The ironies are layered and rich. Here was the “Quick Fact” headline in the “Research” section of supposed media watchdog, the liberal Media Matters:
And the equally fact-challenged article…
Glenn Beck falsely claimed that President Obama “suggested that [it] was OK” to “go into those pregnant women and pull the babies out of them and put a spike in the baby’s head,” echoing the oft-repeated right-wing falsehood that Obama did not support protecting babies who survived botched abortions. In fact, while serving in the state Senate, Obama opposed legislation to amend the IL Abortion Law because the amendment threatened abortion rights and was unnecessary since existing law already required doctors to provide medical care for babies who survived abortions.
Here is what MM was brainlessly protesting, pardon the pun, a particularly witty segment from Glenn Beck’s radio show wherein Beck contrasted Obama’s supposed concern about killing innocent civilians in times of war to his support of Partial Birth Abortion…
MM not only confused PBAs with an entirely different late-term abortion procedure, induced labor abortion, it falsely claimed that a law passed after Obama left the IL state senate, the IL Born Alive Infants Protection Act, “threatened abortion rights and was unnecessary.”
For MM’s information, here’s an illustration of the PBA, via National Right to Life:
Yahoo Health describes induced labor abortions although it omits one risk, as identified in a workbook I have from a 2001 symposium for Waukesha Memorial Hospital in WI on induced labor abortions. The worksheet describes one marker of success, if the preborn baby dies, and one complication, “live birth.”
If legislation attempting to safeguard the lives of abortion survivors somehow interfered with the right to abort, and it was “unnecessary” anyway, why did the IL state legislature eventually pass the Born Alive Infants Protection Act?
MM needs to take Abortion 101 and Logic 101, although I’m sure it is interested in neither.