Among Democratic Sen. Barack Obama's many political talents is his ability to
recalibrate his message to the tastes of different audiences. This gift for
niche-messaging sometimes gets him into trouble — just ask those God-fearing,
gun-clinging, small-town folks in Pennsylvania — but it also allows Obama to
position himself as a candidate who transcends divisions despite a rigidly
partisan record.

Nowhere is Obama's skill at squaring contradictions more evident than on
abortion. It is the rare presidential candidate who is adept enough at spinning
his abortion record to win a historic endorsement from Planned Parenthood and
earn a perfect voting score from NARAL Pro-Choice America, while also inspiring
supporters to build websites proclaiming him the race's "pro-life" candidate.

Those websites are run by Democratic partisans whose commitment to
defending the right to life of the unborn generally ranks far behind their
commitment to seeing the electoral map awash in blue. Still, their brashness in
defending Obama's pro-life credentials is remarkable. Listening to them, you
never would know that Obama supports taxpayer-funded abortions, opposed
legislation aimed at protecting babies who survive late-term abortions and has
pledged to sign the Freedom of Choice Act, which would eliminate virtually all
federal, state and local restrictions on abortion.

The brashness of Obama's supporters is shared by the candidate himself. Viewers
caught a glimpse of Obama's boldness during last week's presidential debate,
when he said that he would not use support for Roe v. Wade as a litmus test for
his judicial nominees. Yet he repeatedly has indicated otherwise and recently
told Glamour magazine that a judge who did not believe in the "right to
privacy" as defined in Roe is one whose judicial philosophy he would not
embrace.

Obama showed similar audacity when pressed about his refusal to oppose
partial-birth abortion, a gruesome procedure denounced by the late Democratic
Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan as "too close to infanticide" and outlawed by a
bipartisan congressional majority. Although Obama never has voted to ban
partial-birth abortion or any other late-term abortion procedure, he claimed to
be "completely supportive" of doing so, as long as such bans include health
exceptions for the mother. Obama did not mention that "health exceptions" are
the favorite tool of the abortion lobby for gutting pro-life laws. Such
undefined exceptions can be interpreted broadly enough to allow even medically
unnecessary procedures such as partial-birth abortion, which involves the
extraction of a fetus limb by limb and the suctioning of her brain so she can
be delivered dead.

Despite his extreme record, Obama claimed the middle ground. "Nobody's
pro-abortion," he said. "I think it's always a tragic situation." That might be
news to those who heard Obama trumpet his "decades" of fighting for legalized
abortion at last year's Planned Parenthood Action Fund conference. He reminded
them that he "put Roe at the center of my lesson plan" when educating law
students and that, when it comes to abortion, "This election is not just about
defense, it's also about playing offense. . . . On this fundamental issue, I
will not yield, and Planned Parenthood will not yield."

So who is the real Obama: The one who considers the question of when a baby
gets human rights "above my pay grade" or the one who promises never to relent
in his refusal to recognize the rights of the unborn?

The answer can be found in the curious silence of Obama's allies at Planned
Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America, who seem unruffled by his recent
backpedaling on their core issue. Unlike some of Obama's pro-life supporters,
they know that the truth about a politician's views lies not in his rhetoric
but in his record.

Colleen Carroll Campbell is an author, television and radio host and St.
Louis-based fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. Her website is
www.colleen-campbell.com.