PBS's Bonnie Erbe is annoyed with Barack Obama's rhetoric at Sunday's Notre Dame commencement ceremony. The "To the Contrary" host and U.S. News contributor slammed the president's appeal to find "common ground" between pro-life and pro-choice activists.
"The Left has made great concessions: abandoning any semblance of seeking abortion on demand, acceding to all sorts of limits on abortion rights in the 37 [sic] years since Roe v. Wade became law," Erbe griped in her May 18 blog post, "Liberals Have Made Abortion Concessions, Now Conservatives Must Give Ground Too."
What planet is Erbe living on? Parental consent laws and partial-birth abortion bans have been vigorously contested by abortion rights advocates in courts, albeit with a mixed record of success in having the courts overturn the will of the people in enacting abortion regulations. Can Erbe honestly point to any abortion regulation -- parental consent, parental notification, required ultrasounds, waiting periods, partial-birth abortion bans -- that a major Democratic presidential aspirant has actively pushed for in the past 25 years?
President Obama pledged during his campaign -- on the 35th anniversary of Roe v. Wade -- to sign the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA). In the same statement he heralded his 100% rating by NARAL Pro-Choice America, which by no means has acquiesced on its push for abortion-on-demand.
No matter, Erbe huffs. It is conservatives and pro-lifers who must make concessions:
Now it's the Right's turn: Stop referring to abortion as "baby-killing" and use of Plan B and other contraceptives as "murder." Maybe then we could see some real progress on this issue.
Shhhh. Don't tell Bonnie the ground is shifting under her according to recent polling:
For the first time since pollsters posed the question in 1995, a slim majority of Americans consider themselves "pro-life," a new Gallup poll shows.Fifty-one percent of respondents describe themselves as "pro-life," while 42% said they are "pro-choice."
The findings were based on answers to Gallup's annual Values and Beliefs survey, which was conducted in early May.
Last year, 50% of respondents described themselves as "pro-choice" and 44% as "pro-life." The previous high-water mark for the "pro-life" category was 46%, reached in 2001 and 2002.
—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Erbe won't be swayed by new polls and facts
May 19, 2009 - 14:18 ET by GalvanicShe's of the old femi-nazi school of thought. She can't change.
Not reading it, not reading it....
May 19, 2009 - 16:44 ET by motherbeltJust commenting: Do we really need to hear any more of what Bonnie Erbe thinks?
I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows. -Bart Simpson
I report, you deride.
May 19, 2009 - 16:59 ET by Ken ShepherdI report, you deride.
Penalty
May 19, 2009 - 17:52 ET by KC MulvilleFlag on Shepherd, for punning, first and fifteen.
Thanks, ladies and
May 19, 2009 - 19:29 ET by Ken ShepherdThanks, ladies and gentlemen, I'll be here all week.
Eugenics
May 19, 2009 - 14:23 ET by 10ksnookerAbortion is just one end of the eugenics scale. The other end is granny costs to much to fix. Soylent Green, in real life.
OK I'll compromise. From
May 19, 2009 - 14:26 ET by mattmOK I'll compromise. From now on all pro-abortion fetuses can be aborted, while all pro-life fetuses can be born.
I'll go one further Matt
May 19, 2009 - 15:00 ET by IamTinmanI'll make a deal. If the pro choice people drop their support for abortion, I'll drop my support for capital punishment. It's a win-win. We all vote for life!
Somehow I don't think they will go for it.
I don't equate the due
May 19, 2009 - 17:51 ET by mattmI don't equate the due process taking of the life of a convicted criminal with the killing of an innocent unborn child. But I do believe you are correct to say that they wouldn't go for it.
Appears Bonnie Erbe, that ground was just given..
May 19, 2009 - 14:31 ET by Gary HallAppears Bonnie Erbe, that a good bit of ground was just given.. by conservatives. Your sides turn!
From: The transformation is almost complete
5. Repealing limitations on taxpayer-funding of abortions overseas.
6. Pledging $50 million to the United Nation’s Population Fund, which supports China’s draconian one-child policy.
7. Proposing new rules to gut conscience clause protections for pro-life doctors and other medical personnel who don’t want to be forced to perform abortions or other procedures that violate their values.
8. Proposing increased funding for the nation’s largest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood.
If they are so compromising
May 19, 2009 - 21:51 ET by kgIf they are so compromising then why do they want partial birth abortions allowed?
"DumbAssity of Dope"
You can't be half-human
May 19, 2009 - 14:33 ET by KC MulvilleIt's either a human being or it isn't. Everything follows from that.
You don't want me to call it murder. Fine. I don't do that now anyway. But I won't compromise about it being a baby. It is a baby. That's the whole point of the debate.
Here again, I think, is where we find the "consensus" fallacy. It's simply wrong-headed to demand consensus in a free society. That's exactly what makes the society free; I don't have to make any effort to agree with my fellow citizens. That's what a vote is. It's how people resolve differences and preserve the union.
If not "murder", what do
May 19, 2009 - 19:20 ET by JerIf not "murder", what do you call it? Currently, it's not unlawful and therefore not legally a homicide, but the official position of the GOP is that from the instant of conception abortion is the taking of a human life which should be unlawful and thus murder. So where is the room for compromise?
Jer
infanticide
May 19, 2009 - 19:29 ET by botginfanticide
Not a perfect response, but
May 19, 2009 - 19:48 ET by JerNot a perfect response, but not bad.
Jer
riddle me this Jer
May 19, 2009 - 20:20 ET by botgif the unborn baby is not a human then you are claiming that all humans come from non-humans
“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” -- Chief Justice John Roberts
Probably better stated as
May 19, 2009 - 20:34 ET by balboaProbably better stated as not a human _yet_.
boa... That post is a
May 19, 2009 - 20:44 ET by bigtimerboa...
That post is a crying shame.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
foolish sophistry
May 19, 2009 - 20:48 ET by botgand nuance without merit Bal,
you confirm my logic
“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” -- Chief Justice John Roberts
It's not perfect. I was
May 19, 2009 - 21:10 ET by balboaIt's not perfect. I was trying to assist.
An unborn baby is a human fetus, absolutely. It's human.
Human.
May 19, 2009 - 20:49 ET by mandrakeOk, I'm going to stick my hand into the wood chipper here just for fun. (I have a strange sense of fun)
The most common distiction made between humans and animals is that humans are 'self aware'. So I ask you at what point did you become self-aware? For me, my earliest memory is around 18 months after birth..before that..nothing. But maybe I'm just slow.
Blast away :)
mandrake
May 19, 2009 - 20:56 ET by bigtimerFor me, my earliest memory is around 18 months after birth..before that..nothing. But maybe I'm just slow.
That may be.
I know one thing as a gal, your natural instincts are to protect that child with your very life, while you are carrying that child or not.
Natural maternal instincts.
Kind of like those simple animals.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
BT
May 19, 2009 - 21:04 ET by mandrakeThanks, as a father I have the same instincts. But I was trying to address a diffrent question. At what point do we come human?
I know..at the point of conception..end of debate right!!!
At what point didn't you
May 19, 2009 - 21:17 ET by bigtimerAt what point didn't you understand, as simple as I could make it ...that you didn't understand?
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
I do find these debates
May 19, 2009 - 22:22 ET by balboaI do find these debates interesting sometimes: when do you become a human.
boa... Evidently
May 19, 2009 - 22:41 ET by bigtimerboa...
Evidently something you'll never experience lil bro'. ;-)
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Zing! Boy I left the door
May 19, 2009 - 22:45 ET by balboaZing! Boy I left the door wide open on that one. :-)
ROFL boa....you'll never
May 19, 2009 - 23:06 ET by bigtimerROFL boa....you'll never know how many times I modified that.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Good one, bt...
May 19, 2009 - 23:18 ET by JerHope bal doesn't think I'm betraying him...but I have to chalk one up for you for that one.
Pretty darn funny.
Jer
mandrake
May 19, 2009 - 20:59 ET by botgso people in comas aren't human? are less intelligent people less human? are 6 month olds not human?
now try making up another definition, i'm not buying yours........
“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” -- Chief Justice John Roberts
New definition
May 19, 2009 - 21:17 ET by mandrakeOk how about this definition. You're not human if you believe posting on the subject of abortion on NB could possibly influence anyone. Does that work?
nope
May 19, 2009 - 21:24 ET by botg“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” -- Chief Justice John Roberts
No Scotch for you! The
May 19, 2009 - 21:27 ET by NL207No Scotch for you!
The fact YOU feel the need to debate the point here indicates YOU believe that this debate has some value. Maybe you believe it will influence others?
Hey NL, Always good to hear
May 19, 2009 - 21:36 ET by mandrakeHey NL, Always good to hear from you! If you go back and read my original post I really had no expectation of influencing anyone. Just trying to kick the NB habit..my therapist sez I'm making progress!
Scotch is habit forming as
May 19, 2009 - 22:34 ET by NL207Scotch is habit forming as well. Perhaps you could resort to substitution therapy?
Why does self-awareness matter?
May 20, 2009 - 03:48 ET by KC MulvilleYou're right, it is the most common distinction. Being being common doesn't justify it. Can you establish why self-awareness should be necessary?
That argument goes down (at least) two paths.
I'll throw you another curve. Miranda. The basis of the Miranda decision is that citizens have civil rights, even when they don't know about them. That's why Miranda forces officers to inform suspects of their rights. In other words, the law presumes that you have rights, but doesn't presume you know them. So if the law claims that knowledge of rights doesn't matter, your level of knowledge (including self-awareness) doesn't matter either. So how can we claim that a legal "person" needs to show signs of self-awareness?
_______
Civil rights should be based on only two qualities:
That's it. If you're human, and you're alive, we protect you.
mandrake: Self-awareness is
May 20, 2009 - 08:26 ET by QueenMummandrake: Self-awareness is not the same concept as memory.
GO CAVS!!!!!
QueenMum
May 20, 2009 - 09:40 ET by mandrakeOf course you are correct, as always. There are folks with Alzheimers who can't remember what they did yesterday and yet are self aware..my bad. But I was just trying to cause a ruckus..and succeed! :-)
riddle me this bruce
May 19, 2009 - 23:20 ET by shawn228why are eggs not called baby chickens, are they eggs or are they chickens?
He had my vote
shawn...
May 19, 2009 - 23:27 ET by JerI think it depends on which came first.
Jer
Shawn,
May 19, 2009 - 23:29 ET by RESTLESS 1You are on your own here. Wow.
"This
liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about
basically taking over and the government running all of your companies."-Maxine Waters 2008
Good morning Restless
May 20, 2009 - 08:18 ET by shawn228I am not a big fan or abortion, I was challenging Bruce's analogy
He had my vote
→ Hey Shawn
May 20, 2009 - 08:58 ET by Cool ArrowIn keeping with your train of logic, might I ask if you've ever heard a pregnant woman say "My fetus just kicked"?
"I was fighting a war in Iraq!" - Nancy Lugosi
Jer, you are just way too
May 19, 2009 - 20:38 ET by NL207Jer, you are just way too much fun.
"and therefore not legally a homicide"
If the taking of an unborn Fetus' life is not homicide or murder, then under what legal theory was the infamous Scott Petersen tried for the murder of not just his wife, Lacey, but also of their unborn son, Connor?
As to the use of the term 'Homicide' to denote only unlawful taking of human life: I would ask you what cause of death is given on the death certificates of those executed in the United States for capital crimes? In most states, it is 'legal homicide'.
NL207...
May 19, 2009 - 21:36 ET by JerNL...
You make a fair point. It probably would have been better for me to use the term "criminal homicide". That said, the distinctions are highly complex, and often depend upon, and vary somwhat among, governing juridictions and in accordance with applicable statutes.
Regarding Peterson, I would imagine there was a specific statute covering this circumstance, as well as a recognition that the pregnancy was at a stage where a live birth would have been a medical certainty--as opposed to that of, say, a one-day old fertilized egg.
By the way, I think you're fun too. :-)
Jer
Oh Jer...I just love it
May 19, 2009 - 21:45 ET by bigtimerOh Jer...I just love it when you do the "lawyer speak" stuff...I get so excited.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
res ipsa loquitor...Did
May 19, 2009 - 22:49 ET by Jerres ipsa loquitor...
Did that give you a special tingle in your leg, bt? But, relax, I am far from being an authority in the area of criminal law. I'm sure many here who have never stepped foot inside a school of law know as much or more as I do about it.
Jer
edit. Then again, I may be overplaying the humility card. Actually, only one of the jaywalkers I represented was given the chair, and he was a repeat offender. Plus, not a very likable guy to boot.
→ Get a room
May 19, 2009 - 21:50 ET by Cool ArrowI think you're really keen too, Jer.
But I was bumfuzzled on the "Connors Law" and how it fit ex post facto in the Peterson case too.
Stop fuzzling my bum.
"I was fighting a war in Iraq!" - Nancy Lugosi
I doubt neither NL nor I
May 19, 2009 - 22:12 ET by JerI doubt neither NL nor I are ready for that step, Cool. [However, I would love for him to take me for a spin in an F-4.]
Jer
→ Not me, Jer
May 19, 2009 - 22:22 ET by Cool ArrowI'm not particularly fond of commercial flight, much less the thought of riding a dart through the air at supersonic speed.
My helmet would be so impacted with chunks it wouldn't come off my head.
"I was fighting a war in Iraq!" - Nancy Lugosi
Funny thing. I never saw Ms
May 19, 2009 - 23:14 ET by ArchConservativeFunny thing. I never saw Ms Lugosi/Pelosi when I was over there.
"My helmet would be so
May 20, 2009 - 09:48 ET by NL207"My helmet would be so impacted with chunks it wouldn't come off my head."
The RIO seat is equipped with a bag for this exigency. Another rule I was taught very early on: "Don't ralph in the mask."
" there was a specific
May 20, 2009 - 11:59 ET by NL207" there was a specific statute covering this circumstance, as well as a recognition that the pregnancy was at a stage where a live birth would have been a medical certainty--as opposed to that of, say, a one-day old fertilized egg"
This is worth discussing.
For law to be just, or even to be law, it must be administered consistently and it must itself be consistent. If a jurisdiction has law crminalizing the taking of fetal life where live birth is a near 'medical certainty', how can it also sanction law that permits the taking of said life as an elective 'medical procedure'.
This is where California is presently with its homicide and abortion statutes. I believe several other states also have similar laws.
Degrees
May 20, 2009 - 03:23 ET by KC MulvilleAs a lawyer, you know that there are degrees of homicide. We make distinctions. A cold-blooded killer is supposed to get "first-degree" murder, and we legally respond with the most severe penalties. Another category is "manslaughter," in which the victim is just as dead, but we recognize mitigating circumstances for the guilty. Not every homicide is first-degree murder. The law makes distinctions.
Why not treat abortion with distinctions? Surely a 14-year old should not have killed her baby, but we can understand the circumstances if she'd been raped by her father. It doesn't excuse her actions, but it gives the law some flexibility to respond to real life circumstances. On the other hand, if an expecting single mother who's 35 years old aborts her baby at 8 months because she's angry that the boyfriend split, well, that's a different circumstance, and the law should treat it differently. Part of the deceptive campaign to win support for abortion is to present it as a false choice: making all abortions equivalent to Charles Manson, which no one believes we should do.
You want compromise? I'll give you one. If we can make a category for manslaughter, why can't we make a category for abortion? Society still declares the act to be wrong and immoral, but we agree to take circumstances into account. As a society, we can legislatively haggle out the circumstances.
Rational Thought Approaching -- Abort! Abort!
May 19, 2009 - 14:35 ET by Pilgrim1949Once again, a potentially rational thought, birthed in facts and a wider context for legitimate comparison and discussion.....killed in the womb.
Another liberal, "intellectual" abortificient success.
"Can Erbe honestly point to any abortion regulation..."
May 19, 2009 - 14:36 ET by SickofLibsWell, I can point to an upcoming one: Simply driving past a Planned Parenthood "clinic" while pregnant and on the way to pick up a few groceries without stopping in for a quickie abortion will soon be a federal crime.
Here's a few options to that distasteful "baby killing" phrase for ya, Monster:
• Forceptus deceptus (the medical term)
• Embryo evacuation
• Spring cleaning
• Placental repatriation
• Dysonography
• Veal harvest
Clever and compelling,
May 19, 2009 - 19:51 ET by JerClever and compelling, Sicko...
Seriously.
Jer
This woman lives and
May 19, 2009 - 14:36 ET by Chris NormanThis woman lives and breathes abortion - she is obsessed with abortion. It sounds like she wants every woman in America to get pregnant and get an abortion. She's like the Dr. Jack Kevorkian of abortion. What a sick way to live one's life.
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
Isn't it amazing...
May 19, 2009 - 14:37 ET by jdlybrand... the same people who want no part of God in the schools are perfectly comfortable with abortions where there is no parental consent.
Not only that, but these
May 19, 2009 - 14:53 ET by moderncommentaries83Not only that, but these are the same people who practically have a stroke if a kid takes two Tylenol in school without going through reams of red tape - parental permission, supervision by a school official/nurs - and have "zero tolerance" policies in schools that never, ever really punish chronic offenders but the good students who make a stupid mistake.
The illogic of it all, and the hypocrisy, would be absolutely stunning if this wasn't a liberal's continued behavior pattern.
There is no way to compromise on abortion. A baby isn't "sort of" aborted. The undertone of pro-abortion folks - that we expect women to keep and raise kids and will force them to like it - is outrageous.
No woman has sex without knowing it can lead to pregnancy. That's how babies are made! A choice comes in deciding to either abstain from sex (100% foolproof in preventing pregnancy), use birth control (a compromise by some pro-life folks), or have/put up for adoption the child you create.
The notion that a woman achieves independence and "equality" by taking the life of another human being is a sad, pathetic regression in the development of Western Civilization.
Aut viam inveniam aut faciam
I liked what Michael Steel stated today
May 19, 2009 - 14:42 ET by Southern voterThat from this day forward we will not apologize for what was done wrong in the Republican party !!!
I think we need to take the same stand with regard to abortion..that from this day on more emphasis needs to be placed on 'showing' what abortion truly is ....ultra sounds that prove this is a baby not a fetus and photos that show the horrible manner in which these babies are murdered in the womb...these type photos have always been considered taboo..WHY ??
The media made so much about the plane that flew over Notre Dame displaying pictures of aborted babies....however no one appears to object to the trash and porn blatently displayed everywhere you turn around...
Per Fr Pavone...Until America sees abortion America will not end abortion...
Abortion IS murder,
May 19, 2009 - 14:49 ET by RogerCfromSDAbortion IS murder, lady.
Just as being forced to have sex is rape, not "coaxed coitus."
Liberals' in ability to confront the truth blinds them to their own contradictions.
A nation cannot be free without a free, unbiased media. We are not free.
Of all the absurdity spread by the Obama administration
May 19, 2009 - 14:55 ET by IamTinmanOf all the absurdity spread by the Obama administration, the idea of finding a middle ground in the abortion controversy far and away leads the field.
Granted we can be a little more civil in the discourse, but it always boils down to whether you believe that killing an unborn (or in some cases a born) child is right or wrong. There is no room for agreement, it's a yes/no question.
I find it astonishing that
May 19, 2009 - 14:56 ET by SickofLibsI find it astonishing that this psychopath is actually getting paid, and probably fairly well, for her "blogs".
Her headline is "Liberals Have Made Abortion Concessions...", yet she provides not one iota of evidence or backup of this preposterous claim. Zero. Zippo. Nada.
And she has the balls to name her blog the Thomas Jefferson Street Blog. Thomas Jefferson would have strangled her on sight, I believe.
Kind of like "anonymous insiders"
May 19, 2009 - 15:15 ET by moderncommentaries83In a liberal's world, if someone said it, it must be true. Erbe said the left has made concessions; ergo - in her mind - it's a fact.
Evidence is for little people.
Aut viam inveniam aut faciam
Further proof that liberals
May 19, 2009 - 15:15 ET by ConservativeRexFurther proof that liberals support the party of death. Democrats surround themselves in death. For one thing, most of them have a Peter Pan syndrome, they worship youth, hence all of the rebelliousness against any form of authority.
Eugenics, government sanctioned eugenics, can not be far behind. Dems feel they must, at every phase of life, control everything. Environment, healthy food, physical fitness (with the exception of gym class, that makes slow kids look bad).
These things all sound good right? How could anyone possibly be against any of these things? Well, Conservatives are not against these things. We just don't need the government pushing them down our throats. Which is what the dems do. There was another political party at one time 75 years ago that pushed these very same things. How'd that work out?
The chutzpah is breathtaking
May 19, 2009 - 15:17 ET by danebramageSo this genius Erbe thinks that when Hitler gave ground in France because we drove his stinkin' butt back off the beaches, we were required, by some weird protocol that exists only in the minds of idiot leftists, to cede something to him in return?
Excuse me, please, while I laugh in her evil, baby-killing face.
Observation
May 19, 2009 - 15:29 ET by okiehawk44In my life of many years I have observed that those who are the most strident about a subject (say pornography or homosexuality) usually are either a secret part of that group they claim to abhor or are in some other way crippled by the subject.
Bonnie Erbe has either aborted a fetus and deeply regrets that and is growing ever more fearful of the consequences of that action or has a self-absorbed body fetish worried that her female body is under constant attack from men who want to force it to do their bidding or own it or something.
Bipartisanship Trap
May 19, 2009 - 15:40 ET by MAS1916Bonnie Erbe is doing what all Democrats do when they see their issue slipping in popularity - they try to convince conservatives that they need to be 'fair' and compromise.
The life issue is indeed slipping away from liberal Democrats. Should this trend continue, social conservatives would again be a major force. Right to Life issues galvanize the conservative base and - now that it appears the tide is turning in their favor - the base will be energized as well.
Conservatives and Republicans though need to absolutely avoid doing what Erbe suggests. Conservatives must fight for conservative values. Arlen Specter couldn't handle this and jumped ship. He will have a difficult time winning re-election. Bipartisanship and compromise are Democrat code words for 'let us share the blame with you' when unintended consequences arise.
Liberals are laying out all kinds of these 'bipartisanship traps' hoping to lure in a few gullible Republicans. This is just one of them. For a lighter look at other 'traps,' you can hit:
http://firstconserva...
Compromise
May 19, 2009 - 16:39 ET by seven51% oppose abortion. 42% favor it.
Compromise is a good request when you are losing rapidly.
compromise #1
Cut funding to planned Parenthood by 50% since half oppose it
2 Have a waitting period of 2 days instead of 4
3 Create a video on the after effects of abortion and make a girl that is a minor view it with her mother.
Common Ground
May 19, 2009 - 17:30 ET by slickwillie2001An interesting challenge to the Bamster: Obama, Want Common Ground? Start by Curbing Fetal Pain: http://www.nydailynews.com
I haven't heard the standard liberal talking point reponse to this question. I'm sure it will be imaginative.
P2PL protocol
May 19, 2009 - 17:36 ET by katainkentPaid to Print Lies.
Not a single shred of evidence to backup her opening statement.
___________________________________________
Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past - George Orwell - 1984
The Left's definition of
May 19, 2009 - 18:52 ET by GrannyGrump42The Left's definition of "compromise" is the same as a toddler's: Give me everything that I want and pretend that you're happy about it.
Attila's chick
May 19, 2009 - 22:01 ET by zachlindLook, lets face it. Bonnie Erbe is not an easy view by any stretch. I suspect she would give up her biased and bigoted ways just to have a personal abortion problem. Short of Attila the Hun on a long winter night, who would volunteer?
What does BAIPA mean?
May 20, 2009 - 05:36 ET by Retired GeekWhat does BAIPA mean - 'Born Alive Infant Protection Act'.
Why did Congress pass the BAIPA if there was no need?
Why did Barack Obama work so hard to defeat BAIPA if it would NOT protect the babies?
Why are there no 'Death Certificates' if these babies were already protected by law?
Why HAS THERE NEVER BEEN A DEATH CERTIFICATE ANYWHERE when a baby survives a botched abortion and left to die?
Why did Barack Obama lie about his position and instead say 'There is already a law protecting babies'?
Why of the estimated 100 babies per year left to die alone, has THERE NEVER been a police report or a death certificate?
Why, because the baby is NOT considered anything but 'Medical Waste' and it is not illegal to dispose of medical waste.
Barack Obama thinks when a woman contracts with an abortionist to have a 'Dead Baby' - she deserves a 'Dead Baby' - even if that baby is alive and separated from its mother - and by definition a United States Citizen.
Barack Obama wants that baby treated as medical waste and disposed of - even if the baby is alive and could possibly live.
That reflects the lack of compassion, empathy and regard for human life - that is the Barack Obama 'Character'.
http://hisfacts.blog... n_terror.thtml