[magritte]

Hey Charles...you can find any support for this usage for "blood libel" because there isn't any...Palin has tried to "split the meaning." and create her own version of the phrase. She uses the part of the definition that includes false and sensational allegations. Instead of thinking of it in terms of "human sacrifices", which is the crux of the "blood" part of the term, she is turning it to mean "murder." Then, of course, she ignores the harshest part of the phrase, which is the cannibalism component, instead implying that the libel is she is somehow complicit in the murder.

It's awkwardly handled, but may be effective to those who aren't familiar with the real usage of the phrase...magritte

[Brytani]

Or, she’s most likely expanding on defenses of her by people such as Glenn Reynold’s in the WSJ who’ve called the attacks against her “blood libel”.

The Arizona Tragedy and the Politics of Blood Libel
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703667904576071913818696964.html

Followed up by Ed Driscoll of Pajamas Media, in The Politics of Blood Libel
http://pajamasmedia.com/eddriscoll/2011/01/10/the-politics-of-blood-libel/

[reegs]

If you ask me, the MSM has used the bodies of the victims as a sacrifice on the altar of public opinion. Instead of honoring the slain, they couldn't help their pathetic, opportunistic selves and took the blood that was shed and splashed it across their papers, Web sites, etc. in an attempt to bring those who oppose them down.