Nimwit defines "Blood Libel" for us Liberals

[my2sense]

<snip>
Remember two weeks ago, when "blood libel" was the ancient allegation that Jews murdered children? Those were the days! Now it means "being falsely accused of having blood on your hands," as former Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin clarified Monday.

A British psychiatrist says that, scientifically, Monday was "the most depressing day of the year." Was it actually? Well, talkative self-parody Sarah Palin was on Sean Hannity's Fox News show, so... yes. It was Palin's first television appearance since last week's bit of videotaped performance art, a speech uploaded to Vimeo in which she accused the media of "manufacturing a blood libel" against her.

Was she going to say sorry? Offer up a sincere apology for her misuse of the term? Ha ha, no, of course not, what are you, British? Instead, she taught us all a lesson about the meaning of "blood libel":

"Blood libel obviously means being falsely accused of having blood on your hands. In this case, that's exactly what was going on... Just two days before, an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal had that term in its title. And that term has been used for eons."

Source: http://gawker.com/5736243/sarah-palin-defines-blood-libel-for-all-you-dumb-liberals

[rurallib]

1. I believe that is a woman who would do anything to be president

and I do mean anything.
Man she is stupid. Damn near the definition of stupid.

[Generic Other]

2. She appropriates others' misery as her own

Political munchausen by proxy feeding off suffering and proclaiming herself the victim. It's pathological.

[Stuart G]

4. She is no victim...never was, never is, never will be..nt

[DCKit]

3. It took me about five seconds to find a detailed, comprensive and horrifying definition.

Leave it to a Tea Bagging secessionist to parse something so offensive down to an easily digested soundbite.

The constant dog whistles are beyond annoying.