Newsom used video of crying student in a pro-abortion ad. She is again reminding him those were tears of joy over Roe being overturned: ‘Sad? Try ecstatic’
By: JOSEPH MACKINNON | January 27, 2023
Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/student-calls-out-gavin-newsom-for-misrepresenting-her-in-pro-abortion-ad/

Like Blaze News? Get the news that matters most delivered directly to your inbox. SIGN UP
California Gov. Gavin Newsom recently ran a pro-abortion ad wherein a young woman appears crying outside the U.S. Supreme Court. The woman’s tearful response appears to have been strategically situated in the video to convey grief over the high court’s Dobbs decision, which overturned Roe v. Wade and enabled the states to once again make their own determinations about abortion.
There was, however, nothing grievous about the woman’s actual response.
In fact, contrary to the voiceover that states in the ad, “Panic is the primary reaction,” the woman seen crying was jubilant, overwhelmed by the hard-won result of decades of pro-life efforts and prayers.
“Panic? Sad? Try ecstatic, blown away by God’s grace on this country,” tweeted Macy Petty, a pro-life activist and student at Lee University.
Petty is the woman grossly misrepresented in the Democratic governor’s agitprop, posted to the official California governor’s Twitter account as well as to Newsom’s personal account.
She has called out Newsom for seeking to retroactively convert her documented joy into anguish for the purpose of promoting state-sanctioned homicide.
In a Jan. 21 statement posted to Instagram, Petty said, “California governor Gavin Newsom has used my image in one of his political ads in yet another attempt to show his support for women. He and pro abortion Democrats have once again shown Americans that they care little for my voice as a woman.”
Despite reaching out to Newsom and his team several times, “asking them to stop their pathetic mischaracterization of who I am,” Petty noted “they have chosen once again to use my image and misrepresent me as a pro-life woman.”
Petty added, “I do not appreciate, nor do I consent to this kind of treatment and belittling of who I am as a woman. … Remove my image from your shameful ad and stop your disgraceful treatment of pro-life women just like me.”
Ahead of the midterm elections, Newsom and other supporters of pro-abortion Proposition 1, including former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, circulated a campaign video that similarly used the footage of Petty crying. Petty had called them out then as well, noting, “In your campaign video, you portrayed me in an evil light and distorted my emotions as part of your political game.”
The pro-life activist, who has also taken a stand against men in women’s sports, clarified, “As I continued to witness history, I pondered how lucky I was to witness such an event. I thanked the Lord for this decision and for opening my eyes to the evil of abortion. This is what brought me to tears.”
Clinton shared the deceptive video wherein “SAD” is superimposed on the student’s face on Oct. 18. Days later, Petty tweeted to her, “Hey Hillary, I’m the girl crying in this video. I am pro-life and those are HAPPY tears because I just witnessed a MIRACLE!”
Petty told the Christian Post, “I’m part of a generation of pro-life activists. … My mom worked at a pregnancy center, and my grandma started one. So it’s in my blood. And I was just so grateful to be there to witness it because there are so many people who were in the fight before me who didn’t get to witness it.”
Campus Reform reported that Petty has recently partnered with the California Family Council to take the Newsom administration to task.
The CFC issued a statement Monday, writing, “The California Family Council and Macy Petty are urging Governor Gavin Newsom to apologize for his act of defamation, remove the video from circulation, and never again use Macy Petty’s name to promote a pro-abortion stance.”
Posted on May 9, 2016












Americans are frustrated because they know that many of the “news stories” they read are only opinion columns in disguise. If the story does not fit the liberal worldview, then facts are ignored, dissent is silenced, and Americans are told what to think. Perhaps one of the worst examples of one-sided, biased reporting involves global warming.
Those who reject the liberal viewpoint that climate change is the greatest threat to our country are ridiculed and ignored. For example, the Associated Press recently amended its stylebook to recommend that those who question the science behind global warming be called climate change “doubters” instead of “skeptics.” But this is inaccurate, since many “skeptics” don’t doubt that climate change has occurred.
Liberal groups continue to attempt to silence debate. The repeated claims that “the debate is over” and that “97 percent of scientists agree that human-caused global warming is real” are false and mislead the public. In testimony before the Science Committee, a lead author of the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change stated that the 97 percent estimate “just crumbles when you touch it.”
The source of this “97 percent” myth is a discredited study that attempted to categorize scholarly articles on climate change by the position the papers took on the issue. But most of the papers never took a position on climate change at all. This has not stopped the liberal national media from touting this illegitimate statistic.
Silencing debate is contrary to the scientific method. If these groups were confident about their arguments, they would welcome more debate to test their theories. However, some media outlets, such as the Los Angeles Times, have changed their policies and no longer accept letters to the editor from those who question human-made climate change. That this would happen in a democracy where free speech is enshrined in the Constitution is unbelievable.
Scientists who are not alarmists agree that climate change is a complex subject with many variables. But the liberal national media instead chooses to focus on human contributions and usually fails to provide both sides.
For example, the national media hyped NASA’s finding that 2014 was the hottest year on record. Ignored was the footnote that revealed that NASA was only 38 percent certain this was accurate. Less than fifty-fifty. Americans would have been better served by a coin toss.
Too often, these alarmist announcements are based on manipulations of existing data. And when Congress or independent researchers question federal agencies about the data, they are criticized as “attacking scientists.”
Particularly regrettable is that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) fails to include all relevant data sources in its monthly temperature news releases. Atmospheric satellite data, considered by many to be the most reliable, has clearly showed no warming for the past two decades. This fact is well documented, but it does not fit the liberal politics of the administration or the national media.
NOAA also published a controversial study last year where scientists altered global surface temperature data and widely publicized their results as refuting the two-decade pause in global warming. This week, a new peer-reviewed study was published in the journal Nature that, according to one of the authors, shows “reduced rates of surface warming” and “essentially refutes” NOAA’s study. Shouldn’t the media acknowledge that their alarmist headlines are based on incomplete information?
Americans will continue to distrust the liberal national media until the media provide objective coverage of the news. Americans deserve all the facts that surround climate change, not just those that the national media want to promote.