Wendy Davis - Nice story

[LunarRay]

How exactly does that fit into her whole single mother working her way out of poverty story line?

I've no idea how what I said fits into your question. But, the short answer is that it seems she probably was at the poverty level and I like to let the facts speak for themselves.... what ever the facts are are nifty that way.

 

[nehalem256]

I've no idea how what I said fits into your question. But, the short answer is that it seems she probably was at the poverty level and I like to let the facts speak for themselves.... what ever the facts are are nifty that way.

Doesn't sound very poverty level to me:

Davis later got help from a second husband, Jeff Davis, who helped pay for her two years at Texas Christian University and her time at Harvard.

"When she was accepted to Harvard Law School, Jeff Davis cashed in his 401(k) account and eventually took out a loan to pay for her final year there," Slater reports.

 

[Wreckem]

Doesn't sound very poverty level to me:

What about the first 7-8 years of her daughters life? I guess you just don't count that as raising a child because it doesn't fit your narrative.

 

[werepossum]

She had a kid at 17/18ish. She was not married until 19. Separated shortly there after and divorced at 21.

So she was an unmarried mother for the first one to two years of her first daughters life, and 5 out of the first 7(6 out of the first 7 if you count the time she was separated from the first husband). She was making roughly minimum wage for the first 7 years of her daughters life, so it is not wholly inaccurate like you are trying to make it. I guess it doesn't count unless you are unmarried and in poverty your child's whole life.

Um, no. From the OP's linked article:

Davis' campaign released a statement later Monday to clarify some of the details from her life.

"Wendy left home at 17, married when she was 18 and had her first daughter Amber when she was 19. She and her husband lived in a trailer, and Wendy continued to live there with Amber after they were separated."

"As a single mother at age 19, she often struggled to make ends meet," the statement continued. "Wendy filed for divorce when she was 20 and she and Amber lived for a short time with her mother. The divorce became final when she was 21."

Davis later got help from a second husband, Jeff Davis, who helped pay for her two years at Texas Christian University and her time at Harvard.

"When she was accepted to Harvard Law School, Jeff Davis cashed in his 401(k) account and eventually took out a loan to pay for her final year there," Slater reports.

So she got married, had a kid, kicked out her husband, got an apartment, found a better husband, took his 401K and had him take out loans so that she could go to school, left him (after screwing around on him*) once the loans were paid off, then gave him custody of both daughters (including the one step-daughter) so that she could enjoy her income free and clear.

*This doesn't mean there was not proof or that the adultery was even contested. This is lawyerese: Think what it will do to your daughters to have this come out on their mother in open court. If however you switch your filing to something non-accusatory, we're prepared to give you custody and not fight the divorce.

Obviously someone has confused "compelling story of overcoming adversity" and "train wreck looking for a new place to happen."

 

[senseamp]

This is interesting? She is not running for mother of the year, last I checked.

 

[Strk]

Um, no. From the OP's linked article:


So she got married, had a kid, kicked out her husband, got an apartment, found a better husband, took his 401K and had him take out loans so that she could go to school, left him (after screwing around on him*) once the loans were paid off, then gave him custody of both daughters (including the one step-daughter) so that she could enjoy her income free and clear.

*This doesn't mean there was not proof or that the adultery was even contested. This is lawyerese: Think what it will do to your daughters to have this come out on their mother in open court. If however you switch your filing to something non-accusatory, we're prepared to give you custody and not fight the divorce.

Obviously someone has confused "compelling story of overcoming adversity" and "train wreck looking for a new place to happen."

She was married for 16 years (that part seems to be skipped). And she was a lawyer for more than half of it. She also pays child support.

 

[Texashiker]

She was married for 16 years (that part seems to be skipped). And she was a lawyer for more than half of it. She also pays child support.

I hope she paid back her ex husbands 401k + interest, and paid the loan he took out.

 

[werepossum]

She was married for 16 years (that part seems to be skipped). And she was a lawyer for more than half of it. She also pays child support.

And was probably faithful for several of those.

I hope she paid back her ex husbands 401k + interest, and paid the loan he took out.

This, plus alimony.

 

[Wreckem]

Um, no. From the OP's linked article:


So she got married, had a kid, kicked out her husband, got an apartment, found a better husband, took his 401K and had him take out loans so that she could go to school, left him (after screwing around on him*) once the loans were paid off, then gave him custody of both daughters (including the one step-daughter) so that she could enjoy her income free and clear.

*This doesn't mean there was not proof or that the adultery was even contested. This is lawyerese: Think what it will do to your daughters to have this come out on their mother in open court. If however you switch your filing to something non-accusatory, we're prepared to give you custody and not fight the divorce.

Obviously someone has confused "compelling story of overcoming adversity" and "train wreck looking for a new place to happen."

She was almost 19 when they go married, it was over a year after she gave birth. They were seperated before she was 20(ie they were together for less than a year). The divorce was only finalizes when she was 21. She wasn't living with anyone other than her daughter from slightly before 20, until 24 almost 25 when she married the Davis guy. Those years inbetween SHE WAS living in poverty.

She then married, finished her degree at TCU, got into Harvard. Made $70k to well over $100k the rest of their marriage. You are insinutating she got everything scott free when she didn't. The only reason he had to pay for her last two years of TCU is because they got married. Same for Harvard. She wouldnt have had to pay much if they never got married. You are trying to insinuate that she used her ex to get everything/have him pay for everything. That is not the case. They were married for 17 years. That beats the average marriage length by a mile. If she had left right after leaving school it would be one thing but 10 years later(12 until the divorce) you can't claim what you are claiming. The husband made a profit off his investment in her.

 

[Wreckem]

And was probably faithful for several of those.


This, plus alimony.

The issue is, they got married in 1988, from that point onward, half of his income was her money under Texas community property laws. So in reality, the money outside parts of the 401k that were prior to their marriage, were just as much hers as his. In all actuality, Wendy Davis likely cleared close to a million during the time she earned her law degree and her divorce, so its unlikely he was uncompensated. As for alimony, both were six figure earners and in Texas, that isn't going to get someone alimony, more so if the person wanting it makes more than the other person.

 

[bradly1101]

took his 401K

You make it sound like she stole it, maybe her husband loved her.

Is this more about her lie (she's the first BTW, and it's only liberals), her popularity, the filibuster or her stance on abortion rights?

 

[Wreckem]

You make it sound like she stole it, maybe her husband loved her.

Is this more about her lie (she's the first BTW, and it's only liberals), her popularity, the filibuster or her stance on abortion rights?

I wouldn't call it a lie. I'd call it an embellishment.. And all politicians embellish the hell out of their personal narratives.

 

[werepossum]

She was almost 19 when they go married, it was over a year after she gave birth. They were seperated before she was 20(ie they were together for less than a year). The divorce was only finalizes when she was 21. She wasn't living with anyone other than her daughter from slightly before 20, until 24 almost 25 when she married the Davis guy. Those years inbetween SHE WAS living in poverty.

She then married, finished her degree at TCU, got into Harvard. Made $70k to well over $100k the rest of their marriage. You are insinutating she got everything scott free when she didn't. The only reason he had to pay for her last two years of TCU is because they got married. Same for Harvard. She wouldnt have had to pay much if they never got married. You are trying to insinuate that she used her ex to get everything/have him pay for everything. That is not the case. They were married for 17 years. That beats the average marriage length by a mile. If she had left right after leaving school it would be one thing but 10 years later(12 until the divorce) you can't claim what you are claiming. The husband made a profit off his investment in her.

I do not think Harvard pro-rates your tuition on your ability to pay. And had she left right after leaving school, they would have been her school debts, not their debts.

I don't know all the details of her second marriage, but it's very clear that she lied about her life for political advantage even when compared to other politicians' questionable standards. If that doesn't bother you, well, everyone has different priorities.

 

[werepossum]

You make it sound like she stole it, maybe her husband loved her.

Is this more about her lie (she's the first BTW, and it's only liberals), her popularity, the filibuster or her stance on abortion rights?

It's about politicians' inability to be honest even about the smallest things, and even more about how we tolerate it as long as we're on the same team. Want a rags-to-riches story? Make one up, secure in your knowledge that 40% of the population will rabidly defend you.

I have no clue about her popularity, I have no issue with her filibuster, and I likely agree with her stance on abortion rights. (Perhaps not morally but almost certainly legally.)

 

[Wreckem]

I do not think Harvard pro-rates your tuition on your ability to pay. And had she left right after leaving school, they would have been her school debts, not their debts.

I don't know all the details of her second marriage, but it's very clear that she lied about her life for political advantage even when compared to other politicians' questionable standards. If that doesn't bother you, well, everyone has different priorities.

Harvard gives both need and merit based scholarships. And you are forgetting Texas is a community property state. Regardless of who was the primary signer of the loan, if she had left after graduating, it would have been both their debts because it was debt incurred during the marriage. Same goes if the loan was in her name, it would have been joint debt, unless agreed upon differently. If what you and some others are trying to insuinate is true, she would have left right after finishing school.

And earlier you said she left up and left him with the two kids. One was already an adult and almost out of college when they separated in 2003 and the other was 17 and a junior/senior in high school when their divorce went through in 2005. So really?

 

[Wreckem]

It's about politicians' inability to be honest even about the smallest things, and even more about how we tolerate it as long as we're on the same team. Want a rags-to-riches story? Make one up, secure in your knowledge that 40% of the population will rabidly defend you.

I have no clue about her popularity, I have no issue with her filibuster, and I likely agree with her stance on abortion rights. (Perhaps not morally but almost certainly legally.)

Was she or was she not a unwed mother working for minimum wage when her first daughter was born? Was she not working for minimum, or close to it wage, for the first 7-8 years of her daughters life?

Yep, but you want to say she completely lied.

 

[werepossum]

Harvard gives both need and merit based scholarships. And you are forgetting Texas is a community property state. Regardless of who was the primary signer of the loan, if she had left after graduating, it would have been both their debts because it was debt incurred during the marriage. Same goes if the loan was in her name, it would have been joint debt, unless agreed upon differently.

Fair enough. I still say this is the kind of person who needs to be kept as far away from power as possible, not given more.

 

[bradly1101]

I wouldn't call it a lie. I'd call it an embellishment.. And all politicians embellish the hell out of their personal narratives.

Agreed.

 

[Wreckem]

Fair enough. I still say this is the kind of person who needs to be kept as far away from power as possible, not given more.

So lets kill all politicians because all politicans are as guilty as she is when embellishing their personal narratives.

Using your logic, Bush should have never been allowed to be Governor of Texas and certainly not PotUS.

 

[werepossum]

Was she or was she not a unwed mother working for minimum wage when her first daughter was born? Was she not working for minimum, or close to it wage, for the first 7-8 years of her daughters life?

Yep, but you want to say she completely lied.

<sigh> From HER campaign:

Wendy left home at 17,

married when she was 18

and had her first daughter Amber when she was 19.

She and her husband lived in a trailer, and Wendy continued to live there with Amber after they were separated."

"As a single mother at age 19, she often struggled to make ends meet," the statement continued.

"Wendy filed for divorce when she was 20 and she and Amber lived for a short time with her mother. The divorce became final when she was 21."

She was NOT a single mother when her child was born, assuming you subscribe to a linear interpretation of time.

She became a SEPARATED mother (by HER choice, apparently) AFTER her child was born.

She later filed for divorce and became a single mother by choice.

She MAY have struggled until she found husband #2 to pay her bills. Hard to say since I can't trust anything she says.

After she graduated with the education that husband #2 provided - including cashing out his freakin' retirement - she graciously lived with him until those debts were paid off, presumably a decade after finishing school. May have been totally coincidental, but it certainly gives me a bad taste. And apparently, she felt no need to not screw around on him, although that MAY have been only his allegation.

 

[Wreckem]

<sigh> From HER campaign:


She was NOT a single mother when her child was born.

She became a SEPARATED mother (by HER choice, apparently) AFTER her child was born.

She later filed for divorce and became a single mother by choice.

She MAY have struggled until she found husband #2 to pay her bills. Hard to say since I can't trust anything she says.

After she graduated with the education that husband #2 provided - including cashing out his freakin' retirement - she graciously lived with him until those debts were paid off, presumably a decade after finishing school. May have been totally coincidental, but it certainly gives me a bad taste. And apparently, she felt no need to not screw around on him, although that MAY have been only his allegation.

I don't have the exact dates of when she was married the first time I was going off of Wiki and its not that clear. Either way it was shot gun wedding. And Im not sure how you hold a divorce/seperation against someone who got married at as a teenage by saying it was their choice. Teenages are morons and who knows how their relationship was. It could have been the shittiest thing in the world.

Even so, she was living in poverty, single or married(and they were seperated for most of her married years), for the years before she married the Davis guy. I guess she should have stayed with him for ever since he "paid" for her schooling, even though it was paid for with COMMUNITY PROPERTY. Nope shes forever an indebted slave to him, even though she brought close to a million(or more) in income into their family prior to divorcing. At most $56k vs close to a million or more in additional family income over 10-12 years. Yep poor poor sucker ex husband... Oh and the audacity of her forgoing the splitting of their house(which was community property that she most certainly helped pay for) during her divorce so the children could still live in the house they grew up in.

 

[senseamp]

Is it an important qualification for a Texas politician to live in a trailer?

 

[werepossum]

Is it an important qualification for a Texas politician to live in a trailer?

Apparently at least Wendy Davis believes it is.

I'll give Wreckem the last word here; he obviously likes her far more than I dislike her.

 

[Wreckem]

Apparently at least Wendy Davis believes it is.

I'll give Wreckem the last word here; he obviously likes her far more than I dislike her.

You are vilifying this woman for minor embellishments that ALL POLITICIANS HAVE IN THEIR PERSONAL NARRATIVE. Name a politician that doesn't have an embellished/exaggerated personal narrative. And for some stupid reason that you think shes some psycho that planned to stay with someone so they'd pay for her education/loans, that were at MOST $56k, while she started out making $70k+ and quickly was making $100k+. Fuck I know lawyers that have paid off that level of student loans in a little over a year making only making $90k. So sure she stayed with him for 10 years so he would pay off her "education". And like I said before, they could have paid off the loans long before their divorce. They didn't because they likely had interest rates lower than inflation. And again its not like he financed a modern law school education from Harvard that would cost close over $210k. No the tuition for all 3 years + the two at TCU would have been at most $56k(not taking into account the merit scholarships she had). You are basically saying they were married for 17-18 years solely so he could pay ~$56k in education costs, when they both together probably cleared over $2million in those ten years from when she graduated until they divorced. Yeah that is not fucking rational and is totally nonsensical.

 

[Nebor]

A self-made woman... as long as you ignore all the used up, broken men in her wake. While I admired her stand in the legislature for abortion, the fact is she's the perfect representative for modern feminism, living a life built on the sacrifices of men. She doesn't have a prayer of winning of governor's race, and the smear machine is just spinning up. Wait until we start hearing from all the guys she was fucking in Boston while her husband cashed in his 401k for her to be there.