Palin Calls Criticism ‘Blood Libel’

New York Times ^ | January 12, 2011 | MICHAEL D. SHEAR

[reaganaut1]

Sarah Palin, who had been silent for days, on Wednesday issued a forceful denunciation of her critics in a video statement that accused pundits and journalists of “blood libel” in their rush to blame heated political rhetoric for the shootings in Arizona.

“Acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own,” she said in a video posted to her Facebook page. “Especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence that they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible.”

Ms. Palin’s use last year of a map with crosshairs hovering over a number of swing districts, including that of Gabrielle Giffords, had increasingly become the symbol of that overheated rhetoric. In and interview with The Caucus on Monday, potential 2012 rival Tim Pawlenty, the former Republican governor of Minnesota, said he would not have produced such a map.

But in the video, Ms. Palin rejected criticism of the map, casting it as a broader indictment of the basic political rights of free speech exercised by people of all political persuasions.

She said that acts like the shootings in Arizona “begin and end with the criminals who commit them, not collectively with all the citizens of a state.”

“Not with those who listen to talk radio,” she added. “Not with maps of swing districts used by both sides of the aisle. Not with law abiding citizens who respectfully exercise their first amendment rights at campaign rallies. Not with those who proudly voted in the last election.”

[Netizen]

Your words already have proven my point. You didn’t say ‘no I wouldn’t’. Sometimes it isn’t what you say as much as what you didn’t say! LOL

[bcsco]

You assume that I visit that site. I don't, although it is obvious that you do.

Yep, I do visit that site. And so do you, turkey! WE'RE ON THAT SITE! My link was to a FREE REPUBLIC THREAD in which a quote, taken from a 2008 statement by the founder of Daily KOS, was printed.

You are so critical of others, yet so careless in your own awareness. Sheesh, you are way too easy a mark.

[DBeers]

The Left is worried in a different way about Romney...he’s not far enough Right to attack as a Tea Party guy, but he’s too close to the middle and left to call an idiot since he holds some similar positions to Obama and the Left cannot afford to drive any Independent votes to a “safe” candidate like Romney...the knives will be out later for him ... magritte

I agree -he is just a place holder that will never lead as he represents nothing clear.

As far as Newt -he was beaten down by the left. I like him; however, his 'spunk' seems spanked. His spark seems dim. Maybe he will regain his spine -sticking his neck out and pushing the edge will be required -standing on the right with the tea party and with Palin is where he must be if he is going to pull it off.

Just my opinion...

[arasina]

Look what it has dredged up out of your fingers, as well as the other sycophantisizers in the liberal/leftist camp.

Good word! Sycophants+fantasizing sympathizers=sycophantisizers

[roses of sharon]

(take note of this last bit of exchange between a blogger who politely complained to a Washington Post journalist about their murder accusations, this is what they think of us..and our leaders)

Ed. We are not in court. I have been watching the development of this combination of loons and opportunists since it started. The Tea Party, the very name is ridiculous. Crazed fat people tortured by their lack of success in life, following the absolute worst of our politicians. Palin, Angel, Quayle’s rotten kid. These people are your choice for anything? The whole thing is based on unreality. Don’t you understand? And Mcveigh was reading that crazy shit from the enbd times or whagtever it is called.

In the end the government has GOT to work. We are in competition with the world. Car companies don’t compete. nation now compete. And these asses want to go back to the 1700′s. I’ve written enough. The whole thing is probably unstoppable except with another dumb war. That’s what usually happens. You can have it.

http://frankstrategiesblog.com/2011/01/10/danziger-tea-party-ultimately-to-blame-for-tucson-shootings/

[americanophile]

Good for her, but conservatives are on the defensive again. We always allow our political opponents to shape and drive the debate, we’re always responding to their accusations. We should be launching a media counteroffensive about how the Left is attempting to undermine fundamental rights - the First and Second Amendments.

[swpa_mom]

I’m shocked, but I’m not shocked.

The more I see of liberals and their attacks on anyone not them, the more I know those not like them......are right.

[socialism_stinX]

"Ms. Palin’s use last year of a map with crosshairs hovering over a number of swing districts, including that of Gabrielle Giffords, had increasingly become the symbol of that overheated rhetoric."

This is a classic example of a liberal writer stating his opinion as if it's a fact. That is a very frequent tactic used by liberal writers to slant "news" articles against conservatives and subtly attack conservatives. There is no factual basis for this statement he made, and it DOES NOT BELONG IN A NEWS ARTICLE. This is his opinion only and it should only be included in an editorial. I for one, do not view the crosshair survey symbol that was used on Palin's website as any kind of a symbol of "overheated rhetoric."

If any of this is unclear to you punk writers at the NY Times, feel free to send me an email on this site and I'll be happy to spend some of my time explaining this to you and educating you on journalistic ethics. That goes for any of you other MSM punk writers who have also been misstating you opinions on the use of this surveyor's symbol as if your opinions are facts. I'll be happy to contribute some of my time to educate you as well.

[Syncro]

Thank you!

I thought it fit quite well.

If Palin can make up words so can I.

No one could refudiate that.

: > )

[editor-surveyor]

Trying to stir up trouble as usual, huh!

Troll on...

[dirtboy]

It is interesting to see someone who acts so concerned about the well-being of the Tea Party harping on its losses and not its wins. It's kind of like pointing out how many games the San Francisco Giants lost last year, instead of the fact that they won the World Series.

Every political movement has its setbacks. But only concern trolls dwell on them.

[dirtboy]

How about syncophanticfragilisticexpialidocious?

[editor-surveyor]

>> “What worries me about this whole thing is that old saying about fighting with someone who buys ink by the barrel.” <<

.
Ink is obsolete!

The internet is the current “paper,” and the ink flows to every home.

Sarah rules the ‘net.

[Jess79]

Like Clyburn has any room to criticize anyone else’s intellectual capabilities.

[Syncro]

That might cause them to be syncophantisueacidical

They are pretty fragile.

BTW, both of those words are acceptable to the FR spell checker!

[editor-surveyor]

r9etb isn’t just a concern troll; he is here to wipe FR off the ‘net.

[Sans-Culotte]

You can be fat, dumb, and happy about your little Tea Party if you wish; but it would be more intelligent to acknowledge and address its shortcomings.

Or, you can just sit there and look longingly at your framed and autographed Trent Lott glossy photo. Interesting how your comment about "fat, dumb little Tea party" coincides with the WaPo blogger's comment referenced by roses of sharon in post 465. Are you that guy?

[Melas]

You’re blinded by admiration. If you could be honest with yourself, even for only even a moment, you’d realize that at best, it was a mistake on her part. Only you and half a dozen of her most loyal following are going to believe otherwise.

As for Palin debating Bill Clinton and winning, you’re simply mad. Bill Clinton could hold his own with F. Lee Baily if he were alive. Clinton’s failings were entirely ethical, not intellectual or charismatic in nature. Unfortunately he’s a shining example that stellar politicians (and he truly was) rarely make stellar presidents. There has to be some middle ground between a master snake-oil salesman like Clinton and a candidate as simple minded as Palin.

As for being a snob? So be it. I’ve been called far worse. I can live with being a snob.

[Fiji Hill]

Like I keep telling you, this woman is no brain trust, and is not suited for higher office. Being conservative (she is), having good values (she does) is not enough to lead the free world. Leaders have to be the best of us, and Sarah is intellectually mediocre at best.

She's better suited for higher office than any of her Republican rivals.