Wednesday, January 12, 2011


ABC's The Note blog:
BOTTOM LINE: Sarah Palin, once again, has found a way to become part of the story. And she may well face further criticism for the timing and scope of her remarks. She is already taking heat for her use of the term "blood libel" ...

The New York Times For Boehner, Rampage Imposes Its Own Agenda. Anybody normal would have simply said Speaker Boehner postpones politics in respect for wounded House member. But this had to be given a snarky political spin, making it sound as if he considered it an irritation.

The WaPo On Faith Column:
'Blood libel,' social sin and Sarah Palin

Sarah Palin released a nearly eight-minute video Wednesday morning that says that those who imply she bears some responsibility for the tragic shootings in Arizona are guilty of "blood libel," a loaded phrase that dates to the Middle Ages and has deep and painful connotations for Jews.
I've been hearing the term "blood libel" more frequently lately, mostly in the sense of the myth about Jews, but I wasn't aware that it was copyrighted. Here's Alan Derschowitz' opinion of that: "There is nothing improper and certainly nothing anti-Semitic in Sarah Palin using the term to characterize what she reasonably believes are false accusations that her words or images may have caused a mentally disturbed individual to kill and maim."


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home