Forbidden descriptions

Now pundits are drawing back from their initial claims that Sarah Palin and company were responsible for the Tucson shootings, since it’s evident that the gunman Jared Loughner was simply mentally ill and never paid attention to political rhetoric.  But now they are attacking Palin for describing the way she was blamed for the killings as a “blood libel.”

That phrase specifically refers to the old anti-semitic libel that Jews mix the blood of Christian children in their matzoh balls.  How dare Palin compare criticism of her with the pograms of the Jews, especially in the context of the shooting of a Jewish congresswoman!  Oh, how insensitive!  Oh, how hateful!

The phrase was first used in this context by conservative blogger Glenn Reynolds, aka “Instapundit.”  It has also been used in other contexts and for other meanings without attracting condemnation.

So do you think “blood libel” can only apply to what Jews have been falsely accused of?

Some say that “holocaust” should only refer to what happened to the Jew, though it seems acceptable to speak of “nuclear holocaust.”  Some say the same for  “genocide,” but it is still used for attempts to wipe out other ethnic groups.

Should “inquisition” be off limits, out of sensitivity to Lutherans and Jews, the two main targets of that persecution?

Is “witch hunt” insensitive to Wiccans?

Should we reserve “purge” for the victims of Communism?

Can you think of other potentially problematic terms, if we are going to go this route?

Sarah Palin’s effort to defuse controversy backfires with ‘blood libel’ comment.

About Gene Veith

Professor of Literature at Patrick Henry College, the Director of the Cranach Institute at Concordia Theological Seminary, a columnist for World Magazine and TableTalk, and the author of 18 books on different facets of Christianity & Culture.

  • SKPeterson

    “Massacre.” Out of sensitivity to the victims of raids by and against Native Americans, and this past bowl season for the Big 10, although they have probably cornered “debacle” now, too.

  • SKPeterson

    “Massacre.” Out of sensitivity to the victims of raids by and against Native Americans, and this past bowl season for the Big 10, although they have probably cornered “debacle” now, too.

  • Carl Vehse
  • Carl Vehse
  • Jonathan

    Crusade.

  • Jonathan

    Crusade.

  • WebMonk

    “Blood Libel” was an extremely stupid and asinine phrase for Palin to use, and whoever wrote that speech ought to be fired.

    Obviously the speech writer thought it was appropriate to the situation, and he could probably come up with some bizarre excuse for why it was appropriate. What is so abysmally stupid, is that even IF the phrase were an accurate description/association, the speech writer still shouldn’t have used it because even a high school student could have seen that it would needlessly cause conflict and derail things.

    Moron for writing it. Moron for speaking it. In her defense, it’s certainly possible she didn’t recognize the term, and so used it in ignorance. Unfortunately, that’s the best connotation I can put on her using it.

  • WebMonk

    “Blood Libel” was an extremely stupid and asinine phrase for Palin to use, and whoever wrote that speech ought to be fired.

    Obviously the speech writer thought it was appropriate to the situation, and he could probably come up with some bizarre excuse for why it was appropriate. What is so abysmally stupid, is that even IF the phrase were an accurate description/association, the speech writer still shouldn’t have used it because even a high school student could have seen that it would needlessly cause conflict and derail things.

    Moron for writing it. Moron for speaking it. In her defense, it’s certainly possible she didn’t recognize the term, and so used it in ignorance. Unfortunately, that’s the best connotation I can put on her using it.

  • Tom Hering

    Perhaps she misunderestimated* the power of words.

    *George W. Bush.

  • Tom Hering

    Perhaps she misunderestimated* the power of words.

    *George W. Bush.

  • http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/12/branding-the-tuscon-massacre-together-we-thrive-in-white-and-blue/ Carl Vehse

    In his PDS rant Webmonk (@4) spews only a single claim that Palin’s use of the word “would needlessly cause conflict and derail things.” To the contrary, it was the leftwing MSM who needlessly caused conflict with their blood libel, and now that they were called on it, they and their sycophants needlessly cause conflict by trying to divert blame and spin attention away from their discredited actions.

    As for “derail things,” well, yes. That is what I noted yesterday when I referred to Palin’s “use of that phrase as a description would bring out (which it did!) the foaming-at-the-mouth livid rage of the contemptible liberal MSM and their sycophants.”

  • http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/12/branding-the-tuscon-massacre-together-we-thrive-in-white-and-blue/ Carl Vehse

    In his PDS rant Webmonk (@4) spews only a single claim that Palin’s use of the word “would needlessly cause conflict and derail things.” To the contrary, it was the leftwing MSM who needlessly caused conflict with their blood libel, and now that they were called on it, they and their sycophants needlessly cause conflict by trying to divert blame and spin attention away from their discredited actions.

    As for “derail things,” well, yes. That is what I noted yesterday when I referred to Palin’s “use of that phrase as a description would bring out (which it did!) the foaming-at-the-mouth livid rage of the contemptible liberal MSM and their sycophants.”

  • Rose

    A little off-topic: Why wasn’t the Tucson Memorial held in a church? The arena setting, cheers and whooping distort the meaning of memorial service.

  • Rose

    A little off-topic: Why wasn’t the Tucson Memorial held in a church? The arena setting, cheers and whooping distort the meaning of memorial service.

  • Dan Kempin

    So “blood libel” means that Jews mix the blood of Christians in their dumplings.

    Sure. Everyone knows that. It is such a loaded phrase.

    Better search “Huck Finn” to see if they missed it in their expurgation.

    (Really. Is that the best they can muster? Matzah slander? Looks like Carl’s “foaming at the mouth” assessment was just about right.)

  • Dan Kempin

    So “blood libel” means that Jews mix the blood of Christians in their dumplings.

    Sure. Everyone knows that. It is such a loaded phrase.

    Better search “Huck Finn” to see if they missed it in their expurgation.

    (Really. Is that the best they can muster? Matzah slander? Looks like Carl’s “foaming at the mouth” assessment was just about right.)

  • Tom Hering

    I suppose most people who didn’t know what “blood libel” meant either looked it up, or asked others about it, and wondered “What the heck is she talking about? Are far-right conservatives slandered Jews? Does that mean the media is Christianity?”

    Yes, it was a brilliantly helpful and incisive analogy.

  • Tom Hering

    I suppose most people who didn’t know what “blood libel” meant either looked it up, or asked others about it, and wondered “What the heck is she talking about? Are far-right conservatives slandered Jews? Does that mean the media is Christianity?”

    Yes, it was a brilliantly helpful and incisive analogy.

  • http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/12/branding-the-tuscon-massacre-together-we-thrive-in-white-and-blue/ Carl Vehse

    Dan @8, yes, just like the physical deterioration of a crackhead, one sees the sad effects of rampant PDS.

    Remember the MSM hullabaloo about a photo showing a few phrases written on Sarah Palin’s hand at a Tea Party speech, and her response to that?

  • http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/12/branding-the-tuscon-massacre-together-we-thrive-in-white-and-blue/ Carl Vehse

    Dan @8, yes, just like the physical deterioration of a crackhead, one sees the sad effects of rampant PDS.

    Remember the MSM hullabaloo about a photo showing a few phrases written on Sarah Palin’s hand at a Tea Party speech, and her response to that?

  • Cincinnatus

    Sound and fury signifying nothing. The only reason pundits and the media generally care is because a) Sarah Palin garners ratings and b) they were already crucifying her without reason, so she gave them a reason–even if it is only the slimmest possible–and race/Jew-baiting always garners ratings, so it’s a win-win.

    I’ll be honest and confess my historical illiteracy: I did not actually know that the term “blood libel” refers exclusively to a particular libelous accusation against certain Jews. But I do think claims–by Jews and others–that it should remain such an exclusive ascription is stupid. Though we are all in thrall to some extent to political correctness, I really don’t see why we should reserve a whole class of words as verboten unless they refer to their original context as aspersions against a particular ethnic group (usually Jews). It’s just a stupid, stupid claim that plays on our own blood-guilt and, in America, our unfathomable affection for all things Jewish.

    Look, if a conversation like the following happened, it would be silly, if not insensitive: “‘We really demolished that pizza.’ ‘Yeah, it was a regular pizza holocaust!’” But the term “nuclear holocaust” seems entirely appropriate and evocative. Sorry, Jews. The word “ghetto” is another fine example of co-opted vocabulary: it is a fitting description of many of America’s blasted, forgotten, racially-segregated inner cities. Maybe it is even fitting (though I tend to agree with others here that it was stupid/silly) to describe unveiled accusations that Palin was responsible for Loughner’s atrocities to be, figuratively (or not so figuratively) speaking, “blood libel.” Which brings me back to my first point: who cares? Really? I am daily mystified by the fact that we care about Palin–opportunistic media-whore that she is–but this particular incident beggars comprehension. I literally don’t care, and neither should the Jew-baiters in the media.

    Meanwhile, no ethnic group has the right to reserve an entire class of vocabulary for themselves, no matter how difficult their collective history has been.

  • Cincinnatus

    Sound and fury signifying nothing. The only reason pundits and the media generally care is because a) Sarah Palin garners ratings and b) they were already crucifying her without reason, so she gave them a reason–even if it is only the slimmest possible–and race/Jew-baiting always garners ratings, so it’s a win-win.

    I’ll be honest and confess my historical illiteracy: I did not actually know that the term “blood libel” refers exclusively to a particular libelous accusation against certain Jews. But I do think claims–by Jews and others–that it should remain such an exclusive ascription is stupid. Though we are all in thrall to some extent to political correctness, I really don’t see why we should reserve a whole class of words as verboten unless they refer to their original context as aspersions against a particular ethnic group (usually Jews). It’s just a stupid, stupid claim that plays on our own blood-guilt and, in America, our unfathomable affection for all things Jewish.

    Look, if a conversation like the following happened, it would be silly, if not insensitive: “‘We really demolished that pizza.’ ‘Yeah, it was a regular pizza holocaust!’” But the term “nuclear holocaust” seems entirely appropriate and evocative. Sorry, Jews. The word “ghetto” is another fine example of co-opted vocabulary: it is a fitting description of many of America’s blasted, forgotten, racially-segregated inner cities. Maybe it is even fitting (though I tend to agree with others here that it was stupid/silly) to describe unveiled accusations that Palin was responsible for Loughner’s atrocities to be, figuratively (or not so figuratively) speaking, “blood libel.” Which brings me back to my first point: who cares? Really? I am daily mystified by the fact that we care about Palin–opportunistic media-whore that she is–but this particular incident beggars comprehension. I literally don’t care, and neither should the Jew-baiters in the media.

    Meanwhile, no ethnic group has the right to reserve an entire class of vocabulary for themselves, no matter how difficult their collective history has been.

  • Helen F

    What I’d like to know, since I’ve never heard the phrase, does the
    “myth” about “blood libel” have any truth to it?

  • Helen F

    What I’d like to know, since I’ve never heard the phrase, does the
    “myth” about “blood libel” have any truth to it?

  • The Jones

    “The bomb,” a favorite adolescent phrase of mine describing something totally awesome, can no longer be used as it is insensitive to Oklahoma City Bombing victims. Oh yeah, and it incites violence.

    “Epic” can no longer be used as an adjective of grandiose proportions out of sensitivity to the innocent victims of Troy.

    I don’t think anybody mentioned this, but did anyone else notice in Obama’s speech how strange it was that people were cheering before, during and after it? How do you cheer at a funeral? If you listen to the speech, you can find that it wasn’t written with the idea that people would be cheering. There were no natural pauses, and even the signature line of the speech, “Gabby opened her eyes,” wasn’t crafted with an expected boisterous response. It was just weird to me. I think it was weird to the president, too.

    I don’t know if it is acceptable at this point to criticize the people of Tucson for their reaction, but I think a lesson on the finer points of situational appropriateness is in order. I suppose Obama can’t be blamed for that. Although I did have a gut-reaction against what looked like him basking in the political-rally-type praise of people screaming “We love you!” at somebody else’s funeral right at the beginning. I think it would have been better to step away from the podium, let the noise pass, and then continue when the reverence of the audience is directed in the proper place. But then again, maybe that’s me being old-fashioned.

  • The Jones

    “The bomb,” a favorite adolescent phrase of mine describing something totally awesome, can no longer be used as it is insensitive to Oklahoma City Bombing victims. Oh yeah, and it incites violence.

    “Epic” can no longer be used as an adjective of grandiose proportions out of sensitivity to the innocent victims of Troy.

    I don’t think anybody mentioned this, but did anyone else notice in Obama’s speech how strange it was that people were cheering before, during and after it? How do you cheer at a funeral? If you listen to the speech, you can find that it wasn’t written with the idea that people would be cheering. There were no natural pauses, and even the signature line of the speech, “Gabby opened her eyes,” wasn’t crafted with an expected boisterous response. It was just weird to me. I think it was weird to the president, too.

    I don’t know if it is acceptable at this point to criticize the people of Tucson for their reaction, but I think a lesson on the finer points of situational appropriateness is in order. I suppose Obama can’t be blamed for that. Although I did have a gut-reaction against what looked like him basking in the political-rally-type praise of people screaming “We love you!” at somebody else’s funeral right at the beginning. I think it would have been better to step away from the podium, let the noise pass, and then continue when the reverence of the audience is directed in the proper place. But then again, maybe that’s me being old-fashioned.

  • http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/12/branding-the-tuscon-massacre-together-we-thrive-in-white-and-blue/ Carl Vehse

    More forbidden phrases not approved for use by the clymer media:

    In the headlines or first paragraph, the party designation of a politician accused of a crime (innocent until proven guilty, unless it’s [R])
    Pro-life (political or ethical group are normally referred to by their designation, except in this case, use anti-choice or anti-abortion instead)
    Pro-abortion (use nicer sounding pro-woman’s rights or pro-choice)
    Murder-by-abortion (or any phrase implying the child being slaughtered in the womb)
    Homosexual pervert (denounce phrase as bigoted and use gay rights or committed monogamous relationship instead)
    Christian (not in any positive connotation)
    Islam; Muslim; Mohammed (not in any negative connotation)
    Islamoterrorist
    Jihadist
    Mohammedan
    Traitor (instead point out the Constitution is too hard to understand)
    Failed presidency; disgraced presidency; incompetent presidency (unless describing a Republican)
    TOTUS (Teleprompter-of-the-United-States)
    Bush Derangement Syndrome; Palin Derangement Syndrome (but the behavior is allowed and encouraged)
    Global warming hoax; global warming fraud; global warming sham (global warming is only to be associated with “proven” or “fact” or, along with “global cooling,” climate change)
    Dinosaur Media Deathwatch(tm)
    Smartest woman in the world (unless referring to a Democrat)
    gun (instead use large-caliber semi-automatic assault handgun, along with at least two anti-2nd Amendment quotes)
    Card-carrying Communist; Commie (not even for an avowed Communist)
    “An effete corps of impudent snobs who characterize themselves as intellectuals” (even a crook occasionally says the right thing)
    Murderous Pope and Turk (Oops…wrong list! That’s a forbidden phrase for Lutheran hymnals)
    Melting pot; cultural assimilation (except as a bad alternative to multiculturalism)
    Entitlement mentality
    and, of course, clymer media.

  • http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/12/branding-the-tuscon-massacre-together-we-thrive-in-white-and-blue/ Carl Vehse

    More forbidden phrases not approved for use by the clymer media:

    In the headlines or first paragraph, the party designation of a politician accused of a crime (innocent until proven guilty, unless it’s [R])
    Pro-life (political or ethical group are normally referred to by their designation, except in this case, use anti-choice or anti-abortion instead)
    Pro-abortion (use nicer sounding pro-woman’s rights or pro-choice)
    Murder-by-abortion (or any phrase implying the child being slaughtered in the womb)
    Homosexual pervert (denounce phrase as bigoted and use gay rights or committed monogamous relationship instead)
    Christian (not in any positive connotation)
    Islam; Muslim; Mohammed (not in any negative connotation)
    Islamoterrorist
    Jihadist
    Mohammedan
    Traitor (instead point out the Constitution is too hard to understand)
    Failed presidency; disgraced presidency; incompetent presidency (unless describing a Republican)
    TOTUS (Teleprompter-of-the-United-States)
    Bush Derangement Syndrome; Palin Derangement Syndrome (but the behavior is allowed and encouraged)
    Global warming hoax; global warming fraud; global warming sham (global warming is only to be associated with “proven” or “fact” or, along with “global cooling,” climate change)
    Dinosaur Media Deathwatch(tm)
    Smartest woman in the world (unless referring to a Democrat)
    gun (instead use large-caliber semi-automatic assault handgun, along with at least two anti-2nd Amendment quotes)
    Card-carrying Communist; Commie (not even for an avowed Communist)
    “An effete corps of impudent snobs who characterize themselves as intellectuals” (even a crook occasionally says the right thing)
    Murderous Pope and Turk (Oops…wrong list! That’s a forbidden phrase for Lutheran hymnals)
    Melting pot; cultural assimilation (except as a bad alternative to multiculturalism)
    Entitlement mentality
    and, of course, clymer media.

  • WebMonk

    Hey, I know. Could we PLEASE outlaw the use of the word clymer, in any context and use?

    Almost by definition, those who use it are themselves clymers. Any votes of agreement on this?

  • WebMonk

    Hey, I know. Could we PLEASE outlaw the use of the word clymer, in any context and use?

    Almost by definition, those who use it are themselves clymers. Any votes of agreement on this?

  • Cincinnatus

    J: I’m assuming the servers at YouTube, 4Chan, or the DailyKos are down, otherwise you wouldn’t be practicing on this thread. But may I ask to what, exactly, you are referring? Carl is the only one authoring comments that would remotely conform to your description (“hateful,” “untrue,” and “paranoid”–not to mention “right-wing”–though I don’t know if Carl is Lutheran).

    /I know, I know, I shouldn’t feed the troll…

  • Cincinnatus

    J: I’m assuming the servers at YouTube, 4Chan, or the DailyKos are down, otherwise you wouldn’t be practicing on this thread. But may I ask to what, exactly, you are referring? Carl is the only one authoring comments that would remotely conform to your description (“hateful,” “untrue,” and “paranoid”–not to mention “right-wing”–though I don’t know if Carl is Lutheran).

    /I know, I know, I shouldn’t feed the troll…

  • Tom Hering

    WebMonk @ 15: Nah. Let the far-right speak as freely as it likes. It does nothing but help to turn reasonable citizens (both liberal and conservative) against them.

  • Tom Hering

    WebMonk @ 15: Nah. Let the far-right speak as freely as it likes. It does nothing but help to turn reasonable citizens (both liberal and conservative) against them.

  • Cincinnatus

    Tom, we used to agree on stuff and have thoughtful conversations. When did you become yet another troll? You haven’t said anything of substance for days.

  • Cincinnatus

    Tom, we used to agree on stuff and have thoughtful conversations. When did you become yet another troll? You haven’t said anything of substance for days.

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Maybe, instead of limiting the use of certain words, we should encourage certain people to limit their overall use of words, ie, to realise that sometimes, shutting up is a good thing.

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Maybe, instead of limiting the use of certain words, we should encourage certain people to limit their overall use of words, ie, to realise that sometimes, shutting up is a good thing.

  • Booklover

    I hate to enter the discussion because of hesitance to give the topic more importance than it deserves. This is just one more tireless example of the media’s 24/7 fixation on unimportant and uninteresting and profoundly trivial surface issues. And yes, both sides do it.

    Here is an interesting quote from the article:

    “Liberal Harvard University law professor Alan Dershowitz told the blog biggovernment.com that blood libel has taken on ‘broad metaphorical meaning’ and said there was ‘nothing improper and certainly nothing anti-Semitic in Sarah Palin using the term to characterize what she reasonably believes are false accusations.’”

  • Booklover

    I hate to enter the discussion because of hesitance to give the topic more importance than it deserves. This is just one more tireless example of the media’s 24/7 fixation on unimportant and uninteresting and profoundly trivial surface issues. And yes, both sides do it.

    Here is an interesting quote from the article:

    “Liberal Harvard University law professor Alan Dershowitz told the blog biggovernment.com that blood libel has taken on ‘broad metaphorical meaning’ and said there was ‘nothing improper and certainly nothing anti-Semitic in Sarah Palin using the term to characterize what she reasonably believes are false accusations.’”

  • Tom Hering

    Cincinnatus @ 19, I have my good days and I have my bad days. I don’t think we’ll always agree on which is which.

  • Tom Hering

    Cincinnatus @ 19, I have my good days and I have my bad days. I don’t think we’ll always agree on which is which.

  • WebMonk

    Cin – yes, Vehse is a Lutheran. In Lutheranism’s defense, not all Lutherans are clymers like Vehse.

  • WebMonk

    Cin – yes, Vehse is a Lutheran. In Lutheranism’s defense, not all Lutherans are clymers like Vehse.

  • Cincinnatus

    WebMonk: It’s beside the point anyway.

  • Cincinnatus

    WebMonk: It’s beside the point anyway.

  • http://facebook.com/mesamike Mike Westfall

    From Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals:
    RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.

    That’s what the good little radical acolytes are doing to Sarah. No big deal. They’re just trying to live out their catechism. We can use RULE 5 (ridicule) to counter this attack by pointing out and praising them for being such good little obedient radical acolytes….

  • http://facebook.com/mesamike Mike Westfall

    From Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals:
    RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.

    That’s what the good little radical acolytes are doing to Sarah. No big deal. They’re just trying to live out their catechism. We can use RULE 5 (ridicule) to counter this attack by pointing out and praising them for being such good little obedient radical acolytes….

  • George A. Marquart

    Relatively few gentiles are aware of the history of the persecution of the Jews by those who called themselves Christians. Most, particularly in the USA, think that what we know as the “Holocaust” is pretty much it. In actuality it is a tragic story of hundreds of years of cruel, mindless, murder, torture, expulsion, and discrimination. For this reason, the word “ghetto”, when used for other than an area where Jews are forced to live, seems to me to dilute the horrors that have been committed against the Jews. Harlem is not a ghetto, nor are any number of other areas of urban blight.

    I remember seeing the Lodz ghetto in 1943. Based on what I learned not all that much later, I never use the word “ghetto” for anything but its original meaning.

    Peace and Joy!
    George A. Marquart

  • George A. Marquart

    Relatively few gentiles are aware of the history of the persecution of the Jews by those who called themselves Christians. Most, particularly in the USA, think that what we know as the “Holocaust” is pretty much it. In actuality it is a tragic story of hundreds of years of cruel, mindless, murder, torture, expulsion, and discrimination. For this reason, the word “ghetto”, when used for other than an area where Jews are forced to live, seems to me to dilute the horrors that have been committed against the Jews. Harlem is not a ghetto, nor are any number of other areas of urban blight.

    I remember seeing the Lodz ghetto in 1943. Based on what I learned not all that much later, I never use the word “ghetto” for anything but its original meaning.

    Peace and Joy!
    George A. Marquart

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Bob (though he might be gone?), you are guilty of generalising:
    Not everybody here are Lutherans.
    Not all Lutherans here are rightwing.
    We talk about the topics our host picks, generally.

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Bob (though he might be gone?), you are guilty of generalising:
    Not everybody here are Lutherans.
    Not all Lutherans here are rightwing.
    We talk about the topics our host picks, generally.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    As to Veith’s original question, obviously, “putsch” is right out, due to the sensitivity to the Germans.

    Also, people should avoid saying “bad thing”, because I had a bad thing happen to me the other day, and it’s really insensitive for you to think that your bad thing is even remotely comparable, or even to think about yourself at a time when I’m feeling like this.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    As to Veith’s original question, obviously, “putsch” is right out, due to the sensitivity to the Germans.

    Also, people should avoid saying “bad thing”, because I had a bad thing happen to me the other day, and it’s really insensitive for you to think that your bad thing is even remotely comparable, or even to think about yourself at a time when I’m feeling like this.

  • SKPeterson

    Well, since the blood libel comes from The Protocols of the Elders of Zion we probably shouldn’t use “protocol”, “elders” and “Zion”. Best stop using “the” too, it’s safer that way and people won’t be offended.

  • SKPeterson

    Well, since the blood libel comes from The Protocols of the Elders of Zion we probably shouldn’t use “protocol”, “elders” and “Zion”. Best stop using “the” too, it’s safer that way and people won’t be offended.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    I also think calling Palin a troll, while accurate, is ultimately offensive to those who dwell below bridges, threatening to eat passersby.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    I also think calling Palin a troll, while accurate, is ultimately offensive to those who dwell below bridges, threatening to eat passersby.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    I’d like to hear more from this Carl Vehse fellow. He really seems quite reasonable. Why doesn’t he post here more? I mean, can anyone honestly think of a good reason why the media is afraid to use the phrase “Dinosaur Media Deathwatch”?

    Oh, and Bob (@21), you must be the political commentary that you wish to see in the world, to coin a phrase.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    I’d like to hear more from this Carl Vehse fellow. He really seems quite reasonable. Why doesn’t he post here more? I mean, can anyone honestly think of a good reason why the media is afraid to use the phrase “Dinosaur Media Deathwatch”?

    Oh, and Bob (@21), you must be the political commentary that you wish to see in the world, to coin a phrase.

  • SKPeterson

    @tODD – if there are trolls, who are the 3 billy goats gruff? How will we avoid offending them? Are they sufficiently Lutheran to be part of the conversation?

  • SKPeterson

    @tODD – if there are trolls, who are the 3 billy goats gruff? How will we avoid offending them? Are they sufficiently Lutheran to be part of the conversation?

  • DonS

    If anyone other than Sarah Palin had uttered this phrase, which admittedly was a bit odd in context, it would have passed into the winds of history. Instead, a multi-day firestorm of media and blog comments have ensued, on both sides, that do nothing to lower the temperature of public discourse or improve civility. A reasonable person might wonder why the ex-governor of Alaska and failed vice presidential candidate deserves this kind of scrutiny for a comment that is debatable but not scurrilous, when such comments are uttered all of the time by practically everyone in the public eye.

  • DonS

    If anyone other than Sarah Palin had uttered this phrase, which admittedly was a bit odd in context, it would have passed into the winds of history. Instead, a multi-day firestorm of media and blog comments have ensued, on both sides, that do nothing to lower the temperature of public discourse or improve civility. A reasonable person might wonder why the ex-governor of Alaska and failed vice presidential candidate deserves this kind of scrutiny for a comment that is debatable but not scurrilous, when such comments are uttered all of the time by practically everyone in the public eye.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    DonS said (@34), “A reasonable person might wonder why the ex-governor of Alaska and failed vice presidential candidate deserves this kind of scrutiny.”

    Um, Don, I believe you forgot to add “… and 2012 REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE YEEEEEHA!” ;)

    Also, according to unnamed sources in the Palin camp, after receiving the Republican nomination in 2012, Palin plans to quit about 3/4 of the way through the campaign, citing unprecedented levels of criticism. I have obtained a copy of her speech, which reads in part:

    I am no longer able to do the job I have been nominated to do because the jackbooted brownshirts of the media have carried out their Kristallnacht against me, keeping in mind their Final Solution of having my opponent elected. [pause for applause]

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    DonS said (@34), “A reasonable person might wonder why the ex-governor of Alaska and failed vice presidential candidate deserves this kind of scrutiny.”

    Um, Don, I believe you forgot to add “… and 2012 REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE YEEEEEHA!” ;)

    Also, according to unnamed sources in the Palin camp, after receiving the Republican nomination in 2012, Palin plans to quit about 3/4 of the way through the campaign, citing unprecedented levels of criticism. I have obtained a copy of her speech, which reads in part:

    I am no longer able to do the job I have been nominated to do because the jackbooted brownshirts of the media have carried out their Kristallnacht against me, keeping in mind their Final Solution of having my opponent elected. [pause for applause]

  • SKPeterson

    Well tODD, I heard that if Michelle Bachmann runs she plans on nominating Ted Turner as her running mate and they’ll go out on tour with Styx.

  • SKPeterson

    Well tODD, I heard that if Michelle Bachmann runs she plans on nominating Ted Turner as her running mate and they’ll go out on tour with Styx.

  • trotk

    I think that calling Palin, or anyone else, a troll is offensive to all of the honest fishermen in America, as well as to the fish.

  • trotk

    I think that calling Palin, or anyone else, a troll is offensive to all of the honest fishermen in America, as well as to the fish.

  • Steve Billingsley

    The overreaction to this phrase is ridiculous. It has been used many times before in political rhetoric recently (a few examples…hat tip to Jim Geraghty)

    MSNBC’s Mike Barnicle: John Kerry Underwent A “Blood Libel By The Swift Boat People.” “The problem for Kerry here is that two years ago, Joe, he did not talk like that when he was undergoing a blood libel by the Swift Boat people. If he had stood up two years ago, in July of 2004, and looked into the cameras with the same intensity he showed today on this issue and said, Hey, I didn`t see Dick Cheney on the bow of my boat in the Mekong Delta, we might have a different president today. That didn`t happen then, and so he`s playing catch-up in terms of his reputation now.” (“Scarborough Country,” MSNBC, 10/31/06)

    Democratic Congresswoman On Accusations Against Al Gore: “I Would Put Them In A Category, Literally, Of Blood Libel.”“Rep. DEUTSCH: Well, again, it–it is ve–a–an incredibly fair and well-run process. But let me respond to the two things you said. First is the Republicans’ allegations over the last 24 or 48 hours, which I consider the most scandalous statements that I probably have heard in my entire life. And I would put them in a category, literally, of blood libel, that Al Gore has conspired to prevent servicemen and women from their votes being counted, which is absolutely not true.” (“Rivera Live,” CNBC, 11/20/00)

    Christie Todd Whitman & “Blood Libel” “Think McCain-Palin and Obama-Biden have it tough? During Whitman’s re-election campaign, baseball cards bearing her photo with a daily ‘baby murder count’ were mass-mailed to the ‘base’ by the so-called ‘Christian’ right. The left wing, moreover, has smeared her record relentlessly, blaming her for everything from summertime droughts to the current fiscal crisis. Most egregious has been the blood libel that as EPA administrator she deliberately misled responders at Ground Zero about the air quality, putting their health and even their lives at risk. The fact that she repeatedly advised responders to wear protection goes unmentioned.” (John Farmer Jr., “Why The True Mavericks Can’t Win,” The Star-Ledger, 10/19/08)

    Some Democrats View Attacks On Their Patriotism “A Blood Libel.” “What about Bush’s cheap shot attack on Democrats implying they support terrorists? Unfortunately, it’s just the kind of wedge issue many people, maybe most, in whole sections of the country, primarily the South and the West, are all too ready to accept on faith. Democrats, as they see it, are embarrassed by expressions of patriotism or, worse yet, ashamed of them. For a minority of left-wing Democrats that’s all too true; but for most Democrats that’s a blood libel that Republicans have been spreading since the McCarthy era — alas, with some success.” (John Farmer, “Presidential Campaign To Run From The Sewers,” Star-Ledger, 11/24/03)

    Salon: Blair Trumpeted “Blood Libel” Against Iran. “You can’t teach an old lapdog new tricks. And Tony Blair was barking up the wrong tree yet again last week in his first major appearance since he skulked ingloriously away from office back in June. Blair seized the opportunity of a New York speech to trumpet the blood libel that Iran is now the embodiment of the entire ‘global ideology’ of Islamic extremism, explicitly conflating the Tehran regime not only with al-Qaida but also with Nazi Germany.” (Chris Floyd, “Blair And Bush Team Up To Sell New War,” Salon.com, 10/24/07)

    Washington Monthly Book Reviews Labels Anti-Clinton Book “Awfully Close To A Blood Libel.” “Losing bin Laden might be thought of as the pilot for a series to be called CSI: Right ‘Wing Conspiracy.’ In the book, British journalist Richard Miniter sifts through eight years’ worth of the Clinton administration’s approach to Osama bin Laden’s terrorism, and lays the blame for failing to prevent the 9/11 attacks squarely on — altogethernow, Regnery Publishing buffs! — Bill Clinton. Armed with 20/20 hindsight, Miniter finds a long series of missed opportunities to capture or kill the terrorist. The result is an odd book that manages to raise serious questions and make serious points about the competing pressures and interests that go into creating a foreign policy, but that still overreaches in manipulative and mendacious ways. . . . However, if Miniter had been less interested in leveling what seems awfully close to a blood libel, it would be easier to congratulate him for producing a clear account of the competing policy questions, institutional inertia, bureaucratic competition, and the personality conflicts that thwarted the formulation and execution of a policy to stop bin Laden.” (Jamie Malanowski, “Kill Bill: The Relentless Effort To Blame 9/11 On President Clinton,” Washington Monthly, 11/1/03)

    CQ Weekly: “Not Just A Fiction, It Was Very Nearly A Blood Libel.” “In his Oct. 17, 2002, testimony for the joint House and Senate inquiry, CIA Director George J. Tenet conceded no error, acknowledged no miscalculation. Beyond removing ‘the wall’ of legal restrictions on intelligence sharing and increasing his budget, he saw no need for fundamental change. In his view, any suggestion that the CIA was not joined at the hip with the FBI in pursuit of al Qaeda was not just a fiction, it was very nearly a blood libel. ‘One of the most critical alliances in the war against terrorism is that between CIA and FBI,’ Tenet testified.” (“CQ Outlook: Is Homeland Security Keeping America Safe?,” CQ Weekly, 6/13/03)

    Pulitzer Prize-Winning Journalist & Author David Halberstam Describes The Movie Pearl Harbor As A “Blood Libel.” “Look at ‘Pearl Harbor.’ ‘Pearl Harbor’ is nearly a blood libel against the event. The people who made that movie should be ashamed of themselves. Then you see ‘Apocalypse’ and you see what real filmmaking really is.” (Jeff Stark, “David Halberstam on ‘Apocalypse Now’,” Salon.com, 8/3/01)

    Baltimore Sun: Ellen Sauerbrey Issued “A Political Blood Libel” In 1998. “Post: ‘Take us back to the last election. Do you still think you won that?’ Sauerbrey: ‘I think it’s irrelevant.’ Excuse me? Sauerbrey then vaguely blamed Baltimore City for ‘problems,’ which she said have been addressed by ‘new equipment.’ And then the subject was changed. Well, all denials to the contrary, the last election is not ‘irrelevant.’ What Sauerbrey issued, in its aftermath, was a political blood libel, accusing her opponents of stealing the democratic process. She had all sorts of time to prove her allegations, or drop them, or apologize for them and blame them on the emotions of the moment. Instead, she took them all the way to court — where they were thrown in her face.” (Michael Olesker, “Accusations Hurt Credibility Of Candidate Sauerbrey,” The Baltimore Sun, 7/21/98)

    People just lose their minds when Sarah Palin is involved.

  • Steve Billingsley

    The overreaction to this phrase is ridiculous. It has been used many times before in political rhetoric recently (a few examples…hat tip to Jim Geraghty)

    MSNBC’s Mike Barnicle: John Kerry Underwent A “Blood Libel By The Swift Boat People.” “The problem for Kerry here is that two years ago, Joe, he did not talk like that when he was undergoing a blood libel by the Swift Boat people. If he had stood up two years ago, in July of 2004, and looked into the cameras with the same intensity he showed today on this issue and said, Hey, I didn`t see Dick Cheney on the bow of my boat in the Mekong Delta, we might have a different president today. That didn`t happen then, and so he`s playing catch-up in terms of his reputation now.” (“Scarborough Country,” MSNBC, 10/31/06)

    Democratic Congresswoman On Accusations Against Al Gore: “I Would Put Them In A Category, Literally, Of Blood Libel.”“Rep. DEUTSCH: Well, again, it–it is ve–a–an incredibly fair and well-run process. But let me respond to the two things you said. First is the Republicans’ allegations over the last 24 or 48 hours, which I consider the most scandalous statements that I probably have heard in my entire life. And I would put them in a category, literally, of blood libel, that Al Gore has conspired to prevent servicemen and women from their votes being counted, which is absolutely not true.” (“Rivera Live,” CNBC, 11/20/00)

    Christie Todd Whitman & “Blood Libel” “Think McCain-Palin and Obama-Biden have it tough? During Whitman’s re-election campaign, baseball cards bearing her photo with a daily ‘baby murder count’ were mass-mailed to the ‘base’ by the so-called ‘Christian’ right. The left wing, moreover, has smeared her record relentlessly, blaming her for everything from summertime droughts to the current fiscal crisis. Most egregious has been the blood libel that as EPA administrator she deliberately misled responders at Ground Zero about the air quality, putting their health and even their lives at risk. The fact that she repeatedly advised responders to wear protection goes unmentioned.” (John Farmer Jr., “Why The True Mavericks Can’t Win,” The Star-Ledger, 10/19/08)

    Some Democrats View Attacks On Their Patriotism “A Blood Libel.” “What about Bush’s cheap shot attack on Democrats implying they support terrorists? Unfortunately, it’s just the kind of wedge issue many people, maybe most, in whole sections of the country, primarily the South and the West, are all too ready to accept on faith. Democrats, as they see it, are embarrassed by expressions of patriotism or, worse yet, ashamed of them. For a minority of left-wing Democrats that’s all too true; but for most Democrats that’s a blood libel that Republicans have been spreading since the McCarthy era — alas, with some success.” (John Farmer, “Presidential Campaign To Run From The Sewers,” Star-Ledger, 11/24/03)

    Salon: Blair Trumpeted “Blood Libel” Against Iran. “You can’t teach an old lapdog new tricks. And Tony Blair was barking up the wrong tree yet again last week in his first major appearance since he skulked ingloriously away from office back in June. Blair seized the opportunity of a New York speech to trumpet the blood libel that Iran is now the embodiment of the entire ‘global ideology’ of Islamic extremism, explicitly conflating the Tehran regime not only with al-Qaida but also with Nazi Germany.” (Chris Floyd, “Blair And Bush Team Up To Sell New War,” Salon.com, 10/24/07)

    Washington Monthly Book Reviews Labels Anti-Clinton Book “Awfully Close To A Blood Libel.” “Losing bin Laden might be thought of as the pilot for a series to be called CSI: Right ‘Wing Conspiracy.’ In the book, British journalist Richard Miniter sifts through eight years’ worth of the Clinton administration’s approach to Osama bin Laden’s terrorism, and lays the blame for failing to prevent the 9/11 attacks squarely on — altogethernow, Regnery Publishing buffs! — Bill Clinton. Armed with 20/20 hindsight, Miniter finds a long series of missed opportunities to capture or kill the terrorist. The result is an odd book that manages to raise serious questions and make serious points about the competing pressures and interests that go into creating a foreign policy, but that still overreaches in manipulative and mendacious ways. . . . However, if Miniter had been less interested in leveling what seems awfully close to a blood libel, it would be easier to congratulate him for producing a clear account of the competing policy questions, institutional inertia, bureaucratic competition, and the personality conflicts that thwarted the formulation and execution of a policy to stop bin Laden.” (Jamie Malanowski, “Kill Bill: The Relentless Effort To Blame 9/11 On President Clinton,” Washington Monthly, 11/1/03)

    CQ Weekly: “Not Just A Fiction, It Was Very Nearly A Blood Libel.” “In his Oct. 17, 2002, testimony for the joint House and Senate inquiry, CIA Director George J. Tenet conceded no error, acknowledged no miscalculation. Beyond removing ‘the wall’ of legal restrictions on intelligence sharing and increasing his budget, he saw no need for fundamental change. In his view, any suggestion that the CIA was not joined at the hip with the FBI in pursuit of al Qaeda was not just a fiction, it was very nearly a blood libel. ‘One of the most critical alliances in the war against terrorism is that between CIA and FBI,’ Tenet testified.” (“CQ Outlook: Is Homeland Security Keeping America Safe?,” CQ Weekly, 6/13/03)

    Pulitzer Prize-Winning Journalist & Author David Halberstam Describes The Movie Pearl Harbor As A “Blood Libel.” “Look at ‘Pearl Harbor.’ ‘Pearl Harbor’ is nearly a blood libel against the event. The people who made that movie should be ashamed of themselves. Then you see ‘Apocalypse’ and you see what real filmmaking really is.” (Jeff Stark, “David Halberstam on ‘Apocalypse Now’,” Salon.com, 8/3/01)

    Baltimore Sun: Ellen Sauerbrey Issued “A Political Blood Libel” In 1998. “Post: ‘Take us back to the last election. Do you still think you won that?’ Sauerbrey: ‘I think it’s irrelevant.’ Excuse me? Sauerbrey then vaguely blamed Baltimore City for ‘problems,’ which she said have been addressed by ‘new equipment.’ And then the subject was changed. Well, all denials to the contrary, the last election is not ‘irrelevant.’ What Sauerbrey issued, in its aftermath, was a political blood libel, accusing her opponents of stealing the democratic process. She had all sorts of time to prove her allegations, or drop them, or apologize for them and blame them on the emotions of the moment. Instead, she took them all the way to court — where they were thrown in her face.” (Michael Olesker, “Accusations Hurt Credibility Of Candidate Sauerbrey,” The Baltimore Sun, 7/21/98)

    People just lose their minds when Sarah Palin is involved.

  • trotk

    Maybe it is because people get frustrated when others quit their jobs to campaign for themselves.

  • trotk

    Maybe it is because people get frustrated when others quit their jobs to campaign for themselves.

  • DonS

    tODD @ 35: Hmmm, I must have missed that 2012 presidential nominee thing. I know they have been advancing these campaigns, but have I already missed the 2012 presidential primary campaigns and conventions?

    To my knowledge, Palin is not even an announced candidate yet. So, again, knowing that she already has an incredible amount of baggage to overcome, why the fixation with her? As Steve Billingsley @ 38 points out, it’s not like no one else in the modern political world has ever used the term “blood libel” before. And yet, strangely, none of us can probably recall any of these prior instances. But now, when she says it, it’s a national story and she is obviously anti-Semitic! Go figure. And let’s not forget that the reason she was defending herself with this video speech is because she was, herself, being blamed for the Tucson massacre. All by herself! Because she put crosshairs on a Congressional map, even though that has been done dozens of times in the past by others on both sides of the political aisle.

    I don’t get it. Logically, it’s hard to argue that this fixation on Palin is anything other than what Mike Westfall says @ 26 — Rule 12 from Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals in practice. And it evidences that those responsible for this assault on Palin don’t believe in the least that she’s as dense or stupid as they are attempting to paint her as being. Or, I guess alternatively, they believe the American people ARE that dense and stupid.

  • DonS

    tODD @ 35: Hmmm, I must have missed that 2012 presidential nominee thing. I know they have been advancing these campaigns, but have I already missed the 2012 presidential primary campaigns and conventions?

    To my knowledge, Palin is not even an announced candidate yet. So, again, knowing that she already has an incredible amount of baggage to overcome, why the fixation with her? As Steve Billingsley @ 38 points out, it’s not like no one else in the modern political world has ever used the term “blood libel” before. And yet, strangely, none of us can probably recall any of these prior instances. But now, when she says it, it’s a national story and she is obviously anti-Semitic! Go figure. And let’s not forget that the reason she was defending herself with this video speech is because she was, herself, being blamed for the Tucson massacre. All by herself! Because she put crosshairs on a Congressional map, even though that has been done dozens of times in the past by others on both sides of the political aisle.

    I don’t get it. Logically, it’s hard to argue that this fixation on Palin is anything other than what Mike Westfall says @ 26 — Rule 12 from Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals in practice. And it evidences that those responsible for this assault on Palin don’t believe in the least that she’s as dense or stupid as they are attempting to paint her as being. Or, I guess alternatively, they believe the American people ARE that dense and stupid.

  • Steve Billingsley

    trotk

    So what? What is Sarah Palin to you? She was the vice-presidential candidate on a losing political ticket, a less-than one term governor of a sparsely populated state and maybe an aspiring presidential candidate. All she really is right now is a media celebrity and a fundraiser (a pretty effective one at that) for Republican political candidates. If and when she ever runs for president, then don’t vote for her if you don’t like her. And if you don’t like what she has to say on TV, change the channel or turn the TV off.

    It isn’t that hard. If she (or any other political figure) twist someone up in knots so much that they feel the need to spout off some vitriolic comment than the problem is more about that person than the political figure in question.

    I would say the same thing about President Obama as well. The only difference (and it is a significant one) is that he actually holds a powerful political office (and the most powerful one in the land). He does have real political power. Even so, if you don’t like him, don’t vote for him in 2012 and support politicians who are in the opposite political camp. And in the meantime, live your life and don’t go crazy over everything the man says or does.

  • Steve Billingsley

    trotk

    So what? What is Sarah Palin to you? She was the vice-presidential candidate on a losing political ticket, a less-than one term governor of a sparsely populated state and maybe an aspiring presidential candidate. All she really is right now is a media celebrity and a fundraiser (a pretty effective one at that) for Republican political candidates. If and when she ever runs for president, then don’t vote for her if you don’t like her. And if you don’t like what she has to say on TV, change the channel or turn the TV off.

    It isn’t that hard. If she (or any other political figure) twist someone up in knots so much that they feel the need to spout off some vitriolic comment than the problem is more about that person than the political figure in question.

    I would say the same thing about President Obama as well. The only difference (and it is a significant one) is that he actually holds a powerful political office (and the most powerful one in the land). He does have real political power. Even so, if you don’t like him, don’t vote for him in 2012 and support politicians who are in the opposite political camp. And in the meantime, live your life and don’t go crazy over everything the man says or does.

  • trotk

    DonS – the media (of all types, whether conservative or liberal, whether blog or radio, etc) are like sharks. A popular figure on the other side of the aisle who is seemingly weak is like a bleeding victim in the water, and they attack.

    Palin was seemingly weak. She was popular. And so the other side attacked. This has happened to both sides by both sides, and there is nothing spectacular about it. It is safer than attacking a well-spoken intellectual giant on the other side.

  • trotk

    DonS – the media (of all types, whether conservative or liberal, whether blog or radio, etc) are like sharks. A popular figure on the other side of the aisle who is seemingly weak is like a bleeding victim in the water, and they attack.

    Palin was seemingly weak. She was popular. And so the other side attacked. This has happened to both sides by both sides, and there is nothing spectacular about it. It is safer than attacking a well-spoken intellectual giant on the other side.

  • DonS

    trotK @ 39: Isn’t that between Palin and the people of Alaska? What’s her decision to quit to the rest of us, other than a big deal if she does decide to run in 2012? It shouldn’t make the rest of us mad, any more than the tens of thousands of selfish things politicians do every day in this country. Why is she singled out? All it does, by the way, is keep the focus on her even more and cause a lot of good people to defend her and stay engage in her when they would otherwise probably move on. Americans always fight for the underdog, and the left and its media allies are definitely making her the underdog by their incessant and stupid attacks.

  • DonS

    trotK @ 39: Isn’t that between Palin and the people of Alaska? What’s her decision to quit to the rest of us, other than a big deal if she does decide to run in 2012? It shouldn’t make the rest of us mad, any more than the tens of thousands of selfish things politicians do every day in this country. Why is she singled out? All it does, by the way, is keep the focus on her even more and cause a lot of good people to defend her and stay engage in her when they would otherwise probably move on. Americans always fight for the underdog, and the left and its media allies are definitely making her the underdog by their incessant and stupid attacks.

  • trotk

    By Palin being seemingly weak, I mean that her responses in interviews and debates made her appear to not understand our government or foreign policy.

  • trotk

    By Palin being seemingly weak, I mean that her responses in interviews and debates made her appear to not understand our government or foreign policy.

  • trotk

    DonS and Steve, my remark at 39 was an attempt to practice trolling. Excuse me if it was a cheap shot.

  • trotk

    DonS and Steve, my remark at 39 was an attempt to practice trolling. Excuse me if it was a cheap shot.

  • DonS

    trotk @ 42: I don’t think that is true. The seemingly weak are ignored. It is those deemed threatening that are attacked. Popularity does not denote weakness, it belies it. Moreover, it doesn’t explain your frustration, evidenced by your comment @ 39. There’s something else at work here.

  • DonS

    trotk @ 42: I don’t think that is true. The seemingly weak are ignored. It is those deemed threatening that are attacked. Popularity does not denote weakness, it belies it. Moreover, it doesn’t explain your frustration, evidenced by your comment @ 39. There’s something else at work here.

  • trotk

    DonS, I’m not frustrated; I was just joking at 39, although I do think her quitting the governorship should play into consideration should she run for president.

    By weak I don’t mean non-threatening. In fact, the ones the other side attacks most are the threatening (because they are popular) with glaring weaknesses.

    Palin is threatening (because she is popular) but weak (because of lack of experience/knowledge), thus she is attacked.

    For other examples, look at Ann Coutler’s attacks on Johns Kerry and Edwards – you will see the same phenomenon there.

  • trotk

    DonS, I’m not frustrated; I was just joking at 39, although I do think her quitting the governorship should play into consideration should she run for president.

    By weak I don’t mean non-threatening. In fact, the ones the other side attacks most are the threatening (because they are popular) with glaring weaknesses.

    Palin is threatening (because she is popular) but weak (because of lack of experience/knowledge), thus she is attacked.

    For other examples, look at Ann Coutler’s attacks on Johns Kerry and Edwards – you will see the same phenomenon there.

  • http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/12/branding-the-tuscon-massacre-together-we-thrive-in-white-and-blue/ Carl Vehse

    In referring to Steve Billingsley’s list @38 of others who have used the blood libel against their (or their associate’s) accusers, one should keep in mind that by definition blood libel refers to murder, and especially mass murder, of innocent people. Accusations about stupidity or incompetence or being in Cambodia at Christmas or consorting with the enemy in Paris don’t qualify for the label of “blood libel.”

    Also by definition blood libel involves false accusations. Where the accusers are making true and valid accusations, labeling such accusers with blood libel is not appropriate.

  • http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/12/branding-the-tuscon-massacre-together-we-thrive-in-white-and-blue/ Carl Vehse

    In referring to Steve Billingsley’s list @38 of others who have used the blood libel against their (or their associate’s) accusers, one should keep in mind that by definition blood libel refers to murder, and especially mass murder, of innocent people. Accusations about stupidity or incompetence or being in Cambodia at Christmas or consorting with the enemy in Paris don’t qualify for the label of “blood libel.”

    Also by definition blood libel involves false accusations. Where the accusers are making true and valid accusations, labeling such accusers with blood libel is not appropriate.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    DonS asks (@40), “why the fixation” with Palin?

    Don’s right. It’s not like she’s seeking our attention. After her failed nomination, Palin took her lumps and quietly went back to work as governor. When even that proved too much for her, she quit so she could spend some quiet time with her family.

    So why won’t everyone just leave her alone? It’s not like she’s trying to hang onto the spotlight she was thrust into in 2008 by oh, I don’t know, writing a book. Or two. I mean, this is a woman who just wants peace, not to sit on some cable TV network and spout off time and time again. It’s not like she’s out there hosting some reality TV show with her name in the title!

    And now she’s been implicated by her critics in this whole Arizona shooting thing. And what was her reply? Did she ratchet up the counter-rhetoric with tin-eared phrases, released in a video on the day of the memorial? No. In keeping with her attention-avoiding ways, she quietly took her lumps once more, trying her best not to make it seem like this tragic shooting was all about her, with Palin made to seem the victim while the wounded were still in the hospital.

    So why is everyone still so fixated on Palin, then? I guess it’s a mystery.

    But it probably has something to do with socialists and their rule book, I’d bet.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    DonS asks (@40), “why the fixation” with Palin?

    Don’s right. It’s not like she’s seeking our attention. After her failed nomination, Palin took her lumps and quietly went back to work as governor. When even that proved too much for her, she quit so she could spend some quiet time with her family.

    So why won’t everyone just leave her alone? It’s not like she’s trying to hang onto the spotlight she was thrust into in 2008 by oh, I don’t know, writing a book. Or two. I mean, this is a woman who just wants peace, not to sit on some cable TV network and spout off time and time again. It’s not like she’s out there hosting some reality TV show with her name in the title!

    And now she’s been implicated by her critics in this whole Arizona shooting thing. And what was her reply? Did she ratchet up the counter-rhetoric with tin-eared phrases, released in a video on the day of the memorial? No. In keeping with her attention-avoiding ways, she quietly took her lumps once more, trying her best not to make it seem like this tragic shooting was all about her, with Palin made to seem the victim while the wounded were still in the hospital.

    So why is everyone still so fixated on Palin, then? I guess it’s a mystery.

    But it probably has something to do with socialists and their rule book, I’d bet.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Also, I think a lot of people are thinking that, since many of the statements against Palin were oral and not necessarily written, she should have used the more general phrase “blood defamation”.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Also, I think a lot of people are thinking that, since many of the statements against Palin were oral and not necessarily written, she should have used the more general phrase “blood defamation”.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    I agree with Webmonk @ 4. Palin likely has no idea the meaning of the phrase. Was the speechwriter trying to score points with Jews? If so, it didn’t work. Whatever else Palin may be, she is no anti-semite. So, the whole thing is just an example of what can happen when you can’t, won’t, but anyhow don’t write your own stuff. You are responsible for everything you say and look foolish when you don’t understand what you are saying.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    I agree with Webmonk @ 4. Palin likely has no idea the meaning of the phrase. Was the speechwriter trying to score points with Jews? If so, it didn’t work. Whatever else Palin may be, she is no anti-semite. So, the whole thing is just an example of what can happen when you can’t, won’t, but anyhow don’t write your own stuff. You are responsible for everything you say and look foolish when you don’t understand what you are saying.

  • Carl Vehse
  • Carl Vehse
  • mark+

    I guess that what Luther said, “We should fear and love God, so that we do not lie about, betray or slander our neighbor, but excuse him, speak well of him, and put the best construction on everything,” doesn’t really matter when it comes to politics, or certain political figures. All that matters is that you get your pound of flesh.

  • mark+

    I guess that what Luther said, “We should fear and love God, so that we do not lie about, betray or slander our neighbor, but excuse him, speak well of him, and put the best construction on everything,” doesn’t really matter when it comes to politics, or certain political figures. All that matters is that you get your pound of flesh.

  • Tom Hering

    Carl Vehse @ 52, I’m mystified by your YouTube link. Which question is Todd evading by tap dancing around it?

  • Tom Hering

    Carl Vehse @ 52, I’m mystified by your YouTube link. Which question is Todd evading by tap dancing around it?

  • http://www.intolerantfox.com/ Carl Vehse

    In her column, “Top 10 Tragedies Exploited by the Left,” Megan Fox explains:

    Democrats are good at a lot of things (that damage our country) but in particular they are very talented in the business of exploitation for political gain. The entire Democrat strategy can be summed up in one unguarded sentence uttered by Rahm Emanuel.

    “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”

    Democrats are ghoulish. It’s hard for regular folks to understand the depths of their depravity because normal people are sad when tragedies happen. Those on the Left get gleeful. They even go so far as to wish tragedies on America in order to further their political gains.

    “The bottom line here is that Americans don’t believe in President Obama’s leadership,” says Rob Shapiro, another former Clinton official and a supporter of Mr Obama. “He has to find some way between now and November of demonstrating that he is a leader who can command confidence and, short of a 9/11 event or an Oklahoma City bombing, I can’t think of how he could do that.”

    Sickening.

    The article then discusses (including links on) the top ten leftist expolitations of tragedies:

    10. Columbine
    9. The Paul Wellstone Memorial Service
    8. Oklahoma City Bombing
    7.Christopher Reeve/Michael J. Fox
    6. Terri Schiavo
    5. Exploiting dead soldiers
    4. Exploiting the mothers of dead soldiers
    3. Ted Kennedy’s Death
    2. Katrina
    1. Arizona shooting

    Of course there is one horrendous tragedy leftists have exploited for political gain that tops all of these combined, and that is the demonrat party platform and political/legislative efforts for the continuing genocidal murder of over 50 million unborn children in the U.S.

  • http://www.intolerantfox.com/ Carl Vehse

    In her column, “Top 10 Tragedies Exploited by the Left,” Megan Fox explains:

    Democrats are good at a lot of things (that damage our country) but in particular they are very talented in the business of exploitation for political gain. The entire Democrat strategy can be summed up in one unguarded sentence uttered by Rahm Emanuel.

    “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”

    Democrats are ghoulish. It’s hard for regular folks to understand the depths of their depravity because normal people are sad when tragedies happen. Those on the Left get gleeful. They even go so far as to wish tragedies on America in order to further their political gains.

    “The bottom line here is that Americans don’t believe in President Obama’s leadership,” says Rob Shapiro, another former Clinton official and a supporter of Mr Obama. “He has to find some way between now and November of demonstrating that he is a leader who can command confidence and, short of a 9/11 event or an Oklahoma City bombing, I can’t think of how he could do that.”

    Sickening.

    The article then discusses (including links on) the top ten leftist expolitations of tragedies:

    10. Columbine
    9. The Paul Wellstone Memorial Service
    8. Oklahoma City Bombing
    7.Christopher Reeve/Michael J. Fox
    6. Terri Schiavo
    5. Exploiting dead soldiers
    4. Exploiting the mothers of dead soldiers
    3. Ted Kennedy’s Death
    2. Katrina
    1. Arizona shooting

    Of course there is one horrendous tragedy leftists have exploited for political gain that tops all of these combined, and that is the demonrat party platform and political/legislative efforts for the continuing genocidal murder of over 50 million unborn children in the U.S.

  • http://www.intolerantfox.com/ Carl Vehse

    In her column, “Top 10 Unhinged Reactions to the Arizona Shooting (Plus Hanoi Jane),” Cassy Fiano describes and provides links for her top ten list of the lunatic responses to the Arizona Shooting:

    10. Amanda Marcotte blames the men
    9. Jessica Valenti: Masculinity is the root of all evil
    8. No Labels [a supposedly nonpartisan, but actually leftist, political group] has no class
    7. Sherrod Brown blames health care hate speech
    6. Bob Kerrey: the health care bill ticked Loughner off
    5. Glenn LaFantasie: The American experience created Loughner
    4. Spike Lee: America is the most violent country in history
    3. Daisy Hernandez thanks God the shooter was white
    2. Clarence Dupnik: It’s all because of the tea party, and no, there’s no evidence.
    1. It’s all Sarah Palin’s fault

    In that No.1 “Unhinged Reactions” slot Arizona shooting victim Eric Fuller would have to be included for his statement to the press, “”How many more demented people are out there? It looks like Palin, Beck, Sharron Angle and the rest got their first target.” Yesterday Fuller, 63, was arrested and involuntarily committed for psychiatric evaluation at an undisclosed hospital after yelling “You’re dead!” at a Tea Party spokesman during the taping of an ABC-TV town hall event at St. Odilia’s Catholic Church, Tucson.

  • http://www.intolerantfox.com/ Carl Vehse

    In her column, “Top 10 Unhinged Reactions to the Arizona Shooting (Plus Hanoi Jane),” Cassy Fiano describes and provides links for her top ten list of the lunatic responses to the Arizona Shooting:

    10. Amanda Marcotte blames the men
    9. Jessica Valenti: Masculinity is the root of all evil
    8. No Labels [a supposedly nonpartisan, but actually leftist, political group] has no class
    7. Sherrod Brown blames health care hate speech
    6. Bob Kerrey: the health care bill ticked Loughner off
    5. Glenn LaFantasie: The American experience created Loughner
    4. Spike Lee: America is the most violent country in history
    3. Daisy Hernandez thanks God the shooter was white
    2. Clarence Dupnik: It’s all because of the tea party, and no, there’s no evidence.
    1. It’s all Sarah Palin’s fault

    In that No.1 “Unhinged Reactions” slot Arizona shooting victim Eric Fuller would have to be included for his statement to the press, “”How many more demented people are out there? It looks like Palin, Beck, Sharron Angle and the rest got their first target.” Yesterday Fuller, 63, was arrested and involuntarily committed for psychiatric evaluation at an undisclosed hospital after yelling “You’re dead!” at a Tea Party spokesman during the taping of an ABC-TV town hall event at St. Odilia’s Catholic Church, Tucson.

  • Tom Hering

    Yeah, Carl, let’s not cut one of the victims any slack. I’m sure that you – given the perfectly charitable attitude displayed in all your comments – would never become wildly angry if you were shot in the knee and the back.

  • Tom Hering

    Yeah, Carl, let’s not cut one of the victims any slack. I’m sure that you – given the perfectly charitable attitude displayed in all your comments – would never become wildly angry if you were shot in the knee and the back.

  • http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/12/branding-the-tuscon-massacre-together-we-thrive-in-white-and-blue/ Carl Vehse

    Tom Hering:

    I’m sure that you – given the perfectly charitable attitude displayed in all your comments – would never become wildly angry if you were shot in the knee and the back.

    Tom, you are here asserting that if someone shoots you, it is your moral opinion that you are reasonably allowed, a week later, at a meeting where another person says something about a political issue with which you disagree to make death threats against that person, who had nothing to do with shooting you. Your opinion is immoral and sick.

  • http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/12/branding-the-tuscon-massacre-together-we-thrive-in-white-and-blue/ Carl Vehse

    Tom Hering:

    I’m sure that you – given the perfectly charitable attitude displayed in all your comments – would never become wildly angry if you were shot in the knee and the back.

    Tom, you are here asserting that if someone shoots you, it is your moral opinion that you are reasonably allowed, a week later, at a meeting where another person says something about a political issue with which you disagree to make death threats against that person, who had nothing to do with shooting you. Your opinion is immoral and sick.

  • Tom Hering

    Carl, you exaggerate my assertion. I didn’t say his behavior could be justified – I said cut him some some slack. I know you’re not trying to make political hay out of the aftermath of the tragedy, because that would be hypocritical, but do try to assign the #1 ranking in the “unhinged” category to someone other than a victim.

  • Tom Hering

    Carl, you exaggerate my assertion. I didn’t say his behavior could be justified – I said cut him some some slack. I know you’re not trying to make political hay out of the aftermath of the tragedy, because that would be hypocritical, but do try to assign the #1 ranking in the “unhinged” category to someone other than a victim.

  • http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/12/branding-the-tuscon-massacre-together-we-thrive-in-white-and-blue/ Carl Vehse

    Tom, if you really feel this way then you should call up the Tucson Police Department and inform them about how the police erred in not cutting Fuller some slack when they arrested Fuller, charged him with making threats, intimidation and disorderly conduct, and sent him for a psychiatric evaluation following his unhinged reaction at the Saturday townhall meeting.

  • http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/12/branding-the-tuscon-massacre-together-we-thrive-in-white-and-blue/ Carl Vehse

    Tom, if you really feel this way then you should call up the Tucson Police Department and inform them about how the police erred in not cutting Fuller some slack when they arrested Fuller, charged him with making threats, intimidation and disorderly conduct, and sent him for a psychiatric evaluation following his unhinged reaction at the Saturday townhall meeting.

  • Tom Hering

    Carl, I’m not talking about the law following its proper course. I’m talking about a little mercy on our part – in our judgment of an obviously distraught victim. That’s all.

  • Tom Hering

    Carl, I’m not talking about the law following its proper course. I’m talking about a little mercy on our part – in our judgment of an obviously distraught victim. That’s all.

  • http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/12/branding-the-tuscon-massacre-together-we-thrive-in-white-and-blue/ Carl Vehse

    Today, the NY Post reported:

    James Eric Fuller, 63, who was shot in the knee, had told The Post on Friday, the day before his arrest, that top Republican figures should be tortured — and their ears severed.

    “There would be torture and then an ear necklace, with [Minnesota US Rep.] Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin’s ears toward the end, because they’re small, female ears, and then Limbaugh, Hannity and the biggest ears of all, Cheney’s, in the center,” Fuller said….

    On Saturday, Fuller was carted away for a psychiatric exam after disrupting the town-hall meeting by taking a photo of Tucson Tea Party co-founder Trent Humphries and shouting, “You’re dead!”

    Fuller seems to have cut off any “slack” he could have had with unhinged threats like these.

  • http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/12/branding-the-tuscon-massacre-together-we-thrive-in-white-and-blue/ Carl Vehse

    Today, the NY Post reported:

    James Eric Fuller, 63, who was shot in the knee, had told The Post on Friday, the day before his arrest, that top Republican figures should be tortured — and their ears severed.

    “There would be torture and then an ear necklace, with [Minnesota US Rep.] Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin’s ears toward the end, because they’re small, female ears, and then Limbaugh, Hannity and the biggest ears of all, Cheney’s, in the center,” Fuller said….

    On Saturday, Fuller was carted away for a psychiatric exam after disrupting the town-hall meeting by taking a photo of Tucson Tea Party co-founder Trent Humphries and shouting, “You’re dead!”

    Fuller seems to have cut off any “slack” he could have had with unhinged threats like these.

  • Tom Hering

    Well, I guess that closes the case on Mr. Fuller. We can only hope he’ll remain unemotional the next time he gets shot at a political event.

  • Tom Hering

    Well, I guess that closes the case on Mr. Fuller. We can only hope he’ll remain unemotional the next time he gets shot at a political event.

  • Carl Vehse

    Tom Hering:

    Well, I guess that closes the case on Mr. Fuller.

    Not quite. First, what voices have you heard discussing (or posting) about Fuller’s emotions the last time he was shot (much less the next time) at a political event?

    The news reports I referenced were to James Eric Fuller’s interviews with the media later in the week following the shooting or to his rampage at a media townhall meeting the following Saturday. All of these occurred well after Fuller was shot, taken or drove himself (depending on his different versions) to the hospital, where he was sedated, but stayed up all Saturday night writing down the Declaration of Independence, which he said he had memorized some time ago, in order to calmed himself down. Fuller was then released from the hospital on the Monday after the shooting.

    Now according to interviews reported in “Go Figure…. Leftist Hero Eric Fuller Has Long History of Violent Unhinged Behavior“, Eric Fuller has a long history of violent unhinged behavior. This includes standing up during an election polling training session last year and begin doing leg kicks and karate chops in the middle of the class. During the primary election Fuller angrily chased a woman legally passing out literature; she had to run and lock herself in her car for protection.

    Now when I said above, “Not quite,” I was not referring to what I have said above, but to an unanswered question of whether the James Eric Fuller discussed above is the same man formerly known as Prince Eric Fuller who legally changed his name in November, 1997, to James Eric Fuller according to Pima County, AZ, court records signed by Judge Lina Rodriguez under case number c323363.

    Of course, there is nothing unhinged about legally changing one’s name. However there is an interesting link to a U.S. Supreme Court case (No. 73-5280) brought by Prince Eric Fuller in 1974 on whether an indigent person had to pay court costs associated with having committed a crime. Prince Fuller’s appeal was, not surprisingly, denied in this case in which Fuller had pleaded guilty, in July 20, 1972, to a charge of sodomy in the third degree.

  • Carl Vehse

    Tom Hering:

    Well, I guess that closes the case on Mr. Fuller.

    Not quite. First, what voices have you heard discussing (or posting) about Fuller’s emotions the last time he was shot (much less the next time) at a political event?

    The news reports I referenced were to James Eric Fuller’s interviews with the media later in the week following the shooting or to his rampage at a media townhall meeting the following Saturday. All of these occurred well after Fuller was shot, taken or drove himself (depending on his different versions) to the hospital, where he was sedated, but stayed up all Saturday night writing down the Declaration of Independence, which he said he had memorized some time ago, in order to calmed himself down. Fuller was then released from the hospital on the Monday after the shooting.

    Now according to interviews reported in “Go Figure…. Leftist Hero Eric Fuller Has Long History of Violent Unhinged Behavior“, Eric Fuller has a long history of violent unhinged behavior. This includes standing up during an election polling training session last year and begin doing leg kicks and karate chops in the middle of the class. During the primary election Fuller angrily chased a woman legally passing out literature; she had to run and lock herself in her car for protection.

    Now when I said above, “Not quite,” I was not referring to what I have said above, but to an unanswered question of whether the James Eric Fuller discussed above is the same man formerly known as Prince Eric Fuller who legally changed his name in November, 1997, to James Eric Fuller according to Pima County, AZ, court records signed by Judge Lina Rodriguez under case number c323363.

    Of course, there is nothing unhinged about legally changing one’s name. However there is an interesting link to a U.S. Supreme Court case (No. 73-5280) brought by Prince Eric Fuller in 1974 on whether an indigent person had to pay court costs associated with having committed a crime. Prince Fuller’s appeal was, not surprisingly, denied in this case in which Fuller had pleaded guilty, in July 20, 1972, to a charge of sodomy in the third degree.

  • Tom Hering

    I honestly don’t know what Fuller’s wacky views or behavior, before or after the shooting, have to do with cutting him some slack as a traumatized shooting victim. What point are you trying to make, Carl, by presenting him as the #1 unhinged character of the tragedy’s aftermath? That the far left is wackier than the far right? That your comments on this blog shouldn’t be judged a bit wacky when there are leftists like Fuller around? What?

  • Tom Hering

    I honestly don’t know what Fuller’s wacky views or behavior, before or after the shooting, have to do with cutting him some slack as a traumatized shooting victim. What point are you trying to make, Carl, by presenting him as the #1 unhinged character of the tragedy’s aftermath? That the far left is wackier than the far right? That your comments on this blog shouldn’t be judged a bit wacky when there are leftists like Fuller around? What?

  • Tom Hering

    You know, even Loughner is going to be cut some slack by the justice system because of his insanity.

  • Tom Hering

    You know, even Loughner is going to be cut some slack by the justice system because of his insanity.

  • Carl Vehse

    Descriptions provided of James Eric Fuller’s unhinged behavior in the past, then more recently, and, following the shooting, in statements and actions in the presence of the lamestream media qualify him to be included in Cassy Fiano’s No. 1 slot of unhinged reactions (don’t worry; he has a lot of company).

    How Fuller is to be treated (either in the slack-cutting or the straight-jacket department) is a question that will be determined following the results of his psychiatric evaluation. The evidence of even some of his actions was sufficient to recognize his behavior fit an unhinged slot that warranted a mental health examination.

    In the meantime, Cincinnatus’ use of “opportunistic media-whore” and tODD’s label of “troll” to describe Sarah Palin can be gauged along side similar PDS rants from James Eric Fuller and other loony leftists.

  • Carl Vehse

    Descriptions provided of James Eric Fuller’s unhinged behavior in the past, then more recently, and, following the shooting, in statements and actions in the presence of the lamestream media qualify him to be included in Cassy Fiano’s No. 1 slot of unhinged reactions (don’t worry; he has a lot of company).

    How Fuller is to be treated (either in the slack-cutting or the straight-jacket department) is a question that will be determined following the results of his psychiatric evaluation. The evidence of even some of his actions was sufficient to recognize his behavior fit an unhinged slot that warranted a mental health examination.

    In the meantime, Cincinnatus’ use of “opportunistic media-whore” and tODD’s label of “troll” to describe Sarah Palin can be gauged along side similar PDS rants from James Eric Fuller and other loony leftists.

  • Tom Hering

    Carl, do you think you contribute to more hinged, less Fulleresque discourse?

  • Tom Hering

    Carl, do you think you contribute to more hinged, less Fulleresque discourse?

  • http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/10/the-progressive-climate-of-hate-an-illustrated-primer-2000-2010/ Carl Vehse

    As if leftist rantings of rage following the Tucscon massacre (not to mention before) couldn’t sink into a more loony abyss (yes, even beyond the liberal apologist blather on Cranach), the latest innocent people to be the targets in the crosshairs of a Palm Beach Post media assassin, Jose Lambiet, are Gerald and Emily Lemole, who live and work in Delaware.

    And what are this couple’s hideous crimes… at least according to the neural synaptic arcing inside one liberal head?

    Well, it seems that heart surgeon Gerald Lemole and his wife, Emily, are the parents of Dr. Michael Lemole, the Arizona neurosurgeon treating Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, and they are also major contributors to several Tea Party candidates, including some people the clymer media proclaim to be responsible for the rhetoric that drove Loughner to “allegedly” injure Giffords and kill six others. These parents are also to blame for having raised Michael so that he has also contributed to PACs that support only Republicans.

    Cassy Fiano’s list of of the top ten unhinged reactions to the Tucson shooting may need to be expanded with all of the unhinged competition in the leftwing media.

  • http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/10/the-progressive-climate-of-hate-an-illustrated-primer-2000-2010/ Carl Vehse

    As if leftist rantings of rage following the Tucscon massacre (not to mention before) couldn’t sink into a more loony abyss (yes, even beyond the liberal apologist blather on Cranach), the latest innocent people to be the targets in the crosshairs of a Palm Beach Post media assassin, Jose Lambiet, are Gerald and Emily Lemole, who live and work in Delaware.

    And what are this couple’s hideous crimes… at least according to the neural synaptic arcing inside one liberal head?

    Well, it seems that heart surgeon Gerald Lemole and his wife, Emily, are the parents of Dr. Michael Lemole, the Arizona neurosurgeon treating Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, and they are also major contributors to several Tea Party candidates, including some people the clymer media proclaim to be responsible for the rhetoric that drove Loughner to “allegedly” injure Giffords and kill six others. These parents are also to blame for having raised Michael so that he has also contributed to PACs that support only Republicans.

    Cassy Fiano’s list of of the top ten unhinged reactions to the Tucson shooting may need to be expanded with all of the unhinged competition in the leftwing media.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    If only everyone could be as loving and reasonable as one Carl Vehse.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    If only everyone could be as loving and reasonable as one Carl Vehse.

  • Carl Vehse

    Newsbusters refers to the continuing unhinged reactions in “Palm Beach Post Columnist Defends Political Smear Story About Parents of Giffords’ Doctor by Claiming It Wasn’t Political.”

    Leftist media loon, Jose Lambiet, now claims: “There was no political point to Monday’s Page2Live story about the parents of Dr. Michael Lemole, one of the neurosurgeons in Tucson who brought back U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords from the brink of death.”

    Newsbusters points out that even as he protests that his story was not political, Lambiet includes yet another political smear against the parents of Michael Lemole. As for those who dare to criticize Lambiet’s column, Lambiet retorts: “They may provide an insight in the twisted psychology of today’s political discourse and make you wonder: Who’s the next Jared Loughner?”

    Newbusters concludes: “It is obvious that Lambiet is so far gone that he probably won’t apologize but what is the excuse of the Palm Beach Post?”

  • Carl Vehse

    Newsbusters refers to the continuing unhinged reactions in “Palm Beach Post Columnist Defends Political Smear Story About Parents of Giffords’ Doctor by Claiming It Wasn’t Political.”

    Leftist media loon, Jose Lambiet, now claims: “There was no political point to Monday’s Page2Live story about the parents of Dr. Michael Lemole, one of the neurosurgeons in Tucson who brought back U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords from the brink of death.”

    Newsbusters points out that even as he protests that his story was not political, Lambiet includes yet another political smear against the parents of Michael Lemole. As for those who dare to criticize Lambiet’s column, Lambiet retorts: “They may provide an insight in the twisted psychology of today’s political discourse and make you wonder: Who’s the next Jared Loughner?”

    Newbusters concludes: “It is obvious that Lambiet is so far gone that he probably won’t apologize but what is the excuse of the Palm Beach Post?”

  • Carl Vehse

    A Washington Compost writer, who authored a political book with a homosexual sex act included in the title, has referred to his own PDS-sickness and pledged to not mention Sarah Palin in print, online, or in interviews for one month. He’s also encouraging others in the MSM to do the same.

    So instead of showing their bias by using lies and distortions in an attempted media assassination of Sarah Palin, the clymer press now seeks to show their bias by targeting her as a media nonperson for one month, or at least until they can come up with more lies and distortions… or if their blood pressure rises to a level where they might explode.

  • Carl Vehse

    A Washington Compost writer, who authored a political book with a homosexual sex act included in the title, has referred to his own PDS-sickness and pledged to not mention Sarah Palin in print, online, or in interviews for one month. He’s also encouraging others in the MSM to do the same.

    So instead of showing their bias by using lies and distortions in an attempted media assassination of Sarah Palin, the clymer press now seeks to show their bias by targeting her as a media nonperson for one month, or at least until they can come up with more lies and distortions… or if their blood pressure rises to a level where they might explode.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Again, if only everyone could be as loving and reasonable as one Carl Vehse.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Again, if only everyone could be as loving and reasonable as one Carl Vehse.

  • Carl Vehse

    It is by now a common occurence for The New York Times to demonstrates it liberal hypocrisy. After implying violent language, particularly from the GOP (including Sarah Palin), was associated to the Tucson massacre by a person who turned out to be a leftist lunatic, the Old Gray Media Clymer today headlined an article on Rep Paul Ryan, “Republicans’ Budget Man Draws Fire,” and followed up the “target” image by noting that Ryan was “the Republican point man” on budget cuts. The article also notes “Democrats ripped into Mr. Ryan.”

    Nice.

  • Carl Vehse

    It is by now a common occurence for The New York Times to demonstrates it liberal hypocrisy. After implying violent language, particularly from the GOP (including Sarah Palin), was associated to the Tucson massacre by a person who turned out to be a leftist lunatic, the Old Gray Media Clymer today headlined an article on Rep Paul Ryan, “Republicans’ Budget Man Draws Fire,” and followed up the “target” image by noting that Ryan was “the Republican point man” on budget cuts. The article also notes “Democrats ripped into Mr. Ryan.”

    Nice.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Once again, if only everyone could be as … oh, never mind.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Once again, if only everyone could be as … oh, never mind.

  • Carl Vehse

    As reported in the Citizen of Liconia New Hampshire newspaper, Ed Allard, the chairman of the Belknap County Democratic Committee, speaking to fellow Democrats in a planning session last evening at the New Hampton Community School to combat the supermajorities the Republicans won in the New Hampshire House of Representatives, Senate and on the Executive Council:

    “They’re going to hang themselves and we’re going to help them.”

    .

    Maybe Allard thinks his suggestion is just being helpful, so that qualifies as being civil. Oh yeah, that suggestion will help win votes – “Vote for us or we’ll help hang you!”

  • Carl Vehse

    As reported in the Citizen of Liconia New Hampshire newspaper, Ed Allard, the chairman of the Belknap County Democratic Committee, speaking to fellow Democrats in a planning session last evening at the New Hampton Community School to combat the supermajorities the Republicans won in the New Hampshire House of Representatives, Senate and on the Executive Council:

    “They’re going to hang themselves and we’re going to help them.”

    .

    Maybe Allard thinks his suggestion is just being helpful, so that qualifies as being civil. Oh yeah, that suggestion will help win votes – “Vote for us or we’ll help hang you!”

  • Carl Vehse

    It seems the Missoula (MT)Community Theater didn’t get the civility word yet from the Political Correctness Czar, when, in a fit of PDS, they altered part of the script in the production of “The Mikado” to include a reference to the beheading of Sarah Palin.

    MCT Executive Director, Michael McGill, issued a typical liberal phony apology, posted in the link.

  • Carl Vehse

    It seems the Missoula (MT)Community Theater didn’t get the civility word yet from the Political Correctness Czar, when, in a fit of PDS, they altered part of the script in the production of “The Mikado” to include a reference to the beheading of Sarah Palin.

    MCT Executive Director, Michael McGill, issued a typical liberal phony apology, posted in the link.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Wow, Carl (@76, 77), the Belknap County Democratic Committee and now the Missoula Community Theater, too?

    Well, as long as we have civil, reasonable people like you to keep us abreast of these important developments …

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Wow, Carl (@76, 77), the Belknap County Democratic Committee and now the Missoula Community Theater, too?

    Well, as long as we have civil, reasonable people like you to keep us abreast of these important developments …

  • Carl Vehse

    The article, “The Real Truth About Sarah Palin,” is a “forbidden (by the leftist clymer media) description” of two women – Sarah Palin and the FLOTUS.

  • Carl Vehse

    The article, “The Real Truth About Sarah Palin,” is a “forbidden (by the leftist clymer media) description” of two women – Sarah Palin and the FLOTUS.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    I find that when I’m looking for “the real truth”, I head to a Web site that is explicitly associated with the political group it’s covering (and, naturally, defending), especially when said site posts articles that are “Re-Posted from FB” (to say nothing of the high quality of the copy, e.g. “Whether your a Democrat”).

    With such high media standards, Carl, it’s clear why you would hate the “leftist clymer media” so much.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    I find that when I’m looking for “the real truth”, I head to a Web site that is explicitly associated with the political group it’s covering (and, naturally, defending), especially when said site posts articles that are “Re-Posted from FB” (to say nothing of the high quality of the copy, e.g. “Whether your a Democrat”).

    With such high media standards, Carl, it’s clear why you would hate the “leftist clymer media” so much.

  • Carl Vehse

    Another “forbidden description” unlikely to be uttered by the Obamessiah, the clymer press, and other liberal sycophants is the answer to a PowerLine blog question:

    “Here is a trick question repeated from earlier this year because it bears on current events in the Middle East. In what Middle East country do Arabs enjoy the greatest civil liberties? That is a question worthy of the investigation of the Middle East correspondents of Time, the Washington Post, the New York Times, et al. It may even be worthy of reflection by President Obama.”

  • Carl Vehse

    Another “forbidden description” unlikely to be uttered by the Obamessiah, the clymer press, and other liberal sycophants is the answer to a PowerLine blog question:

    “Here is a trick question repeated from earlier this year because it bears on current events in the Middle East. In what Middle East country do Arabs enjoy the greatest civil liberties? That is a question worthy of the investigation of the Middle East correspondents of Time, the Washington Post, the New York Times, et al. It may even be worthy of reflection by President Obama.”


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X