It didn't take long for Sarah Palin to go from an uncompromising response to critics of her campaign rhetoric to new questions about her choice of words.
Not the gun-toting choice of words that had already landed the former Alaska governor in hot water with political opponents who tried to blame her rhetoric for last weekend's melee in Tucson, where a gunman tried to assassinate congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords while killing six and wounding 13 others.
This time the questions surround two words that are charged with meaning: blood libel.
"...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," she says of her critics in a message posted on her Facebook page.
The term "blood libel" has an ugly origin. It dates back to the Middle Ages and refers to the false accusation that Jews kidnapped Christian children, killed them and used their blood in religious rituals. Through the centuries, the accusations have been used as an excuse for the persecution and murder of Jews.