30 August 2008

Hello?


One of the decisions of any newspaper is deciding which stories run in its pages.  The St. Louis Review makes the mystifying decision this week to run a CNS story about Joe Biden, the pro-abortion vice presidential candidate.   Of course, the pick of Biden is newsworthy, but the story's focus and its headline are designed to excuse his support of the murder of unborn babies.

The headline and an excerpt of this lamentable attempt to rationalize voting for the pro-death ticket folows, with my emphases and comments:

Biden’s record ranges on Church issues 

Delaware Sen. Joe Biden, announced Aug. 23 as Sen. Barack Obama’s choice as his running mate for the White House, puts on the Democratic ticket a Catholic who supports legal abortion but on other issues has been an ally for the Church’s public policy interests

Biden, 65, has come in for his share of conflicts
with some in the Church over his legislative support for keeping abortion legal. The National Right to Life Committee gives him a rating of 0 for his positions on select issues, including federal abortion funding and stem-cell research as well as some relating to lobbying by groups like the National Right to Life Committee. 

But he’s no darling of the "pro-choice" view, either, earning a score of 36 percent once from NARAL Pro-Choice America for his votes on their select issues. Obama has a score of 100 percent from NARAL.


_____________________________

Can someone tell me why this article is in a Catholic newspaper?  What exactly is the point?  Hey, the great Joe Biden may have ruffled a few feathers with SOME in the Church (like the Pope?  the Fathers?  Revealed truth?  "bitter clingers"?) over keeping abortion legal (I mean, hey, it was legal already--don't blame poor Joe), but hey, he occasionally agrees with the USCCB on some less contentious social justice concern.  So, they cancel each other out?  

The only conceivable reason for this story is to salve the consciences of those who want to vote for Obama, the defender of infanticide.  Give me a break.

Let me try to rephrase the above story if I can:

Biden seeks to divert attention from pro-abortion record

Delaware Sen. Joe Biden, announced Aug. 23 as Sen. Barack Obama’s choice as his running mate for the White House, puts on the Democratic ticket a Catholic who supports legal abortion; of course, he wants Catholics to somehow overlook this by pointing out his coincidental agreement with the USCCB on some far less important issues.

Biden, 65, ought to be excommunicated for his public support of abortion, evidenced by his zero rating from key pro-life advocacy groups.  NARAL doesn't give him a 100 percent rating, like the pro-infanticide Obama, but his record is nonetheless deplorable.

"I am glad I was asked to comment on this CNS story by the editors prior to its appearance in the St. Louis Review, " said Bishop Robert Hermann, Archdiocesan Administrator.  "I would hate for any Catholic in the Archdiocese to get the wrong idea and think that Biden's sad insistence on supporting the murder of unborn babies was somehow o.k."

9 comments:

Steve said...

I felt the same way when I read it.

ordinary catholic said...

Thanks for pointing this out, Timman--and great re-writing of this story.

Latinmassgirl said...

Well written Timman. I think the review needs to clean house and hire you!!!

P.S. I wonder if they would have published that pro-vote-for-Biden bit if Archbishop Burke were still here?

dnlgfnk said...

Timman...I already was preparing my letter to the ed, but your post gives me confidence that others see through the subtle equating of abortion with other "social justice" issues. So, apparently Bishop Hermann's "conscience" column is a rebuttal to the CNS story, choosing to run it after discussion with the STLR editors? I'm a bit confused on the circumstances of the Bishop's quote.

thetimman said...

Write the letter to the editor anyway.

The "bishop's" quote is my own-- my way of pointing out that the editors should not have run this story, or at least should have gotten the Bishop's take on it first. I like to think the Bishop's reaction would have been similar to ours had he seen this prior to publication.

TKSB2GOD said...

Timman,
The statement,"Biden 65, has come in for his share on conflicts with SOME in the Church over his legislative support for keeping abortion legal," should be enough to scandalize every big C Catholic this side of the Tiber. Are we also to be comforted by his 36% kill ratio to NoBamas 100%?

Athelstane said...

Actually, Tim, that rating by NARAL only pertains to one year - 2003.

Typically, Biden gets a 100% rating from NARAL:

2007: 75%
2006: 100%
2005: 100%
2004: 100%
2003: 33%
2002: 100%
2001: 100%
2000: 90%

Source: http://www.votesmart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=53279

So most years, Biden is with NARAL every inch of the way.

Apparently once in a great while he does vote for an abortion restriction - he voted for the Partial Birth Abortion Ban, the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, and once voted for the Hyde Amednemt in previous years. But it seems to be so rare that he looks moderate only in comparison to the senator at the top of the ticket.

Source: http://www.nrlc.org/ObamaBAIPA/ObamavBiden.html

So there you have it.

Anonymous said...

You really don’t get why the Review and other Catholic publications print stories praising Biden and the pro-abortion Obama/Biden ticket. The Catholic machine is willing to close their eyes to abortion rather than face the fact that if McCain/Palin is elected a female will be second most powerful seat in America. That will give her dominion over men. The Catholic machine is afraid of powerful woman. And in four years, if McCain decides not to run for re-election, she’ll run for the top office. Ooohhhh, what a dilemma for the conservative Catholics.

thetimman said...

Hey, anon, great theory-- but it presupposes that the Review is omniscient, since the story ran before the Palin announcement.

Try again. How about womenpriests?