No Sanctuary City for the Unborn

Editorial

 

 

By Phil Erwin

Kathryn Ste

Kathryn Steinle

In the aftermath of Kate Steinle’s murder by an oft-deported felon in San Francisco, reporter Jesse Watters visited that city’s Board of Supervisors. It was their “sanctuary city” policy that had allowed Kate’s alleged murderer to ignore Federal law and roam San Francisco’s streets freely.

In an open session, Watters asked whether the Board members felt any responsibility for Kate Steinle’s death. The Supervisors refused to respond. They studiously avoided looking at Watters as he held up a picture Kate, now dead because of their policy. The members offered no comment, not even so much as “We’re sorry her family is suffering.”

Insufferable.

When Watters approached Supervisor Scott Weiner in a hallway, Weiner tossed this excuse for dodging public comment over his shoulder as he dove for cover in his office: “FOX News is not real news, and you’re not a real reporter. I only talk to real news.” Weiner was so proud of his “stance” that he tweeted out self-congratulations for having parroted this Liberal line, albeit while running away from confrontation.

Insufferable.

But we’ve heard that same charge from the White House and elsewhere, so one might reasonably ask: How do they know? How can we distinguish between “real” and “not-real” news?

One way is to compare what stories competing news venues consider “important” by measuring how much time they spending covering it. Fortunately, there is an organization that does just such analysis for us: The Media Research Center.

Consider two seemingly very different stories that have an underlying connection: The killing of a lion in Zimbabwe, and the release of videos showing how Planned Parenthood approaches the donation of fetal tissue for medical research. You may not think these two news items have anything in common, but stay with me…

DEMAND JUSTICE FOR CECIL THE LION IN ZIMBABWE from Care2.com

DEMAND JUSTICE FOR CECIL THE LION IN ZIMBABWE from Care2.com

The lion – referred to unanimously in the media as “the Beloved lion, Cecil” – was apparently lured off a game preserve, wounded with a crossbow arrow, and eventually shot dead by an American dentist, an inveterate Big-Game hunter. This is considered sport; but there are rules, and between hunter and guides, somebody broke some. But that’s not why the story is a story. It’s a story because the lion is “Beloved.” By whom, no one says. But he had a name, a tracking collar, and now a global cadre of mourners, most of whom would probably like to put the crossbow to the dentist and mount his hide.

Gestational age: 15 weeks in the womb

Gestational age: 15 weeks in the womb

PP video of baby body parts: Center for Medical Progress

PP video of baby body parts: PP Video #4 from Center for Medical Progress

 

This is what is known in the trades as a “Human Interest” story. It’s not important because the lion is important. It’s important because people care about the lion.

Now, the videos: These are hidden-camera captures of Planned Parenthood personnel – including doctors – discussing abortion procedures; discussing how to keep from “crunching” the organs so they can be sold – Pardon me, donated – and poking around in dishes of fetal tissue like High Schoolers dissecting frogs.

Except – these frogs have human DNA embodied in recognizable human body parts, and they’re talking about how much money they can get for those parts.

Insufferable.

(I’m not including direct links to the video clips because I don’t want to blind-side you with inherently disturbing material. If you wish, you can look the links up on Google here.)

What marries this story to that of the lion is that this really is of Human Interest. These are human fetuses being dissected, divided up and sold for parts. If that doesn’t sound like a news story worthy of some human interest, I don’t know what does.

And yet, the three major news broadcast networks, CBS, ABC and NBC, all devoted more time to the lion in two days than they did to the Planned Parenthood story over two weeks – by a margin of 30 minutes to a paltry eleven. And they have not even mentioned Planned Parenthood since July 21, which means they completely ignored the third and fourth release of videos.

Think about that. Really, think about it. Whether you favor unfettered access to abortion, or oppose abortion completely: Just think about it.

A dead lion outranks the importance of trafficking in human baby parts by three-to-one? A video showing doctors picking over fetal remains with tweezers for salvageable parts is not newsworthy?

How does such coverage classify those three as the “real news” networks?

Greg Gutfeld, author and humorist, has a keenly revealing take on this: “We agree both things are wrong,” he says, “ but it’s a question of proportion and priority: Killing the lion – Bad. Dismembering the unborn – Worse. Why aren’t people saying that? Because Big-Game hunting is not camouflaged by euphemism. The lion isn’t called “tissue,” and shooting the lion isn’t called “a medical procedure driven by choice.” Planned Parenthood’s entire existence is based on keeping people in the dark through euphemism. You don’t call it “genocide,” you call it “reproductive health.” Many people don’t even know what we’re talking about – this dismemberment – because they’ve been told for decades [that abortion is] “reproductive health.” But you saw the lion; you know that it’s dead.”

According to the CDC, in the 42 years since Roe v. Wade there have been at least 50 million human abortions performed in the U.S. – the vast majority of them by Planned Parenthood. That exceeds the human destructiveness of Hitler and Stalin combined. Yet, you and your fellow citizens pay hundreds of millions of dollars to that organization each year, to support “reproductive health.” And though they are supposed to be a “non-profit” organization, on the videos they’re joking about how much money they can get for “parts”, and how they aspire to drive Lamborghinis.

And CBS, ABC and NBC all think the lion is more important?

Be very, very careful when picking whom you think delivers you “real” news.

The future of your nation depends on you being informed well enough to vote sensibly.

=============================================

Phil Erwin is an author, IT administrator and registered Independent living in Newbury Park. He sometimes wishes he could support Democrat ideals, but he has a visceral hatred for Lies and Damn Lies, and is none too fond of Statistics. If his writing depresses you, he recommends you visit Chip Bok’s site for a more lighthearted perspective.

Get Citizensjournal.us Headlines free  SUBSCRIPTION. Keep us publishing – DONATE

*Scroll down to post a comment

 

 

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments