Sarah Palin: Paul Revere's Ride to Protect the Second Amendment - Page 61
Results 601 to 610 of 1225
06-10-11, 02:14 AM #601
... is no different than her saying, "Paul Revere told people to ring bells and shoot off guns"?
06-10-11, 10:27 AM #602
Historians said she was correct and you want to cherry pick because you are so partisan Palin could never be right.
Keep trying but the left calling historians liars just shows they have no credibility
06-10-11, 10:31 AM #603
06-10-11, 10:41 AM #604
Calling historians liars shows who wants to repeat enough times.
06-10-11, 11:04 AM #605
I don't think they are necessarily liars. I think they are biased. The bottom line is that she ****ed up. This has been demonstrated repeatedly in this thread. The Palin supporters have gotten to the point now where they are basically saying "Nuh uh!" in the face of the evidence that has been shown. A couple of historians have claimed that she was correct in her assessment. That's hardly enough to support that she didn't **** up, especially if these historians have an agenda.
06-10-11, 11:07 AM #606
The sources I used lean left so where is the Bias. I guess now a historian stating facts is bias
06-10-11, 11:08 AM #607
Where is the proof that they lean left, or is this just your assessment?
06-10-11, 11:10 AM #608
As usual, you ignore the big picture.
The general procedure to warn people of impending events like the British marching into town, was to shoot off guns, ring bells, go from house to house and actually warn people, etc. etc. etc. THAT... is what Palin was trying (and failing quite spectacularly) to say with her comment.
Feel free to read into it anything your partisan little heart desires.
06-10-11, 11:11 AM #609
Boston Globe and NPR lean left
06-10-11, 11:18 AM #610
Sarah Palin: Paul Revere's Ride to Protect the Second Amendment - Page 61
Results 601 to 610 of 1225
06-10-11, 02:14 AM #601
... is no different than her saying, "Paul Revere told people to ring bells and shoot off guns"?
06-10-11, 10:27 AM #602
Historians said she was correct and you want to cherry pick because you are so partisan Palin could never be right.
Keep trying but the left calling historians liars just shows they have no credibility
06-10-11, 10:31 AM #603
06-10-11, 10:41 AM #604
Calling historians liars shows who wants to repeat enough times.
06-10-11, 11:04 AM #605
I don't think they are necessarily liars. I think they are biased. The bottom line is that she ****ed up. This has been demonstrated repeatedly in this thread. The Palin supporters have gotten to the point now where they are basically saying "Nuh uh!" in the face of the evidence that has been shown. A co
uple of historians have claimed that she was correct in her assessment. That's hardly enough to support that she didn't **** up, especially if these historians have an agenda.
06-10-11, 11:07 AM #606
The sources I used lean left so where is the Bias. I guess now a historian stating facts is bias
06-10-11, 11:08 AM #607
Where is the proof that they lean left, or is this just your assessment?
06-10-11, 11:10 AM #608
As usual, you ignore the big picture.
The general procedure to warn people of impending events like the British marching into town, was to shoot off guns, ring bells, go from house to house and actually warn people, etc. etc. etc. THAT... is what Palin was trying (and failing quite spectacularly) to say with her comment.
Feel free to read into it anything your partisan little heart desires.
06-10-11, 11:11 AM #609
Boston Globe and NPR lean left
06-10-11, 11:18 AM #610