Quote Of The Day

“Barack Obama is the most extreme pro-abortion candidate ever to seek the office of President of the United States. He is the most extreme pro-abortion member of the United States Senate. Indeed, he is the most extreme pro-abortion legislator ever to serve in either house of the United States Congress.” — Robert George, professor of jurisprudence at Princeton University

12 Responses to “Quote Of The Day”


  • Good Grief. (rolling eyes)

    Perhaps Mr. George could enlighten me as to Grover Cleveland’s position on abortion? I seem to have forgotten it.

    The facts of the matter (as opposed to Mr. George’s wild hyperbole) are that abortion has only been a hot-button political issue for the last half century, and has only really been a hot-button religious issue for about the same amount of time.

    Saying that Senator Obama is the most pro-abortion candidate ever, is akin to saying that McCain is the most TV-watching President ever. It may or may not be true, but even if it is true it’s only true because the first 30 or so Presidents never got a chance to watch TV.

  • That’s a fair point, LawrenceB, but on the other hand I have to say his position on abortion is disappointing. The article HP points to paints him as to the left of even the most rabid pro-choicers in Congress. He wants to make it clear that abortion is permissible through the full 9 months (which I thought was already the case, but whatever)? He’s definitely not a centrist on this one unfortunately. Makes Bill Clinton look like a pro-lifer’s dream come true.

  • He wants to make it clear that abortion is permissible through the full 9 months (which I thought was already the case, but whatever)?

    Obama wants it to be clear that abortion is permissible throughout the nine months of pregnancy in exceptional circumstances such as when the life of the mother is threatened. As you suspected, that is precisely how the law stands now. It is not extreme, or even unusual. Most Americans are consistently in favor of these provisions.

  • The term you folks are looking for is infanticide. A full term, or almost full term, infant can be delivered healthy and with the mothers approval, since she wanted to abort, the infant is terminated at birth. Sounds rather barbaric to me, but it seems to be just fine in Obama world. What’s next, terminating the elderly once they become a burden on society? With Obama in office such a possibility is not beyond imagination.

  • On the other hand, Eyes of Texas, no effort will be spared to protect polar bears, wolves, and other pet causes…priorities you know.

  • LaurenceB,

    I’m curious, did you read the article before commenting? The reason I ask is, frankly, the article shows that Obama’s views on abortion are alot worse than even I had assumed. ALot worse! And your response of “Obama wants it to be clear that abortion is permissible throughout the nine months of pregnancy in exceptional circumstances such as when the life of the mother is threatened” addresses little to nothing of the article.

    FYI though…everybody believes that ‘abortion’ is permissible when the life of the mother is truly threatened. Even the most ardent abortion foes – such as the Catholic Church – believes this. In other words, not even Rick Santorum would draft a bill that opposed that.

    What pro-life members of congress know is that when you include dubious exceptions into pro-life laws, things like “health of the mother”, that those exceptions are abortionspeak for “any and all things”. In other words, as McCain explained during the third debate, when a politicians says he supports abortion bans except in cases where “the health of the mother” is at risk, thats really a way to say to the abortion crowd “I support abortion for any reason” because that is the way that clause is legally interpreted (even morning sickness could be classified as ‘health of the mother’) – yet the politician is able to seem reasonable on abortion. Don’t be fooled by the abortionspeak.

    Either way – the article is a must read and goes far beyond his simple support for late term abortions.

  • HP,

    Yes, I did read the article – or at least I tried. It’s hard for me to have patience, or take seriously, people who use over-the-top language like (for example) the “killing” of embryos produced through in vitro fertilization. The reason I only addressed one piece of the article was that a) that was the only piece Jon brought up, and b) the article was just too long to discuss all of it.

    My general view of the article was that I found some of it persuasive (Obama’s opposition to federal funding of non-embryonic stem cell research I think is damning, and is something I wasn’t aware of). But I found most of it was just a re-hashing of issues with which I am familiar and with which I respectfully disagree. For example, I frankly, have no problem with embryonic stem cell research, and I prefer to continue to allow women to choose an abortion in exceptional circumstances such as when there is a health issue or the pregnancy was the result of a rape. On these issues, you and Mr. George see Obama and I as an extremist (and a murderer), whereas I, and most other Americans, see him as a moderate.

  • For example, I frankly, have no problem with embryonic stem cell research, and I prefer to continue to allow women to choose an abortion in exceptional circumstances such as when there is a health issue or the pregnancy was the result of a rape.

    I’m curious LaurenceB, as stated, one can make the argument that your views are no different than GWB’s views on abortion…after all, he also supports abortion in cases of rape, incest, and for the life of the mother.

    So to clarify what you are saying, I ask, in what way are your abortion views different than GWB’s? Or are they not?

  • Obama is a

    1)baby killer
    2)arab and muslim
    3)will be killing jews with with Osama Bin Laden
    4)domestic terrorist who is planning U.S. attacks with Ayers
    5)hates Americans especially whites and is planning attack whites with Rev. reverend Jeremiah Wright
    6)is planning to steal rich whites kids lunch money and give it to black crack heads in the ghetto.

    Sarah Palin will inform us about his other evil plans for America.

  • Then there is the other view:

    Obama is a

    1) Messiah
    2) Immaculate
    3) Always right in all things
    4) The most caring person to have ever lived
    5) The one who will bring paradise on earth
    6) He who brings peace on earth for ever after

    The media will inform u s about his other benefits for America.

    I reject both views…and stand somewhere in the middle.

  • Frank, note the tenor of the discussion between LaurenceB and H-Pundit. I personally don’t try for written sarcasm because to pull it off effectively requires the ability and dexterity to use words and ideas as a smallsword rather than a claymore. I would want to leave the readers thinking “Ahhh very incisive…and witty to boot.” Afterwhich, one leaves the field of dueling ideas with an air of graciousness.
    But that’s just me. :-)

  • HP,
    I’m not positive that I know precisely Bush’s position, but I think we differ in these respects:

    1. I agree with how the law currently stands: that a woman should have the option to choose an abortion early in the pregnancy, when the fetus is still not “viable” – typically, the first trimester. Bush does not.

    2. I also agree with standing laws that a woman may choose, after the first trimester, to have an abortion in exceptional circumstances. Bush probably doesn’t, but I’m not sure. Most likely, he agrees with you that there should be such exceptions, but he would outlaw them anyway on the grounds that they would be taken advantage of. The Republican Party Platform for 2008 takes a hardline stand that the law should be changed to allow no exceptions. In any case, we disagree. Laura Bush agrees with me, I’m sure. (Cindy McCain also, I suspect).

Leave a Reply