The Smoking Gun on Obama's Infanticide Stance?

This audio has surfaced over the last twenty four hours.
(h/t to Red State)



This audio reveals a cold Obama justifying his opposition to a bill that would have protected the baby after a botched abortion.

In this audio Obama coldly claims two doctors helping a baby born alive after a botched abortion would be a burden for the aborting mother when he is arguing against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act at the Illinois state legislature April 2002

Here is Barack Obama's shocking explanation.

As I understand it, this puts the burden on the attending physician who has determined, since they were performing this procedure, that, in fact, this is nonviable fetus; that if that fetus, or child - however way you want to describe it - is now outside the mother's womb and the doctor continues to think that it's nonviable but there's, let's say, movement or some indication that, in fact, they're not just coming out limp and dead, that, in fact, they would then have to call a second physician to monitor and check off and make sure that this is not a live child that could be saved.

So, according to Obama, a baby is worth saving only if a doctor thinks the baby is worth saving.

The biggest problem this audio creates for the Obama campaign is the natural visceral reaction any human being should have to a legislator justifying the killing of a baby as being too burdensome on the doctor.

Second, what he says on this audio in no way squares with what he claims is the reason he opposed the bill. His justification was always that the bill opened up a slippery slope to making abortion illegal. Here, he is saying something totally different entirely.

This issue is not going away for Obama, and at any moment, it will explode. It might happen today, tommorrow, next week, September, October, or right before election day. If I am the Obama campaign, I want it to explode sooner rather than later. With the introduction of You Tube, this story takes on a new level of coverage in our new fractured media dynamic. So far, it has only received just over 10,000 views. It will need to reach past one million to have any significant impact. The right blogosphere has been on this story for months, however on its own the story won't break into the mainstream that way.

In the last few days though, this story has started to see the light of day in the MSM. The Washington Post mentioned and so did Ben Smith of Politico (though his article attacked Jill Stanek the nurse that brought attention to the issue, though frankly, that is totally irrelevant. Folks aren't moved by the direction the media drives the story but merely by what they cover) Of course, Fox News has also given the story plenty of coverage.

Some stories the MSM can bury, usually financial ones. That's because financial stories are almost always complicated and so unless there is a lot of coverage and the story is explained fully the public simply doesn't follow. This story is different. It is easy to follow. A hospital, Christ Hospital, took no care to try and save babies that survived a botched abortion. A nurse was so traumatized when she discovered this brutal practice that she was moved to take her story to the legislature. Barack Obama opposed her every step of the way and did everything he could to make sure a bill that would have protected such babies got killed. That is the simple story.

It is Barack Obama's defense that will be full of confusing nuance that will be difficult for the public to follow. He claims that he voted against it because it didn't have "abortion neutral language" though that has been called into question. Furthermore, some defenders claim such a law was already on the books, though it is unclear why then Christ Hospital was allowing these babies to die. That's because under then current law the Illinois Attorney General concluded that doctors were under no order to save the life of a baby that was intended to die, only those intended to live. (that's why there was need for new legislation)Some even dismiss the debate as smear tactics suggesting that Barack Obama is in favor of killing babies. Well, such a charge is shocking but what are we to make of this vote.