The only problem is that J.D.Vance said nothing of the sort. Here's what the WaPo published:
"[A]s replacement discourse enters the conservative mainstream, talk of birthrates comes along with it. “Our people aren’t having enough children to replace themselves. That should bother us,” J.D. Vance, author of the best-selling “Hillbilly Elegy,” told his audience at the National Conservatism Conference last month; earlier this year, he described himself as “appalled” by Democrats’ permissive attitudes toward abortion. Vance did not spell out exactly who was included in the word “our.” He didn’t need to."
Brostoff was right, he didn't need to because right before he said that he said this:
"There are a lot of ways to measure a healthy society, but the most important way to measure a healthy society is by whether a nation is having enough children to replace itself. Do people look to the future and see a place worth having children in? Do they have economic prospects and the expectation that they’re going to be able to put a good roof over that kid’s head, food on the table, and provide that child with a good education? By every statistic that we have, people are answering “no” to all of those questions."
"There are a lot of ways to measure a healthy society, but the most important way to measure a healthy society is by whether a nation is having enough children to replace itself. Do people look to the future and see a place worth having children in? Do they have economic prospects and the expectation that they’re going to be able to put a good roof over that kid’s head, food on the table, and provide that child with a good education? By every statistic that we have, people are answering “no” to all of those questions."
Which made clear that by our people he meant Americans. Brostoff should have known that so it's likely she deliberately lied to smear a conservative and to provide "support" for her claim that white nationalists are embracing the pro-life movement. It's also possible that she's merely incompetent and careless and didn't bother to read the paragraph before the comment she quoted.
Another option is that despite there being no racist strain to J.D. Vance's work she simply assumed that anyone who isn't a hard core leftist and who is white is a racist.
Whatever the reason it was an egregious error which undermined the entire point of her editorial.
The reality is that while some white nationalists may embrace the pro-life movement many reject it precisely because Black women are 3 times as likely to abort as white women. Democrat supported abortion is doing a great job keeping the US Black population low since the leading cause of death for Black Americans is now abortion.
Interestingly leftists like Ms. Brostoff never seem bothered about that huge racial disparity and continue to support Planned Parenthood which targets minorities for abortions.
On the plus side there is one actual nugget of truth in this otherwise totally dishonest article:
After all the founder of Planned Parenthood wanted to ensure that "undesirables"--Blacks and Catholics for example--didn't reproduce so that only the "better" AngloSaxon white people would continue to run America. In fact it's fair to say that Margret Sanger was, using todays nomenclature, a white nationalist.
Abortion supporters have found common cause with racists and bigots. Many Democrat abortion supporters have said that abortions save us money because otherwise there would be more criminals and people on welfare; and when they speak unlike the case of J.D. Vance it's either explicit or implicit that they're talking about aborting Black babies.
Similarly abortion advocates are generally enthused about aborting any baby who might not be perfect; eugenics 101.
When confronted with the facts the WaPo removed the lie about J.D. Vance but left in the conclusion that mainstream pro-lifers were talking about replacement discourse even though the only example she had of that was J.D. Vance.
Just one more example of how the WaPo is working tirelessly to keep we the people in the dark.
No comments:
Post a Comment