Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Only AP Article on Palin Fox News Sunday Interview: Palin: I didn't mess up Paul Revere history
The Associated Press ^ | Sunday, June 5, 2011 | Laurie Kellman

Posted on 06/05/2011 8:06:14 AM PDT by kristinn

WASHINGTON (AP) — Sarah Palin says she didn't mess up her history on Paul Revere.

(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: godsgravesglyphs; palin; palinrevere; paulrevere; sarahpalin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-198 next last
To: cripplecreek

Yes that is what I understood from his summary.

Even with a gun to his head. Makes you wonder what would have happened if he hadn’t been riding and warning everyone along the way. Interesting how they all responded with their guns ready to defend their homes.

Do you know if the threat the Brit made that he had 500 men coming was true.


161 posted on 06/05/2011 11:04:32 AM PDT by Marty62 (Marty60)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: worst-case scenario

Your first statement, that Palin is using the word British as Longfellow did, assumes much, and is dead wrong.


162 posted on 06/05/2011 11:12:38 AM PDT by HMS Surprise (Chris Christie can go to hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: Let_It_Be_So

You gave me a good laugh! So true!


163 posted on 06/05/2011 11:16:20 AM PDT by miss marmelstein (.Life and Death are wearing me out)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: Polybius
"Ringing those bells"? "Warning shots" during the ride through town? (Ever try to reload a muzzleloader on a galloping horse?)

Ever hear of a "figure of speech?" (I'm sure that's beyond your education level.)

164 posted on 06/05/2011 11:20:43 AM PDT by TigersEye (Who crashed the markets on 9/15/08 and why?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Polybius
We can safely assume that the British used "enhanced interrogation methods" before Paul Revere spilled the beans ...

So, you're free to make wild assumptions but Sarah Palin must speak using only dry literal facts even when ambushed by a reporter when she is obviously dead tired? LOL

165 posted on 06/05/2011 11:25:15 AM PDT by TigersEye (Who crashed the markets on 9/15/08 and why?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: nhwingut
The RINO PDS trolls are out this morning I see. These puzzies trash Palin yet won’t say who they support.

Bill Clinton did not announce his first winning candidacy until the October of the year before the general election. The GOP candidate that can ultimately defeat Obama may not even be on the radar screen yet.

In the meantime, it is not Rocket Science to declare who we do NOT support ....... ANY candidate that a crushing majority of American voters have already said that they will DEFINITELY NOT ..... repeat ..... DEFINITELY NOT vote for:

What percentage of ALL voters have stated that they will DEFINITELY NOT ..... repeat ..... DEFINITELY NOT vote for Sarah Palin?

SIXTY FIVE PERCENT (65%).

Such a candidate absolutely GUARANTEES the reelection of Barack Hussein Obama in 2012. America cannot afford such a disaster.

Must be nice to play offense without having to worry about D. At least we criticize Romney while saying we support Palin.

Again .... Bill Clinton did not announce his first winning candidacy until the October of the year before the general election. The GOP candidate that can ultimately defeat Obama may not even be on the radar screen yet.

It is not a matter of supporting RINO Romney. A guaranteed landslide for Barack Hussein Obama (a Sarah Palin nomination) or RINO Romney is a false choice.

Most Americans want "None of the Above" and we are waiting for that candidate to show up before October 2011.

It is a matter of finding a conservative candidate that has not already alienated SIXTY FIVE PERCENT (65%) of all American voters to the point that they have stated that they will DEFINITELY NOT ..... repeat ..... DEFINITELY NOT vote for Sarah Palin in the general election.

At least we criticize Romney while saying we support Palin. Wimps, all of them.

So, you are just going to sit there, like a bump on a log, and complain that the only possible choices are a RINO or a Sarah Palin nomination that absolutely GUARANTEES the reelection of Marxist Barack Hussein Obama?

That does not have anything to do with the lack of wimpiness.

That has everything to do with the total lack of rational thinking.

166 posted on 06/05/2011 11:27:35 AM PDT by Polybius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: nhwingut
The RINO PDS trolls are out this morning I see. These puzzies trash Palin yet won’t say who they support.

Bill Clinton did not announce his first winning candidacy until the October of the year before the general election. The GOP candidate that can ultimately defeat Obama may not even be on the radar screen yet.

In the meantime, it is not Rocket Science to declare who we do NOT support ....... ANY candidate that a crushing majority of American voters have already said that they will DEFINITELY NOT ..... repeat ..... DEFINITELY NOT vote for:

What percentage of ALL voters have stated that they will DEFINITELY NOT ..... repeat ..... DEFINITELY NOT vote for Sarah Palin?

SIXTY FIVE PERCENT (65%).

Such a candidate absolutely GUARANTEES the reelection of Barack Hussein Obama in 2012. America cannot afford such a disaster.

Must be nice to play offense without having to worry about D. At least we criticize Romney while saying we support Palin.

Again .... Bill Clinton did not announce his first winning candidacy until the October of the year before the general election. The GOP candidate that can ultimately defeat Obama may not even be on the radar screen yet.

It is not a matter of supporting RINO Romney. A guaranteed landslide for Barack Hussein Obama (a Sarah Palin nomination) or RINO Romney is a false choice.

Most Americans want "None of the Above" and we are waiting for that candidate to show up before October 2011.

It is a matter of finding a conservative candidate that has not already alienated SIXTY FIVE PERCENT (65%) of all American voters to the point that they have stated that they will DEFINITELY NOT ..... repeat ..... DEFINITELY NOT vote for Sarah Palin in the general election.

At least we criticize Romney while saying we support Palin. Wimps, all of them.

So, you are just going to sit there, like a bump on a log, and complain that the only possible choices are a RINO or a Sarah Palin nomination that absolutely GUARANTEES the reelection of Marxist Barack Hussein Obama?

That does not have anything to do with the lack of wimpiness.

That has everything to do with the total lack of rational thinking.

167 posted on 06/05/2011 11:32:14 AM PDT by Polybius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Let_It_Be_So

“John and Mary are sitting at their dining table...”

One says: “well, our economy is in bad shape and our personal situation is worse than it’s ever been. I think we should vote Obama out.”

The other says: “yes, but what about how Palin got it wrong about Paul Revere? And, I can’t stand her voice. I guess I have no choice but to vote for Obama again”.

John and Mary shouldn’t be married lol


168 posted on 06/05/2011 11:51:35 AM PDT by Rennes Templar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: All
Typical troll behavior can be identified by ...


169 posted on 06/05/2011 12:06:49 PM PDT by TigersEye (Who crashed the markets on 9/15/08 and why?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino

what I’m experiencing is fairly common reaction to certain female vocal tones and pitches... will that hurt Sarah? Who knows... I mean, I never thought Obama would be elected.
And no sorry, I’ve managed to avoid hearing Obama speak but a handful of times... his adopted language style and local color is too affected for me. And by “affected” I mean FAKE.


170 posted on 06/05/2011 12:27:58 PM PDT by Katya (Homo Nosce Te Ipsum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Mail for you.


171 posted on 06/05/2011 1:31:28 PM PDT by Peter Libra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: catfish1957
“Well that just seals it. Palinite Freepers have decided that 4/18/1775 was nothing but a gun grab, and the men came out to fight were secondary.”

The Red Coats were not going to Concord to throw the Colonists a clam bake. They were going there to seize their munitions.

PDS has rotted you're brain.

172 posted on 06/05/2011 1:35:20 PM PDT by mickey finn (GO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: miss marmelstein

Bottom line: This is embarrassing for Gov. Palin.

You can spin it all you wish that Palin was technically correct.

But my understanding is the *primary* purpose of Revere’s mission was to warn Americans of the advance of the British.

This will add fuel to the meme that Palin isn’t ready for prime time.

Hope she can recover from this or that DeMint jumps in.


173 posted on 06/05/2011 3:00:15 PM PDT by Calif Conservative (rwr and gwb backer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino

Palin supporters will have to do better than “well, Obama screwed up *his* history and geography answers too !”


174 posted on 06/05/2011 3:05:39 PM PDT by Calif Conservative (rwr and gwb backer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: M-cubed
lol...I haven't heard that one!...do u have a source?

Sure. You'll love this youtube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjaoJuAYnaI&feature=player_embedded

Then check out this FR thread:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2198485/posts

175 posted on 06/05/2011 4:13:51 PM PDT by freespirited (Truth is the new hate speech. -- Pamela Geller)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Calif Conservative

Why are you writing me about Palin being technically correct? I didn’t even hear the sound bite. I don’t care what she said about Paul Revere. I think she’s great; I’ll vote for her if she runs and if she don’t...well, life goes on.

But who do you folks (who don’t like Palin) want to get the nomination? I’m curious about that.


176 posted on 06/05/2011 4:44:42 PM PDT by miss marmelstein (.Life and Death are wearing me out)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: Calif Conservative

Oh, DeMint. Well, as Kate Hepburn used to say: bore, bore, bore.


177 posted on 06/05/2011 4:46:50 PM PDT by miss marmelstein (.Life and Death are wearing me out)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: CMAC51

Bookmark for later!


178 posted on 06/05/2011 5:19:09 PM PDT by stayathomemom (Beware of kittens modifying your posts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: miss marmelstein

You’d be surprised how many of the rest of us are embarrassed for the Palin-worshippers.


179 posted on 06/05/2011 5:42:27 PM PDT by worst-case scenario (Striving to reach the light)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: worst-case scenario

Just out of curiosity - who are you supporting?


180 posted on 06/05/2011 7:20:36 PM PDT by miss marmelstein (.Life and Death are wearing me out)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-198 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson