Leftovers are hysterical: they lost the House; then polls show the smears against Palin last week had little effect; now over her use of the term "blood libel" to describe their libel of her.
Medieval anti-Semites libeled Jews by claiming they killed gentile children to make bread; Democrats libel Palin by saying she killed a child and a Congresswoman with her "heated" rhetoric to win elections. Got it, airheads? On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Jonathan Ashley < [email protected]> wrote: > So, let me understand this. "Blood Libel" is a derogatory term but > "Moose-woman" isn't? > > Tommy, where do you find this crap? > > > On 1/14/2011 5:36 AM, Tommy News wrote: > > From our friend Karl: > > "What I don't understand about what Mr Neusner said (and I fully > subscribe to his outrage about Moose-woman's use of such an > outrageously derogatory term) is his statement that Moose-woman was > "maligned in a gross and unfair way." It was Moose-woman's > organization which prepared the ad that had the "crosshairs map," it > was Moose-woman's organization which, after the shooting of the > Congresswoman, quickly removed the words "crosshairs map" from the > crosshairs map, and it is the Moose-woman's organization and its > lapdogs in the media (viz Rush Limbaugh's comment about killing all > the liberals except two so that they can be used as museum pieces) > which have been fomenting the violence which eventually erupted in > Tucson. Whether or not the nutcase in Tucson was or was not involved > in "partisan politics," the fact is that he acted in a climate which > has become terribly poisonous in sociopolitical terms, and that is a > turd, if you will forgive me, which needs to be laid right on the > front porch of Moose-woman and her cohorts. No "gross and unfair" > maligning has occurred. I have said it before, and I will say it > again -- Moose-woman needs to be hauled into court as an accessory and > conspirator to murder and attempted murder." > > On 1/12/11, Tommy News <[email protected]> <[email protected]> wrote: > > Sarah Palin: The "Blood Libel" in Tucson mass shooting is on Her Own > Hands, but is also on ours. > > In Palin's version of events, her controversial actions represented > common cause with Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.), who a few days > before being critically wounded in the mass shooting had read the > First Amendment on the House floor. > > "Acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own," Palin said in the > statement. "They begin and end with the criminals who commit them, not > collectively with all the citizens of a state, not with those who > listen to talk radio, not with maps of swing districts used by both > sides of the aisle, not with law-abiding citizens who respectfully > exercise their First Amendment rights at campaign rallies, not with > those who proudly voted in the last election." > > Palin's statement contained an instance of provocative religious > imagery that might be missed by more secular voters who read her > statement, but which likely will be recognized by the religious > conservatives who constitute such an important part of her following. > > Within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should > not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very > hatred and violence they purport to condemn," she wrote. "That is > reprehensible." > > "Blood libel" is a phrase that refers to a centuries-old anti-Semitic > slander - the false charge that Jews use the blood of Christian > children for rituals - that has been used as an excuse for > persecution. The phrase was first used in connection with response to > the Arizona shootings in an opinion piece in Monday's Wall Street > Journal and has been picked up by others on the right. > > Palin's defensiveness was apparent in the indirect reference to > criticism of a map on Palin's Web site during the midterm elections > that showed districts of congressional Democrats she had targeted for > defeat marked with crosshairs. > > Giffords, whose district was one of those 20, had publicly complained > that this was an invitation to violence. > > Palin's statement comes as President Obama is headed to Tucson to > speak at a service for the victims, and guarantees that her > perspective will be part of the storyline of the day. > > In its careful timing and deliberate language, it also represents a > departure from her previous attention-getting Facebook posts and > tweets, many of which were reflexive spasms to even small criticisms. > > On Thanksgiving, for instance, as most of the nation was still > sleepily digesting turkey dinners, she issued an angry blast at Obama > and the media, recalling a gaffe the president made during the 2008 > campaign. It was an apparent reaction to the fact that she herself had > been ridiculed for a slip of the tongue in which she referred to North > Korea as South Korea. > > "The one-word slip occurred yesterday during one of my seven > back-to-back interviews wherein I was privileged to speak to the > American public about the important, world-changing issues before us," > Palin wrote. "If the media had bothered to actually listen to all of > my remarks on Glenn Beck's radio show, they would have noticed that I > refer to South Korea as our ally throughout, that I corrected myself > seconds after my slip-of-the-tongue, and that I made it abundantly > clear that pressure should be put on China to restrict energy exports > to the North Korean regime." > > Those kinds of outbursts could be fatal in a presidential campaign, > and stand as a stark contrast to the statement that Palin released > Wednesday. > > Source:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/12/AR2011011202145.html?hpid=topnews > > Is Sarah Palin to Blame for the Tucson Shootings or Are We All? > > The Washington Post and numerous other news agencies are discussing a > potential connection between a graphic released by Sarah Palin's Take > Back the 20 campaign and the Jan. 8 shooting of Arizona > Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. Giffords is in intensive care as a result of > Jared Loughner's one-man rampage that left six people dead and 14 > injured. The graphic in question was used in the 2010 midterm > elections. It featured 20 crosshairs with each set meant to denote a > seat up for re-election that was held by representatives who voted for > health care reform. Crosshairs covered Giffords' district. > > Almost immediately after the shooting, the media picked up the story > of Palin's map and it targeting Giffords' congressional seat. At > first, Palin did not address this part of the developing story in > Tucson and instead extended condolences to Giffords' family and the > families of the other victims via her Facebook page on Saturday > afternoon, according to TMZ. > > However, members of Palin's political action committee did offer > commentary by suggesting that the markings were denoting a map > location. But when messages were released by Palin promoting the > graphic, she used the words "Don't Retreat -- Instead RELOAD." > > A map is not reloaded. A gun is reloaded. > > Because of this graphic and the word choices that followed its issue, > are Palin and the tea party movement somehow responsible for the > shooting of Giffords and innocent bystanders at her public meeting in > Tucson? > > The answer is "Yes." They are responsible. But they are only > responsible to the extent that every American who engages in partisan > politics is responsible. The level of American political discourse has > trickled down from a creation point of heated debate with an air of > respect to a cesspool of rhetoric best encapsulated in the phrase "You > are either for us, or you are against us." > > More:http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/6207326/is_sarah_palin_to_blame_for_the_tucson.html > -- > Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time. > Have a great day, > Tommy > > > > -- > *This is my life. I make the rules.* > > *"It is incredible how as soon as a people becomes subject, it promptly > falls into such complete forgetfulness of its freedom that it can hardly be > roused to the point of regaining it, obeying so easily and so willingly that > one is led to say, on beholding such a situation, that this people has not > so much lost its liberty as won its enslavement." > - Étienne de la Boétie* > > *Far too many good people rely on stupid ideas offered by amateurs who > send out emails or hold weekend seminars! > Jurisdictionary<http://www.jurisdictionary.com?refercode=CG0004>was created > by a lawyer with a quarter-century of experience winning > lawsuits by controlling judges and lawyers!* > > *I Refuse To Comply With The Unconstitutional Demands Of The Federal > Government* > *Read the US > Constitution<http://amgona.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7&Itemid=7#Amends> > * > > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
