The pro-abort media does its best to ignore March for Life

Kimberley Ross:
Unsurprisingly, the mainstream media would rather cover pro-abort masses as they clamor on about “rights” than a march proclaiming the worth of unborn human life.

The 2017 March for Life is Friday in D.C. This annual event protests the legal homicide of abortion, and draws hundreds of thousands of people from all over the country. But the media isn’t very interested in covering it since it disrupts their obvious pro-abort agenda.

According to NewsBusters, the media’s coverage of this year’s Women’s March compared to the 2016 March for Life was grossly lopsided.

During their morning and evening news shows, the three broadcast networks (ABC, CBS, NBC) covered the women’s march 129 times more than they did the 2016 March for Life last year. And it’s anyone’s guess as to whether or not they will cover the 2017 March for Life Friday.

ABC, CBS and NBC spent at least one hour, 15 minutes and 18 seconds on the women’s march. But for the 2016 March for Life, they devoted an embarrassing 35 seconds (22 seconds following the march, 13 before).
...
There is more.

It is possible that the media may be forced to expose the March for Life this year because they went so overboard in following the women in funny hats and dressed like a body orifice.

Meanwhile, some Chile's locations have backed down on its proposed fundraiser for Planned Parenthood. The parent company recognized that such a fundraiser would do great harm to their business.

Trump is disrupting the pro-abort narrative and that could cause media to at least take a glimpse at the march against abortion.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t...
Read more

Is the F-35 obsolete?

Headline USA: Pentagon Fires Back after Musk Calls Its Most Expensive Project ‘Obsolete’ 'Yeah, as I'm sure you can appreciate, Mr. Musk is, currently, a private citizen, I'm not going to make any comments about what a private citizen may have to say about the F-35....'   ... ... Drones appear to be replacing jets for many operations.  The Russia-Ukraine war is an example of that.  Drones are often hard to detect and can be used for intelligence operations as well as for attacking enemy targets.  It would not surprise me to see drones engaging other drones in combat.  They also cost much less than manned fighters.  
Read more