An insidious form of media bias stems from what our press decides isn't worthy of coverage. In a column at Red State, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus decries American journalism's relative silence on the stunning testimony of a Planned Parenthood official in Florida last week. Asked if a child who survived an attempted abortion has a right not to be killed post-birth, Alisa Lapolt Snow repeatedly invoked a mother's right to choose, declining to state whether the newborn should be protected under law. Here's her ghoulish exchange with lawmakers:
When Rep. Todd Akin made his biologically illiterate remarks about "legitimate rape" on a local television show last year, the story blew up nationally. Republicans from coast to coast were tied to his comments, which Democrats seized upon to promulgate their "war on women" narrative. The basic message: The GOP is too extreme on abortion -- even though virtually every Republican under the sun rejected Akin's sentiments. Now we have a top representative from the abortion industry making appallingly extreme comments, tacitly suggesting that "choice" doesn't necessarily expire once a child is born. Priebus wants to know why this isn't a national story:
Planned Parenthood is an organization that receives taxpayer funding, including millions from the federal government. They also enjoy the unwavering support of almost all elected Democrats. The President, the Senate Majority Leader, the House Democratic Leader, and the Chair of the Democratic National Committee (in whose home state this hearing occurred) made funding Planned Parenthood an issue in the 2012 campaign. They should now all be held to account for that outspoken support. If the media won’t, then voters must ask the pressing questions: Do these Democrats also believe a newborn has no rights? Do they also endorse infanticide? I certainly hope not. I hope this is a place where we can all find common ground. Surely, all Americans can agree that a newborn deserves immediate medical care—and, if necessary, emergency care—regardless of the circumstances of birth. As a proud pro-life Republican, I firmly believe that an unborn child has a right to life. I realize there are those who disagree, but I never thought there was a debate over whether a newborn child had a right to life. Some may not believe life begins at conception, but don’t we all agree life begins at birth? Apparently not. Liberals often attack conservative lawmakers for casting a wary eye toward federal and state funding for Planned Parenthood. They can’t seem to comprehend why anyone would oppose giving taxpayer dollars to the abortion provider. Maybe now they can understand. In the last election, Republicans were repeatedly asked about whether they supported cutting funding to Planned Parenthood. It’s time Democrats are asked whether they still support funding an organization that refuses to care for a newborn. And this case of blatant media bias—cover-up really—should also be cause for some thoughtful self-examination among journalists.
He asks if President Obama endorses infanticide. Of course not, Obama says. Not so fast, Obama's record retorts. As a State Senator in Illinois, Obama was the most vocal opponent of a law that sought to clarify that born-alive infants would have full legal rights. He voted against different iterations of the law three times, then lied about why he did so. The media works overtime to make sure every voter is aware of an ignorant statement from a GOP back-bencher, but they've done precious little to expose the president's abortion extremism. They're more interested in protecting a pro-choice president than the lives of accidentally born babies. That's a horrible assertion, but it's true. I'll leave you with two related stories: (1) Watchdog.org reports that Rep. Todd Akin -- that "true conservative" -- doubled his Congressional staff's pay after losing his Senate race to Claire McCaskill. Missouri taxpayers sent him packing, so he decided to stick them with a bigger tab. A real gem, that one.
(2) MSNBC anchor Melissa Harris Perry has taken to referring to unborn children as "things:"
HARRIS-PERRY: So my only worry about that, is because I feel like a lot, I mean, having an 11-year-old, I do a lot of kids reading that sort of thing. But I feel like we do that, but it`s always about private morality, right? It feels sort of like to the extent that we talk about morality in the public sphere, we talk about private morality, who you should and shouldn’t sleep with, how you should or should not dispose of things in your uterus. I mean, you know, this is — this is what we think of as morality, right? But we don`t talk about public morality, what it means.
She refers to her 11-year-old child in that quote. It's nice to know that some "things" aren't "disposed of."