Sister Sarah Steps in it Again

[curvemudgeon]

Sarah Palin addressed 'the Nation' today, [washingtonpost.com video], nominally to speak about the tragedy of the Arizona shooting. During the video she made the statement:

"Journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hated and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible."

Either Palin is staying true-to-form in remaining willfully ignorant of historical context, or the words "blood libel" were carefully chosen.

For reference, quote from the opening Wikipedia page on "blood libel":

Blood libel (also blood accusation) refers to a false accusation or claim that religious minorities, in European contexts almost always Jews, murder children to use their blood in certain aspects of their religious rituals and holidays. Historically, these claims have–alongside those of well poisoning and host desecration–been a major theme in European persecution of Jews.

The libels typically allege that Jews require human blood for the baking of matzos for Passover. The accusations often assert that the blood of Christian children is especially coveted, and historically blood libel claims have often been made to account for otherwise unexplained deaths of children.

That's some dark shit right there.

Is it reasonably possible, at this stage of development of her public persona and after all the verbal gaffes she is guilty of, that the thought never crossed her mind that maybe, just maybe, the reason some conveniently evocative, argument framing catch-phrase stuck in her head is because the concepts and context behind it are so vile as to preclude it's use in anything purporting to be civil dialog?

Reprehensible is an accurate description, but not just of the behavior of journalists and pundits implied by Palin. If you are in possession of a bully pulpit and make use of it on a regular basis you are 100% responsible for the words you so carefully craft and the repercussions stemming from your presentation of same.

Comments

[desiringmachine.livejournal.com]

This is one of those things that makes me a bit paranoid. I start to wonder if her idiot persona has just been a carefully crafted facade just so she can get away with saying this kind of thing and be excused on the basis of stupidity.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

Oh no - she can't speak as well as a pageant girl without a script and 3 assistants. She refuses to do any kind of interview - if she can't have her handlers control everything she falls apart and fast.

[curvemudgeon.livejournal.com]

And yet, even with every advantage available to a public figure attempting to deliver a message, she still manages to pull a fubar.

If this is the finished product I'm willing to drop mad cash for the outtake reels.

[desiringmachine.livejournal.com]

Yeah I'm not generally one to go in for paranoia...but it still creeps me out occasionally.

Quoting a friend here....

[etcet.livejournal.com]

some Jewish groups have responded. Simon Greer of Jewish Funds for Justice wins, imo, with this:

"We are deeply disturbed by Fox News commentator Sarah Palin's decision to characterize as a 'blood libel' the criticism directed at her following the terrorist attack in Tucson. The term 'blood libel' is not a synonym for 'false accusation.' It refers to a specific falsehood perpetuated by Christians about Jews for centuries, a falsehood that motivated a good deal of anti-Jewish violence and discrimination. Unless someone has been accusing Ms. Palin of killing Christian babies and making matzoh from their blood, her use of the term is totally out-of-line. [...]

"Ms. Palin clearly took some time to reflect before putting out her statement today. Despite that time, her primary conclusion was that she is the victim and Rep. Giffords is the perpetrator. As a powerful rhetorical advocate for personal responsibility, Ms. Palin has failed to live up to her own standards with this statement."

[joanarkham.livejournal.com]

I might be wrong, but I'm leaning toward "just plain stupid" on this one...