Several political conservatives -- invoked “blood libel” in print yesterday

[RamboLiberal]

Carrie Dann writes: Within minutes of the release of Sarah Palin’s video response to the Tucson shootings, the Web ignited with furious debate about the former Alaska governor’s use of the phrase “blood libel” to describe connections drawn between Arizona shooter Jared Loughner and conservatives who have used guns and violence as metaphors for political activism.

-----

Less than 4 hours after the release of the video, Wikipedia.org's entry on “blood libel” had been updated to note Palin's application of the phrase to the aftermath of the Tucson shootings.

Despite the bright spotlight pointed at Palin’s uttering of the flashpoint expression, hers was not the first usage of the phrase by a conservative in the wake of the Arizona shootings. Several other commentators -- all political conservatives -- invoked “blood libel” in print yesterday.

In an op-ed about the shootings in the Wall Street Journal on January 11, University of Tennessee law professor Glenn Harlan Reynolds asked “Where is the decency in blood libel?” Human Events staff writer John Hayward urged the “Right to fight back” against blame for the attacks in a piece titled “The Giffords Blood Libel Will Fail; The Left rides a horse that is dying beneath them.”

And, on the same day, the editorial page of the Washington Examiner slammed New York Times columnist Paul Krugman for placing “the blood libel of blame for the Tucson murders squarely on the shoulders of the crowds at the McCain-Palin rallies and right-wing extremism."

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/01/12/5822791-what-is-blood-libel

Coordinated talking point? How many of us had even heard the term "blood libel" till Palin uttered it. I hadn't. This sounds like dog-whistle to me! Painting your true origins & thoughts RW'ers?