March for Life in the Media

Posted: Jan 24, 2014 9:55 AM
March for Life in the Media

The March for Life, an annual national demonstration that takes place in Washington, DC each year on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade (January 22), normally does not glean the media attention it deserves. The March essentially shuts down the District of Columbia for hours, as more than 600,000 pro-lifers from across the country converge to tell America's leaders what they think of legalized abortion in the United States. The mainstream media tends to significantly under-report the number of participants each year, and frequently the handful of abortion-advocating protesters (this year it was 14 at the Supreme Court) of the March appear in more or as many TV spots and newspaper photographs than the massive droves of pro-lifers who participate in the March.

This year, however, the March for Life is receiving vicarious media attention via a separate, viral story: the chairman of the Republican National Committee, Reince Priebus, chose to postpone the start of the Committee's winter meeting by several hours so that members of the RNC could first attend the March for Life. Priebus is a contributor at Red State, where he posted the following statement regarding his decision to postpone the start of the RNC winter meeting on Wednesday:

We’ll be there to send a message: We are a pro-life party. Life is a gift, and it must be protected. That means advocating for our beliefs, embracing the right to life, and celebrating the blessing of adoption.

A New York Times piece this week attempted to spew the myth that "attacks on women's reproductive rights" (aka pro-life laws) put Republicans at odds with women voters.

That couldn’t be more wrong.

It's no secret that Obama's ratings have gone down since his first term began in 2008. His ratings went down some between his first and second terms. But they have spiraled out of control since the sweeping reforms of Obamacare have taken hold and blatantly failed. And do you know who noticed? Women-- without whom, Obama would never have been able to win an election in the first place. TIME Magazine even acknowledged the problem:

Among women, opposition has risen almost six points since November, from 54 percent to 60 percent.

And Tim Malloy, the assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute, concurred:

Any Democrat with an 11-point approval deficit among women is in trouble. And any elected official with an 8-point trust deficit is in serious trouble.

Polling from as recently as November shows that Obama's ratings among women have hit an all-time low since the enactment of Obamacare rulings like the HHS contraception mandate, which is touted as a boon to women's reproductive freedom, while it forces employers with conscientious objections to provide free abortifacient birth control to all female employees. Females, however, are not as happy about this as the liberal left would have us believe. A Quinnipiac University poll reveals that only 40% of women still approve of President Obama -- and that number is rapidly dropping.

Continuing his earlier piece, Priebus described the problem of liberal rhetoric blurring key stats about voter support for abortion:

Despite Democrats’ rhetoric, Republicans actually stand with the majority of Americans on many important life issues. For example, a majority of Americans disapprove of late term abortions, but Democrats, especially President Obama, take the extreme position of supporting them. Republicans at the state and national level have worked to enact protections for life after 20 weeks of pregnancy, but Democrats by and large have opposed them—and therefore opposed the majority of Americans. Most Americans see these protections as reasonable and the right thing to do.

Moreover, polling in recent years shows Americans support a range of other pro-life policies: 87 percent support informed-consent laws; 71 percent support parental consent laws; 69 percent support a 24-waiting period; 64 percent support banning partial-birth abortion.

Contrary to the advice given by some notable RINOs that the Republican party abandon its social platform (especially on life issues) to secure a greater chance at victory in the 2016 presidential elections, Priebus has demonstrated that he intends to steer the Republican ship securely along the course of its long-held, life-affirming platform. And socially-liberal Republicans... well, maybe they're not as “Republican” as they think, after all:

I’ll be on the March for Life stage with national and local pro-life leaders next week because I think America should stand on the side of life, and that is where the Republican Party will continue to stand.