Page 47 of 67 FirstFirst ... 37454647484957 ... LastLast
Results 461 to 470 of 661

Thread: Sarah Palin accuses critics of "blood libel"

  1. #461
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,740

    Re: Sarah Palin accuses critics of "blood libel"

    Quote Originally Posted by Manc Skipper View Post
    The term may have its origins in the middle ages, but the original meaning still reverberates today. The reference was a dog-whistle call to her faithful.


    Seriously, it's not enough folks like you run your mouth calling your opposition racist... now your calling them anti-semite? What do you actually know about us man, your not even in this country.

    Rabbi Shmuley Boteach: Sarah Palin Is Right About 'Blood Libel' - WSJ.com

    Is this jewish fellow also an anti-semite?



    This tragedy, really has open my eyes to some of you people.
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  2. #462
    User
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Paris, France/ LA California
    Last Seen
    11-16-13 @ 07:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    87

    Re: Sarah Palin accuses critics of "blood libel"

    Quote Originally Posted by ReverendHellh0und View Post
    Seriously, it's not enough folks like you run your mouth calling your opposition racist... now your calling them anti-semite? What do you actually know about us man, your not even in this country.

    Rabbi Shmuley Boteach: Sarah Palin Is Right About 'Blood Libel' - WSJ.com

    Is this jewish fellow also an anti-semite?



    This tragedy, really has open my eyes to some of you people.
    I agree

    Dennis Prager has talked about this issue as well...actually, non-issue, and just like majority of the time, Palin is right...

  3. #463
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Sarah Palin accuses critics of "blood libel"

    Quote Originally Posted by ReverendHellh0und View Post
    Seriously, it's not enough folks like you run your mouth calling your opposition racist... now your calling them anti-semite? What do you actually know about us man, your not even in this country.

    Rabbi Shmuley Boteach: Sarah Palin Is Right About 'Blood Libel' - WSJ.com

    Is this jewish fellow also an anti-semite?



    This tragedy, really has open my eyes to some of you people.
    The Rabbi in that fine article you submitted says, "How unfortunate that some have chosen to compound a national tragedy by politicizing the murder of six innocent lives and the attempted assassination of a congresswoman".

    And, as well, some are now hinting she is a racist for using the term.

    This shameful hate and vitriol is spinning out of control. These people should pause for a moment to look at themselves and exmine just what is important here.

  4. #464
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: Sarah Palin accuses critics of "blood libel"

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    OMG! Are we still on this distraction?


    j-mac
    Shocking isn't it?

    I think Sarah Palin was right but also wrong.

    I admit, like many others I, too jumped to conclusions when news of this tragic shooting spree first aired. I believed the gunman, Jared Loughner, was some Right-Wing radical nutjob who either had read or heard so much of the anti-American/anti-patriotic/anti-Obama rhetoric that spewed from the Right against the Left and that he ultimately took his anger and frustrations out on the only "direct link to government" he knew of, Congresswoman Gifford, as a representation of the very government he apparently mistrusted. To date, there is no evidence that Jared Loughner was a Republic. In fact, an accounting by one of Loughner's closes friends stated recently that Loughner was an Independent. However, his political association doesn't rule out the fact that he was angry with government for whatever reason and saw Congresswoman Gifford as a direct representation to government (which as a Congresswoman, she is. Still, you never know what lurks within the mind of a mad man.)

    Essentially, what we don't know is exactly why he shot Congresswoman Gifford along with several other innocent people. Word is Loughner asked Gifford a question presumably at a meeting or gathering of some sort the Congresswoman was hosting in 2007, but she didn't answer him. I don't know if that was because she didn't hear him or because she didn't believe his inquiry was relevent. Regardless of why she didn't answer him, Loughner obvious took it personal. All we know for sure is this man was mentally disturbed and took his anger out on the one "face of government" he knew - Congresswoman Gabrielle Gifford - and innocent people died or were seriously injured as a result of his anger.

    With the president signing this unwanted and “transformative” government takeover of our health care system today with promises impossible to keep, let’s not get discouraged. Don’t get demoralized. Get organized! (Palin, 2010, ¶1)

    We’re going to reclaim the power of the people from those who disregarded the will of the people. We’re going to fire them and send them back to the private sector, which has been shrinking thanks to their destructive government-growing policies. Maybe when they join the millions of unemployed, they’ll understand why Americans wanted them to focus on job creation and an invigorated private sector. Come November, we’re going to print pink slips for members of Congress as fast as they’ve been printing money (Palin, 2010, ¶2).

    We’re paying particular attention to those House members who voted in favor of Obamacare and represent districts that Senator John McCain and I carried during the 2008 election. Three of these House members are retiring – from Arkansas’s 2nd district, Indiana’s 8th district, and Tennessee’s 6th district – but we’ll be working to make sure that those who replace them are Commonsense Conservatives. The others are running for re-election, and we’re going to hold them accountable for this disastrous Obamacare vote. They are: Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ-1), Harry E. Mitchell (AZ-5), Gabrielle Giffords (AZ-8), John Salazar (CO-3), Betsy Markey (CO-4). Allen Boyd (FL-2), Suzanne M. Kosmas (FL-24), Baron P. Hill (IN-9), Earl Pomeroy (ND-AL), Charlie Wilson (OH-6), John Boccieri (OH-16), Kathy Dahlkemper (PA-3), Christopher Carney (PA-10), John M. Spratt, Jr. (SC-5), Tom Perriello (VA-5), Alan B. Mollohan (WV-1), and Nick J. Rahall II (WV-3) (Palin, 2010, ¶3).

    We’ll aim for these races and many others. This is just the first salvo in a fight to elect people across the nation who will bring common sense to Washington. Please go to sarahpac.com and join me in the fight (Palin, 2010, ¶4).

    Stand tall, America. Real change is coming (Palin, 2010, ¶5)!

    - Sarah Palin
    So, I understand where she was coming from with her "don't retreat, reload" comment. However, targetting the offices of the various political figures who voted for ObamaCare (of which Congresswoman Gifford was among them) using any resemblance of actual "targets" and using the kind of language she used was irresponsible. Moreover, using the words "blood libel" in defense of her actions (her "tweet") where a fellow politician who happened to be a Jew and was the primary target of a shooting spree is equally irresponsible. The undertone of her "don't retreat, reload" comment may not have been to insight people who disagree with the President's agenda to take up arms against him or members of the Democrat party, but adding the crosshairs image certainly didn't dispell that notion. Again, did Sarah know that Gifford was a Jew? I believe she did. Why else would she use that exact wording?

    Putting it all in it's proper context, I can understand why so many people are upset with her. However, she was right in defending her political ideology, but she was wrong for using the words and phrases she espoused. Words do have meaning even if that meaning is vailed in political-speak. She had to know deep down that as long as the political divide remained such a hot bed of differing viewpoints, sooner or later somebody may misconstrue her comments and take matters into their own hands. She may not be responsible for his actions, but I don't think she can deny the possibility that her words may have been a catalyst to death and mayhem. Why else would she take the site down otherwise?

    Again, we don't know with absolute certainty what caused Loughner to go on his shooting spree, but we do know he was angry with the government about something and targetted Congresswoman Gifford as a result. While it is wrong to say that Sarah Palin and the rest of the Republican/Conservative were hoping that such a tragic event would unfold, I do believe they wanted the American people to "get angry as hell and not take it anymore," whatever "it" is. Unfortunately, the Right wasn't counting on that anger spewing away from the voting box and into the streets - not like this anyway.

    I'm glad Sarah Palin took the website with the "targets" down. Hopefully, all politicians including Sarah Palin will think twice before posting such images and language again, language and imagtry that can easily be misconstrued not as a call to political action, but rather as a call to take matters into one's own hands violently.

  5. #465
    Educating the Ignorant
    zimmer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:04 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    14,484
    Blog Entries
    12

    Re: Sarah Palin accuses critics of "blood libel"

    Quote Originally Posted by zimmer View Post
    Not bad when she adds a word to the Oxford Engish Dictionary, a word some cunning linguist could have created decades ago, but didn't.

    Who is here refudiating the vile claptrap spewing from Sher'f Dumb**** and the journOlist enablers yaps? You perhaps Middle?

    As for the Blood Libel usage, it was appropriate
    . The jackals tried to use blood and a heinous crime to bring about political change by attacking Palin, Limbaugh, FOXNEWS and the like.

    .
    Call me Rabbi Zimmer.

    Sarah Palin Is Right About 'Blood Libel'
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...googlenews_wsj
    The anti-Semite BS is just that. Another swing and miss at an empty pinata.

    Free speech has tremendous value. It identifies the genius and idiots amongst us. The left is doing a wonderful job revealing who they really are.

    Rev,
    After their putrid, treasonous behavior, sending troops into harms way and then stabbing them in the back... there are no surprises as to how low the leftists will go. None. I'm not surprised at this in the least. They're the party of Judas... The "Betray-Us" Party.

    .
    Last edited by zimmer; 01-14-11 at 01:57 PM.
    The Clintons are what happens...
    when you have NO MORAL COMPASS.

  6. #466
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,322

    Re: Sarah Palin accuses critics of "blood libel"

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    Shocking isn't it?

    I think Sarah Palin was right but also wrong.

    I admit, like many others I, too jumped to conclusions when news of this tragic shooting spree first aired. I believed the gunman, Jared Loughner, was some Right-Wing radical nutjob who either had read or heard so much of the anti-American/anti-patriotic/anti-Obama rhetoric that spewed from the Right against the Left and that he ultimately took his anger and frustrations out on the only "direct link to government" he knew of, Congresswoman Gifford, as a representation of the very government he apparently mistrusted.
    And ask yourself why you jumped to those conclusions? Was that because of the supposed FOXNews machine brainwashing you? Or too much MSNBC and alike?

    To date, there is no evidence that Jared Loughner was a Republic. In fact, an accounting by one of Loughner's closes friends stated recently that Loughner was an Independent. However, his political association doesn't rule out the fact that he was angry with government for whatever reason and saw Congresswoman Gifford as a direct representation to government (which as a Congresswoman, she is. Still, you never know what lurks within the mind of a mad man.)
    A disturbed individual to be sure.

    Essentially, what we don't know is exactly why he shot Congresswoman Gifford along with several other innocent people. Word is Loughner asked Gifford a question presumably at a meeting or gathering of some sort the Congresswoman was hosting in 2007, but she didn't answer him. I don't know if that was because she didn't hear him or because she didn't believe his inquiry was relevent. Regardless of why she didn't answer him, Loughner obvious took it personal. All we know for sure is this man was mentally disturbed and took his anger out on the one "face of government" he knew - Congresswoman Gabrielle Gifford - and innocent people died or were seriously injured as a result of his anger.
    We really don't know if it was that simple yet, but Ok.


    So, I understand where she was coming from with her "don't retreat, reload" comment. However, targetting the offices of the various political figures who voted for ObamaCare (of which Congresswoman Gifford was among them) using any resemblance of actual "targets" and using the kind of language she used was irresponsible.

    Not isolated, Demo's have used 'targeting imagery' in their political campaigns as well, are they wrong also?

    Moreover, using the words "blood libel" in defense of her actions (her "tweet") where a fellow politician who happened to be a Jew and was the primary target of a shooting spree is equally irresponsible.
    I don't think so, when anyone tries to connect someone to a horrendous crime such as what took place, simply for political smearing, it is appropriate I think.

    The undertone of her "don't retreat, reload" comment may not have been to insight people who disagree with the President's agenda to take up arms against him or members of the Democrat party, but adding the crosshairs image certainly didn't dispell that notion.
    Again plenty of examples of Demo's using the same type of language. Why only focus on Palin?

    Again, did Sarah know that Gifford was a Jew? I believe she did. Why else would she use that exact wording?
    Well, you making an assumption here, truth is we don't know if she knew or not. Not that it matters because the phrase is no longer exclusive to usage against Jews.

    Putting it all in it's proper context, I can understand why so many people are upset with her. However, she was right in defending her political ideology, but she was wrong for using the words and phrases she espoused.
    What would you have had her say?

    While it is wrong to say that Sarah Palin and the rest of the Republican/Conservative were hoping that such a tragic event would unfold, I do believe they wanted the American people to "get angry as hell and not take it anymore," whatever "it" is.
    The "it" would be the trend toward collectivism, and move away from individuality.

    Unfortunately, the Right wasn't counting on that anger spewing away from the voting box and into the streets - not like this anyway.
    Oh please, we just had an election, and peaceful transition of power where the American people did exactly that. They got mad, they voted, and kicked out those they didn't want in office. And without violence in the streets.....Amazing eh?

    I'm glad Sarah Palin took the website with the "targets" down. Hopefully, all politicians including Sarah Palin will think twice before posting such images and language again, language and imagtry that can easily be misconstrued not as a call to political action, but rather as a call to take matters into one's own hands violently.
    What other politicians would you like to see "reign it in"?


    j-mac
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  7. #467
    Sage
    Barbbtx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    W'Ford TX
    Last Seen
    11-10-12 @ 08:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,467

    Re: Sarah Palin accuses critics of "blood libel"

    Must see interview on MSNBC

    Benyamin Korn was permitted to get a few words in.
    It starts at 1:20 min. mark. Korn gets to speak at the 3:20 min. mark


    msnbc.com Video Player
    Catawa is my favorite bleeding heart liberal.
    1/27/12

  8. #468
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,322

    Re: Sarah Palin accuses critics of "blood libel"

    Quote Originally Posted by Barbbtx View Post
    Must see interview on MSNBC

    Benyamin Korn was permitted to get a few words in.
    It starts at 1:20 min. mark. Korn gets to speak at the 3:20 min. mark


    msnbc.com Video Player

    Wow! just yet, one more example of how lunitic Larry O'donnell is nothing but a hack! And what was up with that Asst. Prof that he had on, was she on drugs or something, she couldn't even sit still.

    j-mac
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  9. #469
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Sarah Palin accuses critics of "blood libel"

    What is funny as hell is this Asst. Professor from a college no one ever heard of, has such passionate disagreement with the use of two words - and the Jewish man does not. It furthers the knee jerk reaction and frothing liberal commentary of our times where fake outrage and continued false accusation burdens progressive liberal extremists and blows their mind. Their insanity can be clearly seen with Ms. whatever her name is.

    And was she on drugs? No - that's not drugs. That's progressive liberal twitching. If she wasn't allowed to twitch we would have seen the classic mouth foam, and expansion of the skull to the point of explosion.
    “I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what’s being proposed here, he’d agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute.” - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  10. #470
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,812

    Re: Sarah Palin accuses critics of "blood libel"

    Quote Originally Posted by Barbbtx View Post
    Must see interview on MSNBC

    Benyamin Korn was permitted to get a few words in.
    It starts at 1:20 min. mark. Korn gets to speak at the 3:20 min. mark


    msnbc.com Video Player
    It seems like the liberal media is on a crusade against Sarah Palin. Oops, did I just say Crusade? how awful - i'm obviously trivilizing the murder and deaths of millions.

    BTW, I am a Jew by birth - and I, as most jews that haven't joined this crusade, are not in the least bit offended.

Page 47 of 67 FirstFirst ... 37454647484957 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •