Honestly, who do they think they're going to fool? All this hoo-ha is only going to make anyone who's unclear on the history go seek out alternative sources (yes, there still are some), like history books. And they'll then see that not only is she ignorant, she's dishonest too. I think this one could really backfire on her.

But then, I thought that when she put the crosshairs of a rifle sight over a map of Arizona, then denied any association when Gabrielle Giffords got it. (I notice she changed the maps too. Fast. Crosshairs? What crosshairs?? I don't see any crosshairs...)

Or when she stood, blissfully unaware, in front of a turkey being slaughtered while she prattled on about caring for animals, or whatever it was. I only remember that what we were seeing completely belied what she was saying.

I keep waiting for her to self-destruct and it keeps not happening :-( This time, maybe? Wonder how much all this intensive revisionism is costing? And what parlour-tricks the taxpayer would have to fork out for if she gets elected?