Pro Life?

Commentary By Ron Beasley

As we have all noticed the pro life crowd is only pro life before you are born or when you are brain dead.  Well David Kurtz watched a Fox News host Alisyn Camerota do a gotcha on a pro life hypocrite.

The host was Alisyn Camerota, and she was doing a panel on health care reform where Bob Beckel was playing the liberal going up against Kate Obenshain of the conservative Young America's Foundation.

The discussion turned to abortion restrictions in the health care reform bill, and of course Obenshain is opposed to any federal funds going to abortions, even indirectly via insurance policies subsidized by federal dollars.

At which point Camerota asks her, "If there is no federal money used to subsidize abortions for low-income women, doesn't that mean there will be more low-income babies, and do any of these amendments talk about the health care for them then?"

Obenshain sort of does a double take and stumbles through an answer to the question. She is clearly put off her game, or confused, or maybe horrified. I was mostly confused. But the more I ponder it, the more I wonder if I shouldn't just be horrified.

It was as if the Fox host were trying to play devil's advocate and in her mind the counterargument to opposing federal funding for abortions is that you'll end up having more low-income babies whose health care will cost the federal government even more than the abortions would.

Does that sort of crude cost-benefit analysis enter into anyone's thinking when supporting federal funding for abortions? Who thinks this way? Is that a reflection of how the Fox host views the "pro-abortion" position? Or how she views the budget hawk position?

You can watch it here:

I don't know if was intentional but it took a FOX News host to point out the hypocrisy of the right wing pro lifers.  And yes, I loved watching her squirm.