Skip to comments.Giuliani defends Palin: Shooting had 'nothing to do' with 'a map'
Posted on 01/16/2011 11:55:18 AM PST by Justaham
Onetime Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani on Sunday defended Sarah Palins response to critics who placed partial blame for the shooting that injured Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) on the former Alaska governor.
But Giuliani and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) questioned the wisdom of her response.
Several days after the mass shooting in Tucson, Ariz., Palin posted a video statement on her Facebook page charging her critics in the media had committed a blood libel for pinning blame on her.
Her critics said she had helped create a political atmosphere that could lead to such an event by previously posting a map with gun sights over some vulnerable lawmakers' districts. Those charges were reprehensible, Palin said last week.
But Palins use of blood libel only generated more criticism. The term has long referred to what many scholars call a false charge that Jews murdered children and used their blood for baking matzos during Passover.
Giuliani said during a Face the Nation interview on CBS that her use of that term was off the mark -- but the former New York City mayor also defended Palin.
He called her response to the blame one of someone accused unjustifiably, adding facts and circumstances uncovered thus far show alleged shooter Jared Loughner was not motivated by an politician or ideology. Rather, his apparent unstable mental condition is to blame, Giuliani said.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
The shooting was caused by metaphors!
Liberals should demand the English language be banned now. BAN ENGLISH!
Count on Rudy to keep one leg on each side of any fence.
I suspect him to jump on the gun control wagon again just as soon as he sees a chance.
Establishment Republican Takes Sweet Time Coming to Palin Defense
Where are Rudy’s words that said she was off the mark? They only say he said it. If he did, I’d like to see his exact words, not their interpretation of it.
Which Republicans came to her defense last Sunday when the attacks started?
What term comes closer to describing what they did? If it wasn't "Blood Libel" then what the hell was it?
The only Man in the Republican Presidential Pool is Sarah Palin, and maybe Michelle Bachmann.
Time to reduce the GOP to 3rd party status.
So now we have Donald Trump and Rudy taking a stand...where is everyone else?
Romney is non commital and the huckster is gleefully applauding all this.
Eight days after the shootings and the main topic on every news show is Sarah Palin. Now if Obama did such a magical job during the “Memorial Service” why is no one talking about him?
shows to go ya that there is no such thing as bad publicity.
palin/bachmann : PaBach (payback) will be a “female dog” to the Rats
Seems you are working on your agenda than what I posted - only using it for a rant. I said nothing against Rudy but at the author of the article - his words should be included. Keeping the media honest.
No matter what is posted - the eternal mantra - “it won’t help her cause” is included. If your cause isn’t the same as Sarah’s - you could give a flip about God, Family, Country.
The irony is that with all these liberals trying to pin this on Palin, is that they are unwittingly buying into the theories spouted by Loughner - that words could perform mind control over their subjects and make them do things.
And Loughner was crazy.
One word she could have used, rather than “blood libel”, is defamation. The idiot liberals are guilty of both slander (spoken defamation) and libel (written defamation) against her and all conservatives.
She must have thought long and hard about using “blood libel”, given how she had to have known that it was going to stir up another hornet’s nest of idiot liberals in the media and the Demonrat party.
So she used “blood libel” intentionally, in order to get the exact reaction that ensued.
I think the words defamation, libel and slander have lost most of their power and effect (because the left inhabits these concepts every day, just about everything they say and do defames someone who disagrees with them), and therefore would have been mostly ignored had she just used one of those. She needed something much stronger to vividly illustrate the nature of the left’s sickness and mental illness.
Once again, Sarah Palin drives the debate.
Good for Rudy for speaking out. He didn’t have to do so.
Ooookk. Thanks for proving my point.
I so agree...
by never allowing ANY criticism of her...the Palin fans create exactly what the left does...a caricature of Palin,
one is perfectly evil, the other perfectly good....
but certainly not a person of substance that can easily handle critics.
That is too broad. It doesn't make that point that what they were accusing her of was "having blood on her hands". Those words were used by Commentators in the MSM including the New York Times. That was BLOOD LIBEL and nothing less.
You defame someone when you claim that they lied when they didn't. That is defamation. When you accuse someone of being complicit in a massacre of innocent people, you are committing nothing less than BLOOD LIBEL. That term is not uniquely owned by the Jews any more than the word HOLOCAUST, which is used by Liberals to speak about Kentucky Fried Chicken. Liberals have diluted the whole meaning of the word Holocaust.
Palin has done nothing more than educate the public. People not only know that Palin was the target of liberal Blood Libel, but that Jews historically have been the target and still are the target of Islamic Blood Libel.
Once again, Sarah Palin drives the debate.
You’re correct. The simple words defamation, libel and slander were too impotent to actually define what happened. The media was reveling in the fresh blood of innocents, deliberately trying to pin mass-murder on Palin and the Tea Party. “Blood Libel” is a gravely serious accusation, but in this case is was spot-on accurate.
Perhaps waiting for the dead to be buried is the proper time to now defend. Just an observation...
Palin performed a surgical stike on Soetoro before his Pep Rally Memorial. This kept him on the fence and on the defensive in his speech.
And you proved mine - for it’s obvious you see what isn’t there - and proved it by your posts.
His words... starting at the 00:08:30 mark.
“... yeah, she used the wrong word in responding to it...
But generally, he defended her.
Yes I know he defended her - that wasn’t in question. I was questioning the author - wanted to read Rudy’s words and not the author’s interpretation. IOW, I don’t trust the media. Thank you!
Then listen to the video I posted. Sheesh! Are you waiting for a transcript, or what?
What are you talking about? What made you think I didn’t listen?
I was explaining what my original concern was hearing/reading HIS words. And saying thanks should have been another clue that I listened! Geez.
Perhaps because you made no mention of listening to his actual words, or acknowledging that I gave you a quote? Just a thought.
I was explaining what my original concern was hearing/reading HIS words.
No explanation was required. I understood quite clearly and that is why I gave you a link - to hear for yourself.
And saying thanks should have been another clue that I listened!
The words it followed made it sound quite sarcastic.
But you're welcome.
Thank you, I do appreciate it. Sorry for any misunderstanding on my part.
It’s disappointing to me to hear that Giuliani decided to pile on Palin. He was—up until this moment—my favorite Rino. Now, I have no favorite Rino.
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.