Skip to comments.Unearthed audio: Obama calls newborn baby a ‘fetus outside of the womb’
Posted on 08/24/2012 5:36:58 PM PDT by Morgana
Did Obama vote in favor infanticide? Pro-life activists have long made the argument that he did, and that a conspiracy of silence from the mainstream media is the only thing that has prevented Americans from knowing the full extent of Obamas extreme views on the abortion issue.
Now, newly unearthed audio from 2002 shows Barack Obama, then a state senator in Illinois, discussing the bill that has elicited charges that he voted to allow infanticide: the Born Alive Infant Protection Act (BAIPA).
The bill was introduced after pro-life nurse Jill Stanek witnessed babies being born alive after failed abortions, then being brought to a room in the hospital where she worked and left to die. The legislation, which ultimately passed, mandated that doctors must provide care to babies born alive after failed abortions.
However, one of the most ardent opponents of the bill, who repeatedly voted against it, was now-President Barack Obama. In audio dug up this week by John McCormack of The Weekly Standard, then-Senator Obama is heard attempting to explain his opposition to the bill.
While his explanations are extremely convoluted and difficult to quote, the thrust of Obamas argument is that he trusts that abortionists who make an error that results in a baby being born alive will take care of the baby.
Obama says that if you argue that an abortionist wouldnt try to exercise the sort of medical measures and practices that would be involved in saving that child of his own accord, then maybe this bill makes sense (notice the maybe!). But he adds, I, at least, have confidence that a doctor who is in that room is going to make sure that theyre looked after.
Of course, the obvious response to Obamas paper-thin objection is to point to the clear evidence that, in fact, abortionists were not providing such care. Babies were being killed - not quickly or mercifully, but by being left exposed, without food or water, to die. And, after all, what motivation would an abortionist, who was moments ago seeking to kill the baby, have to save the life of the same baby, especially when doing so would only expose the fact that he screwed up?
But in one turn of phrase that is extremely revealing Obama attempts to describe the purpose of the bill, and says that the fetus, or child however way you want to describe it is now outside the womb.
One of the great doctrines of the pro-abortion movement, of course, is that as long as the baby is in the mothers womb, it is a fetus, but then at the moment of birth, it magically transforms into a baby. Except, perhaps (as Obamas indifference to terminology illustrates) if that baby was supposed to be dead, and was only born by mistake in which case, its much more convenient to continue labeling it with the dehumanizing term fetus.
Whether or not you take Obamas slip of the tongue as evidence of his support for infanticide, what is certain is that Obama, his campaign, and the media have deliberately hushed up his record on the Born Alive bill.
Since making his presidential run Obama has claimed that he would have voted for BAIPA if it had included a clause found in a federal version of the bill that stated the bill would have no effect on legal abortion. The only problem: Obama was presented with a state version that did have that clause, and he still voted against it. In fact, Obama presided as the chair at a committee meeting where the clause was inserted into the bill. Almost immediately after it was inserted, he voted to kill the bill.
Obama did this at a time when even NARAL - one of the most extreme pro-abortion organizations in the country - had withdrawn its opposition to the federal version of the bill.
Even if you argue that Obama didnt explicitly support infanticide, the fact is that he was so concerned about protecting abortion that he would turn a blind eye to infanticide in an effort to make sure that doctors could kill unborn babies up until the last minute possible.
If thats not extreme, what is?
Here is a transcript of Obamas remarks on BAIPA:
OBAMA: I just want to be clear because I think this was the source of the objections of the Medical Society. 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 a nonviable fetus; that if that fetus, or child however way you want to describe it is now outside the mothers womb and the doctor continues to think that its nonviable but theres, lets say, movement or some indication that, in fact, theyre not just out limp and dead, 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. Is that correct?
OBAMA: Let me just go to the bill, very quickly. Essentially, I think, as as this emerged during debate and during committee, the only plausible rationale, to my mind, for this legislation would be if you had a suspicion that a doctor, the attending physician, who has made an assessment that this is a nonviable fetus and that, lets say for the purposes of the mothers health, is being that that labor is being induced, that that physician (a) is going to make the wrong assessment and (b) if the physician discovered, after the labor had been induced, that, in fact, he made an error, or she made an error, and, in fact, that that physician, of his own accord or her own accord, would not try to exercise the sort of medical measures and practices that would be involved in saving that child. Now, if if you think that there are possibilities that doctors would not do that, then maybe this bill makes sense, but I I suspect and my impression is, is that the Medical Society suspects as well that doctors feel that they would be under that obligation, that they would already be making these determinations and that, essentially, adding a an additional doctor who then has to be called in an emergency situation to come in and make these assessments is really designed simply to burden the original decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion. Now, if thats the case and and I know that some of us feel very strongly one way or another on that issue thats fine, but I think its important to understand that this issue ultimately is about abortion and not live births. Because if these children are being born alive, I, at least, have confidence that a doctor who is in that room is going to make sure that theyre looked after. Thank you, Mr. President.
Hmmm... when does the GOP Convention start?
I think my next few hundred Tweets are going to focus on Obama’s Infanticide and Oil/Gas Prices
There is no way he’s gonna wash the blood of those babies off his hands.
But then, he just laughs it off when he’s called on it. So be it.
He grins when the heckler tells him he’s “guilty of innocent blood”.
Too wordy for a sound bite
Obama Live Birth Abortion Induced Labor Abortions 2008
I guess we don’t have to see his school records to know he flunked biology.
Sounds very much like the way the devil would react. 0bama is pure evil!
Bet this doesn’t stir up as much outrage on FR as Akin’s comment did.
Wasnt this an issue here during Obama’s election?
The sound bite is new but I remember his stammering and searching for the right words to say on this. I’ve read it before. (I think)
But then, he just laughs it off when hes called on it. So be it.
Imagine the moment he arrives in front of The LORD’s throne of judgment... We ought to pray that he has an awakening.
Yours is a very perceptive observation. Actually, much of this was already known to Free Republic in 2008. We had the testimony of the nurse who described the death of babies who were the product of botched abortions.
Most of the communist affiliations of Barack Obama were well-known by us in 2008. Now, only when the People's pocketbooks have been emptied by Obama's policies do we find that the truth about Obama gains traction.
In 2008 Free Republic was way ahead of the national curve in its understanding of Barack Obama. But the freshly minted indignation of the people against Obama which is spawned primarily by their parochial financial interests tells us much about how and why the politics of the nation has got us to the point where we could elect a Barack Obama and where we find half the people dependent on the government to some degree.
It's Latin for a baby in the womb and not a synonym for "something that is OK to kill".
You nailed it, these words are from Satan. Who else would want one dead baby, never mind the 50 MILLION BABIES KILLED IN THIS COUNTRY.
Bet this doesnt stir up as much outrage on FR as Akins comment did.
Well, you know, it shouldn’t. Many of us have known about this for a few years. Video isn’t all that makes it so.
Who knows—if FReepers aren’t aware of this, there’s a better than even chance the general public doesn’t know about it either. Could this be a comeback for Akin?
I stumbled upon the audio earlier and was shocked. That cartoon is just too true.
Yes, I agree completely.
Most here already know Obama’s record. Outrage towards Akin is because his gross stupidity has put the Republican takeover of the United States Senate in jeopardy, thus insuring the full implementation of Obamacare and the fiscal demise of the Country.
Informed people aren't outraged by the actions of those they expect such behavior from, they warn others of it.
I'm not sure what your point is.
First Psalm 109:8 and yeah I’ll pray for his Salvation. He needs to turn from this evil for sure.
In other words, if it’s not a “legitimate baby”, then let it die?
>> Bet this doesnt stir up as much outrage on FR as Akins comment did.
No, of course it won’t. Such outrage requires some motivation from Leftwing Media, the GOP, and the talkers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.