Re: Palin's secret message

On Sat, 15 Jan 2011, Karl Swenson wrote:

>> The libel itself is offensive, yes; and not only offensive, but 
>> downright harmful, because it has historically encouraged people to 
>> commit acts of anti-Semitism (and not just in the medieval past, but 
>> today, too; if I'm not mistaken, a lot of people in the Muslim world, 
>> e.g. Palestine, have stoked anti-Semitic violence by spreading modern 
>> versions of those medieval lies).
>
> **That's the same argument black use about their history (less so the 
> modern usages).  I get it, but at the same time, when do we get over it 
> ahnd allow it to heal?  How long does offense and butt hurt disable our 
> society?

Y'know, I'm not really sure what you're talking about here.  Is there a 
specific instance you can point to, of blacks saying "don't use this term 
because it is an integral and unique part of our history"?

**Oh god, many.  How about the black caucus getting riled when the guy used
the phrase black whole?  Slave is considered offensive when used it some
contexts.  The fact is that victim logy allows people all the time to say
"stop saying that, it offends me" and is all nothing but people clinging to
offense.

And, uh, "butt hurt"...?

**google it.


> **as a Christian are you likewise offended when someone claims to have 
> been crucified by the media (or similar)?

Don't see why I should be.  Crucifixion was awfully common in the Roman 
world.  Plus, it doesn't really happen much nowadays.

**yet I heard that offered as an excuse by some liberals recently, who said
"Christians would feel the same way about the word crucified"...

>> Is she the victim of violent persecution?
>
> **do death threats count?

Honestly, I don't know.  I imagine *all* politicians of her stature (or 
Obama's) get death threats of one sort or another.  Maybe Palin's office 
was vandalized once, just as Giffords' was, I dunno.

**Her death threats have increased exponentially due to this, I would say
that qualifies.


>> Has anyone accused her of killing children so that she can mix their 
>> blood in her food?
>
> **so the term can only have a single example, not be used 
> metaphorically?  Really?  When did we decide we have to be so strict?

When the metaphor betrays no sense of proportion, natch.

**but it did, plenty of people have already concluded that.


>> The fact that Rep. Giffords is, herself, Jewish just makes Palin's "I'm 
>> a victim just like the Jews were" posture that much more distasteful. 
>> And no, the fact that Palin might have been clueless about the term's 
>> meaning when she used it does not, in and of itself, make the faux pas 
>> any less distasteful.
>
> **that wasn't her position.  She was complaining about herself only, any 
> reading of equivalency is yours.

Again, I don't know what you're saying here.  "Complaining about herself"? 
"Reading of equivalency"?  I have no idea what these terms mean here.


***Palin was not saying she is just like the jews.  She said an accusation
of her being the cause of death was made falsely and that apparently she
(along with Glenn Reynolds and many others) felt that it fit the definition
of a blood libel.

**you are reading more into it then necessary, likely because you find her
even complaining of being a victim distasteful.

**the reality is that she IS a victim, a victim of libel, slander and
demogoguary.  And no one  on the left has showm the least desire to
apologize for it.

**Instead they are redirecting to "lets have a national discussion on being
nicer".  Bullshit.  If her rhetoric was not responsible for this guy, then
there is no reason to have the discussion.

**That is like me falsely accusing you of encouraging someone else to commit
child rape, and then the accusation falls apart, saying well we should not
waste this moment to talk about how bad child rape is.  Either way you were
wronged, some people will still remember the accusations.


-- 
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot