Tuesday, January 18, 2011

Sarah Palin was too blood libeled!

By Joan Walsh

Sean Hannity is an oaf. A better interviewer, even a sympathetic one, would actually have asked Sarah Palin harder questions, so her self-centered flailing wouldn't have seemed so aimless on his Fox show Monday night (ideal programming to celebrate the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday, don't you think?)

Hannity let Palin insist she knew the meaning of "blood libel" – a term once used to defend violence against Jews who were falsely accused of killing Christian babies and using their blood in ritual. But Jews aren't the only victims, Sarah seemed to say. “Blood libel obviously means being falsely accused, or having blood on their hands,” Palin insisted, though she did reference that other meaning of blood libel from medieval times.

Palin looked even angrier and more defiant than in her tone-deaf video from last week, confusing calls for more civility in politics with calls for censorship. Hannity actually asked if she thought maybe crosshairs and gun imagery might be retired from politics for a while – by far his toughest question -- and she answered no. “Certainly I agree with the idea of being civil… but we should not use an event like that in Arizona to stifle debate,” Palin said. “They can’t make us sit down and shut up. And if they succeeded in doing that our Republic would be destroyed.”..........................

No comments: