I must be exaggerating, you say? Watch.

Quote: “If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”

He’s offering this to make the case that the new bill is less draconian than its right-wing critics claim. Yes, he allows, there will be situations where a child is delivered alive and then killed on the table on mom’s instructions — the logical end point of liberal abortion laws, as pro-lifers have warned about for years. But it’ll be “kept comfortable.” Why, they might even revive it if it isn’t breathing when it’s born, like saving the life of a death-row inmate during a suicide attempt so that he can be properly executed the next day.

What’s all the fuss about?

Ralph Northam isn’t a radical Democrat. He governs one of the more purplish blue states in the country. (He’s also a … pediatric neurologist by trade.) And yet the bill that state is now considering would allow abortion essentially up to, if not beyond, the moment of birth provided that the mother can find one doctor willing to sign off on it as necessary for health reasons. (Ross Douthat points to this study from the Guttmacher Institute as evidence that, contra pro-choice talking points, most women who seek late-term abortions don’t so for medical reasons.) Current law requires the consent of two doctors; needless to say, it’s easier to find yourself one Kermit Gosnell willing to fib about the medical necessity of an eleventh-hour termination than a pair.

The bill’s Democratic sponsor was asked directly during a hearing yesterday whether her bill would allow an abortion right up to the point where the mother is about to give birth. Sure, said state Rep. Kathy Tran, so long as a doctor agrees.

To repeat: This is no longer a radical position. If you doubt that, consider that a guy who was primaried last year for not being progressive enough is leading the charge in New York for a similar “kill ’em whenever” approach to abortion.

Governor Andrew Cuomo dug in his heels today, defending signing a law legalizing abortion up until birth while lashing out at Catholic bishops, some of whom increasingly speak of his future excommunication…

Earlier today, New York City’s Cardinal Timothy Dolan did not mince words, saying that the abortion bill Cuomo signed into law is “ghoulish, grisly, and gruesome.”…

“Any thinking human being that would want a baby, allow a baby, to be aborted right up to the moment of birth…anybody who thinks that a baby who survives a gruesome abortion procedure and that a doctor is no longer required to attempt to save that baby’s life – you don’t have to be a Catholic to abhor those types of things,” continued Dolan.

Why would anyone vote for this filth, especially on “lesser of two evils” grounds? Ask a progressive to name the most vicious thing Trump has done while in office and they’re apt to cite his family separation policy at the border. Practically to a man or woman, all of those same people either enthusiastically support or comfortably tolerate a Democratic leadership that thinks actual out-of-the-womb infanticide is unproblematic. They’re diseased. How could any righty, anti-Trump or not, support them?

Update: The only spin the left is offering on Northam’s comments is that he must be describing an unviable fetus, a baby that’s too sick to live for long after delivery. That’ll probably be his spin too after the outrage wave reaches him. But that’s missing the point: Although the idea of a doctor killing a child on the table after it’s been born alive is especially gruesome, there seems to be no dispute that Tran’s bill would allow the child to be killed right up to the point of birth. There’s also nothing in the bill that I’m aware of that limits late-term abortion to “unviable” fetuses. There’s a requirement about the mother’s health, but that determination is left to the discretion of a single doctor. I refer you again to Cuomo, who’s making no bones about the fact that he views this as a matter of “choice” and rights, not medical necessity. The best possible spin on Northam is that he’d agree to draw the line on when it’s okay to kill the baby at the point it starts crowning. That’s “moderation” in today’s Democratic Party.

Update: As expected, Northam is claiming he’s been taken out of context:

Note the slippery phrase “tragic or difficult circumstances” and return again to that Guttmacher Institute study I linked above. It’s just not the case that women seek late-term abortions for medical reasons only. And the whole point of changing the law so that only one doctor is needed to certify medical need instead of three is to make it easier to fib on that point. Find a single doctor who’s willing to say that your non-medical reason for aborting was medical and you’re free to proceed.