10 episodes

Alexandra DeSanctis discusses social policy, the pro-life movement, religion, and culture.

The most recent ten episodes of this podcast are available on this feed. Full archives are available to NRPLUS subscribers at NationalReview.com.

For Life National Review

    • Politics
    • 4.8, 120 Ratings

Alexandra DeSanctis discusses social policy, the pro-life movement, religion, and culture.

The most recent ten episodes of this podcast are available on this feed. Full archives are available to NRPLUS subscribers at NationalReview.com.

    Episode 12: How Not to Cover Abortion

    Episode 12: How Not to Cover Abortion

    Alexandra discusses the biased journalism of a CBS News reporter, lawsuits from abortion-rights groups against COVID-19 policies, and the Left’s hypocritical treatment of Tara Reade’s allegation against Biden.

    • 22 min
    Episode 11: The Pro-Life Movement You Haven’t Heard Of

    Episode 11: The Pro-Life Movement You Haven’t Heard Of

    Alexandra discusses her latest article for NR magazine on the little-known groups and leaders of the pro-life movement.

    • 19 min
    Episode 10: Abortion in the Time of Coronavirus

    Episode 10: Abortion in the Time of Coronavirus

    Planned Parenthood claims to be providing ‘essential health care.’

    • 17 min
    Episode 9: The Referendum on Pro-Life Democrats

    Episode 9: The Referendum on Pro-Life Democrats

    Pro-life Democratic congressman Dan Lipinski faces a primary threat from a progressive challenger who favors abortion rights.

    • 16 min
    Episode 8: Abortion Is Back at the Supreme Court

    Episode 8: Abortion Is Back at the Supreme Court

    Alexandra discusses the details of June Medical Services v. Russo, the Supreme Court case considering a Louisiana law regulation abortion providers.

    • 24 min
    Episode 7: Media Give Cover to Democratic Extremism on Born-Alive Bill

    Episode 7: Media Give Cover to Democratic Extremism on Born-Alive Bill

    Alexandra discusses recent Senate votes on pro-life bills and details the inaccurate media coverage.

    • 19 min

Customer Reviews

4.8 out of 5
120 Ratings

120 Ratings

Matthew J. C. ,

Highly recommended

Alexandra is a thoughtful, interesting, and engaging host. Highly recommend listening to become more informed about the most important issue of our day.

wish displayname were initials ,

Poor reasoning and cherry-picks data

As someone trying to finding good podcasts to understand multiple sides on various issues, I had the hope that this would be the one for prolife. Not the case. In short, the host cherry-picks data, doesn’t clearly state when what she is saying is a direct quote or an assessment of what the source is saying, and provides poor reasoning skills. So far from the NR team, I have found Charles CW Cooke to be someone who doesn’t fall for these mistakes.

If you have time to read a longer review, here are some specific examples through the beginning of episode 4, when I unsubscribed.

Episode 1: Calls Planned Parenthood an abortion corporation when 97% of their services are not abortions. I would think to call something an [adjective] corporation, their product/service would need to be more than 3% of what they do. But maybe we based this wording on the market share of services (about 1/3rd), and you can give some slack for trying to paint a picture.

Episode 2: She cherry-picks a Marist poll that says 70% of people favor abortion restrictions. Here was a great opportunity to acknowledge the nuisances that these restrictions people favor various depending on which trimester the pollster asks about. Also, no acknowledgment of when abortions occur by trimester: 89/90/1. This made me start questioning the value of the podcast, but I stuck with it.

Episode 4: On the topic of pro-life democrats, she said that the Democratic party has formally changed its language in the platform to support “unlimited” abortions. Not only does abortion never come with a word like unlimited, but also “unlimited” isn’t listed in the platform at all. When talking about the previously used phrase for abortion of safe, legal, and rare, she says "That [the 3 words] in itself doesn't make any sense because if there is nothing wrong with abortion, it should be safe and legal why should it be rare? What is happening in this procedure that should make us think it ought to be rare? It's totally an incoherent formulation." This statement was ‘incoherent’ to me. It seems that a fair number of things in life could have this phrase applied to it. For example, a junk food like Twinkies. Also, one thing that happens with the procedure that should make us think it ought to be rare is the long-term emotional impact.

Kaufm78 ,

To the point and consistent

Always enjoy this. Focus is great, well-researched and timely.

Top Podcasts In Politics

Listeners Also Subscribed To