Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 10:51 AM ET, 01/12/2011

The foolishness of the 'blood libel' charge

By Adam Serwer

Greg already touched on many of the more egregious aspects of Sarah Palin's video response to critics, but I wanted to focus more directly on her use of the term "blood libel."

First off, it would be a serious stretch to assign any blame to Palin for Jared Loughner's actions. But while this is a situation in which Palin has been genuinely wronged by critics, she has already squandered any moral high ground she might have fairly laid claim to. Part of Palin's appeal to her base comes from her willingness to push the envelope in her political statements -- and the aftermath of the Tucson shooting was not the time to do that.

Palin's best move would have been to remain silent, as Dave Weigel wrote yesterday, especially since Giffords had expressed concern about Palin's map at the time it had been released.

Instead, egged on by her conservative supporters in the blogosphere, Palin has released a video accusing liberal critics who made a connection between her actions and the Tucson shooting with "blood libel":

Vigorous and spirited public debates during elections are among our most cherished traditions. And after the election, we shake hands and get back to work, and often both sides find common ground back in D.C. and elsewhere. If you don't like a person's vision for the country, you're free to debate that vision. If you don't like their ideas, you're free to propose better ideas. But, 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 they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible.

Most of Palin's message is banal and unobjectionable, although it's odd to hear Palin call for "common ground" having previously suggested that criticism of her threatens her First Amendment rights. Conservative blogger Glenn Reynolds employed the term earlier this week. Its use couldn't be less appropriate, particularly since she goes on to reverse the accusation and imply her critics might bear responsibility for inciting violence.

Blood libel is a term that usually refers to an ancient falsehood that Jews use the blood of Christian children in religious rituals. For hundreds of years, particularly during the Middle Ages, it was used to justify the slaughter of Jews in the street and their expulsion from entire countries. "Blood libel" is not wrongfully assigning guilt to an individual for murder, but rather assigning guilt collectively to an entire group of people and then using it to justify violence against them. 

This is a new low for Palin, but outsize comparisons of partisan political conflict to instances of terrible historical oppression is a fairly frequent rhetorical device among conservative media figures. Early in the Obama administration, Rush Limbaugh said D.C. was like "the Old South" for Republicans, who were an "oppressed minority." Following the news that the Department of Justice was reviewing the outcome of the case of a white cop who had shot an unarmed black man in San Francisco, Glenn Beck told his audience that, "We have turned this into the 1950s overnight, except the races are reversed."

Given that people like Beck and Limbaugh have spent the last two years trying to convince their audiences that being white and conservative in America today is comparable to being black under Jim Crow, Palin's use of "blood libel" isn't entirely surprising.

The difference is, though, that Beck and Limbaugh don't really fancy themselves as political leaders in the sense Palin does. As David Frum wrote earlier this week, Palin's previous response to the incident was "petty at a moment when Palin had been handed perhaps her last clear chance to show herself presidentially magnanimous." That was before she was drawing parallels between harsh, even unfair verbal criticism and genocide. 

Now, mere days after the incident, with six people dead and Giffords still recovering, Palin is making herself the center of attention. It might please the audience for conservative talk radio or Fox News, but most people will be disgusted. As well they should be.

By Adam Serwer  | January 12, 2011; 10:51 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Sarah Palin and `blood libel'
Next: Breaking: ADL condemns Sarah Palin's "blood libel"

Comments

She thought she came out with a lasso but isntead it was a noose. Blood Libel, obviously she didn't come up with it. Who did put that in the text?

Posted by: Papagnello | January 12, 2011 10:59 AM | Report abuse

OT/

Angle weighs in:"The irresponsible assignment of blame to me, Sarah Palin or the TEA Party movement by commentators and elected officials puts all who gather to redress grievances in danger." http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2011/01/what_2nd_amendment_remedies.php?ref=fpblg

Apparently, she thinks her critics vis-a-vis "Second Amendment Remedies" hold her directly responsible. No, Sharron, we hold your statements to Manders as irresponsible and provocative. You are taking the easy way out.

I wonder if she even realizes what she said?

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | January 12, 2011 11:01 AM | Report abuse

In other news, this guy needs to stop imitating Glen Beck. Does he use VapoRub too? At least this time he isn't crying about himself.

(AP) House Speaker John Boehner has opened a session of the House by honoring victims of Saturday's shooting in Arizona, speaking in a halting voice, his eyes welled up with tears...

Posted by: shrink2 | January 12, 2011 11:03 AM | Report abuse

"Given that people like Beck and Limbaugh have spent the last two years trying to convince their audiences that being white and conservative in America today is comparable to being black under Jim Crow,"
Being White in America is definitely a role reversal to many of the older, overweight boomers that have nothing else better to do than complain.

Posted by: sherlockjt | January 12, 2011 11:06 AM | Report abuse

I think if you view Sarah Palin in strictly entertainment and incitement terms a la Beck, Limbaugh, and Olbermann, then this isn't surprising or even abnormal. Her job has never been to lead but to incite. It's only when we take her out of that context and expect her to be some kind of leader of our country that this seems out of place. She is not a leader and never has been. She is not running for President. She is not interested in outcomes. Full stop.

Posted by: willows1 | January 12, 2011 11:08 AM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin has not been "genuinely wronged by critics," she was appropriately criticized for a map that used crosshair targets to identify 20 Democratic CDs. It's disingenuous to say otherwise. But she needs to learn the role played by society & discourse and own her rhetoric, which she still refuses to do.

Posted by: cab91 | January 12, 2011 11:12 AM | Report abuse

All Sarah has to do is apologize for the use of the term "blood libel," and every thing will be as it was. Sarah will be returned to her high regard as a thoughtful commentator and compentent, vialble politician.

Posted by: mddg7771 | January 12, 2011 11:12 AM | Report abuse

“Blood libel” ... another buzz term released by Mama Barracuda. Sarah doesn't get it at all because she can't see past her ego. She's deflecting blame (I don't think the nut did it because of her - he may not even know she exists), but this is a wakeup call to KNOCK OFF her "Lock'N'Load" banter. She does this to hype up the gundolts because real hunters know she's a poseur when she doesn't load/carry her own firearm and takes five shots to hit a target. The rest of the country is bored with her divisive rhetoric - NONE of it is geared to solving the nation's ills. She doesn't have to admit fault - she's got to change her attitude by saying/doing something constructive. Luckily other Republicans understand this, if for no other reason than to get votes. UNITED WE STAND, DIVIDED WE FALL. The only good thing about this “press release” is it will drop her approval ratings, though as always, her loyal parrots will squawk louder.

Will be interesting to see the next Palin Polls - coming soon at a media outlet near you!! Bookies are probably taking bets on how many points she'll drop...

Posted by: chris76543 | January 12, 2011 11:14 AM | Report abuse

Funny how libs have a problem with the term "blood libel" when they continue the blood libel against jews by demonizing israel and jews, and even alleging that jews harvest organs from palestinians, etc... And excuse every time the arabs say that jews make matzah out of arab blood..

Posted by: scoran | January 12, 2011 11:14 AM | Report abuse

Wonder why Glen Beck is not orange like John Boehner.

Posted by: bigmac1810 | January 12, 2011 11:15 AM | Report abuse

It doesn't matter if she had issued a media response or not, because these homos and leftist haters are going to brow beat any and everyone with this incident, in order to promote their leftist agenda. Whether its gun rights, censorship, homo rights, illegal immigration, abortion, you name it. You leftist are a sad and sordid bunch indeed, especially those like this homo Capehart and these other leftist media squawkers. But keep your squawking and your Palin hating, no one's really listening, and Palin isn't going anywhere, so eat your hate-filled leftist hearts out.

Posted by: hared | January 12, 2011 11:15 AM | Report abuse

Is Palin aware that Giffords is Jewish and that the shooter listed Mein Kampf as an influence?

To follow that up with claiming a 'blood libel' on herself..... that's just stunningly insensitive to about 2000 years of people claiming that Jews murder babies for their blood (that is, after all, what blood libel is).

Posted by: TheHillman | January 12, 2011 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Hared, are you sure your name isn't missing it's t?

Posted by: Papagnello | January 12, 2011 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Can I say it one more time? Please stop giving so much attention to Sarah Palin. Being the center of attention is just what she wants. She seems irresistible to men of the Left as much as the Right. Why should she stop when she has everyone hanging on her every word, no matter how reprehensible?

While I agree with Adam's points, still this seems to be the chief topic on the 'sphere this am. Please, folks, stop hanging on and amplifying her every word. She won't quit as long as it brings her attention. Let the Right have to disavow her all by themselves.

Just stop givong her so much attention. Talk about something serious like the need for more mental health services and the proper balance between referring every bizarre person to the underpaid authorities and having a society full of alienated, unstable people who get no treatment. Talk about whether wearing guns in public nis connected to the apparent (to any female sports fan) increase in erectile dysfunction in our society. Anything.

Just not the neverending effluvia of Sarah Palin.

Posted by: Mimikatz | January 12, 2011 11:18 AM | Report abuse

And for the first time in the history of the English language "raising arms" means voting. To her, freedom of speech is saying whatever comes into your head and making up the definition later.

Posted by: jim4postnatl | January 12, 2011 11:21 AM | Report abuse

Reynolds' words in his Blood libel article are worth repeating:

"Those who try to connect Sarah Palin and other political figures with whom they disagree to the shootings in Arizona use attacks on "rhetoric" and a "climate of hate" to obscure their own dishonesty in trying to imply responsibility where none exists."

Posted by: sbj3 | January 12, 2011 11:22 AM | Report abuse

The vitriolic hatred between the conservatives and the liberals continues.

You people, both kinds, are as disgusting a bunch of juvenile fools as this nation has ever had to endure. But this one is a new low - the pansy liberals are calling out the conservatives on their own words and the conservatives are whining about how unfair it is.

Fricking disgusting, all of you.

Posted by: eezmamata | January 12, 2011 11:22 AM | Report abuse

It's laughable to suggest that Palin is somehow making herself the center of attention, when it was the left that immediately pulled her into this tragedy despite no connection to it.

The pushback seems to be awful for pundits like Sargent and Serwer. They started the week thinking, "let's not let a dead little girl go to waste," and hoping to make some cheap political mileage off of her corpse. The fact that it isn't sticking just seems to be maddening, as their rhetoric just flies farther and farther from reality.

Posted by: tomtildrum | January 12, 2011 11:24 AM | Report abuse

I'm quite sure ms palin is frantically searcing the internet to see what exactly "blood libel" means and what all the commotion is about...she didn't write that speech, she just read that self-serving steaming pile of crap from a teleprompter.

Posted by: JilliB | January 12, 2011 11:25 AM | Report abuse

One only has to imagine the noise from the rightwingnuts if a republican, in particular a tea party uber conservative have been shot rather than a democrat.

Would they behave any differently than the democrats, or would they have gone out of their way to blame the political ideology of their opponents just as the democrats are doing now?

Yeah, I thought so. The only thing more disgusting than the liberals blaming you conservatives for this murder is your cowardly response to it.

Posted by: eezmamata | January 12, 2011 11:28 AM | Report abuse

@sbj3-

So, you don't agree that there is a "climate" of hate existing on the extremes?
Why can't there be a recognition of this w/o saying that any one particular individual is responsible?

Let's say the shooting didn't happen, certainly the emnity still exists?

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | January 12, 2011 11:32 AM | Report abuse

The American People are sick of the liberals

The American People do NOT want your kind of health care bill


The American People do NOT want the liberal agenda


The American People do not want your lame duck session, when you do things CLEARLY OPPOSED to what the AMERICAN PEOPLE said they wanted in the NOVEMBER ELECTION


In this country, we settle things with elections


The liberals have VIOLATED THAT IDEA


The liberals have DISRESPECTED THE AMERICAN PEOPLE


AND YES, I SPEAK FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.


You liberals can't say you speak for the people, you lost the election.


No one wants your garbage - time to LEAVE


Stop your smear campaigns, your baseless attacks


Stop your FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM


Get lost


Get it?


Not sure you do.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 12, 2011 11:33 AM | Report abuse

@sbj3-

So, you don't agree that there is a "climate" of hate existing on the extremes?
Why can't there be a recognition of this w/o saying that any one particular individual is responsible?

Let's say the shooting didn't happen, certainly the emnity still exists?

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | January 12, 2011 11:33 AM | Report abuse

sorry for double post...

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | January 12, 2011 11:34 AM | Report abuse

@Blood Libel: "For hundreds of years, particularly during the Middle Ages, it was used to justify the slaughter of Jews in the street and their expulsion from entire countries."

MY ANCESTORS.

THANKS A LOT SARAH.

Gee, what effect does that have on MY First Amendment rights to be told that because I am a member of the Left that this is all my fault and that I (a white American Jew) am guilty of the same abhorrence of indecency as a term used by NAZIS to JUSTIFY EXTERMINATION.

Huh Sarah? What effect does that have on MY First Amendment?

How bout this. Go fk yourself you stupid b***ch.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | January 12, 2011 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Adam


You just watched the conduct of Obama and the liberals over the past two years.


And you have the nerve to use the word "foolishness" on Sarah Palin???

I'm not sure how much of an idiot you are, but certainly there must be a word for "extreme idiot."

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 12, 2011 11:35 AM | Report abuse

Yep, Palin nailed it, and Serwer's response is proof.

Posted by: fishcrow | January 12, 2011 11:37 AM | Report abuse

I accuse Adam Serwer of morbid, psyco-sexual, obsessive-compulsive, Sarah Palin fixation complex.

It is peculiar to partisan, Obama media operatives. It makes it's victims write compulsively about their love-hate object, Sarah Palin.

I coin the term, "Paliomaniacs" for this sad condition.

Maybe some sort of group therapy treatment is in order.

I call on all "Journolisters" to seek the help they so desperately need, immiediately.

For the sake of responsible journalists everywhere.

All three of them!

Posted by: battleground51 | January 12, 2011 11:37 AM | Report abuse

Huh Sarah? What effect does that have on MY First Amendment?

How bout this. Go fk yourself you stupid b***ch.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | January 12, 2011 11:34 AM


_____________________

Greg Ban him forever.


Foul language Ban him forever.


False Charges of anti-semitism. Ban him forever.


Enough


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 12, 2011 11:38 AM | Report abuse


Huh Sarah? What effect does that have on MY First Amendment?

How bout this. Go fk yourself you stupid b***ch.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | January 12, 2011 11:34 AM


_____________________


Greg Ban him forever.


Foul language Ban him forever.


False Charges of anti-semitism. Ban him forever.


Enough


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 12, 2011 11:40 AM | Report abuse

And you have the nerve to use the word "foolishness" on Sarah Palin???
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Drill baby Drill.

She handles foolishness all on her own.

Drill Baby.

Posted by: dcinmd1 | January 12, 2011 11:41 AM | Report abuse

Using an ant-semitic expression right out of the mouth of the Nazi party to defend herself for being blamed of the shooting of a Jewish congresswoman is probably the stupidest thing she has done so far, though probably not the last one.

Posted by: Mighty7 | January 12, 2011 11:43 AM | Report abuse

Speaking of blood libel, by Palin's standard here, those who spread the blood libel against Jews are not to blame for violence against them since they didn't literally commit the violence. She argues here not that the crosshairs don't amount to incitement, but that incitement doesn't exist.

Posted by: birchbeer | January 12, 2011 11:44 AM | Report abuse

Adam

After reading a number of your columns, I have to be honest.


You are the LAST PERSON who should be using the word FOOLISHNESS.


Really?


Are you kidding? Do you have any self-awareness at all???


I have to wonder about you.


Maybe we do need a greater amount of Federal fund for MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES.


The liberals REALLY REALLY need it.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 12, 2011 11:44 AM | Report abuse

@papagnello: "Blood Libel, obviously she didn't come up with it. Who did put that in the text?"

That is the $24,000 question.

I'd really like to know that myself.

WHO IS IT?

Who is putting her up to these comments?

Posted by: Ethan2010 | January 12, 2011 11:45 AM | Report abuse

@Ethan2010: "Go fk yourself you stupid b***ch."

The tribes are rather rowdy today, aren't they, professor?

:)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 12, 2011 11:47 AM | Report abuse

@chuck: "Why can't there be a recognition of [a climate of hate] w/o saying that any one particular individual is responsible?"

Don't be so naive or, less charitably, so disingenuous. By choosing this moment to discuss "rhetoric" and a "climate of hate" Greg and Adam and many others are quite transparently trying to "obscure their own dishonesty in trying to imply responsibility where none exists."

Posted by: sbj3 | January 12, 2011 11:50 AM | Report abuse

But, there is some actual political news today and it is good. for both parties!

"Americans give higher marks to President Barack Obama and congressional Republicans after a holiday season of compromise paid dividends for both, according to the latest Associated Press-GfK poll...

At the start of the divided government era, the survey found that 53 percent of Americans approve of how Obama is doing his job, his best numbers since the divisive health care vote 10 months ago...

Most people, according to the poll, now are putting their faith in Republicans to implement the changes needed to fix the economy...

But a majority also now view the Democrats favorably, an oddity just two months after voters dealt Obama's party what he called "a shellacking" in congressional elections. AP

Posted by: shrink2 | January 12, 2011 11:50 AM | Report abuse

So the liberals think - that after being caught red-handed in a baseless smear campaign over the weekend,


their best move now is .... more attacks on Sarah Palin????


foolish is not the word for that. Complete idiocy is what is should be called.


Posted by: RainForestRising | January 12, 2011 11:50 AM | Report abuse

whoever has been pulling sarah's strings has been remarkably successful - up until now.
Driving the liberals nuts with outrageous BS is her handler's modus operandi, but this time they've gone too far. Only the most rabid rightwingnuts like this pissforestrising goober are trying to defend her on it. ANd in the usual conservative fashion, blaming the liberals for being just like they are themselves.

Posted by: eezmamata | January 12, 2011 11:50 AM | Report abuse

The events speak for themselves. Giffords understood the possible consequences from the gunsight map posted on Palin's web site. She mentioned that on MSNBC:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tTDiZZYCAs

Giffords was shot - along with six who were killed and a dozen others wounded. It's not surprising that Palin refuses to lay a claim to that map. She doesn't have either the background or the skills to realize how foolish it was. She certainly doesn't have what it takes to lead.

We all have to take responsibility for the things we say and do. If we can't do that, we're not fully realized as people. Moreover, the idea that everyone is completely independent from everyone else, with no implications for anything beyond the outrageous content, is absurd on its face and laughable in every other way given the great lengths to which advertisers are going to use "social media" to find friends of friends of friends...

Sarah is "right-on-target", now and forever. That's why she won't be winning any presidential elections. She sees nothing beyond the political bullseye. Above all she sees no one but herself.

As for how "wronged" she's been, the range of commentary has been all over the map. While some of it assigns direct blame, the bulk of it has not. Many have simply wanted her to acknowledge it wasn't a good idea to put that map up on her site. She will, apparently, never do that. So be it.

Posted by: NCimon | January 12, 2011 11:51 AM | Report abuse

So the liberals think - that after being caught red-handed in a baseless smear campaign over the weekend,


their best move now is .... more attacks on Sarah Palin????


foolish is not the word for that. Complete idiocy is what is should be called.


_________________________


Blood Libel


Yes, the liberals were using the blood of a 9 year old girl to ATTACK SARAH PALIN this weekend


YOU PEOPLE ARE UNBELIEVABLE FOOLS.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 12, 2011 11:52 AM | Report abuse

You know who is thrilled today?
Mitt Romney.

This is Palin's "I am not a witch" moment.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 12, 2011 11:54 AM | Report abuse

RainForestRising, these continuous posts of yours are saying something about you. do you know what it is?
The desperation is obvious, to everybody. What are you so worried about, that the independents are going to believe the liberals about you and your kind?

Don't worry about it. We already know what you are, we don't need the liberals throwing their own tantrums about this.

Whatever the liberals say, you are in a panic. It gives people reason to their complaints in fact.

Posted by: eezmamata | January 12, 2011 11:55 AM | Report abuse

"Just hours after 22-year-old gunman Jared Loughner launched a shooting spree at a Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) constituent event in Tucson on Saturday that left six dead and 14 wounded, Legislative District chairman Anthony Miller, a Republican, announced that he would resign his position. In an email to the state’s GOP chair, Miller cited “constant verbal attacks” after his election last year “and Internet blog posts by some local members with Tea Party ties made him worry about his family’s safety.” Many of his Republican colleagues followed him out the door"

http://thinkprogress.org/

Posted by: wbgonne | January 12, 2011 11:55 AM | Report abuse

@shrink: Not only that but Gallup "finds that within only five days of Republicans taking majority control of the House of Representatives on Jan. 4, Americans' approval of the bicameral body's job shot up more than 50%"

http://www.gallup.com/poll/145538/Congress-Job-Approval-Rebounds.aspx?utm_source=alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=syndication&utm_content=morelink&utm_term=Politics

Posted by: sbj3 | January 12, 2011 11:55 AM | Report abuse

Let's raise money to buy Palin a house in Arizona. Then we can use Arizona law to have her locked up in a mental hospital.

Posted by: foofoofoo | January 12, 2011 11:56 AM | Report abuse

The author proves the opposite against his own thesis. Liberals, much like mobs in old Europe have been castigating Palin, teabaggers, Beck, Limbaugh and even viewers of FOX NOISE for the actions of a deranged gunman when even he(Greg Sargent)admits"it would be quite a stretch to blame Palin". By his reasoning and the actions of the howling liberal mob, Palin is right in declaring a "blood libel".

Posted by: slim21 | January 12, 2011 11:57 AM | Report abuse

KW: "The tribes are rather rowdy today, aren't they, professor?"

Don't fkng smile at me idiot.

You "love" this raging lunatic.

YOU ARE THE PROBLEM KEVIN. WAKE UP.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | January 12, 2011 11:57 AM | Report abuse

Huh Sarah? What effect does that have on MY First Amendment?

How bout this. Go fk yourself you stupid b***ch.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | January 12, 2011 11:34 AM


_____________________


Greg Ban him forever.


Foul language Ban him forever.


False Charges of anti-semitism. Ban him forever.


Enough


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 12, 2011 11:57 AM | Report abuse

I though David Dayen had an intelligent comment this morning. BTW, we're all getting tired of commenting on this, me included. Here's part of it. I especially like the part about freedom of speech not being freedom from criticism. That's what I've been trying to say since Saturday or Sunday. We can all respect our right to freedom of speech but we also have the right to criticize what is said. I hope they don't pass something in the heat of the moment to take away another civil liberty.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"And third, there’s this “blood libel” part. I have to figure whoever wrote this for Palin knew precisely what that metaphor was all about. It’s not an accident that Palin likens herself to a persecuted religious sect. She has the victimization thing down pat. But there’s a certain monstrousness in comparing being criticized, by political opponents and media figures, to claiming that Jews eat their matzos soaked in the blood of Christian babies as a pretext for a pogrom.

Finally, I join with Palin in her criticism of Bob Brady’s proposed bill that would criminalize speech. That’s not the answer, and I particularly don’t trust government to decide what constitutes protected speech and what doesn’t. But there’s a difference between freedom of speech and freedom from criticism. Palin wants both, and the latter appears nowhere in the founding documents or the laws of the land. Nobody forced her to become a public figure, and nobody gave her a card offering immunity from criticism. If you don’t want to be misunderstood for inciting violence through rhetoric, the best remedy is to not put yourself in that situation to begin with. That’s best settled with a norm and not a law."

http://news.firedoglake.com/2011/01/12/methinks-palin-angle-doth-protest-too-much/

Posted by: lmsinca | January 12, 2011 11:57 AM | Report abuse

Cluebat to Adam: The shooter's mother is Jewish. And Leftists injected anti-Semitism into the debate by obsessing about the loony Leftist shooter's fixation with Mein Kampf. Own him, Leftists.

Professor Reynolds (accurately) described this orchestrated Leftist smear campaign against Mrs. Palin as "blood libel."

There's a very good reason the term "blood libel" was applied in such situations, and that's because of the common meanings of "blood" and "libel."

I see very little distinction between accusing Jews of killing children and accusing Sarah Palin of prompting a mass murder, except the difference between a principal and an accomplice. (And keep in mind the law punishes the accomplice-before-the-fact the same as the principal.) These are both horrific examples of defamation.

For what it's worth, the phrase "blood libel" has been used more recently, and fairly commonly, to describe suggestions that gays might be more likely to molest, or recruit, children.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/10/paladinos-rants.html

There are other examples.
http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1010/12/joy.01.html

Try harder to take a little responsibility for this Leftists smear campaign and adding smear on smear by implying anti-Semitism where there isn't any.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | January 12, 2011 11:57 AM | Report abuse

@Kadaffi: "Cluebat to Adam: The shooter's mother is Jewish."

This is not the first time you've posted almost this entire piece, and I don't think it's the second. Once you've posted the almost-identical thing more than a few times, I think you can assume we've got the picture, and you don't need to keep re-posting it, again and again and again.

It makes you look kinda, I dunno, obsessive-compulsive or something.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 12, 2011 12:01 PM | Report abuse

Huh Sarah? What effect does that have on MY First Amendment?

How bout this. Go fk yourself you stupid b***ch.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | January 12, 2011 11:34 AM


_____________________


Ethan is far out of control.


All he is is a paid troll who re-types talking points which have been emailed to him.

That - and he posts nasty comments about other people


There has NEVER been a constructive or civil discussion from Ethan


Greg Ban him forever.


Foul language Ban him forever.


False Charges of anti-semitism. Ban him forever.


Enough

It is about time.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 12, 2011 12:01 PM | Report abuse

re Dave Weigel's conclusion about 'keep your mouth shut' being a smart approach; that may be best for the NRA but is not appropriate for a leader, let alone a "great" leader as SP would like to think she is. That is why her whining video shows such poor judgment.

'''''''''''''''
But Keach Hagey notes that Palin, a Fox News commentator, has not herself spoke about Arizona since Saturday. And I noticed that the NRA has supplied the same quote to every reporter asking for comment on Arizona or on gun control legislation: "Anything other than prayers for the victims and their families at this time would be inappropriate."

This strikes me as smart media strategy.

Posted by: smd1234 | January 12, 2011 12:01 PM | Report abuse

Kevin that KDE is only the second person to be assigned, according to my understanding of your point system, a place in the ash heap of the PL.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 12, 2011 12:04 PM | Report abuse

In “Open Letter Sent to Anti Defamation League About Sarah Palin,” Geoff Livingston, an author, well-known blogger, and co-founder of communications consulting firm Zoetica, writes the following:

To Whom It May Concern:

I am the great grand nephew of Siegfried Livingston, your founder, and a blogger at geofflivingston.com. It’s my request as a descendant of Siegfried and as a Jew that the Anti Defamation League (ADL) take swift and prompt action to condemn Sarah Palin’s remarks this morning against the media, in conjunction with the Arizona Shootings.

In her video speech, Ms. Palin directly used the words “Blood Libel” in blaming the media for associations with her during the shooting aftermath. The ensuing wave of antisemitism caused the words “Jews” and “Blood Libel” to trend on Twitter for hours, tens of thousands of people associating Jewish people with drinking children’s blood. Further, the association with Jews running the media cannot be ignored. Ms. Palin continues to be irresponsible in her use of media to inspire hate. Today’s acts against the Jewish faith are no different. We must make a stand. You are the organization to do it. Please act swiftly.

Thank you,

Geoff

http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/jewish-anti-defamation-league-asked-to-condemn-palins-remarks/politics/2011/01/12/16705

Posted by: Ethan2010 | January 12, 2011 12:04 PM | Report abuse

ChuckinDenton

I saw your response in the last thread, thanks. I just wanted to make sure my statement was clear. You're right there's a lot of heated dialogue today so I didn't want to add to it by giving the wrong impression.

Posted by: lmsinca | January 12, 2011 12:05 PM | Report abuse

The conservatives have been bullying the liberals for years now, calling them communists, socialists, perverts, baby killers, America haters and whatever.

So now the liberals are responding in kind, using the same kinds of lies against the conservatives as the conservatives are using against them.

And like all bullies do when they get caught, they're running home to mama and crying about how unfair it is.

Your lying about each other like this is pathetic and disgusting, but nothing is as disgusting as the conservatives whining about it.

Posted by: eezmamata | January 12, 2011 12:05 PM | Report abuse

likely origin of loose use of blood libel terminology was on Monday

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703667904576071913818696964.html

GLENN HARLAN REYNOLDS

Posted by: smd1234 | January 12, 2011 12:06 PM | Report abuse

Ethan

Can you please make a list of ALL the words and phrases that people are not allowed to use.

A child died on Saturday - and YOU used that death to SMEAR other people


I WOULD CALL THAT BLOOD LIBEL - THE PHRASE APPLIES CORRECTLY TO YOUR OWN ACTIONS ON THIS BLOG ETHAN.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 12, 2011 12:07 PM | Report abuse

Given the term's historical meaning, am I reading too much into the fact that Rep. Giffords is Jewish. Or am I giving Palin too much credit?

Posted by: Ralphinjersey | January 12, 2011 12:09 PM | Report abuse

eezmamata in reply to your comment at 12:05 PM


Are you kidding?


The Obama people havent tried to use False Charges of Racism to BULLY people?


You can take your charges and put them where they belong - in the garbage.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 12, 2011 12:09 PM | Report abuse

"Kevin that KDE is only the second person to be assigned, according to my understanding of your point system, a place in the ash heap of the PL."

shrink, me too, on Monday. Thanks again Kevin.

Posted by: lmsinca | January 12, 2011 12:11 PM | Report abuse


Ethan

A child died on Saturday - and YOU used that death to SMEAR other people


I WOULD CALL THAT BLOOD LIBEL -


THE PHRASE APPLIES CORRECTLY TO YOUR OWN ACTIONS ON THIS BLOG ETHAN.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 12, 2011 12:11 PM | Report abuse

The most accurate and appropriate quote I've seen thusfar...

"Today has been set aside to honor the victims of the Tucson massacre. And Sarah Palin has apparently decided she's one of them." Josh Marshall

He nailed it.

Posted by: JilliB | January 12, 2011 12:12 PM | Report abuse

"Following Saturday’s tragic shooting in Tucson, Arizona, some Republicans have argued that 22-year old assassin Jared Lee Loughner was more affected by his mental illness than the nation’s lax gun control laws or Washington’s divisive and often times violent political rhetoric. “What will solve this problem is removing the politics from it and getting after the crux of this problem and that is somebody who needed mental health services and or legal intervention much earlier in his cycle toward violence,” Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI) said this afternoon on MSNBC ... Newly-elected Rep. Allen West (R-FL) struck a similar note on his Facebook page, saying “The shooter was a very disturbed individual and it appears there were so many warning signs that he was going to do something horrible. We should be focusing on the mental health crisis in our country, not politics.”

... President Obama’s health reform legislation — which all Republicans now want to repeal — would go even further in helping Americans with mental illness. By 2014, families and individuals will be able to enroll in insurance through an expanded Medicaid program or the exchanges, where private companies will have to offer mental health and substance use disorder services as part of the essential package of benefits. The law also expands parity to a much wider pool, “making it possible for millions more people to get the same coverage for substance abuse and illnesses like bipolar disorder, major depression and schizophrenia as they would for, say, diabetes or cancer.” As Michael J. Fitzpatrick, executive director of the National Alliance on Mental Illness, or NAMI, told the New York Times shortly after reform was signed into law, reform “can change the mental health system in America and really give families and individuals an opportunity to get a level of access to care we could only fantasize about before this became law.”"

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/01/11/rogers-mental-tucson/

Posted by: wbgonne | January 12, 2011 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Palin has exhibited her sociopathic personality in all its glory. This is bad for Obama, since Palin as a GOP candidate for 2012 is toast. He would have mopped the floor with her. Romney is still trying to figure out what to say about Tucson so he can pleases all factions.

Posted by: filmnoia | January 12, 2011 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Palin = psychopath and sociopath. Why keep publishing her garbage and trash talk?

Posted by: bloommarko4 | January 12, 2011 12:14 PM | Report abuse

Ralph,

Palin did not write her speech, the person who did knows the historical context because that person is almost certainly literate.

Palin is going to be very upset that her use of that phrase will be held against her by the lamstream media and everyone knows who controls the lamestream media.

Yep nobody can upstage the victim status of Sarah Palin,
n-o-b-o-d-y.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 12, 2011 12:15 PM | Report abuse

Less than a year ago, ARIZONA Senator John McShame:

~McCain: ‘Fine’ for Palin to use gun imagery directed at Democrats~

March 25th, 2010

"I have seen the rhetoric of 'targeted districts' as long as I've been in politics," McCain responded, chuckling. "To say that there's a targeted district or that we 'reload' or 'got back into the fight again.' Please."

"Those are not my words," Curry interrupted. "Those are her words."

"Those are fine," McCain reaffirmed, smiling broadly. "They're used all the time."

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/03/mccain-defends-palin-gun-talk/

Posted by: Ethan2010 | January 12, 2011 12:15 PM | Report abuse

[Ethan2010 screeched: "MY ANCESTORS... Go fk yourself you stupid b***ch."]

As the self-annointed expert on "ancestors", does the fact that Giffords and the shooter are BOTH Jewish mean ANYTHING to you?

Own him, Ethan.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | January 12, 2011 12:15 PM | Report abuse

eezmamata in reply to your comments at 11:55 AM


Seriously, you are making ridiculous statements


Everyone in the country knows that Obama's people have been at war with the Tea Party for the last two years


Obama's people have been attempting to smear the Tea Party constantly - INNOCENT AMERICAN CITIZENS have been under ATTACK.


Clearly, this is unacceptable behavior for the President of the United States - to have a group of people on the side who attack innocent American citizens.

Everyone remembers what Clinton tried to do with the Oklahoma City bombing - and the Obama people started it on Saturday

So, DON'T START THE ATTACKS AND THEN SAY THE OTHER SIDE IS DEFENSIVE.


It just proves how hypocritical, and insane the Obama people.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 12, 2011 12:16 PM | Report abuse

wbgonne

That thinkprogress piece re GOP Miller resigning was as chilling as almost anything else I've read in the last few days, other than the actual events of Saturday of course. Very discouraging and I have to wonder if everyone has simply taken all the mirrors and thrown them in the trash heap of discarded responsibility.

Posted by: lmsinca | January 12, 2011 12:17 PM | Report abuse

Inexcusable as Gov. Palin's violent rhetoric and imagery may be, and notwithstanding the fact that it was the more famous Governor whom Rep. Giffords called out on national TV for the calls to violence being aimed at her, it seems that the blame for this massacre ought to fall more squarely on the Congresswoman's opponent Jesse Kelly.

After all, it was Mr. Kelly who ran ads brandishing a gun, calling on his supporters to go get theirs and help him to take the congresswoman out. Gov. Palin's national ad campaign had to have been a lot more attenuated in Tucson.

That being said, it is hard to see Gov. Palin's campaign as representing anything other than utter moral depravity.

Posted by: Itzajob | January 12, 2011 12:18 PM | Report abuse

panic, RainForestRising, remember the panic. You and your kind are showing their true colors in response to this matter.

We independents are paying close attention to how you people respond to the other side doing to you what you've been doing to them.

You are disgusting.

Posted by: eezmamata | January 12, 2011 12:18 PM | Report abuse

As usual, Palin displays her ignorance, hatefulness. bigotry and defensiveness.

Her repeated calls for violence and shooting against her political opponents, including Giffords, can't be swept under the rug.

That she is making herself the victim and the star of today's sad rituals for the true victims speaks louder than words what a vile opportunist she is.

Posted by: solsticebelle | January 12, 2011 12:18 PM | Report abuse

eemamata

I don't think you would ever make these comments to someone's face


You are proving why the Obama people MUST BE SENT OUT OF THE GOVERNMENT FOREVER.


The Obama people ARE dragging down the political climate in this country.


This country can not heal until ALL the Obama people are DRIVEN OUT.


Seriously, you people are just worthless leaches.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 12, 2011 12:18 PM | Report abuse

panic, RainForestRising, remember the panic. You and your kind are showing their true colors in response to this matter.

We independents are paying close attention to how you people respond to the other side doing to you what you've been doing to them.

You are disgusting.

Posted by: eezmamata | January 12, 2011 12:19 PM | Report abuse

"Romney is still trying to figure out what to say about Tucson so he can pleases all factions." Yes and as I mentioned earlier, Huck's message to wingnut radio audiences was masterful, it was apolitical and 100% compassionate. I am a tough old bird and I could have squeezed off a tear if I had thought too much about it.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 12, 2011 12:19 PM | Report abuse

Could we all just try to back up a bit and see the forest for the trees.

The reason this story originally blew up about Palin's involvement is just (pick your word...karma..fate...serendipity) Sarah did not make herself the center of this story. The left wing media did not set out to destroy Sarah...R or D Conservative or Liberal there are some stories that write themselves...rightly or wrongly. This story was written on the now famous bit of video of the victim decrying Palin's use of the targets.
Seeing an incredibly popular, very likeable smiling woman lightly say that she didn't really appreciate it because "words have consequences" is just too powerful of an image for either the left, the right or the Palin political machine to handle. That piece of video is what really was the end of Palin...popular victim asking a widely despised politician to do the decent thing.

If that video had not existed, and instead there was video of equal quality of Sharron Angle's 2nd Amendment remedies remarks instead of scratchy audio it would have been splashed all over the screen instead of Palin. IMHO kismet...not the left..not the right...and not Sarah herself is what focused so much white hot attention on her.

As for her "blood libel" remarks...it is so predictably Sarah isn't it?
It's amazing. Three days of silence and then this slick seven minute production.
Can there be any doubt that with three days time Palin's staff of advisors including some national figures didn't get a chance to vet this speech. Have any of you ever worked on a campaign or any other form of PR for that matter...stuff of this magnitude doesn't simply get written recorded and sent off. That seven minutes was vetted over and over again scrubbed meticulously, carefully parsing every word so that nobody could take offense. Can than be any doubt that Sarah received plenty of council to dump the "blood libel" charge and all the reasons why she should refrain from a slur that would appear Anti Semitic..especially in thewake of the fact the victim was Jewish? She like the sound of it and it's quite easy to see Sarah ignoring their advice and doing it anyway..especially after all that leaked from R's after the '08 campaign about the difficulty of managing Miss Rogue.

Sarah reminds me of something my mother used to say to me when we would argue...
"You'd rather be right than President".

And so Sarah how's that always being right thing workin out fer ya?

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 12, 2011 12:20 PM | Report abuse

Set aside your political feelings for a moment and ask -- doesn't this woman know or say anything of value? Ever?

It's all about the Sarah Palin Brand.

Posted by: tony_in_Durham_NC | January 12, 2011 12:21 PM | Report abuse

[Ethan2010 whined: "I have seen the rhetoric of 'targeted districts' as long as I've been in politics," McCain responded, chuckling.]

So what... McCain was correct.

EVIDENCE: Feel the Leftist hate target rage.
http://www.verumserum.com/?p=13647

[Source: Democratic Leadership Committee website]

The shooter was one of your own. Own him, Ethan.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | January 12, 2011 12:22 PM | Report abuse

"You are disgusting."

You've made his day.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 12, 2011 12:22 PM | Report abuse

"First off, it would be a serious stretch to assign any blame to Palin for Jared Loughner's actions. But while this is a situation in which Palin has been genuinely wronged by critics..."

====================

That's right. Palin has been genuinely wronged by critics.

Is there no way to stop the misguided criticism?

The liberal media just loves/hates her.

Posted by: postfan1 | January 12, 2011 12:22 PM | Report abuse

Ethan the shooter was jewish


Just another example of jewish violence - which has a horrible history.


Ethan - how many PALESTINIANS have died???


How many PALESTINIANS HAVE LOST THEIR HOMES???


You should start to address JEWISH VIOLENCE.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 12, 2011 12:23 PM | Report abuse

I have a better question...

So who's the teleprompter™ reader now?

Does she even know what "blood libel" means?

PS: Conservatives hate it when their opponents use their own tactics against them. I can count many statements made by Democrats like President Obama, just to hear them nitpicked to death by wingnuts. Especially bull hockey they make up about what wasn't said.

No doubt Palin's "bulls eye" ad campaign was in bad taste. We know the shooter was crazy, but Palin just makes it worse when all she had to do was shut up and look, I dunno, "presidential"?

Posted by: tony_in_Durham_NC | January 12, 2011 12:26 PM | Report abuse

@Kevin_Willis "@Ethan2010: "Go fk yourself you stupid b***ch."

The tribes are rather rowdy today, aren't they, professor?

:)"

Kevin, I think some people get up in the morning and actively look for ways to make themselves angry.

As usual, Ezra Klein seems to have a more reasonable take:

"I'll stand with Jon Chait and, oddly enough, Sarah Palin on this one: Palin is right to feel aggrieved. As Chait says, many have blamed her for a killing rampage that she had nothing to do with. A lot of Palin's rhetoric is over the top, and her gun metaphors ("RELOAD!") and her target sights looked unsettling in light of subsequent events. But the subsequent events were not her fault.

Moreover, I just don't care if Palin thought "blood libel" was a vivid way of saying "nasty smear" instead of a description of the once-common anti-Semitic trope that Jews murder Christian children because their blood is needed to bake matzoh. I'm Jewish, so I know the term well. But I imagine the history of it is more obscure to those who didn't attend Hebrew school.

What is remarkable to me, however, is Palin's ability to never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. Palin didn't ask to be part of this story. But she did choose how to respond to it. Imagine if Palin had come out and said, "My initial response was to defend the fact that I had never condoned such violence, and never would. But the fact is, if I in any way contributed to an unhealthy political climate, I have to be more careful and deliberate in my public language rather than merely sharpen my defenses." That would've been leadership: It would have made her critics look small, and it would've made her look big. Those who doubted whether Palin could rise to an occasion that called for more than sharp partisanship would've been silenced."

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/

Posted by: jnc4p | January 12, 2011 12:27 PM | Report abuse


Huh Sarah? What effect does that have on MY First Amendment?

How bout this. Go fk yourself you stupid b***ch.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | January 12, 2011 11:34 AM


_____________________


Ethan is far out of control.


All he is is a paid troll who re-types talking points which have been emailed to him.

That - and he posts nasty comments about other people


There has NEVER been a constructive or civil discussion from Ethan


Greg Ban him forever.


Foul language Ban him forever.


False Charges of anti-semitism. Ban him forever.


Enough


It is about time.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 12, 2011 12:28 PM | Report abuse

Sorry another homophone got me...counsel not council BTW Hared Homophones are two words that sound alike but are spelled differently.
Didn't want to get you all nuts again with that Homo thing ya know.

Posted by: rukidding7 | January 12, 2011 12:28 PM | Report abuse

lmsinca:

That's why the debate over whether this is a "political" shooting is important. The AZ GOPers know what's going on in their state. ANd they are AFRAID of the Tea Party extremists. The hateful rhetoric of the anti-government nihilists isn't circumscribed by political party: when the government becomes the enemy, everyone serving in government becomes the enemy: Democrat, Republican, whatever.

Posted by: wbgonne | January 12, 2011 12:30 PM | Report abuse

You say Sarah Palin is making herself the center of attention. The MSM directed blame towards Mrs. Palin, the Tea Party, and others. Sheriff Dupnik brought in Rush Limbaugh as deserving partial blame. The MSM hurled accusations at Mrs. Palin of being complicit in mass murder and now the MSM is throwing accusations at her because she has the nerve to defend herself.

With every day that passes, the MSM reaches a new low, and as bad as the MSM has been at times, that's really low.

Back in 1990, Texas Gubernatorial candidate Clayton Williams, while talking about the weather in Texas, said it was like rape. “If it’s inevitable, just relax and enjoy it.”

The MSM has libeled Sarah Palin by saying she is partly to blame for Jared Loughner's killing a Federal Judge and five other people, and wounding a sitting member of Congress.

When Mrs. Palin dares to make a response, the MSM says, to paraphrase Clayton Williams, that she should take the blame and relax and enjoy it.

Posted by: Rschrim1 | January 12, 2011 12:30 PM | Report abuse

[tony_in_Durham_NC whined: "It's all about the Sarah Palin Brand."]

Yesterday, Leftists were shrieking for Mrs. Palin to say something. Today, they condemn her for doing just that.

Make up your collectivists minds.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | January 12, 2011 12:31 PM | Report abuse

@RUK (hey bud!): "Can than be any doubt that Sarah received plenty of council to dump the "blood libel" charge and all the reasons why she should refrain from a slur that would appear Anti Semitic..especially in thewake of the fact the victim was Jewish?"

I don't think so at all. I think it was purposefully designed.

Look at the context. The MEDIA is concocting a blood libel. And who "runs the media"?

Hebrews.

No, this was clearly an intentional anti-Semitic slur.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | January 12, 2011 12:37 PM | Report abuse

wb, in re your 12:12, yes, after what Stalin referred to as some "left-right deviationism" (which he of course, considered a capital offense) we are on message.

The legal intervention has to do with an intersection between the 2nd, e.g., what does "well regulated" mean?, and 4th amendments.

Our mental health laws exist in a wrinkle on the page, an intent the framers never debated or considered, but which was attributed to them, evidently by people who were not strict constitutionalists, you know, like Clarence Thomas.

Nowadays, the government does not have to wait for a mentally ill person to do something terrible in order to take him into custody and forcibly treat him. But the standard for imminent danger is far too narrow, in the opinion of everyone who works around or finds themselves on the receiving end of untreated mental illness.

We talked about why that is before, briefly, past abuses of the psychiatric industry. L Ron Hubbard, imo, created Scientology to right the wrongs done against him - to prove he was not crazy and that psychiatrists are charlatans or worse. But the 4th amendment rights of crazy people go way past where they were attenuated prior to the lobotomy/wall current electroshock period, at great social and personal cost.

Posted by: shrink2 | January 12, 2011 12:37 PM | Report abuse

Given that notorious Jew hunter Fred Malek is a top-tier advisor to Palin, is it any wonder a despicable phrase like blood libel would work its way into her incoherent, self-pitying rant? Palin was sending a signal to her base last spring when she put crosshairs on the districts of 20 elected officials; she was sending a signal to her base today by equating herself with the innocent Christian children murdered by Jews (the same Jews who control much of the much-despised lamestream media) so they can bake their Passover unleavened bread with christian blood. Every responsible Republican, if there are any left, must condemn this heinous statement.

Posted by: ImaDem | January 12, 2011 12:39 PM | Report abuse

Note to KaddafiDillweed:

I'd rather not hear Sarah Palin say another word again.

I don't represent anyone but myself. That's obviously a concept you struggle with, bless your heart.


Posted by: tony_in_Durham_NC | January 12, 2011 12:39 PM | Report abuse

2000+ news stories on google already. Obama who? She's a genius at working the liberal media. The incoherent liberal rants had pretty much subsided once they realized how they were just embarrassing themselves but here we go again.

Posted by: peterg73 | January 12, 2011 12:41 PM | Report abuse

As Sarah Palin teaches her children "don't retreat, reload," what does anyone expect from her but to come out shooting her mouth off.

Sarah Palin may consider herself some kind of "political voice" but rest assured as Oprah said "she trusts the intelligence of the American voter, the American people" when it comes to Sarah Palin.

Keep talking Sarah, keep the ignorance rolling off your tongue, keep "reloading," you are only hurting yourself, thank goodness.

Posted by: rannrann | January 12, 2011 12:42 PM | Report abuse

[Ethan2010 spat: who "runs the media"? Hebrews.]

LMAO! Ethan just jumped the shark.

As the self-annointed expert on "Hebrews", does the fact that Giffords and the shooter are BOTH Jewish mean ANYTHING to you?

Own him, Ethan.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | January 12, 2011 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Ok yea this is a new low. I'm disgusted, and I think she's a shirker, and this is just one more time where she's shirking.

Posted by: Nymous | January 12, 2011 12:43 PM | Report abuse

BLOOD LIBEL


A 9 year old girl died, and the democrats used that death to attack innocent people.


that is a FAIR USE of the term "blood libel"


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | January 12, 2011 12:43 PM | Report abuse

@jnc4p: "Palin is right to feel aggrieved."

(quoting Ezra)

Well, certainly, and I'm also right to scratch myself with certain areas are itchy, but it doesn't mean I have to do it in public. ;)

I love me some Sarah, but I think the right thing to do, if she was going to make any statement at all, is express sympathy to the injured, the dead, and so on, and let her critics complain. She couldn't really agree that her rhetoric was inappropriate (as this would be treated as an admission of guilt), but she didn't have to come out and talk about dueling and blood libel.

But, ah well, to each their own. I'm adding a hi-lite feature to the Troll Hunter. That's what I'm doing. ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 12, 2011 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Doctor:
What is it she does now? Look how she rubs her hands.

Gentlewoman:
It is an accustom'd action with her, to seem thus washing her hands. I have known her continue in this a quarter of an hour.

Lady Macbeth:
Yet here's a spot.

Doctor:
Hark, she speaks. I will set down what comes from her, to satisfy my remembrance the more strongly.

Lady Macbeth:
Out, damn'd spot! Out, I say!—One; two: why, then 'tis time to do't. — Hell is murky. — Fie, my lord, fie, a soldier, and afeard? What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our pow'r to accompt? — Yet who would have thought the old man to have had so much blood in him?

William Shakespeare, Macbeth, Act 5, Scene 1, 26–40

Posted by: 02Pete | January 12, 2011 12:45 PM | Report abuse

@Ethan2010: "Don't fkng smile at me idiot."

:)

"You 'love' this raging lunatic."

I think "raging lunatic" is kind of strong.

"YOU ARE THE PROBLEM KEVIN."

Oh, there may be a problem here. But, I'm pretty sure it's not me.

I'll consult the tribal council. What say ye, wise personages of the Wingnut Tribe?

Hi-lite favorite users in Troll Hunter. It's coming: soon!

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 12, 2011 12:47 PM | Report abuse

I did not learn of the "cross-hairs" ad until after the fact, probably from a blog. How was it distributed? Post cards to registered Rs? TV ads? At a website? By email?

I did not learn of the Ds' "bullseyes" ad until after the fact, probably from a blog. How was it distributed? Post cards to registered Ds? TV ads? At a website? By email?

Where and when did you learn about either of these?

When we talk about football recruiting we say teams like USC, FL, OH ST, OK, and UT don't rebuild, they "reload".

Groups like the "militias" and the "Lone Star Republic" and disgruntled militant Muslim youths in "training" scare me. But I have worked political campaigns and using words like "target" and phrases like "knock off" is old hat. Not to excuse it, just to say the pumped up volume seems different by degree, but not in kind, to an old guy.

I am among those who think that the assumption that political disagreement is a sign of bad faith is unfortunate, and often ridiculous. I am among those who think that assuming that background noise causes, rather than is coincidental with, violence, is foolish, without any evidence of causal connection.

I am among those who think SHP's speech was bland and decent except for the unfortunate use of the freighted words "blood libel".
I am among those who would never vote for SHP for any office whatsoever.

I am among those who think Angle and Kanjorski crossed lines of propriety in their much repeated infamous campaign statements.

I am among those who think the right does this more than the left in the current climate, but that this has not always been so; and that competitive blaming for outrageous statements does not lead to progress.

This argument between SHP defenders and her accusers sounds like:

SHP drew cross-hairs on Giffords' CD, in an ad that appeared somewhere, that we do not know if the shooter saw.

Giffords said that the ad was irresponsible.

Giffords was shot by Loughner, who had some unknown history with her, at least in his head, since 2007.
========================
Therefore, SHP contributed to Giffords having been shot, according to some opponents and bloggers and media pundits; perhaps some said she had "blood on her hands".

In return, SHP blames her opponents for attacking her gratuitously, without acknowledging any desire to lower the volume, because that would be taken by her opponents as an admission, even were it not.

Thus SHP and her supporters claim freedom to avoid any responsibility for their words while criticizing others for theirs.
=======================
The whole discussion fails for me after "Giffords was shot by Loughner". The blaming by some and the counter blaming by others has been continuing for four days. Enough.

Chuck in Denton and KW, thanks for your replies to my interest in rational discussion of gun laws. Shrink, I always am grateful for your insights on mental health.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | January 12, 2011 12:47 PM | Report abuse

Just in case America's liberals ever wonder why so few people respect them, they should ponder the intent of this essay from Mr Serwer.

Essentially Mr Serwer says this: Yes, the liberals wronged you, but you have accept this in the manner we liberals prescribe.

Yet another example of one of the pillars of liberalism: do as we say, not as we do.

Mr Serwer you are simply disgusting. Nothing, and I mean nothing, any conservative ever does will ever be acceptable to you. I believe that fits the definition of "epistomological closure". It boils down to this: (1)the liberals can never be wrong. (2)In case of the appearance of liberal error see (1) above.

the image conjured in my mind of Mr Serwer while he wrote this is a pouting boy (yes, I mean boy) being forced to apologize for insulting his sister.

Here is a perfect example:
"Palin's best move would have been to remain silent, as Dave Weigel wrote yesterday, especially since Giffords had expressed concern about Palin's map at the time it had been released."

soooo, according to our pouting little boy, Ms Palin blew her opportunity to score points with people who hate her because she failed to heed the advice of another back bench liberal hack who lost his job at the WaPo when it was discovered that he despised the people he was supposed to be "covering" in his blog.

yeah right. Let's see Mr Serwer. I will paraphrase an old Mort Sahl joke: Mr Serwer, Mr Weigel, if you were on the same plane as Ms Palin and that plane crashed, killing all aboard it, whose name would be printed in the largest type on the front page of the paper that employs(ed) you? Would your name even make it on the front page?

What absolute nonsense. I've never much respected Mr Serwer, but this is a new low even for a inveterate leftie.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | January 12, 2011 12:48 PM | Report abuse

I see it this way: if the rebirth of the term "blood libel" sparks more research and social/ethnic/religious discourse in and out of your place of worship, you're already farther along in enlightenment than you were five days ago. Sarah Palin -in my opinion- is a poster child for why higher education is necessary.

Posted by: mukazzi | January 12, 2011 12:48 PM | Report abuse

From a commenter on another site, re Palin's statement:

How about this for logic:

1. "Acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own. They begin and end with the criminals who commit them."

2. "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 they purport to condemn."

In the first statement, she is saying that you can't incite people to violence, they stand on their own. The second statement, however, makes the opposite claim (that you can incite people to violence).

Posted by: pragmaticagain | January 12, 2011 12:49 PM | Report abuse

[Kevin_Willis: "she didn't have to come out and talk about dueling and blood libel."]

Leftists are now openly calling for Palin's assassination.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxgJKNpjSNI&feature=player_embedded#!

Death threats: how progressive!

Can Leftists imagine Giffords effigy hung from a noose?
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/27/can-you-imagine-if-an-obama-effigy-were-hung-from-a-noose/

She ignore this viciousness? Really?

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | January 12, 2011 12:50 PM | Report abuse

@sbj3-

We don't know where this story ends regarding the shooter's motives or influences. You are saying that Greg and other are so blinded by partisanship that they wouldn't call for soul-searching if it were a GOP victim? Some undoubtedly are but I would bet that Greg isn't one of them.

To me, its nasty all the way around. Some are more culpable *for the rhetoric* than other-not for the act.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | January 12, 2011 12:50 PM | Report abuse

Yall better watch your mouths talkin bout my man Adam Serwer. UPTOWN

Posted by: lilhollywood10 | January 12, 2011 12:50 PM | Report abuse

This was a case of very bad timing, on the part of Sarah Palin.

She waited too long, to make a statement, and then she chose the wrong day to post her video, because it made her look inconsiderate of the families, on the day that the President was going to make his address.

She came across as being irate, and strident, at a time when calm, non beligerant leadership is called for. I said, a few days ago, that I doubt if her words or gunsight icons, had any connection to the actions of a guy who appears to be extremely psychotic.

Still, I think Palin should not have posted this video today, and should have projected a less strident and combative demeanour.

Also; would some one please tell her how to properly pronounce the word; pundits. She is still calling them pundints.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 12, 2011 12:51 PM | Report abuse

@eezmamata: "You are disgusting."

I, too, share your disgust of performance artists.

How do you feel about mimes?

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 12, 2011 12:51 PM | Report abuse

I think this is just more of Sarah Palin's nastiness--she knows, or SHOULD know, that Congresswoman Giffords is Jewish and she knows, or SHOULD know that the term "blood libel" is especially offensive to Jews (see the Antidefamation League's website for more on that)--yet, she weaves blood libel into her "look at me, I'm the real victim here" statement.

Posted by: Prosperity2008 | January 12, 2011 12:51 PM | Report abuse

So, Sarah should have just shut up and taken her lumps without defending herself? Isn't that just like a liberal to demand something for nothing -- Sarah Palin's speech rights -- while they slander and libel her to their hearts' content.

Oh, did I accuse liberals of having a heart? I'm sorry, please forgive me!

Posted by: braunt | January 12, 2011 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Quoting you, blood libel "usually refers to an ancient falsehood that Jews use the blood of Christian children in religious rituals." What a nice hedge.

Is it really unforgivable that someone would use that term after being accused endlessly of "having blood on her hands"? That charge is false, ergo, "libel" per se.

And the concept of blood libel DID NOT begin in the Middle Ages, and has not been confined to people of the Jewish faith:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/jud_blib1.htm

So she didn't just invent this out of ignorance -- and as you say, Glenn Reynolds used it before her:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703667904576071913818696964.html

And finally, I'd note that the Wikipedia entry on blood libel began with a more general definition as far back as 2006:

"Blood libels are unfounded allegations that a particular group kills people as a form of human sacrifice, and uses their blood in various rituals."

It has since been scrubbed to make it much more focused on the term's use against Jewish people. Gee, I wonder why THAT happened?

Posted by: mattr1970 | January 12, 2011 12:54 PM | Report abuse

@Liam-still: "Still, I think Palin should not have posted this video today, and should have projected a less strident and combative demeanour."

Perhaps. In my opinion, she shouldn't have used the word blood libel (in fact, should have avoided blood entirely), and, while I like the part about dueling, she probably should have stayed of the topic of heated rhetoric entirely.

Something yesterday or before expressing sympathy and prayers for everyone who was hurt, or lost someone, would have made more sense. And just ignoring the criticisms, real or perceived, entirely, would have been better, in my mind.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 12, 2011 12:54 PM | Report abuse

How do you feel about mimes?

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 12, 2011 12:51 PM

.......................

I feel that A Mime is not a terrible thing to waste!

Posted by: Liam-still | January 12, 2011 12:55 PM | Report abuse

[Prosperity2008 whined: "the term "blood libel" is especially offensive to Jews"]

Cluebat to morons: The shooter's mother is Jewish. And Leftists injected anti-Semitism into the debate by obsessing about the loony Leftist shooter's fixation with Mein Kampf.

Professor Reynolds (accurately) described this orchestrated Leftist smear campaign against Mrs. Palin as "blood libel."

There's a very good reason the term "blood libel" was applied in such situations, and that's because of the common meanings of "blood" and "libel."

I see very little distinction between accusing Jews of killing children and accusing Sarah Palin of prompting a mass murder, except the difference between a principal and an accomplice. (And keep in mind the law punishes the accomplice-before-the-fact the same as the principal.) These are both horrific examples of defamation.

For what it's worth, the phrase "blood libel" has been used more recently, and fairly commonly, to describe suggestions that gays might be more likely to molest, or recruit, children.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/10/paladinos-rants.html

There are other examples.
http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1010/12/joy.01.html

Try harder to take a little responsibility for this Leftists smear campaign of heaping smear-on-smear by implying anti-Semitism where there isn't any.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | January 12, 2011 12:59 PM | Report abuse

@Kadaffi: "Leftists are now openly calling for Palin's assassination."

There will always be someone. Is that the position of Obama, Harry Reid, Nany Pelosi, Gabrielle Giffords, Greg Sargent, Ezra Klein, or even Paul Krugman? Well, perhaps Krugman, but even he hasn't really •said• it.

"Death threats: how progressive!"

Or conservative. People who believe themselves of both sides do it. However, in neither case, is the making of death threats a product of defects in the underlying ideology.

"Can Leftists imagine Giffords effigy hung from a noose?"

You've made this point about 20 times now. I can't speak for other people here, but I think I get it now. Thanks.

"She ignore this viciousness? Really?"

Aboslutely. 100%. The only way, in my opinion, to address it would be to let it speak for itself, when it's specifically about her, and then say, "Our country is a free nation that allows everybody to express their opinions and share their ideas, in almost any format . . . " launch into the antithesis of viciousness. Instead of letting them set the agenda. Letting your opposition set your agenda is always a mistake.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 12, 2011 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Palin and Beck and the rest don't get it. Whether it is of the vast left wing conspiracy or the media, they just love being the victim, and that is the height of hypocrisy. The hard truth is this: Palin has decided that as part of her political persona, she is going to use extreme, aggressive, in your face, and threatening language and imagery to dehumanize and marginalize her opponents. Fine, that’s her right. But now, when people respond in kind because of a senseless and tragic event that more or less mirrors the imagery and language she uses, she is the victim? Please. She is incapable of bearing responsibility or showing humility. Had she said, "In light of what happened in Tucson we regret our use of unfortunate images and language in the election, and never intended for it to be construed as wanting to cause harm to anyone. We are shocked that this sick individual did this and will work to do whatever it takes to make sure these sorts of tragedies never occur again" she would probably deflect much of this. But no, Sarah nor the right can never admit to being wrong, or mistaken, or in error, not when there is an opportunity to cast themselves as the victim. If you need to be reminded just how dangerous and extreme the noise from the right and Palin's beloved Tea Party has been, take a look here - http://wp.me/pNmlT-AK

Posted by: Dh1953 | January 12, 2011 1:00 PM | Report abuse

[Kevin_Willis: "Death Threats... both sides do it."]

Really? Then you can cite examples of conservatives doing this?

/crickets chirp

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | January 12, 2011 1:06 PM | Report abuse

Mama Grizzly is locked and loaded once again. Big bad Sarah comes out with some prepared speech thats suppose to make us all think she is some innocent victim of the media, who only reported what she said. Gifford just wanted to know what was the purpose Palins crosshairs map.

Posted by: rj2008 | January 12, 2011 1:08 PM | Report abuse

@KW: "Is that the position of ... or even Paul Krugman? Well, perhaps Krugman"

Kevin, I don't find joking about assassination to be funny.

I guess you do.

Your comments today have been disgusting.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | January 12, 2011 1:09 PM | Report abuse

[Dh1953 sneered: "a senseless and tragic event that more or less mirrors the imagery and language she uses, she is the victim?"]

Leftists and Democrats want us to focus on the (alleged) "right-wing extremism" rather than the Leftist shooters discipleship with Obama mentor, Bill Ayers. Maybe they should start with condemning President Obama, the Extremist-in-Chief.
http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2011/01/did-barack-obama-cause-the-shootings-yesterday-in-tucson

** Obama: “They Bring a Knife…We Bring a Gun”
** Obama to His Followers: “Get in Their Faces!”
** Obama on ACORN Mobs: “I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry! I’m angry!”
** Obama to His Mercenary Army: “Hit Back Twice As Hard”
** Obama on the private sector: “We talk to these folks… so I know whose ass to kick.“
** Obama to voters: Republican victory would mean “hand to hand combat”
** Obama to lib supporters: “It’s time to Fight for it.”
** Obama to Latino supporters: “Punish your enemies.”
** Obama to democrats: “I’m itching for a fight.”

If Leftists really want to consider the atmosphere of violent language, they should start at the White House.

BREAKING: AZ Shooter is Leftist-terrorist Bill Ayers disciple
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=249429#ixzz1AfFPHymn

"Jared Lee Loughner, the suspected gunman in Saturday's Arizona shooting, attended a high school that is part of a network in which teachers are trained and provided resources by a liberal group founded by Weatherman terrorist Bill Ayers and funded by President Obama..."

I eagerly await the MSM’s strong denunciation of Obama’s violent rhetoric.

Own him, Leftists. He's all yours.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | January 12, 2011 1:09 PM | Report abuse

@Chuck: "You are saying that Greg and other are so blinded by partisanship that they wouldn't call for soul-searching if it were a GOP victim?"

Sadly, yes - that's sort of what I'm saying.

I don't think that Greg is "blinded" by partisanship, but he is a self-admitted partisan. He is also smart. We know from his past writings that he feels the right produces more incendiary rhetoric than the left. And while he calls the left out for over-the-top rhetoric, to my knowledge he has never tossed the theory around that the incendiary rhetoric of the left might contribute to an environment that would lead the insane to kill.

For instance, has Greg ever pondered in writing whether the constant name-calling by the left of tea party supporters using the intentionally provocative term "teabagger" might not drive a tea party supporter to violence?

It sure seems to me that Greg and others chose the topic of "rhetoric" at this time - perhaps subconsciously - to obscure an effort to imply responsibility where none exists. He's already denied that, but I am of that opinion, and I like and respect Greg.

Posted by: sbj3 | January 12, 2011 1:11 PM | Report abuse

Gov. Tim Pawlenty(R) is supposed to be one of the candidates that will seek the Republican Presidential nomination in 2012.

He recently said that he would not have used the gunsights icons, like Palin did. He said that he thought it was a mistake for to have posted them on the web.

I think one of the reasons why Palin put out this video now, was because her handlers saw that it had given her opponents in the Republican presidential sweepstakes an opening to paint her as being too extreme and divisive.

I think Palin attacked the Media, and "Pundints", in order to make it more difficult for people like Pawlenty to continue with that approach toward her, without looking like they are siding with the media, that Republicans have convinced their base to actually hate.

Posted by: Liam-still | January 12, 2011 1:11 PM | Report abuse

@Kaddafi: "Really? Then you can cite examples of conservatives doing this?"

People who call themselves conservatives or libertarians? Are you kidding me?

Again, it's not a defect of the ideology. If you want to say it never happens because the folks who wear the same color shirt you do would never do that sort of thing, that's fine. I'll let others provide the citations. The reality is, people who agree with us on some basic, normal things are capable of irrational behavior elsewhere. Always have been, always will be. And critics of the basic, normal things will try to tie the irrational behavior irrevocably to the basic, normal things.

Wanting universal healthcare does not naturally and inevitable lead to Stalin-esque purges (although, of course, Stalin favored an early single-payer system, so to speak). And so on. Wanting lower taxes and less government regulation does not mean that you are a doppelganger of David Koresh. Etc.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | January 12, 2011 1:12 PM | Report abuse

Funny how libs have a problem with the term "blood libel" when they continue the blood libel against jews by demonizing israel and jews, and even alleging that jews harvest organs from palestinians, etc... And excuse every time the arabs say that jews make matzah out of arab blood..

Posted by: scoran | January 12, 2011 11:14 AM | Report abuse

*******
It appears that you own ignorance is as great as Palins.
And your accusations against liberals with claims that liberals demonize Jews is utter insanity. Most Jewish people are liberal, especially in America and we never demonize Israel. The truth is that the teabagging taliban hyenas, mostly like yourself, hate the Jews and always have. This is why so few Jewish Americans and Black Americans for that matter, hold elected offices in the Republikkklan Congress. They are not welcomed in that good old southern baptist tradition.
Look in the mirror Mr. Bigot and you'll see your true self and maybe reason out why you feel the need to hate Jewish people. The "harvesting" of organs is your imaginative way of selling your lies. What a rotter you are. fritz

Posted by: papafritz571 | January 12, 2011 1:14 PM | Report abuse

In response to this:
==========================
Yall better watch your mouths talkin bout my man Adam Serwer. UPTOWN

========================

What are you going to do about it pal?

Posted by: skipsailing28 | January 12, 2011 1:15 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Serwer, I think your article is partially based on two false assumptions. The first is that Sarah had anything to do with writing the text for her video. Obviously it is beyond her capabilities. And I doubt sincerely that she has any idea of what she was reading when she made the voice over on her video. The other is that the person who actually wrote it had any idea of what "blood libel" means. I strongly suspect that to them it's just a phrase to incite their followers to more violence.

Posted by: dkmjr | January 12, 2011 1:16 PM | Report abuse

[Kevin_Willis "I'll let others provide the citations."]

That's what I thought. Alleging false moral-equivalency without citing a shred of evidence. Empty-boasting.

Leftists are now openly calling for Palin's assassination.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxgJKNpjSNI&feature=player_embedded#!

Death threats: how progressive!

/checkmate

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | January 12, 2011 1:29 PM | Report abuse

This incident in AZ could have been an opportunity to get people who have been inciting violence to tone down their rhetoric to something that could be classified as civilized. However, when we read the posts by such individuals as rain forest rising, sbj3, hared and others, we realize that if there has been any change at all, it is that they have decided that they will double down on their rhetoric to show that they can't be intimidated.

Posted by: dkmjr | January 12, 2011 1:31 PM | Report abuse

[papafritz571 sneered: "your accusations against liberals with claims that liberals demonize Jews is utter insanity. Most Jewish people are liberal"]

You're either a liar or an ignoramus.

Obama's Leftist "progressives" spent the last decade on CNN committing acts of criminal mayhem during their kristalnaght-style, anti-Semitic gutter riots (masquerading as "peace" protests) in support of Islamo-supremacism to achieve their hate-America political agenda.
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame

Yet Leftists now have the temerity to climb up on their hind legs (without a shred of evidence) and howl about (alleged) "the violence of conservative extremism"?

You are aware that the shooter is Jewish?

This shooter was one of your own. Own him, Leftists.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | January 12, 2011 1:35 PM | Report abuse

We've had to listen to her Satanic hatemongering rhetoric for too long. It's time for America to change the channel, and send her into obscurity.

Posted by: thomasmc1957 | January 12, 2011 1:38 PM | Report abuse


Senator John Kerry, a Democrat, also used the term Blood Libel in the past.

But you never heard the Liberal pro-Israel groups such as J-Street call out Kerry for using that term.

A little hypocritical, eh?

Posted by: janet8 | January 12, 2011 1:38 PM | Report abuse

We've had to listen to her hate filled rhetoric for too long. America needs to change the channel, and send her into obscurity.

Posted by: thomasmc1957 | January 12, 2011 1:42 PM | Report abuse

FLASHBACK 2008: Remember when spitting, rock throwing and chemical spraying were "the highest form of patriotism"?
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/02/rnc-protest-update-spitting-rock-throwing-poison-spraying-and-cub-scout-harassing

Own the Leftists terrorism. The AZ shooter is all yours.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | January 12, 2011 1:49 PM | Report abuse

Take your broom now and fly away to somewhere where you can get a better view of Russia rearing it's ugly mug.

Posted by: xpatriate | January 12, 2011 2:45 PM | Report abuse

Take your broom now and fly away to somewhere where you can get a better view of Russia rearing its ugly mug.

Posted by: xpatriate | January 12, 2011 2:47 PM | Report abuse

TWO-YEAR-OLD PATTERN:

Beginning in 2008, the American public became the political dumping ground for fiery debate, including Sarah Palin's hill-billy-style "anti-government call" during an unusually historic and unstable atmosphere in this country. She targeted language like the sound comparison between Obama and Osama, a tactic to strike a sensitive, public-response cord.

When all that failed, after being deprived of the vice-presidency (in her opinion) and feeling she was the butt of a cruel republican joke,-- instead of following the country's lead in making positive strides to move forward and revive some stability---she, like a spoiled child who "misbehaves" after not getting his or her way, ran to the corner to make mischief.

It's true. She's no more responsible for congresswoman Gifford's assassination attempt than president Obama is for this country's current economic and military-stretched condition. The difference in the analogy is: president Obama didn't contribute to America's going to Iran or the economic melt-down; however, people like Sarah Palin, and others contributed to violent temperature by using "key" words like "reload", "government take-over" and "be armed and dangerous", "they'll kill grandma", etc.

America--the "United" condition of States in jeopardy--allowed a fundamentally unlearned Alaskan to perform wild-west-style theatrics, unleashing fabricated and defamatory attacks on president Obama's character because it was interesting to watch an arrogant, politically scorned woman brave enough to defy the election process-- Sore-loser syndrome, a symtom of narcissism.

She said things others wanted to say---not because they were true, but because it addressed the shock and frustration of republicans and other extremists who didn't want an African American president. Then...she began to "freestyle"; and wouldn't go away, becoming the true conservative's worst nightmare; while being the radicals' hope for tomorrow.

Everyone is aware of Freedom of Speech and the right to bear arms in this country. Once upon a time we were intelligent enough to exercise those freedoms with sanity and human decency. ---and not incite already rowdy gatherings-- with smiling enthusiasm--to "reload" or "hit the bullseye" or "be armed and dangerous". We allowed an open and proud menace to society to parade freely into our communities and destroy unity of townships. Something was terribly wrong.

DIAGNOSIS: The nation WAS infected with "Palin-itus", a disease eating away at our political process and basic human decency.

PROGNOSIS: FOOLS go undetected as long as they remain silent--thank you for sharing, Sarah. Not only were you the disease, you were also the antidote.

Now...please go away and leave true Americans to grieve and heal in peace and dignity.

Posted by: Optimistically | January 12, 2011 3:10 PM | Report abuse

test

|red: you make me sick|

Posted by: shrink2 | January 12, 2011 3:59 PM | Report abuse

test

|yellow: I love you.|

Posted by: shrink2 | January 12, 2011 4:00 PM | Report abuse

The Media should not be be pointing the finger at her, now says the same shrill Harpy, who kept shrieking over and over that Barack Obama was "palling around with terrorists"

Posted by: Liam-still | January 12, 2011 4:59 PM | Report abuse

John Kerry used "blood libel" too?! Even Dershowitz is defending her: http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/01/12/exclusive-alan-dershowitz-defends-sarah-palins-use-of-term-blood-libel/

Posted by: clawrence12 | January 12, 2011 11:48 PM | Report abuse

Poor little Sarah.

Always the victim, and never presidential.

Posted by: thomasmc1957 | January 13, 2011 6:50 PM | Report abuse

Actually, this column should be called The Foolishness of the Washington Post which is apparently hiring partisan nincompoops to write nonsense.
How low can the Post go?

Are all the editors on vacation?

Posted by: clarice2 | January 14, 2011 10:54 AM | Report abuse

Actually, this column should be called The Foolishness of the Washington Post which is apparently hiring partisan nincompoops to write nonsense.
How low can the Post go?

Are all the editors on vacation?

Posted by: clarice2 | January 14, 2011 10:55 AM | Report abuse

Actually, this column should be called The Foolishness of the Washington Post which is apparently hiring partisan nincompoops to write nonsense.
How low can the Post go?

Are all the editors on vacation?

Posted by: clarice2 | January 14, 2011 10:56 AM | Report abuse

Actually, this column should be called The Foolishness of the Washington Post which is apparently hiring partisan nincompoops to write nonsense.
How low can the Post go?

Are all the editors on vacation?

Posted by: clarice2 | January 14, 2011 10:56 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company