Taft2016
Verified User
You're criticizing her for something that happened more than 17 years ago?
Aren't you the same person who called Laura Bush a "murderer" who should have gone to jail for a car accident she had when she was 17 years-old?
You're criticizing her for something that happened more than 17 years ago?
It amazes me that people don't think what happened 20 short years ago matters today.
Murder someone 20 years ago like Laura Bush did?
Sure, that matters today.
Sue a newspaper for slander 20 years ago and claim it's caused you some mental anguish?
Not such a big deal...well except to partisan asshats like Daft2016 desperately trying to slander Davis once again.
People aren't entitled to hold public office. They are going to be held to these standard thingies when they run for office, because it's kind of a big deal...
It amazes me that people don't think what happened 20 short years ago matters today.
Aren't you the same person who called Laura Bush a "murderer" who should have gone to jail for a car accident she had when she was 17 years-old?
I believe Jarod gave a learned opinion on that thread. Maybe you should go back and re-read it.
No thanks. I got tired of everybody ignoring everything I said.
Jarod's a lawyer.
Well, being physically sick and dying or resigning is terrible, but being mentally sick and making choices that affect people in a state of delirium or unaccountability is worse. for me, at least, I'm not concerned with the blaming her or trying her, but the possibility of damage done.
Having a track record of mental illness does make you more of a target. Because it can happen again.
Why are you willing to put material known to be faulty into a vital position? Would you put your kid in a car that was known to have brake failure?
Yeah, right.
He wasn't able to explain why everybody who goes through a stop sign isn't arrested, was he?
That over mental illness.
Go back and re-read the comments. I'm not going to spoon-feed them to you.
Let's elect John Hinckley to office. His mental health issues are 30 years olde, now.
The Democrats intent on taking back Texas were so desperate for a hero, they turned to pink clad Wendy Davis with, as Vogue described her, “Barbie-doll looks”. They might live to regret that.
Back in 1996, Wendy Davis lost an election for the Fort Worth, TX City Council. After the election, she sued the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, the local newspaper, for defamation. In short, Davis did not like being criticized by the media (something she won’t have to worry about this go round), so she sued for those criticisms claiming they defamed her.
The Texas Court of Appeals and then the Texas Supreme Court both threw out her case. But it is worth noting that Davis, in making her case, claimed that the nasty newspaper, by virtue of criticizing her, damaged her “mental health.”
More worrisome regarding her mental stability, Davis sued the newspaper months after losing her city council and claimed that she “ha[d] suffered and [was] continuing to suffer damages to her mental health.”
Think about that. The best candidate the Texas Democrats could find to run is a lady who admits in open court that a newspaper editorial caused her mental health to be damaged.
http://www.redstate.com/2013/11/06/...s-in-court-that-she-has-mental-health-issues/
![]()
Evidently the court decided that her mental health was not impaired and that she had suffered no damage from the actions of the newspaper. In other words, she thought she had suffered some damage but the court disagreed. So there isn't a story here because she was never found so damaged by the court which heard her case. Sorry you went though all this just to get so unequivocally shot down!