Very odd comment by Governor Palin

[txgho1911]

One of the oldest uses of the term relates to a vilification of the Jew from before Christ. It is still used today in several areas of the ME. The blooding of none Jewish children for making the unlevin bread for Passover recognition. Caustic and vile kind of act attributed to the Jewish people that may have added to the antisemitism in Europe.
More modern uses of the word relate to the false charges by groups and governments.
Palin's use of the term in this is correct. This takes nothing away from anyone.

We are tired of being demonized and libeled by the left.

Of course some f us want to be divided by this and anything else.

[p12]

Having never heard of the term "blood liable" before reading this thread, I must say she hit the nail on the head very squarely.

Touché Gov. Palin.

[Ron]

Plus it's a chance for lefties to scream: "SHE'S SENDING SECRET NAZI MESSAGES!!!1111!!"

Seriously? You can't step back and see that libellously accusing someone of murder, i.e. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' blood is on Sarah Palin's hands after putting cross hair over district, isn't a type blood libel?

Of course you know it is. You and the leftist media just want to find SOMETHING to attack her, and by association, conservatives.

Here are some of the headlines from leftwing editorialist's. Blood libel while not the term I would have used, as I wasn't that familiar with the nuances of it, still seems to be spot on.    

Natural Result of a Climate of Hate - Paul Krugman The New York Times

Giffords' Blood is on Palin's Hands - Michael Daly The New York Daily News

"Palin Needs to Look at Her Own Behavior" - John Nichols The Nation

Why the Tea Party Movement is Culpable - Jacob Weisberg Slate

Hate & Rage Is Encoded in Rightwing's DNA - Michael Tomasky The Guardian

[roo_ster]

I think some terms are so associated with certain political beliefs as to be irrevocably so associated.  "Blood libel', despite any protests to the contrary, is associated with anti-Semitism, due to a centuries-long history of being so used in that specific context.  If Governor Palin had been giving a speech about immigration and used the term 'lebensraum', would we we claim that she inadvertently used a term so associated with Nazi ideology, or was she sending a coded message?  I would lean towards the latter, and I would say that about anyone on the political spectrum.

I myself would not use the term 'blood libel' because of my opinion as to the anti-Semitic association, and I do not propound, espouse or support anti-Semitism.  I suspect that many people had never heard of the term before the current controversy; I have known it for 35 years based on my reading, and I think it is so associated with anti-Semitic issues to have an irrevocable taint. 

"Taint" my taint. The term "blood libel" is English, whereas "Lebensraum" and "shoah" are foreign words.

"Blood libel" has been used before to describe similar situations and the actual English turn of phrase, "blood libel," is a description of what was done, not a given name. 

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/libel
1.
a. A false publication, as in writing, print, signs, or pictures, that damages a person's reputation.
b. The act of presenting such material to the public.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/blood
1.
a. The fluid consisting of plasma, blood cells, and platelets that is circulated by the heart through the vertebrate vascular system, carrying oxygen and nutrients to and waste materials away from all body tissues.
b. A functionally similar fluid in animals other than vertebrates.
c. The juice or sap of certain plants.
2. A vital or animating force; lifeblood.
3. One of the four humors of ancient and medieval physiology, identified with the blood found in blood vessels, and thought to cause cheerfulness.
4. Bloodshed; murder.
5. Temperament or disposition

In the recent Tucson case, "blood libel," is quite apt.  It's use is similar how the term, "genocide" (which is another English construction) used to refer to the shoah, the Armenian genocide perpetrated by the Turks, and many others.  No one ethnic group has a monopoly on it.

The Jews are not so special as to have a monopoly on the English language.  They have Hebrew and Yiddish if they want to get all grabby.


Palin isn't even the first out the door in this particular instance.  Several journalists saw what was happening and reported it as "blood libel:"

The Arizona Tragedy and the Politics of Blood Libel
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703667904576071913818696964.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

So as the usual talking heads begin their "have you no decency?" routine aimed at talk radio and Republican politicians, perhaps we should turn the question around. Where is the decency in blood libel?

To paraphrase Justice Cardozo ("proof of negligence in the air, so to speak, will not do"), there is no such thing as responsibility in the air. 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. But the dishonesty remains.

To be clear, if you're using this event to criticize the "rhetoric" of Mrs. Palin or others with whom you disagree, then you're either: (a) asserting a connection between the "rhetoric" and the shooting, which based on evidence to date would be what we call a vicious lie; or (b) you're not, in which case you're just seizing on a tragedy to try to score unrelated political points, which is contemptible. Which is it?

I understand the desperation that Democrats must feel after taking a historic beating in the midterm elections and seeing the popularity of ObamaCare plummet while voters flee the party in droves. But those who purport to care about the health of our political community demonstrate precious little actual concern for America's political well-being when they seize on any pretext, however flimsy, to call their political opponents accomplices to murder.

In recent history, it was used to describe the Democrats' and journalists' actions WRT the Marines at Haditha:
Media dance macabre
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/jun/6/20060606-090947-7470r/

But what further cuts is to listen to media people casually perpetrate blood libel against not just the still-presumed-innocent Marines but against our services more generally. To see the gleam in the eyes of reporters happily cackling on about "other possible incidents" -- about which they know not whether they even exist -- is to be filled with a fury that we have a system of journalism that permits people with such mentalities to poison the minds of the world with their malice.

It was even used by Jews to describe things much more recent than medieval Jews killing Christian children for use in matzo:
Jenin massacre syndrome
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3280038,00.html

The fairytale about the "Jenin massacre" may have died, but were lessons learned? Some were. The European media, especially the electronic media, has given some expression to the suffering of Israeli civilians under attack. It has not (usually) supported Hizbullah.

 
But in other cases, no lessons were learned from the blood libel of the Jenin massacre.

BBC's "Jenin–massacre" that never was
http://www.takeapen.org/Takeapen/Templates/showpage.asp?DBID=1&TMID=84&LNGID=1&FID=577&PID=869

"There was not a massacre in Jenin"? Thus, the BBC actually conveyed the blood libel of the 'massacre'  to many readers even with that very article which should have cleansed the previous misinformation! We found the BBC quoting this title - libellous in itself - as late as in November 2002!

This is manufactured outrage by the malignant in order to sway the ignorant.

[MillCreek]

How interesting that the term 'blood libel' is now being used in a wider variety of contexts these days.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

I note that most of the people harping on the antisemitism thing seem to be doing it in order to distract from the accuracy and veracity of Palin's remarks.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

How interesting that the term 'blood libel' is now being used in a wider variety of contexts these days.

"Now"?

This is not a recent development.

[Monkeyleg]

I note that most of the people harping on the antisemitism thing seem to be doing it in order to distract from the accuracy and veracity of Palin's remarks.

They generally don't attack the substance of a person's statement if the statement is true. They can't call her a "racist", so they'll have to settle for anti-semite. (Which is ironic coming from a bunch of Israel-haters).

[BridgeRunner]

How interesting that the term 'blood libel' is now being used in a wider variety of contexts these days.

Ghetto, too.  The trouble is how frequently people get offended when I refer to the Jewish ghetto in metro Detroit, which fits the historical use of the word at least well as its most common use today.  

Not all Jewish ghettos have historically been walled or enforced by civil authorities, but are limited to a tight geographical area and have significant elements of self-governance.  Most Orthodox Jewish communities in the US outside the New York metro area (and some within it) can be described quite accurately as ghettos.

My most outspokenly liberal friend, who some of you on fb may have had the pleasure of "meeting," and her buddies are busy focusing much more on the purported racism, xenophobia, and fascism of the Tea Party.  Because duh, the Tea Party is JUST LIKE the Nazis.  After all there's the appeal to founding myths and it has arisen during a particularly bad recession.  I wish these people would realize that conservatives and mainstream Americans outside the coastal cities/liberal university towns/few other liberal-dominated areas have always talked about American history, and that it's a bit foolish to characterize well-recorded events and arguments of <250 years ago as "founding myths" on par with the invention of "Aryan" culture.

And no one but me seems to the see the irony in screaming about vitriol and fascism in a conversation where someone has stated "I don't know why [Gov. Palin] is even allowed to live." Wtf?

Sorry, had to get that off my chest.  Thread drift...

[zxcvbob]

...anything else would be anti-Norwegian.  We must be sensitive to their long history of oppression by Danes, Swedes, and Germans.

Sven is passing by Ole's barn one day when through a gap in the door he sees Ole doing a slow and sensual striptease in front of an old green John Deere.
 
Buttocks clenched he performs a slow pirouette and gently slides off first the right strap of his overalls, followed by the left. He then hunches his shoulders forward and in a classic striptease move and lets his overalls fall down to his hips revealing a torn and frayed plaid shirt.  Grabbing both sides of his shirt he rips it apart to reveal his stained tee shirt underneath. With a final flourish he tears the tee shirt from his body and hurls his baseball cap onto a pile of hay.
 
Having seen enough Sven rushes in and says "what in the heck are you doing Ole?"
 
"Yumpin Yimminy, Sven! Ya scared da livin bejeevas out of me!" exclaimed an obviously embarrassed Ole; "But, me and Lena, vell, ve ben havin some troubles lately in da bedroom department and da terapist said I got to do something sexy to a tractor."   

[roo_ster]

Ghetto, too.

Yeah, thanks to that infamous anti-semite:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_n3ebuL1cPA

[MechAg94]

Having never heard of the term "blood liable" before reading this thread, I must say she hit the nail on the head very squarely.

Touché Gov. Palin.

I have heard of the term, but I would never have thought it had anything to do with Jews.  I guess I don't know enough Jewish people or any antisemitic people. 

[MillCreek]

Ghetto, too.  The trouble is how frequently people get offended when I refer to the Jewish ghetto in metro Detroit, which fits the historical use of the word at least well as its most common use today.  

Not all Jewish ghettos have historically been walled or enforced by civil authorities, but are limited to a tight geographical area and have significant elements of self-governance.  Most Orthodox Jewish communities in the US outside the New York metro area (and some within it) can be described quite accurately as ghettos.

And when I hear the word 'ghetto' in the Jewish context, the first thing I think of is my reading about the Warsaw ghetto uprising in WWII, and tales of the pogroms in Central and Eastern Europe.  Another interesting example of how words change meaning over time and context.  I never would have thought about contemporary Jewish enclaves in this sense.

[MicroBalrog]

It was even used by Jews to describe things much more recent than medieval Jews killing Christian children for use in matzo:

And is used by Israeli politicians on a near-weekly basis.

MicroJewBalrog.

[BridgeRunner]

And when I hear the word 'ghetto' in the Jewish context, the first thing I think of is my reading about the Warsaw ghetto uprising in WWII, and tales of the pogroms in Central and Eastern Europe.  Another interesting example of how words change meaning over time and context.  I never would have thought about contemporary Jewish enclaves in this sense.

Right, but those pogroms happened in the pre-existing ghettos.  The ghettos weren't about the pogroms, they were merely the location of the pogroms. 

[Waitone]

What I find so interesting is Palin is forcing the media to dance to her tune.  Whereas the media is usually the initiator of a flap.

The lady is far more powerful than we imagine.  How many political figures would sell their kids to be able to make the media tap dance.

[Monkeyleg]

I hadn't thought of it in those terms, Waitone. I suppose it's very possible that the constant attacks on her by Krugman et al will eventually bring more moderates over to her side.

She's either very cunning or not as bright as some of us would like.

[grampster]

The Left has raised hypocrisy to an art form.

[BReilley]

http://m.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/01/12/remarks-president-barack-obama-memorial-service-victims-shooting-tucson

His speech was meh.  It wasn't the propaganda piece I expected, but it was a bit vague and... directionless.  It wasn't too distasteful, which I appreciate.  I was disappointed, though, that he did not quiet the audience's applause(as I was disappointed that the audience applauded at all).

The irony of this is that while conservatives are now upset at being blamed for the acts of an individual extremists, if this had been a guy with a Muslim name, the conservative pundits would've been first in line to bash Islam & Muslims as responsible.

Muslim name, eh?  Is Loughner a "conservative name"?  Was he spouting rightist propaganda or quoting the founders as he massacred innocents?  Nope.  Lil' different from the cases to which you refer.
I'll go ahead and say that, whenever a person(Arab name or not) starts shooting people while screaming 'allahu akbar', the "pundits"(and most otherwise clear-minded people) can pretty safely start assuming religious motives.  Or were you on the lets-not-be-too-hasty bus with Hassan?
Loughner wasn't conservative, or liberal, or anything other than *broken*.  At first, after reading about his grammar and currency conspiracies, if I had been asked to guess what his favorite radio show might be I'd have said Alex Jones... but we now know he didn't follow news, radio, or much of anything.  He must have gone nuts all by himself, with no help from Rush.

I think some terms are so associated with certain political beliefs as to be irrevocably so associated.  "Blood libel', despite any protests to the contrary, is associated with anti-Semitism, due to a centuries-long history of being so used in that specific context.  If Governor Palin had been giving a speech about immigration and used the term 'lebensraum', would we we claim that she inadvertently used a term so associated with Nazi ideology, or was she sending a coded message?  I would lean towards the latter, and I would say that about anyone on the political spectrum.

Coded message?  You mean, dog-whistle politics? What coded message might Palin be sending with "blood libel"(or did you even mean to imply that?)?

I don't take issue with her use of the term, and I don't think Jews should either.  Indeed, one might think a Jew would have a strong understanding of politically-motivated fabrications, and perhaps empathize with an individual suffering them.  I think she could maybe have chosen a better term, but let's be honest - something else would've been chosen to pick on.  Or, as ABC put it, she would've found another way to insert herself into the story :rolleyes:

MillCreek, do you think Palin was correct in her statements?

[MillCreek]

Oh, I thought the concepts she articulated in the speech and much of the content was great, and I agree with it.  I still, myself, would not have chosen, or had my speechwriter use, a term that I myself consider anti-Semitic.

[SteveS]

I hadn't thought of it in those terms, Waitone. I suppose it's very possible that the constant attacks on her by Krugman et al will eventually bring more moderates over to her side.

She's either very cunning or not as bright as some of us would like.

I am leaning towards not that bright.  In my non-media opinion, she would have been better off not saying anything or just issuing some kind of 'pray for the victims' sympathy statement.  The Andrew Sullivans are going to blast her and hate her no matter what she does.  By the time she made her statement, most media outlets seemed to drop the rhetoric of hate angle and were focusing on disturbed this nutjob is.  I just don't see a benefit to her in saying what she said. 

[Monkeyleg]

I just don't see a benefit to her in saying what she said.

Using what I believe to be Waitone's position, she's dragging the media back into her arena.

Hers is not the only recent use of the phrase "blood libel" by a politician, and the term isn't familiar to most, so she can rely on columnists to print the names of Democrats who've used the phrase, and rely on most people to not care about the origins of the phrase.

If they continue to follow past patterns, Jewish voters will go by a large margin for Democrat candidates, so there isn't really an electoral downside to using the term. There is, however, the upside of continuing to show the media to be petty. Richard Nixon was able to play the public against the media for the better part of his political career.

[Tallpine]

a term that I myself consider anti-Semitic.

I just don't see how the term is anti-semitic, unless of course one is currently engaged in blood libel against the Jews 

Is the word slave anti-Black ...?

Is the word sausage anti-Polish 

[red headed stranger]

I think she has turned being a lightning rod into an art form. 

The media reflexively jumps on things that public figures say if it can be misconstrued.  But Palin stymies them every time by refusing to do the "perp walk" though the media outlets to apologize. 

[makattak]

I think she has turned being a lightning rod into an art form. 

The media reflexively jumps on things that public figures say if it can be misconstrued.  But Palin stymies them every time by refusing to do the "perp walk" though the media outlets to apologize. 

It's because she doesn't rely on the media in order to get her message out.

All the other politicians will only speak to a few people if the media doesn't cover what they say.

Palin has circumvented the media. This angers them so they lash out. Unfortunately for them, it only helps her when they do.

If it weren't so sick, their flailing would be amusing to watch.