Sarah Palin bites back , and she won't let go ....

Palin did say one thing Monday that  can believed. "I am not going to sit down. I am not going to shut up." I have little doubt.

This is not a surprising statement for Palin to make. She never shuts up !

Last week, Sarah Palin bit back at those who claim that she has contributed to a nasty tone in American politics. She started with praise for vigorous, free and respectful debate. Then she accused her opponents of arguing in bad faith, and she drew parallels between her critics and centuries of anti-Semitic murderers.

Apparently she didn't see the irony, even after dozens of commentaries -- not just from the left, but from centrists and conservatives -- discussed it. Because Palin went on Fox News's "Sean Hannity Show" on Monday night and praised the calm exchange of ideas -- and then again insisted that her critics aren't acting in good faith.

"And I know that a lot of those on the left hate my message, and they'll do all that they can to stop me, because they don't like the message."

Perhaps Palin has a point about some of those who overeagerly associated her with the Tucson shootings. But she didn't just attack them; she also claimed Monday that the myriad people -- of varying politics -- who criticized her "blood libel" speech last week were just trying to "spin up" a "diversion" from the substance of her message. As one of those people, I didn't need some ulterior motivation to find her words inappropriate and unwise. Neither did the Anti-Defamation League.

Nevertheless, Palin insisted that, really, her critics just dislike those like her who "embrace the time-tested truths that helped build this country." Amazingly, this both says almost nothing about what those truths are -- great job getting that "message" out -- and implies that those who criticize her are anti-American.

However Palin construes her "message," Palin's detractors, of course, actually do take issue with her willingness to say things such as that. Or to use the phrase "blood libel" with reference to her critics. Or her popularizing of the misleading term "death panels" during the health-care debate. Or the chanting of "drill, baby, drill" during the 2008 Republican National Convention. Or the way she dismisses criticism as though it were about everything but the quality of the things she does and says. She has every right to say these things. But that doesn't mean her pervasive use of simplistic overstatement and us-vs.-them-ism is a responsible contribution to public debate. It's not just about her agenda -- beyond "death panels," do most Americans really have any idea of her policy preferences? -- it's about her judgment and her lack of self-reflection.