• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Sarah Palin accuses critics of "blood libel"

I'm sick of this.

Palin is a dumbass but at least she demonstrated some tact by waiting a few days to come forth and address this civilly.

Her presidential bid is dead. It's the Independents who matter, not her loyal Kool-Aid followers or the people who hate her guts, and from what I can tell, Indepedents have not been swayed by a lot of her actions. Quitting as governor, going on a reality show, rabidly reacting to most criticism, etc. has not won any moderates to her cause.


Palin's strength is to work behind the scenes in helping truly conservative individuals get elected. You hate Palin for what she stands for, but her lean is disclosed....wink wink....

j-mac
 
I'm sick of this.

Palin is a dumbass but at least she demonstrated some tact by waiting a few days to come forth and address this civilly.

Her presidential bid is dead. It's the Independents who matter, not her loyal Kool-Aid followers or the people who hate her guts, and from what I can tell, Indepedents have not been swayed by a lot of her actions. Quitting as governor, going on a reality show, rabidly reacting to most criticism, etc. has not won any moderates to her cause.
Can you stay on topic....NO.
 
Well, somebody forgot to send the memo on this to the conservative pundits.

You're expanding was is generally meant by victimhood.....and you know it. :rolleyes:
 
Somebody should clue in Ms. Palin that the target was Jewish.

She's not even smart enough to understand the 'blood libel' reference in her own speech.

Apparently it went over the OP's head as well.
 
She's not even smart enough to understand the 'blood libel' reference in her own speech.

Apparently it went over the OP's head as well.

My biggest question is where she got it from. You know she didn't put that in her speech by herself.

The reference had three similarities:

Both involved blood
Both seek to demonize to accused
Both are wholly inaccurate

Apparently the only people that don't have the mental acuity to understand the parallels are those that are attacking her for the use.
 
The reference had three similarities:

Both involved blood
Both seek to demonize to accused
Both are wholly inaccurate

Apparently the only people that don't have the mental acuity to understand the parallels are those that are attacking her for the use.

You're trying realllllyyy hard for an anology that makes no sense at all. This didn't involve Jews. Or children. Or an excuse to attack people because of their religion. The only way you can even compare the two is if you take such a broad definition of blood libel that the phrase is essentially meaningless.
 
The reference had three similarities:

Both involved blood
Both seek to demonize to accused
Both are wholly inaccurate

Apparently the only people that don't have the mental acuity to understand the parallels are those that are attacking her for the use.

That's quite a stretch, though. She could have a number of different terms to describe it. Blood libel refers to a very specific thing and it's not really something that one would use metaphorically. I honestly don't even think it's that she went overboard. I think she didn't fully understand the meaning of the word. It's quite absurd for anyone to attempt to draw parallels between the two.
 
That's quite a stretch, though. She could have a number of different terms to describe it. Blood libel refers to a very specific thing and it's not really something that one would use metaphorically. I honestly don't even think it's that she went overboard. I think she didn't fully understand the meaning of the word. It's quite absurd for anyone to attempt to draw parallels between the two.

I agree. I think the most she thought about the phrase was "Ooo, sounds cool."
 
You're trying realllllyyy hard for an anology that makes no sense at all. This didn't involve Jews. Or children. Or an excuse to attack people because of their religion. The only way you can even compare the two is if you take such a broad definition of blood libel that the phrase is essentially meaningless.

One detail popping up in many of the profiles of Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords to appear since she was shot on Saturday is that the congresswoman has increasingly come to define herself as a Jew.

Elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 2006, Giffords was the first Jewish woman from Arizona to serve in Congress. The JTA reports that Giffords made her Jewish background part of her House campaign, which saw her win in a traditionally Republican district

Wounded Arizona congresswoman had strengthened Jewish identity – CNN Belief Blog - CNN.com Blogs


Google is your friend.


j-mac
 
I agree. I think the most she thought about the phrase was "Ooo, sounds cool."

Exactly. I think she may have heard the term before and just assumed that adding "blood" to it was only for the purposes of intensifying the meaning of "libel".
 
Google is your friend.


j-mac

It still doesn't really make sense, because "blood libel" refers to the Jews as the victims of the wrongful criticism.
 
Actually . . .

Several conservative writers have used it in recent days to describe her treatment by the liberal media.
 
You're trying realllllyyy hard for an anology that makes no sense at all. This didn't involve Jews. Or children. Or an excuse to attack people because of their religion. The only way you can even compare the two is if you take such a broad definition of blood libel that the phrase is essentially meaningless.

I'm not trying hard at all, it fits.
 
It still doesn't really make sense, because "blood libel" refers to the Jews as the victims of the wrongful criticism.

Do you think the shooters criticism was on the mark concerning Congresswoman Giffords?


j-mac
 
Google is your friend.


j-mac

Pretty sure that had no reason with either why she was shot or Palin's use of the phrase. Plus it completely messes with the comparison. The Jews are attacked because of supposed attacks on Christians. Now liberals are attacking conservatives because of an actual attack on a Jew? See it makes no sense at all.
 
Pretty sure that had no reason with either why she was shot or Palin's use of the phrase. Plus it completely messes with the comparison. The Jews are attacked because of supposed attacks on Christians. Now liberals are attacking conservatives because of an actual attack on a Jew? See it makes no sense at all.

Again with not looking into anything before you type eh...sigh*

A law enforcement memo based on information from the Department of Homeland Security suggests Jared Loughner, the alleged shooter of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, may have been linked to a racist white supremacy and anti-Semitic hate group — a link the group itself vehemently denies.

The government memo, obtained by Fox News, notes that Loughlin has no direct connection, but “strong suspicion is being directed at” a group called American Renaissance, a group that Loughner mentioned in some of his internet postings.

Does Giffords‘ Shooter Have Ties to ’Anti-Semitic’ White Supremacy Group? | The Blaze

The man is mentally disturbed and should have been under supervision. If you ask me, the Sheriff, and liberals defending this Sheriff should be looked at for why after no less than 5 incidents where police were called on this guy he wasn't treated. Yet, if you want to keep posting untruths, that have already made the news go ahead, I'll keep batting them down.

j-mac
 
Let's look at this section by section:

Blood libel (also blood accusation[1][2]) refers to a false accusation or claim[3][4][5] that religious minorities, almost always Jews[citation needed],

No false accusations have been made against religious minorities, Jews or otherwise.

murder children to use their blood in certain aspects of their religious rituals and holidays.[1][2][6]

No blood of children have been used in religious rituals.

Historically, these claims have–alongside those of well poisoning and host desecration–been a major theme in European persecution of Jews.[4]

Claims were not used to justify persecution.


Any insistance that she used the right phrase is just really sad grasping at straws. She used the wrong phrase. It happens to all politicians. Trying to stretch the definition of the phrase to make it fit her message reeks of desperation. She's not perfect. Get over it.
 
Back
Top Bottom