theamericanconservative.com

Who's Really Exploiting Norma McCorvey?

A new documentary's portrayal of Jane Roe from the famous abortion case rings hollow to her longtime friends. Pro-life activist Norma McCorvey poses …
Ultraviolet
Everybody. But it probably wasn't exploitation since she agreed to be a paid collaborator. It's a fun read, just for the spin control. Here's a highlights reel.

"appears to be selling the entire mainstream media on the idea that the last decades of Norma McCorvey’s life were -an act-"

Since she's openly admitted she didn't care about the pro-life message, that's what her pro-life stance was. …More
Everybody. But it probably wasn't exploitation since she agreed to be a paid collaborator. It's a fun read, just for the spin control. Here's a highlights reel.

"appears to be selling the entire mainstream media on the idea that the last decades of Norma McCorvey’s life were -an act-"

Since she's openly admitted she didn't care about the pro-life message, that's what her pro-life stance was.

"and that her relationship with the pro-life movement was defined by money."

See the last point. At this point, it's a fact she confirmed.

"and AKA Jane Roe adds almost nothing new."

---except for the huge revelation that her pro-life convictions were nothing but a paid endorsement.

The article's detailed retrospective of her life conveniently omits how McCorvey tried to get some black men framed for rape (in Texas no less) while trying to get a free abortion. Or how she kept changing her story on whether that rape happened.

"But despite the headlines, nowhere does McCorvey say she was paid to change her mind -only that she was paid to speak."

A pro-abortion adovocate who was paid to speak at pro-life events. That isn't changing her mind? :P

Given her previous flip-flopping and money-hustling, her credibility at this point was nil.

"Over the decades, Sweeney reveals, McCorvey and her ministry received up to $456,911 in gifts, a relatively small amount."

Nearly half a million dollars is not "a small amount", champ. :D

"McCorvey’s friend of 22 years Karen Garnett told me that..."

Anecdotal fallacy. Zero support shown for the claims told to the article's author.

"The reality is that McCorvey’s pro-life friends were always there for her."

Yeah, taking care of her, making sure she had what she wanted, paying her off and that's why McCorvey cherished her "pro-life friends". If her pro-abortion friends had been "there for her" instead, she would have stayed their figure-head.

"None of this, both Newman and Garnett told me, was done for money."

Her friends gave her free room and board? Probably free transportation? From the photos, she ate VERY well. It's a lifetime of compensation, all the same.

This is a popular scam welfare-advocates use. "We don't get enough money" -while not mentioning all their food, housing, transportation, medical care, child care, education and even TV/ internet are already paid for by the state.

"But that is not how her friends saw her."

It doesn't matter how her friends saw her. What matters is how McCorvey saw them, which was a reliable source of freebies.

"She does not say she was given large sums of money in order to remain pro-life."

It's a matter of fact that she was, as the author already acknowledges. Whether McCorvey says it or not is irrelevant.

"In fact, it was Sweeney who specifically asked her if some of her advocacy had been -an act- his words."

Notice how the article's author avoids giving McCorvey's reply! :D

Like the old saying goes, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. With this old mare, all you had to do is wave enough money under her nose and she'd drink from whatever stream you wanted.

"Sweeney was clearly searching for an interviewee who would confirm his prejudices about the pro-life movement"

...and he found one in "Jane Roe" McCorvey herself.