In an article on the website Politicususa the author, Adalia Woodbury's main topic is how Wendy Davis keeps calling her opponent out on his hypocrisy. The title of the article is, Wendy Davis smacks down Greg Abbott's $20 Mil hypocrisy on Pre-K. The article not only talks about Abbott's hypocrisy, but also about what Abbott's hidden motives are by his actions towards cutting spending on Pre-K.
    Woodbury lays the ground work for her argument by presenting another situation in which Davis calls out Abbott. She refers to the Attorney-General's discriminatory pay policies while claiming to support equal pay for women. Then Woodbury attacks with her main argument. Apparently, Abbott is claiming to support and improve Texas's Pre-K program while defending a cut of $21 million to Texas's Pre-K program in court. Not only is a statement provided expressing the outrage at such blatant hypocrisy and disregard for the public interest Woodbury suggests that Abbott's true agenda with this move is to return to "yester-century". She explains this as being a time when the opportunity for education was only allowed to rich. With this in mind it is argued that Abbott thinks that educating children for 21st century problems is a privilege given only to a few, in a particular those whit a lot of dollar bills.
    Throughout the entire article Woodbury is careful to always use the word fact when talking about anything Davis does or says, "Davis countered Abbott's hypocrisy on an important policy with facts", "Davis' use of facts...", "Aside from using facts to prove...". It's clear that Woodbury wants to portray Davis as someone who does what they say and only sticks to the truth, while painting her opponent as someone who just throws their words around and does whatever they want. Woodbury praises Wendy Davis for, " proving to be a capable leader" while stating that Abbott is shortsighted and uses, "koch style smear tactics"
    Obviously this article is biased, but it's a liberal blog so what do you expect. But even so I still would have liked a little less bias and a lot more facts on Abbott's part. I am a supporter of Wendy Davis but still believe there are two parts to every story. Even if it does turn out to be true it's nice to hear all the facts. Woodbury does and excellent job of presenting Davis as an honest and truthful candidate. But even beyond that she portrays her as someone who will seek justice by not only doing what she says, but also calling out other people who don't. I believe Woodbury was very successful in making Wendy Davis out to be a shiny beacon of justice in comparison to her grimy and sleazy opponent.