The National Public Radio talk show 1A did an hour on new “restrictive” laws on abortion on Tuesday, but it was not a debate, it was a pro-abortion show. Substitute host Sasha-Ann Symons announced “we understand passions run very high, but we want today’s conversation to focus on the impact and likely consequences of these laws. Our guests are here to answer your questions, not to debate the topic.”
The guests were two liberal journalists — NPR legal correspondent/Ruth Bader Ginsburg bestie Nina Totenberg, and former NPR health correspondent Julie Rovner — as well as abortionist Colleen McNicholas. Almost every question was carefully curated from the abortion-advocate talking-point list.
Simons asked Dr. McNicholas to explain what happens in an abortion. The doctor explained there is “medical” abortion, with a cocktail of drugs, or an “aspiration procedure…where we essentially open the cervix just enough to place a small straw into the uterus and then we use a, some sort of aspiration device to remove all the pregnancy tissue.”
“Baby” was a term they avoided. “Fetus” was vastly preferred. The doctor was also “woke” enough to refer to “women and pregnant patients,” for the pregnant trans men.
Simons asked Totenberg “what is the ultimate goal of this legislation?: Totenberg said “the ultimate goal ….is to get a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade to the Supreme Court, when at this moment, for the very first time, you have five very conservative justices, all of whom have a history, to one degree or another, of antipathy to Roe v Wade.” Brett Kavanaugh is “far more conservative than Kennedy on this, and other things.”
The one discordant note in this pro-abortion parade came from “Mike in Georgia,” who asked: “Can this be looked at as a positive for potential fathers who want the children? My ex-wife had two abortions without telling me, and it caused the end of our marriage.”
Totenberg only focused on the woman, and who cares about the man? “One would suspect if she was that determined, she would have found a way, even if it meant going to another state.”
The abortionist also ignored any male wishes: “I also think you have to remember that you know, being pregnant is, it takes away your autonomy in some sense, and so asking a person to continue a pregnancy just to fulfill the needs of another person can be a really dangerous place, where we start to see women and pregnant people as something other than autonomous beings who have full control over their body.”
“Exactly,” said Simons. (On her Instagram page, Simons celebrated her opportunity to moderate this one-sided show, saying “God is GREAT.”)
As the show wrapped up, Totenberg seemed to call liberals to action after these pro-life bills: “It’s a wakeup call. I would argue that the pro-life community has already woken up and fought this — voted on this, turned out on this, made a difference on this in local and national and presidential elections, and now it’s a question of whether the other side will wake up.”
Dr. McNicholas was asked to wrap up the discussion, and she was appalled this was even a political issue, where someone could object to an untrammeled “right to choose” abortion at any time, for any reason: “I just think it’s really time that we place abortion back into the lens that it deserves to be, which is health care. I think when abortion was moved from the health care lens to the political lens, this is how we get to this place where we’re talking about states that don’t have access at all.”
She’s the kind of arrogant lefty who thinks she represents “reason and humanity” and the other side only has an ideology. The kind of arrogant lefty who can count on taxpayer-funded NPR to deliver only her message.
LifeNews.com Note: Tim Graham is the director of media analysis for the Media Research Center, a media watchdog group. He was a White House correspondent for World magazine in 2001 and 2002. This originally appeared on the NewsBusters web site.