Posted on 07/02/2004 12:30:29 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
Edited on 07/02/2004 12:31:04 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Friday, July 2, 2004
Kerry's divorce papers: A ticking time bomb
Posted: July 2, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Kevin McCullough
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.comSome Democrats in Illinois may have been tickled pink at the prospect of throwing the U.S. Senate race into utter confusion two weeks ago, but those same Democrats have now likely opened up vulnerability at the top of the ticket. And with what is already publicly known about the tortured marriage between Sen. John Kerry and his first wife Julia Stimson Thorne, there is reason to believe that where there's smoke, there's fire.
When the Chicago Tribune and ABC News decided to sue for information that had been sealed in custody agreements in the Jack and Jeri Ryan divorce, the judge stunningly ruled against the wishes of both parents to open up sensitive information that even the judge said would bring embarrassment and damage to their son. If the judge was willing to go to such extraordinary measures for the sake of the "public's right to know," it seems to me it will be a difficult task for John Kerry to be able to keep his divorce records sealed.
For one, John Kerry is running for the highest office in the land, and it is self-evident that voters want to know as much as possible about the public life of someone running for that position. The argument that the press made in the Jack Ryan case was that all divorce proceedings are public. A public act, paid for by public fees and taxes, and the proceedings take place in the public's courthouse. The "public's right to know" became the all-encompassing battle cry for the Chicago Tribune. Now the tables are being turned against John Kerry, and he has given his opponents even more reason to pursue the records after, according to the Boston Globe, he flatly rejected making the documents public this week.
What are we likely to find in the John Kerry records? There are only a handful of people who know for sure. But adding up what we know about the circumstances surrounding the John Kerry/Julia Thorne divorce, it is obvious to many that it impacted her a great deal more than it did him. This becomes a matter for the voters when you realize that on his website John Kerry claims "a very active Catholic faith."
Joseph Curl wrote for the Washington Times back in April of this year:
"The couple had two daughters, Alexandra in 1973 and Vanessa in 1976, but all was not bliss in the Kerry mansions. They separated in 1982, with Thorne in the depths of a severe depression and on the brink of suicide, which she blamed on her husband's cold and distant nature, his long absences and his fierce ambition (which she was bankrolling). The separation came as Kerry was mulling a bid to run for the Senate seat vacated by Paul Tsongas in 1984; Thorne said she still associates politics 'only with anger, fear and loneliness.' In 1988, the final divorce went through. ... She later called her relationship with Kerry a 'suffocating marriage.'"
What kind of man leaves his wife, but especially when she is in the midst of suicidal depression? In addition, there seemed to be a hotly contested issue when Kerry later wished to marry Teresa Heinz over whether or not he should be granted an annulment.
He pushed ahead for the annulment even though it technically threw his daughters into the bizarre state of illegitimacy. Having recovered from her depression by that point, some 18 years later Thorne fired back with hotly worded letters that she also copied to the Boston Globe. In 1997, Kerry even publicly joked about the issue of annulment on a radio talk show saying that 75 percent of all annulments in the world take place in the U.S., but he guessed, "That number would drop to 50 percent if you take out all of the Massachusetts politicians."
Hmm, seems like a really caring guy with just loads of respect for his daughters, the institution of marriage and his formerly depressed ex-wife.
Voter's have the right to know what kind of decision process Kerry goes through before making such important moves. And the media organizations that are now planning on suing for access to the sealed documents will make "the public's right to know" the foremost argument in the strategy to get the records open.
Kerry will try to fight it, but the decision to open them is pretty much a foregone conclusion I mean, after all, "The public has the right to know ..."
Kevin McCullough is heard daily from 1 to 4 p.m. EST in New York City on AM 570 WMCA, and in New Jersey on AM 970 WWDJ. Additionally, you can read his daily postings at The KMC Blog. For information on how to bring "The Kevin McCullough Show" to a station near you, call Dave Armstrong at 201-298-5700.
agreed... but the mainstream media will paint this all as unfair tactics by the Republicans... That is how they will spin it... and spin it they will... And they will not mention Ryan.
I personally think these should remain sealed. I just don't think personal relationships, unless it points to some illegality, should be a part of any political campaign. It was wrong in the Ryan case and it is wrong for Kerry. If the morality, or lack therefore, of this move isn't enough, then the pragmatics don't make sense either. It will not convince anyone who wants Kerry to defeat Pres. Bush. It may strengthen us Bush supporters, but we're the choir anyway. We know he has no character. It may convince some swing voters that we're just nasty--these are people who probably never heard of Ryan, but will hear of this because the national media will jump all over it. Keep the documents sealed.
Okay, if the character questions don't bug you, how about security considerations? To my mind, any candidate with something to hide is a national security risk.
The character issues DO bother me. But whatever I need to know about that is already out there. I find it plenty troublesome that he left a depressed wife and that he has a history of marrying for money. I don't need the unsealing of these documents to know that though. Everyone has personal issues that they don't want to divulge in a public campaign. So I guess everyone with a personal life is a national security risk? So if Pres. Bush's DUI had not been revealed he would have been a nat. sec. risk? I think some things DO constitute that--but not personal divorce papers. If there is something in personal issues that rise to the level of illegality, then I agree with you.
These were sealed divorce papers forced open by a partisan, rabid liberal media and an activist judge. None of their business concerning the details of Ryan's divorce.
Just like these same people forced open GWB's 1976 drunk-driving conviction that was SEALED also.
I still want to know. I'll vote for a person with good character and policies I disgree with before I'll vote for a degenerate who shares my political views.
Democrats don't care. Kerry can commit adultery, sexual assault, and perjury and they will still vote for him in a general election. This is only an issue with Americans of Conscience, almost all of whom are voting for President Bush anyway.
So will I. But I already know that Kerry comes nowhere near my standard of character for a political figure. I don't need the unsealing of these records to figure it out.
Other people might, however. I'm a good case in point. Back when I still drinking the kool-aid, I voted for Bubba twice. Since '98 I've been voting Republican and Right to Life. If I'd known then what I know now, I'd've never voted for Bubba. Information matters.
I agree that info matters. But a line has to be drawn. And I just think that this goes over that line. I thought it was unethical when the partisan judge unsealed the Ryan papers. And I don't want to be associated with politicos who stoop to these actions.
I don't like this. Ryan's should NEVER have been opened against his and his wife's wishes.
This was political witch hunting - par for the course for the dems.
They are slimes who think nothing of hurting a Republican child - if they get their power. Hypocritical slime.
Let this go. It will ultimately be blamed on GW, of course. You know the mantra. La la la ...politics of personal destruction.....la la la.
I'm not saying it was ethical, but I have no sympathy for people who do things they wouldn't want made public. None.
You know what is sad? That he cared enough about his religion that he got an annulment but believes in abortion which is completely against all that the church believes about life. Reverence for life is the precise reason that marriage is considered a sacrament.
Then you're a far better person than I am. There's plenty of things I would not want to be made public, even if only that they are private and not meant to be public.
To be honest, I think all sides should be "open books", especially at the Presidental level.
Divorce, Court, Arrest, Business, Military, and Educational records should be open and available, without retractions, or black-outs, regardless of political party.
You wanna be President, OK, just open up your closets, and let those skeletons tumble out...
So a person who in their private life is a lier, a cheater, a stealer and only God knows what else in their dealings with people they know it is to be assumed that they will be ever faithful to the public (the people they don't know).
"My guess is that Kerry got a settlement from his wife instead of the other way around. In other words, he took money from her and then had the marriage annulled after he found a new source of funds."
That makes sense, otherwise, based on what DJtex said, he would just go ahead and release the documents.
bttt
If they are like that, it will be discernable in their public life. No need to get into their personal relationships, and drag their family members -- who certainly should have some expectation of privacy -- through the media grist mill.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.