******************** THIS BLOG HAS MOVED TO WWW.LEGALINSURRECTION.COM ********************

This blog is moving to www.legalinsurrection.com. If you have not been automatically redirected please click on the link.

NEW COMMENTS will NOT be put through and will NOT be transferred to the new website.

Monday, June 6, 2011

Suffolk Univ. History Prof. - Palin Right About Paul Revere

In the continuing saga, in which Palin is being savaged and mocked, please listen to this NPR interview with Robert Allison, a professor and historian at Suffolk University, in which Allison argues that while Palin may have had some details wrong, she mostly was correct about Paul Revere's ride, including the ringing of bells and firing of shots as warning to the British:

Money Q&A:
Q. So you think basically on the whole Sarah Palin got her history right?

A. Well yes she did, now remember she's a politician she's not a historian, and God help us when historians start acting like politicians, and I suppose policitians start writing history.
(h/t to commenter CW at HotAir)

Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!
Bookmark and Share


  1. Note, the NPR interviewer reacted with shock, asking, "Are there other historians, Professor Allison, who say you are being entirely too charitable to Sarah Palin?"

    Professor Allison did not know.

  2. If Palin said water in the ocean was wet, the left would dispute it and call her a moron and quote something from Tina Fey.

  3. Look at the bright side...

    You didn't expect the left's collective heads to explode and not get a little gray matter splattered on you, did you?

    The dust is beginning to settle, and it is quite apparent that Palin, however inarticulately she said it, was correct. Indelibly correct. From the words of Revere himself correct.

    And she did not give one inch of ground to the howls of protest.

    The lady's not for turning.

    Now witness the historians (ostensibly of the liberal persuasion given their vocation) muttering through gritted teeth:

    "Sarah Palin was right."

    Let's party like it was 1773!

  4. That will be your last interview on NPR, Professor Allison!

  5. The obvious explanation as to why she gave a muddled but basically correct answer to the question is that she really did just read some book about it some time in the past. It's muddled because she's not a historian who has a depth of knowledge to draw from, but given that it's not drawing from the Longfellow poem that Everyone Knows, it's obvious she did a little reading. Not much, mind you, and she clearly isn't deeply interested in the subject, but it's just one of those things she read about.

    But they just can't accept that she was intellectually curious enough to crack a book on the American revolution. This is probably because it demonstrates that they clearly weren't, and worse, that her patriotism is born in part of that genuine curiosity.

  6. (Bill) O’Reilly: "Now I’m going to stick up for the Governor because I know something about Paul Revere, I actually have his signature. He DID tell the British, you better knock it off, you better not try to seize the guns, because if you do there is going to be a big problem which off course ensued. So we’ll give her the benefit of the doubt as we try to do with everybody, Bernie."

  7. This part of the interview is not on the audio, but it's great:

    Prof. ALLISON: I haven't talked to many - well, I don't know. I mean, I haven't talked to too many historians today. And, you know, Sarah Palin is a lightning rod. I just was thinking about how many times, you know, I've spoken about Paul Revere. I've organized events about the American Revolution. No one ever pays any attention. Suddenly, Sarah Palin comes to town, makes an off-the-cuff remark about what she learned, and suddenly, you're calling me to find out what I think about Paul Revere and the American Revolution.


    PS btw I think the interviewer, Block, was pathetic, as gcotharn pointed out above, obviously hoping for something. anything to use that she could use to mock & sneer at Palin.

  8. Palin's problem is that she'll start a sentence, accidently say a word or phrase that doesn't quite fit with what she was hoping to say, but then, instead of going back to correct herself, she just decides to meander along with the words already spoken until the end of the sentence comes into sight. I would assume she picked up this habit as a TV sportscaster. In that field, you can't be pausing, rephrasing, stumbling over words, etc. It's more important to speak smoothly and confidently, and to not run out of time, than it is construct precise, elegant sentences. As a politician, however, while she may still benefit from having a smooth, unbroken delivery, she needs to be a lot more concerned that her sentences make sense and convey her actual, intended meaning, and that she has reasonable syntax. She needs to understand that it's ok to stop and say, after "warned the British," something like, ". . . well of course he was out there to warn the colonists ABOUT the British, but he also in effect warned the British they couldn't take away our arms . . . ."

  9. We don't have professional journalists, we have amateur journalists and professional propagandists.

    And it's become a threat to our freedom, because that freedom depends on accurate information.

  10. Wow. That interviewer didn't even realize the put-down the Professor nailed her with at the end of his talk.

  11. Oh, brother...Professor Jacobson, with all due respect, you're an idiot.

    Sarah Palin said, "He who warned - uh - the...the British that they weren't going to be taking away our arms......uh...by ringing those bells and - and, uh, making sure as he's riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that, uh, we were going to be secure and we were going to be free."

    So sorry, but that is not correct. Nothing in Paul Revere's warning included the vow that they wouldn't be taking away our arms, nor did he do this by ringing bells...which would require an elaborate system of bells to create such nuanced message. And no, he was not riding his horse through town to send warning shots and bells.

    Good grief, man! Have a little self-respect and be willing to either sympathetically ignore Palin's embarrassing flub or dismiss it as inconsequential. But don't make an ass of yourself by snarling that she got it right. Don't sacrifice your credibility and integrity for the likes of Palin, Professor. She simply isn't worth it.

  12. My comment will be visible after approval? Forget I posted. If you're that craven, my admonition will simply be lost on you. You're about as honest as Jerome Corsi.

  13. You know what? I don't really care if Palin was spot-on accurate, misspoke, or completely clueless. I haven't seen heard anything from her anywhere near as idiotic as I have from Obama, who is apparently brilliant and insightful.

    Oh, and Patrick? As far as I know, everyone is moderated. Get over yourself.

  14. @Patrick -- Uh, Patrick, it was historian Robert Allison who said Palin was right.

    You apparently didn't listen to the interview or read the transcript. Always a bad sign when you don't do elementary research.

    "Prof. ALLISON: Well, he's not firing warning shots. He is telling people so that they can ring bells to alert others. What he's doing is going from house to house, knocking on doors of members of the Committees of Safety saying the regulars are out. That is, he knew that General Gage was sending troops out to Lexington and Concord, really Concord, to seize the weapons being stockpiled there, but also perhaps to arrest John Hancock and Samuel Adams, leaders of the Continental Congress, who were staying in the town of Lexington.

    "Remember, Gage was planning - this is a secret operation, that's why he's moving at night. He gets over to Cambridge, the troops start marching from Cambridge, and church bells are ringing throughout the countryside."

  15. Stephen Bannon producer of the new Palin movie, at Heritage Foundation.

    Forty minutes, I rate it a must see.

    US Stream

  16. Rush Limbaugh today:

    If Sarah Palin gets in the presidential race, it will be her race to lose.

  17. Professor, I just read Patrick's comment.

    May I have a glass of Chianti with that?

    My, my, my that was delicious.

    And you didn't have to type a word.

    Patrick - in case you missed it - Revere agrees with Palin. Look it up.

    OK, off to comment moderation!

  18. nor did he do this by ringing bells...which would require an elaborate system of bells to create such nuanced message

    "So if the regulars break camp, I'll ride to warn you and you ring the bells to alert the militia"

    My God! It would take a team of Harvard PhDs and a Cray supercomputer to formulate a nuanced message like that! That's crazy talk!

  19. ...This just in; commenter Patrick beclowns self, cites Palin as culprit.

  20. Wow, good job, Patrick. Impressive combination of cluelessness and arrogance!

  21. It is utterly ridiculous to think that Colonial New England, its landscape dotted with a motley of small towns each centered on a tiny church, had anything like the resources to create an elaborate system of bells...

    Wait, what?

    Well the founders were all Deists, and they would never stoop to mixing politics and religion. Unlike that B***** snowbilly Palin.

    You inconsiderate jerks.

  22. It's been 30 seconds, now 35 seconds, and my last post still isn't up?!? (now 45 seconds)


  23. @Loren Ibsen...Just another "Tolerant", "Peace Loving" Liberal I see. How many more foul words and smears can you think up? Wait, what? who's inconsiderate now?