Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
She used it incorrectly, as a small few have also used it incorrectly in the past. The English language is a living language, but changing the meaning of a word overnight due to ignorance is not the mechanism of linguistic evolution.
|
Let's simply say that not everyone agrees with you:
Quote:
Jewish Americans for Sarah Palin defended Palin’s use of the term.
“Sarah Palin got it right,” said the group. “Falsely accusing someone of shedding blood is the definition of a blood libel.”
Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz similarly defended Palin from criticism over the use of the term.
“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” Dershowitz told BigGovernment.com.
|
Read more:
Dershowitz, others defend Palin’s use of ‘blood libel’ | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
---------- Post added at 04:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:16 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel_
As an external observer of the American political situation, and a person with a fondness for the best of American ideas and thinkers, I am consistently shocked that Mrs Palin is apparently seriously considered a possible future president.
|
Palin has never said her intent was to run for President, she was not even interested in the VP slot on the McCain ticket until she was approached. She stepped down as governor of AK to move on with her life, virtually ending her political career - but liberals would not leave her alone. Liberals keep bring the issue up. Liberals are obsessed with the idea of Palin running. Liberals feel it is their job to eliminate her from a Republican run at the nomination, but what they do back fires. They think by trying to knocking her down, they build themselves up but they come across as being very foolish.