Barack Obama's Own Words Contradict Claims on Opposing Anti-Infanticide Bill

From http://lifenews.com/nat4173.html



Barack Obama's Own Words Contradict Claims on Opposing Anti-Infanticide Bill

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
August 21, 2008

Email RSS Printer Buzz up!
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Barack Obama and his campaign have repeated the same excuse as to why he opposed a bill in the Illinois legislature that would have stopped infanticide. Obama is on record opposing a measure to give medical care to prematurely born babies who survive botched abortions.

One columnist says Obama's own words during the debate on the bill contradict his current claims that he opposed it because it could have contradicted Roe v. Wade.

Obama originally opposed the Born Alive Infants Protection Act in 2001 with concerns that it would impact the Roe decision and Illinois state law concerning when abortions were legal.

But, by the time the bill came up for debate again in 2002, those concerns had been rectified yet Obama continued to oppose the common sense bill.

"In 2002, Senator Obama was not concerned about Roe v. Wade. He was not concerned with undermining abortion laws in Illinois," writes Red State columnist Erick Erickson. "No, what Senator Obama today claims were his concerns were not his concerns back in 2002."

"In 2002, Senator Obama stood on the floor of the Illinois State Senate to oppose the Born Alive Infant Protection Act. By this time, even the abortion rights organizations like Planned Parenthood had dropped their opposition," he explained.

"But Obama continued to oppose the law," Erickson writes in a Thursday column. "He was the only person to speak out against the legislation."

Here is what Obama said, in an exchange with Senator O'Malley, the sponsor of the bill:

"As I understand it, this puts the burden on the attending physician who has determined, since they were performing this procedure, that, in fact, this is a nonviable fetus; that if that fetus, or child - however way you want to describe it - is now outside the mother's womb and the doctor continues to think that it's nonviable but there's, let's say, movement or some indication that, in fact, they're not just coming out limp and dead, that, in fact, they would then have to call a second physician to monitor and check off and make sure that this is not a live child that could be saved."


Erickson summarizes the Obama complaint by saying: "Let's trust the guy who just botched the abortion to determine whether or not he actually did botch the abortion."

"That's it. If a baby comes out and is alive, Barack Obama thought it too burdensome to have another doctor, someone used to dealing with live babies, check to see if the baby was viable," Erickson explained.

"No one else spoke out against the legislation. Only Barack Obama was so concerned about the doctor performing the abortion, he did not think it worth having a doctor used to live babies coming in to see if the baby might live," he added. "Only Barack Obama."



________________________________________

From http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2008/08/rh_reality_unch.html



The left is so predictable. When they are confronted with evidence against them, they almost always attack the person exposing it and not the evidence itself. It was obvious when this started that they were going after Jill Stanek. Also, what they do is come up with a different explanation each day about their wrongdoing until one sticks. Obama all along said that he didn't vote for the Illinois bill because it didn't protect Roe v. Wade. When that was exposed to be wrong, his surrogates then said that there was a companion bill he didn't like so he didn't vote for the Born Alive bill. That didn't work so yesterday they said there was already a bill on the books covering this. Now they're desperate because Obama and his followers are saying that of course he doesn't believe in infanticide. Anyone who accuses him of that is the one that is wrong in this issue. I wonder what their response will be today. I'm sure they are shaking in their boots because there really is no way out of this one. I hope some group or McCain (I don't think so) will bring this up in an ad, because the mainstream press won't touch it.

Posted by: Monte Harms at August 22, 2008 6:28 AM



_____________________________


mk @ 6:32 AM

mk - the mistake that Jill admitted: she was wrong about the bill being "held" (as in "held-up" in committee) when in fact the bill was actually amended and voted upon with the identical language of the federal BAIPA (save changes for the state vs Fed).

Many people have been believing the lie that Obama's been spinning.

The basic truth is - if there really was nothing wrong with his defense of induced labor abortion then why did he lie about it?

Posted by: Chris Arsenault at August 22, 2008 7:20 AM



______________________________



It appears to me that the Radical Left is in a rabid frenzy over the exposure of Obama's votes. When Obama, himself, contrary to his many statements, voted to amend the 2003 bill to be identical to the federal bill and then voted against the identical bill, it's sad, but not surprising, that some would try to turn it around against Jill and continue a strategy of trying to confuse people. Truth is still truth.

On a side note, Obama (and Alan Colmes last night)keep repeating the statement that there was already a law in place in Illinois to protect the babies, but in a letter
in July 2000, Illinois Attorney General Jim Ryan told us
he found no violation of Illinois. FYI

Posted by: Karen Hayes at August 22, 2008 7:46 AM