You would have a difficult time figuring out Barack Obama supports infanticide by the Jan. 17 Associated Press story entitled, "Obama record may be gold mine for critics."

Each of five times the AP referred to Obama's votes as state senator against legislation to stop infanticide, it softened the blow to make it unintelligible to the fetus on the street.

Yes, the AP's use of "fetus" in its story was as incorrect and ridiculous as that.

(Column continues below)

Any dictionary defines "fetus" as "an unborn or unhatched vertebrate ... a developing human from usually three months after conception to birth."

And it's not as if the English language isn't rich with terminology to properly describe the human after birth – neonate, newborn, baby, infant or child, to name five.

But the AP couldn't admit abortion has extended to killing born children in the U.S.:

[Obama] voted against requiring medical care for aborted fetuses who survive. ...

One vote that especially riled abortion opponents involved restrictions on a type of abortion where the fetus sometimes survives, occasionally for hours. The restrictions, which never became law, included requiring the presence of a second doctor to care for the fetus. ...

Abortion opponents see Obama's vote on medical care for aborted fetuses as a refusal to protect the helpless. Some have even accused him of supporting infanticide. ...

Obama – who joined several other Democrats in voting "present" in 2001 and "no" the next year – argued the legislation was worded in a way that unconstitutionally threatened a woman's right to abortion by defining the fetus as a child.

What a ridiculous claim – to define a born fetus as a child – one that the gullible World Health Organization in 1950, United Nations in 1955, U.S. Congress and president in 2002, and even Noah Webster in 1828 all believed when adapting identical language to define non-fetushood.

The AP's language mangling to obscure the humanity of live aborted babies is purposeful, a repeat offense.

In 2002, National Right to Life corrected the AP editor to no avail after it released a story stating, "A fetus outside a woman's body that has a heartbeat or is breathing on its own would be considered 'born alive' and given legal protection under a bill approved by the House."

Before that, I contacted the AP in 2001 after it released a story with the headline, "State Senate OKs rules for living fetuses in abortions."

In the article, the AP garbled language to unintelligibility by stating, "The fetus would be 'fully recognized as a human person' and all reasonable measures consistent with good medical practice would have to be undertaken to preserve the life and health of the child."

At some point in that sentence the fetus became a child, but I don't know where.

Giving noncredit where it's due, the AP is not the only mainstream media outlet to handle the topic of babies aborted alive with fetus gloves. The Chicago Sun-Times reported the same news in 2001 with this headline: "Bill proposes care for fetus after abortion," which would lead one to believe the story was about proper fetal waste disposal.

That story compounded the inhumanity of a live aborted baby by calling her or him an "it": "It would be considered 'born alive' if it has a beating heart. …" Oh, those telltale hearts.

Back to Obama, the Southern Illinoisan reported Jan. 21, "Obama voted against a measure designed to protect what supporters termed live babies born during abortion procedures," as if pro-lifers made that term up.

Not to be cornered, Obama's inaptly named communications director, Robert Gibbs, explained, according to the paper, "[T]he legislation, which was defeated, defined a fetus as a person and 'would have criminalized every abortion.'"

This was a patent lie, but since the newspaper cannot afford a dictionary, how much less should we expect it to afford a competent investigative reporter?

Then again, the mainstream media and Barack Obama are so much more enlightened than the rest of us, existential to the point they have created their owns terms for human existence, modern-day Renaissance fetuses.

---

Related special offer:

"Struggling for Life: How our Tax Dollars and Twisted Science Target the Unborn"