August 11, 2010

By Dave Andrusko

Good evening. Please send your comments on any or all parts of either TN&V or National Right to Life News Today to daveandrusko@gmail.com. If you like, join those who are now following me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/daveha.

Earlier today a friend sent along a piece that appears on the op-ed page of today's USA Today. It's titled "Fog of war: What are we missing?" He knew that

I would be intrigued, because it is a level-headed critique of press coverage, in this instance of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

It is of relevance to us for what it says about how reporters write stories that are chronically behind what is taking place on the ground. Author Jim Michael's point is that reporters would be writing "x" when events had already moved past that juncture, in fact were on the verge of turning "x" on its head.

Why? Largely because reporters focused on the spectacular and the easily chronicled.

I would argue that the parallel to our unselfish campaign to save the unborn–media coverage obsessing on a handful of developments and lagging behind the underlying realities--is uncanny.

Let me be first be clear: I am not suggesting that we ignore or minimize the "easily chronicled," either in the sense of not getting involved or concluding they don't matter. We should, and they do. What I am saying is that for anyone to focus only on the obvious can be seriously, seriously misleading.

For example, pro-abortion Democrats control the House and Senate as well as the Executive Branch. This is hugely important, no question about it. To take just two examples of the consequences: (1) the passage of ObamaCare; (2) the confirmation of the second of two appointments to the Supreme Court of justices we can know without question are safe votes to retain the substance of Roe v. Wade.

But beneath the surface ObamaCare's pro-abortion, pro-rationing components potentially carry the seeds of its own destruction. Whether that comes to pass depends on whether opponents are able to channel the massive disenchantment of a health care "reform" that commandeers a sixth of the entire economy and violates the values of a gigantic segment of the American public.

Likewise, if you were to look at the balance sheets of such pro-abortion PACs as EMILY's List, you'd think pro-life candidates will be buried under the resources of groups like EMILY's List. However, beneath the surface, there is NRL PAC with an amazingly successful track record.

Or if you were to scan the required reading lists for many college classes, you'd think that no student could survive the pro-abortion educational blitzkrieg. But beneath the surface you'd see that pro-life organizations are flourishing on campus.

Young people are increasingly pro-life, which occasionally the media acknowledges. NRLC and its state affiliates are playing a pivotal role in creating the next generation of leadership through pro-life camps (see www.nrlc.org/NewsToday/ProlifeCamp.html) and NRLC's hugely successful Academy and intern program (see www.nrlc.org/NewsToday/AcademyGraduates2010.html).

My point is a simple one. Our Movement, led by NRLC, is gradually dissolving the pillars that undergird the foundation of Roe. On the surface that is hard to see, but in the end it is what matters most.

Part Two
Part Three
Part Four
Part Five