They’re defending it by claiming that the term now has widespread political context, even though one of the two examples cited is Israel defending itself from repeated Arab and Palestinian claims of purposefully targeting Palestinian kids and engaging in the classic anti Semitic smear of the blood libel.

Further, claiming that just because Tony Blankley used it - improperly I might add - doesn’t justify its use here either.

More here.

It’s BS.

Blood libel has a clear meaning and context. Had Palin said that she was being libeled because of the comments directed in her direction, she might have had a point. But her use of the term is wrong - and just as wrong as Reynolds, or anyone else who used the term incorrectly.