"journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel"
This evening Kieth Olbermann tried to diminish Palin's bite by accusing her of an apparent callous abuse of the term "blood libel." Historically, the term relates to false accusations against Jews for using the blood of murdered Christians, particularly children, in the making of matzos for Passover.
In Olbermann's view Palin's analogy amounts to an offense against Jews who as a group have been victim to this libel. To give some kind of credibility to the claim against Palin, he brought on Simon Greer who runs Jewish Funds for Justice to explain why he and other Jews were offended by Palin's misuse of the term. Basically, Greer wants the term exclusively restricted to describe accusations against Jews and the persecution resulting from those accusations. What Greer wants from Palin seems to be an abject apology.
As a political term, Palin once again has introduced a neologism and done so with excellent flare and perfect application. In my opinion, accusations against Conservatives in the liberal media and among liberal posters pretty much reeks of a Blood Libel. In context, I don't see how any person can mistake the false accusations against Conservatives for the historical slander against Jews.
What the two meanings share in common is the intensity of hatred directed at an identifiable group. We should use the political aspect of Blood Libel as often as possible to describe the false accusations leveled against Conservatives and those who support Conservative causes.