As you know, we here at The Brody File pride ourselves on laying out both sides of an argument and letting you, the readers come to your own conclusions. Hence, let’s delve into the aftermath of the controversy surrounding Barack Obama, the National Right to Life committee and The Born Alive Infant Protection Act.
Clearly, National Right to Life and the Obama campaign have different takes on this. The Brody File WILL NOT go through the entire minutiae in this space but we have provided links to both perspectives. The Obama campaign has sent me their argument layout and that can be viewed here.The National Right to Life argument is here.
In addition, the Obama campaign has sent The Brody File a statement. Read it below:
“Senator Obama strongly supports Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to choose. He believes that there is a moral and ethical element to this issue, and he believes that women do not make these decisions casually, but wrestle with them in consultation with their doctors, pastors and family. Senator Obama understands that some will disagree with him and choose not to support him, and he respects those with different opinions. But the recent attacks on Senator Obama that allege he would allow babies born alive to die are outrageous lies. The suggestion that Obama – the proud father of two little girls – and others who opposed these bills supported infanticide is deeply offensive and insulting. There is no room for these kinds of distortions and lies in this campaign. What Senator Obama’s attackers don’t tell you is that existing Illinois law already requires doctors to provide medical care in the very rare case that babies are born alive during abortions. They will not tell you that Obama voted against these laws in Illinois because they were clear attempts to undermine Roe v. Wade. They will not tell you that these laws were also opposed by pro-choice Republicans and the Illinois Medical Society – a leading association of doctors in the state. And they will not tell you that Obama has always maintained that he would have voted for the federal version of this bill, which did not pose such a threat. The bills Senator Obama voted against in Illinois were crafted to undermine Roe v. Wade or pre-existing Illinois state law regulating reproductive healthcare and medical practice, which is why Senator Obama objected to them.”
They do not address National Right to Life’s main contention that Obama misrepresented the situation. While they agree that the 2003 Illinois bill and the federal bill had the same language, they won’t concede the point that Senator Obama is pulling a fast one on the American public. That's because they say nothing could be farther than the truth.Their point is that with so many different versions of the bill out there it can all lead to some confusion as to what bill is being talked about. Conservative critics will have a field day with the fact that the campaign is not backing down from their authenticity on this issue. I’m sure they won’t let this drop but Obama and his campaign can’t afford any sort of narrative where they look like they are in cover up mode. They are running on a narrative of change and a “new way of politics”
As for the interview, I think it was pretty clear that Obama got heated in his answer with me because National Right to Life and other conservative critics have gotten under his skin. After all, the conservative blogs have been painting him as some sort of baby killer. I mean look at this line from Human Events:
Barack Obama would rather see infants thrown, quite literally, into trash cans than dare encroach on the right to an abortion.”
Obama is a father of two young girls. You can bet that attacks like that will get him or any father riled up. That language seems to be way over the top. His critics can paint him as a pro-choice liberal. That’s fair but to go any further is really beyond the pale. Is Obama really sinister, a monster? That narrative may fly in some conservative circles and in chat rooms but most Americans won’t buy it.
Look, here’s the political point to all of this. Can we bottom line it for you? Obama can not afford to get labeled with the tag of “abortion President”, or bumper stickers that say, “More liberal than Barbara Boxer”. Here’s the good news for Obama. John McCain may be his best friend on this because social issues like abortion isn’t something McCain will likely spend a lot of open mike time talking about. Yes the McCain camp will paint Obama’s abortion positions as part of a liberal narrative and hope the mainstream media bites at it. And yes social conservative groups will hold their press conferences on these abortion topics but unless John McCain brings it up at a debate or makes it part of his campaign pitch then it’s questionable whether or not this will really go anywhere in the end.