Defending 'blood libel': Palin takes on her critics... again
In a Fox News interview last night, the Alaska conservative stood by her use of the controversial phrase. Will her detractors back down?
The video: Sarah Palin was back on television last night (view clip below) responding to criticism of the video statement she released last week on the Arizona shootings. At the time, commentators slammed Palin for employing the phrase "blood libel," a term coined centuries ago in reference to anti-Semitic rumors that Jews killed Christian children to use their blood in rituals. Speaking with Fox News' Sean Hannity last night, Palin insisted that the term "obviously means being falsely accused of having blood on your hands" and charged her Jewish critics with deliberately misconstruing her meaning. Palin added that liberals should not try to use the Arizona shootings to stifle debate. "They can't make us sit down and shut up," she said.
The reaction: Palin "came out swinging" in her Hannity interview, says Rick Moran at American Thinker, and "didn't hurt herself with her strong defense of her actions and words." It remains to be seen, however, if "independents and Republicans" will agree. Palin obviously didn't mean to "tap into an old anti-Semitic trope" with her "blood libel" remark, says Alex Altman at Time. But wouldn't it have been more dignified to "simply say that no malice was intended" and apologize for any offense? Instead, Palin chose to ignore the "post-Tucson unity push" in favor of calculated division. "It's the only play she has." Watch her response:
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
-
Massacre in the favela: Rio’s police take on the gangsIn the Spotlight The ‘defence operation’ killed 132 suspected gang members, but could spark ‘more hatred and revenge’
-
The John Lewis ad: touching, or just weird?Talking Point This year’s festive offering is full of 1990s nostalgia – but are hedonistic raves really the spirit of Christmas?
-
Codeword: November 15, 2025The daily codeword puzzle from The Week
-
Has Zohran Mamdani shown the Democrats how to win again?Today’s Big Question New York City mayoral election touted as victory for left-wing populists but moderate centrist wins elsewhere present more complex path for Democratic Party
-
Millions turn out for anti-Trump ‘No Kings’ ralliesSpeed Read An estimated 7 million people participated, 2 million more than at the first ‘No Kings’ protest in June
-
Ghislaine Maxwell: angling for a Trump pardonTalking Point Convicted sex trafficker's testimony could shed new light on president's links to Jeffrey Epstein
-
The last words and final moments of 40 presidentsThe Explainer Some are eloquent quotes worthy of the holders of the highest office in the nation, and others... aren't
-
The JFK files: the truth at last?In The Spotlight More than 64,000 previously classified documents relating the 1963 assassination of John F. Kennedy have been released by the Trump administration
-
'Seriously, not literally': how should the world take Donald Trump?Today's big question White House rhetoric and reality look likely to become increasingly blurred
-
Will Trump's 'madman' strategy pay off?Today's Big Question Incoming US president likes to seem unpredictable but, this time round, world leaders could be wise to his playbook
-
Democrats vs. Republicans: who are US billionaires backing?The Explainer Younger tech titans join 'boys' club throwing money and support' behind President Trump, while older plutocrats quietly rebuke new administration