I have never tried it but I believe it: you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink. By the same token you can’t shame the MSM into giving Kermit Gosnell the same treatment as they gave, for example the Duke Lacrosse players. It’s simply not natural. Let’s face it; the MSM is philosophically and politically on the side of abortion and abortion doctors, just as they are philosophically and politically opposed to rich white kids and white males in general.
There’s no need to remind me that the kids of media heavyweights are mostly white and very rich, but we’re speaking of people they don’t know and who the MSM heavies consider the enemy.
So now we have a couple of MSM talking heads mentioning the Gosnell horror and we think we’ve won a victory. We haven’t. The essence of the treatment they gave the Treyvon Martin case, for example, was the 24/7 saturation coverage, the editorials it spawned, the Sunday news shows it dominated, the marches it fathered, the continuation of the blame game, even if they had to invent a new term – “white Hispanic” – to fit their paradigm. Gosnell, if the case gets anything at all, will get the one-time mention and then the MSM eyes will be averted once again. And if the pro-life side complains, they're going to be told that we covered it and now shut up about it.
They are not going to create a national story that examines the dark underbelly of the abortion industry because the people who determine what gets on the air and in print really don’t believe that what Gosnell did was mass murder, just sloppy medicine. They realize that it may reflect badly on abortion and as supporters they are not going to go to highlight its seamy side. Keep in mind that the NY Times still rules the MSM roost and it simply does not think that Gosnell and his charnel house is nearly as important as the sex of the membership of the Augusta Golf Club.
So what should people who are opposed to abortion do? They are already using the Internet to make themselves heard but it's far from enough. What’s the objective? To demonstrate to elected officials that they don’t have to be afraid of the pro-abortion groups? To have abortion clinics held to the same standards as other medical facilities? To reduce the number of abortions by having women think about what they're doing when they consider abortion? The Internet isn’t going to do that, and the MSM isn’t going to do it for them.
This is the perfect time for citizen action. Think in terms of street protests. Tea Party type rallies were hugely effective at getting attention of a reluctant and even antagonistic media. Gosnell has all of the elements that, once uncovered, can’t be waved away: butchering women, killing babies after birth, and the bête noir of all media evil: racism. Gosnell preyed mostly on poor black and immigrant women; he even has a segregated reception area for white women.
It’s rarely talked about but it’s a fact that most aborted babies are black. There is a silent holocaust going on that the mostly white upper class MSM masters don’t want to admit. Some may even consider it a "good thing."
The next meeting of any pro-life group should be in the street, right in front of the newspaper and TV offices with “No More Gosnell” as the battle cry. And if they accuse you of using dead babies as props, you just cry “Sandy Hook.”
1 comment:
If Obama had an uncle, would he look like Gosnell? It seems our president, Planned Parenthood, and Kermit are on the same page on this question. If a child is accidentally born alive its all about original intent. Recently we hear the Planned Parenthood folks claim not to know the answer to the question of what you do with the living breathing product of an intended abortion and we know Obama's record in Illinois.
I remember my father once talking about the Nazis and how they find people to do the horrific things the Nazis did. He believed you could find people who would do these things everywhere. I guess everywhere includes Philadelphia, Planned Parenthood and Washington D.C.
Post a Comment