|
Gastronomicus
3-0-G



Registered: 03/31/05
Posts: 9,742
Last seen: 14 hours, 42 minutes
|
|
Quote:
That would be spoon feeding you. I was pretty clear you have to come to the journey all by yourself. Do you have no want to not be ignorant? Is there no desire to know both sides of the argument?
AKA you do not know. Thanks for playing.
Quote:
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
Gastronomicus said:

"The truth." Since you're an expert, would you care to explain how plutocrats like Palin and Ryan have my best interests at heart?
I'll tell you if you can tell me how Hope & Change spent trillions in 3 stimulus packages and our unemployment is still at 9.1%, how exactly has the spendthrift marxist plutocrat have our best interests at heart
Shit, Obama sold out liberalism the moment he got elected. Plutocrats abound my friend.
-------------------- Make my Funk the P Funk, I wants to get Funked up
LAGM2024
|
Flashmob
something something dark side

Registered: 04/20/11
Posts: 60
Last seen: 7 years, 4 months
|
|
Did you stop reading there ? You have never actually watched Paul Ryans proposal ever have you ?
|
RogerRabbit
Bans for Pleasure



Registered: 03/26/03
Posts: 42,214
Loc: Seattle
Last seen: 1 year, 12 days
|
|
Let's see: Palin certainly wasn't the first to go into campaign mode with the "Take our guns away" mantra, and most have been equally distant from reality. The NRA and Fox, and of course Palin and NRA have been at it for years, always using the phrase "Take our guns away", as if repeating it often enough makes it true.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/sarah-palins-nra-speech-redneck-jokes-and-threats-of-gutting-the-second-amendment/
Quote:
“President Obama and his allies, like Nancy Pelosi, have been relatively quiet on the gun control front, not because they don’t want to limit your rights, but becasue they’re afraid of the political consequences. Don’t doubt for a minute that if they thought they could get away with it they would ban guns and ban ammunition, and gut the Second Amendment.”
Of course, other people, equally of sound mind such as Chuck Norris have said the same thing. Michael Steel went even farther when he said "Obama wants to take away our guns" and "move terrorists into our neighborhoods" 
These above quotes far pre-date her latest use of the exact term "take away our guns" to mis-represent A hero of the American Revolution who would be aghast that prevarications such as these were being used in his name against someone who has actually increased gun owner's rights since taking office.
We all certainly hope the GOP nominates Palin. Well, at least the comedians do. They haven't had this much material since Bush, and before that you have to go back to Ross Perot and Ralph Nader. Of course, all these people defending her make it even better.
Now, let's forget all about the gun nonsense and get back to something really important to national security. . .like Weiner's underwear.  RR
-------------------- Download Let's Grow Mushrooms semper in excretia sumus solim profundum variat "I've never had a failed experiment. I've only discovered 10,000 methods which do not work." Thomas Edison
|
ChuangTzu
starvingphysicist



Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 4 months
|
|
The only part of what she said that bothered me was the ringing bells and firing of warning shots. Who was ringing bells and/or firing warning shots?
But who the fuck cares?
|
ChuangTzu
starvingphysicist



Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 4 months
|
|
>>“President Obama and his allies, like Nancy Pelosi, have been relatively quiet on the gun control front, not because they don’t want to limit your rights, but becasue they’re afraid of the political consequences. Don’t doubt for a minute that if they thought they could get away with it they would ban guns and ban ammunition, and gut the Second Amendment.”
You doubt that? I'm not sure most republicans would do any differently. THe thing is, they can't get away with it.
>>These above quotes far pre-date her latest use of the exact term "take away our guns" to mis-represent A hero of the American Revolution who would be aghast that prevarications such as these were being used in his name against someone who has actually increased gun owner's rights since taking office.
Can you clarify what you mean by that?
|
Gastronomicus
3-0-G



Registered: 03/31/05
Posts: 9,742
Last seen: 14 hours, 42 minutes
|
Re: Paul Revere [Re: Flashmob]
#14566390 - 06/05/11 08:40 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
From Paul Ryan's own website we get this
Oh goody! Moar corporate tax cuts! Those are going great.
Here is the budget itself. I actually haven't read through the whole thing before now. Let's take a look at all the items that have my best interests at heart.
582 billion for defense in 2012. Excellent. I do hate muslims and I do love oil... so far so good. Compare that to the 27 billion for science, space, and technology and you can clearly see that Paul Ryan is a man who is investing in America's future. Here we have 7 billion for energy, but I assume some of that is also covered by defense 
Oh here's a gem. For 2012, the Ryan budget proposes 14 billion for commerce and housing credit. By 2015, that number is -2.6 billion. Ryan's budget is so miraculous that it actually makes housing credits pay over 2 billion dollars back to the government!
This is asinine. I am neither an economist nor an expert on congressional budgets. The bottom line is that the Republican party unabashedly assaults education, social services, and most of the other functions that I consider critical for government. People like Palin and Ryan are not politicians who are out to serve the greater good. Palin especially seems enamored by the money and the influence and the fame that came with being a star in the Republican party. This is not one-sided or solely contained within members of the right, but at least the scum bags on the left side of the aisle don't want to ban abortion and teach creationism in science classes.
You claim that I am ignorant, that is categorically untrue. You claim that vacuous plutocrats like Palin have my best interest at heart, yet you have no support other than to assault my own knowledge of American politics. You claim to have gotten my goat. Nothing you have claimed is true.
-------------------- Make my Funk the P Funk, I wants to get Funked up
LAGM2024
|
Phred
Fred's son


Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
Paul Revere did not ride through the streets shouting warnings and ringing bells and firing warning shots...
Did Revere himself leap off his horse every few miles to ring church bells and personally fire warning shots? Nope. But would those shots of alarm have been fired and those church bells have been rung absent Revere's warnings? Nope. In Revere's own words --
"In Medford," he records, "I awaked the captain of the minute men; and after that, I alarmed every house, till I got to Lexington."
Did Palin phrase her point synecdochically? And perhaps even a bit inscrutably? Yeah, she did. So what? What she said in that edited clip was still substantially more articulate and coherent than a lot of things we've seen Joe Biden say. Or even Mr "all fifty-seven states" Obama himself.
Eloquence aside, what matters is that what she said in that clip is historically accurate. She didn't make up some idiotic or even uniformed bullshit about American history, she in fact showed a greater knowledge of the minutiae of Revere's participation in the American revolution than did the many gleefully sneering pundits tripping all over themselves in the hope of catching her in an error. I'd be willing to bet a a few hundred bucks that what little knowledge of Paul Revere the majority of the TV Talking Heads now tsk-tsking over this supposed gaffe remember from their middle school experience comes from Longfellow's poem, not from history class. This is exactly the same thing that happened when they all beclowned themselves by thinking the Boston Tea Party took place in 1776 rather than in 1773, as Palin correctly noted.
Phred
--------------------
|
Phred
Fred's son


Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 1 month
|
|
zappaisgod says
Quote:
No Roger, you continue to lie and ignore the actual facts. What Palin said was 100% correct. What you say she said is 100% lie. Everything you say is dumbed down from Palin. You are a liar who doesn't know history and a propagandist who erects shitty straw men when you get caught in your bullshit.
Dude, you'd best dial the rhetoric back several notches here. It is true that RR is not representing accurately what Palin said, but there are less inflammatory ways of pointing this out to the audience than calling him a liar. It's enough to point out he's mistaken or that he is misrepresenting or that he is not being factual and leave it at that.
Phred
--------------------
|
Not Quite Social


Registered: 07/16/10
Posts: 1,418
Loc: Midwest
|
Re: Paul Revere [Re: Phred]
#14567184 - 06/05/11 11:03 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Heh, heh, heh ... HISTORY: Paul Revere alerted the colonists that the British were coming. SEMI-LITERATE PALIN/TEA PARTY DISTORTION: Paul Revere (and, again, I quote) "warned the British not to be takin' away our arms." I love it! Zappa actually references Massachusetts historical archives in order to prop up the distortion. Honestly, the reason it didn't make sense coming out of her mouth was because she was tripping over a gross distortion of a well known story to serve her crackpot fear mongering, They want to take away your guns. It's that simple. But what an effort the righties make to prop up this dunce! Why? Are y'all going to stand behind her for prez. Nope. So what's the point? Why go to the effort of consulting archives? Ha!
--------------------
Edited by Not Quite Social (06/05/11 11:10 PM)
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 5 months, 23 days
|
Re: Paul Revere [Re: Flashmob]
#14567548 - 06/06/11 12:21 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Flashmob said: Hows that gas price ? is it still going up ? Hows gold and silver, also on the rise ? Your government thinks taxing you MORE is a good idea (rep. C. Rangel). Where is your money going to come from ? Your breaking your own constitution right now (libya) and all you can do is badmouth Palin...
Did you know the great recession began in December 2007 (about a year before Obama) and that people invest more in gold and silver in a recession? Did you know the stock market's gone up over 50% since Obama took office? Did you know gas prices still aren't as high as they were under Bush? 
I agree with you on Lybia. As for Palin, a Presidential candidate should have above average intelligence to be taken seriously. Who cares if she fumbled through the Paul Revere story (it is pretty damn funny though).
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Phred
Fred's son


Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 1 month
|
|
Not Quite Social writes:
Quote:
Heh, heh, heh ... HISTORY: Paul Revere alerted the colonists that the British were coming.
And he also warned the King's men the Colonists were ready and waiting to blow their heads off.
Quote:
SEMI-LITERATE PALIN/TEA PARTY DISTORTION: Paul Revere (and, again, I quote) "warned the British not to be takin' away our arms."
You mean, "and I misquote". You can't even get that much right, let alone the historical details of Revere's efforts.
Quote:
Zappa actually references Massachusetts historical archives in order to prop up the distortion.
Let's measure zap's reference from historians against your reference to....
... to...
...well, whaddya know! Your reference is to nothing but your own ignorance of historical events. Try to imagine how shocked we all are.
Let me supply another reference to the audience, who can then gauge its worth against your asswind -
Here are a few paragraphs from a 1994 New York Times "Notable Book of the Year" Paul Revere's Ride by historian David Hackett Fischer. Fischer is Warren Professor of History at Brandeis University and author of the acclaimed Albion's Seed: Four British Folkways in America and Washington's Crossing (Pivotal Moments in American History) and several other highly regarded scholarly works on the Revolutionary War period.
Quote:
While Paul Revere escorted the Whig leaders to safety, General Gage's Regulars marched steadily toward Lexington. Five hours had passed since the British troops had left Boston, and they still didn't know where they were going or what they were expected to do. Even the company commanders has not been told the purpose of the mission. But the men could feel the tension in the air, and they could see in the demeanor of Colonel Smith that things were not going according to plan. As they advanced rapidly through Cambridge, they began to hear gnshots in the distance. One officer looked at his pocket watch and noted that the time was about three o'clock. Another thought to himself, "a very unusual hour for firing." 1
Suddenly they heard the hoofbeats of many horsemen galloping toward the column from the west. In the van, Marine Lieutenant Jesse Adair and Tory guide Daniel Murray anxiously searched the moonlit road ahead. In a moment the riders were upon them, shouting General Gage's password, "Patrole! Patrole!"
It was the party of British officers who had been scouting the road to Concord - Major Edward Mitchell, Captain Charles Lumm, Captain Charles Cochrane, and seven others, fresh from their encounter with Paul Revere. The column halted to hear their news. In high excitement, Major Mitchell announced that "the whole country was alarmed" and that they had "galloped for their lives." He explained in a few breathless sentences what had happened on the Concord Road. "We have taken Paul Revierre," the major said, "but was obliged to let him go, after having cut his girth and stirrups." 2
Mitchell repeated Paul Revere's warning that 500 New England men were mustering in Lexington. He told of the alarm bells and the signal guns, and the volley of musket-fire near the Green. The news raced back along the column. Lieutenant John Barker of the King's Own never forgot that moment, "about five miles on this side of a town called Lexington which lay in our road," when "we heard there were some hundreds of people collected together intending to oppose us and stop our going in." 3
Others also remembered with vivid clarity this electrifying instant when they halted on the road, and Paul Revere's warning reached them through the mouth of his highly excited captor, Major Mitchell. The message struck the column with shattering force. For five hours they had been kept in the dark, in more senses than one. Most had left Boston with no idea of the mission's purpose, or whether it was a mission at all, or merely another training march.
They recognized the name of Paul Revere. Lieutenant William Sutherland of the 38th Foot made a special mention in his report that it was Revere whom Major Mitchell intercepted on the road that night. Another wrote that the information had come from "the noted Paul Revere." The British soldiers knew this man. Some had heard he was an "ambassador" from the Whig Committees of Massachusetts to the Continental Congress. Others were aware that he had frustrated their Portsmouth plans by galloping from Boston to New Hampshire. A few knew that he tried to do the same thing again to the Salem expedition, and that the 64th had caught his men and kept them prisoner at Castle William in Boston harbor. 4
Now as they were marching deep into dangerous country on a supposedly secret expedition, Paul Revere was ahead of them again - captured on a fast horse near Concord twenty miles west of Boston, while they were still slogging through Cambridge. They knew that this meddlesome Yankee meant trouble, and were horrified to learn from Major Mitchell that he knew more about their mission than they did. His presence was a sign that the people of New England were organizing against them. They would not be opposed merely by a milling mob of angry "peasants" with pitchforks in their hands. 5
Suddenly they also knew that what many had suspected from the start. This night march was no drill. They had not been sent on one of "Old Woman" Gage's hated training exercises, or another of his futile demonstrations to impress the country people of New England. They began to realize that they were marching deep into a hostile country, and might have to fight before the day was done. Few of these men had been in combat before. The thoughts of young soldiers on the eve of their first battle raced through their minds.
I'll stop there, and leave you to guess what happened next. I'll bet you a sizeable wad of cash Sarah Palin knows what happened next, though. She doesn't have to guess, she knows. She also knows that Paul Revere accomplished two things of value that night:
- he alerted the Colonials of the approach of the King's men - he warned the King's men the Colonials would kick their butts if they didn't abandon their mission
I use two different terms above advisedly - there is a difference between alerting your own side that the enemy is approaching and warning that enemy that approaching further is hazardous to his health. Of course you know this already, which is why you chose the word "alerted" in the first line of yours I quoted at the beginning of this post. You made the same differentiation Palin did, so I guess you're not totally beyond hope.
Quote:
Honestly, the reason it didn't make sense coming out of her mouth was because she was tripping over a gross distortion of a well known story...
Apart from the fact that the media still has not shown the entire unedited exchange starting with the actual question asked and the first part of her response which was cut out, she was not "distorting" history at all. In fact, the only part of her response the media has released - the part of her response which was shown on that truncated video clip - plainly demonstrates she knows more of the story than you do.
Quote:
Why go to the effort of consulting archives?
In order to show you and others with a superficial knowledge of the events of the Revolutionary War that the oh-so-smug pundits were wrong when they sneered that Palin had screwed up. Turns out Palin was right, and they were wrong, and not for the first time, either. I realize that you prefer to lead a fact free existence, but that doesn't mean the rest of the readers of this thread share that preference.
Phred
--------------------
|
orison
mcfluffysugarnuts


Registered: 01/19/09
Posts: 5,468
Last seen: 7 hours, 52 seconds
|
Re: Paul Revere [Re: Phred]
#14567690 - 06/06/11 01:16 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 8 months
|
Re: Paul Revere [Re: orison]
#14568588 - 06/06/11 09:28 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/06/06/historians-agree-palin-was-right-about-revere/
Money quote:
Quote:
If all people know of Revere is Longfellow’s poem, which is what the reaction to Palin’s remarks seem to show, then they know far less than they think.
Scholarship. Sadly lacking for journalists and leftists in general. They don't know and they don't care.
--------------------
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger



Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 1 month
|
|
Submitted for inclusion:
Quote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/sarah-palins-midnight-ride-twice-over/2011/06/06/AGIsoJKH_blog.html “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 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.”
However, to be charitable to Palin, later that evening, Revere was arrested by a British patrol. In Revere’s own account of the incident, 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. 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. “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!’ ”
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?”
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
Gastronomicus
3-0-G



Registered: 03/31/05
Posts: 9,742
Last seen: 14 hours, 42 minutes
|
|
This thread is pointless, everyone knows this is the real history of Paul Revere
-------------------- Make my Funk the P Funk, I wants to get Funked up
LAGM2024
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 8 months
|
|
Yeah so? She was right both times. Except about shouting the "British are coming" I believe that what he actually said was "The Regulars are coming". Which I can understand her saying because she clearly had to dumb down her answer for her audience who were abysmally ignorant about any history outside the poem written 80 years later. Which was a fiction.
--------------------
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
|
Quote:
Not Quite Social said:
Quote:
He who warned the British that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms, uh, by ringin’ those bells and, um, makin’ sure as he’s ridin’ his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that were gonna be secure and we were gonna be free. And we were gonna be armed.---Sarah Palin on Paul Revere
---
Seriously?
OK, I asked my nine year old who was Paul Revere, and he knew. So, they're teaching this in school by third or fourth grade. People here have dedicated threads to praising Palin up and down. She's an imbecile, but that doesn't seem to matter.
Yes. Seriously. And correctly.
(bold by me)
Experts back Sarah Palin’s historical account You betcha she was right! By Chris Cassidy Monday, June 6, 2011 - Updated 4 minutes ago
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.
Palin prompted howls of partisan derision when she said on Boston’s Freedom Trail that Revere “warned the British that they weren’t going to be taking away our arms 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.”
Palin insisted yesterday on Fox News Sunday she was right: “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.”
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.”
Patrick Leehey of the Paul Revere House said Revere was probably bluffing his British captors, but reluctantly conceded that it could be construed as Revere warning the British.
“I suppose you could say that,” Leehey said. “But I don’t know if that’s really what Mrs. Palin was referring to.”
McConville said he also is not convinced that Palin’s remarks reflect scholarship.
“I would call her lucky in her comments,” McConville said.
Meanwhile, the state’s Democratic Party held a thin blue line on the issue, insisting on mocking Palin despite a brief historical review of the matter. State party chairman John Walsh wise-cracked that the region welcomes all tourists, even those with “an alternative view of history.”
“If you believe he was riding through the countryside sending text messages and Tweets to the British, still come to Boston,” he said. “There are a lot of things to do and see.”
But Cornell law professor William Jacobson, who asserted last week that Palin was correct, linking to Revere quotes on his conservative blog Legalinsurrection.com, said Palin’s critics are the ones in need of a history lesson. “It seems to be a historical fact that this happened,” he said. “A lot of the criticism is unfair and made by people who are themselves ignorant of history.”
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
Not Quite Social


Registered: 07/16/10
Posts: 1,418
Loc: Midwest
|
|
Yes, yes, yes, I get it now. The mainstream media, since Longfellow, has misled liberals. The whole truth is encapsulated in a narrow reading of a particular incident and aspect of the story that supports your political point (poorly made by an idiot mouthpiece), liberals are trying to take away your guns. Gotcha! You betcha!
--------------------
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
|
Yup. Don't let the facts stand in your way.
I mean, after all... what would the guy who actually wrote the letter know?
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
Flashmob
something something dark side

Registered: 04/20/11
Posts: 60
Last seen: 7 years, 4 months
|
|
Quote:
Gastronomicus said: From Paul Ryan's own website we get this
Oh goody! Moar corporate tax cuts! Those are going great.
Here is the budget itself. I actually haven't read through the whole thing before now. Let's take a look at all the items that have my best interests at heart.
582 billion for defense in 2012. Excellent. I do hate muslims and I do love oil...
This is asinine. I am neither an economist nor an expert on
The next word should be ANYTHING. 
The left cannot talk in any way shape OR form about defense or wars. All previous wars have been fought with the approval of congress to clear the way. A majority vote is needed so dems must back it as well. Explain Libya to me ? it's a war... making little word games like the left does and saying its a kinetic military action doesn't change it. Especially considering he had SOME wiggle room in his first (war) mandate. Explain how your darling leader is attacking another country on his own without approval of the american people?
THEN you can start about defence budgets... IF YOUR guy is gonna start wars just because he's bored (don't start with me on the UN when the HELL have we ever done what they said) then yeah I want our Men and Women on the front lines to have all the money they need so they can come home to their families...
|
|