PDA

View Full Version : “Americans will forgive a lot in a politician. But a woman who leaves her kids is...



Elspeth
01-25-2014, 12:44 AM
“Americans will forgive a lot in a politician. But a woman who leaves her kids is just beyond the pale.”

Wendy Davis has no future in politics
http://nypost.com/2014/01/24/wendy-davis-has-no-future-in-politics/

By Naomi Schaefer Riley

January 24, 2014 | 12:41am

Want to know why Wendy Davis will have trouble winning higher office in Texas or anywhere else in America? It’s not because she stretched the truth in her “from mobile-home-living single mom to Harvard Law grad” campaign biography, nor because her husband paid for her education, nor even because she placed a lot of value on her career.

Nope: It’s because Davis, the Lone Star State senator who became famous for her filibuster of an abortion-limiting bill in Texas, lost custody of her children to her ex-husband.

This revelation about Davis’ past, which came to light thanks to reporting by Wayne Slater at The Dallas Morning News, is nothing less than shocking to most women, regardless of their political affiliation.

According to Slater’s account, Davis decided to leave her children, then ages 8 and 2, with their father in Fort Worth while she went off to Harvard Law School. Who could resist the siren call of the Ivy League? Well, I suspect that most women and plenty of men would, if it meant moving across the country from their kids for three years.

But before we get to that, note two things. First of all, that 8-year-old was not her husband’s biological child. I don’t mean to cast any aspersions on Jeff Davis’ commitment to his daughters; in fact, he looks like the knight in shining armor of this story.

He not only took on raising his own daughter alone, but also another girl, who’d been abandoned first by her father and then her mother.

Second: After Jeff finished paying off the last of Wendy’s school loans, she filed for divorce and gave up custody of her children. According to Jeff, his wife just decided, “While I’ve been a good mother, it’s not a good time for me right now.”

That line sounds like it was lifted from MTV’s “16 and Pregnant,” but even the girls on that show are probably not self-absorbed or immature enough to utter it. I hope Jeff Davis made it up, but somehow I doubt it.

There are single mothers all over the country in dire straits who can’t afford to have such a thought. And even if someone offered them the chance to get away from it all and start over without a child, few of them would say yes.

Sure, there are women who pursue high-powered careers and need to spend time away from their children. Take Florida Rep. Deborah Wasserman Schultz, who (according to a recent New York Times blog) manages to do plenty with her 9-year-old and 13-year-old twins over the course of a weekend at home. She played basketball with her son, read with her daughter, shuttled one to ballet, took another to the bookstore and out to lunch.

Still, when her son complains about her work schedule, she says, “My heart hurts.” Can you imagine Wasserman Schultz saying “it’s not a good time” for her to be a mother?

Anne Marie Slaughter decided to take a job in Washington even while her family was still in New Jersey. But she was home every week and her kids were teens when she began — and it still bothered her enough that she quit and wrote an Atlantic cover story about it, “Why Women Still Can’t Have It All.”

The working moms I know sometimes discuss which is harder — leaving an older child or a younger one. The older ones are awfully good at the guilt trips when you come home, but also they’re old enough to know that you are coming back. They can talk on the phone and Skype. But when a 2-year-old’s mother leaves for some significant amount of time, her life is up-ended.

A few years ago, one of my guy friends was dating a woman who didn’t have custody of her child. Every one of this man’s female friends told him to run. The fact that she would either willingly give up custody or that a judge would deem her unworthy of even joint custody raised alarm bells.

Feel free to call it sexism, if you want. But it’s a double standard that I don’t expect will change any time soon.

Americans will forgive a lot in a politician. But a woman who leaves her kids is just beyond the pale.

Lanie
01-28-2014, 02:32 PM
I can forgive that (although I wouldn't vote for her unless she was sorrowful), but that is pretty crappy.

on edit: I would say the same thing about a man. Truth is you can go to law school without going across the country.

NJCardFan
01-28-2014, 03:12 PM
I can forgive that (although I wouldn't vote for her unless she was sorrowful), but that is pretty crappy.

on edit: I would say the same thing about a man. Truth is you can go to law school without going across the country.

How is it the same with a man? When people go through a divorce for some reason custody is nearly almost always automatically awarded to the wife and the husband is usually forced to pay an idiotic amount for child support. If he wants to be the custodial parent he must prove that the wife is an unfit mother. That is no easy task. At best he could get duel custody but will still have to pay support even if his children are with him 50% of the year so if this woman's children ended up with her husband chances are she relinquished custodial parenthood meaning she voluntarily gave her children to her estranged husband meaning she didn't want them. This is a simple fact.

noonwitch
01-28-2014, 03:22 PM
How is it the same with a man? When people go through a divorce for some reason custody is nearly almost always automatically awarded to the wife and the husband is usually forced to pay an idiotic amount for child support. If he wants to be the custodial parent he must prove that the wife is an unfit mother. That is no easy task. At best he could get duel custody but will still have to pay support even if his children are with him 50% of the year so if this woman's children ended up with her husband chances are she relinquished custodial parenthood meaning she voluntarily gave her children to her estranged husband meaning she didn't want them. This is a simple fact.


Was it voluntary? Or did the court deem her ex husband the "better" parent? It wouldn't make her look any better, it actually could open up a whole new can of worms for her if the divorce court decided she was an "unfit" parent.

The ex raised one of her kids who wasn't his biological child. That does not happen without a reason.

Lanie
01-28-2014, 04:27 PM
How is it the same with a man? When people go through a divorce for some reason custody is nearly almost always automatically awarded to the wife and the husband is usually forced to pay an idiotic amount for child support. If he wants to be the custodial parent he must prove that the wife is an unfit mother. That is no easy task. At best he could get duel custody but will still have to pay support even if his children are with him 50% of the year so if this woman's children ended up with her husband chances are she relinquished custodial parenthood meaning she voluntarily gave her children to her estranged husband meaning she didn't want them. This is a simple fact.

What I was saying was that it is wrong for a man or a woman to leave their kids for the sake of school.

NJCardFan
01-28-2014, 10:15 PM
Was it voluntary? Or did the court deem her ex husband the "better" parent? It wouldn't make her look any better, it actually could open up a whole new can of worms for her if the divorce court decided she was an "unfit" parent.

The ex raised one of her kids who wasn't his biological child. That does not happen without a reason.

I've never seen an instance where the husband was deemed the better parent. 99.9999999999999999996% of the time the kids automatically go to the mother. Believe me, if there were even the hint of an inkling that this was the case in their divorce, her opponent or at least the Texas GOP PAC would be all over it like a dog on a steak bone. Either way doesn't bode well for her. Either she voluntarily gave up her children for the sake of her career or she was such an unfit mother that the court gave her ex the kids. Is this the kind of person the Democrats want representing them in a crucial governor's race? If this is the case then the progressive movement is truly evil and even satanic.

noonwitch
01-29-2014, 09:46 AM
I've never seen an instance where the husband was deemed the better parent. 99.9999999999999999996% of the time the kids automatically go to the mother. Believe me, if there were even the hint of an inkling that this was the case in their divorce, her opponent or at least the Texas GOP PAC would be all over it like a dog on a steak bone. Either way doesn't bode well for her. Either she voluntarily gave up her children for the sake of her career or she was such an unfit mother that the court gave her ex the kids. Is this the kind of person the Democrats want representing them in a crucial governor's race? If this is the case then the progressive movement is truly evil and even satanic.


I don't think she had much of a chance of winning the Governor's race before this all came out. She's not Ann Richards-for a female democrat to win Texas, she has to at least be an old pro in the political sense, and understand the people of her state. I don't think Davis does.

Novaheart
01-29-2014, 12:16 PM
I wish Republicans would figure out how to stop getting sidetracked by stupid shit and personalities.

Strong military, because if there is no power then there is no America

Secure borders and population, because if America has no definition then there is no America.

Universal healthcare, because the role of government in medicine cannot be accounted for in any other fashion and because small businesses need an equal footing with major corporations when it comes to their healthcare and that of their employees.

National Shall-Issue

National concealed carry reciprocity.

DumbAss Tanker
01-29-2014, 12:19 PM
I've never seen an instance where the husband was deemed the better parent. 99.9999999999999999996% of the time the kids automatically go to the mother.

Oh, I have, but it is rare, and is generally either a case where the mother really ought to be sterilized and locked up long-term, or (Much more rarely) the father, his family, and/or his attorney is connected and they line up a parade of liars against a mother with no allies. Neither of those appear to be the case with Abortion Barbie (Well, maybe the first one, a bit, but that doesn't seem to have had anything to do with the custody decision involved there).

NJCardFan
01-29-2014, 12:29 PM
National concealed carry reciprocity.

Law enforcement already has this so it doesn't make sense that if you're legally allowed to carry a concealed firearm in your home state another state shouldn't have an issue.

Novaheart
01-29-2014, 12:29 PM
Dads make up 17.4% of single, custodial parents in the U.S., according to the 2007 Census, and thus get less attention for their role in child rearing, as opposed to the overwhelming majority of custodial single mothers who make up the remaining 83.6%

http://www.examiner.com/article/how-do-single-custodial-dads-stack-up-against-single-mothers


Study 1: MASS
2100 cases where fathers sought custody (100%)
5 year duration

29% of fathers got primary custody
65% of fathers got joint custody
7% of mothers got primary custody

Study 2: MASS
700 cases. In 57, (8.14%) father sought custody
6 years

67% of fathers got primary custody
23% of mothers got primary custody

Study 3: MASS
500 cases. In 8% of these cases, father sought custody
6 years

41% of fathers got sole custody
38% of fathers got joint custody
15% of mothers got sole custody

Study 4: Los Angeles
63% of fathers who sought sole custody were successful

Study 5: US appellate custody cases
51% of fathers who sought custody were successful (not clear from wording whether this includes just sole or sole/joint custody)

The study concluded:

The high success rate of fathers does not by itself establish gender bias against women. Additional evidence, however, indicates that women may be less able to afford the lawyers and experts needed in contested custody cases (see “Family Law Overview”) and that, in contested cases, different and stricter standards are applied to mothers.

http://www.villainouscompany.com/vcblog/archives/2012/04/child_supportcu.html

Novaheart
01-29-2014, 12:34 PM
Law enforcement already has this so it doesn't make sense that if you're legally allowed to carry a concealed firearm in your home state another state shouldn't have an issue.

They do though.

Hawkgirl
01-29-2014, 04:42 PM
I have to agree with this article.

I work with a grown woman who willingly left her husband and 3 year old daughter to move in with a guy at work who she was having an affair with. This "other man" hated kids, and he would only let her move in with him if she agreed to cease all contact with her daughter. She chose this "other man" over her daughter, divorced her husband and never looked back.

Fast forward 15 years, the relationship with the "other man" didn't work out. She's tried to rebuild her relationship with her daughter. At first, her daughter was happy to have her mom back in her life, but with time, she couldn't get past the resentment. They lead separate lives now.

Whenever a new person starts working here, everyone spills the secret. Her reputation is pretty much ruined and everyone talks about her leaving her daughter for a man.

NJCardFan
01-29-2014, 06:30 PM
They do though.

The easiest thing to do is limit yourself to states that have open carry laws. Arizona, Oklahoma, Alabama, Alaska, Idaho...pretty much every red state.

Odysseus
01-30-2014, 05:36 PM
Was it voluntary? Or did the court deem her ex husband the "better" parent? It wouldn't make her look any better, it actually could open up a whole new can of worms for her if the divorce court decided she was an "unfit" parent.

The ex raised one of her kids who wasn't his biological child. That does not happen without a reason.

It had a reason. She didn't want to be bothered with raising her children.


I wish Republicans would figure out how to stop getting sidetracked by stupid shit and personalities.

Universal healthcare, because the role of government in medicine cannot be accounted for in any other fashion and because small businesses need an equal footing with major corporations when it comes to their healthcare and that of their employees.

The role of government in medicine is not to provide it, subsidize it or mandate it, it is to get out of the way of those who do provide it.