'Blood Libel': Schultz Suggests Palin Used Term 'As Appeal To Extremist Christian Conservative Base For 2012'
Call it a libel squared . . .
Ed Schultz has suggested that Sarah Palin employed the term "blood libel" to describe the way her critics have tried to hold her responsible for the Arizona shootings "as an appeal to an extreme Christian conservative base for 2012."
Citing no evidence for his grotesque allegation, Schultz first floated it during his opening monologue on his MSNBC show this evening. He raised it again with his first guest, Dem congressman Jan Schakowsky, and took things a despicable step further. Schultz suggested that Palin "got help from the speech from somebody who knows exactly what 'blood libel' means."
Put up or shut up time, Schultz. View video after the jump.
Watch Schultz make his contemptible, evidence-free, allegation.
ED SCHULTZ: Well once again, Palin is proving to be nothing more than an unguided missile in the political arena. Many people think she's used the term "blood libel" as an appeal to an extremist Christian conservative base for 2012.
Here was Schultz a bit later, floating his ugly fantasy to Schakowsky.
SCHULTZ: Why do you think she did it?
SCHAKOWSKY: Frankly, I think she didn't know what she was saying. That's the most charitable thing that I can say, is that she had no idea what it really means . . .
SCHULTZ: Well, let's just say that she does know what's it mean. And maybe she got some help on the speech from somebody who knows exactly what blood libel means. What kind of light does that shed on this?
"Let's just say," that making those kind of ugly and unsubstantiated accusations sheds considerable light--on Ed Schultz.
Note: As John Tabin at the American Spectator has pointed out, citing Jim Geraghty at National Review Online, "blood libel" has been used by many, including people on the left, in other than a Jewish context.
- Mark Finkelstein's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Schultz....
Submitted by almostacowboy on Wed, 01/12/2011 - 7:52pm.
and Schakowsky. You know, if you rearrange the letters in their names it spells "two socialist ass hats".
It does?
Submitted by yutsnark on Thu, 01/13/2011 - 10:36am.
It does?
If you polled a 1000 people
Submitted by Soldat44 on Wed, 01/12/2011 - 7:52pm.
If you polled a 1000 people and asked them what 'blood libel' means, 1000 would say they do not know.
Leave it to the media to reference an ancient jewish term and attemp to paint Palin as the next Fuhrer.
What a bunch of jackwagons!
Did you say all that
Submitted by troglodyt on Wed, 01/12/2011 - 7:59pm.
to prove your point?
Soldat44: please limit your posts to 2 sentences max
Submitted by SickofLibs on Wed, 01/12/2011 - 10:56pm.
Some of our eurotrolls here are having a hard time keeping up.
You might try a more condensed posting style which we refer to as Balbonics. For example, your above post In Balbonic:
"I didn't personally see the movie, but 1,000."
Would he have stopped writing
Submitted by troglodyt on Wed, 01/12/2011 - 11:10pm.
after two sentences his comment would have triggered the same response. "ancient jewish term"? He seemed to be all to willing to show his ignorance.
Bwahahahahahahahah
Submitted by donabernathy on Wed, 01/12/2011 - 8:04pm.
Poor Ed going LOUNGNER
roflmao
This proves nothing more than
Submitted by golfman on Wed, 01/12/2011 - 8:04pm.
This proves nothing more than Ed will stop at nothing to tear into Palin. If the best you got is to make this flimsy connection, then so be it. I am beginning to think Eddie may have a little crush on Sarah.
A little crush on Sarah?
Submitted by needle on Wed, 01/12/2011 - 9:34pm.
Ugh, I had not thought of that; but at least Sarah is safe from Olbermann in that respect.
- Looking forward to the self-annihilation of the Manipulated Stories Machine.
Why is the Liberal Media afraid of Sarah Palin?
Submitted by A300Driver on Wed, 01/12/2011 - 8:31pm.
It bewilders me as to why to liberal media is obsessed with attacking Sarah Palin, day in and day out. Are they that scared of her as to justify belittling or marginalizing her whenver an opportunity arises? Must be.
They are Paliphobic
Submitted by yutsnark on Thu, 01/13/2011 - 10:39am.
They are Paliphobic
Unbelieveable.
Submitted by Ashrak on Wed, 01/12/2011 - 8:56pm.
As Obama and crew remake the Wellstone gathering with their empty "we" shirts, folks like Sgt Schultz feel emboldened to do this kind of thing.
Maybe it is just me, and I have felt this way since the Beck initiated the 9-12 project came to be, the focus of the people has to be pointed at the Establishment Media. It is my hope that the "Tell the Truth" campaign expands exponentially. I think it a more important part of the Liberty movement than the TEA parties, to be honest.
We The People have indeed made our presence felt at the political level where politicians are concerned. The Town Hall meetings and gatherings has returned SOME sanity to the halls of Congress. The insanity in media continues unabated.
I offer that it is time for the national Liberty movement, all its players, to turn its focus to media. Millions upon millions of Letters to the Editor to newspapers would be a good start, imho.
This madness has got to stop.
Antisemitism does not appeal to Evangelicals
Submitted by nkviking75 on Wed, 01/12/2011 - 9:23pm.
If Schultz is suggesting that Palin is using the term in an anti-Semitic sense to appeal to evangelical Christians, it's just one more item in a long list that shows that the Sarge is an utter moron. It would be hard to find a more pro-Israel demographic that evangelical Christians except perhaps Jews themselves.
“Always love your country — but never trust your government!" -- Bob Novak (1931-2009)
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
nkviking
Submitted by yutsnark on Thu, 01/13/2011 - 12:39pm.
Well, yes and no. Evangelicals are indeed supportive of Israel. But they envision a "perfect" world in which all Jews convert to Christianity. Indeed, they engage in missionary activities inside of Israel. So in the long run, would the Evangelicals be content for Israel to remain a Jewish state?
yes
Submitted by Agnostic on Thu, 01/13/2011 - 1:20pm.
yes
Blood Libel refers to you, Schultz
Submitted by needle on Wed, 01/12/2011 - 9:28pm.
Sarah Palin used the experssion "Blood Libel" appropriately to refer to you, Ed, and people like you.
PS: Anti-Semitism runs thick through the Liberal community; so in general, there is a good chance that her usage of the expression may actually be doubly appropriate for the likes of Ed.
- Looking forward to the self-annihilation of the Manipulated Stories Machine.
"Anti-Semitism runs thick
Submitted by yutsnark on Thu, 01/13/2011 - 10:43am.
"Anti-Semitism runs thick through the liberal community."
I saw some of that back in the sixties. Now I see anti-semitism mostly among Muslims and Christian conservatives. Most of the Jews I know are liberal.
yutsnark,
Submitted by Agnostic on Thu, 01/13/2011 - 10:49am.
while I have no doubt that this is your personal observation you obviously missed the "Peace" rallys and anti-war demonstrations during the previous administration. For that matter the rally they had in DC between Beck and Comedy Central rallys could have easily been named "Reason to Hate Jews Rally".
Thankfully it was small and while covered by the media as a retaliation to the Beck rally the substance was well hidden - imo, for good reason.
Agnostic
Submitted by yutsnark on Thu, 01/13/2011 - 12:27pm.
I did miss that rally. Do you happen to have any links to it?
I have noticed that liberals (to my dismay) will sometimes express sympathy for the "Palestinians," and criticize Israeli policy as being too aggressive. I haven't seen this cross the line where it becomes outright anti-semitism.
And while I appreciate the fact that many Christians are strong supporters of Israel, I'm not sure whether this is because of their concern for the wellfare of Jews, or if they even want Israel to continue, in the long run, as a Jewish state.
political vs religious
Submitted by Agnostic on Thu, 01/13/2011 - 1:25pm.
Israel is an ally and as odd as it seems US Christians in general and conservatives especially will support an ally to the US over religious differences - even muslim given the opportunity.
Supporting allies seems to be a strange concept these days but it is one that has worked in the past.
It is not about the welfare of the Jews you see because it is about the welfare for a political ally who also happens to be in a strategic position - bonus.
Agnostic
Submitted by yutsnark on Thu, 01/13/2011 - 4:14pm.
Yeah, I see what you mean, and I do believe that you're right about the main motives. However, I don't see anything particular "Christian" or "conservative" about supporting our allies.
That's not what I see.
Submitted by CobraMan on Thu, 01/13/2011 - 2:18pm.
"Now I see anti-semitism mostly among Muslims and Christian conservatives."
Well, I haven't see many Christians of ANY political leanings displaying antisemitism here in Minneapolis (as a matter of fact, I haven't seen much antisemitism at all here even though we have a large Muslim population) , so I guess it all depends on where you live.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Palin is an unguided missile?
Submitted by Hoosier Conservative on Wed, 01/12/2011 - 9:29pm.
man he has to be brain dead.HARDBALL: BLOND LIBEL
Submitted by Jack Bauer on Wed, 01/12/2011 - 9:33pm.
I assume Chris Matthews is one chubby Blond Libel?
All of the above Mr Obama? --- How about ALL OF THE BELOW, instead.
The erudite Dr. Krauthammer says it perfectly:
Submitted by motherbelt on Wed, 01/12/2011 - 9:47pm.
“Let’s step back for a second. Here we have a brilliant, intelligent, articulate, beautiful, wife, mother and congresswoman fighting for her life, in a hospital in Tucson, and we’re having a national debate over whether the term ‘blood libel’ can be used appropriately in a non-Jewish context? Have we completely lost our minds?” (emphasis mine)
In Schultz's case, we all know the answer.
Yes Eddy
Submitted by NDanielson on Wed, 01/12/2011 - 11:49pm.
and she should lead a crusade to point out the blood libel spewed by clowns like yourself. To paraphrase the highly inept Barry 0bama: keep a boot to their throats, Sarah, Rush and the entire right leaning patriots of America.
I get it
Submitted by CobraMan on Wed, 01/12/2011 - 11:49pm.
I get it. Sarah used 'blood libel," an antisemitic term, as a code word for to signal Christian Conservatives that they need to stop falsely accusing others of inciting violence through inflammatory rhetoric. I mean, really, it's obvious that Christian Conservatives need Jewish-based code words in order understand that it''s not Christian-like to accuse others of inciting violence until there is, you know, proof. Ok, we got the message, Sarah.
It's too bad that Sarah doesn't have a code word, Jewish-based or otherwise, that works on the liberal media. They STILL haven't gotten the message.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
I'm tired of the smoke and mirrors.
Submitted by CobraMan on Thu, 01/13/2011 - 12:05am.
I'm tired of the smoke and mirrors that the liberal press is using here. By trying to focus national attention onto Sarah Palin, they're hoping that we don;t notice that they are NOT fully investigating the man who committed the crime himself.
I think I know WHY they're resorting to smoke and mirrors here. There's no proof that the man is, you know, one of those blood thirsty, gun totting, bible thumping, raciest Tea Party members the liberal press warned us about for almost a year. You know that dangerous White Conservative Veteran who's striking out against the First Black President and anyone who supports him.
As a matter of fact, the evidence is starting to point to the other direction, that the man in question is, in fact, a LIBERAL! They don't want America to focus on the man who committed the crime, for HE, HIMSELF, is becoming too embarrassing for the people who keep claiming that "right wing extremists" are the biggest threat that America faces.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Ed Schitz is "Schultz Faced" at showtime
Submitted by Diesel on Thu, 01/13/2011 - 2:53am.
Say that 4 times real fast!
Seriously though, Ed is always soused by noon and really wanted another drink during his pathetic show, so he was just dreaming of having a "Bloody Mary" as soon as he could stumble out of 30 Rock & get back to the tavern!
Palin missed a golden opportunity.
Submitted by RichieBABY on Thu, 01/13/2011 - 4:07am.
What better way to prove what FRAUDS the MSM is, by instead of delivering that speech of hers, she instead announced that she was running for PREZ. After her announcement, if you want to hear rhetoric that would make your hair stand up, tune into MSNBC. Let us see what "Minky Dinky" on Morning Joe would have to say about that annoucement of Palin's.
A challenge for liberals:
Submitted by Beukeboom on Thu, 01/13/2011 - 12:21pm.
A challenge for liberals: Give any sound, rational and logical reasons why anyone should believe anything Ed Schultz says.
Pathological liar seems to fit Schultz's profile.
But when a leading liberal
Submitted by Cowboy on Thu, 01/13/2011 - 1:56pm.
But when a leading liberal blogger uses the term 'blood libel', not a word from Sgt Schlitz....