Blood Libel

Alan Dershowitz isn't offended. He says it's OK for Sarah Palin to invoke one of the most anti-Semitic images of our time in attacking those who have been critical of her putting crosshairs over the name of the congresswoman who was later shot.

"There is nothing improper and certainly nothing anti-Semitic in Sarah Palin using the term to characterize what she reasonably believes are false accusations that her words or images may have caused a mentally disturbed individual to kill and maim. The fact that two of the victims are Jewish is utterly irrelevant to the propriety of using this widely used term," he reportedly told BigGovernment.com.

I disagree.

The best thing that can be said for Palin is that she probably didn't even know that "blood libel" refers to the longstanding accusation that Jews killed Christian babies to use their blood to make Passover matzohs. Generations of murdered Jews attest to the power of this true libel. There is simply no comparison between this terrible term and Palin's complaint that talking heads are blaming her for contributing to an environment of hate. So quick was Palin to get herself into the very fray she purports to condemn, that she didn't check what she said.

And for this, she will hit the jackpot.

Her appearance next week on Sean Hannity's show is already being promoted and is sure to be a ratings winner. Condemn the state of the public discourse all you want: My money is on her outing on Fox News (for whom she and I are both contributors) beating everything in its time slot combined.

I don't blame Palin for the tragic shooting in Tucson. The man who pulled the trigger is to blame. Culpability is individual.

I do blame her for not acting like a leader in the days since. Not knowing what "blood libel" means is bad enough. But it's far worse not knowing that in times of national crisis you don't respond to the cranks; you rise above them and bring the country together, as the president later did.

And I blame those who let her get away with it.

Palin keeps asking to be taken seriously as a future president, even if only to maintain the bright lights and big fees. But she behaves like every other striving talk-show host, eager to get in the good jab, the good line, the zinger -- even if the end result of an endless cycle of such zingers is a level of political discourse that is disgraceful if not also dangerous.

If this is, in retrospect, just another chapter in building the career of Sarah Palin, television talker, international toastmaster, seven-figure speaker for hire, there is no doubt that it will be counted as a success. Her comments have come to play a central role in the story: The liberal media have once again vilified her. She has once again stood up for herself, refusing to let them get away with it, holding her ground and hitting the ratings jackpot.

For some purposes, this is a very good story. Running for president is not one of them.

COPYRIGHT 2011 CREATORS.COM

See Other Political Commentaries.

See Other Commentaries by Susan Estrich.  

Views expressed in this column are those of the author, not those of Rasmussen Reports.