From my e-mail box, it appears that Paula Hawks’ campaign is sending out an e-mail to people tonight about a health scare her family is going through, noting that it’s drawing her attention away from the campaign:
———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Paula Hawks <[email protected]>
Date: Monday, December 21, 2015
Subject: keeping you informed
To: (REDACTED)
(REDACTED) —
Today, I am writing all of my supporters to share a sensitive topic for my family and I. In early November, my eldest daughter, Ruby, had a serious health scare that drew my attention away from the campaign. I’m happy to announce that after multiple doctor visits and tests, Ruby will be having surgery tomorrow to remove a mass in her neck and thyroid and is expected to have a positive outcome and a full recovery. Following Ruby’s surgery and recovery I am looking forward to devoting 100% of my time and energy to my campaign for U.S. House.
Your support has been overwhelming since I announced my campaign for U.S. House. It is clear you want a change in congressional representation, and I promise to not only work hard to win, but to also make you proud once I earn your vote. I appreciate you all standing with my family during this difficult time. While I am committed to the people of South Dakota and committed to this race, the needs of my children and family are always foremost in my mind.
Best,
Paula
We certainly take her at her word, as any parent would be acutely attuned to and concerned about the health of their child.
But, after such a heartfelt commentary on the health of a loved one, the next paragraph claiming “It is clear you want a change in congressional representation,” just seems to frost over the previous layer of sincerity with partisanship.
What are your thoughts on all of this?
“Hawks campaign claiming family health scare drew her attention away from the campaign.”-Really? Claiming?
“Ruby will be having surgery tomorrow to remove a mass in her neck and thyroid and is expected to have a positive outcome and a full recovery.”— Are you suggesting she is lying or that something like that shouldn’t be more important than anything else? That is sleazy dude.
You debated what the definition of “is” is when Bill Clinton was around, didn’t you?
Who was debating her child’s illness?
I think you need to tell at least one of the voices in your head to take a chill pill.
She is “claiming” that it is somehow possible to scale back her nearly nonexistent campaign.
I wish the best for her daughter, and hope Paula can quickly return to the race that she has no chance whatsoever of winning.
And you’re not partisan?
What about her job as a state legislator? How much attention is she giving that?
I hope she has enough integrity to know when she needs to step down.
Given the current family situation, I would completely understand. However If she attempts to continue to serve and neglect her family, I will lose what little respect I have for her.
I honestly hope she know what needs to happen.
At the end of the day, parents have a higher obligation to their children than to the rest of the world. I pray the surgery goes well.
Again, at the end of the day, Hawks is informing us to excuse (most legitimate) the lack of activity the last 45 days and during the recovery period. Parsing “claiming” or whether it should have been “asserting” or some other word is foolish.
It’s not foolish Troy. Powers could and should have written ‘Paula Hawks says’. Instead he writes ‘Hawks campaign claiming’ doing everything possible to depersonalize the situation, even going so far as to refer to himself as ‘we.’
And unlike your comment, there’s not a shred of empathy for Paula and her child coming from Pat. The closest he gets is to tell us that any parent would do the same thing. Then he has the audacity to suggest that her letter might just be political.
Pat’s post is sleazy, Troy, no two ways around it. He knows it and you know it. Don’t try to defend the indefensible.
Look, it’s Christmas. Just imagine for a minute how much differently Powers could have written this post if, instead of callous political partisanship, he would have had genuine compassion in his heart.
As for the letter’s assertion that it is clear we want a change in congressional representation, suffice it to say that obviously the letter wasn’t written to him, and one wonders why he felt compelled to respond to it.
I would so much rather read here that Kristi herself wishes Paula and her child well and that Pat, instead of writing something cheap and borderline snarky, was the one who sought out and delivered Noem’s public best wishes to Hawkes and family.
But I’m not holding my breath.
Troy, it seems there’s a whole lot of parsing going on. Do you have a copy of the un-angry dictionary? Apparently they think I need to read it.
(Or is it “how to avoid microagressions from the left? I forget.)
As a parent, when your child is ill, nothing else matters.
However, The recovery from this slow down it going to take a toll
Bill,
I think we are parsing too much. Should I give you a lecture that unless Pat has one of his children go through something similar, the correct word is sympathy and not empathy? Should I criticize you for calling for compassion when compassion is personally entering into the suffering?
With regard to Pats comment on Hawks comment on a change in leadership, she obstensibly sent this to campaign supporters and not close friends and family which links the two. And, I understand both Hawk’s and Pat’s comments in that light. Hawks campaign supporters deserve to know. Pat can respond to the linkage. I am critical of neither.
when I think of the callousness given to a mom whose child died at the hand of a man ultimately executed or the family/daughter on another blog, parsing “claim” vs. “says” is definitely minor.
That said, this is all about Ruby. If her mom uses the campaign as a distraction, good for her. If she never thinks about the campaign, good for her. Whatever is best for Ruby and the ability of her mom to do what mothers do is what should be done.
Merry Christmas, brother Troy. Pat knows what he wrote and why he wrote it. If he’s comfortable with it, he can let it stand. If he decides to write a better one, he can delete this one along with our comments. He’s done it before when he has egg on it’s face. In any case, there’s no need for you to be his apologist, let alone my dictionary. I know full well what my words mean, and had I meant different ones, I would have used them. Peace, my friend.
Pat had nothing to apologize for. We can all wish Ruby the best. His post had nothing wrong with it unless of course your a democrat and haven’t voted for Kristi in the past and have no intentions too in the future. Much to do about nothing.
Politicians using their families and family tragedies for political purposes need to be called out for their actions and held accountable.
Unless you have bee n a victim of this type of situation, please do not criticize.
Without exception, comments and opinions on candidates’ minor kids should be kept to oneself. A candidate’s decision to disclose any information about their kids – something inevitable in many campaigns – does not equate to an invitation or license to opine or critically focus on the kids.
John–
Unless you’ve had a child or family member’s illness used in public to further an agenda, you have no right to criticize anyone else. Until then, keep your judgments t to yourself.
don’t be a prick about it.