Dear Fellow Pro-lifer:
I just read an interesting article in the National Review. Tim Busch, the founder of the Napa Institute writes that the pro-life movement must fight for the culture, not just the law. Pulse agrees and has done both for more than half a century.
He goes on to say:
“… as Tuesday’s elections made painfully clear, large numbers of Americans currently support abortion in some form or fashion. Their minds are made up well before they get to the ballot box. If we hope to change election outcomes, we must change people’s minds well before the voting starts.”
Newer readers of our blogposts may not realize the extent of Pulse Life Advocates involvement in promoting a culture of life at the Iowa state house. Together with the Iowa Coalition of Pro-Life Leaders, we have chipped away at the culture of death that once dominated Iowa politics. We are one court decision away from having a Heartbeat bill (passed twice by the Iowa legislature!) implemented.
But Tim Busch is absolutely correct. Ultimately, you save more unborn babies when you change the culture of rank and file Iowans.
So here’s what I’d like to do. I’d like to give you a quick video overview of how Pulse has impacted, and will continue to impact, Iowa’s culture with smart, loving pro-life outreach:
The March For Life.
We’ve taken tens of thousands of students to this watershed human rights events in Washington DC for decades. Many of these pilgrims have grown and become Iowa leaders.
A Clash of Creeds
We used the theatrical arts to stage a play that showcased the clashing philosophies of three important women of the 20th century: Ayn Rand; Margaret Sanger; and Saint Mother Teresa of Calcutta. We used their own words, and just to make it even more fun, the moderator was the great G.K. Chesterton.
The Holy Family Project
Families are the ‘soul’ solution for a wounded world. This epic 4-part production explored the spiritual foundations of the family, and how families help prevent abortion.
Pro-Life Apologetics
What should your kids and grandkids say when confronted by smug abortion proponents at school or on college campuses? We created 24 videos of less than a minute each to show them exactly how to respond.
How to Raise Pro-Life Children
Our new 4-part video series will be released next week and show you how to raise pro-life children.
Pulse does more, so much more than what I’ve listed here. But these were big projects that have made a big splash here in the Hawkeye State.
If you want us to turn a ‘big splash’ into a tsunami, donate to our educational pro-life outreach today.
Our Christmas Gala is this Saturday. Be sure to bid on some of our online Christmas items, whether if you attend in person or not. Click on this link to see what we’ve got. You’ll be blown away!
I hope to see you Saturday night in person at our Gala!
Sincerely,
Maggie DeWitte, Executive Director
[Can’t make our Christmas Gala? Watch our live stream at 7PM Saturday night here on our website or at our Facebook page. Support our pro-life outreach with your gift today. Thank-you.]
Pulse Life Advocates published a post on Facebook which asks,
“What does abortion look like? This:”
We accompanied the caption with a photo that showed body parts of an unborn abortion victim. Facebook masked the photo with their own caption which said:
“Violent or graphic content. This photo is covered so people can choose whether they want to see it.”
Most abortion rights advocates refuse to click through and look at the depravity of abortion. Frankly, most pro-lifers don’t want to look either. And yet you must.
If we don’t see the reality of abortion, it remains an abstraction in the hearts and minds of most decent people. It leads to tepid and even insipid responses to abortion, such as:
“Although I’m personally against abortion, I can’t tell a woman what to do with her own body.”
Or …
“Although I’m personally against abortion, I can’t impose my own religion on someone else.”
How to make the violence of abortion a reality
If you have ever looked into the dead eyes of a decapitated baby in the womb (above), the violence of abortion becomes a reality.
You realize you’re not talking about a woman’s body, you’re talking about her daughter’s body.
You realize you’re not trying to convert the mom into becoming a Roman Catholic … or a Southern Baptist … or a Muslim. You’re simply trying to convert her into becoming a civilized human being by acknowledging the humanity of the child she chose to bring into this world through an act of consensual sex.
When you see the actual depravity, it allows you to understand yourself better. WHY are you personally against abortion? The picture of the body parts of the aborted unborn child reminds you. Abortion kills a unique human being in a particularly savage fashion.
Take the pro-life rationale stated above and rephrase it:
“Although I’m personally against someone ripping apart the body of a tiny defenseless baby girl in the womb, I can’t tell a woman what to do with her own body.”
It makes a big difference when you’ve seen the reality of the violence. It makes you squirm, knowing what you have been willing to tolerate in the past.
The video above humanizes abortion
Abortion advocates don’t want you to see these images, which is why the actor Kevin Sorbo agreed to narrate the video above. Although animated, it humanizes the issue in such a heartbreaking way.
Imagine how God feels seeing His creation treated this way. Imagine how He feels about people who claim to follow Him, and yet refuse to stand up for the little gal in the womb.
You’ve got to look at what you’re allowing to happen through your inaction, through your tolerance of abortion.
In 1955, an African-American young man, Emmett Till, was brutally murdered by two white men. (A movie came out on the story last year.) Till’s mother insisted on an open casket funeral so the nation could see the reality of racism and the violence being perpetrated against Black Americans.
Last month, conservative talk show host, Ben Shapiro, took some heat for showing unedited footage of the massacre of Israelis by Hamas, complete with beheadings and mutilated bodies.
Then in Los Angeles last week, Israeli actress, Gal Gadot, rented a movie theater and screened more footage of the violent attack in Israel, leading to riots in the street outside the theater.
Yes, it’s hard to look at all this depravity, but if you don’t, the violence is less real. And you get more of it. Watch the video above for a wake-up call. Peace begins in the womb. We MUST stand up for the little gal in the womb who screams at us with each abortion, “Stop, you’re hurting me!”
[Our Christmas Gala is THIS Saturday. Get your tickets now.]
The year was 1860. The Republican candidate for president, Abraham Lincoln, stepped to the podium and said:
“You have to be honest with the American people. Slavery is a personal issue. I am unapologetically pro-emancipation for the slaves. But we have to acknowledge that the courts have given the power to make this decision to the individual states.
And as much as I am pro-emancipation, I don’t want anyone being judged for being pro-slavery, and I don’t want them to judge me, because there are some things that are going wrong on the pro-emancipation side. The same on the pro-slavery side.
When it comes to the federal law, it will take 60 senate votes, a majority of the house and the president to sign it. We’ve never had 60 senate votes. Ever. No Republican president can ban slavery anymore than the Democrat president can ban state laws.
Let’s make sure that none of these laws put slave owners in jail or give them the death penalty for depriving black people of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and let’s focus on freeing as many slaves as we can and stop the judgment. We do not need to divide America over this anymore.”
We’re playing, with you, of course. Lincoln didn’t really say that, Nikki Haley did in last night’s Republican debate. Simply swap out ‘abortion’ for ‘slavery’ for her actual comments.
For someone who claims to be “unapologetically pro-life,” Ms. Haley sounds very un-Lincolnesque. She’s not very convincing, is she, especially when contrasted with Mr. Lincoln’s eloquence as he took on the Democratic Party of his day.
Here’s how Lincoln made the moral case for emancipation:
“If A can prove, however conclusively, that he may, of right, enslave B why may not B snatch the same argument, and prove equally, that he may enslave A?
You say A is white and B is black. It is color, then; the lighter, having the right to enslave the darker? Take care. By this rule, you are to be slave to the first man you meet, with a fairer skin than your own.
You do not mean color exactly? You mean the whites are intellectually the superiors of the blacks, and, therefore have the right to enslave them? Take care again. By this rule, you are to be slave to the first man you meet, with an intellect superior to your own.
But, say you, it is a question of [self] interest; and, if you can make it your [self] interest, you have the right to enslave another. Very well. And if he can make it his [self] interest, he has the right to enslave you.”
Lincoln, of course, invokes the timeless wisdom of Jesus, as quoted in the Gospel of Matthew 7:1-2:
“Judge not, that you be not judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you.”
Writing in the Reformed Perspective website, John Dykstra suggests Lincoln might have approached the abortion issue this way:
What Jesus issued as a warning Lincoln used as a tool. So how might this tool work in the abortion debate? We could begin by noting that if someone argues the unborn can be killed because they are smaller than us, then, as Lincoln might have put it, “Take care. By this rule you could be killed by the first man you meet who is bigger than you.”
Or if it comes down to some ability, then watch out when you meet someone who is more able than you.
Self-interest? This is a major justification for abortion: a child would interfere with our lifestyle. But, “take care again – by this rule you may be killed by any who can show it is in their self-interest for you to be dead.”
Nikki Haley could learn a thing or two from Abraham Lincoln.
[Our Christmas Gala is filling up fast! Buy your tickets today!]
Josh Mandelbaum, pro-abortion mayor candidate
The Des Moines mayor’s race will be determined by the abortion issue. As we’ve written before, candidate Josh Mandelbaum has made abortion a central issue of his campaign, promoting an agenda which would transform Des Moines into a sanctuary city for abortion.
Although his chief rival, Connie Boesen, is pro-abortion rights, she reiterates that it is not an appropriate issue for the Des Moines city council and should be left to the state legislature.
Just two days ago, he boasted that he worked closely with Planned Parenthood in writing proposed abortion policy which would strip away rights of unborn babies in Des Moines. He wrote:
“When it comes to reproductive rights in this race, there’s a real difference between me and my opponent. But don’t just take it from me, read what Planned Parenthood has to say about the race.”
And here is what Planned Parenthood has to say about Mandelbaum:
Planned Parenthood Advocates of Iowa today issued the following statement regarding the Des Moines mayoral candidates’ stance on protecting the reproductive rights of the people voting for them:
“Since the fall of Roe, reproductive freedom has become a key issue in elections across the country. From federal to state to local races, Planned Parenthood supporters are demanding their elected officials be clear about their positions on sexual and reproductive health. The Des Moines mayoral race is no different.
“Unfortunately, as the mayoral election nears its final days, the events surrounding a City Council resolution in support of bodily autonomy introduced in October 2022 by Councilmember Josh Mandelbaum have been misrepresented. Mandelbaum worked in close coordination with Planned Parenthood Advocates of Iowa to update a proposed resolution to reflect meaningful policy to lawfully protect the reproductive freedoms of Des Moines residents and city staff. When the resolution was brought before the Council for consideration, Councilmember Connie Boesen was the second to a motion by Councilman Joe Gatto to dismiss the resolution without discussion. This vote shut down the effort to act within the city’s authority to protect abortion rights and is a matter of public record.
“When it comes to protecting our freedoms, every level of government matters. It’s not enough to wait on action from the very state government that continually violates Iowans’ freedoms. Municipal governments ought to use any means available to defend the rights of their residents and staff. In this moment, no politician who calls themselves pro-choice gets a pass on protecting bodily autonomy. We appreciate the proactive leadership demonstrated through this resolution and remain disappointed that a majority of the Council chose not to support the rights of their constituents when presented the opportunity to do so.”
To be sure we all understand the primacy of this issue in the Des Moines mayor’s race, Mandelbaum emphasized the point:
“… there’s no question about it, abortion rights are on the ballot in Des Moines this November [7th].”
Pulse Life Advocates encourages pro-lifers everywhere to spread the word. A mayor Josh Mandelbaum who promotes a policy of death would destroy the livability of this great city.
[Big abortion has their tentacles everywhere, even the Des Moines mayor’s race. Help us continue to promote sanctity of life throughout Iowa. Donate to our pro-life educational outreach today.]
The city of Des Moines has flourished over the past two decades. In fact, in an analysis of all the cities in the U.S., the US News and World Report ranks Des Moines as #19! That’s how great this city is. But next week’s mayoral race features a candidate who wants to turn Des Moines into a sanctuary city for abortion.
Yes, Josh Mandelbaum is running for mayor of Des Moines on an abortion platform. Watch his campaign ad above.
In it, he criticizes Governor Kim Reynolds for signing pro-life legislation. It states he proposes ‘new’ reproductive health protections.
And what are these new protections? Here is his proposal:
- Provide a benefit to city employees to cover travel costs in the case that they must seek abortion care outside the state;
- Prohibit discrimination based on reproductive health care decisions;
- Prohibit use of city funds to store or catalog information about abortion, conduct surveillance or collect information to determine if an abortion occurred, or provide information to government agencies about an abortion;
- Make enforcement of state laws that seek to criminalize abortion the lowest enforcement priority; and
- Advocate for the codification of access to abortion care in state and federal law.
In other words, he demands that taxpayers partially fund abortions for our city employees. And in Iowa’s largest city, he wants to end enforcement of pro-life laws passed by our state legislature.
His opponent, Connie Boesen, disagrees
His chief opponent, Connie Boesen, disagrees with Mandelbaum. Although Ms. Boesen is pro-choice, she believes the issue belongs at the state level. And when push came to shove, she voted NO when Mandelbaum called for a vote in Des Moines’ City Council last year. (Pulse was present monitoring the debate.)
Des Moines experienced a renaissance over the past two decades, led by council members who focused on appropriate city matters such as downtown development, bike paths, beautiful parks and public safety.
Josh Mandelbaum fundraises on the abortion issue. He has one of the largest campaign war chests of any mayor candidate in the country as out-of-state abortion money pours into his coffers.
Pro-lifers are advised to keep their eye on the ball. Although the current city council is opposed to Mandelbaum’s radical proposal, that can change in a single election cycle.
Mandelbaum’s website trumpets the fact that he is an “outspoken voice in favor of ‘progressive’ policy”, and that policy begins with gutting life protections in Des Moines.
While most mayoral candidates focus on “livability” issues to make a city better, Mandelbaum focuses on death.
Are you okay with that?
The massacre in Israel leaves most people of conscience speechless. Men were murdered and beheaded. Women raped, then murdered, then spat upon. And babies murdered and mutilated.
Hamas, the perpetrator of the bloodbath, live-streamed the carnage to make sure we understand that the savagery was the point. They have no boundaries, no compunction in the pursuit of their stated goal to wipe Israel and Jews off the map.
The headline above, “what kind of people can celebrate the mutilation of babies,” leads to a follow up question: “what kind of people can support, or even applaud, perpetrators of such a carnage?”
Woke college campuses
In the U.S., you’ll find them on elite, woke college campuses.
Yalies4Palestine blamed Israel:
“We mourn the tragic loss of civilian lives, and for this we hold the Zionist regime accountable.”
Thirty-three student groups at Harvard said pretty much said the same thing:
“We hold the Israeli regime entirely responsible for all unfolding violence.”
At Stanford, the Students for Justice in Palestine rationalized the viciousness of the attack as “part of the ongoing, decades-long struggle against Israeli oppression,” and that the Palestinians have “the legitimate right to resist occupation, apartheid and systemic injustice.”
Did the same people say that to the Ukrainians when Russia invaded them?
Some people are ‘lesser’ than others
Obviously not. Anti-semitism drives the acceptance of savagery in these elite conclaves in the United States. And anti-semitism at home and abroad is fueled by the belief that some people are lesser than others.
Pulse Life Advocates addresses this issue because we see a connection between the massacre in Kfar Azza, Israel, and the massacre taking place in the womb in every state in America.
Some reading this may bristle at the comparison. And there are differences, of course. Jews have been targeted for centuries out of sheer hatred. The unborn have been targeted for their inconvenience.
But in both cases, Jews and the unborn are viewed as being ‘lesser’ humans than others.
In both cases, these two groups have been viewed as obstacles to another’s prosperity, success, and happiness.
But the carnage has been the same. While Jews have been wiped out at music festivals and concentration camps by anti-semitic terrorists, the unborn are wiped out in their mothers’ wombs at the hands of highly paid abortionists.
Thirteen hundred innocent Jews were butchered in Kfar Azza on October 7th. Six million innocent Jews were killed in the Holocaust. And 64 million innocent unborn babies have been aborted in the U.S. since 1973.
On American college campuses, these same haters of Israel and also rabidly pro-abortion. Eighty percent of all college students are pro-choice, and it’s worse in woke enclaves like Harvard, Yale, and Stanford. (Tragically, the acceptance of human abortion is about the same amongst Jews.)
What does this mean for our future?
So the Jews and the unborn are viewed as lesser people in the eyes of these elites. What does this portend for our future?
The National Review’s Charles C. W. Cooke says it’s a prerequisite to barbarism:
Charles C. W. Cooke
“Indeed, I shall go one further here and propose that it is not simply abhorrent to subordinate one’s elementary sense of horror to a set of esoteric abstractions; it is the prerequisite to barbarism. From time to time, students of history wonder how the great tyrannies of the past could have impelled so many ostensibly rational people to treat others with such brazen contempt. This question, I’m afraid, has a mundane answer: Those tyrannies persuaded their accomplices to do terrible things by insisting that the people to whom the terrible things were being done were lesser in some meaningful way.”
If you can kill innocent human beings in the womb because they are an inconvenience, anything is possible.
Pulse Life Advocates stands in solidarity with our Jewish brothers and sisters who once again are targets of raw evil.
The killing must end. It starts with the recognition that peace begins in the womb.
[Support Pulse’s pro-life outreach. Give today.]
By Tom Quiner
Our Lady of Fatima
I was sitting on my patio one summer night sipping on a glass of wine and enjoying the company of some good friends when the conversation took a mysterious turn.
Carol told of something extraordinary she witnessed years ago at Veterans Auditorium here in Des Moines, Iowa. She was the reluctant attendee of something called a “Marian Conference.” For my non-Catholic readers, a Marian Conference is devoted to the study and veneration of Mary, the Mother of Christ.
Carol was roped into attending by an aunt. She admitted she was a little tentative attending an event that seemed a little “out there” to her.
These photos were taken by a visitor on September 27, 2005 atop Holy Family Hill on the grounds of Sylvan Springs in Rome City, IN. This event took place shortly after a small group of people making an Our Lady of America pilgrimage prayed The Divine Mercy Chaplet.
During a break, she stood outside with a group of people when it happened. She saw the sun begin to move erratically in the sky.
Does this sound a little crazy to you? Well, it did to me, which is why Carol is reluctant to talk about it. And yet other people saw it, too. I know, because when Carol told her story, our friend Jeane exclaimed: “You were there, too? My parents were there and saw the same thing.”
Hmmm.
This phenomenon of the dancing sun is known as the “miracle of the sun.” It has been witnessed by thousands, even hundreds of thousands of people over the past century.
It is always associated with the Blessed Mother.
What would a modern day scientist, such as the late Stephen Hawking, have to say about such nonsense? Something like this:
“The universe is governed by scientific laws. These laws must hold without exception.”
So what are we to make of this miracle of the sun?
The phenomenon was first observed on October 13th, 1917 in Fatima, Portugal. (Read my earlier post on the subject, The oddity of Fatima). According to published reports, somewhere from 30,000 to 100,00 were present to witness this event.
That’s a lot of witnesses!
So what happened? The sun appeared as an opaque, spinning disc in the sky. It cast multi-colored lights across the ground and the people watching the phenomenon. It danced and zigzagged in defiance of Mr. Hawking’s scientific laws. It even careened toward earth leading some frightened observers to think it was the end of the world.
The anti-clericical Portuguse newspaper, O Seculo, reported on the event as follows:
“Before the astonished eyes of the crowd, whose aspect was biblical as they stood bare-headed, eagerly searching the sky, the sun trembled, made sudden incredible movements outside all cosmic laws — the sun ‘danced’ according to the typical expression of the people.”
Here’s what a doctor saw, Dr. Domingos Pinto Coelho, writing for another newspaper, Ordem:
“The sun, at one moment surrounded with scarlet flame, at another aureoled in yellow and deep purple, seemed to be in an exceedingly swift and whirling movement, at times appearing to be loosened from the sky and to be approaching the earth, strongly radiating heat.”
And then another reporter saw the following as published in O Dia, a newspaper in Lisbon:
“…The silver sun, enveloped in the same gauzy grey light, was seen to whirl and turn in the circle of broken clouds… The light turned a beautiful blue, as if it had come through the stained-glass windows of a cathedral, and spread itself over the people who knelt with outstretched hands… people wept and prayed with uncovered heads, in the presence of a miracle they had awaited. The seconds seemed like hours, so vivid were they.”
The miracle of the sun phenomenon has been witnessed on other occasions, each associated with a “Marian” site including in Lubbock, Texas in 1989 and Denver, Colorado in 1992 to name a few. Several movies have been made of the Fatima event, most recently in 2020 (see trailer below).
Interestingly, not all present at these events witnessed the phenomenon.
Interestingly, there were people present who witnessed the event who were not the least bit religious. By the same token, some in attendance who were very religious did not see anything unusual.
We’re left with the following possibilities:
A publication of the day, Ilustração Portugueza, October 29, 1917, shows the crowd looking at the Miracle of the Sun during the Fátima apparitions.
1. The tens of thousands of people who witnessed the event suffered from a mass psychosis, sharing the same delusion at the same time. Even more, this mass psychosis proved to be contagious as others contracted the same delusion over the years, including my friend, Carol (she seems normal to me otherwise!), and the parents of my friend, Jeane.
2. Perhaps that’s what happens to folks who stare at the sun too long. In other words, maybe it’s their retinas playing tricks on them. (What’s wrong with this hypothesis is that it rained in Fatima immediately preceding the event, and people’s clothes were totally dried within minutes. Heat goes beyond a phenomenon of the retina.)
3. People lied about the story and made it up. But this doesn’t make much sense since so many detractors of the Church witnessed the same phenomenon. We’re talking a ton of witnesses, too many for a lie to be believed.
4. A miraculous event took place.
This leads me back to Mr. Hawkings. The miracle of the sun seems to have been an event outside the system of natural causes. I agree that the laws of nature must hold without exception … unless the Designer of natural causes, God, wishes to “bend the rules.”
As the philosopher, Peter Kreeft, puts it:
“Now the Creator of the universe has authority over all creation. It is truly odd to call his suspending this or that regularly observed sequence a ‘violation,’ as if it were something he should feel guilty or embarrassed about. A miracle violates nothing. When one happens, God has (mercifully) modified the scheduled of the day.”
Scientists rightly revere the laws of nature. They lend a certain order to our lives. But for Mr. Hawking to even discount the possibility that a Designer exists who created these laws is, well, just plain illogical.
In the meantime, let us ponder the miracle of the sun as one of those wonderful modifications in the schedule of our day.
If you see the sun dancing tomorrow, it might not be all bad!
[Reserve your seat to Pulse Life Advocate’s Christmas Gala today.]
Dear Pro-Lifer:
You should have gotten your invitation to our November 18th Christmas Gala in the mail.
I encourage you to reserve your table or seat soon. Tickets are going fast. This is the biggest buzz we’ve ever seen!
Casey & Ron DeSantis
Pro-lifers are excited to hear Governor Ron and Casey DeSantis talk about why they are pro-life, and what they’re doing to raise pro-life children.
In addition, Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird and CEO of The Family Leader will share their insights on being pro-life.
And let’s face it, everyone loves our Christmas Galas, complete with great food, music and fun.
What better way to spend a Saturday night than hanging with a crowd of pro-lifers!
This is our biggest fundraiser of the year. Your presence matters to the future success of our pro-life educational outreach in Iowa.
Click here now to buy your table of ten ($900) or seat ($100 each).
Don’t wait!
I look forward to greeting you personally on Saturday, November 18th at the Iowa Events Center.
Maggie DeWitte, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
P.S. We’re excited to show you the trailer for our new video project, “How to Raise Pro-Life Children!”
By Tom Quiner, Board President, Pulse Life Advocates
Presidential debates are cattle calls which yield unsatisfying results. Moderators ask large questions, such as: “How will you bring about peace on earth and goodwill to men? You have sixty seconds to respond.” These sprawling events allow candidates but ten minutes of total time to expound on a panoply of complex issues. That’s why I’m looking forward to the DeSantis/Newsom debate.
In case you haven’t heard, California Governor, Gavin Newsom, challenged Florida Governor Ron DeSantis to a head-to-head debate on November 30th, hosted by Fox News.
Two visions for America
This debate allows two competing governing and political philosophies to be compared side-by-side. Mr. Newsom has implemented the most progressive agenda in the country, a stark contrast to Mr. DeSantis’ conservative approach to running a state.
Clearly, Gavin Newsom has presidential ambitions and wants to remain in the spotlight if President Biden’s health or popularity sputters and creates an opening in his party’s nominating process.
And Ron DeSantis is already an announced Republican candidate who lags far behind Donald Trump in the polls. He needs to make something happen. This is an interesting and constructive way to do it before the Iowa Caucuses.
Debate precedent
Precedent exists for single candidates from opposing parties to debate during primary season with crowded fields. One such debate took place here in Des Moines on July 20, 1987. It took place at Drake University’s Law School, and I was there.
The debate matched Republican presidential candidate Jack Kemp against a Democratic candidate, Richard Gephardt debating their clashing views on trade policy.
This focused debate allowed them ample time to flesh out a single issue in detail, elevating the audience’s understanding of the complexities of the trade issue. Both served in the House of Representatives at the time, and were actual, real-life friends. The debate lacked the vitriol that so defines today’s debates. Any jabs at each other were made with a twinkle in their eyes, and there was genuine warmth between the two.
This won’t be a warm-fuzzy affair
Expect none such comity in the DeSantis/Newsom debate.
After reaching out to offer to debate, Newsom quickly mocked DeSantis for accepting the “bait.” He claims the Florida governor is “distracted” and “completely unqualified” to be president. He describes him as “weak and undisciplined,” and to be sure we understand his loathing for his Florida counterpart, he calls DeSantis a “cruel bully whose career is defined by “attacking vulnerable communities.”
So much for comity.
Florida and California are each as large as small countries. With a population of 22 million, Florida is the size of Taiwan, while California’s 38 million make it comparable in size to Canada. And yet people are pouring into Florida in droves at the same time they flee California.
California’s -0.66% population decline is the fourth worst in the U.S. while Florida’s 1.9% increase is the best.
Governor DeSantis must be doing something right, and a DeSantis/Newsom debate will help flesh it out.
The two governors disagree on every single critical issue, whether immigration, education, climate change, taxation, border policy … you name it.
California is in a virtual tie for highest taxed state in the union at $6325 per capita compared to Florida’s 48th ranking at $2264 per capita.
With all that tax money in play, does that mean California schools are better than Florida’s? No. The U.S. News and World Report ranked Florida #1 in educational achievement and California #20.
In fact, in spite of, or maybe because of, moderate tax rates and a lack of an income tax, Florida ranks high (#10) in overall rankings for all categories compared to California’s #33 overall ranking in 2023. And California is heading in the wrong direction. They were ranked #24 just two years ago.
Again, with all those ultra high tax rates, you’d think California would at least be fiscally stable. But the U.S. World and News Report ranks them at only #39 compared to Florida’s #13 rank.
Radically different abortion policies
Pulse is particularly concerned with their disconnect over their abortion policies. When the Supreme Court struck down Roe v Wade, Governor Newsom sent out a press release which said:
“An alarming number of states continue to outlaw abortion and criminalize women, and it’s more important than ever to fight like hell for those who need these essential services.”
No, pro-life laws do not criminalize women, they criminalize those who perform abortion which kill unique human persons.
Newsom continues:
“We’re doing everything we can to protect people from any retaliation for accessing abortion care while also making it more affordable to get contraceptives.”
No one retaliates against those who procure abortions. In fact, the pro-life community views women as the victim of the policies Newsom promotes and implements. It is pro-lifers who provide the prayers and hands-on counseling for women wounded morally, spiritually, and physically by abortion, not anyone in the abortion community.
Newsom continues:
“Our Legislature has been on the frontlines of this fight, and no other legislative body in the country is doing more to protect these fundamental rights – I’m proud to stand with them again and sign these critical bills into law.”
Technically, California restricts abortion: 1. At the point of viability (approximately 23 weeks) or; 2. When necessary to protect the health of the mother.
Practically speaking, the latter trumps the former, ushering in unfettered abortion in California.
Newsom signed a whole slate of laws liberalizing abortion even more following the overturning of Roe.
By contrast, Governor DeSantis called the end of Roe an “answered prayer” and signed a Heartbeat Bill into law.
Whether either of these governors ever wins the nomination of their party, a DeSantis/Newsom debate provides a clear contrast to voters, forcing them to answer this question:
Is America better off if it looks like Florida … or California?
[Governor Ron DeSantis is the keynote speaker at Pulse’s November 18th Christmas Gala. Order your ticket today.]
At Wednesday’s 2nd Republican debate, Fox talk show host, Dana Perino, asked Florida Governor Ron DeSantis this question:
“I want to ask you something that is on a lot of Republicans’ minds. This election could come down to less than 50,000 votes in three states. Abortion was on the ballot in six states in 2022. Republicans lost all of them. Next year, abortion will likely be on the ballot in Arizona. That is a must-win state. Governor DeSantis, how are you going to win over independent pro-choice voters in Arizona?”
Governor DeSantis responded like this:
“The same way we did in Florida. We won the greatest Republican race in the history of the state, over 1.5 million votes. We were winning places like Miami/Dade County and Palm Beach which nobody thought was possible because we were leading with vision and conviction. I reject this idea that pro-lifers are to blame for mid-term defeats. I think there were other reasons for that. The former president, he’s missing in action tonight, and he’s had a lot to say about that. He should be here explaining his comments that say pro-life protections are a terrible thing. I want him to look into the eyes and tell people who have been fighting this fight for a long time. My wife and I were earlier today at the gravesite of Mr. and Mrs. Reagan, and I noticed that there was a quote that said, “Every single person has purpose and worth.” We’re better off when everybody counts, and I believe we should stand for what we believe in. I think we should hold the Democrats accountable for their extremism supporting abortion all the way up to the moment of birth. That is infanticide and that is wrong.”
The only other candidate asked about abortion, Governor Chris Christie, supported DeSantis by telling Dana Perino that, yes, pro-life referendums can pass, because he’s done it. But it takes leadership.
On MSNBC, Rachel Maddow and her smug cohort of abortion zealots mocked DeSantis for taking such a pro-life stance in the 2nd Republican debate. Like Donald Trump, they assert the Life issue is a loser for Republicans, implying that we pro-lifers should simply surrender. You can watch the exchange below.
But are they correct? As the Gershwin song says, “it ain’t necessarily so.”
DeSantis deserves a great deal of credit for his full-throated support of the pro-life cause in the 2nd Republican debate. He correctly points out that Donald Trump is a factor. As a reminder, Mr. Trump supported four Senate candidates who lost in 2022.
He supported 11 House candidates who lost and another ten losing gubernatorial candidates. Arizona candidate for governor, Kari Lake, was the ideal prototype of a Trump-endorsed candidate: she fixated on the idea that the 2020 election was stolen. Candidates who looked to the past, focusing on grievance as did Ms. Lake, lost.
Candidates who emulated the Ronald Reagan model by looking to the future while running on “vision and conviction,” like a Ron DeSantis, won big.
Need proof?
Pro-life candidates who remained on offense by promoting gestational limits on abortion enjoyed great success:
Alabama governor Kay Ivey won reelection with 67 percent of the vote.
Sara Huckabee Sanders won the Arkansas governorship with 63 percent.
Idaho governor Brad Little won reelection with 60 percent.
Oklahoma governor Kevin Stitt won reelection with 55 percent.
South Dakota governor Kristi Noem won reelection with 62 percent.
Texas governor Greg Abbot won reelection with 55 percent.
Georgia governor Brian Kemp won reelection with 53 percent.
Here in Iowa, governor Kim Reynolds won reelection with 58 percent.
And the list goes on: Ohio governor Mike Dewine by 62 percent; Tennessee governor Bill Lee by 65 percent; South Carolina governor Henry McMaster by 58 percent.
And perhaps the highest profile winner of all was Florida governor Ron DeSantis who supported and signed pain-capable limits and a complete ban on abortions after 15 weeks. He won reelection by 60 percent after winning his first race for Governor by a mere four-tenths of a percent.
He won over Floridians with conviction and leadership, unlike so many of the Trump-backed candidates who got wobbly on abortion.
The pro-life movement has a great deal of appreciation for Trump’s Supreme Court nominees who threw out Roe v Wade. Voters must sort through many issues when considering a president. Each is important. But ultimately, we must ask this question:
“Does every single person have purpose and worth, no matter how small and vulnerable they may be?”
If a candidate waffles on this single question, they’re not going to be much of a leader.
After all, we’re better off when everybody counts.
[Pulse Life Advocates doesn’t endorse any particular candidate, but supports all candidates who stand up for the pro-life cause. Sign up today to attend our November 18th Christmas Gala.]