June 19, 2004

ANYONE WHO'D CHEAT ON 7 OF 9 IS TOO STUPID EVEN FOR THE GOP:

Ryan Won't Appeal Release Of Divorce Papers: Senate Candidate's Divorce Records To Be Partially Unsealed (NBC5, June 18, 2004)

Senate candidate Jack Ryan decided Friday not to appeal a California court's order unsealing potentially embarrassing child-custody records stemming from his 1995 divorce from television actress Jeri Lynn Ryan. [...]

The release of the child-custody records could deliver a powerful blow to Ryan's campaign against Democrat Barack Obama for the U.S. Senate seat being opened by the retirement of Sen. Peter Fitzgerald, R-Ill. [...]

Rumors about what is in the documents have been circulating since before the March 16 primary.

Ryan has repeatedly assured GOP leaders the files contain nothing embarrassing enough to torpedo his bid for the Senate. But he tempered that a bit on Monday, telling reporters at a news conference: "Is there anything in there that might be embarrassing to me? Maybe. But that's not the criterion."

He said Monday, as he has all along, that he has no problem with the public seeing anything pertaining to him but he would try to block any disclosure that would threaten the well-being of his son. [...]

State Republican leaders asked the Republican National Committee recently whether they had the authority to name a replacement candidate if Ryan decided to withdraw, according to a GOP source speaking only on condition of anonymity. The source said the RNC told them the state party did have such authority.


Given Mr. Ryan's public persona it would be disappointing if there's really damaging information in the files--something worse than heterosexual extramarital affairs--but we're all long past the point where we get starry-eyed about pols.

However, if the GOP gets a free Toricelli-twist, why not just name popular former governor and current 9-11 Commissioner Jim Thompson to the ticket? He's only in his 60's and his qualification edge over the Democratic candidate, State Senator Barrack Obama, is massive.

Posted by Orrin Judd at June 19, 2004 10:15 AM
Comments

Let's hope there's nothing in this release and Ryan benefits from some backlash.
That's probably not going to happen.
As for Thompson I believe he was recruited for the race but turned it down.

Posted by: AWW at June 19, 2004 4:17 PM

Big Jim hasn't run for any office since 1988. I remember seeing our Governor at the 1984 GOP convention floor haggling with some other important GOP pols. My dad kneeled over to me and said, "That could be our next President after Reagan." Jim Thompson had a lot of "clout," as we say in Chicago.

If he didn't run for the Presidency in 1988, there's no reason to think he'll want to be Senator 16 years later.

Maybe in the same parallel universe where Kerry-McCain runs.

Posted by: Chris Durnell at June 20, 2004 3:51 PM

Chris:

Pols don't much care fighting for the nomination. Give it to them and they run.

Posted by: oj at June 20, 2004 4:28 PM

I drove to Chicago and back this weekend. the obama signs were all on the north side. not on the south side. If Bush wins like we think he will, Ryan will too.

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at June 21, 2004 2:21 AM

"Ryan said he would overcome the allegations because he didn't break the law,
his marriage vows or the Ten Commandments. Other people accused of worse have
been elected, he said."

So, it is Jack Ryan's position that public sex in sadomasochistic clubs with
women in cages is not a violation of the sanctity of marriage, nor of God's
law.

Personally, I couldn't care what Jack Ryan or anyone else does in their home, or
with a group of like-minded individuals.

My problems with him are:
1)He tried to trick and bully his wife into behavior she didn't consent to.
"Resistance is futile," he may have told her, "you will be fornicated."
2) Jeri Ryan will probably never have sex where I can watch. Thanks for ruining
that, Jack.
3)I am sick of hearing Ryan's apologists whining that his personal, kinky sex
life isn't fair game, when he has been condemning the loving relationships of
others.

Again, if Jack Ryan enjoyed going to clubs where people are cavorting around
naked and engaging in every sexual act imaginable, I would have absolutely no
objection. Every human being is entitled to whatever activity between
consenting adults float their boat.

But as I have said elsewhere, these "preservation of marriage" people are liars,
frauds and hypocrites. Jack Ryan is no exception.

To sum up, a committed, loving gay marriage (or even a civil union) is a violation of the sanctity of marriage, but public sex
in a dungeon is not:
http://www.jackryan2004.com/issues/issueslist.asp?p=330

"I believe that marriage can only be defined as that union between one man and
one woman. I am opposed to same-sex marriages, civil unions, and registries.

"I believe that we are all equal before God and should be before the law.
Homosexuals deserve the same constitutional protections, safeguards, and human
dignity as every American, but they should not be entitled to special rights
based on their sexual behavior."

Again, to quote Jack Ryan:
"The breakdown of the family over the past 35 years is one of the root causes of
some of our society’s most intractable social problems-criminal activity,
illegitimacy, and the cyclical nature of poverty."

So, if your wife divorces you because you want to engage in group sexual
activities, this is good for the family?

"As an elected leader, my interest will be in promoting laws and educating
people about the fundamental importance of the traditional family unit as the
nucleus of our society."

Thank you, Senator Ryan, for showing us that group sex in kinky dungeons is a
traditional family value. That will be a great relief to many, but problematic for Concerned Women for America.

Marriage, then, according to Jack Ryan, is defined as the union between one man, one woman, and all the people who watch them have sex.

Senator Ryan made other people's bedrooms his business, so nobody has any
business calling foul when someone calls him to task for his own.

Posted by: Rev. Ian Brumberger at June 23, 2004 1:15 PM

Reverend Brumberger:

It is fair game, just rather inconsequential--hardly a reason to allow a divorce.

Posted by: oj at June 23, 2004 2:05 PM

Well, I guess it depends on what Jack Ryan looks like naked.

If his manhood needs so much hardware to function that it looks like part of The Borg Collective, that might make a difference.

Posted by: Rev. Ian Brumberger at October 15, 2004 9:44 AM
« THE FREEDOM-DENYING REALIST: | Main | A TWO-TERM HARDING: »