Sunday, September 07, 2008

Still more Wilson, Palin, politics, religion-in-politics, me, I need a new title-writer....

This is bad. There are likely to be a lot more articles about Palin, etc., before November's out... and even I am getting tired of my own titles. The Borkin' Palin one is my pinnacle thus far. Think, man, think! Anyway....

Doug Wilson is still thinking aloud about the impact of Sarah Palin's addition to the McCain ticket. I need to get him to give me a list of titles; his is John Has Slain His Thousands. He makes a compelling case for the narrative of this candidacy and the impact Palin may well have on Roe. A taste:
Now consider Sarah Palin's position -- both her story and her gifts. Her story demolishes, in a way no syllogism could, the central appeals of the pro-aborts. And they love to play the violin with this question -- remember that Obama was asked the question earlier in this election cycle. This is a staple in our campaigns: "What if your daughter . . ." "What if your wife . . ."

Suppose you were a middle-aged woman with a bright political career ahead of you, perhaps even at the national level. You and your husband are surprised by a pregnancy, and then on top of that you discover that your baby is a Down's child. We live in a culture that has been prepared in countless ways to accept the story that "we had to make a tough choice." And we are then astonished when someone, instead of making the "tough choice," makes a tough choice instead -- in the full confidence that it is the right choice. Sarah Palin is a "no exceptions" pro-lifer and apparently she believes that the law of God includes her.
To evangelical critics of Palin as a professional/wife/mother, Wilson replies "presents an absolutely devastating challenge to the feminist narrative for women, and there are no mights involved." I think Wilson adds a weighty point in her favor in observing that Palin has the Reaganesque "ability to speak over the bobble-heads of the anointed media darlings, and take her business straight to the American people." Bush did not have that ability, and it hurt him. I doubt McCain has it. But Palin does. Even former San Francisco mayor Willie Brown recognizes that she has this quality, and the MSM despise her for it.

As an aside, you've got to love this clip, where Carney of Time says to Wallace of the M/P campaign that Palin has to do interviews. "With who? You?" Wallace replies. "Who cares? Who cares if she can talk to Time magazine?"

And that's just it. I think there are two kinds of people in the world: those who admit that the MSM are heavily biased in favor of liberals, and against (in increasing intensity) conservative, pro-life, practicing-Christians; and those in denial. (For an example of the latter, see this article in — surprise!Time magazine itself.) But the fact is no longer in serious dispute, at least not among serious, informed people. (Diana West gives a bit of a snapshot of the current situation.)

Liberals might be asked questions intended to elicit information and promote favorable understanding. Conservatives (particularly practicing Christian ones) are generally asked questions designed to destroy, humiliate, get the "gotcha" moment, and render powerless. The MSM shares the DNC's goal: they want Christians to look insane, unhinged, and dangerous. They want them shamed from a public presence as Christians.

Knowing that, what sane person would expose himself to such Matthew 7:6 situations unnecessarily?

Don't forget my earlier article. Mark my words: those questions I listed and other similar questions are already on reporter's laptops, waiting the moment to spring them.

In fact, here are some more:
  • Does God talk to you? What does He tell you? Is He talking to you right now?
  • Was it God's will for us to murder 146,000,012 innocent Iraqi's and occupy their country?
  • Is it God's will for you to win this election and run America?
  • Is God a Republican?
  • Is your pregnant daughter going to Hell?
  • Is her boyfriend going to Hell?
  • Have you had sex with anyone beside your husband?
It really isn't rocket-science. I hope someone's getting her ready for it, or she already has gotten herself ready — because it's coming.

There are some hopeful signs. The WSJ reports that many have caught on to media bias. Plus, they're being watched closely, and not just by Christians. The NYT did an interesting article on Palin's religion. I actually thought it surprisingly balanced, considering the source. But it provoked a very strong negative reaction from non-Christian writer John Podhoretz. Folks are catching on to the MSM's game, and that's good.

Now, briefly, to the ongoing discussion of Palin as a female political leader. We've noted a number of helpful contributions by Doug Wilson to the topic. To those, add the brief piece by Southern Baptist NT professor Denny Burk. The professor pulls a statement from John Piper and Wayne Grudem that presents my own view concisely: "As we move out from the church and the home we move further from what is fairly clear and explicit to what is more ambiguous and inferential."

To this we can add the helpful, candid reflections of Al Mohler.

Finally, David Murrow contributes a revealing personal insight into the character of Sarah Palin, with whom he's worked fairly closely. Turns out that the way she strikes non-moonbats is the way she is.

And on the moonbat note, fits of PDS is now also deemed too boring to allow here. This isn't a democracy. Ankle-biters will just have to content themselves with controlling CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, Hollywood, almost anything with "Times" in the title, PBS, NPR, AP, Reuters, Al-Jazeera, and the rest.

(NOTE: this post has been and for a day or two will continue to be updated without notice. Check back from time to time — if it interests you.)


CR said...

The McCain campaign is holding out on putting her before the press. Frankly, given the shameful performance of the media right after her nomination, I think that is the smartest thing the McCain campaign can do.

She will have to debate Biden and whoever does the debate can't very well ask the same destructive questions to her if they don't ask Biden that.

Maybe she can do a townhall meeting and have normal Americans ask her questions, but we don't want the media vultures asking those stupid questions.

I have to say, the McCain campaign has been pretty brilliant.

DJP said...

It has become (operative word) pretty brilliant; and I think we have this man to thank.

Gilbert said...

Question: I haven't had cable for 5 years now, just high-speed Internet and broadcast TV. Should I spend $70 per month to play for blowhards who want a Socialist/Communist, anti-God regime that has destroyed Europe, and much of Central and South America?

Or should I, for free, pray for country, its leaders, that they would repent of their sins, knowing that politics will not help Christians much in the long run? And that God would bring revival to our nation, which so desperately needs it?

Now asking all of that...Comcrash isn't getting my money, I'll pray for this country and for revival, and then I must ask Dan...

Who do YOU think will win, and why?
I'm thinking Obama for the delusion that God is obviously spreading over this country. What sayeth you, DJP?

DJP said...

I'm sure wiser heads would agree when I say that two months is an eternity in campaigning. Sarah Palin will have every MSM "journalist," every DNC operative, and an assortment of others after her and out for blood.

But I'll "man up" and give you my prediction as of today.

Premise: the MSM has pounded the GOP and McCain steadily. It has literally treated Obama as if he were the Messiah, with blind-eyed, kid-glove treatment. He's gotten gauzy preferential treatment you couldn't buy with money.

By rights, he should have had a twenty-point lead.

And yet, in spite of all that, he's never been able to pull but a few points ahead of McCain.

And now McCain's back in the game, with (to all appearances) a dynamite running-mate, a re-energized and disciplined campaign, and the base on-board.

So, HSAT, if both campaigns stay on their current courses without major game-changing-AGAIN events, I'd say that, the day after election...

*the rest of my hair will be gone
*so will my fingernails
*I'll either have lost or gained 50 pounds; and
*McCain will be president-elect

CR said...

I read something about the McCain campaign receiving 1,600 e-mails about how excited they are about the Palin pick.

Palin is reportedly going to be interviewed by Charlie Gibson from ABC. No date given.

Have you thought about e-mailing the McCain campaign on your blog content? Your blog content could be one of the most important e-mails they receive?

One Salient Oversight said...

Liberals actually like the fact that Palin chose to keep the baby.

Their argument is - she had a choice.

CR said...

DNCTV is planning to yank Keith Olberman and Chris Matthews from the anchor chair (obviously because of the bias) for the rest of the election. They'll stay on as "analysts."

Also, very strange, USATODAY released a poll of likely voters showing McCain-Palin ten points ahead over Obama/Biden. This is unusual (doing a poll of likely voters, that is), because polls don't release likely voters this early in the game, not until a few weeks before the election.

They were probably very curious and/or want to inform/warn Obama that he is in trouble. The only respectable poll is Rassmussen. The other polls all have the MSM so obviously they're biased. I don't even believe the NBC/WSJ poll is as reliable because of NBC.

Truth Unites... and Divides said...

I think there are two kinds of people in the world: those who admit that the MSM are heavily biased in favor of liberals, and against (in increasing intensity) conservative, pro-life, practicing-Christians; and those in denial. But the fact is no longer in serious dispute, at least not among serious, informed people.

If we can snap more people in the second camp out of denial and over into the first camp about admitting MSM liberal bias (like Bernie Goldberg), then that'll be a good thing!

CR said...

Comrade One Salient Oversight: Liberals actually like the fact that Palin chose to keep the baby.

Their argument is - she had a choice.

Actually, liberals have accused her of being a hypocrite for having her child because she wants to "deny the choice for others." Twisted logic if you ask me from liberals.

CR said...

A great Ask Pastor John of what it is at stake in the definition of marriage for those genuinely concerned about voting for Palin because of role as a professional/wife/mother

J♥Yce Burrows said...

This Pastor John in days past taught this:

It's appreciated to read the thoughts of others shared so far and I'd like to know what say he in view of recent days.

No one is going to reside at Number One Observatory Circle or1600 Pennsylvania Avenue other than God sovereignly orchestrating each so, yes? We should suspect He'll be putting in hearts what will carry out His highest purpose/glory and voters and non-voters will be responsible for motives/choices. The perspective of some(Ladies Against Feminism or Vision Forum, etc.) seeing Palin as a curse on this country may meet the perspective of another person...a genuine believer desiring God's will...seeing aspects of ideal along with less than ideal as tremendous possibilities for God to grow that family and others onlooking close and far from them in His grace and mercy. He'd have us pray for and do good toward those He has risen to this junction.

It is nothing short of God at work as "His hand, heart, and face" is being sought and found as He seeks and finds...that believers/unbelievers & liberals/conservatives in the real and virtual orbit are talking about what is right to believe and do concerning the family ~ media friend and foe alike asking what does God say and mean? Even if they don't realize they are doing that very thing.

Regardless of the names in the history books ~ they will reflect God's sovereignty, glory, and the Word eternally the Way, the Truth, and the Life. Hisstory. God is Love ~ Love never fails. Our place is to pray and weigh ~ hear His voice amidst so many, and follow Him with the exhortation to do so without being a stumbling block. See. what. God. will. do? He already is doing good!

Mike Westfall said...

Heres what caught my eye immediately:
> And we are then astonished when
> someone, instead of making the
> "tough choice," makes a tough
> choice instead.

Although one wonders why those who support abortion consider it a "tough" choice. What's so tough about it? It's just a blob of tissue, right? Right?

A bit OT, so delete if deemed not appropriate: Mesa Mike and family managed to get front row at the McCain-Palin rally in Albuquerque!

CR said...

Cool, you must have been real stoked at the rally. Thanks for sharing.

ChosenClay said...

Well for those of us living in California, this is really a moot point, since this state is so heavily communist, I mean democrat, that it won't matter even if one was inclined to vote for McCain/Palin, of which I am not.

CR said...

I was thinking about that when we spoke about out on Sunday. Conservatives' vote won't make a hill a beans in the general election in California.

But oh, my, we sure had impact on the primary election. I will make my admission, again, I did vote for McCain in the primary because I thought he would be the best person to win over Sen. Clinton or Obama.

I know that after the selection of Palin, the Obama campaign must have beaten themselves on the head for not picking HRC.

But the fact is, Mark, even if it's not a foregone conclusion a Republican can win in CA, I think it's an important civic lesson you can teach your children. There are three big issues at stake:

(1)Abortion - the federal ban on partial birth abortions was upheld by one vote on the SCOTUS.

(2)Gay marriages. We have two states now that have gay marriages. These couple will soon take their case to the federal courts claiming the federal Defense of Marriage Act (which says a state doesn't have a gay marriage from another state) claming in unconstitutional.

(3)Lastly, national defense and war on terror.

Now, yes, whatever is God's will come to pass but if it is more evil and more judgment that is to come to our nation let it be by someone else's vote, not yours so you can stand with a clean conscience. Let that more judgment be a vote by the wicked, the fools and ignorant. But not us, Mark there is too much at stake especially if Sen. Obama gets elected.