I don't think two comments that seem to have originated unfiltered from the heart of the writer necessarily pollute his other arguments in the article. In public discourse it pays not being overly sensitive.
They pollute his arguments by way of inclusion. Do you think these statements reveal nothing about the quality of his logical processing (at least in this article)?
No. If I make a case about poverty and include an overly abrasive comment about some filthy rich person I would hope my argument wouldn't be dismissed for that comment either. And this is the last I'll say about this.
The opposition between the poverty and the wealth would be the connection and make it at least relevant. Briefly diverging from an article about a law to make an unrelated, nonsense, sexist jibe is not the same and absolutely indicates a lower quality article.
Not surprise you refuse to say more because what you're saying isn't very sensible.
