Sarah Palin, Paul Revere and Wikipedia.

[Berkut]

She kind of got lucky and semi-accurately stated some facts;

Calling her comments "semi-accurate" is like saying that Stalin really did care a lot about the Poles at Katyn. It may be "semi-accurate" but not in any meaningful sense, and certainly not in the manner that Palin stated it.

[Razgovory]

Isn't Palin displaying her general ignornace a dog bites man story?  Why is this particular comment drawing attention?

Yeah, I admit, it's kind of like making fun of the retarded kid in class.  What interested me was how her partisans were trying to rewrite history.

[Berkut]

Isn't Palin displaying her general ignornace a dog bites man story?  Why is this particular comment drawing attention?

Yeah, I admit, it's kind of like making fun of the retarded kid in class.  What interested me was how her partisans were trying to rewrite history.

The idea that Paul Revere was motivated by a desire to protect gun rights is pretty funny. Not quite as funny as the idea that Revere was running around with the intent to warn the Brits though - about anything.

[HisMajestyBOB]

"If you follow Wikipedia's rules," he wrote, "we must maintain a neutral position, representing the mainstream position as well as disputed versions."

So any piece of random crap said by a public figure has to be put up?

And any crackpot idea that can be found in a book.

[dps]

Isn't Palin displaying her general ignornace a dog bites man story?  Why is this particular comment drawing attention?

Yeah, I admit, it's kind of like making fun of the retarded kid in class.  What interested me was how her partisans were trying to rewrite history.

The idea that Paul Revere was motivated by a desire to protect gun rights is pretty funny.

Actually, that might be the most accurate part of her statement.  The goal of the British in setting out from Boston was to capture and destroy munitions that had been stockpiled by the colonists.

Of course, for the colonists, having the arms wasn't the point, it was a means to a goal.

[DGuller]

Beating up on Palin is like beating up on a cripple;  sure, it's fun to do for a while, but after the cripple turns into a bloody pulp, it's more annoying than rewarding to keep pummeling.

[Iormlund]

A cripple would eventually show some sense, though.

Palin is more akin to the Black Knight. She just won't give up.

[crazy canuck]

Palin is more akin to the Black Knight. She just won't give up.

The dangerous difference is that some people take Palin seriously while everyone knows enough to laugh at the Black Knight.

[Berkut]

Isn't Palin displaying her general ignornace a dog bites man story?  Why is this particular comment drawing attention?

Yeah, I admit, it's kind of like making fun of the retarded kid in class.  What interested me was how her partisans were trying to rewrite history.

The idea that Paul Revere was motivated by a desire to protect gun rights is pretty funny.

Actually, that might be the most accurate part of her statement.  The goal of the British in setting out from Boston was to capture and destroy munitions that had been stockpiled by the colonists.

Of course, for the colonists, having the arms wasn't the point, it was a means to a goal.

While the desire to secure munitions was a military goal of the British, the desire to not let them secure those munitions is a ALSO a military goal, not a political one. One could be vehemently opposed to gun rights as espoused by the NRA, and still think that if you are going to be in a war, it might be a good idea to secure your munitions before the enemy seizes them.

I guess when the US bombed German munitions factories in WW2, that meant we were anti-gun rights, and the Luftwaffe trying to shoot down B-17s were fighting for the Second Amendment.

[grumbler]

Isn't Palin displaying her general ignornace a dog bites man story?  Why is this particular comment drawing attention?

Because when the mistake was pointed out, she didn't retract or clarify, but instead insisted that she was correct, and her minions went along with the canard.  It is hilarious.

[Berkut]

Palin is more akin to the Black Knight. She just won't give up.

The dangerous difference is that some people take Palin seriously while everyone knows enough to laugh at the Black Knight.

[dps]
Well, if you look closely, you can see that Arthur didn't actually cut his arm off - there was still a considerable stump there. So really, the Black Knight wasn't incorrect.
[/dps]

[The Minsky Moment]

Because when the mistake was pointed out, she didn't retract or clarify, but instead insisted that she was correct, and her minions went along with the canard.  It is hilarious.

Got it.  It's the "cover up" more than the deed itself.

[MadImmortalMan]

Because when the mistake was pointed out, she didn't retract or clarify, but instead insisted that she was correct, and her minions went along with the canard.  It is hilarious.

Got it.  It's the "cover up" more than the deed itself.

Like Wiener. He should have just said, "Yeah I texted that bitch my crotch. That's how I roll".

[HVC]

Because when the mistake was pointed out, she didn't retract or clarify, but instead insisted that she was correct, and her minions went along with the canard.  It is hilarious.

Got it.  It's the "cover up" more than the deed itself.

Like Wiener. He should have just said, "Yeah I texted that bitch my crotch. That's how I roll".

No wiener (perfect name for this scandal too ) forgot the age old advice. Deny 'til you die. There was always some plausibilty to his story. Coming clean or getting caught in the lie has the same consequences, so denying was his only intellegent option.

[Malthus]

Because when the mistake was pointed out, she didn't retract or clarify, but instead insisted that she was correct, and her minions went along with the canard.  It is hilarious.

Got it.  It's the "cover up" more than the deed itself.

Like Wiener. He should have just said, "Yeah I texted that bitch my crotch. That's how I roll".

No wiener (perfect name for this scandal too ) forgot the age old advice. Deny 'til you die. There was always some plausibilty to his story. Coming clean or getting caught in the lie has the same consequences, so denying was his only intellegent option.

I think the problem here is that so many other women had incriminating photos of him ... denial was futile.

If he just did the oopsie dance when the story broke, it wouldn't have made much of a story.

Note: I'm using "incriminating" loosely here - he wasn't actually doing anything criminal (assuming the women he texted weren't underage ...  ).