'Acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own,' Palin says. | POLITICO Screengrab | POLITICO Staff Palin charges critics with 'blood libel'

Sarah Palin released a video statement Wednesday calling the rush to pin blame on conservatives for the shooting in Tucson, Ariz., a “blood libel.”

“Acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own,” she said. “They begin and end with the criminals who commit them.”


In the eight-minute video, Palin says, “Especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible.”

Palin’s use of the charged phrase “blood libel” — which refers to the anti-Semitic accusation from the Middle Ages that Jews killed Christian children to use their blood to make matzo for Passover — touched off an immediate backlash. (see: Full text of Sarah Palin's statement)

“The blood libel is something anti-Semites have historically used in Europe as an excuse to murder Jews — the comparison is stupid. Jews and rational people will find it objectionable,” said Hank Sheinkopf, a New York-based Democratic political consultant and devout Jew. “This will forever link her to the events in Tucson. It deepens the hole she’s already dug for herself. … It’s absolutely inappropriate.” (see: The Arena: Palin's 'blood libel' defense fair?)

It’s not certain that Palin even knew the historic context of the phrase, which was used by Glenn Reynolds in a Wall Street Journal op-ed on Monday and has been picked up as a rallying cry by the right in their effort to pushback over the blame-casting by the left over the attemped assassination Saturday of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.)

What is clear, though, is that her used of such a loaded phrase has all but overwhelmed the rest of her message.

“By using those words she failed to rise above and focus on the victims,” said former Bush press secretary Ari Fleischer. “It was a mistaken approach, though I don’t think offensive on religious grounds.”

And it couldn’t have happened at a worse time for conservatives.

The furious counter-attack on the right against the notion that conservatives were somehow responsible for the tragedy had been galvanized by respected figures as George F. Will and Charles Krauthammer, who each wrote compelling columns; a CBS poll released Tuesday night showed that 57 percent of Americans didn’t think that the country’s harsh political tone had played a role in the shooting; and, most important, there was mounting evidence that the gunman was a deeply disturbed young man who was not motivated by conventional political grievances.

But in her first extended response to the shooting - and just hours before President Barack Obama planned to speak at a memorial service in Tucson - Palin created a frenzy. ( see: Obama hopes for healing in Arizona)

It was chiefly because of her use of “blood libel,” but also because she used the video largely to make an unapologetic case for her brand of confrontational politics.

Though some “claim political debate has somehow gotten more heated just recently,” Palin said, it has always been “heated.”

“When was it less heated?” she asked. “Back in those ‘calm days’ when political figures literally settled their differences with dueling pistols?”

“In an ideal world, all discourse would be civil and all disagreements cordial. But our Founding Fathers knew they weren’t designing a system for perfect men and women. If men and women were angels, there would be no need for government. Our Founders’ genius was to design a system that helped settle the inevitable conflicts caused by our imperfect passions in civil ways. So we must condemn violence if our republic is to endure.”

Palin said that “America must be stronger than the evil we saw displayed last week.”

(see: Arizona to Obama: Rise above the 'vitriol')

“We are better than the mindless finger-pointing we endured in the wake of the tragedy,” she added. “We will come out of this stronger and more united in our desire to peacefully engage in the great debates of our time, to respectfully embrace our differences in a positive manner and to unite in the knowledge that, though our ideas may be different, we must all strive for a better future for our country.”

Before posting the video, Palin had said little about the shooting. She released a brief message on Saturday afternoon expressing her condolences to the families of Giffords (who at the time was incorrectly reported to have died) and the other victims.

Her only other remarks were in a brief e-mail exchange with Fox New host Glenn Beck. “I hate violence. I hate war. Our children will not have peace if politicos just capitalize on this to succeed in portraying anyone as inciting terror and violence,” she wrote to Beck, who read her statement on the air.

SarahPAC Treasurer Tim Crawford told POLITICO the Palin camp chose to release the video because Palin wanted to redirect media attention back to the tragedy and away from the raging political blame game. (see: House rolls out Gabrielle Giffords resolution)

“She is her best spokesperson by far,” said Crawford. “She had things she wanted to say.”

Palin warned against any efforts to limit free speech, saying, “We will not be stopped from celebrating the greatness of our country and our foundational freedoms by those who mock its greatness by being intolerant of differing opinion and seeking to muzzle dissent with shrill cries of imagined insults.” (see: Beck, Limbaugh respond to shooting)

She noted in the video that less than a week after the shooting “another member of Congress announced that he would propose a law that would criminalize speech he found offensive.” (see: Tragedy marks turning point for Palin)

That was an apparent reference to Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.), who has said there may be a need for revised standards for talk shows on TV and radio.

“I came up in a time that the Fairness Doctrine did not allow media outlets to say things about a candidate or a person in public office without giving that person equal time to respond,” he told NPR on Monday. “And I really believe that everybody needs to take a look at where we are pushing things and may need to take a serious step back and evaluate what’s going on here.”

Meanwhile, former Nevada Republican Senate candidate Sharron Angle is blasting those blaming her for inciting the Arizona shooting, saying the accused shooter went off the deep end long before the tea party movement started. (see: Angle defends herself, tea party)

In her first comments — coming three days after the shooting — Angle said in a harshly worded statement that her critics were “dangerous and ignorant.”

“Expanding the context of the attack to blame and to infringe upon the people’s constitutional liberties is both dangerous and ignorant,” she added. (see: War of words rages on)

“The irresponsible assignment of blame to me, Sarah Palin or the tea party movement by commentators and elected officials puts all who gather to redress grievances in danger.”

She added, “Finger-pointing towards political figures is an audience-rating game and contradicts the facts as they are known — that the shooter was obsessed with his twisted plans long before the tea party movement began.” (see: Loughner’s supremacists tie debunked)

Andy Barr and Jonathan Martin contributed to this report.