Skip to comments.After Florida, the Media’s Silence on the Value of Some Lives
Posted on 02/17/2018 2:10:45 PM PST by Kaslin
Journalists are racing to target President Trump and blame the Florida shooting on guns and the NRA. So, it might be a good time to look back. President Ronald Reagan wrote an essay in the spring of 1983. He was talking about exactly what was not on display in Parkland, Florida in the heart and soul of shooter Nikolas Cruz- the value of, and the respect for, human life. And in the aftermath of the school shooting that left seventeen dead? The nation’s media was also determined - one might say determined to the point of obsession to place blame.
Let’s start with recalling some of what President Reagan said:
The real question today is not when human life begins, but, What is the value of human life? The abortionist who reassembles the arms and legs of a tiny baby to make sure all its parts have been torn from its mother's body can hardly doubt whether it is a human being. The real question for him and for all of us is whether that tiny human life has a God-given right to be protected by the law the same right we have.
…Regrettably, we live at a time when some persons do not value all human life. They want to pick and choose which individuals have value.
So. What is the media saying about having a culture that has at its core the value of and respect for human life? Nothing. Zero. And one can feel fairly certain that the reason for this is because, but of course, what Reagan was saying is today thoroughly politically incorrect among the nation’s media elites. Put more bluntly, the American Left simply will not permit a discussion on abortion having a negative affect on American culture. Examples abound in the last few days.
My old CNN colleague Chris Cuomo, co-host of CNN’s New Day, as reported here at NewsBusters, went after “our leaders" for not appearing on New Day, making the argument that “they’re hiding from the reality and they’ll disguise it as sympathy and sensitivity. Wow, what an irony.’”
And here’s NBC’s Megyn Kelly laying the shooting, with the predictability of rain, on the NRA and guns. Said Kelly:
"No gun reforms are getting through. They’re not. And most of the ones that will be proposed in the wake of this shooting will be utterly meaningless and wouldn’t have even arguably prevented this killing. The NRA is too powerful. Our politicians are too weak. And the guns are too ubiquitous."
After the Las Vegas shooting The Los Angeles Times oh-so bravely published this story, headlined: "'Thoughts and prayers' — and fistfuls of NRA money: Why America can't control guns."
The story began:
“There is no better example of the corrosive effect of money on American politics than the spending of the National Rifle Assn.
The gun rights organization spent a stupendous $54.4 million in the 2016 election cycle, almost all of it in "independent expenditures," meaning spending for or against a candidate but not a direct contribution to a campaign. The money went almost entirely to Republicans to a degree that almost looks like a misprint (but isn't): Of independent expenditures totaling $52.6 million, Democrats received $265. Yes, that's 265 dollars.
If you're looking for a reason that politicians are quick to declare that their "thoughts and prayers" are with the victims of the horrific slaughters that have become virtually routine in American life, but do nothing further to stop them, look no further."
One could go on and on and on with a list of media figures saying some version of what Cuomo, Kelly and The Los Angeles Times are saying. One could also take the very same list to illustrate what all of them are afraid to say — which would be the point Reagan was making a full 35 years ago. To wit:
“…Regrettably, we live at a time when some persons do not value all human life. They want to pick and choose which individuals have value.”
And why won’t Cuomo, Kelly or the Times discuss Reagan’s point? The answer is plain. Either they themselves believe in the abortion doctrines Reagan said were so damaging - or, if “pro-life” are terrified of saying so as they work among a media elite that holds Roe v. Wade as a veritable sacrament.
Take Kelly’s point and re-write it to reflect Reagan. The statement would then read:
"No abortion reforms are getting through. They’re not. And most of the ones that will be proposed in the wake of this shooting will be utterly meaningless and wouldn’t have even arguably prevented this killing. Planned Parenthood and special interest’s supporting abortion are too powerful. Our politicians are too weak. And the abortions- millions of them - are too ubiquitous."
Rush Limbaugh on Friday took some time to discuss the issue of political contributions. Saying this:
“I just checked the email. I’m overflowing with people saying, “Rush, you don’t know what you’re talking about when you say the NRA is not among the largest of the political contributors! That’s just not right. That’s just not right.” I can forgive all of you for thinking that the NRA is a major donor. All of your life that’s how they’ve been portrayed in the media. You think the NRA is the No. 1 donor for the Republican Party, probably. You think the NRA is donating left and right. The NRA has these politicians in their back pocket.
Well, let me give you the numbers: Between 1998 and 2017, the NRA spent $200 million on all political activities. Ladies and gentlemen, that is 19 years, 20 years. In 20 years, the NRA spent $200 million. In 2016, alone, unions spent $1.7 billion on policy. The NRA is not a major donor, and they are not running around with politicians in their back pockets.”
And the unions are, but of course, political allies of Planned Parenthood in contributing, supporting and electing pro-abortion Democrats.
Over at PolitiFact Wisconsin a part of the USA Today network and a partnership with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, the site noted this when Wisconsin Republican Congressman Sean Duffy discussed the subject of pro-abortion money pouring into the coffers of their political favorites. Politifact rated Duffy’s statement on the flood of pro-abortion money “Mostly True” and said this:
“In the 2014 election cycle alone, Planned Parenthood-affiliated groups that can't give directly to candidates or coordinate with them, such as Planned Parenthood Votes, a Super PAC, made over $6 million in independent expenditures.
That included $1.85 million spent in support of Democrats and $2.87 million spent against Republicans.
"In addition, Planned Parenthood's PAC gave nearly $590,000 to congressional candidates, all of them Democrats.”
The numbers would be higher, of course, if previous cycles were included.”
That was just the 2014 cycle. On it went in 2016 and on it goes this minute. And when added to the money of other groups — unions, for example - that support “pro-choice” candidates the campaign contributions total over, yes, a billion dollars of contributions to supporters of the abortion agenda.
Will Cuomo, Kelly or the L.A. Times and other media figures focus on this? Of course not. Reagan’s point will be simply ignored - and hell will freeze over before Planned Parenthood and the other contributors to pro-choice candidates get the furious scrutiny of the NRA.
Is there a way out of this nightmare? Yes - and Fox’s Sean Hannity has suggested it. Hannity points out that media outlets where he has worked have security. As someone who has been on both Hannity radio and television shows - not to mention the full range of CNN shows - I can attest that one simply doesn’t get in the building without a security check.
Every time I showed up at CNN’s New York bureau there was armed security, and as with an airport, an X-ray scanner for the belongings of non-employees and a body scanner for everybody, employee or not. This procedure follows as well at government office buildings from the White House to the U.S. Capitol building to House and Senate offices. And, as mentioned, there is all that airport security, a direct result of 9/11.
Why in the world can’t this be done for America’s schools, Hannity asks. One suspects one knows the answer: the real media objective is to get rid of guns. Period.
The hard reality of the American media, as Rush Limbaugh pointed out yet again on Friday when discussing the Florida school shooting, is that it is filled not with journalists but liberal activists. Said Rush:
“There’s also something happening here that is perfectly illustrating a point that I’ve been making for a couple of years. And that is that the American media has become the power center and the source of energy and guidance for the American left. Not the Democrat Party, but the media. The media gives the marching orders. The media are the activists. The media are not involved in news. The media are not reporting anything. The media have become full-fledged advocates of one particular thing.”
Which is exactly why Ronald Reagan’s long ago point about a culture that does “not value all human life” but rather wants to “pick and choose which individuals have value” will never be acknowledged by the liberal media, much less seriously discussed or acted upon as a serious societal and cultural reform. The media, in other words, demands and enforces silence on a serious cultural problem that can only enforce a would-be shooter’s idea that human life has no value.
A sad fact, but a fact nonetheless.
They’re progressives. By definition, they don’t care about any lives but their own.
Got that right. They could care less if a violent criminal breaks into your home. If he kills you they won’t punish him either.
Okay Megan, I have the solution. Let's pass a law that makes it illegal to kill people.
What’s the difference between aborting teenage kids and aborting unborn babies?
If taking human life is wrong, shouldn’t liberals have a consistent position on it?
Its the values, stupid.
February to Date
Shot & Killed: 17
Shot & Wounded: 59
Total Shot: 76
Total Homicides: 22
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.