Talk:Kay Bailey Hutchison

Lies?

November 28, 2004

So habituated to dissembling are our politicians, Republicans especially, it is understandable that the opportunity to lie by merely confirming a mistaken assertion by someone else would prove irresitable, saving one the trouble of making up a fresh falsehood. Thus it was that I heard an interviewer say to Mrs H, (broadcast 11-28-04, possiblly taped eariler) busily promoting her book about heroic females, that she had been re-elected to the Senate three times, right? Wrong, since Senate terms are 6 years and she was elected first in 1993, then re-elected in 1994 and 2000. That means she was re-elected twice. But Mrs. H piped right up and said: "That's correct, I have been re-elected to the Senate three times." Maybe The distinction between being elected or re-elected is unclear to her, or she considers it unimportant, like the truth itself.

George Sullivan

What does this have to do with anything regarding an encyclopædia article? Nothing at all. A dig against Republicans is what it is. You've never said the wrong tense of a word or used a word with an incorrect modifier? Ridiculous. Bill Clinton out and out lied when he said he "did not have sexual relations with that woman Miss Lewinsky".

--JRed 16:49, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)

Graduation from UT Law School

Hutchison graduated from the University of Texas Law School w/ a JD in 1967. She was part of a accelerated law program, since discontinued, that combined undergraduate and law shool courses for six years and awarded a JD w/o a bachelor's degree. She took a few undergraduate courses while she was Texas Treasurer in the early 1990's and received her BA in 1992. I worked in her U.S. Senate press office and this alway's caused a lot of confusion. Everybody thinks 1992 was transposed and should be 1962. She was 19 years old in 1962. The years of graduation were later taken out of her official bio to limit the confusion. I tried to edit here on the Wikipedia, but it was changed back. I am sure it was found to be confusing. RSP

Pro-life?

So, was she a cheerleader or not? Is she pro-choice or pro-life? Or are some vandals having fun? sendmoreinfo 19:21, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

She is pro-Life, although she does not support overturning Roe v. Wade at this time. It is a distinction that is lost on some people, but the safest way to explain it is to say that she is much more moderate on abortion than other Republicans. She recently sponsored legislation to prevent minors from crossing state lines to avoid parental notification laws, which is hardly a pro-choice position.

There has been a lot of vandalism on this site in recent months. The segment on Ronnie Earle's charges, for example, has repeatedly been changed to mislead readers into implying that criminal activity took place, when in fact, Hutchison was acquitted. One must be careful because while facts may be right, the way those are presented can be misleading.

The comment about her allegedly hitting an employee was not a significant issue in the 1993 campaign.

JS 19:44 7 August 2006 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.91.194.231 (talk • contribs)

One must be careful because while facts may be right, the way those are presented can be misleading. I would say perhaps the opposite: One must be careful to present the relevant facts, with the appropriate level of detail, and then trust the reader to decide what they mean. If you do that and readers draw a conclusion other than what you think is correct, then perhaps your conclusion is wrong." John Broughton 21:33, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Attacks against Hutchison

I removed a link that someone had obviously put up about Hutchison's term-limits pledge. The link was to a very partisan blog called Capitol Annex that had the provocative title, "Broken promises of an aging prom queen" (which is the term her opponent uses against her). First of all, it is doubtful that the term limits issue was a factor, as all the Republicans stated their support of a term limits limit for the U.S. Congress. However, since the source used was a clearly political blog, that does not belong on Wikipedia. 20:26, 29 August 2006 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aalan (talk • contribs)

I replaced the link you deleted to a newspaper article, "Hutchison moving her children to suburban D.C. for school". In the future, please follow wikipedia policy by using edit summaries to explain your edits (see: Help:Edit summary); this makes it possible for others to understand that what you was for a good reason, rather than being an inadvertent mistake.

As for the term-limits pledge, you apparently missed that the blog was actually quoting newspaper articles, which are acceptable, and cited another website where the full articles appear. I've put the information back in. I do agree that the language that was previously there wasn't as NPOV as it should have been, and I have changed it. John Broughton 13:28, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Blogs with a partisan bent have no credibility whatsoever. If a prime source exists, cite it. If not, then do not post partisan blogs, as they will be removed. Additionally, the fact that Sen. Hutchison owns a home in the Washington D.C. area is irrelevant, because ALL senators own homes in D.C. U.S. Senators do not sleep under a bridge. Hutchison has a Dallas home for which she pays taxes and takes an exemption as her homestead. The fact that her opponent is trying to make an issue out of having a home in D.C. should make anyone skeptical about the motivation for highlighting the D.C. residence. 20:38, 11 September 2006 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aalan (talk • contribs)

Angry Washingtonians and Pistol Ban Controversy

This entire section "appears" to violate NPOV. It is without citations, and needs them. The following sentence, especially, seems to be factually incorrect:

"Hutchison lives in an extremely wealthy and well-educated area of Northeast Washington, within spitting distance from the Capitol and Senate buildings."

At www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1618447/posts, it seems that she no longer lives in Washington, but in Virginia:

"U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison is buying a home in Virginia to give her two young children more stability as they enter school age, her staff said Wednesday."

The date of the above reference was April 20, 2006, so conceivably, she could still be living in her "spitting distance" home while she waits to close on the VA home ;-). --Redheaded dude 09:34, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Where's the controversy in the pistol ban position? Seems like a strange header since there's nothing mentioned about a 'controversy'. The section should be renamed "Second Amendment position(s)" or "pro-gun positions" Sublium (talk) 04:47, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

1986-92 -- Missing Info?

I was an attorney at Jenkens & Gilchrist, P.C. (Dallas, Texas) from 1986-92. Some time during that period, another law firm merged into mine -- I don't recall the exact name, but it was Ray Hutchison's firm, in which Kay was also employed as an attorney. She and Ray both became partners in Jenkens & Gilchrist. The merger was unwound within a year or few, as law firm mergers often are. I never heard of her being a "successful business executive" during that period. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.138.98.253 (talk) 08:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC).

Slap Incident

General George Patton lost his position for slapping a soldier. Well-sourced information about Kay Bailey Hutchison slapping an employee is appropriate for this encyclopedia article. — LisaSmall ^T/C 23:04, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Biases in Ronnie Earle's Prosecution of KBH....

This article shows HEAVY bias with regard to the Ronnie Earle's prosecution of KBH. The author paints Ronnie Earle like a victim of a loose cannon judge. The judge had not even ruled on the admissablity of the evidence yet Ronnie Earle refuses to proceed with the trial of KBH. Yeah r-i-i-i-ght. Perhaps judges want to hear all the facts and hear both sides before making these types of decisions. The implication was KBH was guilty of corruption....BUT.... a loose cannon judge saved her from Ronnie Earle. R-i-i-i-ght....

Now, with the Tom DeLay indictments, Ronnie Earle is repeating history by ***RETIRING*** before proceeding with a trial against Tom DeLay. LOL! See a pattern here? Ronnie Earle is a attention hound that loves getting his name in the press and trashing his political enemies...BUT... when it comes to being a lawyer and going to trial, he avoids the hard work of a trial and heads str8 to the bar...

This article shows the primary weakness of wiki. People use wiki as a platform to smear their political opponents. Since wiki stomps overly biased accounts, partisans try to sneak under the radar by making less objectional comments. Felixnietzsche (talk) 15:04, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Publishing the Names of Rape Victims?

In the article it states "Hutchison worked to protect rape victims from having their names published..." I am so confused. Who was proposing to publish the names of rape victims? Newspapers? Could someone please provide some clarification? Also, this bit seems out of place where it is. If someone makes it a bit more specific (and a source would be nice), I will try to clean it up (it's currently poorly worded). Thanks! 71.131.34.60 (talk) 16:16, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Representation

Lawyer/law professor Michael Tigar represented Hutchison...most likely against the charges of using state equipment and personnel during her campaign. Additional information on this might be useful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.211.242.80 (talk) 21:40, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

THE WASHINGTON ADDRESS OF THE SENATOR —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.185.8.194 (talk) 14:28, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Ladies home journal

I can't see any citation for the claim that she was named an influential woman by Ladies home journal. Could this be an unflattering smear by her political detractors? I mean, if you are looking for credibility outside of 1950's stay at home June Cleaver types, you probably wouldn't talk about being mentioned in a supermarket rag, maybe you want to talk about legislation that you have enacted or the boards that you are on. I'm thinking maybe someone added it to belittle her? If this was added in good faith, maybe someone should add a citation, and maybe move it out of the first paragraph, cause geez, I hope she's got more going for her than that. --208.125.68.211 (talk) 20:33, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/100-Most-Important-Women-of-the-20th-Century/Ladies-Home-Journal/e/9780696208232 --rpogge

"rick perry gay"?

What do you make of this? [1] [2] Stonemason89 (talk) 22:28, 30 July 2009 (UTC)