About Me

Name: Bob Siegel
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Why Was Abortion Not Mentioned at the Debate?


Gwen Ifill did not raise the issue of abortion last night. Nobody seems to have noticed, but to me, it was a glaring omission!  I was certain abortion would be a big part of the conversation and I said so in my blog and on my radio show. My prediction was wrong! Yes, you heard me correctly. I am admitting that I was wrong. I confess this freely since I’m not a politician and I do not need to explain what I "really meant” and how if you could just remember the context, you could see that  I was really right after all.  Nevertheless, I still think we should pause for a moment or two and try to figure out what happened.

I’ll start by listing the reasons why I was so sure about this:

1) I have never seen an election year debate (within the last two decades), without abortion questions from the moderator. True, it is generally found in only one of the three presidential debates but that’s because they are divided up according to subject matter. Since only one debate takes place amongst the VP candidates, the most crucial issues are usually included.

 

2) Although Democrats and Republicans are different in just about every conceivable fashion, to the point where they can barely agree on what kind of toothpaste to use, few of these issues stir the heart and turn up the heat like abortion. We must literally suspend all belief to suggest that Miss Ifill accidentally omitted the topic, or, after thinking about it, concluded that the country wasn’t interested.

 

3) Sarah Palin, in particular, has been under fire over the abortion issue. (I just made the understatement of the century. That includes the 20th Century, since we have not yet experienced much of the 21st Century.)

 

This Tuesday, McCain and Obama will discuss domestic issues.  At the risk of making another inaccurate prediction, I am reasonably certain abortion will be included.  Why bring it up with McCain and not with Sarah?

 

ANSWER: Because she’s Sarah! McCain is just another of those "crotchey old men” who want to suppress all women and turn back the clock by two thousand years. But Palin’s willingness to stand by her convictions (even to the point of allowing a child with Down’s Syndrome to be born) flies in the face of conventional wisdom. It reminds our country that this is not a men verses women issue, but, rather, an issue that deeply divides women! It reminds us that most of the leading opponents to abortion are women, many of whom had abortions themselves or at one time seriously considered it. These right-to life spokeswomen warn others about the horrible aftermath of guilt coming from the conscience (that still, small, voice inside which is not running for public office and therefore does not change its commentary on right and wrong based upon polls and focus groups.)  We know Ifill is an Obama supporter and we know how Obama feels, not only about abortion, but infanticide as well. Any question put forth related to a Pro-Life or Pro-Choice discussion, would have been met with Sarah’s charming smile and heart tugging sonnet about a mother’s love for her little son Trig.  And if good ol’ Joe opened his mouth in response, Palin could have asked, in her sly, congenial manor, “So, people like my son should never have been born, Joe?”

 

It would have ended the debate. It would have been the dominant subject amongst pundits the next morning. Ifill knew this and chose not to go there. Already under fire for being in Obama’s camp, Ifill was careful to come across as fair and objective. To some degree, she accomplished this and delivered a performance better than expected. To another degree, her bias showed, but only in a subtle fashion. I will discuss that subtlety in my next article. As for her decision to strike abortion from the conversation altogether? It was an unexpected stroke of genius. I may be troubled by her reason for taking this course of action, but I will give credit where credit is due. If you want to be a biased moderator, but come across looking unbiased, you’d do well to learn from Gwen Ifill. Here is an agenda based journalist with her head set squarely on her shoulders.

 

I will never be able to prove my theory, but if you think about it, you may just see this as another example of:

 

Bob Siegel, making the obvious, obvious.



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive