Wendy Davis

Pro-abortion groups funding Wendy Davis’ gubernatorial run

Wendy Davis
Wendy Davis

A year ago, Wendy Davis was an unknown state senator in Texas. No one knew or cared about her political career — at least, not on the national stage. But then she had her attention-grabbing filibuster in order to allow Texas women to continue to kill their babies after the 20th week of pregnancy. She was hailed as a hero by the pro-abortion lobby, even though her filibuster failed spectacularly. Her filibuster didn’t keep Texas legislators from voting, and the bill ultimately passed later in a special session anyway.

While the filibuster didn’t let Davis accomplish her goal of allowing gruesome late-term abortions to continue, it did catapult her into the national spotlight, and unsurprisingly, she ultimately announced that she would be running for governor of Texas.

Wendy Davis’ campaign finance filing came out this week, and over at Beltway Confidential, Timothy Carney has some interesting analysis:

Wendy Davis, running for Texas governor on the strength of her stand in favor of late-term abortion, raised nearly $3.80 million in the second half of 2013. Nearly $1.07 million – 28 percent – of that money came from outside of Texas, according to my analysis of her campaign finance filing.

… In fact, the biggest out-of-state contributions Davis lists are all cash or in-kind contributions from pro-choice groups. EMILY’s List contributed $135,000 in cash, plus $25,000 in speechwriting and $4,761 in postage. Planned Parenthood and its affiliates have contributed more than $60,000 between cash, list rental, staff time, and other in-kind gifts.

NARAL has been fundraising for Davis, which accounts for more than $18,000 in in-kind contributions. Naomi Aberly, who sits on the board of Planned Parenthood’s lobbying arm, spent more than $10,000 as an “event expense” for Davis. Aberly has deep connections in Texas, but Davis’s campaign reports her as living in Boston.

Fully a quarter of Davis’s out-of-state money, then, is directly attributable to the cause of legal abortion. Considering Aberly’s and NARAL’s fundraising for Davis, and Planned Parenthood’s providing mailing lists to Davis, probably most of that million in out-of-state money was motivated by her standing up against abortion restrictions.

This isn’t entirely surprising, considering that the majority of the support she enjoyed during her attention-grabbing filibuster wasn’t coming from Texans. The majority of Texans supported the bill Davis fought to keep from passing, after all, so it’s not likely that they would be too thrilled about her efforts to protect late-term abortion in their name.

Abortion advocates are extremely invested in this gubernatorial race. Texas remains, to their despair and dismay, a largely pro-life state. Their hope is that, with Wendy Davis in office, Texas can become more of a pro-abortion state. It doesn’t matter that Texans don’t agree with them — likely why Davis has remained largely silent on the issue and, most appallingly, tried to claim that she was against late-term abortion. She even insulted the Texans who don’t agree with her.

Wendy Davis doesn’t seem to have much of a chance of winning this election, but if by some chance she does, it’s important to remember that the abortion lobby played a huge role in putting her there. And it also is important for pro-lifers to pay close attention to this race — it is a perfect example of why it is so important for us to be active politically.

Pro-abortion groups like NARAL and Emily’s List, along with abortion industry titans like Planned Parenthood, are extremely invested in getting pro-abortion politicians elected into office. They’re willing to put in time, money, and manpower, which means that pro-lifers must do the same. Wendy Davis is currently an extremely notable example, receiving millions from out-of-state thanks to her abortion industry backers, and it’s something for pro-lifers to keep in mind each election season.

  • Basset_Hound

    When she ran for her State Senate seat last November, she presented herself as a “pull yourself up by your bootstraps, hard workin’ single Mom, rags to riches” type. Almost sounded like a Republican….

  • Wanda

    god the junk live action news posts is so one sided. it’s no wonder people who write for this site are nut jobs.

    • Andrew J. Corrales

      It’s a site dedicated to a cause. Of course it’s one-sided. Do we need to be called nutjobs by someone who doesn’t capitalize or know compound words when she sees them?

    • Calvin Freiburger

      Really? Couldn’t think of a complaint less banal?

      • Basset_Hound

        Calvin, sweetie, do you think we’re in store for 300 MORE comments of thrashing and fulminating?

    • KM Misener

      Instead of insulting everyone here, why don’t you tell us what the article was wrong about?

    • MarcusFenix

      God, the junk that random people post is so one sided. It’s no wonder people who post comments like yours are nut jobs.

      Especially when you really don’t challenge what’s there with any facts, you just act like a spoiled teenager. Keep up the good work.

    • john lind

      You are certainly entitled to your opinion but the logic you used is backwards. It would be more accurate to state, “People who write for this site are nut jobs, it’s no wonder the news posts are so one sided.” Also, even though most of the people who post to this website are strongly pro-life, we don’t necessarily agree on other items. For instance, Calvin Freiburger comes from a solid conservative position while I come from a solid libertarian position. He and I will disagree vehemently on a number of issues but we’re definitely in agreement that murdering children in the womb is a horrible thing.

    • PJ4

      god the junk on jezebel, mother jones, rh et al is so one sided. it’s no wonder people who write for those sites are nut jobs.

    • Basset_Hound

      god the junk adobe captivate posts is so one sided its no wonder people who write for this site are nut jobs.

    • MarcusFenix

      We’re still waiting for your smashing indictment of how we’re all a bunch of anti-science nutjobs, with your overwhelming logical arguments to back this all up. You’ve made those statements elsewhere, so surely you can back them up here.

      C’mon Wanda. We don’t bite.


  • MarcusFenix


    There were people who genuinely believed McAuliffe wouldn’t win VA either, because is a total slime ball. Food for thought there.

    Hopefully, the people of Texas will continue to hold the line there, and send people like Davis crawling back into obscurity.

  • Here’s a rundown of Wendy Davis’ extreme abortion record: http://therealwendy.com/abortion/

  • MamaBear

    Not to change all the lovely comments about “nut-jobs” here, but back to the topic, let us hope the good people of Texas keep their good sense in this coming election. I heard that Ms Pink-shoes Wendy has been trying to soften her image, even redefining pro-life in some strange way so she could try to claim she is pro-life. (Double-speak at it’s best.)

    • Basset_Hound

      Pray to God she’s not successful. If they turn Texas blue, then America becomes a One Party State into perpetuity.

  • MarcusFenix

    Well, for those who think Wendy is such an upstanding, honest “go getter”…might want to check those expectations at the door.

    Saw this on Drudge this morning:


    From the article:

    “Other missing details have included: her second husband paid her way
    through law school and she divorced him the day after the last payment
    was made; her ex-husband accused her in initial court filings of
    adultery, and was awarded custody of their two daughters; and she first
    ran for city council in Fort Worth as a Republican.

    “My language should be tighter,” she said, admitting her campaign biography has been less than truthful.”

    Should be tighter? How about “should be accurate”? How about “should have been truthful”? I mean, either of those would have been acceptable.

    Scratch the surface of people like Davis, and find this kind of crap. Not surprising.

    • Basset_Hound

      Wow! So Abortion Barbie had a sugar daddy whom she dumped when she got what she was after. Not only that, but she lost custody! With today’s feminist judges, that rarely happens!

      • MarcusFenix

        It’s bad enough that she’s inherently and completely dishonest, but…rather telling that such things are the case as well.

        What saddens me (and by sad, i mean SMH kind of sad) is that people idolize and follow this walking waste of elemental carbon without a second thought.

        • Basset_Hound

          Maybe they could use this little ditty by the Eagles as her campaign song…

          Are you Old Batster enough to remember it????

          • MarcusFenix

            Actually, yeah…kinda. The Eagles, Rolling Stones, CCR…all part of my childhood. When I was a kid, this was already out but still pretty popular in its own right. :)

          • Basset_Hound

            Here’s another good Wendy Davis song for you…this time sung by Sugar Daddy…

          • MarcusFenix

            Actually……I think the Stones might have one for ya that fits.

          • Basset_Hound

            Good one Marcus. Here’s another…a bit newer…http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCNPXpehoCM

          • MarcusFenix


            Since we’re on the topic…and i’ll post this at the top too.


          • Basset_Hound

            That’s one MORE reason to love Matt Walsh.

            God, I wish I had known about him sooner. Mark Davis, a talk show host here in Dallas read his piece about Robin Thicke. That’s when I found out about HIM.

          • MamaBear

            Perfect song!

  • Basset_Hound

    According to a Dallas Morning News article this morning, Wendy Davis’ poor teen mother to Harvard Law grad has been “embellished”.

  • MarcusFenix
    • Basset_Hound

      I can’t help but wonder…

      Did Sugar Daddy actually love her?
      Did he see her as a daughter surrogate to pet and spoil?
      Or maybe he just used her as “eye candy”?

      No matter what, it doesn’t sound very “liberating” to me.

      • MarcusFenix

        I’ve had that discussion, in one form or another, about the objectification of women versus empowerment (or, as Sweetie-Pie Sharon would call out, Bodily Autonomy maybe?)

        About 6 weeks ago, was talking to someone about this very thing. The conversation revolved around women doing what they want with their bodies, in this case doing porn and/or being a stripper.

        In 2 separate sentences, they made the statement that doing such things for them was empowering….but that we shouldn’t objectify them as a result.

        Anyone with an IQ over 85 or so would be able to tackle this head on…It’s not hard to conceptualize that a person (man or woman, really) that *makes* themselves out to be an object (for purposes of a sexual nature, in this case) put themselves in the position of *being* objectified. Yet, when they become that object, we’re not supposed to see them in the very light with which they paint themselves?

        It’s not liberating at all. In fact, it’s in some senses the opposite. But those who believe that it’s objectifying AND liberating/empowering at the same time have much deeper problems (at least with the logical end of it) to deal with. It’s like they can’t see the blinding hypocrisy staring back at them, because the idea that doing something which carries a specific consequence is outside the realm of what they believe is correct.

        • Basset_Hound

          Back when I was a freshman in college, a guy friend went to see Gloria Steinem when she gave a speech on campus. She was wearing a low cut tank top and jeans so tight she looked like she had been melted down and poured into them. He said she looked like a hooker. Yet here she was ranting and raving about how sick and tired she was of being a “sex object”. Go figger?

          I guess that’s what feminism was all about in the first place. Now we women can use men and dump them, just like we accuse them of doing for us. How “empowering”.

          • MarcusFenix

            None of that really surprises me. In college, we had a few young women who went on similar rants. It was never pretty, much less made sense…but at least there was always a healthy number of people there to point out where they were just acting out and not really making a valid point.

            Well, Sweetie doesn’t have time, remember? The others…meh. Let them come. Or, let them stay there. They do have their work cut out for them, however, if they’re going to apologize for Davis though…it’s not a position I envy. ;)