NBC and ABC on Thursday night framed stories around concerns of “abortion rights” advocates who want proof Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor is on their side, but both cloaked their pieces around the proposition “both sides” of the debate are equally worried.
With “Where Does She Stand?” as the on-screen heading, as if there is genuine belief Obama would have selected the judge without knowing she'd uphold Roe v Wade, NBC anchor Lester Holt set up a story through the prism of pro-abortion activists as he announced that White House “spokesman Robert Gibbs says the President did not specifically ask her about the right to privacy, a key issue in the abortion debate.” Reporter Pete Williams proceeded to declare that Sotomayor's stand on abortion is “a mystery” as “both sides on the abortion issue agree...they're eager to know exactly what Sonia Sotomayor thinks about abortion and the constitution.” Viewers then heard only from one side, an “abortion rights advocate.”
Charles Gibson, with “Choosing Sides” as the tag on the screen, teased the lead World News story: “Both sides of the abortion debate demand to know where the President's Supreme Court pick stands on the issue.” Like Holt, ABC's Jan Crawford Greenburg highlighted what concerns those on the left, how “Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said Obama didn't discuss specific cases with Sotomayor, but was satisfied with her views on individual rights.” After a clip of Gibbs' reassurance to pro-abortion supporters -- “He left very comfortable with her interpretation of the constitution being similar to that of his” -- Greenburg concluded by echoing the fears of those who consider Roe v Wade sacrosanct: “But Sotomayor's record on abortion has yet to bear that out.”
Thursday's CBS Evening News, after a Wednesday story on how a political label cannot be applied to Sotomayer, didn't mention her.
Unlike ABC ad NBC, the Fox News Channel delivered the concerns of those on the right, as Special Report anchor Bret Baier introduced a story on how Sotomayor's “paper trail has many Second Amendment-boosters worried.” Reporter Shannon Bream explained:
The Supreme Court has ruled definitively that the Second Amendment does guarantee gun ownership rights to individuals, but some gun rights advocates worry that Supreme Court nominee, Judge Sonia Sotomayor, may see things differently. Just months after the high court's June 2008 District of Columbia v Heller decision, Sotomayor signed on to one from the 2nd circuit ruling saying that states still maintain the right to regulate gun ownership...
The beginning of the story on the Thursday, May 28 NBC Nightly News:
LESTER HOLT: The White House said today President Obama is very comfortable that Supreme Court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor shares his interpretation of the constitution. But spokesman Robert Gibbs says the President did not specifically ask her about the right to privacy, a key issue in the abortion debate.PETE WILLIAMS: Ever since the Supreme Court decided Roe versus Wade 36 years ago, a nominee's view on abortion has been the dominant issue, but with this nominee, it's a mystery. Both sides on the abortion issue agree on this, they're eager to know exactly what Sonia Sotomayor thinks about abortion and the constitution.
NANCY NORTHRUP, ABORTION RIGHTS ADVOCATE: It is important that we not have a guessing game when we're talking about a justice who's going to take a seat on a court that was 5-4 in its last abortion decisions.
ABC's World News:
AN CRAWFORD GREENBERG: In this battle over Sotomayor's nomination, there appears to be unusual common ground on one of the nation's most divisive issues. On abortion, both sides in the contentious debate want to know more.
NANCY NORTHRUP, CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS: We simply don't know where Judge Sotomayor is on core constitutional protections in Roe versus Wade.
CHARMAINE YOEST, AMERICANS UNITED FOR LIFE: We need to know what her philosophy is and how she would approach a case if it came before her.
GREENBURG: In her eleven years as a federal appeals court judge, Sotomayor has never ruled directly on abortion rights. Her cases touched only on side issues in the broader abortion debate. That leaves both sides looking for clues...
Although her views on abortion are not known, some anti-abortion groups assume she would vote to uphold Roe versus Wade....
Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said Obama didn't discuss specific cases with Sotomayor, but was satisfied with her views on individual rights.
GIBBS: He left very comfortable with her interpretation of the constitution being similar to that of his.
GREENBURG: But Sotomayor's record on abortion has yet to bear that out.
—Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
It's insulting how stupid they think people are.
May 28, 2009 - 21:10 ET by superconPETE WILLIAMS: Ever since the Supreme Court decided Roe versus Wade 36
years ago, a nominee's view on abortion has been the dominant issue,
but with this nominee, it's a mystery. Both sides on the abortion issue
agree on this, they're eager to know exactly what Sonia Sotomayor
thinks about abortion and the constitution.
Yeah.....a real mystery. It's as about mysterious as what her opinion on illegal immigration is.It's about as mysterious as who she voted for.
What a putz.
Hey Janet Napolitano...I'm proud to be a Right-winger.
You're Right!
May 29, 2009 - 11:41 ET by StogieGuyThis Roe v. Wade so-called mystery is being used as a straw man by the media to cloud the real issue at hand - that she's an activist radical lefty who wants to litigate her ideas of 'morality' from the bench. Take a look at her politics and her record and tell me that anyone with an IQ above 80 has even a question as to how she feels about abortion rights.
Clearly, the media do think that the public is stupid and treat them as such. However, in this case even they have underestimated the intelligence of the American public (quite a feat). The big question is whether that same public is actually paying attention. Sadly, I'd bet not. Not sure what it's going to take to wake people up.
The leftist revolution is here folks - let's hope that enough people notice before it's too late.
Don't hold your breath...
May 28, 2009 - 21:12 ET by SlyrrOh please, libs. If you're waiting for this racist candidate to publically admit she's pro-baby killing, you're dreaming. In case you Obama media slaves didn't get the memo, it's now standard operating procedure for any and all liberal political candidates (either running for or holding office) to say flat-out lies about what they're planning, or what they've done.
Barney Frank is their current exemplar. This odious man destroyed the housing industry and a huge chunk of the economy in general for his own selfish gain, and to create a campaign issue for '08. Everyone knows this man and his cohorts are as guilty as the day is long.
But whenever anyone asks about it, they deny it blatently and say it was someone else's fault. It's the most amazingly frustrating thing to watch - you know they're telling a bald-faced filthy stinking lie, but they scream and shriek that YOU are the liar for pointing it out - and the media is helping them to get away with it.
Obama is cut from the same cloth. His decisions have destroyed GM/Chrysler and are destroying the auto industry in general. He's blackmailed and threatened private citizens, and used the government to shut down successful businesses for no other reason than that their owners donate to the GOP. And when asked about it, he pulls a Barney Frank and says he didn't do it and that he 'inherited' a mess. And the media smiles and nods and laps it up like pigs eating slop from a waller.
So you media slaves - don't expect the truth from this woman. She's one of the liberal left and you can expect her to lie, cheat, steal and do any disgusting thing to get what she wants. And if she's caught in her lies (as is already happening), she'll lie about that too, and blame it on Bush or Rove. And you idiots in the media will fall for it like a ton of proverbial bricks. Because it doesn't matter how much they lie or how transparent the lie is - you're on their side and you'll package their lies as 'the new truth'.
I can hear it now - whatever evidence that is gathered to prove she's a lousy nominee they'll say was 'taken out of context' or 'misunderstood' or 'wilfully distorted.
You liberal media types are truly pathetic. Here we have great events taking place all over the world - N. Korea, Iran, Russia and the terrorists are steamrolling the world towards war, and all you care about is helping a racist and an abortionist to get on the high court so she can force-feed abortions and discrimination on the whole nation....
Slyrr... While destroying
May 28, 2009 - 21:29 ET by bigtimerSlyrr...
While destroying what they can of what was once this great nation to-boot...as they do so....all is in progress.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Why would he ask her about
May 28, 2009 - 21:23 ET by motherbeltWhy would he ask her about that?
He picked her because of her "empathy"...'nuff said.
I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows. -Bart Simpson
Draw it out
May 28, 2009 - 21:39 ET by KC MulvilleA confirmation process is about the only time we get to see a genuine discussion of legal philosophy, so I say that the smart move is to get her to put her philosophy on the table.
Nominees know not to say anything directly. We've all learned that to say anything is to provide ammunition, so nominees say as close to nothing as possible. If I'm a GOP senator, I'd turn the tables. Instead of focusing on the obvious quotes, for which I'm certain the White House already has her prepared, I'd go a different way:
Let's face it, there are only two competing philosophies of law and the judiciary: the "living Constitution" crowd, against the originalists. Make her describe each one, and then ask her which school she belongs to. If she's going to show how she feels about each one, she'll give herself away.
So,,,do they really think
May 28, 2009 - 22:29 ET by RR GOPSo,,,do they really think that if they push the abortion issue the pro-lifers are going to sit there and say, "Oh, yes. ____ News has a point there. I guess killing babies is fine after all."
Huh?
One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 61% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory (yep...approval for Congress now at 39%...do you believe that!?).
Yes, it's a mystery, a
May 28, 2009 - 23:09 ET by eaglewingz08Yes, it's a mystery, a confirmed democrap in New York City who had the approval to the Bench and Circuit by Daniel Moynihan and Chuck Schumer would definitely have pro life anti abortion views. Really, these democrap newsies have such contempt for their viewing public it's no wonder that their viewership is plummeting to the single digits.
Of course she is pro-abortion, duh.
May 29, 2009 - 08:48 ET by slickwillie2001I'm sure when Sotomayor met with the Bamster and his staff, her views on abortion were thoroughly vetted. The empathy that the Bamster is looking for certainly does not include empathy for babies. This would have been the first thing the Bamster would verify. Anyone that might think this didn't happen is terribly naive.
This is a made-up story by the liberal media to deflect attention from Sotomayor's far-left views.
Duh, indeed...
May 29, 2009 - 08:55 ET by Sergeant ROCK.. I'm sure that anyone who has no qualms whatsoever about tossing newborns into a linen closet to die would seek an individual with similiar interests.
"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason
You are correct, Sir
May 29, 2009 - 09:16 ET by SickofLibsOf course her abortion stance would have to be Question 1 from this crew.
I believe they are playing this like an obscure, but diabolical, chess move.
The truth will come out. And it will have zero effect on her confirmation because the Republicans are eunuchs, and are checkers-players, not chess-players.
No offense to checkers fans.
Who will ask her if she had an abortion?
May 29, 2009 - 10:56 ET by sevenIf she wants to be transparent, we shouldn't have to ask about that part of her life story.
→ Somebody needs to
May 30, 2009 - 21:30 ET by Cool ArrowThe Democrats demand to know how a nominee feels about infanticide.
Republicans would be remiss in their duties if they didn't root out her beliefs, wouldn't they?
Reality check
May 29, 2009 - 14:58 ET by Blogger Guy00001If Sotomayor opposed abortion, we would have heard all sorts of personal, mean-spirited attacks on her from the intolerant, mean-spirited bunch known as "feminists."
There is no way that Obama would have alienated the group that is one of his supporters.
Therefore we can safely conclude that Sotomayor supports abortion on demand.
Abortion Rights....Administration Pres. OMAMA'S .-
May 30, 2009 - 21:17 ET by Charles H. GarridoHello! Mr. Baker your Column,thanks- 5/28/09.-Mrs Sonia Sotomayor.-Such, not be LATIN, this Lady is born as American ( Caucasian.). Puerto Rico is American.-Tell how many fellows: "Puertoriqueños" in the Armed Services fought on WORLD WAR II, KOREA, VIETNAM. Blood and Sweat, FIGHTING we were as Americans.(Caucasian) ór Negroes .- This Country is SCREWED. Always So and So.- "YELLOW NEWS PRESS" pushing the barriers .-USA/Country dividing by Racial Latino-American, Black-American, Chinese- American, Greek- American, "George STEPHANOPOULUS" . ITALIAN-Americans-such Mrs.Pelosi, Mrs. Napolitano.- all be Americans.-- "Whats the Difference".- Know.. if about RACE here is Whites (CAUCASIAN) ,BLACKS, REDS INDIANS, (Chinese YELLOW.).!American is American SO BE IT.!!PERIOD.- Administration Obama's, Arrogant's Pelosi, Biden, Sebelius.- "ABOVE" the Press" Couric, Rodriguez, Gibson, Sanchez, Holt, Gibbs, Willians, Sawyer etc- Intimidation & Harrasment, Atheist & Ignorante POPULACE WHITES TRASH Americans are cowards "Killing Childrens" ABORTION.!. QUOTE: "IT IS POVERTY TO DECIDE THAT A CHILD MUST DIE, SO THAT YOU MAY LIVE AS YOU WISH"( MOTHER TERESA).- "I'm grateful when people are kind enough to take time out to offer generous thoughts.I am also greatful for the passion an concern of those who disagree with me.- (E.J. Dionne)
Thanks & Cooperation, Charles H. Garrido Miami Fla.-
→ Thanks Charles
May 30, 2009 - 21:27 ET by Cool Arrow"IT IS POVERTY TO DECIDE THAT A CHILD MUST DIE, SO THAT YOU MAY LIVE AS YOU WISH"( MOTHER TERESA).
Thanks for that quote from Mother Teresa.
It is also poverty to sell your children into slavery so you won't have to face up to your failures.
Barack Obama and his slave-trader Democrats have done this with our children.