Posted by
Andrews on Sunday, March 30, 2008 2:47:32 PM
I have just stumbled upon a
commentary from Michelle Malkin and a similar article
here on a Townhall blog, which take Obama to task for speaking of his young girls being "punished" with babies and equating pregnancy to STDs.
Now, yes, I can see how this would possibly turn off pro-life voters, but is it really news? The man has already fought long and hard to allow
infanticide. Perhaps my title is a bit excessive, but I have to say, once you know Obama supports infanticide does it matter what else he says on the issue?
I would worry about anyone, pro-life or pro-choice, who lined up behind someone supporting infanticide.
So, the question should be "Do you still support allowing babies to die of exposure if they survive an attempted abortion?" Anything else really doesn't matter until we know the answer to that.
Correction (03/30/2008): My apologies to any readers who tried the original links. The first link, to Michelle Malkin, actually pointed to an article by Jill Stanek on World Net Daily. (At least it was on a related topic.) I have now fixed the link, and it sends readers to the correct article by Michelle Malkin. I also corrected the spelling of Mrs. Malkin's name in the article, as I had omitted one "L" from her name.