Jill Stanek

After Week Of Sexist Meltdowns, Anti-Choice Activists Stick With Candidate Who Once 'Disgusted' Them

In late January, just days before Iowa caucus-goers cast the first votes of the presidential nominating contests, a coalition of leading women in the anti-abortion movement issued a scathing open letter urging Republican voters "to support anyone but Donald Trump." They cited what they saw as Trump's lack of commitment on their key issue, including their doubts about whether he would nominate justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade, help them to defund Planned Parenthood, or pick a vice president friendly to the anti-abortion cause.

But the letter ended with something more personal: an indictment of Trump's appalling treatment of women.

Moreover, as women, we are disgusted by Mr. Trump’s treatment of individuals, women, in particular. He has impugned the dignity of women, most notably Megyn Kelly, he mocked and bullied Carly Fiorina, and has through the years made disparaging public comments to and about many women. Further, Mr. Trump has profited from the exploitation of women in his Atlantic City casino hotel which boasted of the first strip club casino in the country.

America will only be a great nation when we have leaders of strong character who will defend both unborn children and the dignity of women. We cannot trust Donald Trump to do either. Therefore we urge our fellow citizens to support an alternative candidate.

Signing the letter were Susan B. Anthony List president Marjorie Dannenfelser and her SBA colleagues Jill Stanek and Marilyn Musgrave, former National Organization for Marriage leader Maggie Gallagher, activist Star Parker, Concerned Women for America founder Beverly LaHaye and CWA president Penny Nance.

Many of these activists have tried to paint the anti-abortion movement as a feminist, woman-centered endeavor and portray Planned Parenthood and Democrats as the true enemies of women.

Eight months later, several of the women who signed the letter are supporting Trump’s candidacy and a few are even “pro-life” advisers to his campaign.

What changed?

Certainly not Trump. Yesterday the Associated Press published a story detailing Trump’s history of demeaning treatment of women on the set of his reality show “The Apprentice”:

During one season, Trump called for female contestants to wear shorter dresses that also showed more cleavage, according to contestant Gene Folkes. Several cast members said Trump had one female contestant twirl before him so he could ogle her figure.

Randal Pinkett, who won the program in December 2005 and who has recently criticized Trump during his run for president, said he remembered the real estate mogul talking about which female contestants he wanted to sleep with, even though Trump had married former model Melania Knauss earlier that year: "He was like 'Isn't she hot, check her out,' kind of gawking, something to the effect of 'I'd like to hit that.' "

Former producer Katherine Walker said Trump frequently talked about women's bodies during the five seasons she worked with him and said he speculated about which female contestant would be "a tiger in bed."

A former crew member who signed a non-disclosure agreement and asked not to be identified, recalled that Trump asked male contestants whether they would sleep with a particular female contestant, then expressed his own interest.

"We were in the boardroom one time figuring out who to blame for the task, and he just stopped in the middle and pointed to someone and said, 'You'd f... her, wouldn't you? I'd f... her. C'mon, wouldn't you?'"

The person continued: "Everyone is trying to make him stop talking, and the woman is shrinking in her seat."

This story came just days after Trump, in the first presidential debate against Hillary Clinton, defended his history of comments demeaning women by saying that one object of those comments, Rosie O’Donnell, “deserves it and nobody feels sorry for her.” At the same debate, Clinton got under Trump’s skin by bringing up his treatment of Alicia Machado, the Miss Universe winner whom he reportedly called “Miss Piggy” and “Miss Housekeeping.” Trump responded the next day by explaining that Machado had “gained a massive amount of weight.” Then, a few days later, Trump took to Twitter in the middle of the night to call Machado “disgusting” and urge Americans to “check out” her nonexistent “sex tape,” only for it to be revealed that Trump himself was featured in a 2000 pornographic film by Playboy.

It was between the debate and the “sex tape” tweet that Trump’s campaign announced the formation of a “pro-life advisory council” that would work to help solidify social conservative support for the GOP nominee. The council, as had previously been announced, would be led by Dannenfelser. Its members would include Nance and Stanek, both of whom signed the anti-Trump letter with Dannenfelser back in January.

Some of the signers of that January letter have held firm, notably Gallagher, who wrote in The National Review in May that it would be “just too degrading” to support Trump. “If you join Team Trump,” she wrote, “you have to swallow not just what Trump has done and said but the next thing he will say or do. Truthfully, I think he lost me in March, when all it took was just a little prodding from little Marco to get the man to discuss his genitals on national TV. I don’t know what insulting, immoral, gross thing he will say next.”

Gallagher’s observation has held true, as Trump’s supporters have, again and again, had to put up with “the next thing he will say or do.”

But for the core of Trump’s new anti-choice team, his new promises to nominate justices who would overturn Roe and to sign a bill defunding Planned Parenthood and his pick of anti-choice hero Mike Pence as his vice presidential running mate seem to have erased any concerns about his “disgusting” treatment of women—even as he continues what they once called his “disparaging public comments.”

The anti-choice movement is increasingly attempting to portray itself as “pro-women” rather than just anti-abortion. The support of activists like Dannenfelser for Trump, even after he gets caught in sexist meltdown after sexist meltdown, shows that for much of the movement this “pro-women” rhetoric is just window dressing.

Anti-Choice Movement Placing Its Hopes In 2016 Election

Anti-choice groups, which were unable to sneak any anti-Planned Parenthood measures into a spending bill this month, are placing all their hopes in the election of an anti-choice president in 2016.

Jackie Calmes at the New York Times explains how an upcoming House vote on stripping funding from Planned Parenthood, which President Obama is expected to veto, is designed to show that defunding Planned Parenthood could be achieved with a Republican president:

Carol Tobias, the president of the National Right to Life Committee, wrote in an email: “We won’t be able to remove federal funds from Planned Parenthood while this president is still in office. But we do have a pathway when(!) a pro-life president is elected.”

Showing that pathway is the purpose of the House vote, tentatively scheduled for next Wednesday, on a so-called budget reconciliation bill. The measure includes provisions to ban funds for Planned Parenthood and repeal the Affordable Care Act. House Republicans’ expected approval of the bill, which the Senate passed early this month, would send it to Mr. Obama.

The president has promised a veto. But congressional Republicans say the effort will show they can pass such conservative priorities over Democrats’ opposition — and get them signed into law once a Republican president is elected. They hope Mr. Obama’s veto will elevate the issues of Planned Parenthood and abortion rights more broadly in the 2016 election debate as the parties contend for control of the White House and the Senate. Yet for several vulnerable Senate Republicans from Democratic-leaning states, the less their party says about the issues, the better.

Susan B. Anthony List, the major anti-choice electoral group, has been pushing this messaging around the House vote. SBA List’s Jill Stanek wrote in a December 17 fundraising email:

As we learned from the reconciliation fight to defund Planned Parenthood, we CAN advance pro-life legislation through the Senate… but the veto pen of a pro-abortion president remains our biggest road block.

Only when we elect a pro-life president (and retain our pro-life majorities in Congress), can we get a bill defunding Planned Parenthood signed into law.

The stakes couldn’t be higher.

President Obama is likely to veto the recent reconciliation bill defunding Planned Parenthood as soon as it gets to his desk.

Hillary Clinton would be no different, which is why we must work to advance pro-life candidates and ensure a pro-life candidate wins the White House.

Anti-Choice Activists Furious About GOP's Reversal On 20-Week Abortion Ban

Yesterday, Republican leaders in the House decided to pull a plan to vote on a national ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy after Republican women balked at a provision that would have exempted rape survivors only if they reported their assault to the police. The vote had been planned to coincide with the anniversary of Roe v. Wade and the anti-choice March for Life on the National Mall.

Anti-choice activists are, predictably, furious. After all, many saw the rape and incest exception as an unacceptable compromise in the first place. The bill, originally proposed by Rep. Trent Franks last year, included only an exception for abortions that could save the life of the pregnant woman. After Franks claimed in a hearing that “the incidence of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low,” GOP leaders quietly added a rape exception to the bill and picked a Republican woman, Rep. Marsha Blackburn, to handle the vote on the House floor.

Rep. Steve King of Iowa told the National Journal yesterday that he would fix the problem by eliminating the rape exception entirely: "I would not make exceptions for rape and incest, and then the reporting requirement would not be necessary.”

After House leaders decided to pull the bill yesterday, prominent anti-choice blogger Jill Stanek and the group Students for Life announced that they were putting together a last-minute protest at the offices of two Republican women, Reps. Renee Ellmers and Jackie Walorski, who reportedly led the fight against the rape reporting provision:

Conservative pundit Erik Erickson, in a late-night blog post, attacked Ellmers for her “two-faced ploy” and shot off a series of tweets giving her the “abortion Barbie” label he had previously bestowed on Wendy Davis:


Russell Moore, head of the Southern Baptist Convention’s policy arm, responded with a press release saying he was “disgusted” by the House leadership’s “act of moral cowardice” and urged his supporters to call their members of Congress to protest the “breach of trust.”

“I am disgusted by this act of moral cowardice. If the House Republicans cannot pass something as basic as restricting the abortion of five-month, pain-capable unborn children, what can they get done?

“The Republicans in Congress should come and explain this atrocity to the hundreds of thousands of people gathering here in the nation’s capital to march for life. The congressional Republicans seem to think that pro-lifers will be satisfied with Ronald Reagan rhetoric and Nancy Pelosi results. They are quite wrong.”

House Republicans are now scheduled to vote on a bill Thursday that would prohibit federal funding for abortions. This scheduled vote coincides with the annual March for Life event, held in Washington, D.C., on or around the anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision legalizing abortion in the case Roe v. Wade.

Conservative columnist Ross Douthat seemed to capture the feelings of many abortion rights opponents:


Anti-Choice Activist: Nelson Mandela 'Engaged In Mass Genocide'

Anti-choice activist Jill Stanek says she won’t be mourning the death of Nelson Mandela because, she claims, the late leader’s pro-choice record means he “engaged in mass genocide of his own innocent people” and “has the blood of preborn children on his hands.”

Even the Pope and Cardinal Dolan have been lauding South African leader Nelson Mandela following his death earlier this week of natural causes at age 95.

But I can’t.

Nelson Mandela has the blood of preborn children on his hands… lots of them.

I cannot get past this and cannot view Mandela as any other than a leader who engaged in mass genocide of his own innocent people.

Meanwhile, Alveda King of Priests for Life regrets that she didn’t try to persuade Mandela to drop his support for reproductive rights before he died in order to help fight the “three-headed hydra monster—racism, reproductive genocide and sexual perversion”:

While he sanctioned abortion during his presidency, he was perhaps like me and millions of others who were once deceived into believing that abortion and harmful contraceptives would help our people. I wish I had told him the truth. I didn’t know the truth when I met him in the early 1970s. So I failed him. I didn’t speak to him about our babies.

What is happening now in the battle to end human injustice, to stop man’s inhumanity to man, whether we are women, men or little children, is occurring on a divided battleground. Some battle against racism, based upon skin color or class or rank. Some battle against reproductive genocide, and that is certainly appropriate as well, wherein we fight for the lives of the little babies in the womb, their mothers, the sick and the elderly and demand that they be treated with equality, justice, mercy and agape love. And then some battle against sexual perversion. That in itself also is a very important fight.

Now, if we can see that we are battling a three-headed hydra monster—racism, reproductive genocide and sexual perversion—and get to the heart of those matters and fight them all together with the understanding that we can overcome evil with good, then at the death of someone like a Nelson Mandela, some of us would not feel as though he should just be totally lambasted, ostracized, cast out of history and considered to be one of the most terrible people that ever lived.

And so I do acknowledge the work of President Nelson Mandela. He confronted apartheid, a serious evil during his lifetime. He did some things that were not good. And we pray that he had an opportunity to meet his Maker before he left the planet and that he was able to reconcile those differences.

Live Action Rally: Abortion Providers Just as Bad as the Taliban

Anti-choice activists gathered in front of ABC studios in Washington, D.C. today to draw attention to what they say is the “real” war on women.

The March on the Media rally claimed to be exposing the media’s supposed censorship of the realities of abortion and the lionization of pro-choice advocates like Wendy Davis. The rally was organized by Lila Rose, the president of Live Action, who previously equated the anti-choice movement with the abolitionist movement and the Revolutionary War.

Rose wasn’t alone in her questionable historical comparisons. Jill Stanek, an anti-choice activist who previously accused Obama of supporting infanticide while a member of the Illinois Senate, stole the show today by comparing abortion to the brutality of the Vietnam War, the Oklahoma City bombing, and the atrocities committed by the Taliban.

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious