Tuesday, June 07, 2011

Paul Revere Embarrassment?

I think someone down below said that Palin's remarks regarding Paul Revere were an embarrassment.

Historians Agree With Palin

7 comments:

Maximum Colossus said...

I'm a big Palin supporter, but even I gotta admit she kind of screwed up on this one. While technically correct that Revere ended up warning the British after his unplanned capture that they couldn't have taken arms from the militia, nobody else in the world would have given that answer in regards to what Revere's contributions were.

Whatshe should have said is, "I did not expect the question, so when asked I immediately referenced the first part of Revere's story that came to mind. Of course, I'm well aware that Revere's most compelling actions were to ride forth and rouse the militia."

Instead, she comes off as someone unable to admit mistakes and many of her supporters are stuck making excuses.

Still can't wait for her to be President, though. Then it will truly be my turn to be smug and smell my own glorious farts.

BVM said...

Yes, she did get her story a little goofed up because Revere's plan was not to warn the British, but he did end up warning the British because of his capture.

But overall I see this event differently than most. She knew that Revere warned the British, even though her understanding of how it happened was a little off. Still, the basic point was in her mind, "Revere warned both the colonists and the British".

Knowing this she did not back down, and that impresses me. She stood by what she knew even though everyone else was making fun of her. I think that's an awesome trait to have in a leader. Its hard to take a stand for what you know is right, even though supposedly "smart" people are telling you that you are wrong.

Maximum Colossus said...

As I said, I didn't expect her to say that she was wrong, but only to point out how she was aware that this was not the answer most people would have expected. I felt her defense made it easy for her opponents to make her look stubborn and a little bit foolish.

Blogust said...

All in all I think she has guts. I don't know how she is able to put up with so much scrutiny.

Maximum Colossus said...

How can anyone in the political arena put up with so much scrutiny? I'm not trying to denigrate Palin, because as I've said before I want her to be President, but let's not make a hero out of her for this Reveregate bullshit. Why in the world she didn't just say "Paul Revere? Oh yeah, the British are coming! The British are coming! American hero that guy!?" Sometimes being a leader means knowing the right things to say and she fucked up. And then, instead of owning it she stubbornly defended her statements. Not a great example in my book.

Blogust said...

If Palin explained it the way you wanted her to it wouldn't matter. Her Paul Revere comment spread like wildfire. A lot of people were posting it on facebook and the comments were very telling. Whether she admitted it as a mistake or tried to defend it, no one would listen.
That is the type of scrutiny I am talking about. She isn't perfect and people are dying to jump on it more than on anyone else. I think she is tough to put up with it.

Blogust said...

I agree with you that her explanation should have been more honest. She sounded like a typical politician to me with that answer. Sorta greasy and slippery, but it doesn't matter. The rest of the interview I thought was really good, but no one will listen. If Palin wins '12 I will be shocked.