LifeSiteNews is reporting that new documents just obtained by the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) prove that Senator Obama has for the past four years blatantly misrepresented his actions on the Illinois Born-Alive Infants Protection bill. But one media observer points out that the mainstream media hasn’t touched the new wrinkle in the story about the Born Alive Infants Protection Act.
Tony Perkins, President of the Family Resource Council, writes:
For all of his stirring speeches, even Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) can’t talk himself out of the controversy that’s emerged over his position on the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA).
The legislation, which protects newborns who survive an abortion from infanticide, became a federal law in 2002.
In Illinois, Obama actively opposed an identical piece of legislation as a committee chairman, stating later that he would have endorsed it had the bill contained the same language as the federal version.
When it surfaced that he voted against the BAIPA, Obama lied in several interviews, including this one with Chicago Tribune in 2004 in which he told reporters that “had he been in the U.S. Senate two years ago, he would have voted for the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act.”
This week, the National Right to Life Committee uncovered new documents proving that the Illinois version of the Act was taken verbatim from the congressional bill, which means that the man running for president has been lying about his position on the issue for six years.
The deception continues on his website, where a June 30 “fact check” claims that the Illinois and federal bills “did not contain . . . exactly the same language.”
Is it any surprise that a man who referred to babies as a “punishment” would vote for the killing of innocent children who survive abortions?
As David Limbaugh writes in a recent column, “Are pro-life Obama supporters so selfishly hooked on a feeling … that they’ll back Obama and his party in the most immoral crusade since slavery?”
It appears so.