Media Continue to Ignore Obama Abortion Kerfuffle

By John Stephenson (Bio | Archive)
August 19, 2008 - 22:32 ET

All the spin will make you dizzy. Obama digs the hole deeper. After the media ignored the Obama campaign admitting that he lied about a vote he made in 2003 in favor of infanticide, now Obama is accusing others of “attacking” him with “outrageous lies”!

“Senator Obama strongly supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose. He believes that there is a moral and ethical element to this issue, and he believes that women do not make these decisions casually, but wrestle with them in consultation with their doctors, pastors and family. Senator Obama understands that some will disagree with him and choose not to support him, and he respects those with different opinions.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

But 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.

I know we could get very creative with the word “audacity” now! David Freddoso zeroes in on the spin.

Instead of apologizing to the people Obama wrongly called “liars” on Saturday, he is taking refuge in charged semantics. His campaign, unable to defend the votes he took and the things he said, which are all backed up by documentary evidence, is dropping an atomic bomb of triviality on the entire debate. Obama will only get away with this if the media lets him. A reader asks, “Where is FactCheck.org?”

Don’t count on the media to do any fact checking. If they were interested in doing that, the documents and facts are easily available. I can see why Obama thinks he can get away with this. The media ignored his lies once, they’ll most likely continue to eat them up. Meanwhile, Obama’s arrogance and audacity will continue to reach uncharted levels.

—John Stephenson is editor of Stop The ACLU.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I heard this statement put

August 19, 2008 - 23:08 ET by bigtimer

I heard this statement put out today...the msm aren't eating up his lies, they know the truth, they are just defending them with their intentional bias to get their guy in...facts do not matter haven't in a long time...repeat a lie often enough usually works for them...it isn't going to on this subject as much as they wished...spin as they might...

Desperation mode is showing... this will help do them in...they know it too... 

Obama's own arrogance will do him in...and he is working on that hard.

Just the patriotism BS today at the VFW town Hall meeting is another prime example...

I have never seen such a fool as this man is.

The leftist msm goes without saying.

...gotta' be lots of people that supported him quaking in their boots about now getting symptoms of buyers remorse.

All the while Hill smiles in the background. 

"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh

unbelievable

August 19, 2008 - 23:22 ET by candance

Now if you disagree with Obama, not only are you racist, you're a lying liar to boot.

They really are pulling out all the stops to get him to win the election.

This is why you should avoid simplistic rhetoric

August 20, 2008 - 00:27 ET by KC Mulville

"He [Obama] believes that there is a moral and ethical element to this issue, and he believes that women do not make these decisions casually, but wrestle with them in consultation with their doctors, pastors and family."

  • But I thought these questions were above his pay grade? This is another example of voting "present" instead of yes or no. He's basically saying that he's glad that someone else makes those decisions instead of him. That's a presidential quality, isn't it?
  • If women, doctors, pastors and family have to wrestle with these question, why does Obama not have to? Do we really want a guy in the White House who avoids the most personal and difficult ethical question of life?
  • If women, doctors, pastors and family are willing to take on these tough questions, I'd rather have them run for president than this guy.

More empty rhetoric. Obama must have bought in bulk. I didn't know that BJ's sells manure.

Great post KC

August 20, 2008 - 00:34 ET by Cool Arrow

He's lying of course, as evidenced here;


“I strongly disagree with today’s Supreme Court ruling, which dramatically
departs from previous precedents safeguarding the health of pregnant women. As
Justice Ginsburg emphasized in her dissenting opinion, this ruling signals an
alarming willingness on the part of the conservative majority to disregard its
prior rulings respecting a woman’s medical concerns and the very personal
decisions between a doctor and patient. I am extremely concerned that this
ruling will embolden state legislatures to enact further measures to restrict a
woman’s right to choose, and that the conservative Supreme Court justices will
look for other opportunities to erode Roe v. Wade, which is established federal
law and a matter of equal rights for women.”
—Senator Barack Obama
(D-IL), 4/18/2007

If it's above his pay grade in the Senate, he should keep his trap shut about his silly litmus test.

I ♣ my seal

KC.... Your point about

August 20, 2008 - 00:46 ET by bigtimer

KC....

Your point about "I thought these questions were above his pay grade" is priceless....along with the rest of your post.

You hit the nail right on the head.

"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh

I agree...great point, and

August 20, 2008 - 06:16 ET by motherbelt

I agree...great point, and Cool Arrow made one too...then what is he doing giving speeches about it in the Senate, and voting on these things too? Is President a demotion from Senator?

When his campaign says "Senator Obama has two little girls" I wish someone would respond..."yes, he has two little girls because his wife chose to. Had she had other ideas, he would not have those two beautiful girls. Is he OK with that?"

And let's talk about the intent of the procedure. It was described very well by Dr. Martin Haskell, a well know partial-birth abortionist. Dr. Haskell had this to say in an interview with Medical News, the newspaper of the AMA:

"And I'll be quite frank: most of my abortions are elective in that 20-24 week range. . . . In my particular case, probably 20% [of this procedure] are for genetic reasons. And the other 80% are purely elective." Regarding the fact that the cervix was not dilated wide enough to deliver the head, Haskell also admitted that "you could dilate further" and deliver the baby alive, but "that's not really the point. The point here is you're attempting to do an abortion. And that's the goal of your work, is to complete an abortion. Not to see how do I manipulate the situation so that I get a live birth instead."

LINK

So the intent of abortion is a dead baby, and if by chance one is born alive, as in the induced labor situation, the situation shouldn't be manipulated to try to save the baby.

MB

August 20, 2008 - 12:17 ET by lotr

And these, too, are good points, especially the stark testimony of the abortionist regarding the intent of abortion.

When his campaign says "Senator Obama has two little girls" I wish someone would respond...

"So, I guess he deserves a medal?"

"So, that somehow justifies his voting against a bill that protects abortion survivors (aka, infants)?"

Obama needs to be exposed on this issue.  He also, as a professed Christian, needs to read his Bible.

Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.  -- John 3:20 (emphasis mine)

You must not worship the LORD your God in their way, because in worshiping their gods, they do all kinds of detestable things the LORD hates. They even burn their sons and daughters in the fire as sacrifices to their gods.  -- Deut. 12:31 (emphasis mine)

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and discipline.  -- Prov. 1:7 (emphasis mine)

Why do liberals fight so

August 20, 2008 - 06:36 ET by Nonanon

Why do liberals fight so hard to keep convicted guilty criminals (and terrorists) alive while at the same time fight so hard to kill innocent unborn babies? How do they balance these things in their minds?

that is why some

August 20, 2008 - 08:59 ET by larry on LI

of us consider liberalism ,as a sickness.

Obama History on Abortion and Infanticide

August 21, 2008 - 12:07 ET by AtTheWaterCooler

I have added a link to your article from http://www.jeremiahf... "Obama History on Abortion and Infanticide" where information on by National Right to Life Committee assertions are looked at.