Blood Libel: The Sarah Palin Defense...

Politics is a heated business at the best of times, and rhetoric is often emotive and extreme. There is undoubtedly consequences from this continual ratcheting-up of the rhetoric and the anger. Whether or not the recent mass-killings in Tuscon, Arizona, are proof of this remains a contentious issue of debate. However, Sarah Palin, the one-time Governor of Alaska and Republican Vice-Presidential candidate, is at the center and forefront of this debate.

Sarah Palin makes up for her deficiencies as a politician by using extremely emotive language that disguises the fact that she does not know much about what she must know about to ever become President of the United States. In the lead-up to the recent mid-term elections in the US she was responsible for producing a map that had cross-hairs marking marginal congressional seats that she believed the Tea Party could "target" and win. One of these seats was that of Gabrielle Giffords. Giffords was shot and critically wounded in the Tuscon shootings.

The point of this post is not to question whether that sort of action is an incitement to act that requires some individual who is a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic basket to go buy a gun and kill a few people. To each their own on that one. This post is about how Palin has responded to the accusation that her extreme rhetoric is a trigger to this violence.

Palin stayed quiet for several days. In hindsight, she should have stayed quiet. Palin posted the following video on her Facebook page:



The argument that "acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own" is only true to the extent that the person who commits those crimes, in this case pulls the trigger, is responsible for their actions. However, it would be naive to suggest that every action is independent of every other action. It would be remiss to just accept that people cannot be incited to act when they might otherwise have not acted. Although, in this instance, it would seem that Jared Lee Loughner, the shooter, had serious issues way before Palin started bandying around maps with cross-hairs.

Yet, Palin was not willing to leave it there she then went on to say this:

“Especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence that they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible.”

Blood Libel is an emotive term. It is a loaded term. It has a very specific meaning that is linked to anti-Semitism. Blood libel in essence is a myth that Jews sacrificed Christian children in the lead up to Passover. The blood of these Christian children was then used in medicinal rituals and to bake unleavened bread (matzsos). The blood libel myth has been used throughout history to justify pogroms against Jews and is an underlying piece of the propaganda puzzle that has been employed to justify some of the most heinous atrocities committed by humans against their fellow human beings.

A blood libel is not simply just a false accusation, but rather there are very specific understandings that go with the use of the term.

What is even more bizarre about this line of defense is that Gabrielle Giffords is a Jew. Surely, Sarah Palin and her people are not that stupid that they did not do the hard research yards to firstly find out what the term meant and secondly to think about the context in which they were about to use it, or are they?

Let's assume that she or her minions are not that stupid, then this is a cold, calculating, and deliberate attempt to inflame and incite this situation even further. It is only fair to question Palin's motivations for using the term blood libel. Is Palin suggesting that like the Jews she is being falsely accused or is she suggesting that it is a Jewish conspiracy to undermine her?

I am all for freedom of speech. As much as it sometimes pains me, I do believe that there is a freedom of speech that we all enjoy. But, I believe that freedom of speech and expression is not absolute. The freedoms that we enjoy to speech and expression must be used responsibly. When one chooses to exercise their freedom of speech and expression irresponsibly then they must be brought to account.

In this instance, there were so many other ways and terms that Sarah Palin could have employed to have made the point that she thought she was being unfairly criticised with regards to the Tuscon killings. However, she chose to use a term that was designed to prolong the controversy and to keep the news cycle running and to keep her name at the front and center of that news cycle.

I wonder if the next news-bite from the Palin camp will be about exercising a few of her rights under the Bill of Rights, perhaps she might start exercising her Second Amendment rights not just to keep and bear arms but start using them to return America to exceptionalism?

I am shaking my head at the thought of a Palin run for the presidency of the US...

"Palinisms"...

The recent post that I did on Sarah Palin describing Julian Assange of Wikileaks fame as a terrorist that must be hunted down in the same manner as the US is supposedly hunting down Osama bin Laden has led me to discover the word "Palinisms".

The word has made it into the Urban Dictionary and is defined as follows:


1. Malapropism, non-sensical verbiage, non-sequitor or other illogical, stream of concious meanderings uttered by Sarah Palin.


2. A form of homespun, Midwestern demagoguery and fear mongering comprised of a stream of logically unrelated and unsupported talking points uttered by an attractive woman with nice cans and a presumably fine ass intended to engender loyalty among those inspired by demagoguery, non-sequitors, a great smile, nice tits and a presumably fine ass.

Or, alternatively, like this:


1. An ambiguous colloquial expression that may cause confusion and be interpreted in different ways depending upon circumstance.


2. A statement that has no known basis in science or reality.


3. A statement of religious identity.


So, what does a Palinism look like (courtesy of The Huffington Post):

“Nuclear weaponry, of course, would be the be-all, end-all of just too many people in too many parts of our planet.” -- CBS interview with Katie Couric, September 25, 2008


"As Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where – where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border."
-- CBS interview with Katie Couric, September 25, 2008


"So we discussed what was going on in Africa. And never, ever did I talk about, Well, gee, is it a country or is it a continent, I just don't know about this issue."
-- Fox interview with Greta Van Susteren, November 11, 2008

“I don’t know if I should Buenos Aires or Bonjour, or… this is such a melting pot. This is beautiful. I love the diversity. Yeah. There were a whole bunch of guys named Tony in the photo line, I know that.”
-- Addressing a Charity of Hope gathering, Hamilton, Ontario, April 15, 2010

“Obviously we loved sports, and the baby was born during the spring track season.”
--Going Rogue

“Believe it or not – this was in the 60s – we used to hustle on over the border for health care that we would receive in Whitehorse…. Isn’t that kind of ironic now. Zooming over the border, getting health care from Canada.”
-- Speech in Calgary, Alberta, March 6, 2010

"The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil."
-- Facebook, Aug. 7, 2009

"When the American people elected President Obama they gave him responsibility to handle this disaster. He promised to “heal the earth, and watch the waters recede...” or something far-fetched like that."
-- On the oil spill, May 27, 2010

“I didn’t believe the theory that human beings – thinking, loving beings – originated from fish that sprouted legs and crawled out of the sea. Or that human beings began as single-celled organisms that developed into monkeys who eventually swung down from the trees.”
--Going Rogue

“With the gray Talkeetna Mountains in the distance and the first light covering of snow about to descend on Pioneer Peak, I breathed in an autumn bouquet that combined everything small-town America with rugged splashes of the Last Frontier.”
--Going Rogue

"I think it's appalling and a violation of our freedom of the press."
—On negative media coverage of Republican congressional candidate Vaughn Ward, Boise, Idaho, May 21, 2010

"Ground Zero Mosque supporters: doesn't it stab you in the heart, as it does ours throughout the heartland? Peaceful Muslims, pls refudiate."
—On plans to build an Islamic community center near Ground Zero, via Twitter, July 18, 2010

"'Refudiate,' 'misunderestimate,' 'wee-wee'd up.' English is a living language. Shakespeare liked to coin new words too. Got to celebrate it!"
—Tweet, July 18, 2010

"I'm not politically correct. I am not one to be a word police."
-- Fox interview with Chris Wallace Feb. 7 , 2010

"I didn't really had a good answer, as so often -- is me."
--On writing notes on her hand for the Tea Party convention address, March 5, 2010

More on Julian Assange and Wikileaks: The Sarah Palin View...

Julian Assange has certainly found more fame than he may have craved in developing Wikileaks into a whistleblower of world renown. The recent release of some 250,000 US diplomatic cables has intensified the hunt for Assange and the "need" to bring him to justice. Assange has some serious legal problems aside from the alleged rape and sexual molestation of which he stands accused of committing in Sweden. There are quite a number of states looking to prosecute him for his part in the publication of the "illegally" obtained diplomatic cables.

Australia is clearly looking to build a case against Assange. However, it would seem that the US is also exploring what options it has in making the case and prosecuting Assange in the US. This has obviously brought the ranting and railing conservative right out. Among them is the former Vice-Presidential candidate from the Grand Old Party (GOP), Sarah Palin. The fact that some might consider her a legitimate contender for the GOP presidential nomination in 2012 is scary enough, but the latest outburst is indicative as to what lengths this woman will go to try and capitalise on conservative popular opinion. It is also indicative of the fact that she really does not understand the difference between Osama bin Laden and Julian Assange. It is pretty clear that she obviously missed the advocacy class on why not to use exaggeration.

Sarah Palin in her infinite wisdom has taken to Facebook to condemn Assange for his role in releasing to the world some 250,000 confidential and secret diplomatic cables. Fair enough! There are good arguments to be made that it was irresponsible for Assange to publish via Wikileaks. However, Palin was not satisfied stopping there. In order to really ratchet-up the rhetoric she decided to add that Assnage should be hunted down like Osama bin Laden.

Well, after ten years of searching the US has not found or been able to confirm that it has killed bin Laden. So, it would seem that Assange really need not fear the US if it was to mount a similar "search and destroy" campaign that has been mounted for bin Laden. Although, on a more serious note, it would appear that all those who need to know where Assange is, in fact know where he is. It would also appear that an arrest is not that far away once the arrest warrant(s) are in order, assuming Assange decides to surrender to authorities and not seek political asylum in a country favourable to that proposition, Switzerland perhaps.

To further reinforce her point she suggested that Assange is not a journalist in any shape or form and compared this lack of journalistic skill to the current editor of al-Qaeda's English-language magazine, Inspire. Further intensifying the rhetoric saw Assange labeled as anti-American and with blood on his hands.

In any event, this was a political point scoring opportunity that was more about Palin slamming the White House and President Obama by implying that they were complicit in Assange's Wikileaks work because they have not been serious in hunting him down or arresting him.

Yet, this generally fits into the overall rhetoric of US politics with recent claims seeking to force the US government to declare Wikileaks a terrorist organisation. A whistleblower as a terrorist organisation, what an interesting development. However, it is symptomatic of the way the world is post 9/11. Anything that annoys us or possible effects many as opposed to a few is almost immediately labeled a terrorist organisation. I wonder what the Tea Party might need to do to be labeled a terrorist organisation? What about the Republicans or the Democrats?

However, the US is looking to invoke the Espionage Act with a view to criminal prosecution. And, it is imperative in the US view that they do this one by the numbers, and make the case bullet-proof.

The case to shut down sites that release confidential documents needs to be assessed on a merits basis. The reality is that releasing secret or confidential information can always be criminalised, but at what cost?

The question that must be answered here was whether there was any value in the releasing of these particular diplomatic cables? Simply, does the public need to know outweigh the need to maintain confidentiality?

Ho hum...

Willow & Bristol Palin: Ranting and Railing on Facebook...

Family is important, and when your family is attacked your first reaction is to protect it. However, sometimes common sense and a measured response might better serve your family in the long run. Yet, if that "attack" is merely criticism of your parent's talk show, then it really is sticks and stones stuff. It probably does not need a response at all, particularly if your mum happens to be Sarah Palin, former Governor of Alaska, 2008 GOP Vice Presidential candidate, and possible 2012 Republican Party Presidential candidate.

Nevertheless, Willow took to Facebook without a second thought and proceeded to use some choice swear words and a homophobic slur. I was always taught that a faggot was a bundle of sticks (or as my grancher once told me, a meatball). However, when you read the Facebook exchange, Willow leads little doubt that she is casting aspersions about the sexuality of the target of her vitriol.

Not to be left out, Bristol gets in a few lines about "shit talkers". So, in comparison Bristol was a little tamer than her younger sister. It seems that Bristol might be having a few regrets about her brain explosion.

I wonder how mummy is going to deal with this little media circus? Maybe the Palin kids learn this sort of language at home?

If you want to read a screen capture of the whole series of rants and rails, then head to TMZ.

Fashionable Veeps -- The Palin Cost

Choosing a Vice Presidential candidate does not come cheap when you are clothing a family of five kids and getting them looking all dapper to hit the campaign trail. The Republican National Committee has found this out as it has spent more than USD 150,000 since late August. Now, this is funny in that truly perverse kind of a way. The Republican ticket has been claiming how in touch it is with the problems facing America and ordinary citizens.

The problem as I would see it is that there are not many citizens earning that sort of money that they can be dropping more than 150K on accessorizing. Some of the bills that have been filed in public financial expenditure statements include an almost 50K shopping spree at Saks Fifth Avenue, a more than 75K bill from Neiman Marcus, and almost 5K in hair and make-up expenses.

This has caught the interest of campaign finance experts who have been quick to suggest that personal use items such as clothes and make-up are generally prohibited. Simply, campaign funds are not and cannot be used for personal items.

The RNC's initial response was to blow the whole thing off as politicking. However, the most recent response of the RNC has been to suggest that all of the goods that have been bought for the Palin's are going to be donated to charity after the campaign. In this case it seems that the Salvation Army store could be in for a windfall. It is not often you pick up Saks and Neiman goodies at bargain basement prices.

There is little doubt that the Democrats should get some good yards out of this one as the Democrat financial expenditure statements do not include any similar spending.

At least now the people, the citizens, those that are going to be casting ballots know how much it has cost to keep the Palins looking good!

Nailin' Paylin

This presidential election cycle has provided a few firsts. However, I am guessing the first porn video paying homage to the first Republican Vice Presidential candidate is also a first.

Larry Flynt of Hustler magazine fame has supposedly already shot the movie "Nailin' Paylin" and a release date is imminent. The movie is a hardcore porn spoof of the vice presidential candidate. A porn star by the name of Lisa Ann will be playing the lead.

I wonder if we are going to see a hardcore porn spoof of Joe Biden? Perhaps it could be titled, "Bonking Biden" or the "The Joe Biden Story: Blow by Blow".

Maybe the best part about this skin flick is that there is a script. My understanding is that skin flicks are not usually dialogue driven pieces of art. The script is available here.

If you are interested in seeing all of the promo shots for this film then you can find them here.

Palin, A Stripped Moose, African-Americans, and Jews

If you fail to see the connection then you should feel comfortable with the fact that you are probably not the only one.

But here it is and straight from the mouth of Rep. Alcee Hastings (the Rep. standing for Representative and meaning he is a Congressman in the US) who is a Democrat and former Hillary Clinton supporter and now vocal Barack Obama supporter.

This is what was said:

“anybody toting guns and stripping moose don’t care too much about what they do with Jews and blacks.”

This was a comment made to a group of African-American and Jewish Democrats and by all reports brought hoots of laughter and applause from all in attendance.

The idea that being able to shoot and strip a moose in any way reflects how one views race and religion relationships is about the same as Republicans claiming that Barack Obama's middle name says something about how he will deal with Muslims and Non-Muslims. Or that Obama's middle name in some way brings into question his Christian beliefs. It is bizarre and it is stupid!

Anyone who thinks that race and religion are not going to be important factors in this US Presidential race need to think again. Even with the US economy on the brink of free-fall into a recession (some might say the abyss of depression), the idea that race and religion keep coming to the fore says something about this historic moment for the US.

I am not an American. But, if I was I think there are more important things at stake in this presidential election other than whether Sarah Palin can strip a moose or the fact that Obama's middle name is Hussain.

Then again that's just me!

Gov. Sarah Palin

oI have been tossing up on whether to write anything on Sarah Palin and had been inclined not to.

However, I was listening to / watching Fox News Channel (definite right wing biases and pro-GOP, generally speaking) and there was a fella named Howard Gutman making some comments.

Now, Mr. Gutman is a member of the Obama Team, aka the Team professing to be all about change. Obama himself has been on the record saying Sarah Palin's parenting skills and family are off limits. Someone obviously forgot to tell Gutman.

The gist of the Gutman arguments were that with a 17-year-old daughter who is unmarried and pregnant and an infant son who is a special needs child (or in non-politically correct terms a youngster with Down Syndrome) should be spending more time at home caring for her family than seeking fame as the Vice-President on the Republican ticket. I am not a woman and I am old enough to know better than to try and speak for them. So the following comments are my take on this as a man.

The Gutman comments are offensive, they are sexist, and they highlight how out of touch the Obama campaign is on this issue. Gutman's ideas that the woman's place is in the home is just too 19th Century. I figured the barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen thing was done. The fact that women have for a long time held down two or more jobs, the one in the home and also another one in an office, a factory, a supermarket, or a bar, should perhaps be seen as the strength of women to do more and achieve more than men while women are never getting full recognition for their efforts.

If Obama is as good as his word then Gutman should get a stinging rebuke and if he is on the payroll then he should see the pink slip. The insanity is that no one is asking whether Obama is fit to lead in light of him having two you children. Does this mean that the assumption is that the wife will be sitting at home in the White House taking care of the child raising duties like all good moms should be?

I do not agree with many of the policies of the GOP and would probably be a Democrat if I was an American citizen and had the right to vote. But sexism of this kind might give me pause to reevaluate. Perhaps this is because I grew up in a family where my mother was both carer and worker and the carer responsibilities were shared with the old man because the old man was a worker too.

The interest for me in the 17-year-old pregnant daughter who is currently unmarried but planning to marry the father of the baby is that the Palin family are having experiences that many ordinary families experience. This probably makes her more qualified to comment from an experience point of view than it does many other pundits throwing in their two pennies worth.

So, that's my two pennies worth!