Sunday, March 20, 2011

The No Context Attack Against Sarah Palin

The Reverend Van Ens has written an attack column against Sarah Palin in the Vail Daily newspaper. Of course being a good leftist the "Reverend" left a few things out, like any sort of context.

So I had to respond:

I have rarely seen an article so bereft of context as the one written by Rev. Van Ens.

Of course he was trying to score political points against someone who is, at this point, a private citizen with a Facebook account. He accuses her of “slices” her opponents with “verbal stabs” and accuses her of the dirty trick of using the language of normal people. I remember when leftists accused Bush of the dirty trick of doing what he said he would do. Notice all the civility.

The biggest problem with this article is that it excoriates Sarah Palin for answering attacks on her without even mentioning the attacks on her. Thereby purposefully leaving out context for the reader. This is no accident of course, for his point could never survive any exposure to context. His main theme seems to be that she responds to attacks on her, I mean why shouldn’t she? She should just lie there and accept being raped by leftists?

Palin excels at class warfare between the haves and the have-nots.” - Yes, how dare she try to do what the leftists and Democrats have been doing for a century. It is so horrible and disgusting that only leftist Democrats can be allowed to do it. Again, the point does not survive any contact with context, which party was it that talked of “two America’s?”.

Listeners detected a quality of love in Jesus’ teaching that’s missing in Palin’s malice” - That sounds like a personal thing. I detect a great love for this country and the ideals of independent and free people. You can have no greater love for man as a human being than to set them free from the shackles of the mighty state.

Trying to compare her to Jesus is silly. No one claims she is the immortal daughter of God or a new Savior. Jesus was not a politician, Jesus was not a “community organizer” and Jesus was not a “populist”. Jesus was the Son of God who died for our sins. You lower yourself when you compare politics and politicians to Jesus. I suspect you really meant to replace Jesus with Barack Obama but knew that wouldn’t fly with anyone with half a functioning braincell.

Nothing in the article makes sense when it comes in contact with context.

No comments:

Post a Comment