Posted on 01/12/2011 5:42:46 AM PST by 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.”
(Excerpt) Read more at thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com ...
You are way off base with that post.
She understands what anybody who has had to deal with these people up close and personal have learned (unions, in my case):
It does NO GOOD WHATSOEVER to “play nice,” “be civil,” or any of the other euphanisms for WEAKNESS and CAVING.
The only way to handle them is to get down sh___ty with them, on their own nasty level.
I don’t ever want to hear again, “Oh but we don’t want to be like them,” etc. Bull. Being Mr. Nice Guy really helped Bush, didn’t it?
Get right back at them, go toe to toe, mano a mano and see how they like a dose of their own medicine.
They won’t like it at all...they will move on to their next target du jour. And then we start the process all over again.
I just listened to her response and unless I am deaf, I didn’t hear her use the term Blood Libel.
WHY did the writer use this term? Hyperbole?
Troll.
I have a prediction.
This is the last day you will ever post on this site
happy trails
___________________________________
Utter nonsense, Blood Sport has always meant any sport that involves killing such as cock-fighting, fox hunting or in recent times martial arts like cage fighting. It's meaning vis a vis the Clintons was clear and not in any way a version of Blood Libel.
See, you guys have to create false connections to explain the stupidity of the term's usage. That's spin...and if you are spinning it's because you're wrong to begin with.
But we have a lot of PDS RINOs around here eager to help the Left destroy her.
“Obama Camp Publishes Blood Libels of America, Israel, and Jews”
IsraPundit ^ | 4/12/08 | Bill Levinson
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2000604/posts
Tell us you believe she meant to bring up the “clear” reference that you stated.
Never had any other meaning? Really?
I’ve heard it used many times to describe falsely accusing another of responsibility for heinous acts.
Amazing how the MSM contrasts liberal vs. conservative commentary on the issue. On CNN’s webpage now:
“Obama speech meant to comfort nation”
as opposed to:
“Palin lashes out on shootings.”
They don’t even try to be subtle.
it was here:
“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.”
I loved seeing her just like this. Glizt toned down just a bit, calm, speaking a bit more slowly, less shrill, and just absolutely REASONED, classy and by far more “presidential” than what we’ve seen in the last few days by Obama.
Pure unadulterated AMERICAN.
I loved seeing her just like this. Glitz toned down just a bit, calm, speaking more slowly, less shrill, and just absolutely REASONED, classy and by far more “presidential” than what we’ve seen in the last few days by Obama.
Pure unadulterated AMERICAN.
Yep, already the Times has accused her of “inventing a new definition” for the phrase, when the WSJ yesterday posted Glenn Reynolds’ use of the phrase, as did the Washington Post Jennifer Rubin’s, in just that context.
First of all, try taking a minute and checking definitions before making such claims, easy enough to do with a simple internet search. Blood libel is not limited to attacks against Jews, although the term is often associated with anti-semetic attacks.
And second, the term blood libel is not anti-semetic, it is a description of anti-semetic attacks. In your zeal to bash Palin, you reversed meaning. Hardly a suprise, it happens all the time with Palin-bashing idiots.
I agree that the MSM are a bunch of duplicitous bastards. I just don’t see the wisdom of handing them an issue on a platter.
It is a blood libel because the media has done its best to stir up a literal lynch mob!
There s absolutely nothing connecting her to the crime in AZ, nothing.
Thank You, I’ll listen again.
I wish she would put this on You Tube.
I notice there were very few hits on the vid.
Unless it rises as the day goes on, I will assume the msm is not interested in what she ACTUALLY says. Just likes to use her as a symbol for their propaganda.
You are oh so wise and wonderful!/s
The word “blood” used as an adjective for sport or libel is still the same adjective. And who’s to say the use of the term “blood sport” wasn’t a transmogrification of “blood libel” in it’s earliest use. I’m not a linguist. Pray-tell, are you?
Nonsense. Blood Libel has always been directed at Jews. Spin all you like, it won’t change anything.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.