Skip to main content

See also:

Wendy Davis is not Wendy Davis and gets away with it

Wendy Davis
Wendy DavisPhoto by Stewart F. House/Getty Images

Lunatic Liberal candidate for governor of Texas, Wendy Davis, is well on her way to a successful career in politics if her recent trouble with the truth is any indication. Just like stellar Democratic figures before her, she has lied about her past stating that she was a teenage single mom rising up from poverty and putting herself through school. It turns out none of this is true, also she seems to have lost custody of her children because of adultery which is amazing that this is still possible.

Her cornerstone issue is abortion freedom in late stages and she is doing everything she can to promote it which, it should be noted, is becoming very effective since many parents could fear a daughter growing up to be just like Wendy.

The Dallas Morning News bends over backwards to sugar coat the word "fraud" while exposing Davis:

The basic elements of the narrative are true, but the full story of Davis’ life is more complicated, as often happens when public figures aim to define themselves. In the shorthand version that has developed, some facts have been blurred.

Davis was 21, not 19, when she was divorced. She lived only a few months in the family mobile home while separated from her husband before moving into an apartment with her daughter.

A single mother working two jobs, she met Jeff Davis, a lawyer 13 years older than her, married him and had a second daughter. He paid for her last two years at Texas Christian University and her time at Harvard Law School, and kept their two daughters while she was in Boston. When they divorced in 2005, he was granted parental custody, and the girls stayed with him. Wendy Davis was directed to pay child support.

Being a wife of an attorney is a far cry from a single mother working her way through school, so what's with the Dallas News saying "the basic elements of the narrative are true"? Which part?? What does it take to call someone a liar these days?

“My language should be tighter,” she said. “I’m learning about using broader, looser language. I need to be more focused on the detail.”

It isn't about truth, you see, it's about "language", it ought to be "tighter". Very clever because that's all her supporters needed to hear. All is forgiven and if anyone wants to make anything out of this it's because they hate her because she's a women. Here we go again.