Media Trash National Abortion Limit But Cheer End Of Filibuster
The article discusses Vice President Kamala Harris’s recent pledge to eliminate the Senate filibuster to facilitate the passage of federal legislation that would codify abortion rights throughout all nine months of pregnancy. In an interview, Harris expressed her belief that 51 votes should be sufficient to protect reproductive freedoms, indicating her desire to override the current filibuster rules, which would require a supermajority to pass such legislation. While some Democratic senators, including Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, expressed concern about the implications of removing the filibuster, the corporate media largely overlooked or supported Harris’s radical proposal.
The article contrasts the media’s reaction to Harris’s intentions with its scrutiny of Republicans regarding federal abortion limits. It highlights that, unlike the intense questioning faced by figures like Donald Trump and J.D. Vance about potential federal legislation limiting abortion, Harris’s proposal received relatively little coverage or critical analysis. The piece suggests that the media’s inconsistent treatment reflects a bias in how discussions about abortion legislation are polled and processed.
The same media obsessed with demanding Republicans refrain from passing federal legislation limiting abortion have yet to bat an eye at Kamala Harris’ radical pledge to nuke the filibuster to advance her extremist abortion agenda.
Harris confirmed this week that she hopes to help Senate Democrats annihilate the filibuster so they can pass federal legislation that would codify abortion through all nine months of pregnancy.
“I think we should eliminate the filibuster for Roe,” Harris said in an interview with Wisconsin Public Radio, “and … get us to the point where 51 votes would be what we need to actually put back in law the protections for reproductive freedom and for the ability of every person and every woman to make decisions about their own body and not have their government tell them what to do.”
Harris’ confession that she would remove a check and balance as significant as the filibuster to accomplish her radical political goals is not new, but that does not make it less shocking.
Despite the destruction the Democrat’s promise would wreak on the upper congressional chamber, Democrats and corporate media acted largely unfazed.
Harris’ radical call to overhaul Senate procedure so she can force Democrats’ unpopular abortion agenda onto Americans received some scolding from Democrat Sen. Joe Manchin and independent Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, who only objected to the idea because it would pave the way for a “future Congress to ban all abortion nationwide.”
The outlets that have prided themselves on meddling in the abortion conversation for years, however, barely offered Harris’ confession coverage — much less scrutiny. The radical proposal was even cheered by Washington Post and New York Times columnists as a “great idea” that deserves Americans’ support.
Contrast the corporate media’s handling of Harris’ decision to demolish the only thing protecting Americans from experiencing sweeping change and political whiplash with how they treat talk of a federal abortion law.
Nearly every time former President Donald Trump and J.D. Vance face a member of the propaganda press — either in an interview or on the debate stage — they are asked to weigh in on whether the GOP presidential nominee, if elected, would sign national legislation limiting abortion.
For months, Trump has said he would not sign it. His 2024 abortion platform even explicitly notes decisions about ending life in the womb should be left “up to the states.” Vance has also confirmed that Trump would veto a federal bill limiting ending life in the womb if it happened to make it through both congressional chambers to his desk.
Even if the Trump-Vance ticket committed to endorsing federal legislation limiting abortion to the first trimester, however, it would be well within Congress’s authority to pass such a bill and well within a president’s authority to sign it. As a bonus, it would finally reconcile the law with Americans’ widespread support for restricting abortion.
Nuking the filibuster, on the other hand, would effectively strip the upper chamber of its unique minority power protections.
But corporate media only harp on and criticize the possibility of national abortion law with hopes of bullying the GOP out of ever considering it.
When it comes to abortion, corporate media love to carry water for Democrats. In fact, without help from the propaganda press, the abortion extremism that permeates American politics despite its unpopularity with voters would not be possible.
Harris and her Democrat allies will stop at nothing, including the filibuster, to force abortion through all nine months of pregnancy in every state. The corporate media are too preoccupied with ragging Trump about a question he’s answered multiple times to pretend to care.
Jordan Boyd is a staff writer at The Federalist and producer of The Federalist Radio Hour. Her work has also been featured in The Daily Wire, Fox News, and RealClearPolitics. Jordan graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow her on X @jordanboydtx.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...