"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 that they purport to condemn."— Sarah Palin
To be absolutely clear, as both a pundit and a Jew, I have never accused Sarah Palin and her Tea Party cohorts of murdering children to use their blood in religious rituals. Although it wouldn't surprise me.
(Honestly, I'm just too stunned at Palin's choice of words to produce anything more than a snarky quip, so for the moment, what Andrew Sullivan said.)
The term “blood libel” has taken on a broad metaphorical meaning in public discourse. Although its historical origins were in theologically based false accusations against the Jews and the Jewish People,its current usage is far broader. I myself have used it to describe false accusations against the State of Israel by the Goldstone Report. 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. The fact that two of the victims are Jewish is utterly irrelevant to the propriety of using this widely used term.
Want great deals and a chance to win tickets to the best shows in Seattle? Join The Stranger Presents email list!
All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Takedown Policy: thestranger.com/takedown-policy