December 7 means two things to me. It was my grandmother's birthday and of course, it's Pearl Harbor Day. I've been to Pearl Harbor twice and really, America needs to never forget - Remember Pearl Harbor.

But this blog is mainly about abortion, so here goes. Those who've heard me speak on abortion know I bring up Pearl Harbor on occasion to talk about pro-life relentlessness. (I have a whole chapter on this in my forthcoming book on momentum but an early form appears in my Obtainable Destiny book.) Here's a taste…

What if the first wave of Japanese Zeros would have dropped their initial ordnance on Pearl Harbor, then circled the city for the rest of the morning and tried to take a second shot at the harbor after lunch? Had they let up for even a half-hour, our planes would have gotten off those runways and our seaman could have manned their posts. The Zeros would have been dropping out of the skies like flies. But that didn't happen. Wave after wave of Japanese squadrons hammered the harbor. Our nation was knocked to its knees because the Japanese were relentless. Relentlessness wins wars.

Pick a war and you'll see relentlessness resulting in victory. If you are a Civil War buff, then you know of the siege at Vicksburg. Near the end of May 1863, Grant's forces came down along the Mississippi River from Memphis in the north. They attacked Vicksburg and it wasn't over in a day.

The assault on Vicksburg lasted six weeks. I repeat: The assault on Vicksburg lasted six weeks. Historians tell us there were daily, constant bombardments by Grant's forces. Porter's gunboats on the Mississippi shelled the city night and day. The siege of Vicksburg was the turning point of the war-the Confederacy was effectively split in half. How were they able to take such a key Confederate city on the Mississippi River and turn the war toward a northern victory? The answer is relentlessness - a sustained campaign.

War planners and strategic leaders know this. Four days after the September 11th attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, President Bush came on national television and said:

We are planning a broad and sustained campaign to secure our country and eradicate the evil of terrorism, and we are determined to see this conflict through. I will not settle for a token act. Victory will not take place in a single battle but in a series of decisive actions. Our response must be sweeping and sustained. You will be asked for your patience, for the conflict will not be short. You will be asked for your resolve, for the conflict will not be easy. You will be asked for your strength because the course to victory may be long.

The key words and phrases here are sweeping and sustained, not settling for a token act.

The Bible calls us to this same level of stamina in fighting evil, wicked systems and demonic strongholds. When we let up, the devil gets back up. Imagine an intruder sneaks into your home one night and you confront him. You grab the closest thing to you and throw it across the room at the intruder. Bull's-eye! Down he goes. Then what do you do? I'd be grabbing something bigger and taking another shot at him. Maybe it would be smarter to tie him up. Whatever you do, don't just sit on the couch and wait for the police to arrive. (Actually, a police officer in my church told me the right thing to do is lock yourself in a room with a phone.) My point is: when we let up, the enemy gets up.

1 Peter 5:9 says we are to resist the devil. This word resist is in the present tense, meaning we are to resist and keep on resisting. Those of us who hold to Judeo-Christian values in America have been referred to as the "firecracker crowd." Some judge somewhere will do something far over the line and Christian people quickly explode. We'll hold a press conference and organize a rally. But that's it. And the other side knows that's it. They know we'll get all excited, but they've learned just to wait our hysteria out; soon we'll settle back into our complacency. During this lull, they orchestrate their next move away from our founding principles. In a few short years, we'll wake up dumbfounded as to how we got to where we are as a society. If only we had fully realized we are in a cultural war and that relentlessness wins wars!

My football playing days come to mind. The average football game has 125 plays - yard by yard the ball gets driven down the field. If there is a turnover, you regroup and go get the ball back - you don't head for the showers. Between each play there is a huddle and the strategy is adjusted.

Referring to his 10,000 failed light bulb making attempts a young reporter asked Thomas Edison if he felt like a failure and if he thought he should just give up by now. Perplexed, Edison replied, "Young man, why would I feel like a failure? And why would I ever give up? I am not discouraged, because every wrong attempt discarded is another step forward."

In terms of great moral victories, the relentlessness of William Wilberforce in his sustained campaign against the slave trade sets the pace for us in the pro-life movement. Wilberforce introduced anti-slavery bills every year for eighteen years. It took another twenty-six years until all the slaves were actually freed from the evil that imprisoned them. Wilberforce continued his efforts until a bill declaring all slaves were free throughout the British Empire was passed. He died four days later. All told he invested fifty years of his life in this redemptive process. 

With some measure of disgust I chuckle when I hear good people who know abortion is wrong talk about being tired of this issue. We live in a society that never tires of years of moment by moment OJ coverage. Do we really think we will have any justification before God if we let up after a couple tries at ending abortion in our state? Living children are being dismembered. If your kid had cancer would you let up after one round of chemotherapy? No.

After our defeats in 2006 and 2008 here in South Dakota, Leslee Unruh looked into the television cameras and said we aren't conceding, we'll be back. Pro-aborts interpret this as insanity. They don't get it because they don't see what we see - the intrinsic value of unborn human life. They want us to move on. We can't and we aren't taking our cues from them anyway.

"Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up." Galatians 6:9

All this talk of voter fatique wearies me. If seeing a few yard signs and hearing combatting ads about abortion for a few months last year wearies South Dakotans, God help us. Tell God you are tired of hearing about the plight of the unborn. Maybe he will tell you a few things he's tired of hearing… namely the silent screams of living children as they are dismembered without anesthesia.

We live in a society that never tires of years of moment by moment OJ coverage. People aren't tired of this issue. All this talk of voter fatique is merely Planned Parenthood propaganda. I bet THEY ARE tired of pro-life relentlessness and would rather the public not really know what they do every day.

"Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up." Galatians 6:9

"You have not yet resisted to bloodshed in your struggle against sin." Hebrews 12:4

UPDATED - see below

No secret that the main stream media is not on the side of the unborn. And good people far and wide are aware that this is the year respectable journalism in America died.  Here's an example close to home.

South Dakotan's are being barraged right now with a misleading ad exploiting a mom, Sioux Falls resident Tiffany Campbell, who had a Twin to Twin pregnancy a couple years ago. The point of the ad is say Mrs. Campbell would have no options under Initiated Measure 11. SD doctors have since said the ad is false and that a mom in Mrs. Campbell's situation does have medical options under IM11 and that it wouldn't be considered an abortion if one of the twins were to die trying to save them both.

Unfortunately, but hardly unintentionally, KARE 11 in Minneapolis just ran a 5 minute story "catching" VoteYesForLife.com's Leslee Unruh supposedly saying Mrs. Campbell would have no choices under this measure.  Here's the word for word script:

Scott Goldberg: "Even in the case like Tiffany Campbell's, when a doctor says the fetus cannot survive, Unruh is committed to the ban."

Leslee Unruh: "And in South Dakota, she would make the decision to give her baby life."

Scott Goldberg: "She wouldn't have another choice if this ban passes."

Leslee Unruh: "That's correct."

Here's the problem - a major problem - watch the ad yourself. That on-camera interview was taped here in Sioux Falls last summer long before anyone knew about Tiffany Campbell. I hate to bring this up but… if you look at Leslee today, no longer blond, 20 pounds lighter - you'll know that video was before three months of Weight Watchers or whatever it was and, you get my point. It is impossible Leslee Unruh was speaking to the Tiffany Campbell situation.

KARE 11's Scott Goldberg had her discussing an entirely different woman's situation - a gal named Rachel - whose story is widely used here in South Dakota. Goldberg unethically took her comments about that situation and pasted them into the story line of Tiffany Campbell's situation.

I hope good people around our state contact KARE 11 and tell them to issue a public retraction and correct the error. You can email Scott Goldberg here - SGoldberg@kare11.com. 

The KARE11 story also captured Leslee saying if IM11 doesn't pass we are coming back next year and the next year after that - surely pro-life relentlessness is maddening to those who want the killing to continue. They don't get it that we are driven by verses like this one, which interestingly, is the Bible verse Bill Clinton says is his life verse. If Leslee wasn't doing this, there are many others who would.

UPDATE - KARE 11's Scott Goldberg confirmed to me in an email that the interview with Leslee Unruh took place July 29, 2008. Tiffany Campbell's story was released September 16, 2008.  It is unethical for a journalist to develop a story line (T. Campbell's) then drop in dated quote which actually was from another very different situation, then immediately resume the Campbell storyline.

Last week I published here my interview with South Dakota gubernatorial candidate Scott Munsterman. I won't repeat his strong pro-life position and statements here but will assume you have read the earlier interview. Over the weekend he and I sat down face to face to talk about some of this at another level. And, since then, I'm now about 70 pages into his 175 page book…  A Vision for South Dakota (pdf alert on this download). Thanks to Scott for giving me a signed copy. I told him my pro-life friends are gravitating to Dennis Daugaard and he welcomes me to closely compare the two of them, which I will do.

Phoeey to those of you who wish I'd talk about something other than abortion. I do, just not here. I'm trying to stay focused on the LIFE issue on this blog. In his 175 page book, Munsterman only spends three pages talking about abortion in South Dakota. (In those pages he does not talk about ending it only that we tried. Mainly what's there are really good paragraphs about abstinence and adoption.) I'll leave it to the other bloggers to engage him on all the other issues.  I will say this, Munsterman stands a head taller than any other gubernatorial candidate in terms of having spent the last two years writing and articulating a clear and coherent, Conservative strategy and vision for our state's future. He's got great ideas on building communities, education, the economy and the budget, health care and energy. I'm impressed with what I know about his accomplishments as mayor of our state's fifth largest city. And, specific to my areas of concern, I'm impressed with the centrality of his faith. My sense also is that he knows who he's working for… God and us. This awareness is rare anymore, on both sides of the aisle.

The first ten pages of his book are one page outlines and summaries of his top ten goals. He gets extra points with me for addressing the LIFE issue in Goal #1. However as I state below, what he says is insufficient, in my view, and I hope we hear more from him.  Here's his first statement in the book (p. ix) on abortion which, I suggest, also sums up what he writes later (pgs 10-11).

Even though there are strong views on the abortion subject, it is time we came together as a people around other important missions we can all agree upon to embrace. As a good friend of mine says, "It is time to move off of the extremes and make it about people not ideals." Let's focus on connecting loving parents with children in need through a South Dakota Hero Initiative.

To start off, I'll be admittedly too picky - - a bit of a cringe factor for me that he refers to abortion as a "subject." Killing children isn't a subject like taxes or education. It's an anathema, a horror, an evil. I want Scott to explain what he means by "extremes" because I think "extreme" is dismembering living South Dakota children without anesthesia. If those, including both he and I, who want to stop it are "extreme" then I interpret his statement as a concession that we tried that and now we need to move on. He has told me we need to proceed with the right strategy at the right time to end abortion in South Dakota. I was hoping to read something encouraging about relentlessness with regard to fighting for the right to life for our state's most vulnerable citizens. Wilberforce is the hero here (as I've written elsewhere)…

Wilberforce introduced anti-slavery bills every year for eighteen years. It took another twenty-six years until all the slaves were actually freed from the evil that imprisoned them. Wilberforce continued his efforts until a bill declaring all slaves were free throughout the British Empire was passed. He died four days later. All told he invested fifty years of his life in this redemptive process.

Again, in person Munsterman communicated his commitment to continue fighting for LIFE. I get a different impression in the book. He notes "this issue has polarized friends and families across this state" and his concern is to come back together and move on to things we can agree on. I say let's do both 1) things we can agree on and 2) fight for that which is right regardless of how polarizing it is… especially if innocent human life is at stake. Standing before the Author of Life, I assure you, saying you thought ending abortion was too polarizing an ambition to pursue won't be sufficient. Perhaps to the dismay of fiscal conservatives, God is more attuned to our treatment of the "least of these" than he is our ability to cut spending and lower taxes.

On page ten he begins; "we must accept that we cannot all agree about what is, or is not moral." Scott?! The same could have been said about the disputed morality of the slave trade and the less-than-human status of blacks. I'm sure the first black president is glad this nation fought it out and did not accept the fact that some people thought some people were less than human. Science and now the US Court of Appeals confirms conception produces a biological human. Last I checked, there is no moral wiggle room on taking innocent human life and I can't accept, ever, those who seek to justify it.

The line about making it about people, not ideals is fine as long as we don't lose sight of the fact that stopping abortion IS about letting PEOPLE live.  And, that it IS a death-for-profit-ideology that is killing people in South Dakota right now, and exploiting women. Ideologies kill people. I think he agrees with all this, but this paragraph frustrates me, obviously.

His last sentence in that summary paragraph about connecting loving parents with children in need through a South Dakota Hero Initiative is all about adoption. He explains this more fully on pages 10-11.

It's time for us as a state to come together and lend a hand in support of getting our children into loving homes. Both pro-life and pro-choice organizations can work together toward solutions by promoting and encouraging adoption…. Senator John Thune wrote that "Adoption creates heroes every day." A solution: establish a South Dakota hero Initiative. State law can lend it's efforts by eliminating red tape and even create incentives for loving parents who wish to adopt children.

Agreed!  Let's do it. And, the churches ARE doing it and would love the state's help. But it's not enough. It's a key part of it, but it's not enough. To sum up Munsterman's two-pronged approach to the problem of crisis pregnancies and unwanted children…

1) "championing abstinence until marriage" including "establish a young adult commission in each school district" to "help them understand their dilemma's in life" and "work together with them to set a new direction for their future." 

2) Make adoption easier.

These are great. But not enough. Unplanned pregnancies will still happen and abortion will remain a form of retroactive birth control. Scott, add two more things to your plan. I propose 3 and 4.

3. Support the Lampstand Project - the network of churches that exist in every county in our state - churches of all flavors willing to come alongside women in crisis pregnancy. Abortion IS NOT NECESSARY in South Dakota because there are people to help in tangible ways.

4. Be RELENTLESS in strategic legislative initiatives to end abortion as a form of birth control in our state -  South Dakotan's care about their children.

a. Educate and open the state's eyes to the economic costs and impact of 35 years of dead South Dakota children. Show who profits into the hundreds of millions from abortion.

b. Help awaken the state to the historic opportunity it's been given - that South Dakota could be to the ending of abortion what Alabama was to the ending of segregation. (Moving here 15 years ago I detected a state with a low self-esteem. Scott, South Dakotan's need to hold their head up high that this state is more strategic than any other state in ending a national holocaust.)

c. Expose and have a zero-tolerance policy for the out-of-state abortion cartel dumping millions here to keep their illegal shoddy chop shop open. Strictly enforce every law and penalize every slight violation. Make abortion "doctors" behave like real doctors.

d. Restate the reasons for our state's rejection of embryonic stem cell research and hold fast on that position.

I love this line also on page 10… "The young people of this state must be taught from a young age that they are the future and that they are valuable." New question: does that mean you think we should stop teaching them in schools the theory that they are just the next random mutation in an unguided evolutionary process? But back on point, to me it comes down to… when do SD kids become our state's future and valuable? I think Scott would say "at conception."  Then, Scott, let's be relentless in fighting (as Sen. Tim Johnson hypocritically said in his welcome back speech) that each person be afforded "the opportunity to reach their full potential in life."

This morning I opened up my Argus Leader newspaper to a Kevin Woster article entitled; Exceptions in abortion ban proposal key, scholars say. That headline is accompanied by this subtitle - Professor: Voters 'mad' issue on ballot again. Woster interviews a couple political science professors about Initiated Measure 11. Here's what we find in the second paragraph;

An important group of voters will be those who might lean toward abortion limits, but "they're mad that it's back again," said Northern State University political science professor Ken Blanchard. Those voters, he said, "may be the ones who sink the initiative this time if it fails."

The only mad voters are those who wouldn't vote for it anyway.

Going door to door, those canvassing will occasionally hear, "didn't we vote on this already." The answer is NO, this bill has exceptions for rape and incest which is what voters made clear in '06 they wanted to see. When people hear that they say "oh, okay, good." For sure those canvassing for UNHealthy Families are jumping on those moments with statements like, "yes, voters did already vote on this, but a small group of extremists won't let it go." Their only hope is that voters are stupid, that they aren't fully informed, that they can manipulate their emotions, and convince them they need are higher IQ to understand the fine print.

Voters aren't tired of this… this is a nation that still can't get enough OJ Simpson coverage after 13 years. Come on Professor Blanchard, do you really think sixty days of competing commericals and yard signs has so wearied the South Dakota voter that after two years they still have no gas to hear of this again?? If so, God help us. The cries of the unborn are continuous before God day and night, did you know that?? I challenge the weary, angry South Dakota voter to stand before God and tell him you are tired of hearing about the plight of the unborn. I can't be sure, but I'd think there are a few things he'd say he's tired of us whining to him about. Isaiah 1 says he refuses to listen to the prayers of those who have the blood of the innocent on their hands.

Much of November last year on this blog I debunked the voter fatigue myth. You can find those articles - a dozen or so are here under the category search "voter fatigue." I wrote about how tired I am of hearing about voter fatigue. I said I bet Planned Parenthood is tired of the relentlessness of those who think killing children is wrong.  I bet they are weary and wish this would go away. However, when life and death is at stake, and especially when it involves children, South Dakotans have all the energy in the world. I said, don't tell me I look tired.

It's a psychological reality that when we are repeatedly told we ARE something, we start to think it's true.

Planned Parenthood: "South Dakota, you look tired! Are you sure you want to go through this all over again?"

South Dakota: "Oh, well, now that you mention it, maybe I am tired. Yeah, I'm tired of all this talk about abortion."

Media: VOTER FATIGUE AN ISSUE WITH SD VOTERS ON ABORTION

There IS anger in the South Dakota electorate. And a lot of it I might add. Remember 45% of the state in '06 voted for an almost total ban. That's a lot of people who want abortion no where within our borders. Now with rape and incest exceptions many more are on the side of those wanting the killing to stop. So there are lots of angry people. But here is what we are angry at…

- We are angry at Planned Parenthood getting $335 million taxpayer dollars a year to do abortions and they are campaigning here saying keep government out of this decision.

- It's maddening to hear those profiting from abortion now say "let families decide" when they fight family involvement in the abortion decision at every turn

- We are angry that, come to find out, there is NO doctor-patient relationship at all in abortion.

- We are angry that Planned Parenthood covers up sex crimes against minors and give sex offenders a free pass to hurt other women

- We are angry that women are deceived about abortion by Planned Parenthood and then left to sort out the ramifications of it on their own.

- We are angry that five judges gave America abortion on demand and that only now this is being decided by the voters

- We are angry that Planned Parenthood dismembers living human beings (who feel pain at 7 weeks) without anesthesia

Here's the problem so far. We aren't mad enough. If each South Dakota voter was told the truth about the dark underworld of Planned Parenthood those doors would be closed.  As is, we combat massive out of state dollars funding deceiving ads here with the offerings of a few.  It's a bit maddening.