Obama says question of where life begins is above his pay grade

I’m assuming that when Barack Obama answered Rick Warren’s question regarding the moment unborn babies get human rights with that’s above my pay grade, he meant that only God could answer that question. His answer irked me because, on the one hand, it was annoyingly flippant and, on the other, it was a total cop out.

He didn’t want to answer that question. He couldn’t answer that question because he knew that doing so would cost him the evangelical vote.

And he’d lose the votes of moms who, like me, view their kids as miracles and gifts from God. Right now, Obama seems to be getting a lot of his support from these moms because they probably don’t yet know the real Barack Obama. I’m trying to help these moms get acquainted with him.

As I posted her earlier, Obama is so pro-choice that he skirted the line between abortion and infanticide when he voted against the Illinois Born-Alive Infants Protection Act even though it was identical to a federal version that included a neutrality clause that even NARAL Pro Choice America accepted.

However, Senator Obama is trying hard to cover up his no vote, something the National Right to Life Committee is working very hard to prevent. How? Get this: the National Right to Life Committee has uncovered a paper trail that shows Obama did in fact vote against the BAIPA. Here’s the statement issued by Douglas Johnson (Hat tip: Brutally Honest):

Newly obtained documents prove that in 2003, Barack Obama, as chairman of an Illinois state Senate committee, voted down a bill to protect live-born survivors of abortion — even after the panel had amended the bill to contain verbatim language, copied from a federal bill passed by Congress without objection in 2002, explicitly foreclosing any impact on abortion. Obama’s legislative actions in 2003 — denying effective protection even to babies born alive during abortions — were contrary to the position taken on the same language by even the most liberal members of Congress. The bill Obama killed was virtually identical to the federal bill that even NARAL ultimately did not oppose.

So what are these documents? Johnson explains:

The documents prove that in March 2003, state Senator Obama, then the chairman of the Illinois state Senate Health and Human Services Committee, presided over a committee meeting in which the “neutrality clause” (copied verbatim from the federal bill) was added to the state BAIPA, with Obama voting in support of adding the revision. Yet, immediately afterwards, Obama led the committee Democrats in voting against the amended bill, and it was killed, 6-4.

The bill that Chairman Obama killed, as amended, was virtually identical to the federal law; the only remaining differences were on minor points of bill-drafting style.  To see the language of the two bills side by side, click here.

I linked to the document that recorded Obama’s vote to add the neutrality clause and his vote to mmediately defeat the bill below:

Senate Committee Action Report in HTML (web browser) format
Senate Committee Action Report in JPG (photo) format
Senate Committee Action Report in PDF (Adobe document) format

Here’s the .jpg version. Click to enlarge:

But even in spite of these documents that show he did in fact vote against the bill even with the neutrality clause, he still denied it in an interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network after his hour with Rick Warren.

As Rick at Brutally Honest writes:

I’m sure the MSM will be bringing these inconsistencies to the attention of the American people any day now.

Any. Day. Now.