“Reality-Based” History

Sarah Palin unleashed a minor storm of ridicule from the left for telling supporters to wait until after the November elections to “party like it’s 1773.”

Oops.

FILED UNDER: Quick Takes, Sarah Palin
Dodd Harris
About Dodd Harris
Dodd, who used to run a blog named ipse dixit, is an attorney, a veteran of the United States Navy, and a fairly good poker player. He contributed over 650 pieces to OTB between May 2007 and September 2013. Follow him on Twitter @Amuk3.

Comments

  1. mantis says:

    She’s going to get that rotten King off our backs, you betcha!

  2. Tano says:

    Ah,,,’scuse me, but wasn’t the Boston Tea Party indeed in 1773?

  3. mantis says:

    Tano,

    I think that’s his point. He’s just being a bit coy (or unintentionally vague).

  4. John Personna says:

    Not a big deal, but neither will be 1773 jokes.

  5. Dodd says:

    Ah,,,’scuse me, but wasn’t the Boston Tea Party indeed in 1773?

    That would, indeed, be the point of the “oops,” as the linked page makes clear.

  6. nm says:

    Why in the world would anybody have partied before 1776?

    The problem is that Palin’s statement made no sense. 1773 was likely no “party.”

    Palin used an incorrect analogy.

    What’s new?

  7. john personna says:

    We certainly should acknowledge that the original Tea Party was in 1773, yes.

  8. Dodd says:

    Why in the world would anybody have partied before 1776?

    The problem is that Palin’s statement made no sense. 1773 was likely no “party.”

    Palin used an incorrect analogy.

    Good Lord, what a stupid woman, making a play of the word “party” in reference to an event called the Boston Tea Party.

    Sheesh.

  9. Tano says:

    “That would, indeed, be the point of the “oops,” as the linked page makes clear.”

    It seems to me to either be a cardinal rule of blogging, or it should be, that your reader should not have to follow a link, then read half way down that page in order to get the gist of your snark.

  10. Dodd says:

    I apologize for playing hide-the-ball. That was not my intention. I was going by the other cardinal rule of blogging: Shorter, cryptic links drive more traffic to the linkees.

  11. mantis says:

    It seems to me to either be a cardinal rule of blogging, or it should be, that your reader should not have to follow a link, then read half way down that page in order to get the gist of your snark.

    Gotta disagree. That should not be a rule of blogging. And what you describe is actually a good tool for snark, plus it shows who isn’t paying attention.

  12. Tano says:

    “That should not be a rule of blogging”

    Fine, whatever. But I rarely have the leisure to follow every link in a post.- I only follow those that seem to offer additional interest. I see the links as offering back-up, or substantiation to the point being made. If a poster cannot, or will not make their point explicitly, and thus I don’t end up “getting it”, then that ends up being their problem, not mine. I will gravitate toward writers who are user-friendly.

    “…plus it shows who isn’t paying attention”

    Hey ,what do I know – I am not a blogger. I would imagine that the blogger might want to inspire attention, rather than test for it.