at this moment, Sarah's legions are scouring the Internet

[onenote]

looking for an example of where someone on the left used the term "blood libel" in reference to a someone on the right. Bank on it.

I should add that I spent ten minutes on a google search of the term "blood libel" (filtering out all of the recent references to Palin's speech) and could only find a single reference that was not used in its original context (i.e., with reference to Jews). That was a claim that 9/11 truthers were engaging in a blood libel against bush and company. So much for the claim, falsely spread by Dershowitz, that the term has entered the mainstream as a general refernence to a "false accusation."

[dipsydoodle]

1. The problem now of course

is that of the expression really going into mainstream parlance which would be tragic.

[Common Sense Party]

2. You're a few hours late:

http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/256955/term-blood-libel-more-common-you-might-think

The use of the term “blood libel” in non-Jewish contexts is out of bounds, eh?

Andrew Sullivan, October 10, 2008:

A couple of obvious thoughts. Paladino speaks of “perverts who target our children and seek to destroy their lives.” This is the gay equivalent of the medieval (and Islamist) blood-libel against Jews.

Ann Coulter’s column, October 30, 2008:

His expert pontificator on race was The Washington Post’s Eugene Robinson, who said the Pittsburgh hoax was “the blood libel against black men concerning the defilement of the flower of Caucasian womanhood. It’s been with us for hundreds of years and, apparently, is still with us.”

[1776Forever]

3. Check this recent post out by RamboLiberal for references but they aren't liberals that used it:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x183613