To paraphrase "A Princess Bride" ....
This phrase "blood libel." I don't think it means what you think it means.
Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz similarly defended Palin from criticism over the use of the term.
There is nothing improper and certainly nothing anti-Semitic in Sarah Palin using the term to characterize what she reasonably believes are false accusations that her words or images may have caused a mentally disturbed individual to kill and maim Dershowitz told BigGovernment.com.
The fact that two of the victims are Jewish is utterly irrelevant to the propriety of using this widely used term.
Read more: Dershowitz, others defend Palin’s use of ‘blood libel’ | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
The term “blood libel” has taken on a broad metaphorical meaning in public discourse. Although its historical origins were in theologically based false accusations against the Jews and the Jewish People,its current usage is far broader. I myself have used it to describe false accusations against the State of Israel by the Goldstone Report. There is nothing improper and certainly nothing anti-Semitic in Sarah Palin using the term to characterize what she reasonably believes are false accusations that her words or images may have caused a mentally disturbed individual to kill and maim. The fact that two of the victims are Jewish is utterly irrelevant to the propriety of using this widely used term.
It was inappropriate at the outset to blame Sarah Palin and others for causing this tragedy or for being an accessory to murder. Palin has every right to defend herself against these kinds of attacks, and we agree with her that the best tradition in America is one of finding common ground despite our differences.
Still, we wish that Palin had not invoked the phrase "blood-libel" in reference to the actions of journalists and pundits in placing blame for the shooting in Tucson on others. While the term "blood-libel" has become part of the English parlance to refer to someone being falsely accused, we wish that Palin had used another phrase, instead of one so fraught with pain in Jewish history.
I could give a crap about her as well but this is serious nit picking.
I also understand why she would put out a statement since many national figures have accused her of causing the events.
Understandable. However, if those critics are attacking her for unfounded reasons, then it would be pointless to issue a statement, for they would find more cause for attack. Given her current unpopularity it would
be wise to stay out of the limelight.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
All over the news. Yet again, the irrelevant blabbering of an attention whore gets on the news.
She needs to go away, but won't because the cash flow has to be enormous.
She doesn't need to be the one pointing out the idiocy of those crying about this. Silence and time were beginning to hammer them. She actually slowed the tide by weighing in, but has to remain as relevant as possible so had to.
She's also an expert on diplomatic relations with the Soviets due to proximity of Alaska to Vladivostock.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
I don't want to be confused as a Palin supporter but the things the left has gotten away with saying about her is disgusting. I think a lot of what she has done (you would call it "whoring") is to continue defending herself from the time that she was announced as McCain's running mate. Because of all the recent attacks on her since Saturday's massacre by the insane liberal (identified as a tea party activist by the MSM) I think she is justified in making a statement.
Let's be honest, we live in a day and age of shock value and sound bites. If you don't have a catchy phrase or something the world finds edgy you are just not going to get media attention. It's why every politician says stupid things anymore and are constantly making arses of themselves.
Clinton was capable.
Few better, ever, than Churchill.
Posted via VolNation Mobile