The Atlantic published an article this week on the politicization of ultrasounds. The subject in itself is worth a blog post. The Atlantic of course makes it seem as if it is the extreme right pro-life lobby that made ultrasounds a political issue when it is actually the pro-abortion crowd who advocate to restrict this service to pregnant women.
It’s funny how the abortion movement’s near maniacal commitment to “women’s access to healthcare” is simultaneously engage in denying a fundamental aspect of reproductive health care.
Anyway, the article isn’t the point. You may or may not be interested in this subject. Read it or don’t. What is most interesting about this article is that it is riddled with misinformation and assumptions (like most pro-abortion journalism). The author relied on her feelings and talking points to hilarious degree.
The article was so full of mistakes that The Atlantic was forced to make not one, not two, not three….NOT FOUR… but altogether FIVE corrections to the original publication, the last one being posted as this Redstate article went to publication. As a member of the media myself, I can tell you this is truly astounding. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a major publication have to backtrack this much on one article. Never. This “journalist” should be deeply embarrassed.
I almost feel sorry for Ms. Moira Weigel. When your publication has to add this to the beginning of your article, that’s a great big #Fail right there.
Let’s go to Twitter for reactions.
— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) January 27, 2017
— Matthew Clark (@_MatthewClark) January 27, 2017
Someone needs to inform Ms. Weigel that her feelings are not facts and facts are not on her side…and then they need to teach her how to use Google.