Rough among the Diamonds

Promoted from the Diaries

You know the phrase “a diamond in the rough?” It’s simple – amid all the ugliness, there is one beautiful thing that stands out. It’s a romantic phrase, but consider it’s reversal, a tinge of ugliness hidden among all the beauty.


Such is the case of the story of Wendy Davis, who is running as a Democrat for governor of Texas. Her story (which was shredded not too long ago) is still being told (with corrections, at least) to describe her struggles. But, amid all the pretty talk about her biography, where she is now and how she got there, there are certainly questions that must still be asked.

For example, a New York Times magazine feature piece about Davis talks up the misunderstood candidate and attempts to take some of those ugly rocks and shine them enough to make them less obvious. There is one statement in particular that stands out to me because it fits right in with the narrative that, no, she didn’t make it on her own.

Because she was paid almost nothing and because Jeff Davis was proud of the mark she was making on their city, in 1999 he decided that his title company, Safeco, would pay her an annual salary of $40,000. Davis told Wayne Slater of The Dallas Morning News that she had been “a vibrant part of contributing to our family finances” during the decade after she graduated from law school. When I asked one of the company’s top supervisors at the time what Davis did in her four years with Safeco, this person replied: “Nothing. She was never in a strategy meeting, a marketing meeting, an escrow meeting or a compliance meeting. I never once saw her on the premises of our office. There was no reason for Safeco to have her on the payroll.”


I am in no way condemning the practice of employing for the sake of helping someone out. Private companies do as they wish. However, there is something incredibly wrong here. The woman painted herself as a “Did It Myself” kind of woman, but here she is taking $40,000/year in salary that she allegedly didn’t work for. Of course, that’s one paragraph out of about 50 about the newest pop star in the Democratic party.

There is another spit-shine her campaign is getting, and that comes to us from the Dallas Observer. The lede to this story is all you really need to know about Wendy Davis’ claim to fame.

Wendy Davis said Tuesday that she would have supported a ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, if the law adequately deferred to a woman and her doctor.

Uh. Wait. Hang on. This is the woman who advocated for women’s reproductive rights, right? Suddenly, she’s okay with banning abortion after 20 weeks? Her reason for the filibuster that shot her to stardom is suddenly (though very much explicably) changed. She’s okay with banning abortion that late. Just as long as the decision involves the woman and her doctor.


I don’t know who is running her campaign, but it’s like they’ve spent a few months in Texas and suddenly realized this abortion stance might be an issue in an incredibly red state.

It probably goes without saying, but go Greg Abbott.


Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on RedState Videos