Historical revisionism, Palin-style

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Instead of acknowledging that she made an embarrassing mistake, Sarah Palin predictably went right into all-out double-down mode, claiming that actually she "didn't mess up" with her account of Paul Revere's "Midnight Ride." Here's what she told Fox News's Chris Wallace on Sunday:

Here's what Paul Revere did. He warned the Americans that "the British were coming, the British were coming." And they were going to try to take our arms so got to make sure that, uh, we were protecting ourselves and, uhm, shoring up all of our ammunitions and our firearms so that they couldn't take them.

But remember that the British had already been there — many soldiers — for seven years in that area. And part of Paul Revere's ride... And it wasnlt just one ride. He was a courier. He was a messenger. Part of his ride was to warn the British that were already there that, "Hey. You're not going to succeed. You're not going to take American arms. You are not gonna beat our own well-armed, uh, persons, uh, individual private militia that we have. He did warn the British.

And in a shout-out, gotcha type of question that was asked of me, I answered candidly. And I know my American history.

Uh, no, you don't. Think Progress:

If Palin knows her American history, this latest bit of jujitsu shows no evidence of it. The purpose of Revere's ride was to inform John Hancock, Samuel Adams, and other colonial American patriots that the British Army was marching from Boston to Lexington. As such, secrecy and stealth were essential. So contrary to Palin's claim that Revere warned the British they would not succeed, Revere attempted to avoid all contact with British troops or British loyalists already living in the colonies. The entire point of Revere's mission was to inform the patriots of the British movements without the British knowing they were being informed.

At one point in the night, Revere was temporarily detained and interrogated by British soldiers at a roadblock. He intentionally provided them a falsely inflated description of the colonial militia's strength, though only in the most strained metaphorical reading could this be considered a "warning."

Furthermore — again due to the need for secrecy and stealth — Revere used no bells or warning shots, and delivered his message in face-to-face contacts throughout the night. (Palin seems to simply forget her creative inclusion of the bells and warning shots in her initial recounting.) 

Even in her retelling, then, she still got it wrong. And did so idiotically: "Part of his ride was to warn the British that were already there that, 'Hey. You're not going to succeed. You're not going to take American arms. You are not gonna beat our own well-armed, uh, persons, uh, individual private militia that we have. He did warn the British." Seriously? Who speaks like this? It's like she's auditioning for a supporting role in Clueless 2.

And it wasn't a "gotcha" question, she just got it wrong. End of story. 

But she doesn't get it. (And as usual defends herself by lashing out at the media. It's never her fault, always someone else's, and there's always blame to be hurled at her usual targets.)

And neither do her sycophants, some of whom have gone so far as to try to rewrite Paul Revere's Wikipedia page to match her account of what happened, her version of "history."

Because, of course, Palin can do no wrong nor say no wrong, and so everything must be revised to make it seem like she knows everything.

Just when you think she and her supporters can't sink any lower...