In the wake of the mass murder of seven babies by a Philadelphia abortionist I have to ask where’s the Presidential press conference? Where’s the nationally televised memorial? Where are the t-shirts with the catchy slogan? Where’s the media blame game? Where’s the feature pieces in national magazines on the societal implications of the murders?
Seriously. I’m wondering why isn’t the murder of seven babies of similar national implications to the horrible murders in Tuscon?
Actually, it was hundreds of babies. The Grand Jury was only able to identify seven specific babies, because such killings were so routine that the staff lost track of how many children they'd seen murdered in the course of their typical work days.
There are currently 15,000 mentions of Jared Loughner in the news recently, according to Google. But as of Sunday night there are less than 1,400 mentions of Dr. Kermit Gosnell. That’s 10 percent. Truly, silence is the deadliest bias.
Amen to that.
Shortly after the Tuscon murders journalists, talking heads, and several politicians wasted no time chatting up the far flung societal implications of the tragedy in Arizona mainly focusing the blame for the murders on the “violent” rhetoric of the right wing. But isn’t it a heck of a lot shorter logical leap to suggest that strong pro-abortion rhetoric contributed to an atmosphere that made the violence perpetrated by Gosnell a possibility?
I'll give you some specific rhetoric that gave Gosnell the green light for what he did:
“Essentially adding an additional doctor, who then has to be called into an emergency situation to come in and make these assessments is really designed simply to burden the decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion.”
That's then Illinois State Senator Barack Obama expressing his opposition to the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. Obama has stated that it is absolutely and unequivocally wrong to do anything to second-guess a doctor's decision to proceed with an abortion -- including that he treat any baby born alive in the process as if it were actually a baby.
Barack Obama specifically came out in favor of treating babies that survive abortions as if they are still just fetuses with no legal protection whatsoever.
Rhetoric like this no doubt explains why Gosnell said he was confused by the murder charges relating to the deaths of the newborns.
"Is it possible you could explain the seven counts?" he asked. "I understand the one count because of the patient who died but not the others."
Gosnell told his staff that they were just "ensuring fetal demise." And, given prochoice rhetoric, I would bet that he's genuinely bewildered. When the President of the United States himself has made it very plain that abortion is an unfettered right that extends even after the child has emerged from the mother's body, Gosnell has a right to his confusion. The President is okay with treating babies born during an abortion as if they're still just fetuses. So why, he must wonder, does anybody have grounds to prosecute him?
The link between Jared Lee Loughner's murderous rampage and anybody's "rhetoric" is tenuous at best. The link between Kermit Gosnell's infant murder spree and prochoice rhetoric is crystal clear.
Funny that nobody in the chattering class seems to get this.