It is a big surprise — but a wonderful one. Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska is an ardent right-to-lifer. Proof positive of that came with the recent birth of her fifth child. Palin learned the child she was carrying had Down syndrome. Unphased, Palin didn’t even remotely consider abortion which is the fate of over 90% of children diagnosed in utero with this condition.
McCain himself has been very positive about his right-to-life convictions. People will remember well the Saddleback Church interviews where both candidates were asked when does a child receive human rights. Obama gave an incredibly lame response — siad it was “above his pay grade.” McCain didn’t hesitate, responding “at the moment of conception.”
In a radio address this past Saturday, McCain said: “If I am President, advancing the cause of life will not be above my pay grade.” McCain also took Obama to task for his infanticide votes as an Illinois state senator.
It’s great to have a complete team that right-to-lifers can wholeheartedly support!
For the full text of McCain’s radio address, please click here.
FactCheck, a self-described watchdog website operated out of the University of Pennsylvania, reviewed the National Right to Life (NRLC) expose of Obama’s vote as an Illinois Senator against legislation, virtually identical to the federal law, which would have required treatment for babies who survive abortion attempts. As you have read in this blog and in other venues, Obama accused NRLC of lying about his vote.
Obama claims he would have, given the chance, voted for a bill that contained clarifying language found in the federal law that the bill did not apply to unborn children. He said this, despite the fact that NRLC had documents from the Illinois state legislature indisputably proving that Obama voted against a bill in a committee he chaired that was virtually identical to the federal law.
FactCheck has reviewed all of the pertinent information, including the Illinois documents, and concluded that: “We find that, as the NRLC said in a recent statement, Obama voted in committee against the 2003 state bill that was nearly identical to the federal act he says he would have supported.”
Commenting on the new excuse Obama is putting out for his vote, claiming that the bill in question would have in some way impacted Illinois state abortion laws, FactCheck said: “But whether or not one accepts those arguments, it is not the reason Obama had been giving for his 2003 opposition.”
More proof that when cornered, Obama will either lie or change the story or do both. And, in this case, he did do both.
Barack Obama has got to be thrilled with the Democratic Party’s new and even more radical national platform on abortion that was approved this week. The platform calls for unlimited abortions, paid for by us, the American people. The platform, of course, perfectly mirrors Obama’s outrageous support for abortion on demand, for any reason, at any time during pregnancy, for as many times as a woman would want one.
The platform reads, “The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right. The language reflects what Obama told Planned Parenthood in a July 2007 speech saying his first action as president would be signing the so-called Freedom of Choice Act which would overturn all laws regulating abortion, including a ban on partial-birth abortion and parental notification laws.
Yep, Barack Obama and the Democratic Party are in perfect sync in their complete and utter disregard for unborn human life.
Arguments made on talk shows by various Obama mouthpieces expose how feverishly the Obama camp is trying to continue the coverup of Obama’s votes as an Illinois Senator to deny lifesaving treatment to babies who survive abortion attempts.
SPIN: He would have voted for the Illinois Born Alive bill if it had been like the federal version.
FACT: Documents from the Illinois state legislature indisputably prove that Obama voted in a committee he chaired for an amendment which contained the federal language, and then led his committee members to vote against and, thus, kill the amended bill.
SPIN: The reason why he voted against the Illinois bill is because it was one of a series of bills and he didn’t like the whole package.
FACT: The Illinois bill was a stand-alone bill. With this feeble argument, Obama is admitting that he voted against the bill, presumably with the federal language. He can’t have it both ways.
SPIN: Illinois already had a longstanding law protecting babies who survived abortions so a new law was completely unnecessary.
FACT: Induced labor abortions which resulted in some babies surviving the procedure were first exposed by nurses at Christ Hospital in Chicago. They registered a complaint with the Illinois Attorney General in an attempt to stop non-treatment of these living, breathing infants. The AG said the hospital was breaking no law because Illinois law only covered infants who had “sustainable survivability.” Since the aborted infants were pre-viable they could be left to die. It was only because these infants were not protected by law that Congress passed a Born Alive bill and Illinois attempted to do so. Faced with the fact of infants born alive following abortion attempts right in his own back yard, which Obama certainly knew about because of testimony before the Illinois committee he chaired, why didn’t Obama start an investigation of Christ Hospital? If he is so appalled by this practice, as he now claims, and existing Illinois law was being violated, why didn’t he use his authority to shut down the illegal practice?
SPIN: The Illinois Born Alive law with the language Obama wanted was enacted in 2005.
FACT: In 2005, Obama was no longer an Illinois Senator and was serving in the U.S. Senate. As an Illinois committee chair, he was in charge of the 2003 Born Alive bill. If there was insufficient language in the 2003 bill, he could have easily included what was missing himself because he was the committee leader and had the votes. The 2003 bill was defeated by a 6-4 vote. Obama took five other Senators with him to kill the bill that was virtually identical to the federal law he now says he would have voted for given the chance. Again, if he was so appalled by the practice of non-treatment of born alive infants and wanted to stop it, he could have amended the bill his way and gotten it passed. Instead, he killed it. It should come as no surprise that an Illinois Born Alive bill passed when Obama was no longer there to block it.
SPIN: “The recent attacks on Senator Obama that allege he would allow babies born alive to die are outrageous lies. The suggestion that Obama — the proud father of two little girls — and others who opposed these bills supported infanticide is deeply offensive and insulting. There is no room for these kinds of distortions and lies in this campaign.”
FACT: If you are Obama and are caught red-handed, you and your mouthpieces viciously attack those who have exposed your Big Lie, claim they are the ones who are lying, act offended, invoke your family as protection, and “pound the table” as one commentator noted.
Note that none of the spin attempts to deal with or mention the Illinois documents that lay Obama bare. Obama thinks that if he acts outraged enough, he can bluff his way out of a very, very tight corner.
Bottom line: The Illinois legislative documents indisputably expose Obama’s attempted coverup. Not only did Obama callously vote to deny treatment to living, breathing babies who survived abortion attempts, he is willing to erect giant smokescreens to hide his actions and even lie about it.
Hold the phone. Whoever talked to the New York Sun from the Obama campaign, as reported in yesterday’s blog, apparently didn’t check with headquarters. It appeared in the Sun website posting that Obama was conceding that the Illinois Born Alive bill he voted against was virtually identical to the federal legislation he now says he supports.
According to LifeNews.com, in the latest release from his campaign on the Born Alive issue, Obama continues to attack those who exposed his lie and is playing the victim card, using his family as backdrop.
“The recent attacks on Senator Obama that allege he would allow babies born alive to die are outrageous lies,” the campaign said. “The suggestion that Obama — the proud father of two little girls — and others who opposed these bills supported infanticide is deeply offensive and insulting.”
Despite the unassailable Illinois documents uncovered by the National Right to Life Committee proving that Obama voted for the federal clarifying language before voting against the amended bill, Obama continues to state that he voted against the Illinois bill because it wasn’t like the federal legislation. In other words — pretend the documents don’t exist and see if he can get away with it. Or, in the words of David Brody who conducted the now famous interview with Obama over the weekend, “they won’t concede the point that Senator Obama is pulling a fast one on the American public.”
Caught in a major squeeze, Obama’s campaign in a news story that appeared on the New York Sun website Sunday night now says that Obama mis-spoke about his abortion survivor votes. “Mr. Obama appeared to misstate his position in the CBN interview on Saturday…..[Obama’s] campaign yesterday acknowledged that he had voted against an identical bill in the state Senate…”
For the past week, we have filled you in on Obama’s horrendous votes as an Illinois State Senator to deny lifesaving treatment to babies who survive abortion attempts. To summarize, Obama has claimed that he voted against the legislation because it didn’t contain language he favored found in a similar federal law. A cover-up that he has perpetuated nicely for four long years with the help of the mainstream media.
Along comes National Right to Life with documents proving that Obama did indeed vote against a version of the Illinois legislation that was virtually identical to the federal bill he claims he supports. So, Obama accuses NRL of lying! NRL challenges Obama to either prove the documents are forgeries or apologize.
Caught redhanded, Obama is backtracking big time. No apologies so far. And, will the mainstream media still provide cover?
I watched Hannity and Colmes last night and the story was butchered. Two of the commentators had no idea what the issue was and kept speculating — was it this, was it that? Ann Coulter knew the story but was continually interrupted. And, even she didn’t refer to the damning documents. Hannity talked about nurse Jill Stanek who held a precious baby aborted alive for forty-five minutes until he died. And Colmes, of course, read from the original Obama playbook, insisting that Obama voted against the bill because it wasn’t like the federal law. No one said anything about the documents!!!! I found myself yelling at the TV screen!
The most interesting thing said was that if all of this is true — that Obama did indeed vote to deny treatment to abortion survivors — it would damage him badly. Now our job is to keep pushing the issue and the facts.
To read Douglas Johnson’s full report, please click here.
Obama has been caught red-handed by the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) as reported in this blog last week. Records from the Illinois state legislative committee Obama chaired reveal that Obama voted for language clarifying that a Born Alive bill would not affect Roe v. Wade, and then voted against the amended bill which contained the language he claims to this day would have made the bill acceptable to him.
As reported yesterday in LifeNews.com, Obama told CBN News correspondent David Brody that NRLC is lying! What Obama said is so delicious that here it is in full:
“I have said repeatedly that I would have been completely in, fully in support of the federal bill that everybody supported — which was to say — that you should provide assistance to any infant that was born — even if it was as a consequence of an induced abortion. That was not the bill that was presented at the state level. What that bill also was doing was trying to undermine Roe vs. Wade,” Obama claimed.
And, then the shots at NRLC: “So for people to suggest that I… somehow in favor of withholding life saving support from an infant born alive is ridiculous. It defies commonsense and it defies imagination and for people to keep on pushing this is offensive and it’s an example of the kind of politics that we have to get beyond.
“It’s one thing for people to disagree with me about the issue of choice, it’s another thing for people to out and out misrepresent my positions repeatedly, even after they know that they’re wrong,” huffed an offended Obama.
Douglas Johnson, NRLC Legislative Director, has issued a challenge to Obama: “We now challenge Obama to either declare the two 2003 legislative documents to be forgeries and call for an official investigation, or else apologize for his four years of misrepresentation on the issue of babies who are born alive during abortions — and for calling us liars.”
Stay tuned – this is the issue that lays Obama bare, clearly gets under his skin, and is not going to go away.
Obama says his votes as an Illinois Senator against legislation to give lifesaving treatment to babies who survive abortions (Born Alive Infant Protection Act) were legitimate. (By the way, he loves the word “legitimate” — called partial-birth abortion a “legitimate” medical procedure in a 2004 fundraising letter signed by Michelle).
Even though documents uncovered by the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) reveal that Obama voted for a “neutrality” amendment which mirrored language in a virtually identical federal law and then voted against the amended bill, the Obama campaign now claims that “Senator Obama supported such legislation when it did not threaten the Constitutional rights embodied in Roe v. Wade.”
Obama never supported the legislation, with or without the “neutrality” amendment! Yet he claims he is being falsely accused by the “right wing blogosphere and rumor mongers.”
Douglas Johnson, NRLC Legislative Director, stated after Obama’s non-response: “It is rather astonishing that, in light of the new documents that came to light this week, the Obama campaign here continues to brazenly misrepresent the content of the state Born-Alive Infants Protection Act that Obama killed in 2003.”
Obama also ignores the fact that the 2000 version of the federal Born Alive Infant Protection Act had no “neutrality” language and still passed in the House of Representatives by a vote of 380-15, putting him in the tiniest of minorities who believe that a woman seeking an abortion deserves to have a dead baby, even if the baby is separate from her and living and breathing.
What a meeting it would be — a face to face between abortion survivor Gianna Jessen and Barack Obama, the man who doesn’t think lives like hers are worth saving.
Gianna Jessen, a beautiful young woman who sings, writes and runs marathons despite her disabilities, did indeed survive an abortion attempt. Now in her 30s, Gianna travels the world delighting and inspiring anyone who hears her story of a life almost cut very short. Gianna spoke at our 2007 Wisconsin Right to Life Education Fund dinner and participants still rave about the courage, strength, beauty, music and words of this remarkable young woman.
So, let’s pretend that Gianna meets Obama and relates the attempt on her life, her precarious birth, her disabilities, and her ability to overcome a tragic beginning to make a tremendous difference in the lives of others. What would he say? Claim her story is fake? Tell her she should have been left for dead? Or continue his glib rhetoric in a feeble attempt to gloss over his infanticide votes?
No one is fooled by Obama, least of all Gianna. Someday, Obama will have to face the stark reality that he has callously and deliberately thrown Gianna and others like her under the bus.