Editor's note. I would very much encourage you to read Part Two--"Jean Garton: Pro-Life Convert"--which talks about that great defender of life. Please send me your thoughts about both parts at daveandrusko@hotmail.com..

Coming a day before the important North Carolina and Indiana presidential primaries, Howard Kurtz's piece in today's Washington Post is certainly timely. How close it is to the facts on the ground the account is a different story.

"Obama's Chilly Spring" purports to describe how and why "The man who tried to soar above politics has been brought back to earth by the same media organizations that helped fuel his spectacular rise." Well, kind of, sort of, but not really. Let me explain.

Don't misunderstand: Howard Kurtz is a very good reporter and always worth reading. It's just that the article's thesis is, to be polite, overwrought.

Given that the press laid nary a glove on pro-abortion Sen. Barack Obama for over a year, anything other than utter servility could come across as an attempt to beat the junior senator from Illinois to a pulp. While it is true that the media are not quite as unctuously compliant as they were six weeks ago, to act as if Obama is practically under siege is as preposterous as it is amusing.

Without getting into a list of specifics--which we all know--were either pro-abortion Sen. Hillary Clinton or pro-life Sen. John McCain to hit a similar patch of rough water reporters would seek to make mincemeat out of them. The worst conclusion they have drawn thus far is that the perpetually aloof Obama may be…aloof.

The most telling insight in Kurtz's column comes courtesy of David Greenberg, a professor of journalism and history at Rutgers University. Not his statement that among reporters "there has been a real infatuation with Obama that has served as almost an unconscious restraint," although that surely is true.

It's that "What loosened those restraints, Greenberg says, was the media's conclusion that Obama had virtually wrapped up his nomination fight against Hillary Clinton. Greenberg tells Kurtz, "It's backwards -- the toughest scrutiny should come while it's still a real fight."

Of course!

Why is that important to us, as pro-lifers? There are three reasons.

(1) Whether it is Obama or Clinton, the Democrats will put forth a presidential candidate whose embrace of the Planned Parenthood/NARAL agenda is tight enough to (figuratively) crack their ribs. Were either to occupy the White, the contrast with pro-life President George W. Bush could not possibly be more stark.

(2) Contrary to Greenberg's assertion, the fight between Obama and Clinton is not over. They will likely split the states tomorrow night. Obama will retain his lead among delegates yet be still short of the number necessary to formally secure the nomination. At the same time, even as Obama stumbles, Clinton seems surer on her feet.

(3) The "mainstream media"--which is synonymous with a glorification of "abortion rights"--has no particular interest in talking about either Obama's or Clinton's full-throated support for abortion on demand. But the longer the competition between them goes on, the more fully each will be examined by reporters. This is critical, because Obama's public persona bears no resemblance to the pedestrian politician that he is.

Not that you would know this from reading most reporters most of the time. For them he is a living bridge between [fill in the blank]. Thus, were Obama the nominee, no matter how much in the tank he'd be for the Abortion Establishment, the Media Establishment would promote/promise/promulgate the myth that he would move us 'beyond the stalemate" on abortion.

Granted there have been some trivial adjustments, the truth remains that the media's gift to this still wet-behind-the-ears freshman senator has been to allow him to say anything--or nothing--and treat his comments as if they inscribed on tablets brought down from Mt. Sinai. Combine the comforting but erroneous notion that Obama "transcends" anything with a gaggle of gullible reporters eager to treat inanity as if it were loaded down with substance and you have a formula decreeing that any criticism of Obama is out of bounds.
We'll talk about the results from Indiana and North Carolina on Wednesday.

Part Two--"Jean Garton: Pro-Life Convert."