The Odd Historical Memory Of Sarah Palin, Continued

This excerpt from Sarah Palin’s post about her visit last Sunday to Mount Vernon struck me as particularly odd:

I’ve said before that George Washington is my favorite Founding Father because he was reluctant to serve, and yet he rose to the great challenges before him.  I can certainly see why he dreaded leaving his home on the Potomac. His servant’s heart is an inspiration to us all.

When Piper laid the wreath at George Washington’s tomb this afternoon, I wished that every American school student could be here to see and feel the spirit of our nation’s first father. Even Piper was able to grasp the significance of being in the presence of our first President – who had such diverse interests – when she told me later “how hard he must have worked to keep that farm going!”

Umm, what about the, ummm, slaves?

What exactly are you teaching those kids Sarah?

 

FILED UNDER: Campaign 2012, Quick Takes, US Politics
Doug Mataconis
About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May 2010. Before joining OTB, he wrote at Below The BeltwayThe Liberty Papers, and United Liberty Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Comments

  1. Chris says:

    Once again you show your odd obsession with everything Sarah Palin. You cry and bitch for a week that anything to do with Anthony Weiner is not news and then you write a blog post about a Something a 10 year-old girl said to her mother? Seek help.

  2. Chad S says:

    Oh for F***’s sake. She’s not really this dumb, right?

    [Comment edited to comply with Comment Policy — DM]

  3. Falze says:

    You twitter Sarah pictures don’t you, Doug?

    Pretty sweet Chad, attacking a 10 year old girl for thinking Washington had to work hard to be president, lead the army, and be a farmer, too. Probably pretty proud of yourself for attacking the intellectual prowess of 10 year olds.

  4. Chad S says:

    Yawn@ your pathetic attempt at an retort. My stupid comment was directed at her mother. No points this round.

    And no, Piper wasn’t talking about Washington trying to juggle his many jobs. So, try again.

  5. Actually, Washington was the 11th president, following after Samuel Huntington, Thomas McKean, John Hanson, Elias Boudinot, Thomas Mifflin, Richard Henry Lee, John Hancock, Nathaniel Gorham, Arthur St. Clair, and Cyrus Griffin.

    He was, however, the first elected President.

  6. Michael says:

    Never mind the farm, Washington was far from reluctant to serve, he wanted it. His early life was spent trying to gain military commissions and then political appointments and offices. He even jockeyed to get appointed to lead the army again under Pres. Adams.

  7. JKB says:

    Well, she said, “keep that farm going.” Not work the farm or do all that work himself. Are all you office workers a bit confused as to how hard it is to keep a business going? To meeting the needs of those that depend on you and yes, that means feeding his slaves.

    There is a very odd understanding of slavery, that it is all Roots with the abuse. Many owners looked after their slaves as anyone does valuable property. There is no evidence that Washington abused his slaves.

    So the question is, Are you smarter than a 5th grader?

  8. Michael says:

    Stormy, I the President of the Congress and the President of the United States of America were totally different offices.

  9. Michael says:

    There is no evidence that Washington abused his slaves.

    Only if you don’t consider imprisonment, forced labor and beatings to be abusive.

  10. Tano says:

    There is no evidence that Washington abused his slaves.

    Slavery is, inherintly, an abuse of the worst kind.
    Doncha think?

  11. TG Chicago says:

    Well, she said, “keep that farm going.” Not work the farm or do all that work himself. Are all you office workers a bit confused as to how hard it is to keep a business going? To meeting the needs of those that depend on you and yes, that means feeding his slaves.

    Oh, man. I’m going to be laughing about all the wackiness here for a while. Thanks, JKB!

  12. JKB says:

    Well, Michael, do you have any evidence of beatings at Mt Vernon? But let’s say your correct, then you prove Piper’s point. Washington had to work hard to keep the farm going what with all the imprisonment, forcing labor and beatings, in addition to all the other work on a farm.

    Tano, yes, slavery is abusive. I hope when you mature, perhaps get some of that critical thinking everyone talks about, you’ll be able to view historical figures and events through the culture at the time instead of trying to impose over 200 years of advancement of society on the past.

    It is interesting you seem to be able to find all kinds of excuses for modern abusive behavior in muslims and other progressive favored groups, but no sensitivity for a culture nearly a quarter of a millennium in the past.

  13. Vast Variety says:

    There is a very odd understanding of slavery, that it is all Roots with the abuse. Many owners looked after their slaves as anyone does valuable property. There is no evidence that Washington abused his slaves.

    Slavery in and of itself is abuse. The fact that you don’t seem to understand that is disturbing.

  14. Tano says:

    …view historical figures and events through the culture at the time instead of trying to impose over 200 years of advancement of society on the past

    There were plenty of people alive in Washington’s day who understood the inhumanity and immorality of slavery..In fact, slavery was expressly banned in the Northwest Territories (referring to the Great Lakes States), and was outlawed in Rhode Island, both before Washington even became President. Ben Franklin became honorary president of the Pennsylvania Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery in that same year (1787).

    It is interesting you seem to be able to find all kinds of excuses for modern abusive behavior in muslims

    Excuse me? Would you like to point out what kind of abusive behaviors perpetrated by Muslims that I have ever made excuses for? I am calling you a liar. You better have some explanation for this comment….

  15. Gulliver says:

    Palin was and is correct about her historical facts. The most recent statement about Paul Revere is also correct, based upon his own narrative and statements.

    I love it when Palin shows the leftist hacks how ignorant they are. Like pride, intellectual snobbery always leads to a fall, particularly when folks like Taylor and the libs here are so sure of their facts they don’t bother to actually do the work needed to verify anything before they spout off and make fools of themselves.

    Sarah Palin eats the left for lunch without even trying. Again. Funny how this “uneducated” woman keeps making libs look like foolish knee-jerk reactionaries..

  16. john personna says:

    Gulliver, if she got “Paul Revere” and “British” in the same sentence you’d say she was essentially correct, and fit to be President, even if “space aliens” and “zombies” were in the sentence as well.

  17. Stormy, I the President of the Congress and the President of the United States of America were totally different offices.

    Well, the official title was “President of the United States in Congress Assembled”. And while the job did change significantly with the ratification of the Constitution, they were still the chief executive of the confederation and deserve to be remembered more than they are.

  18. G.A.Phillips says:

    If you think Washington was a brutal slave owner your are on crack!

  19. If you think Washington was a brutal slave owner your are on crack!

    <sarcasm>Yeah, Washington just used the threat of brutal beatings and death to force minorities to work for him on subsistence wages. It’s not like he did anything really wrong, like raisining the income tax on white people a few percent.</sarcasm>

  20. Michael says:

    they were still the chief executive of the confederation and deserve to be remembered more than they are.

    They were more akin to the Speaker of the House, I don’t think they had any actual executive powers. Though you are correct that they should get more remembrance than most get.

  21. They did have some other duties: they were the person who signed for the country on all official correspondence to other countries

  22. Michael says:

    Yeah but they weren’t even authorized to meet with the representatives of other countries.

  23. andrew says:

    LOL. This place has hit a new low.

  24. G.A.Phillips says:
  25. An Interested Party says:

    I hope when you mature, perhaps get some of that critical thinking everyone talks about, you’ll be able to view historical figures and events through the culture at the time instead of trying to impose over 200 years of advancement of society on the past.

    Using this line of thinking, pedophilia, treating women as property to be used and raped as their husbands pleased, and ritual human sacrifices, among many other acts, were all just fine when they were practiced because at those times such acts were culturally acceptable…in fact, we can extend that one step further and say that acts practiced in other parts of the world, like, say, stoning adulterous women to death in parts of the Muslim world, is a perfectly acceptable act as it is culturally acceptable where it is practiced…

  26. anjin-san says:

    One if by land, two if by bus…

  27. Yeah but they weren’t even authorized to meet with the representatives of other countries.

    Yes, there’s no argument they were an extremely weak executive. But still the chief executive, even if it was a primarily ceremonial position. It’s kinda like the current queen of england. She is still the head of state, even if the powers of that position have been more or less eliminated.

  28. Wiley Stoner says:

    This blog has reached the level of stupidity only found at the Daily Kos and other lefty places. There is little honesty, few facts, and a reliance on sites which distort the truth to further their aims. Just like when most of you laughed about when Palin said “party like it is 1773”. Seems none of you brilliant scholars (not) even knew in December of that year the activity for which the Tea Party was named took place. Palin is far more knowledgeable than most who post here and are just to ignorant to know it. Most of you learned history from Profs who hated America. If you belleve the liars then you believe the lies. Palin suckers you time after time, and she is the one that is stupid! Dolts!

  29. G.A.Phillips says:

    Wiley, ditto….

  30. CB says:

    seriously? the people mocking you guys for saying ‘the slaves werent beaten, so its a-ok!’ are the idiots? the dolts? the ‘kos kids’? (because the people mocking you CLEARLY have to be crazy unreasonable leftists, i guess)

    WE are why this place is hitting a new low? dont be obtuse

  31. Smooth Jazz says:

    “Once again you show your odd obsession with everything Sarah Palin. You cry and bitch for a week that anything to do with Anthony Weiner is not news and then you write a blog post about a Something a 10 year-old girl said to her mother? Seek help.”

    Nothing will help this left wing hack I’m afraid. When you’re posting about the 10 year old daughter of a politician you despise, you are beyond help unfortunately for him.

  32. Wiley Stoner says:

    I copied this from a statement made by Revere himself. Even the most avid OTB commenter will find Paul Revere warned the British about the fact the colonials were aware of their presents and were waiting for them. Seems Palin knows much more about history than some the the political scientists and attorneys who are obsessed with demeaning Sarah Palin.
    I observed a Wood at a Small distance, & made for that. When I got there, out Started Six officers, on Horse back,and orderd me to dismount;-one of them, who appeared to have the command, examined me, where I came from,& what my Name Was? I told him. it was Revere, he asked if it was Paul? I told him yes He asked me if I was an express? I answered in the afirmative. He demanded what time I left Boston? I told him; and aded, that their troops had catched aground in passing the River, and that There would be five hundred Americans there in a short time, for I had alarmed the Country all the way up. He imediately rode towards those who stoppd us, when all five of them came down upon a full gallop; one of them, whom I afterwards found to be Major Mitchel, of the 5th Regiment, Clapped his pistol to my head, called me by name, & told me he was going to ask me some questions, & if I did not give him true answers, he would blow my brains out. He then asked me similar questions to those above. He then orderd me to mount my Horse, after searching me for arms

  33. anjin-san says:

    Paul Revere warned the British about the fact the colonials were aware of their presents

    Are you sure you are not thinking about the midnight ride of Santa Claus?