The willing suspension of belief about Obama on abortion

The next time my column is published, America will have elected a new president.

Incredibly, a segment of the pro-life voting population is in play. They should be in the bag for John McCain, or even Alan Keyes, but certainly not for Darth Abortion Vader Obama.

But Barack Obama and his surrogates have been making the pitch that despite his unflinching support for abortion on demand – which includes overturning every local, state and federal law against abortion as well as providing government funding for abortion both in the U.S. and internationally – his plan to throw more taxpayer money at failed comprehensive sex ed and contraceptive programs will result in fewer abortions.

And apparently, some very stupid pro-lifers and pro-lifers in name only are falling for it. Yet in no other realm would such an argument hold water.

Were Obama to support overturning every law against theft but argue that his plan to teach people how to avoid pickpockets would result in less theft, we would call him crazy.

Were Obama to support overturning every law against rape but argue his plan to teach women how to fend off rapists would result in fewer rapes, we would call him not only crazy but sick.

Yet we have Obama making that very argument on the abortion issue and some pro-lifers buying it.

Obama is also hedging that his abortion positions are so heinous, another segment of voters will simply believe facts are lies. Obama helps them along by simply denying his own history as the mainstream media looks the other way.

When John McCain brought up Barack Obama's opposition to the Illinois Born Alive Infants Protection Act during the third presidential debate, Obama indignantly responded:

If it sounds incredible that I would vote to withhold lifesaving treatment from an infant, that's because it's not true.

Savvy strategy, and not the first time his side has used something close to this line. When National Right to Life first outed Obama in August as having voted against the identical version of Born Alive in Illinois that passed overwhelmingly on the federal level, Obama's incensed campaign at first denied it all, saying in a written statement:

The suggestion that Obama – the proud father of two little girls – and others who opposed these bills supported infanticide is deeply offensive and insulting.

Is Obama's strategy of denial working? Maybe. Bearing in mind the following chatter on the debate comes from an Obama aide (as recounted by Byron York of National Review), still ...

[W]hen moderator Bob Schieffer of CBS asked whether either man could nominate to the Supreme Court a judicial candidate with whom he disagreed on Roe v. Wade, McCain used the question to disavow any litmus tests for judges, and then brought up Obama's vote, in the Illinois state Senate, against a born-alive protection bill.

Pro-lifers were undoubtedly happy to see McCain bring it up, but the Obama aide told me it wasn't a problem. "When he made the attack on the born-alive legislation, you saw a vertical drop in the dial groups that was pretty astounding," the aide said. "People didn't find it credible." There has been a lot of back-and-forth about what version of the born-alive bill was up for consideration, but you can make a pretty solid case that Obama did indeed do what McCain said he did. Nevertheless, if the aide's account is correct, people didn't buy it.

There's just no way Barack Obama supports infanticide?

In this particular case it will pain me beyond words to ever have to say, "I told you so."