NRLC: We’re still waiting for Obama to apologize
posted at 5:40 pm on September 26, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
The National Right to Life Committee has a new television ad out today in which they demand an apology from Barack Obama for calling them liars. The NRLC uncovered documentation that refuted Obama’s contention that he voted against SB1082, the Illinois version of the Born Again Infant Protection Act because it didn’t have the same “neutrality clause” of the federal BAIPA that protected abortionists. When David Brody confronted Obama about it, he called the NRLC liars — but later had to admit they were correct:
Fact Check has a lengthy rundown of this issue from last month, which the NRLC quotes in this ad. While Fact Check thinks “infanticide” is a questionable term, they clearly state that Obama got this argument wrong, and that the NRLC was right in pointing out that the bill had the same neutrality clause as BAIPA:
The statement was still on Obama’s Web site as of this writing, Aug. 25, long after Obama had accused his detractors of “lying.” But Obama’s claim is wrong. In fact, by the time the HHS Committee voted on the bill, it did contain language identical to the federal act.
And therefore Obama lied about the NRLC. Notice that nowhere in that Brody interview nor anywhere on his website does Obama defend the practice of abandoning infants born of abortion procedures to die, a practice which his vote helped to protect. He never actually defends his vote, because it’s indefensible. Obama instead relies on misdirection and lying about his critics in order to evade the question entirely.
Getting back to Fact Check’s queasiness over the use of the word “infanticide”, let’s see their argument against it:
Whether opposing “born alive” legislation is the same as supporting “infanticide,” however, is entirely a matter of interpretation. That could be true only for those, such as Obama’s 2004 Republican opponent, Alan Keyes, who believe a fetus that doctors give no chance of surviving is an “infant.” It is worth noting that Illinois law already provided that physicians must protect the life of a fetus when there is “a reasonable likelihood of sustained survival of the fetus outside the womb, with or without artificial support.”
Excuse me, but any “fetus” delivered outside of the mother is an “infant” by definition. If alive, the infant should get medical attention. Instead, as Jill Stanek testified (and as subsequent witnesses substantiated), these infants got abandoned to die in closets where others didn’t have to watch them slowly die of neglect. The Attorney General told the legislature that the law didn’t prevent this from happening, and that the legislature needed to make the law more clear. That’s why the legislature considered this bill on three separate occasions. Obama voted against it all three times, and killed it in his committee in 2003.
The NRLC deserves an apology from Barack Obama for calling them liars. Will they get it? I wouldn’t advise them to hold their breath. You can read more about this on the NRLC’s website, or in my previous posts on the subject:
- Infanticide, revisited
- Yes, we can … elect a guy who votes for infanticide
- There are a lot of things above Obama’s “pay grade”
- Team Obama acknowledges infanticide lie
- Obama camp: He only voted against that born-alive abortion bill because it might actually have an effect
- Obama’s support for infanticide breaks into mainstream media
- Obama: Bill unnecessarily burdened doctors with … babies; Update: AOL Hot Seat poll added
- McCarthy: Obama’s moral failing on infanticide
- Obama’s ad lies about infanticide vote