“Senators, congressmen and even President Obama have misquoted the Founding Fathers in recent years,” writes Washington Post reporter David A. Fahrenthold in a June 7 piece suggesting that there is a bipartisan trend of misquotation and misrepresentation of historical events. After citing Sarah Palin’s recent botched account of Paul Revere’s revolutionary ride, Fahrenthold implies that historical distortion comes from a variety of political quarters:
But in Washington, nobody should feel too smug, as Palin is hardly the only politician with a habit of helpfully twisting the historical record, accidentally or not, and sometimes with politically handy consequences.
If Fahrenthold means to give the impression that there is no partisan pattern to the way politicians distort history, that’s not what his assembled facts indicate.
The Washington Post reporter cites eight Republicans for “twisting the historical record”: Six–Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.); Rep. Louie Gohmert (Texas); Rep. Virginia Foxx (N.C.); Rep. Marlin A. Stutzman (Ind.); Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (Utah) and Sen. Tom Coburn (Okla.)–are cited for misquoting founders, while two, Palin and Rep. Michelle Bachman (Minn.), are cited for distorting Revolutionary War history.
And Democrats? Fahrenthold cites only Barack Obama, for dropping the words “by their creator” from a speech he gave quoting the Declaration of Independence. (Fahrenthold reports that the White House insists that the president has accurately quoted the passage “countless times.” If he really thinks Obama left out that phrase because he doesn’t like its religious content, I’ve got a scoop for him involving birth certificates.)
So Fahrenthold’s report is little more than false equivalence–an attempt to attribute a fault that resides largely in one political party and movement to both sides of the political aisle. This is particularly clear when taken in context with a long-term conservative campaign to force history to conform to their views on subjects ranging from religion to the economy.
“This is particularly clear when taken in context with a long-term conservative campaign to force history to conform to their views on subjects ranging from religion to the economy.”
With the Paul Revere thing, Palin’s followers immediately began arguing that she was correct, citing things that did not, in fact, show she was correct (in the apparent hope that no one would be paying attention), and even set to vandalizing Wikipedia, trying to insert her phony version of Revere’s midnight ride. In the past few days, I’ve had running battles in a few venues with conservatives pimping the popular revisionist notions that Joe McCarthy was right all along, and that the South didn’t abandon the Democratic party over the matter of race.
Here’s a real example of a Democratic politician misrepresenting the views of a historical figure:
http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=62448
The weird, queer equivalency thing is a balm to equivocating stenographers like Mr. Fahrenthold. There’s no way he’s going to condemn, no matter the facts, a reactionary numbskull (or group of numbskulls), no matter how conclusive the evidence. (And by God, the evidence is overwhelming that the Right is completely full of shit.)
Fahrenthold knows that he’s ill-served to suggest, no matter how mildly, that perhaps one party or group is much more likely to be guilty of general assholishness. He won’t rock the boat, but will merely report, so that we can decide.
Obama had more stumbles than Bush during his run as has been stated many times.One stupid statement after another(how many states)He is fine as long as he stays on teloprompter.Off it he is a night mare.As far As Sarah….Her account of Paul R may be fast and loose but it is NOT incorrect(as has been stated by any number of historians who have rushed to back her up).It does seem like every knock against her by the left just brings her back twice as strong.Dogs yapping about her.As Tim said” ALL “conservatives are just not that smart….or at least that is the template to be pushed to Dumbacrats and sheeple.Kind of funny…the left has only shrieking Steinem molded woman to represent them.Sarah and Bachman just turn their eyes inside out.Funny funny funny.
More important is what was found to hold against her in 25 thousand E mails.Um nothing!That may make her the singular greatest politician of all time.In fact the consensus is the E mails show her to be” smart, shrewd,funny and honest”.And that is a quote from YOUR attack dogs.NOW when will you lot turn over Nancy Ps e mails during the healthcare debate?Or Obamas?Talk about two numbskulls.Nancy the trustfund baby and Obama the man no one can figure out how he entered the front door of Harvard -joining minds for a half a brain cell moment.Those in glass houses loaded with people who are always wrong should not throw…..
Michael e: Regarding the Palin version of Paul Revere’s Ride, exactly what part of her version are
you claiming was correct? Which Historians are you claiming back her version? You can’t make a valid
argument for your case just by throwing out nonsense like this. Sadly, (and I would say shrewdly),
with all the problems in our country, political discourse is reduced to idiotic revisionary propaganda
such as this.
I know most Reploutocratains must have flunked Civics and Economics in High School, now I see
they obviously flunked American History as well.
“Obama had more stumbles than Bush during his run as has been stated many times.”
Really? By who?
“He is fine as long as he stays on teloprompter.Off it he is a night mare.”
President Obama traveled to a House Republican retreat in Baltimore in January 2010 and for roughly an hour and a half, lectured GOP leaders and, in a protracted, nationally-televised question-and-answer session, deflected their policy critiques, corrected their misstatements and scolded them for playing petty politics. He was, of course, not using a teleprompter.
“how many states)’
Uh, he said 57 when the correct number of states he had visited when he made the comment was 47. Obviously a slip of the tongue.
“Obama the man no one can figure out how he entered the front door of Harvard ”
Uh, by the time he entered Harvard he has graduated form Columbia and worked in the private sector for 4 years.
He’s a smart man, sadly that’s hard for dead-enders to accept. That why they’re left with teleprompter jokes and snide remarks about his being accepted to law school.
Keltickev says of Michael E’s blathering: “political discourse is reduced to idiotic revisionary propaganda
such as this.”
Quite so. And not by accident. Is he paid to do this, I wonder?