Re: Jim Geraghty on "Blood Libel"
Bruce Geerdes <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.music.dadl.ot |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 5:46 PM, Peter T. Chattaway < petert-LOVM4QxV+tDq6eQxt3vRmLDks+cytr/[email protected]> wrote: > If you consider the far right an "oppressed minority", I guess. >>> >> >> More generic than that, as in the generic definitions of "blood" and >> "libel". >> > > Ah, well, the examples cited here indicate that the "generic" use of the > term doesn't have to involve blood at all! (Again I say: recounts??) > I might argue that's *too* generic. > Which means that you have to use the term *more* carefully, not *less*, > when actual blood *is* involved. I don't see it. The fact that blood is involved makes the term more applicable, in my mind, to the situation Palin addressed. So I don't know why she has attracted all this attention for those two words. -- dadl-ot mailing list http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot