5 Responses to “Donald Miller Speaks About Campaigning for Obama”

1. Bryan Says:
   September 26th, 2008 at 9:50 am

   Maybe I’ve missed it, but what exactly is this solid plan Barack has for reducing abortions? I’ve looked and beyond talk of comprehensive sex education and access to contraception, I don’t know that I’ve seen much from him on it.

   On the other hand, I have seen him oppose restrictions on partial birth abortion, oppose solidifying the right to medical treatment for babies that survive abortion (Illinois law was riddled with loopholes that allowed abortion doctors to let babies just die), oppose parental notification laws and pledge to push for and sign the “Freedom of Choice” act that would essentially strike down all statewide restrictions on abortion.

   My dilemma is that I like Barack Obama personally. He seems like someone I’d love to have a beer with and discuss politics and debate issues with. The conversation would be engaging and interesting and challenging without devolving into petty bickering and getting personal. And he says nice things about listening to the other side and working together. I considered voting for him back during the primary season. But the more I looked at his record, I just got the impression that he talks in ways that sound moderate and middle of the road, but he doesn’t seem to vote that way. He seems to be a pretty reliable vote for typical Democrat and liberal positions, especially on social issues.

   So please point me to what he’s proposing to reduce abortion that goes beyond sex ed and contraception. I’d love to read it. And if someone could show me evidence in his past voting record of support for such things so I know it’s more than just election year pandering, that would be awesome too. I’m not being sarcastic, I just haven’t seen it.

2. Tina Harkey Says:
   October 6th, 2008 at 11:02 pm

   Wow, I just joined his fan club on Facebook and now I will leave it. I’m upset that he is now campaigning for anyone.

   If he is such the better candidate why didn’t he offer any of this legislation while in his current office?

3. Douglas Johnson Says:
   October 10th, 2008 at 8:13 am

   Bryan has asked an excellent question that deserves a detailed answer. Mr. Miller seeks to advance Obama’s candidacy by asserting that he will adopt policies that will “reduce abortions.” This claim in part of a post-nomination marketing strategy by the Obama campaign, but to work, it requires deflection of attention away from the fact that Barack Obama is firmly committed to an agenda of abortion-related policy changes that, if implemented, would greatly increase the numbers of abortions performed.

   The pro-life movement has won enactment of literally hundreds of state laws related to abortion — laws that save many lives, despite the severe limits imposed by the Supreme Court’s pro-abortion rulings. Studies by both pro-life researchers and pro-abortion researchers agree about this effect, although of course the pro-abortion side uses different language to describe it. These laws include informed consent laws (some of which now require the woman seeking an abortion to be offered ultrasound images of the unborn child), waiting periods, and parental notification and consent laws. All of these laws, and any other law that would “interfere with” access to abortion, would be nullified by the “Freedom of Choice Act” (FOCA, S. 1173), which is a proposed federal law that Obama has cosponsored. As the National Organization for Women put it, it would “sweep away hundreds of anti-abortion laws [and] policies.”

   On July 17, 2007, Obama stood in front of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, the lobbying-political arm of the nation’s largest abortion provider, and pledged, “The first thing I’d do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That’s the first thing that I’d do.”

   Cardinal Justin Rigali, in a September 19, 2008, letter to members of Congress, explained with great clarity the sweeping power of the language contained in the FOCA:

   “First it [the FOCA] creates a ‘fundamental right’ to abortion throughout the nine months of pregnancy, including a right to abort a fully developed child in the final weeks for undefined ‘health’ reasons. No government body at any level would be able to ‘deny or interfere with’ this newly created federal right. Second, it forbids government at all levels to ‘discriminate’ against the exercise of this right ‘in the regulation or provision of benefits, facilities, services, or information.’ For the first time, abortion on demand would be a national entitlement that government must condone and promote in all public programs affecting pregnant women.”

   Rigali added: “No one who sponsors or supports legislation like FOCA can credibly claim to be part of a good-faith discussion on how to reduce abortions.”

   Obama also advocates repeal of the Hyde Amendment, the law that since 1976 has blocked almost all federal funding of abortion. In other words, he wants to repeal one of the most successful “abortion reduction” policies ever adopted. By even the most conservative estimate, there are more than one million Americans alive today because of the Hyde Amendment. Even the Alan Guttmacher Institute (linked to Planned Parenthood) and NARAL admit that the Hyde Amendment (and the similar policies adopted by many states) have resulted in many, many babies being born who otherwise would have been aborted — indeed, the pro-abortion groups periodically put out papers complaining about this effect. According to a 2007 NARAL factsheet, “A study by The Guttmacher Institute shows that Medicaid-eligible women in states that exclude abortion coverage have abortion rates of about half of those women in statesthat fund abortion care with their own dollars. This suggests that the Hyde amendment forces about half the women who would otherwise have abortions to carry unintended pregnancies to term and bear children against their wishes instead.” Because the Hyde Amendment must be renewed annually, it could quickly be endangered under a president determined to re-establish federal funding of abortion on demand.

   Obama has also pledged to make abortion coverage part of his proposed national health insurance plan. Obama even advocates repeal of the national ban on partial-birth abortions, which the U.S. Supreme Court upheld in 2007 on a 5-4 vote, in a ruling that Obama harshly criticized. Indeed, one of the major purposes of the “Freedom of Choice Act,” according to its prime sponsors, is the nullification of the ban on partial-birth abortions.

   Let me close with just one more example of the phoniness of the Obama “abortion reduction” sales pitch. Across the nation, crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs) provide all manner of assistance to women who are experiencing crisis pregnancies, and they save the lives of many children. A very modest amount of federal funding going to such centers in some states. Pro-life lawmakers have pushed legislation to greatly expand such funding, but it has been blocked by lawmakers allied with the abortion lobby. Late in 2007, RHrealitycheck.org, a prominent pro-abortion advocacy website (representing the side hostile to such funding), submitted in writing the following question to the Obama campaign: “Does Sen. Obama support continuing federal funding for crisis pregnancy centers?” The Obama campaign’s written response was short, but it spoke volumes: “No.”

   Douglas Johnson
   Legislative Director
   National Right to Life Committee (NRLC)
   Washington, D.C.
   www-dot-nrlc-dot-org
   legfederal–at–aol-dot-com

4. Bryan Says:
   October 16th, 2008 at 4:07 pm

   Just curious as to whether Don has seen this or if anyone has heard him comment on it. I’d like to know Don’s thoughts on my question.

5. Interview with Douglas Johnson of the NRLC Says:
   October 20th, 2008 at 1:49 pm

   [...] Johnson, Legislative Director of the National Right to Life Committee, recently left a comment to one of my posts over at Donmillerfans.net regarding Don’s recent campaigning for Barack Obama. I asked Mr. Johnson if I could follow up [...]

Leave a Comment