That is a saying that my parents drummed into my head as I grew-up, and it remains one of those rudders in my conscience keeping me on as even a course through life as possible. I was reminded of this rudder as I tried to comprehend the latest developments in the Republican Primary run-off race between David Dewhurst and Dan Patrick.
I have been critical of members of my own party when I felt they have not lived up to their political promises or the trust we put in them with our votes. Sometimes I have used very forceful language when conveying my criticisms.
For instance, I have made my political distaste for Senator Patrick and his tactics very public over the last few years, and I’ve even satirically likened his antics to the old comic strip character “Fearless Fosdick”. Recently, I described what I viewed as “the discord Senator Patrick has sown as he has blown like an ill-wind through Republican Party politics in this county”:
… From his abuse of his radio station to attack fellow Republican officeholders and candidates as they have had to pay him for advertising, to his declaration of “RINO hunts” against anyone he deems unworthy within the party, to his support for the failed status quo in our party administration in order to try to obtain and maintain political control over its apparatus, to his abusive demagoguery of the immigration issue in his latest campaign to savage his fellow Republican candidates without regard to how such vitriol will impact our party’s relationship to the Latino community for years to come, he has shown me, once again, that while he may have the political skills to win elections, he does not yet have the temperament to be Lieutenant Governor.
But my argument with Senator Patrick always has been political—his political tactics and strategy, his political judgment, his political rhetoric, and his political temperament and character—not personal. And I have supported his opponents in this primary because of what I perceived as their political strengths and his political weaknesses. Had his opponents verbally bludgeoned Senator Patrick with the consequences of his own political demagoguery, I would say that he had reaped what he had sowed.
However, that is not how this race is ending. No matter how wrong I may feel Senator Patrick has behaved—and continues to behave—politically, nothing justifies the recent personal attack on him over his bout with an episode of depression 30 years ago.
Nothing! Two wrongs don’t make a right.
Have we learned nothing about depression and its treatment since the embarrassing Eagleton episode 42 years ago?
Have we learned nothing about mental health generally over this time?
Most importantly, is this any way to treat a neighbor, or the message we wish to send to all of our neighbors who may have struggled, or be struggling with personal or family mental health issues?
I will not be voting for Senator Patrick in this primary—I’ve made that clear. Unfortunately, I can no longer say that I will be voting “for” David Dewhurst. I simply will hold my nose and vote for the lesser of two political evils in this race—and that is the saddest statement I can make about the state of this race.
This is an excellent column which expresses a totally valid viewpoint with your usual eloquence. From my perspective, my growing disappointment in Dewhurst for several years prompts me to come down on the other side of the voting process in this election. We are both overlooking things that we simply don’t respect and that doesn’t feel very good, does it? I tend to be harsher on people/candidates for whom my expectations are higher but the disappointment is greater.
The attack on Dan’s mental health has been fair. There are numerous points I can make at to why but the most important point is how did he get his CHL. A disclosure of his stays in a mental health facility would have prevented him from obtaining a CHL. More importantly he would and should have been prevented from purchasing a firearm. Not only did Dan not disclose his hospitalization to DPS he tried to get exclusions for public officials on where they could carry firearms. One of his admendments for this purpose took down campus carry. Dan Patrick needs to release and explain his CHL disclosures. As a candidate, should he succeed in the primary, Dan could be facing a state jail felony.
“The attack on Dan’s mental health has been fair.” Really??? On what planet? It’s been 30 years – what’s the statute of limitations here? If the DPS has an issue they should pursue it, but until they do (IF they do) it’s NOT a political issue. In the meantime Mr. Dewhurst continues to slither through the political sewer. . . . . .
Don, if it turns out that Dan lied on his application to obtain a CHL, then that is a separate and serious problem for him on a couple of levels: first, he broke the law; and second, his actions are inconsistent with our party’s attempt to address the obvious mental health issues related to mass shootings.
But that is not how this issue was introduced to the media, or how it has evolved over the last few days–it started as an attack on his mental health history. No matter where the next twist in this story may lead, that attack was wrong.
When you lose an election, you get depressed and you lash out at others foolishly. That is the only explanation I can think of — Patterson must be depressed!
Patterson , not Dewhurst is responsible. If you don’t believe Dewhurst. Just ask Patterson. It is wrong to blame Dewhurst.
If it really is Patterson then Dewhurst ought to publicly disavow any connections and call on Patterson to stop. Otherwise it’s just the same slimy politics.
I believe the Lt. Governor has, indeed, disavowed the release of the records.
Ed,
You are totally on target on this. Such is the essence of what I have been telling my friends and other voters asking for advice. We need to raise the bar on the level of our candidates or campaigns, or more good Conservatives will skip the whole process and leave us to our just desserts, opening the door to deceitful Democrats promising the moon to get low information folks to the polls.
Hey Marv,
Give an example of Leticia VDP promising something to get “low information” folks to the polls? C’mon Marv, two wrongs don’t make it right for you to flippantly mention deceitful Dems and not back it up.
I never heard that Patrick was involuntarily committed to a mental hospital or that he was committed at all. I heard he had treatment. There is a difference. A commtment makes one ineligible to receive a firearm under federal law. The other doesn’t.
I hope people trashing Dan Patrick for receiving mental health treatment decades ago never have to deal with a mental illness themselves, either their own or a close family member. One would hope that society had grown enough that successfully treated depression disqualifies anyone from anything.
Today, a relative of mine received a PhD in psychology. She was treated in high school for clinical depression and still takes meds for it. She is not an unusual success story. She is an example of what happens when mental illness is dealt with.
Shame on anyone who uses a person’s treatment for mental illness for political gain.
Thank you for your well-reasoned point.