My point is that her use of Blood Libel is stupid. Rather than making a statement that clearly (and justly) faults the media for its partisan excess Palin has used (mis-used) an inflammatory arcane phrase that is historically anti-semitic and, in the process, given that very same media a point upon which to pivot the argument back against her.
The fact that this thread exists proves that point.
Today's public discussion will not be Palin's measured and cutting response but her use of one phrase within it...the rest, all three pages of it, will be lost.
Please explain the wisdom in that.
A liberal nitwit in the Philadelphia Inquirer tried to 'prove' that the Tea Party and Palin influenced the Tucson shooter because the target was a Democrat.
Congratulations, yet again, you resort to the same lame logic as the MSM types bashing Palin.
That would give most Freepers pause, but it appears to not hinder your PDS one bit.
Yes, your rant was off base.
Yes blood libel is used against Jews. It is not an anti-semitic term by itself.
The people who attacked Palin libeled her using the blood of the victims. Your own bias and desire to bash Palin has clouded your thinking.
The attempted to incite a mob to kill Sarah Palin by the mass media is a blood libel. It fits the description very well.
Your ignorance is astounding. Do your research:
Blood libels are false and sensationalized allegations that a person or group engages in human sacrifice, often accompanied by the claim that the blood of the victims is used in various rituals and/or acts of cannibalism. The alleged victims are often children.
Some of the best documented cases of blood libel focus upon accusations against Jews, but many other groups have been accused throughout history, including Christians, Cathars, Carthaginians, Knights Templar, witches, Wiccans, Christian heretics, Romani people, Mormons, pagans, Native Americans, Africans, atheists and communists.
During the first and second centuries, some Roman commentators had various interpretations of the ritual of the Eucharist and related teachings. While celebrating the Eucharist, Christians drink red wine in response to the words “This is the blood of Christ”. Propaganda arguing that the Christians literally drank blood based on their belief in transubstantiation was written and used to persecute Christians. The Romans were highly suspicious of Christian adoptions of abandoned Roman babies and this was suggested as a possible source of the blood.
- JP
“Today’s public discussion will not be Palin’s measured and cutting response but her use of one phrase within it...the rest, all three pages of it, will be lost.
Please explain the wisdom in that.”
It’s not only wisdom, it’s brilliance. The media CANNOT ignore her use of those words, and the simple truth conveyed there will resonate with people. Very much like her use of the phrase “death panels” last year.
“Rather than making a statement that clearly (and justly) faults the media for its partisan excess Palin has used (mis-used) an inflammatory arcane phrase that is historically anti-semitic and, in the process, given that very same media a point upon which to pivot the argument back against her.”
Has it ever occurred to you that many of us had NEVER heard the phrase before applied to Jews? Until I did an Internet search, I didn’t know the term had any connection to Jews. I had always heard it used as a libel so awful that it would require a bloody nose or more to satisfy the accused. Think of a blood feud from the south...
This was my email to Jonah at NRO:
“It WAS a blood libel - a libel that we seek the blood of liberals, just as Jews were said to seek the blood of Christians. And the libel has the same purpose - to incite anger and revulsion about those being libeled.
Let’s be clear - there are many liberals who would do a happy dance if Sarah Palin was murdered. The folks carrying signs calling for GWB’s death may have lacked the guts to try to kill him, but they would have rejoiced if someone else had done so.
And if not killed, then at a minimum, many liberals like the President and others want Palin or Rush CRUSHED. Liberals don’t think, they emote - so they attack conservatives, not with ideas, but with emotions.
I was one of those who stood in protest outside her office in Tucson, demanding that she hold town halls - something she was refusing to do. When she broke down and agreed to do some, I attended the closest and booed when she claimed she wanted limited government and that Obamacare would help us. And had I been at the Safeway on Oracle & Ina, I would have cheerfully pulled my S&W out of my pocket - to shoot the gunman!
To accuse me and others like me of inciting the attack IS blood libel - libel about blood, libel that we seek blood, libel intended to turn us into demons.
Sarah Palin is right, and you are wrong.”
The English language is always evolving.
For example, the term ghetto was originally about the squalid living conditions of Jews in Italy centuries ago.
Does it still only apply to Jews?
You are being a simplistic moron.
You would say anyone using the term ‘ghetto-blaster’ is stupid, because the Jews never had big boom boxes...
Give it up.
What level of ignorance do you have to be at to be such a literalist? Metaphors must confuse the hell out of you.
Next time the nice lady comes around with the trolley, don't hide the meds. Take them. They may do you some good.
Words and phrases take on new meanings all the time in the English language. It is obvious this meaning is the feeding frenzy (sharks going after blood) of the main stream media and liberal commentators going after Sarah Palin and other conservatives IMMEDIATELY after this tragedy was reported WITH ABSOLUTELY NO FACTS TO CORROBORATE THEIR STATEMENTS.
Sarah Palin had NOTHING to do with Jared Lee Loughner’s attack on Congresswoman Giffords, and neither did the Tea Party, or Christians, or any other conservative. There is absolutely no evidence at this time backing up these contentions of the MSM and liberals. That is what the main point of Governor Palin’s speech is all about—the irresponsibily, mean-spiritedness of those using a horrible incident to politicize their own un-American agendas. That is wrong.
From Dictionary.com’s encyclopedia:
Blood libels are sensationalized allegations that a person or group engages in human sacrifice, often accompanied by the claim that the blood of victims is used in various rituals and/or acts of cannibalism. The alleged victims are often children.
Some of the best documented cases of blood libel focus upon accusations against Jews, but many other groups have been accused throughout history, including Christians, Cathars, Carthaginians, Knights Templar, witches, Wiccans, Christian heretics, Roma, Mormons, neopagans, Native Americans, atheists and communists.
Your understanding of the term is woefully incomplete, FRiend.