CNN’s Costello Omits Part of the Story About Obama’s Radical Abortion Votes

Photo of Matthew Balan.

Carol Costello, CNN Correspondent | NewsBusters.orgIn a report on Monday’s "The Situation Room" purporting to clarify how Barack Obama "really voted on abortion" (as the graphic on-screen at right stated), CNN correspondent Carol Costello misconstrued the Democrat’s stance on legislation during his time in the Illinois state senate that would have protected infants that survived abortions. Besides the two votes specifically mentioned by Costello in the report, Obama also voted against it at the committee level, and when he was committee chair, denied a simple up or down vote on the legislation. The CNN correspondent also misrepresented the apparent pro-life stance of pro-abortion senators like "liberal Ted Kennedy" when the U.S. Senate voted on similar legislation. The bill passed by unanimous consent, so none of the senators actually voted yes or no on it.

Substitute host John Roberts introduced the segment, and asked Costello, "what are the allegations and what's the truth about Obama's abortion record?" Though the CNN correspondent did present both sides of the debate on the issue, she left out key details about Obama’s voting record.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

First, Costello presented how the "charge" that Obama opposed a bill that would have protected unborn babies that survive abortion has been "circulating online for months," as if it’s just another one of those Internet rumors about the senator, like the one that claims that Obama is a Muslim. She then mentioned the criticism of "[a]nti-abortion conservatives like Former Senator Rick Santorum," and Bill Bennett, who have taken Obama to task for the vote.

The CNN correspondent then gave the following outline of Obama’s apparent record on the bill:

COSTELLO: What about that vote? In 2001, when Obama was an Illinois state senator, he and his colleagues considered a bill called the 'Born-Alive Infant Protection Act,' which provided 'that a live child born as a result of an abortion shall be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate protection under the law.' The bill caused an uproar in Illinois, fueled by dramatic testimony by a former Chicago nurse, Jill Stanek.

JILL STANEK: I held this little baby who had Down's syndrome, between 21 and 22 weeks until he died, for 45 minutes, and that instantly catapulted me into being a pro-life activist to stand passionate on this issue.

COSTELLO: Stanek, who was working at an Illinois hospital at that time, became so passionate she said she lost her job. A hospital spokesman, the Reverend Wendall Ulman, would not confirm this, but said Stanek did 'not represent (their) hospital in a credible way.' Still, Stanek's testimony fueled passion for the Illinois bill. It came up for a vote twice in the state legislature. The first time Obama voted present. The second time, he voted no. He said at the time the Illinois Born-Alive Infant Protection Act 'would essentially bar abortions, because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child.' In other words, Obama says now it 'lacked the federal language clarifying the act would not be used to undermine Roe v. Wade.' Planned Parenthood of Chicago told us Obama felt the true goal of the Illinois bill was to make sure all abortion was illegal. Stanek denies that, saying the bill was almost identical to the federal Born-Alive Infant Protection Act, a bill that was approved by every legislator from liberal Ted Kennedy to conservative Rick Santorum. It was signed into law by President Bush in 2002.

That’s not the complete story, Carol. As Stanek herself detailed on her blog, Obama had more than two opportunities to vote on the legislation. On March 28, 2001, when the bill was before the Illinois Senate Judiciary Committee, Obama voted ‘no.’ He then voted ‘present’ two days later. When the bill came up again in 2002, the then-state senator voted ‘no’ twice, both at the committee level and on the floor of the state senate.

The sponsor introduced it for a third time in 2003. By this point, the Democrats took control of the state senate, and sent the bill to the state Health and Human Services Committee, which Obama chaired that year. There, he held the legislation up, not allowing it even to be voted on. When the sponsor tried to amend the bill to add language that would have made it identical to the federal legislation passed in 2002 and signed into law by President Bush, Obama held it up as well.

At the end of her outline, Costello misrepresented how the federal Born-Alive Infant Protection Act "was approved by every legislator from liberal Ted Kennedy to conservative Rick Santorum." In reality, when the Senate took up the legislation, it passed by unanimous consent, thus not putting any senator on record as to whether they supported it or not.

'harsh idealogue' screencap from CNN Coverage - NewsBusters.orgEarlier, when Costello mentioned how Santorum called Obama a "harsh ideologue" in an op-ed for his opposition to the legislation, a graphic misspelled the term as "harsh idealogue." This happened despite the fact that a screen capture of the online text of the op-ed appeared behind the graphic, giving the correct spelling of the term Santorum used. The graphic, together with the screen capture, appeared for only two seconds, so unless the viewer was paying close attention, it might give the false impression that Santorum spelled it wrong, when it was actually CNN’s fault.

So a segment purporting to present "the truth about Obama's abortion record" actually clouded the reality of Obama’s support for the barbarism of letting abortion-surviving babies die of neglect, an atrocity nurses like Jill Stanek have had to deal with.

—Matthew Balan is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.


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.

Proving yet again that the MSM is NOT there to report

They are there to obfuscate, confuse, lie and campaign for their favorite liberal candidate. Obama would not allow this bill to go to a floor vote while he was the chair of the commitee it was sitting in. That is worse than voting "No" that is being a tyrant and preventing the people's representatives from representing them. Why did he not permit the vote? Because it was widely known that it would have passed.

Obama supports infanticide in any form, be it abortion or death from neglect. Yet, he is supposed to give a speech on "faith" soon. How hypocritical! Faith in what? Ba'al?

 

The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.

"Born-Alive Infant Protection Act"

Maybe the title of the bill was not clear enough and he was not sure what the legislation really entailed.

 

The 2ND Amendment exists to secure the rest

"That was not the bill I

"That was not the bill I knew..."

When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).

I saw this segment

I thought Costello was leaving something out. Thanks for clearing it up Matt.

Also, I thought Bill Bennet did a good job of arguing some of these points in the immediate discussion afterwards with Carville. Carville clearly had nothing to say and tried to change the subject but Bennet wouldn't let him.

The discussion

All Carville could do is attack Santorum and the nurse Jill Stanek, not their statements, but them. Bennett was excellent and I would have loved to see Costello respond in some way...like saying "Well, yeah, that's true too, but, ah, but..."

"I don't know is on third ... Hey Abbott!"

You'd think ethical standards would apply to "journalist."

Extreme Irony

These self proclaimed protectors of truth are bigger liars that the politicians.

Amazing how little shame they have when they blatantly cover & lie for the libs...

Be moderatley attractive, get a good hair & makeup person, read on a 8th grade level...bingo, you are a "Journalist".

The worst part is, that only the informed read sites like this...(we all know they pull this crap all the time) however the masses of the asses , or the sheeple, if you will, look starry eyed at the CNN logo & assume it is as truthful as the word of the Good L-ord himself.

 

 

 

 

Because it would prove them wrong

That part has me shaking my head. Obama's excuse for not voting for the Born Alive act was that it would undermine Roe v. Wade. But that was the very point of the legislation.

If Obama was willing to allow a live infant to die, rather than admit that abortion was killing a real person, then he was admitting that it didn't matter whether the fetus was a legal person or not. The chief moral argument for the pro-choice side is that the fetus isn't a person, but if the baby is still alive after the abortion, you can't possibly make that claim. 

Rather than admit that morally obvious point, Obama and his pro-choice extremists were willing to let living, breathing babies die. And it wasn't as if the fetus might become a baby -- he or she was already out of the womb and breathing. By every legal standard, these born infants are legal persons, by the pro-choice side's best definition. Yet they allow the babies to die, rather than accept what that means.

How is that courageous? It's exactly the opposite.

Bring us together? Hope, my ass. He didn't pass the legislation, in his own words, because it would disprove the rationale for abortion. But the living baby had already disproved it. He was just too cowardly to admit it.

That isn't an internet rumor or a smear. That's a cold, hard fact.

KC,      Now your

KC,

     Now your SWIFT BOATING!!!!

If this be swift boating

Here I channel Patrick Henry: "If this be swift boating, then make the most of it!"

Obama's excuse for not

Obama's excuse for not voting for the Born Alive act was that it would
undermine Roe v. Wade. But that was the very point of the legislation.

Dr. Martin Haskell, of partial-birth abortion fame, once said in an interview:

"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."

Similarly, opponents of the BAIPA have as their goal a dead baby, one way or another.


Shoot 'em all; let God sort 'em out! - Marge Simpson

It was already born

Exactly, mb. If we were talking about a two-day old blastocyst, then I could understand the argument. But this was a living, breathing baby.

That vote was logically equaivalent to covering up evidence in a capital crime because it would exonerate the defendant. In fact, that's not an analogy -  that's exactly what he voted for. He voted to dispose of evidence that proved a homicide of a living human being. He voted to let living babies die because their life disproved Roe v. Wade.

He's so proud of being a lawyer. By voting against that law, he showed himself to be the worst kind of defense lawyer -- the slick, do-whatever-it-takes-to-win, including cheating and obfuscation. Justice be damned.

"By every legal standard,

"By every legal standard, these born infants are legal persons, by the pro-choice side's best definition. Yet they allow the babies to die, rather than accept what that means."  

You're exactly right, KC. They have no interest in "truth," let alone "justice." The sacred "right" to kill the unborn can brook no interference, facts be damned.

Outrageous distortion, even for CNN

This is just plain disgusting. Leaning one way or the other is one thing, misrepresenting and distorting a verifiable, cast-in-stone voting record on a topic this sensitive is another. Well, Costello, Obama thanks you from the bottom of his... whatever he calls that blood-pumping thing.

In reality, Obama's stance is that a baby is not a human being until they are issued a social security number, and deserve no protection until then.

Would you pick up a baby bird that fell from it's nest in your yard and try to help it out a bit? Yes.

Does Obama think 'a greater cause' is served by letting a baby die alone on a table in a maternity suite? Yes.

I am hoping against hope that the GOP will make this into a MAJOR issue at some point, because this alone is all any reasonable American should need to know about Obama's moral center. It's not wiggle-outable, unlike all his other flip flops.

Thumping Gizzard

 "Obomb-a thanks you from the bottom of his thumping gizzard" which is attached to his hemmoroids.

(GRINS)  kilrod

Remember, only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American Soldier

Costello is nothing but an

Costello is nothing but an intentional lying leftist with an agenda...always has been...she fits CNN well.

I cannot stand her..never have been able to, I see her, if I am near the clicker I click her.

Nothing is more simple for all to see...  Obama believes in letting babies die...it is called murder.

"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Wilson

Obama works to mobilize 'Christian left'

This is pretty disgusting.

Brian McLaren, a former pastor who spent 24 years in the pulpit and is now an informal adviser to the Obama campaign, believes that a significant portion of evangelical voters are ready to break from their traditional home in the the Republican Party and take a new leap of faith with Obama.

"I think there's a very, very sizable percentage -- I think between a third and half -- of evangelicals, especially younger [evangelicals], who are very open to somebody with a new vision," McLaren said.

That new vision, he said, isn't focused on traditional social issues like abortion and gay marriage but more on efforts to end global warming and the war in Iraq.

"We've watched the evangelical community be led -- be misled -- by the Republican Party to support things they really shouldn't have supported," McLaren said, including "the blind support for the Iraq war when it was launched on either mistaken or false pretenses."

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/01/obama.evangelicals/index.html

That's right, abortion is merely a social "issue", and has nothing to do with killing unborn children.  I want to hear so called evangelicals who support Obama defend his votes on denying health care for babies who survive an abortion.

I read about this nutjob

One-third to one-half of evangelicals are likely to support Obama? Well, if CNN says its true, it must be.

Nice try, McLaren, but this is clear evidence why you are an 'ex-pastor'.

Wishful thinking is

Wishful thinking is stock-in-trade for most political campaigns. And with the MSMs help, today sometimes saying something makes it so. Guess that's what McLaren is hoping.

I've Often Wondered

I have found myself wondering more than once, how those who are so in favour of arbortion, especially late term arbortions, would feel about it if they had to participate in an abortion or two.

Having to do that might cure people like Obama of his delusions about human life and death. I have the distinct impression that he's a typical coward intellectual who lives in a rarified world of ideas, but who fails to connect with the grisly reality of his decisions.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

- Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797)

www.conservativeboot...

Yeah, Geoff,

They don't want to think about the actual procedure. Hell, they don't want to look at pics of a fetus, showing how much it looks like a baby. Or pics of the remains after an abortion. Those pics are "offensive." Well, what do they think the act is?

→ Thank you Matthew Balan

Laura Ingraham's show just mentioned these innocent sacrifices to Barack Molech Obama.

I've brought up BAIPA several times this year to make sure others know of Obama's part in thwarting it in the Ill. Legislature.

Thank God President Bush made BAIPA his first issue upon taking office and it is now Federal Law.

  • LYDSEXICS UNTIE

As I commented many months

As I commented many months ago about Obami, when it comes to abortion he is an absolute MONSTER! His voting against the Born Alive Protection Bill cinched his place in hell. Adolph Hitler(leftist) would approve wholeheartedly of Obami voting for that bill. The KKK is proud of Obami for supporting that bill. The worst Nazi doctors didn't dream of doing what Obami supports. And this is the monster that wants to be leader of the free world. You had better have everything in order if this joker gets in. No telling how rough it's going to get. Keep your powder dry folks.

Obama History on Abortion and Infanticide

I have linked to this post from http://www.jeremiahf... "Obama History on Abortion and Infanticide".