Enlarge By Brian E. Chilson, AP Sarah Palin, pictured signing copies of her book on Nov. 30, responded to critics on Tuesday that she bore some responsibility for the assassination attempt on Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D- Ariz.

WASHINGTON  Most Americans reject the idea that inflammatory political language by conservatives should be part of the debate about the forces behind the Arizona shooting that left six people dead and a congresswoman in critical condition, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds.

A 53% majority of those surveyed call that analysis mostly an attempt to use the tragedy to make conservatives look bad. About a third, 35%, say it is a legitimate point about how dangerous language can be.

And there is little sense that stricter gun control laws in Arizona might have averted the tragedy. Only one in five say they would have prevented the shooting; 72% say tighter controls wouldn't have prevented it.

Meanwhile, former Alaska governor Sarah Palin posted a statement and a video on her Facebook page denouncing criticism that she bore some responsibility for the assassination attempt on Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. The congresswoman was one of 20 congressional Democrats whom Palin had targeted for defeat in November's elections on a map showing their congressional districts in cross hairs.

"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," Palin wrote. "This is reprehensible."

The phrase "blood libel" is a false slur against Jews that has been used for centuries to justify their persecution.

There are partisan differences in views of the shooting. Even among Democrats, however, a third say it isn't legitimate to single out conservatives' language for criticism; just over half say it is legitimate. Seven in 10 Republicans call that analysis mostly an attempt to make conservatives look bad.

In the poll, the public is precisely evenly divided on whether the heated language generally used in politics today was a factor in the shooting: 42% say yes, 42% say no. Another 15% have no opinion.

Those who see political rhetoric as a factor are almost evenly divided over whether it was a major one or a minor one.

Most of those surveyed see inflammatory language being used by both Republicans and Democrats. And the Tea Party movement gets slightly less blame than the two major parties, although the difference is too small to be statistically significant.

Fifty-three percent say Republicans and their supporters have gone too far in using inflammatory language; 51% say that of Democrats; 49% say it of Tea Party supporters.

The poll of 1,002 adults, taken Tuesday, has a margin of error of 4 percentage points.

J Street, a political organization for Jews and supporters of Israel, criticized Palin's choice of words.

"The term 'blood libel' brings back painful echoes of a very dark time in our communal history when Jews were falsely accused of committing heinous deeds," Jeremy Ben-Ami, J Street president, said in a statement. "When Governor Palin learns that many Jews are pained by and take offense at the use of the term, we are sure that she will choose to retract her comment, apologize and make a less inflammatory choice of words."