Republicans & Conservatives: Archives

The problem with Jack Ryan is that it smacks of hypocrisy. From his own website:

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.

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.

What’s his message? That marriage is a private and sacred institution and we can’t let gays have any part of it… but please ignore that I like to have sex in public. That’s my business.

I have no pity for this guy, he stuck his nose into the private affairs of homosexuals and they retaliated by exposing his private deviations.

As a disclaimer, I don’t disagree with the occurence of either.

His candidacy is so important that even George Soros has been involved, with his management fund donating $ 60,000 to put Obama in place.

Just another example of the corrupting influence of money in elections I suppose.

If the accusations were true about Ryan do you think he could have won anyway? I can see a Clinton strategy working in this case. How could democrats attack the defense of ‘it’s his personal life’? He didn’t eve lie about it, some democratic judge disclosed what apparently is illegal to disclose. I hope disbar-ment is under way.

Does it not strike anyone else odd that the Republicans would rather offer up a novelty candidate as opposed to a legitimate conservative candidate?

Haha! No. I’m a Californian. :)

Seriously though, why is it that most GOP public figures in the last 30 years have been popular amiable knuckleheads? Guys like Ditka, Reagan, GW, Schwarzenegger, are all interested in the position, but don’t have any agenda of their own. It’s not like they’ve dedicated their lives to public service and have a myriad of ideas for helping this country live up to its potential.

To answer my own question, it’s because the brand of radical conservatism - supply side economics, legislating our bedroom activities, putting business interests above public interests, etc. - that the ‘behind the scenes’ GOP leadership is currently pushing is a hard sell. Republicans need all the popularity contest winners they can get.

Guys like Reagan, GW, Schwarzenegger, are all interested in the position, but don’t have any agenda of their own. It’s not like they’ve dedicated their lives to public service and have a myriad of ideas for helping this country live up to its potential.

Sure, if by agenda you just mean liberal agenda and by public service you mean never had to work for a regular paycheck, made a payroll, or had to deal with the myriad of government regulations that make running a business harder and by a myriad of ideas you mean the same narrow set of marxist-hewn liberal policies we hear over and over from liberal candidates, then yeah, I suppose so.

First of all Timothy,

Welcome! It’s nice to see another Illinois native join the WatchBlog group - even if you are a Conservative!

Full Disclosure: I am a Barack Obama supporter! His pic and links to his campaign website are proudly posted on my weblog homepage.

The only thing we agree upon, is that I too believe that Ryan’s divorce records should not have been opened. There is absolutely nothing contained in those files that are the business, or are of any concern, to Illinois voters. Ironically, you failed to mention that it was the staunchly Republican Chicago Tribune that led the charge to unseal the records. And, a good bet, is that if Ryan stayed in the race, he would’ve gotten the paper’s endorsement.

The possible explosive content in his divorce records, dogged him thru the Republican Senate Primary. Yet, he assured party leaders like treasurer Topkina, that there was no damaging info contained in those files, of any major consequence. I’d be interested to know, if the sexual conduct charges that failed to derail Gov. Ahnold’s victory, may have added to the party’s complacency?

At the time of the costly bombshell, the state of Ryan’s candidacy at that point, I think, played an important role. The campaign had been reeling from several publicized mis-steps, including having a cameraman stalk his opponent’s every public move.

I truly believe Jack Ryan could’ve and should’ve been given the chance to survive this unfortunate incident. He did not lie about the incident, nor committed any crime, even if his wife’s allegations were true. However, a number of factors coalesced to cause his Conservative base, and the party’s moderate figure heads, to instead kick him to the curb.

For one, the scandal broke at the most quiet of a local news cycle. It dominated newspaper, TV and radio talk shows throughout the state, with everyone passing judgement on Ryan’s fate. I also believe that the state GOP, already inching past the George Ryan scandal, were absolutely freaked by the salacious nature of the revelation, and its coverage.

Second, the RNC and Bush/Cheney ‘04 have already ceded Illinois to the Dems, and Ryan could count on only token support from the national party.

And third, the unexpectedly strong win in the Dem Senate Primary by Barack Obama, had begun to thrust him towards national press recognition, and his double digit lead in the polls, began to make his victory in November a fore gone conclusion.

The weak criticism from the Republicans of Obama’s candidacy, has been more about slapping on tired labels, and absent of any effective scrutiny of his long legislative record in Springfield. I’d like to see our Republican writer here, show how Obama’s record is out of step with a state that local and national GOP party leaders have already abandoned.

As far as the possibility of a Ditka candidacy is concerned, I actually went to the DraftDitka.com and signed the petition. This drive is lead by people who normally could care less about the political process - this is just fun and games!

These yahoos may think they are getting a Jesse Ventura, but from the few political pronouncements I’ve heard from Ditka, he makes Bush look like Billy Graham. I truly believe this would be an embarrassing disaster, both professionally and personally, if Ditka lets his ego take the bait.

And, this will hurt the Republican Party, all over again.

As far as the possibility of a Ditka candidacy is concerned, I actually went to the DraftDitka.com and signed the petition. This drive is lead by people who normally could care less about the political process - this is just fun and games!

Haha! That’s what we thought about Governor Schwarzenegger. Good job signing the petition, Bert. I suspect Senator Ditka will bring all of Ryan’s advisors with him when he goes to work in Washington.

I think what American Pundit is trying to say, Eric is that these people have decided to become elected officials as part of their career as celebrities, rather than as part of a lifelong career of civil service.

I know your people like to glorify the capital hill outsider, the outside the beltway man of the people, but to some extent that means you’re saddled with candidates that are very much lacking in experience at governance. I mean, take Bush for example- six years in a governship that is largely ceremonial in character- he couldn’t do much of anything with legislative approval. Most presidents, even Reagan, got into the game with much more.

And in this day and age, that’s crucial. We need people who are informed, experienced, and tested already. We don’t need to wait for a president to get his bearings and then get to work. Bad things happen when you have a person in a decision making position who doesn’t know how to make a good decision on their own.

I’m glad you wrote about this, Timothy.

This is the dumbest sex scandal ever. In comparison to Ahnuld, Jack Ryan is a candidate for sainthood. As a keen observer of GOP hypocrisy, I can only surmise that after Governor Groper they felt like they had to demonstrate that there is, in fact, such a thing as Republican Sexual Impropriety. I don’t know what the definition is, but apparently wanting to have sex with your own spouse is sometimes a no-no. (OK, the public thing is a little kinky, and despite Ryan’s claim at least violates the spirit of the Ten Commandments, but “he who is without sin…”)

As much as I agree with the main thrust of your post, Obama is not an “uber-liberal”. He is on the faculty of the University of Chicago Law School, a neoliberal, i.e., economically conservative, stronghold.

And in this day and age, that’s crucial. We need people who are informed, experienced, and tested already. We don’t need to wait for a president to get his bearings and then get to work. Bad things happen when you have a person in a decision making position who doesn’t know how to make a good decision on their own.

While I do think that’s true, there’s a tendency on the left to elevate public service above plain old Americans. If anything we need more citizen politicians. I believe many average Americans are more than qualified to represent their fellow average Americans. Isn’t that what democracy is all about? I don’t believe in ‘expert representatives’.

As far as celebrity candidates, I’d agree, celebrity is generally overrated and is not much of a qualification in my mind for public office. But name recognition and practice in a public persona gives many a natural edge.

“public service”

is the ultimate oxymoron from candidates from either party. How many people do you truly feel are in Washington to serve others?

There is only one way to deal with politicians at all levels and that is to choke of their life giving supply of money.

By limiting their ability to control vast amounts of the GNP, Republicans will not have the power to peer into every aspect of our private lives and Democrats cannot tax our grandchildren into abject poverty and vise versa.

Thanks, Timothy, for a good article. Many of us in Illinois are shaking our heads on this one.

Watching Jack Ryan’s campaign was like watching The Gang Who Couldn’t Shoot Straight. I mean, who was the brilliant strategist who decided that it would be a really good idea to keep a videocam in Obama’s face everywhere he went?

Ryan would most likely have gotten trounced by Obama anyway but when Ryan’s indiscretion was made public, it was all over. I don’t think it was specifically the “offense” that got him. There really wasn’t one. He asked his wife to perform a sex act in a public forum and she said no. Case closed.

However, it represented a pretty wide gap between his public standards and his private standards. Such a disparity never mattered to Clinton supporters, but Ryan supporters weren’t likely to stick with him after learning that he lied about the contents of the sealed divorce records that were, at best, embarrassing.

I was especially disappointed because I thought that Illinois Republicans might actually have found someone who could help repair their poor image after the departure of former Governor George Ryan.

Old George left his party badly wounded, and it will probably be years before it recovers in Illinois…if ever. Democrats have always had a lock on virtually everything in Chicago (“digging up” votes is an art form there) but Governor Ryan managed to alienate the rest of the state.

Anyway, what’s done is done, so I say let’s just have fun with it. Grab the Levitra and bring on Ditka. There’s something to be said for a politician who might just punch somebody out if they get in his face.

NOTOTH

Woody,

Thank you for your comments, but I take note with your comment that Obama is not a strong liberal. As my site has pointed out:

Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, the likely Democratic presidential nominee, has just been judged the most liberal senator in the United States, according to the latest ratings by the National Journal, which has just ranked all the senators on 32 economic, 15 social policy and 15 foreign policy issues. Kerry is rated No. 1 in 2003, and his Massachusetts colleague, Sen. Edward Kennedy, is No. 11.

Now, as liberal as Kerry is, he voted for the war in Iraq; Obama would not have. Moreover, once the troops got to Iraq, Obama would not have supported the $87 billion the president requested for reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan, which also supported the troops there. Kerry says he would have supported it if it were accompanied by a tax hike to pay for the $87 billion.

Obama’s position has been a flat no — and once again is to the left of Kerry. In opposing the funding for troops, Obama was the only candidate in the Illinois Democratic field (an extremely liberal field) to take the position. Underscoring the extremism of his position: Even Wisconsin’s Russ Feingold and Illinois’ Dick Durbin, severe critics of the war, voted for this troop assistance.

He has stated flatly that the war on terrorism is not his immediate priority. When the Sun-Times asked what his top priority is, he responded ”health care.” (GOP nominee Jack Ryan said it is the war on terrorism.)

Just wanted to point that out.

Regards,

Tim

Tim,

I don’t buy the idea that being against the Iraq War makes someone ultra-left wing. What about Brent Scowcroft? How about the Cato Institute?

Similarly, a lot of people who aren’t left-of-centered are concerned about our health care system. The spirally costs to employers are harming our ability to compete worldwide.

Jeff, we need public service oriented people. Unfortunately, the Republicans have pounded so hard on the idea of serving one’s people through civil service that most of the people in our bureaucracies are either there so they can get better paying private sector jobs, or so they can climb up the rungs to the influential positions. We need more people who are intent on doing the job we’ve given them.

Choking off the money, in the end, actually encourages the wrong people. It sets up more conflicts about who is where on the line chart, who gets what funding, and everything in government becomes about that. When that happens, all sorts of interesting little phenomena come up which result in such nice things as people getting overpriced equipment to justify their budgets, because the cost cutters take it away if they don’t spend it.

You get more service oriented people, and they will be willing to be honest about what they need, and won’t be as likely to play the games that waste our money.

As for privacy and taxation, these are things which won’t be solved by futile attempts to try and starve the beast. The way you deal with that is by being willing to vote whatever way is necessary to restore the balances of power. If somebody you can vote against taxes too much or pries too much into your affairs, simply use your vote, and your powers of persuasion to put things right it won’t always work, but really, individual’s aren’t meant to be able to rule over an unwilling majority anyways. We just do what we can.

I think you’re right about Democrats not attacking Jack Ryan for his personal peccadilloes. It’s the totally hypocritical right that wouldn’t support him. Where’s the personal attacks and digust from the right, Eric?

Even you know they would have poo-pooed it, and dismissed it as irrelevant, if it was exposed after the election. Even though he lied to the party. Note the lack of attacks against Arnold.

Why can’t the Republicans find national figures with credentials? Excellent and revealing question, which I note Eric avoided.

I think it speaks volumes about the radicalization of the Republican party.

Why can’t the Republicans find national figures with credentials? Excellent and revealing question, which I note Eric avoided.

I’m not sure what you mean by credentials. What are Kerry’s credentials? By my quick count there are 280 Republicans in congress.

The idea that ‘public service’ is a better qualifier for public office than private or self employment is somewhat elitist. People are individuals… but, on balance there is a tendency for ‘public servants’ to have a certain outlook. Tell me the truth, those who you would accept and define as ‘public servants’ are going to be liberal. That’s what it sounds like when you refer to public service, those with a certain political outlook. That speaks vulumes about the integrity of your criticism.

…It looks like Ditka will not be running after all. -via FoxNews “America’s trusted choice for news.”

The idea that ‘public service’ is a better qualifier for public office than private or self employment is somewhat elitist.

But c’mon, don’t you think that Barak Obama is better prepared for bringing an agenda to DC than Ditka is? Ditka’s used to being the head coach, being the business owner (in name, I guess), neither of which are democracies.

Obama and Jack Ryan are both better prepared to march into DC with their own agenda and get some of it tacked onto bills than Ditka is. Ditka has no agenda, and he has no experience. This is the Senate, not a Lettuce Entertain You restaurant outlet.

Ditka could really have some great ideas about how to take Health Care out of liberals’ hands into a conservative direction, say with vouchers, or tax breaks, or by giving block grants to corporations, but do you actually believe Ditka has the prowess to play the parliamentary chess game with the Republican leadership? The only reason any Republican would want Ditka in there is for 1 vote: that he casts for Frist as majority leader.

If the accusations were true about Ryan do you think he could have won anyway? I can see a Clinton strategy working in this case. How could democrats attack the defense of ‘it’s his personal life’? He didn’t eve lie about it, some democratic judge disclosed what apparently is illegal to disclose. I hope disbar-ment is under way.