cottontownrambler: blog 
cottontownrambler's blog
obama in hot water over abortion vote
Published Aug. 20, 2008
Nine years ago, Chicago nurse Jill Stanek discovered babies who survived botched abortions at Christ Hospital were left to die in a soiled-utility room.
Since then, she has worked to protect those babies and educate the public about the horrific practice.
This week, the mainstream media are taking notice of her efforts. Why? Because at the center of the controversy stands Sen. Barack Obama.
Consider recent headlines:
The New York Times: "Obama’s 2003 Stand on Abortion Draws New Criticism in 2008."
The Washington Post: "Candidates' Abortion Views Not So Simple."
Chicago Tribune: "Obama's record on abortion hit."
The Associated Press: "Obama faces new criticism on abortion."
As chairman of the Health and Human Services Committee in the Illinois Legislature in 2003, Obama blocked the Born Alive Infant Protection Act. The bill, which followed Stanek's gruesome discovery, would have protected babies who survive an abortion.
"Senator Obama … did not oppose the killing of babies who were aborted, but then somehow came into the world alive," Dr. James Dobson, founder and chairman of Focus on the Family Action, said on a recent radio broadcast. "That, to him, was a moral position. To me, it’s anathema."
For years, Obama has maintained he blocked the legislation because it did not mirror the federal law. But the National Right to Life Committee has recently presented documentation showing the two bills were virtually identical.
“I don’t know whether he is lying or whether he forgot, but with his words, he is condemning himself," Stanek told The New York Times. “He voted one way and then covered it up, and he has to explain that, not just to me, but to the American people.”
The Obama campaign has said the senator appeared to misstate his position.
Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee, said, "It wasn't until we got these official documents that they finally had to fess up and are now trying to change the subject.
"He knows that millions of Americans would find this position extreme and repugnant."
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Read more about Sen. Obama's efforts to block the Born Alive Infant Protection Act in Illinois.
close27 Comments
(8 votes) firefighter dies after atv wreck
(7 votes) soldier charged in murder-for-hire plot
(6 votes) cooper won't face death penalty
(4 votes) pilot makes emergency landing in sanford
(2 votes) police: man molested 9-year-old girl
Welcome to GOLO, where WRAL.com visitors can comment on stories and create profile pages, blogs and photo galleries.
You must be a registered WRAL.com user to use these tools. Click here to register or log in.
GOLO member since July 7, 2007
August 21, 2008 10:15 a.m.
I'm saying that on the campaign trail, abortion is abortion, and the third railers aren't going to care whether it's third trimester or not. If McCain selects him, he's by default taking the abortion question off the table as a matter of survival because he can't fling arrows at Obama about it without hitting himself as well.
GOLO member since June 10, 2008
August 21, 2008 8:57 a.m.
Then read the floor commentary from the Illinois Senate concerning the bill in question, which you are capable of accessing on your own. His rationale for opposing the bill in question was thoroughly expressed and more than well explained in his own words there.
They're not frightened of the story so much as they're not interested in swinging at the dirt. Denying it and setting the record straight requires a level of explanation that the average voter won't entertain, keeps the focus on the situation and, in the end, does nothing to convince voters that were already predetermined to vote against him. There's no positive for him in trying to deal with it, so why bother?
GOLO member since June 10, 2008
August 21, 2008 8:55 a.m.
I know no such thing. All I know is that the left is very frightened of this story and are doing everything they can to spike it.
"Ridge's support for pro-choice is well documented and has been around for a long time now."
Again, are you saying Ridge supports this particular procedure or are you simply lumping him in with it because you think we are stupid and will fall for it? Or are you saying that leaving a breathing child to die is a mainstream pro-choice position?
August 21, 2008 8:48 a.m.
On the one hand, he picks Ridge and immediately pi sses off every evangelical in the country.
On the other, he doesn't pick Ridge, but chooses instead another pro-lifer, and immediately chops off large sections of his moderate support, especially among women.
Either way he goes, he hurts himself, and allowing oneself to be put into that sort of lose/lose situation is what we call being inept.
Starting out to be a pretty good day :-D
GOLO member since June 10, 2008
August 21, 2008 8:15 a.m.
Roe v. Wade gave women the same choice - to walk away from an unplanned unwanted pregnancy.
On a scale of good, better or best, it's horrific. But it never would have come to this at all had men accepted the responsibilities of their actions long long ago.
So now, here we are, and it's a fine mess, isn't it.
God bless.
Rev. RB
GOLO member since July 2, 2007
August 21, 2008 7:59 a.m.
Get off your righteous indignation high horse. It doesn't play well.
For one, you know that this thing in Illinois is being and has been misrepresented, deliberately, in order to manipulate unsophisticated voters. If believing it makes them "provincial rubes," then that's the breaks, friend.
Ridge's support for pro-choice is well documented and has been around for a long time now. Don't believe me? Google. Either way, it morphs into a situation where every time that this gets trotted out about Obama, they start pointing to Ridge in return.
And that's going to be entertaining.
GOLO member since June 10, 2008
August 21, 2008 7:57 a.m.
With the way abortions are done - during the first trimester and by scraping the child and its by-products from the wall of the mother's uterus, how could they have survived unless someone was illegally performing late term abortions?
A 3 month fetus simply can't live outside the uterus, so I'm just wondering.
God bless.
Rev. RB
GOLO member since July 2, 2007
August 21, 2008 7:56 a.m.
August 21, 2008 7:53 a.m.
August 21, 2008 7:49 a.m.
Please log in to add comment.