Palin's latest ploy...liberals become laughing stalks.

Sarah Palin's references to an arcane part of the famous story of Paul Revere's "midnight" ride has sure provided a little comedy at liberal expense.  In a word: "played". 

By now the world knows Sarah said Revere warned the British, as indeed Revere's own account demonstrates to have happened.  Revere's "warning" of course, was not that the Americans were coming, but a threat that the large American force would crush the assembled "Regulars".

The liberal reaction vividly displays typical liberal tactics, and the disingenuous manner with which such tactics are implemented.

However, most significantly, it demonstrates that liberals are truly and typically ignorant of real history.  Liberal education and historical perspective are almost entirely post modern.  The premise: one must learn "why" and then the facts that support the theoretical conclusion.

Real historians learn the historical facts, provided by the historical actors and contemporaneous reports, and then apply historical evaluation.  Maybe that's why half of 12th graders cannot identify George Washington.   Imagine the mouth breathing if those same 12th graders were asked to describe the monumental accomplishments of the revolutionary commander before he became president.

Once the liberal ignorance of Revere's warning of defeat was exposed their behavior was classic and predictable.

The liberal response.  Deny the historical evidence, furnished by Revere himself.  Why?  Was Paul Revere a known liar?  Nothing in the historical record supports that proposition. 

Rather, liberals now argue that Revere's contemporaneous record of a conversation should be disregarded because it inconveniently demonstrates the shallow nature of the Sarah phobic left.  The liberals also get a chance to toss a little mud in the direction of an American hero,  laingappe for those who believe no American heroes exist beyond the 50/60s civil rights campaigns.

Maybe the progressives believe Revere to have been a psychic of greater precision than say, Edgar Cayce.  Surely Revere created a false account of his 1775 conversation with the knowledge that it would be used to expose the hair trigger on the liberal on the Palin gun. 

Of course, the body of biographical information about Revere describes a cocky and defiant revolutionary.  Those  statements of Revere's that Sarah referenced are entirely consistent with a defiant personality's response to unexpected captivity by the British. 

How loud is the laughter on the Palin family truckster?  Loud enough to hear in sleepy little Iowa.