Jack Ryan, Defender of the Sanctity of Marriage

Political scandals in Washington can be petty. All too often, someone's reputation and electability are ruined by their failure to remain within narrow bounds of public morality. We may lament, in such cases, the crassness that ensues from a scandal in which the impact of their peccadilloes affects only themselves and their families.  Yes, I'm thinking of Bill Clinton.

Sometimes, however, the revelations involved may spotlight the variance between the personal morality of the public figure involved and their positions on matters of public policy.  Jimmy Swaggart was brought down because he preached a fire-and-brimstone-laden message of morality while cavorting with prostitutes behind the scenes.  Rush Limbaugh has survived his drug scandal, thus far at least, despite his past comments on what draconian fates should befall those who run afoul of our nation's drug laws. Even more insulting to one's sense of fair play is the case of George W. Bush, who in campaign 2000 walked a very fine line in regards to admitting or denying his past record of alleged drug use, offering obvious non-denial denials.  Yet, he takes a very tough stance on criminal punishments for drug use, when it doesn't apply to his family.

The case of Jack Ryan, Republican candidate for U.S. Senate in Illinois, is an example of the latter category. After embarrassing revelations involving some rather kinky sexual preferences, he has thrown in the towel on his campaign.  To back up my claim of his political hypocrisy, I submit Exhibit A, a snapshot from the former candidate's web site:

Yes, while he repeatedly tried to coerce his famous former spouse into having sex in front of others in sex clubs, he is publicly aligned with the Republican Morality Machine, trying to impose their moral and religious positions on us all.

On the page "Jack Ryan on Protecting Life", he offers these opinions:

Well, Jack, I don't have a position on you or your family's reproductive choices (or their non-reproductive choices, as the case may be).  However, in backing the Republican Morality Machine's public agenda, your failure to adhere to it is a problem. You want to legislate morality, but yet you fail to accept it for yourself.

And here's my really big point.  If it were simply a case of hypocricy, I could live with it.  Life is complex and we are not always the masters of our minds and bodies that we like to pretend we are.  We may believe something firmly, but fail to live up to our ideals.  But the public morality positions of the Republican party of the 21^st century are simply cover for advancing their political agenda. The goals they espouse would be soundly rejected if argued on their merits.  Here's a quick summary for those who came to class late:

• Changing taxation policy to benefit a tiny fraction of the public, the richest 1% of Americans at the expense of the rest of us
• Removing environmental, consumer safety, workers' rights and other such protections to allow corporations to be unfettered of responsibility for their actions
• Limiting or rolling back civil rights advances
• Scaling back social welfare programs and cutting federal spending to the most minimal levels they can achieve, unless it involves favors for corporate interests to which they are beholden
• Acting as a global bully to advance this agenda throughout the world, with the aim of establishing the dominance of their crony capitalist vision globally

Simply put, they want power.  Unlimited, unfettered and absolute power. And to achieve their goals, they preach their conservative social message far and wide, using their billionaire-funded think tanks and media outlets, their network of right-wing assets in the press.  They appeal to images of a once great America and how they want to restore us to our glory days.  By this strategy, they aim to move the political debate to the right, while trying to convince us of their unassailable moral clarity.

Such events as the fall of Jack Ryan give us the opportunity to reflect on the nature of what such politicians really do stand for.  And believe me, "traditional family values" ain't it.