Skip to comments.Doris Kearns Goodwin at Gettysburg: A Few Inappropriate Remarks
Posted on 07/02/2013 6:44:11 AM PDT by Timber Rattler
On Sunday, a stunned audience sat in silence as Doris Kearns Goodwin turned the keynote address at the opening ceremony for the 150th anniversary of the Battle of Gettysburg into a political lecture focusing on women's and gay rights.
Missing from much of her keynote: Gettysburg.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
To be fair, someone should have explained to the ditz that they were celebrating the 150th anniversary of the Battle of Gettysburg. She probably didn’t have a clue what the hell she was doing there.
Almost all of my reading is in the non-fiction/history area. I have never read one of this idiot’s books and do not intend to.
“She probably didnt have a clue what the hell she was doing there.”
Of course she did. She was picking up a paycheck.
This is what she was hired to do. DKG is not a civil war historian so why else was she picked to do the keynote? Her political views and celebrity.
Why don’t people just boo dumb asses like this off the stage?
At two points during her eulogy for her husband - in front of roughly 150 mourners - she absent-mindedly allowed herself to stray off the topic of the day onto left-wing politics. She simply could not help herself.
In each case, she caught herself after a few seconds and got back to the subject of her deceased husband, and his life and times.
I'm not sure, but I think one of her children - seated in the front row, where I couldn't see them) may have given her some kind of signal to keep politics out of it.
Liberalism is a mental disorder marked by the obsessive need to self congratulate to the point of open masturbatory acts - Doris K. Goodwin
The whole world is celebrating sodomy. Nuts.
Well what did they expect her to say? Sheesh, who chose her to do the keynote, anyway? Should have treated her like a valedictorian - reviewed remarks and cut the mic when she strayed.
How much of her speech was Spielbergs?
Actually, she is, sort of...
She was drawing a big paycheck. What more did she need to know?
History Channel REALLY pushed her talk. I started to listen, then turjned the witch off. As a Civil War Student and History Buff, her talk was insulting to the place, the occasion and the men who suffered and died there.
I’ll never waste my money on one of her books.
“Whomever scheduled her and paid her to stand at the podium and make love to herself is the one to point the finger at.”
THAT is an excellent point.
Although DKG did write “Team Of Rivals” and yes, she is a historian, I just don’t see her as being the right fit for a presentation like this.
Perhaps it would have been wise if the people sponsoring the event had asked DKG if they could see her speech BEFORE she gave it. I know that if I were the one to have reviewed it, I would have looked at her (or her staffer) and said “Seriously? A historian of your caliber and THIS is the speech you’re gonna give?! Absolutely not! Re-do it or consider yourself cancelled from giving this speech. People are here to hear about Gettysburg - not about gay rights and whatever else is passing thru your mind at the moment”.
Yep, it seemed that her audience was not sure what to think about her self-centered gibberish. They knew that she’s famous for something concerning the Civil War, but knew that a lecture on gay and women’s rights is not what they bought tickets for.
She dishonored all those who rest there. I don’t have profanity adequate to describe my thoughts about this vermin.
She is an historian but wasn’t she fired for plagiarizing?