A couple of days ago, I provided my take on the liberal media’s reaction towards the Sarah Palin/Paul Revere situation.
A number of readers took issue with my assertion that Palin had erred in this matter and provided this link in support of the argument that Paul Revere had warned the British after all. Joel J. Miller, who wrote a book about Revere, argues that Palin got the story wrong. Miller writes, “From Revere’s own account, it’s clear that he didn’t fire a shot, he didn’t ring a bell, and he didn’t intend to warn the British of anything.” I would add that Revere hadn’t planned on being captured by the British either.
So Palin made a mistake and let us not pretend otherwise. The point of my post was that when Palin makes a mistake, the liberal media pulls out all the stops. But when Obama errs (as when he said he had visited 57 states) the proverbial cat has caught their tongue.
Now that it has been established that Palin is imperfect I would still vote for her over Obama in a heartbeat. Yet she is not beyond criticism. If she makes a mistake, I will take her to task for it but I will do so with good will. After all, I have defended her on numerous occasions (here, here, here and here) and will continue to do so when warranted. All in all, I see far more positive than negative in Palin.
You could even say that I revere her.
Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://thespectator.com/world.