Divine Intervention
09/05/2011 - 14:57
Douglas Bloomfield

I don't know who Adam Sinclair of Worcester State College is, but he had an observation worth sharing. 

In appeared in the comments section of a Politico story about GOP presidential wannabe Michele Bachman once more trying to explain what she meant when she said Hurricane Irene and the Virginia earthquake last month were God's way of telling Washington politicians to cut spending.
 
It took a couple of days for her to come up with her first explanation: "Of course I was being humorous when I said that. It would be absurd to think it was anything else." But that didn't play well, either, so a week after the joke excuse fell flat, she told Bob Schieffer on CBS's "Face the Nation," that she was "speaking metaphorically." She said, "That was clear to the audience. It was clear to me." 
 
If it was so clear, why did it take her more than a week to come up with that version? She had no explanation.
 
Her divine intervention account echoed a similar one by Preacher Pat Robertson, who has said he converses regularly with God, especially in times of natural and man-made disasters; you can read his revelations in a previous blog.
 
Adam Sinclair had Robertson, Bachmann and so many of their ilk pegged when he commented: "I've noticed that every time some lunatic claims to know what God wants it always conveniently supports their views." 
 
But was Michelle really just speaking metaphorically? Not according to another reader, Randy Storms of Bellingham, Washington. "She's not even using the term ‘metaphor’ correctly, for pity's sake. A metaphor is a literary figure of speech that uses an image, story or tangible thing to represent a less tangible thing or some intangible quality or idea; e.g., ‘Her eyes were glistening jewels.’”
 
What do you expect from a person who thinks the ”shot heard round the world” was fired at Concord, New Hampshire, and confuses John Wayne with John Wayne Gacy?

--Douglas Bloomfield

 
 

 

Comments

'Adam Sinclair had Robertson, Bachmann and so many of their ilk pegged when he commented: "I've noticed that every time some lunatic claims to know what God wants it always conveniently supports their views."'
First of all, I haven't heard anyone claiming to know what G-d wants. I would argue that that is an unfair, distorted description of what Bachmann said. Second, we all know that secular Jews recoil from any politician who talks about their belief in G-d in public. That certainly is their right, but I suggest that their smug 'sophistication' is neither more intelligent nor more Jewish than those of us who believe G-d is watching over us and working his will through us. Since Mr. Sinclair dismisses G-d's impact on the world as non-existent, I would love to hear his explanation for the 'Arab Spring', which I describe as a historical event of monumental proportions which has shaken the entire Islamic world at its foundations, inflicting on it severe damage and suffering. Considering that one day before it began, not one person in the world foresaw it or anticipated it, I don't see how Mr. Sinclair can reasonably argue that G-d could not have had anything to do with what appears to be the vanquishing of Israel's perennial enemies.

Comment Guidelines

The Jewish Week feels comments create a valuable conversation and wants to feature your thoughts on our website. To make everyone feel welcome, we won't publish comments that are profane, irrelevant, promotional or make personal attacks.

Add comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.