To evaluate Alan Dershowitz’s claim that “blood libel” is a phrase that has assumed “broad metaphorical meaning,” I Googled the term.

The only use of “blood libel” that I could find that did not refer to the anti-Semitic slur came (sigh) in the once-great Wall Street Journal on January 10th, in a column by conservative Glenn Harlan Reynolds called “The Arizona Tragedy and the Politics of Blood Libel.”

So as the usual talking heads begin their “have you no decency?” routine aimed at talk radio and Republican politicians, perhaps we should turn the question around. Where is the decency in blood libel?

Which is obviously where Palin’s moronic ghostwriter got the phrase….

A shame no one called Reynolds out on this at the time.

Other than that, nope—can’t find a single use of the term in anything other than its specific meaning. What the hell was Dershowitz talking about?

(To be fair, there is this hilariously unconvincing list that a conservative at National Review dredged up, in which pretty much every example of the term is either in a context that acknowledges its original meaning or comes when it’s misused by conservatives…but there’s one use of blood libel by none other than the Boston Globe’s Alex Beam.

Mr. Beam, care to respond?

In any case, broad metaphorical meaning? I don’t think so.)