It is beginning to seem like “blood libel” has become the contemporary term of art. Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) took the floor last night to compare the Republicans to Nazi propagandist Goebbels and their arguments to “blood libel.” Since Sarah Palin was just skewered over the use of the term, it will be interesting to see the reaction to this reference occurring just days later over national health.
Cohen stated “They say it’s a government takeover of health care, a big lie just like Goebbels. You say it enough, you repeat the lie, you repeat the lie, and eventually, people believe it. Like blood libel. That’s the same kind of thing, blood libel. That’s the same kind of thing,”
Cohen also noted:
“The Germans said enough about the Jews and people believed it–believed it and you have the Holocaust. We heard on this floor, government takeover of health care. Politifact said the biggest lie of 2010 was a government takeover of health care because there is no government takeover.”
Moving from the Holocaust to health care is a bit too much of a jump for many people. We have repeatedly seen objections to the use of Nazi references by politicians.
Here Cohen wanted to refer to the tactic of repeating a lie so often that it becomes accepted as the truth. He could have done that without the Nazi reference. The “blood libel” reference was just recently denounced by the the Anti-Defamation League in relation to Palin. One would think that they would have to do the same with Cohen for consistency purposes.
In the meantime, CNN has taken a commentator to task on the air for simply using the term “crosshairs.”
I am not sure that the mere reference to crosshairs deserves such a mea culpa on the air.
What do you think?
Source: MSNBC
Jonathan Turley
My developer is trying to persuade me to move to .net from
PHP. I have always disliked the idea because of the costs.
But he’s tryiong none the less. I’ve been using WordPress on various
websites for about a year and am worried about switching to another platform.
I have heard great things about blogengine.net. Is there a way I can import
all my wordpress posts into it? Any kind of help would be really appreciated!
Paid per click advertising is only half the Google story.
The other half is Search Engine Optimisation (SEO).
With the entire web (and world for that matter) going SOCIAL the best way to get your business
on the map is to get social and there is no better way to go social than with a Custom Facebook Fan page!
See our gallery of pages and learn more at http://unbouncepages.com/fanspin
Don’t take my word for it Google any local business and your likely to see their Facebook page directly at the top of the search
HOW DO YOU TURN YOUR FACEBOOK into an indestructible lead generating machine?
The answer is a Custom Facebook Page that welcomes consumers and engages them turning likes into actual customers!
See our gallery of pages and learn more at http://unbouncepages.com/fanspin
Bob Esq.,
How would that interpretation effect integrity? Ancient law considered the termination of a fetus via potion or striking the woman to be murder. Due process would be the reason behind reliance on quickening.
“[T]hose lines and distinctions” had a basis. The distinction was based on when a reasonable person would understand that life existed in the womb.
BBB: “In the time of Blackstone, wasn’t “quickening” the ‘stir in the womb’ the only available basis from which to identify that ‘life’ existed in the womb?”
Yep.
BBB: “At common law, isn’t it evident that life was to be provided rights and protections as soon as evidence of that life could be proven?”
Is that what an originalist would say?
Besides, if the originalist drops integrity entirely and makes that argument, then we fall back on the social contract and what I mentioned about the necessity for those lines and distinctions remaining in place so as to keep the compact from becoming illusory.
Bob Esq.,
“The old form ‘stir in the womb’ argument preserves the necessary distinction between individual, fetus and the line between state and individual.”
In the time of Blackstone, wasn’t “quickening” the ‘stir in the womb’ the only available basis from which to identify that ‘life’ existed in the womb?
At common law, isn’t it evident that life was to be provided rights and protections as soon as evidence of that life could be proven?
Slarti: “is the crux of the matter that since the ‘estate’ of the fetus may involve real property (given by bequest), therefore property rights attach to the fetus?”
First, I wouldn’t use the phrase “estate of the fetus;” call it a future interest.
The basic idea (monkey wrench) is that a gestating fetus can have property rights; ergo destroying the notion that a fetus has no ‘rights.’ Thus, you’ll want to drop that phrase in your future debates regarding abortion; because it’s simply not true.
The key to the analysis in the abortion debate is illustrating whose rights are superior at what times during gestation. The inalienable right of self ownership v. the time at which the common law determined the legal existence of a fetus (according to Blackstone ‘when it began to stir in the womb’–i.e. after the first trimester — and thence the next two trimesters where the law deemed it worthy of protection.
The old form ‘stir in the womb’ argument preserves the necessary distinction between individual, fetus and the line between state and individual. Without those lines and distinctions, the social contract becomes illusory and there is no distinction between citizen of and property of the state.
Bob said:
“Don’t worry Kevin, the Ninth Amendment, distinction between alienable and inalienable rights, the inalienable right of self ownership and a commentary by Blackstone has your right to abortion within the first trimester covered.”
Good to know, thanks. Regarding your prior comment, I’m not sure I understand – is the crux of the matter that since the ‘estate’ of the fetus may involve real property (given by bequest), therefore property rights attach to the fetus? That kind of thing is one of the reasons I’m not a lawyer – I’m going to go play with something simple like a differential equation…
Don’t worry Kevin, the Ninth Amendment, distinction between alienable and inalienable rights, the inalienable right of self ownership and a commentary by Blackstone has your right to abortion within the first trimester covered.