The newscaster, Ashley Minelli,from Newscenter 41 in Macon, who interviewed me and put this piece together did an excellent job, but did not have available to herself at the time of packaging this story the following reflection of the Bishops of the United States--and thus she and the news anchor thought President Obama was changing his course when in fact he hasn't done any such thing. In other words, this is premature reporting and has fallen for the President's smoke and mirrors:
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishop's concerns raised Friday night (after this local newscast story was packaged):
...We note at the outset that the lack of clear protection for key stakeholders—for self-insured religious employers; for religious and secular for-profit employers; for secular non-profit employers; for religious insurers; and for individuals—is unacceptable and must be corrected. And in the case where the employee and insurer agree to add the objectionable coverage, that coverage is still provided as a part of the objecting employer's plan, financed in the same way as the rest of the coverage offered by the objecting employer. This, too, raises serious moral concerns.
6 comments:
Call the reporter up and tell her the story as presented is not true.
Don't get too theological with TV reporters - they are not interested in deep thoughts but rather quick images and stories. Keep your message simple even though you may think you are speaking like a simpleton. Work in "positive" words. They will schmooze you for 30 minutes but only use 5% of what you say.
Here is the whole of the latest USCCB press release: http://usccb.org/news/2012/12-026.cfm
Mark Steyn nails it:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/290806/church-obama-mark-steyn?pg=1
I emailed Ashley Minelli the bishops' full statement. But her take on what President Obama said on Friday is exactly what President Obama intended to do, the sly, good politician he is, to placate the media firestorm that was brewing even in the liberal press as well as to placate those in the Democrat party who were alarmed by his unconstitutional mandate. In other words it is a cynical ploy to continue to deceive the press and America to shove his agenda down the throat of religions whose moral teaching oppose his secular agenda.
That was what Rush Limbaugh calls the "drive by media." You were getting into some deep stuff and Jeff was talking as a Catholic. What I got out of it was there are some people concerned in our community.
I really, really liked your comment about being offended as an American. One of the unspoken issues here is the unease people feel because Catholics listen to the head of a foreign state for guidance on issues. This was one of the reasons for founding the Knights of Columbus.
In this specific case this 'accommodation' highlights the cynical nature of this move. He is not leading in any sense of the word. Rather he is 'triangulating' a position that will supposedly gain votes from divergent groups. He, and his 'Catholic' staff, do not understand the nature of Catholic faith. They are simply trying to make public policy and funding accessions for the agenda of one group while trying to not alienate another. It is not because anyone in this Government supports or cares about Catholic concerns, but that the last general election was won by ~4% and they need that small fringe of idiots in our parishes to ensure that edge.
Also, the nice gentleman in the clip, the one titled, 'Catholic', said we are required to go farther and actually believe it. I do not doubt his faith, but that phrase casts the situation as incredulous. I do not believe these things, I *know* them to be true. I may not understand why or how, but they are, by God, true. (That last statement is not an oath, it is causal). My faith, or belief, is only that somehow the problems I encounter following God's will be sorted out. The rest is a true as gravity. FWIW, I would be excited and honored if a news cast introduced me as 'Catholic'. That was cool.
rcg
Also have a woman present with you in a media interview when your are talking about "women's health issues" Have her speak up in support of the Church's teachings and stance on this matter. If you have to take a few hours to wrangle up the right people tell the reporter that you will need a little bit of time to be best prepared- reporters usually appreciate that because they want the best story too.
Sometimes it is not worth doing an interview if you can't be assured you will be able to "show and tell" what you need to in the right way. Don't be afraid to say the same few select words/phrases over and over again even though the question asked may not be directly related - you want to tell your story through their filter. Remember you are on their ground and they get the last say.
"...no religious institution will have to cover these services directly."
This quote from Obama proves to me that he knows that religious institutions will still have to provide for these services INDIRECTLY.
He obviously takes us for complete idiots! How insulting!
Post a Comment