Submitted by Lance, Feb 13, 2008 03:20

The fact is, Obama helped to kill the "induced infant liability act" in committee twice, voting his infamous "present" the first time and "no" the second. Later, when he became chair of the health and human services committee he never called the bill for a vote. It passed after he left the il state senate.

Obama had previously been presented with eye-witness testimony and photographic evidence of the brutality of the live birth abortion, which he ignored as "religious" ideology.

All his spinning aside, then he said, "What we are doing here is to create one more burden on a woman and I can't support that."

Yet, on Sept. 30, 2004, in an interview with Jeff Berkowitz of Public Affairs, Obama stated he would have voted for the federal version, and would have sought protection for viable fetuses in his state, had their not been legislation already in place. The same legislation he voted against? So now in 08, Obama is against live birth abortion, but back in 01, 02, 03 he was not. Might I add a different explanation for his position each time it has come up.

We do not kill babies. I suppose my overall point is Obama is not as honest about his different positions as his fans believe. Furthermore, I doubt 90% of his followers know anything about his unwillingness to have a law that protects the life of infants that would otherwise have lived at the time of the abortion. Wow.

I support a womans right to choice, but this is America, not China. It seems we Americans like to go from one extreme to the next.

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.