Palin Speech Brilliant, Blood Libel Right Term To Use

Sarah Palin: "America's Enduring Strength" from Sarah Palin on Vimeo.

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Palin's speech above, which appeared in a video on her Facebook website, is a response to the poison the media and Democrats have been spewing as they attempt to politicize the Tucson shooting. The speech was brilliant. In the video Sarah Palin's message came across not only appropriately, but, dare I say, presidential. Nothing can be added. Her message was spot on.

The liberal left, because this is what they do, still found a way to try and criticize her. They claim she tried to upstage Obama, or that she inserted herself into this mess. Thing is, she was dragged into it, whether she liked it or not. Like us, she was at home when the news came across the wire on Saturday regarding the attempted assassination of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. The media, then, deeply convinced in their dark little minds that Palin, and anyone on her starboard side of the aisle, was guilty of the fact that an individual punk kid, a disturbed punk kid at that, committed murder, and attempted to assassinate a Congresswoman, let the accusations fly. Palin did the right thing, did not allow the attacks by the left to go unanswered as George W. Bush erroneously did during his presidency, and responded with a speech that nailed it all the way through.

But what about that "blood libel" comment?

At first, myself being fully knowledgeable of what "blood libel" is, I wondered if it was the right term to use when describing the leftist media's poisonous attacks against Palin, the Tea Party, and anyone else they desired to drag into the circle. I actually jotted down a note to myself to write later on how I felt Palin may not fully understand the term, and that she used it inappropriately.

Then, I got to thinking about it. Actually, blood libel was exactly the right term to use. After all, it was not addressing Loughner, who has been inaccurately described as an anti-Semite. The term "blood libel" was addressed to the sleazy liberal left media, politicians, and bloggers alike, who used the death and bloodshed of the Tucson shooting to spread a false accusation against Conservatives.

"Blood libel" goes back to a period in history when a segment of Christianity that falsely adhered to "replacement theology," a teaching still common among some denominations (such as Calvinists), persecuted Jews. Replacement Theology is the belief that the Israelites stopped being God's chosen people when Christ was crucified, and instead, the believers in Christ became God's chosen people. Such nonsense would be akin to, if my son rejected me, for me to stop loving him, turn my back on him, and then adopt a new child and consider him my son instead. That's ridiculous. No loving father would do such a thing. Though as individuals, any Israelite that rejects Christ falls outside God's grace, as a group, Israel is still God's people. Christians have adopted into the family through Christ. Replacement theology is a false teaching.

Anyway, during that historical time period the believers in Replacement Theology murdered many Jews. Many of the believers in Replacement theology were Catholics at the time. In their persecution of the Jewish people, they used as an excuse to do so the false accusation that Jews killed Christian children to use their blood for Matzos on Passover. The story, though ridiculous, fueled the blood lust of the persecutors, giving them more reason to murder the Jews. As a result of that madness, the term wound up being been used for centuries as the pretext for anti-Semitism and violence against Jews.

Though the historical context is unsettling, and the term being used did not sit well with the Jewish community, the usage was actually accurate. Think about it. A false accusation against The Right is being connected to blood shed, a massacre by an unstable kid. By doing this, the leftists are attempting to create a blood libel.

Using "blood libel" was accurate. The appropriateness of the term, especially considering that both Giffords, and Loughner, were Jewish, is another matter.

-- Political Pistachio Consevative News and Commentary