Washington Post media reporter Howard Kurtz earned brickbats from conservative bloggers for claiming on Friday that Charles Gibson was indeed using Sarah Palin’s "exact words" as he mangled her "task from God" comments, when she was praying that American troops were doing God’s will. In Monday’s Style section, Kurtz repeated the error in his ardor to honor Gibson for walking some perfect fine line of balance:
Some conservatives criticized Gibson for raising religion by asking Palin whether she considers the Iraq conflict a "holy war." But how can it be unfair to ask about her own words, in a church, that "our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God"?
It can be unfair when it’s not factual. As Michelle Malkin and others noted, here’s the actual passage that’s being mangled:
"Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God," she exhorted the congregants. "That’s what we have to make sure that we’re praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God’s plan."
What's really eating at the secular media here is words like "God's will" and "God's plan" and "task from God." They don't like God-talk at all, since they don't really believe in God or a God that influences our human history. These words in almost any form sound bizarre and alien to them. Their reactions sound like a knee-jerk reaction, assuming that any politician who uses them must be arrogantly suggesting they have a direct phone line to God, not that they're simply searching for God's will.
Kurtz and Gibson also miss the idea that using the words "holy war" in the question sounds to a lot of Christian ears like deeply secular journalists conflating orthodox Christians with radical Muslims. What in Palin's prayer sounds like jihad? She didn't ask that we successfully slaughter infidels.
