By Jill Stanek
Although President Obama had no trouble commenting on the ongoing Trayvon Martin case, White House spokesperson Jay Carney said [last month] Obama wouldn’t be commenting on the Kermit Gosnell mass murder case because he “cannot take a position on an ongoing trial” or “comment further on an ongoing legal proceeding.”
Of course the White House wants to avoid this topic. What a disaster Gosnell is for Obama.
Gosnell first brings to Obama’s door the uncomfortable topic of infanticide. Obama is well known to have voted four times against the Illinois Born Alive Infants Protection Act as state senator, which sought to protect abortion survivors.
But Obama also opposed two companion bills to BAIPA, one of which brings him zero degrees of separation from Gosnell. I was impressed with Fox’s Ed Henry, who went there in his questions to Carney [last month].
On April 4, 2002, Obama testified against Senate Bill 1663, which required abortionists to provide “reasonable measures consistent with good medical practice” to abortion survivors and to plan to have a second physician present if there was a “reasonable likelihood” that the abortion would result “in a live born child.”
You can read the entire transcript here, but the gist of Obama’s opposition was that he had full faith in abortionists:
The only plausible rationale, to my mind, of this legislation would be if you had a suspicion that a doctor . . . (a) is going to make the wrong assessment, and (b) if the physician discovered, after the labor had been induced, that, in fact, he made an error . . . and . . . would not try to exercise the sort of medical measures and practices that would be involved in saving that child.
Now, if you think that there are possibilities that doctors would not do that, then maybe this bill make sense, but I . . . feel . . . an additional doctor who then has to be called in an emergency situation to come in and make these assessments is really designed to burden the original decision of the woman and the physician.
[I]f these are children who are being born alive, I, at least, have confidence that a doctor who is in that room is going to make sure that they’re looked after.
Obama could not fathom that an abortionist who had been paid to kill a baby wouldn’t turn around and try to save a viable baby’s life in the event of a botch.
Kermit Gosnell would have been one of the abortionists in which Obama had “confidence.” Most know by now Gosnell is on trial for murdering seven abortion survivors and one mother.
Gosnell was committing abortions in Pennsylvania at the very time this bill was being debated in Illinois. Who knows, perhaps Gosnell was “snipping” the spinal cord of an abortion survivor at the moment Obama testified to his sterling character. After all, the grand jury report stated Gosnell likely killed “hundreds” of abortion survivors during the three decades he was in business.
Barack Obama has stated on record that he stands with the Kermit Gosnells of America. He can’t walk that back without opening the door to regulations such as he rejected as state senator. So he’s stuck.
Jill Stanek’s commitment to Christ led her to risk her job, reputation, and friendships to stop the terrible practices of abortion and infanticide. Jill was a registered nurse at Christ Hospital in Illinois when she made the shocking discovery that babies were being aborted alive and allowed to die without medical care. Jill went public and has since become a national figure in the effort to protect both born and preborn infants. In January 2003, Jill was named by World Magazine as one of the 30 most prominent pro-life leaders in the movement over the past 30 years.
This article has been reprinted with permission and can be found at http://www.lifenews.com/2013/04/16/obama-cant-comment-on-gosnell-because-obama-stands-with-him/.
