Obama’s Infanticide Connection -- Part Two of Two

In Part One we talked about Obama’s Houdini-like effort to escape the chains he has forged for himself by heartily embracing abortion on demand. In a word Obama faked a new-found respect for limiting the absolute right to abortion.

When called to account for his apparent change of heart, expressed in an interview with “Relevant” magazine, Obama quickly retreated. Obama said he “wasn't discussing any view that runs contrary to current abortion law,” as ABC’s Jake Tapper described Obama’s “clarification.”

But the “Relevant” interview had a secondary purpose which, in the long run, may be of equal importance to Obama’s chances of making inroads among certain religious communities.

If you read the blogs of Obamaphiles, you often see a nagging concern about Obama’s role in Illinois’ Born-Alive Infants Protection Act.

The Illinois BAIPA was very similar to the federal Born-Alive Infants Protection Act which Senator John McCain voted for. It passed in the United States Senate while Obama was serving in the Illinois state Senate. Its utterly noble intent was to assure that those infants that survive an abortion were not deposited in soiled utility rooms where they were left to die unattended.

After the interview appeared, the National Catholic Outreach leader of Obama for America sent out an email attempting to amplify Obama’s explanation of why he voted against BAIPA. Both the email and Obama’s own remarks were similar to many attempts by the Obama campaign to blunt the impact of Obama’s cold-hearted, merciless votes. (Obama voted twice against the measure and “present” once.)

There are other ancillary explanations but the two primary rationalizations employed by Obama and his apologists are either that the measure wasn’t needed and/or that it somehow directly challenged Roe v. Wade! Both are absurd on their face.

The reason the law was introduced in the first place was precisely because of testimony from nurses that hospitals were performing abortions by inducing labor prior to the point of the baby's "viability and some babies were born alive. BAIPA said that a born-alive infant, as defined, had the same legal status regardless of stage of development.

And at both at the state and federal level, proponents went out of their way to explicitly clarify that the laws would not challenge Roe v. Wade. Why wouldn’t they make this clear when they knew that even this very modest protection could not pass without the clarification?

Obama is a radical on abortion. He supports the Freedom of Choice Act, which would among other things make partial-birth abortions legal; has no problem with minor daughters being whisked out of a state with a parental involvement law to one that doesn’t to have her abortion; would happily appropriate your tax dollars to pay for abortions; and criticized the Supreme Court for upholding the ban on partial-birth abortions.

If that weren’t grisly enough, Obama voted to assure a death sentence for the handful of babies who survive the abortionist’s best efforts. No wonder he works overtime to hide his voting record and his views.

Please send your comments to daveandrusko@hotmail.com.