Obama’s Infanticide History

This is a snapshot of Jill Stanek’s running post, following Newt Gingrich’s cheerful reminder to the Marxstream media about The One they religiously protect and his bloodthirsty record in Illinois.

To say she is a hands-on expert in this matter is a grim understatement.

We encourage you to find the rest at JillStanek.com, to learn how it all went down in Obama’s adopted state, and to inform or remind others – even 5th column journalists.


Obama’s support of infanticide takes center stage in Republican presidential debate


2/24, 6:40a: Conservatives are ripping Politico’s Alexander Burns for incorrectly identifying the object of Newt Gingrich’s criticism as Barack Obama’s opposition to a partial birth abortion ban rather than the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. Read this Newsbusters piece and this Red State piece. I’m also heartened by the volume of commenters who called Burns out… who correctly identified and explained Obama’s BAIPA flak.

2/23, 10:36a: When I wrote yesterday of the unforeseen consequences for the Left of making an issue of contraception, I didn’t see this one coming. But it’s rich.

Last night during CNN’s Republican presidential debate, Newt Gingrich deftly turned a question about birth control into an indictment against the media for suppressing President Barack Obama’s opposition to the Born Alive Infants Protection Act when he was state senator…

Gingrich said:

You did not once during the 2008 campaign ask why Barack Obama voted in favor of legalizing infanticide. If we’re going to debate about who is the extremist on this issues, it is President Obama, who, as a state senator, voted to protect doctors who killed babies.

The Washington Post has attempted to refute Gingrich’s statement, but its corroboration only shows it was a Fox News journalist, not a member of the mainstream media, who asked Obama about his votes; and it was conservative Bill Bennett who broached the topic on CNN; and it was Obama’s Republican opponent John McCain who brought it up during a debate.

About the latter WashPo did admit:

That turn of events would align with Gingrich’s media worldview, which is that you cannot rely on the left-leaning media to pose tough questions to liberal politicians. Such labor thus defaults to their political opponents.


Yet if you consider what Gingrich may have intended to say – i.e., that Obama wasn’t pressed personally by the “elite media” on this question – there may be some daylight here for the speaker.

Having lived through it, I know MSM went overboard to explain away Obama’s support of infanticide, quite the opposite of their interrogation of Republican candidates for any shred of evidence that they would ban contraceptives if only given the chance.

In fact, MSM’s ignorance on this topic lingers. Last night a Politico journalist incorrectly thought Gingrich was talking about Obama’s opposition as state senator to a partial birth abortion ban and jumped in to prove MSM didn’t ignore those heinous votes – by quoting Fox News.

Another reader and I pointed out the reporter’s error, which to his credit he did semi-correct. (“I may have been wrong….”)

Last night on CNN Air Fleischer used Gingrich’s comment to drive home the point of MSM bias…

For clarification purposes I might add Gingrich was in part (intentionally or not) referring to a companion bill to BAIPA when he stated Obama “voted to protect doctors who killed babies.”

That was SB 1663, which would have amended the Illinois Abortion Law of 1975 to require that the abortionist have a second physician present to provide an independent assessment of an abortion survivor’s medical condition and plan of care, if any. Obviously, it is in the abortionist’s best interest that survivors die, which was what this bill attempted to preclude.

As one person wrote, “The gruesome abortions by abortionist Kermit B. Gosnell highlight the real world results of what Obama was defending. Children were born and then killed by putting scissors in the back of their neck and snipping their spinal cord.”

But Obama was willing to give abortionists like Gosnell the benefit of the doubt. Obama saw no conflict of interest in an abortionist who was being paid to kill a baby to provide proper medical care to that baby if the abortion failed. Read Obama’s chilling thoughts on pages 32-33 of the transcript, including his dehumanized descriptions of abortion survivors.

It remains to be seen whether MSM will continue to unquestionably accept Obama’s false and flimsy excuses for opposing BAIPA and its companion bills, but at this point his Republican opponents are keeping the issue alive.

Here is a record of Obama’s votes and his floor speeches opposing BAIPA.

See the full story at  Obama’s Infanticide History; Illinois Expert Stanek Backs-Up Gingrich Claim.

About Albert N. Milliron 6991 Articles
Albert Milliron is the founder of Politisite. Milliron has been credentialed by most major news networks for Presidential debates and major Political Parties for political event coverage. Albert maintains relationships with the White House and State Department to provide direct reporting from the Administration’s Press team. Albert is the former Public Relations Chairman of the Columbia County Republican Party in Georgia. He is a former Delegate. Milliron is a veteran of the US Army Medical Department and worked for Department of Veterans Affairs, Department of Psychiatry.

1 Comment

  1. Corporate journalists have been unwitting instruments of neo-Marxism for a long time. Even the right-left trope descends from the Marxist dialectic, which bifurcates reality into a false dilemma of opposing but equivalent moral positions that make falsehood indistinguishable from truth. In effect, truth becomes something manufactured. The series Mad Men actually hints at this in the first episode in which love is described as nothing more than a marketing tool. Americans should all watch this episode one more time and think what that scene tells us about today.

    It seems Jill Stanek has found and articulated the rub with all this. It’s something we’ve known for a long time: truth isn’t determined by a poll or by a university teacher. It is discerned through the cultivation of moral judgment in the light of the Incarnation. Without the Incarnation, we return to the world as Suetonus described it. Witness the future heralded by Sandra Fluke: state subsidized fornication in the guise of health care. The term “reproductive rights” is a perfect tip-off that total propaganda has been unleashed. In this term, bad is substituted for good in the perfect lie; what is sought isn’t the right to reproduce but rather financial incentives not to.

    The truth has never had a particularly wide audience, so it predictably will never generate any significant market share. Thank goodness, though, for the few voices like Stanek’s that rise above the din of analysis to recall that truth still matters.

1 Trackback / Pingback

  1. The Busy Servants of Moloch « The Anchoress