Sarah Palin's New Video: It's Everyone's Fault But Mine.

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin on Monday night provided the nation with her definition of "blood libel" and defended her initial response to criticism of her map that featured the district of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) in crosshairs. The map was released almost a year before the shooting that nearly took Giffords's life earlier this month. "Blood libel obviously means being falsely accused, or having blood on your hands," Palin said.

TPJ: Well, not exactly. Blood libel is a specific myth that Jews murder and drain the blood of Christian and Muslim children. It's a bit more than just "blood on your hands." Her's is a very sanitized version. Also, if she just wanted to say that she thought she was being falsely accused then why not just say that instead of using a very controversial, anti-Semitic myth to make that point? As for the gun sight? She admits using it on that now infamous map, "targeting" Democratic districts for defeat; including Congresswoman Giffords district but saw no problem in using it.

Well, that map wasn't an original graphic. In fact, for many, many years maps in political races have been used to target certain districts.

TPJ: She either is willfully ignoring the recklessness of mixing of guns with politics or simply doesn't care. She should know better given America's sensitivity over political violence. There have been too many assassinations of political figures in our history to ignore the dangerous potential. Do I think Sarah Palin is directly responsible for the shooting in Tucson, Arizona of Congresswoman Giffords? Of course not, but I do think she has greatly contributed to a political environment that has been infused with violent metaphors. The idea that she can't even admit that the "gun sight target" flier was probably a mistake gives the impression of a lack of maturity and a stubbornness to listen to reason; not exactly traits of a national political leader.

She plays the perpetual victim and that's not what I think Americans want to see in a leader. They seem to want a strong figure that is still willing to be humble enough to admit a need in course change. She couldn't even hold back her immaturity long enough to unite together over the memorial in Tucson, Arizona led by President Obama. She had to instead critique the cheers he got from the crowd upon his arrival; questioning his motive by saying the memorial was more of a "campaign stop" and "pep rally."

The problem is that 70% of Republicans found the president's speech during the memorial to be appropriate. The same Washington Post-ABC News poll found a 54% overall approval of the president. I was really impressed with how non-partisan his speech at the memorial was. If we can't even come together for a memorial then how can we come together on anything? You all know that I wasn't a George W. Bush fan but I thought he did a great job during his speech at Ground Zero with the bull-horn after 9/11.

---End of Transmission---