In retrospect, it is safe to surmise that had the liberal media been more aware of the facts surrounding the Boston Marathon bombings and the loyalties of Tsarnaev brothers who set the bombs, the story would have received scant coverage. The left was in overdrive in the immediate aftermath of the bombing, exuberantly constructing every possible scenario by which the murder and mayhem might be linked to conservative America. But the moment liberals discovered to their surprise and dismay that the terrorism had been perpetrated by militant Islamists of foreign birth (Imagine that!) every attempt was made to downplay the influence of culture and religion on their abhorrent actions. If such an assessment of modern media seems severe, consider their virtual media/press blackout of the Kermit Gosnell trial in Philadelphia.
“Dr.” Kermit Gosnell has been in the national spotlight for numerous unspeakable crimes and atrocities, and is currently on trial for the murder of “aborted” babies who survived the procedure, only to be brutally slaughtered. The testimony of witnesses reads like the script of a “B” rated horror movie, except that the principals involved were very real. Joseph Mengele of Hitler’s death camps would find it difficult to exceed the vicious cruelty of Kermit Gosnell.
Nevertheless, throughout the trial, the nightly news has been virtually devoid of any coverage of this topic. Pictures taken in the courtroom and disseminated throughout the alternative media reveal a press section that shamefully is entirely empty. In this manner, members of America’s liberal media are seeking to bury any discussion of the gruesome business Gosnell conducted, since such a discussion would certainly be bad publicity for the abortion business in general.
Liberal “reporters” are hopeful that the public is still sufficiently programmed to remain indifferent to events of the day or to react emotionally, based solely on how stories are presented to them over the airwaves. This explains why as time passes, the nightly “news” contains less and less information, but significantly more editorializing. Thus, the participation of Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Michael Vick in the brutal pastime of dog fighting made headlines for weeks and resulted in his being universally condemned, while the ghoulish actions of Gosnell are hardly discussed by average Americans. In contrast to Vick, Gosnell was actually described as “an elegant gentleman” in a despicably slanted account of his trial by Maryclaire Dale of the Associated Press.
Despite the fervent attempts at media suppression, this case is peeling back the veneer that for decades has been so meticulously established and diligently maintained over the entire abortion debate. Every aspect of the issue has been enshrouded in “politically correct” rhetoric that does not merely sugarcoat it, but obsessively avoids even the slightest allusion to the hideously ugly reality of human abortion. Thus, according to official press guidelines, abortion proponents are “pro-choice,” and benevolent advocates of women’s “reproductive rights,” while the pro-life community is consistently and scornfully labeled “anti-abortion,” a term often followed by “anti-woman.”
To the dismay of the political left and the counterculture, the specifics of the Gosnell case are being widely circulated throughout the alternative media. Consequently, people across the nation are slowly and perhaps grudgingly being awakened to a true horror that has been occurring in their midst on a wide scale basis for two generations. As the grisly truth continues to be revealed from that Philadelphia courtroom, the unspeakable reality of what Gosnell was perpetrating with impunity for so many years has jolted Americans into consideration of just what the abortion industry actually entails.
For starters, it is total fantasy to presume that the abortion business represents any noble effort to uplift the plight of women. The single demographic most emphatically supportive of abortion is young men who, rather than bear the costs of court-imposed child support, prefer to let women be physically mutilated in the wake of being sexually exploited. Every contrived notion that abortion somehow “liberates” women is thoroughly overshadowed by the manner in which it cheapens their role and purpose in the eyes of self-serving men. And any doubters need only recount the testimony of female witnesses regarding the maltreatment they suffered at the hands of Gosnell. Liberals have no more concern for the well-being of women than they do for minorities or any other group to which they sometimes shamelessly pander, since they will just as quickly discard and debase these constituencies the moment they become a political liability.
Of even greater significance are the ugly truths of abortion itself, which have become inescapable as the testimony in the Gosnell trial ensues. Gosnell is noted for the deliberate killing of children who survived abortions and were born alive. Yet this is hardly an isolated activity. Abortion “clinics” are designed and operated with the intention of moving as many women through them as possible, since it is on this basis that their profits are maximized. They are never set up to contend with the medical needs of premature babies, which means that unintended births are invariably dealt with in the same despicable manner as did Gosnell.
Indeed, the entire abortion industry in America is essentially making this case by its show of support for Gosnell. Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion mill franchise, steadfastly refuses to condemn his barbaric actions, which can only mean that the organization sees nothing objectionable in squalid conditions, exposure of young women to septic filth, and of course the slaughter of innocent unborn children. Gosnell’s principles are their principles and define them as well as all of their supporters, including Barack Obama who attended their celebratory Planned Parenthood “gala” and gave his blessing to everything the organization represents. It should be remembered that in one of the rare instances in which then Illinois State Senator Barack Obama did take a political stand, he voted to give abortionists legal cover for the very actions in which Gosnell was engaged.
Nor can the nightmarish accounts of the events inside Gosnell’s compound leave any shred of doubt that he knew exactly what he was doing to tiny, helpless human beings. Across the entire spectrum of the abortion debate, those who are most keenly aware of the undeniable humanity of an unborn child are the abortionists themselves. But they are comfortable knowing of the selective “awareness” among a counterculture which happily exonerates them. Officially, their brutality against those tiny lives is shrouded in a grim mantle of “legitimacy” and fully sanctioned by the state.
Eventually, the liability that Gosnell represents to the abortion industry will become too great a burden for them to bear, at which point they will attempt to discard him like an “unviable fetal tissue mass” and distance themselves from everything he represents. This fraud cannot be allowed to happen. The blood on their hands is of the exact shade as the blood Gosnell bears on his, and the American people are seeing this situation for what it is. The ghastly business in which America’s abortionists engage can only be differentiated from the dreadful deeds of Kermit Gosnell by a matter of degree, if at all.
Copyright ©2013 Christopher G. Adamo