- This topic has 4 voices and 22 replies.
-
Posts
-
I hate it when I wake up and Sarah Palin is still aliveYup. sure glad the Left aren't a bunch of evil hypocrites or anything. ::)
What about this ? 😉
So what? ??? Politicians have never used the term "target" before? (and I wish she never took it down)
What about this one? Inciting violence? Perhaps politicians should be returning any and all contributions from such a corporation!
If it was harmless why was it swiftly withdrawn from Palin's Facebook profile few time after the shooting ? ???
Probably because she was already being blamed before the last victim fell to the ground. Why did dailyKOS remove the “Giffords is dead to me” post at about the same time?
Nobody knows…Btw, what did SP mean by "blood libel" in her declaration ? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12174254
What about this one? Inciting violence? Perhaps politicians should be returning any and all contributions from such a corporation!
I didn't know that picture was used by some politicians, was it ? who and why ?
I hate it when I wake up and Sarah Palin is still aliveYup. sure glad the Left aren't a bunch of evil hypocrites or anything. ::)
Such idiots like this one are not close to be on the "endangered species" list ... (of any side)(Update : I'm talking about the author of that facebook account)
The term “Blood Libel” goes back to claims that the Jews of Europe sacrificed Christian children and drank their blood in some kind of religious ceremony and is related to the belief at the time that the Jews were responsible for Christ's death.I think Palin is using it to say that the left is holding her personally responsible because of words she has used and particularly for the map with the cross-hairs. The left's whole claim is BS and they know it but they are using the massacre to make hay against the conservative they hate the most now that Bush is gone. I don't see how any rhetoric can be blamed for the actions of a person, if that is the case we are lost as a society because then the concept of personal responsibility no longer applies. Of course, that fits right in with the victim meme the left has been pushing since the beginning of the Civil Rights movement in the late 50's.
I didn't know that picture was used by some politicians, was it ? who and why ?
Why does it have to be used by a politician? Why does it have to be assumed that politicians influence violence, rather than private corporations? I thought corporations were greedy, evil entities.I should add that this post and my previous one were meant to be tongue-in-cheek. I just think that there is a big logical fallacy in the blame-conservative-pundits/politicians way of thinking (post hoc ergo propter hoc). If we extend this way of thinking, we can also blame the Target Corporation.
I think Palin is using it to say that the left is holding her personally responsible because of words she has used and particularly for the map with the cross-hairs. The left's whole claim is BS and they know it but they are using the massacre to make hay against the conservative they hate the most now that Bush is gone. I don't see how any rhetoric can be blamed for the actions of a person, if that is the case we are lost as a society because then the concept of personal responsibility no longer applies. Of course, that fits right in with the victim meme the left has been pushing since the beginning of the Civil Rights movement in the late 50's.
I think she was merely using it in a larger context than its historical term. If someone uses the figural phrase "they are going to throw me to the lions", one would not normally think of this as being an offense to Christians. I think that the Jewish Anti-Defamation League has a history of playing up victimization and going out its way to cry foul. As we know, playing the victim in our day and age often brings power to groups.
I was explaining the historical origin of the term. I definitely don't think Palin used it in that manner. I think she used it to highlight that blaming her for the murders is just as silly as blaming Jews for Christ's death on the cross. Perhaps that is too subtle for many people to grasp though. Perhaps she even meant it some other way completely.
