Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center has been a Herschel Walker apologist ever since he voiced his interest in running for a Senate seat as a Republican -- from actually arguing the domestic violence charges made by his ex-wife weren't true because criminal charges weren't filed to playing whataboutism to distract from his unsavory past. So when it was exposed that Walker had paid for an abortion for a former girlfriend, the MRC quickly assembled to play defense for him again (unlike its "news" division CNSNews.com, which has censored the story) -- even though the MRC is a hive of anti-abortion extremists (to the point that it wants an Orwellian surveillance state to monitor women who might have one).
Scott Whitlock made the usual MRC claim in a Oct. 4 post that non-right-wing media covered the story with added whataboutism regarding his Democratic opponent, Raphael Warnock:
Less than 12 hours after being posted on a liberal website, the ABC, CBS, MSNBC and CNN morning shows on Tuesday devoted 24 minutes and three seconds to Daily Beastclaims that Republican Georgia Senate candidate Herschel Walker paid for an abortion in 2009. Back in 2020, the networks weren’t interested in domestic dispute police video of Walker’s Democratic opponent.
CBS Mornings hyped the accusations against the pro-life Walker for two minutes and 23 seconds. Co-host Nate Burleson touted, “Turning to the midterms where there's a new twist in the pivotal Senate race in Georgia. The website The Daily Beast is reporting Republican candidate Herschel Walker paid for a woman he was dating to get an abortion in 2009.”
[...]
Back in 2020, the networks buried a domestic dispute video involving the Democratic (and pro-abortion) Senator of Georgia Raphael Warnock.
Whitlock didn't explain why right-wing operations like his are trying to distract from the Walker scandal despite abortion being a hot-button right-wing issue.
Mrk Finkelstein played whataboutism of a different sort, while dismissing the story as nothing but a biased "October surprise":
"Hypocrisy?" We got your hypocrisy right here, Morning Joe!
With control of the Senate at stake in next month's elections, Republicans have been bracing for the Democrat/liberal-media complex to drop an "October surprise" on one of the GOP candidates engaged in a tight race.
And, sure enough, the left-wing Daily Beast yesterday published an article alleging that Herschel Walker, the Republican candidate for Senate from Georgia, who has taken a strong pro-life stance, paid for a girlfriend's abortion 13 years ago.
[...]
So, let's turn to another story regarding a Republican. When Rep. Jackie Walorski died along with two of her aides in a car accident in August, Morning Joe prominently featured Pres. Biden's expression of condolences. Biden said that he and Dr. Jill were "shocked and saddened" by Walorski's death.
And Willie Geist mentioned that Walorski had made a very large "impact on Washington."
But Biden was obviously not "shocked" enough by Walorski's death, nor did it "impact" Biden sufficiently, for him to remember it less than two months later. At an event in late September, Biden called out, "Jackie, are you here? Where's Jackie?"
[...]
So, after featuring Biden's "shocked and saddened" condolences at the time of Walorski's death, how much time did Morning Joe ever devote to Biden's gaffe? None, of course.
Hypocrisy, thy name is Morning Joe.
Of course, by Finkelstein's logic, the non-right-wing media were right to dismiss stories about Hunter Biden's laptop because they were an "October surprise" issued by a partisan right-wing publication, the New York Post -- but that's not the argument the MRC is making. Finkelstein then bizarrely attacked Scarborough for going from "a perfect pro-life voting record" as a congressman to having "sounded more like a Planned Parenthood spokesman," inventing a conspiracy theory: "Could there be something in Scarborough's past that would expose him as a hypocrite regarding his erstwhile pro-life position?"
If Finkelstein can't substantiate his conspiracy theory, perhaps he should shut up lest Scarborough slap him with a defamation suit.
The next day, Whitlock again invoked Warnock whataboutism to whine about the coverage:
The media-backed October surprise is finally here. In the 24 hours since the liberal Daily Beast posted an accusation that Georgia Republican senatorial candidate Herschel Walker paid for an abortion in 2009, the ABC, CBS and NBC morning and evening newscasts devoted almost 21 minutes to hyping the allegations.
These same networks weren’t interested in a 2020 domestic abuse police video of Walker’s opponent, the radically pro-abortion Senator Raphael Warnock (D). But they can’t get enough of the charges against the pro-life Republican.
Whitlock didn't explain the relevance of the Walker story coming from a "liberal" (or "left-wing," according to Limbaugh) outlet if the story is true -- and there has been no evidence it isn't. LIek Finkelstein, he also didn't note that the "October surprise" argument justifies non-right-wing media ignoring the Hunter laptop story.
Finkelstein returned for another post attacking Scarborough to distact from Walker, complaining that while Scarborough is "upset that pro-lifers would stick to supporting Herschel Walker in the U.S. Senate race in Georgia," Sarborough himself didn't list opposition to abortion as an attribut that makes him conservative: "So why do you think Scarborough markedly omitted abortion from his list of conservative credentials?" Finkelstein, meanwhile, made no argument in favor of conservatives sticking with a man credibly accused of paying for an abortion.
Whitlock also complained that James Carville pointed out how Republican indifference to abortion when one of its candidates get caught paying for one "exposes the massive, staggering humanity of conservative evangelicals. I’m not going to call these people Christians, because I don’t think they embrace very much of Christianity." He didn't rebut Carville's remarks, just complained that he said them, putting the word "HATER" in all-caps in the headline to describe him.
Sports blogger Jay Maxson tried his (or her) own form of whataboutism in an Oct. 6 post, then gave Walker a pass for purportedly having changed:
Ex-ESPN reporter Darren Rovell on Monday slammed the supporters of conservative Republican Senate candidate Herschel Walker as “vile,” and he labeled the former Heisman Trophy winner possibly the worst political candidate ever. Rovell and Walker’s opponent, Senator Raphael Warnock (D), have skeletons in their own respective closets, but those were ignored.
[...]
If the claim is true, the alleged abortion was not an honorable act on Walker’s part. But 13 years later, he’s on the right side of the sanctity of life issue. Warnock, on the other hand, would have unlimited tax-payer funded abortions.
Yes, Maxson is cheering that "he’s on the right side" of the issue, his personal history to the contrary.
Maxson then attacked Rovell for having "issues of his own" that are completely irrelevant to the issue at hand. Leave it to the MRC to turn a critique into a personal attack.
