step=1&tpc=&pid=&mode=transcript&tpc=&pid=#page1)
 , 
written in 1798, he said he warned that 500  Americans militiamen would be 
awaiting them: “I told him;  and added, that their troops had catched 
aground in passing  the River, and that There would be five hundred Americans 
there  in a short time, for I had alarmed the Country all the way  up.”
Still, it seems a stretch to believe that Palin was focusing on  this 
relatively obscure part of the Revere story, rather than his  midnight ride 
(“He 
who warned, uh, the British . . . ”). Palin also  seems to suggest that 
Revere’s midnight ride was mostly in defense of  the as-yet-unwritten _Second 
Amendment of the  U.S. Constitution_ 
(http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/second_amendment) . That’s not 
right.

 “. . . 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.” 
This is wrong. Revere did not use bells and warning shots, though  others 
may have. Revere was supposed to be quiet. He famously  used two lanterns, “
indicating that troops would row ‘by sea’ across  the Charles River to 
Cambridge, rather than marching ‘by land’ out  Boston Neck,” according to the 
_Paul Revere House_ (http://paulreverehouse.org/ride/real.html) . “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!’ ”
 

 (http://paulreverehouse.org/ride/real.html) 
Palin, Take Two 

“He warned the Americans that the British were coming, the  British were 
coming, and they were going to try to take our arms and  we got to make sure 
that we were protecting ourselves and shoring up  all of our ammunitions and 
our firearms so that they couldn’t take  it.” 
 In her second telling, Palin focuses on the central part of  the Paul 
Revere story and finally gets correct the line that every  schoolchild is 
taught 
— “The British are coming!”

“Part of his ride was to warn the British that were already  there. That, 
hey, you're not going to succeed. You're not going to  take American arms. 
You are not going to beat our own well-armed  persons, individual, private 
militia that we have. He did warn the  British.” 
It does not appear that Revere planned to get arrested. In fact,  Revere’s 
own account demonstrates that he took great care to avoid the  British:

“I saw two men on Horse back, under a  Tree. 
When I got near them, I discovered they were British  officer. 
One tryed to git a head of Me, & the other to  take me. I turned  my Horse 
very quick, & Galloped towards  Charlestown neck, and then pushed for the 
Medford Road.  The one who chased 
me, endeavoring to Cut me off, got into  a Clay pond, near where the new 
Tavern is now built.  I got clear of him.”
 But Revere certainly made the most of it when he was  arrested, inflating 
the number of colonists who had weapons in an  apparent effort to frighten 
the British soldiers. So Palin is correct  to say that he warned the British, 
but not that it was part of his  original mission. She seems to be 
recasting her earlier comment to  avoid admitting that she made a mistake.

  “And in a shout-out, gotcha type of question that  was asked of me, I 
answered candidly. And I know my American  history.” 
The actual “gotcha question” was rather benign: “What have you  seen so 
far today, and what are you going to take away from your  visit?”



-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist  Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: _http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism_ 
(http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism) 
Radical  Centrism website and blog: _http://RadicalCentrism.org_ 
(http://radicalcentrism.org/) 


-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community  
<[email protected]>
Google Group: _http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism_ (ht
tp://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism) 
Radical  Centrism website and blog: _http://RadicalCentrism.org_ 
(http://radicalcentrism.org/) 


-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to