I am almost without words. (Almost)
Two blithering idiots from ABC News- Rachel Madcow look-alike Amy Walter and Michael Falcone – posted what has to be one of most offensive, biased and flat-out stupid articles in a very long time. Not since Hurricane Katrina has the media been so completely derelict in its reporting. And now they’ve just jumped the shark.
Just hours before President Obama is scheduled to speak at a memorial service honoring the victims of last weekend’s shooting in Arizona, Sarah Palin stepped in with her own message addressing criticism that has been leveled against her in the wake of the tragedy.
Oh, that Palin. She “stepped in” just before Obama was supposed to speak.
Her words, of course, amount to a rebuttal of those who have called her out for using violent images to “target” Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and other Democratic lawmakers during the 2010 election.
Ya think??? Everyone on the left short of Josef Stalin blamed Palin for the shooting.
In her video today, Palin tried to find a way to be both. She expresses great compassion and sympathy for the victims, praised our “exceptional nation” that is “a light to the rest of the world.” But she also used the address as a defense of herself and a critique of the media. Instead of trying to get beyond this controversy, Palin has put herself back in the middle of it.
Put herself back in the middle of it? When she did she get out of the middle? As recently as yesterday Rep. James Clyburn still was hammering Palin.
“You know, Sarah Palin just can’t seem to get it, on any front. I think she’s an attractive person, she is articulate,” Clyburn said on the Bill Press radio show. “But I think intellectually, she seems not to be able to understand what’s going on here.”
Their bottom line:
BOTTOM LINE: Sarah Palin, once again, has found a way to become part of the story. And she may well face further criticism for the timing and scope of her remarks. She is already taking heat for her use of the term “blood libel” (see today’s Tweets). In her video she notes, “President Obama and I may not agree on everything, but I know he would join me in affirming the health of our democratic process.” It remains to be seen exactly what Obama will say tonight, but White House aides say another goal of his address will be to lift the nation up in this moment, not sully it with politics.
I don’t recall anyone blaming Obama in spite of his violent rhetoric.
Stupid. Galactically stupid.
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.
Agreed, monumentally stupid. Might I also add arrogant, vile & hateful?
Does this guy (the author of the article) ever offer any information, other than calling people names? Perhaps he ought to look up the meaning of ‘blood libel’, like Palin should have before using the term. Either she didn’t know the meaning (the antisemitic implication) of the term, or didn’t care, or she didn’t read the prepared speech before presenting it–either of which demonstrates the extent of her intelligence. But, it’s likely that she will pass it off and add it to her lexicon of ‘Palinisms’–comprised of made-up words and meanings.
@Liberal1 (objectivity):
Attorney Alan Dershowitz, who is intelligent as well as Jewish completely disagrees with you:
Thanks for playing though.
As someone else said, if you could not find a word that Palin says to complain about, then you would complain about her use of semi-colons. You will always find something about which to complain. There is no objectivity about it.
Ah, Liberal1 you just prove the old proverb, “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink” all too well. No matter how much evidence sits at the bedrock of this horrible event, people like you turn a blind eye.
Do you even know the meaning of blood libel? It seems clear you do not.
A quick wiki linkage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_libel
In this case of the word useage, many media figures and pundits have leapt to the whole concept that somehow Palin is the true murderer or bare level mastermind of this horrible event. This is blood libel, especialy since no evidence has proven the shooter even remotely connected to her in any form or way especialy with former friends of the shooter claiming he never watched TV much or, “Listened to Political Radio.” Blood Libel does not always refer to religous groups, but you can thank the likes of Ed Shultz trying to lay claim Palin is attempting to play the Christian plea card in one of his most recent deranged rantings against Palin.
Least we forget court cases where a person has been charged with murder but all evidence points to that person’s innocence. Again that is a Blood Libel.
And as for the topic post, what ABC’s “professionals” have done is beyond stupid. If they never placed the blame at her feet she wouldn’t be in a spotlight that they have placed onto her. unintended consequences from this attempt to blame her has projected her into more favorable opinions of a good portion of the American population given that most Americans are seeing the evidence of what happened versus the pundit story that she’s somehow at fault. These journalists are angered, jealous and annoyed beyond belief that there are Americans like and respect Palin and the news attempts to smear her have backfired and given her more support. All this blaming at her has forced her to react with her recent facebook video, if they stopped putting her somehow into stories she would fade from most people’s minds as they worry about daily life.
@Aye: Indeed, Aye.
Glenn Reynolds: The Arizona Tragedy and the Politics of Blood Libel
Jim Gerahgty: The Term ‘Blood Libel’: More Common Than You Might Think
Yet it’s only an issue when Sarah Palin uses the term. Give me a freaking break.
I guess “Freedom of Speech” is only for those that are in business of destroying our Constitution.
I see the liberal progressives want to be strict in the application of when the term ‘blood libel’ applies but when it comes to the Second Amendment, they say the document is a living evolving concept. Right.
The other question to be asked of them is, “How and why was she even put in the middle of it to begin with?”
About dayum time. She let them prattle on long enough, her response was measured, dignified and true.
She drove a big Mack right over the scavengers that swooped down to feast on that carcass of lies and even though he may not have wanted to, Obama finished off the survivors.
@Aye:
Although Dershowitz has used the term in a proper metaphorical sense, in a Jewish context, many Jewish leaders have gone on record and taken a stand against her words as insulting–contrary to Dershowitz–who is a right-wing apologist anyway.
@Liberal1 (objectivity): But only against Palin, and not the rest of the multitude who have done exactly the same. There’s a word for that behavior.
Would you suggest Jonathan Chait is also a right wing apologist?
@Liberal1 (objectivity):
A “right-wing apologist”? Dershowitz? That’s some funny stuff right there.
The straws are in the top kitchen drawer on the right…feel free to grab as many as you like.
@Liberal1 (objectivity):
Uhh Liberal, you really have lost it to say Alan Dershowitz is a Right Wing ANYTHING. The man has been an opponent of anything conservative and a bleeding heart liberal for most of his life. I guess you assumed no one on this site knew who he was and you would be the smart kid in class. Good attempt though.
Sarah is never one to let anyone else have a spotlight. Or as Josh Marshall put it: “Today has been set aside to honor the victims of the Tucson massacre. And Sarah Palin has apparently decided she’s one of them.”
It gets better. As John Dickerson at Slate noted
Which is what I find ironic: both Palin and Erick Ericson have essentially warned that “liberals” blaming Palin for Tucson are setting Palin up to be assassinated; yet in the same breath, neither Palin or Ericson seem to acknowledge the possibility that RIGHT WING rhetoric might set someone else up to be assassinated. It is as if they think this is a one way street — it is not, of course. If liberal rhetoric can make a lib take a shot at Palin (as Palin and Ericson imply), the surely con rhetorics can inspire a wingnut to do the same.
We, poor conservatives just need to learn. Just as it takes a “village” to raise a child, it takes a free “t” shirt with a corny slogan to comfort the grieving.
But, the libs have, at least, brought us together as a nation, and increasingly since 1980 or so, it is not, in front of ABC,CBS, NBC, or CNN on the television where we gather.
The hyper liberal media has done more to promote Palin’s popularity in less than a week than the GOP establishment has done during her entire career.
I used to think of them as cockroaches that would run for cover when the lights came one. But that does a great disservice to cockroaches, because these fools stand in the bright light and continue to lie, wide eyed and full of self delusion.
In their own, counterintuitive fashion, they may yet help save this nation. . . from those like them.
@DrJohn:
I see you ignore the part about all the other Jewish commentators who have called her out on it. No comment on that part, huh? Not surprised. Why not just admit that it was an unfortunate choice of words . . . just as putting cross-hairs on Gabby Giffords’ district was, in retrospect, unfortunate.
This is typical Palin, though: say or do something dumb in public, then complain when “the lamestream media” points out that you did something dumb. And you cons think she is ready for prime time? Yeah.
@Wordsmith:
Palin put herself put in the middle of it because (a) in March 2010, Palin produced a poster with Gabby Giffords’ district in cross-hairs; (b) Giffords AT THE TIME complained about the possible “consequences” of that decision; (c) after Giffords beat the teabagger who was running against her, Palin tweeted that Giffords was one of two people to win and escape Palin’s March 2010 “bull’s-eye”; (d) a nut shoots Giffords in the head and, no surprise, (e) people recall the cross-hairs Palin put on Giffords’ district AND Giffords response lamenting the “consequences” of that.
Now my questions:
Knowing what we know now, would you cons still release the same poster? Will you do similar posters in the future? Do you agree with Palin that rhetoric can lead people to act out violently? Or do you agree with the contrary Palin sentence that the only person responsible for conduct is the actor?
@JustAl:
Let me add, in a similar vane, that we should stop feeding the trolls, they are better left to play with their droppings in solitude.
Gee, r-bob, I wish I had the link to a back-and-forth I had with Greg about this same thing.
Greg was able to grasp the FACTS that Jared was already obsessed with Giffords three years before the Palin poster came out.
Do you actually stay as ignorant of what has come out about Jared as it SOUNDS like you do?
Or is your pretense of ignorance a ploy?
Not all liberals are alike.
I have been wrong about things and Greg has corrected me.
I acknowledged it.
Greg has been wrong about things and I have corrected him.
He acknowledged it.
Where have you been?
In a cave?
Now if memory serves me correctly, there were pogroms in Poland: resulting from the bizarre accusation that Jews were abducting Christian teenage boys and butchering them to make soup or matzo ball dumplings. These accusations were about as plausible as blaming Palin for Laughner, but the pogroms were carried out anyway, genocides that killed thousands of Jews because they were Jews and were eating those Polish boys. The Left wants to attack Palin with similar logic; we could say they have initiated a pogrom against Palin. Why? probably fear and an inability to understand someone from another culture, so they attack without logic or reason, there is only vile hatred and beyond that there is no logic or intellect for the attacks.
The Jews said the pogroms were based on a blood libel, in other words they were accused of bloody crimes and barbarity wrongly, based entirely on lies. Palin has also been attacked with hatred and lies, being blamed for the killings of a paranoid schizophrenic who said the Communist Manifesto was his favorite book. I think the term, Blood libel, very accurately describes the attacks against Palin. Accusations of crimes of barbarity and mayhem based on lies. What the Hell is a Blood Libel, tell me: the attacks on Palin are indeed Blood Libel by the classic definition. This is not an ethnocentric term, to be owned by the Jews, it is an accurate description of an injustice, and a very accurate phrase for the persecution of Palin.
@Skookum:
Excellent comment and observations, Skookum.
I am a matzo fan.
Some people don’t care for them but I love them.
Plain with a bit of oleo is good and kosher.
Plain with some butter is better.
I have also had my share of matzo ball soups.
Some cooks blend the whole eggs with the matzo crumbs and the ball sits on the bottom of the bowl.
Other cooks whip the egg whites to a froth and forgo the yolks…then the ball floats on top of the soup.
My favorite version whips the whites then adds the yolks allowing the ball to hang in the middle of the soup.
But never, and I mean never, have matzos had anything other than flour and water in them.
That’s how they are made.
And, try doing it yourself sometime.
It is really tricky.
Nan, I am a cook or the cook, but without your expertise. I will try the matzo balls, you have inspired me.
Maybe we should all have Matzo Balls or soup to get a “flavor or taste” for the Palin persecution that is going on. It is time to educate the public on the depravity of the Left with their witless yellow press and vile attacks or pogrom on Palin.
Why don’t you give us a recipe, I do it occasionally, but my stuff is from the vision of a camp cook. A recipe that people can make and invite neighbors or family over and tell the story of Matzo Balls, Pogroms, Blood Libel, and Palin’s persecution by the lunatics of the Left. We need to make a statement. The president is willing to campaign on the grave of a little girl: we can make Matzo Balls and have someone over for dinner for an education and a little politics. If you tell them the real story, they will never forget it.
OK.
First steal a chicken….
LOL
Do NOT use aluminum cookware.
Make a chicken stock using good tasting water, chicken bones, onion, celery, carrot, some parsley and a bay leaf.
Let that cook a long time and take out all of the solids before adding the cooked matzos.
In 2nd pot:
Boil water then turn it down to a simmer.
Separate 3 eggs.
Whip the whites.
Beat the yolks.
Fold 3/4 cups matzo meal (you can buy it already as meal) into the yolks then carefully fold in the whites.
Gently slide them by tablespoonfuls into the simmering water.
Let them cook for 30 minutes, gently keep them from sticking together.
Add them to the simmering broth.
Serve hot.
(You can try it by cutting this down to 1/3rd…1 egg, 1/4 cup matzo meal.)
If you are not going kosher you can add salt to the soup broth.
Good wishes.
this website has Sarah’s “crosshair” – about 1/2 way down in the right hand column, you’ll see Principal Point which has a symbol that was on her “map”.
http://egsc.usgs.gov/isb/pubs/booklets/symbols/topomapsymbols.pdf
A tale of two maps:
Actually, two others I think have them beat. See this one crafted by Don Faber, Editor In Chief of CBS News, which has to be the most libelous piece of screed I have read in year. Its like a NYT editorial with less intelectual honesty – and yes, this is proof that such a state of affairs is possible.
And then there is House Whip Clyburn’s commentary, which, if you haven’t seen it, is worth the stomach churning effort to take a look. He hits the trifecta – sexism, the race card and condescending arrogance. He really is scum.
I see brobbie is up to his same old tactics.
I thought you were soooo much smarter than us “cons” robbie?
How is it that you keep neglecting to mention that Loughner was fixated on Giffords in 2007? I mean if memory serves, ’07 predates the Tea Party movement AND the emergence of Palin upon the national scene. Yet you still claim Loughner was motivated to mass murder by Palin.
Odd that someone of your massive intellect misses that silly time line issue.
BTW, I am still waiting for a response to my questions about Loughner here.
Steal a chicken, I like that. My dogs might steal a chicken, but I could no more steal a chicken than I could pull off a Bernie Madoff. The humor is rich Nan.
Thanks for the recipe. I’ll probably have one in a story before long. I’ll try to keep it practical, not too many people can cook moose nose.
I’ll try it and let you know how it turns out. I know about good tasting water, my well has excellent water. My girl friend insists on drinking bottled water, but I just refill her bottles with well water and she doesn’t know the difference. I am probably doing her a favor.
REPLY TO: Liberal1 (objectivity) says: COMMENT # 2 aka Mr. Troll
Liberal1 – Analyze your “information” below. Then next time research it yourself before ‘you’ go around ranting about nonsense.
—————————————————————————————
“In an exclusive statement, famed attorney and ” Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz “defended” Sarah Palin’s” use of the term “blood libel” from multiple detractors. As the Media Matters/MSM/Democrat narrative on the Tucson tragedy unravels, they are getting a lot more desperate in their attacks on Palin. Fortunately, there are still plenty of honest liberals around:
The term “blood libel” has taken on a broad metaphorical meaning in public discourse. Although its historical origins were in theologically based false accusations against the Jews and the Jewish People,its current usage is far broader. I myself have used it to describe false accusations against the State of Israel by the Goldstone Report. There is nothing improper and certainly nothing anti-Semitic in Sarah Palin using the term to characterize what she reasonably believes are false accusations that her words or images may have caused a mentally disturbed individual to kill and maim. The fact that two of the victims are Jewish is utterly irrelevant to the propriety of using this widely used term. ”
Cited from: http://biggovernment.com
@B-Rob: Rob, you have chosen to completely ignore the fact that Palindrome is the only one to be singled out for using the phrase while everyone else using it gets a pass- including Glenn Reynolds last week. Jewish groups are frequently left wing so this no surprise. This is war on Palin.
@Rides A Pale Horse: Remember- crosshairs are only for aiming. You shoot at targets.
@B-Rob: Since none of that and to do with anything, the question is moot.
Oh where, oh where has B-Rob gone?
He just keeps avoiding my questions…
@JasperCounty: Jasper, it’s useless trying to use facts and reason to convince a liberal or progressive. To paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, that’s like trying to give medicine to a dead man.
I know…..can’t penetrate a cement covered brain.
Get your facts right before you comment. Alan Dershowitz is not Republican Apoligist. See this artical about the 72 year old porofessor finally endorsing a republican. Hiswhole lifehe has been a liberal. http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/06/alan_dershowitz_finally_endors.htmls
Typical Liberal talking before getting your facts straight.