|
« French "Hate Crime" Was Hoax |
Main
| A Victim of Poor Choices »
Ditka Stays on Sidelines
July 14, 2004
Former Chicago Bears coach and Super Bowl winner Mike Ditka has decided not to run for U.S. Senate as an Illinois Republican. He's worried he's too tempermental and conservative. He'd been thinking seriously about jumping in, and there was a major "Draft Ditka" movement in Illinois. This all came about after the spectacular flame-out of expected GOP nominee Jack Ryan when his unsealed divorce papers revealed allegations by his actress ex-wife Jeri Ryan that he pressured her to have sex in front of strangers at swingers clubs in New York, Paris and New Orleans. The more mainstream Ditka, in contrast, has hawked erectile dysfunction medication on TV. I remember Ditka well, because I lived in Chicago when he led the Bears to a victory in Super Bowl XX, following the 1985 season. "Punky" QB Jim McMahon, speedy wide receiver Willie Gault, and the stolid William "Refrigerator" Perry. What a team. And what a rap video: "The Super Bowl Shuffle." Mostly, I remember Ditka beginning every other sentence with, "In Life....." Let's just say, he's got his eye on the big picture. Or else he's compensating for a perceived lack of perspective. Ditka calls himself an ultraconservative, and his shoot-from-the-hip style has some real appeal, in this era of programmed, packaged pols. However, Ditka was notoriously short-tempered with sports reporters. You've got to wonder - as apparently he did, too - how'd he'd handle life in the fishbowl, including disagreements with media, and Senate colleagues. The hapless Illinois GOP will come up with someone, certain to be mowed down by the smooth Democrat (and current state legislator) Barack Obama. Maybe even the disgraced Ryan, who as of yesterday had not filed papers to remove his name from the ballot yet, AP reported (here via Chicago Trib, free registration req.). For now, ponder some of the wit and wisdom of "Chicago's Philosopher King," presented by Chicago Sun-Times metro columnist Mark Brown. A shame Ditka backed down. This could have been a personal growth experience for "Da Coach." And the electorate. Posted by Matt Rosenberg at July 14, 2004 09:39 AM Trackback Pings TrackBack URL for this entry: Comments:
And just how exactly were the Ryan divorce papers "unsealed"? Hmmm? Posted by: James J. Na at July 15, 2004 12:31 AMJames, the Chicago Tribune and a TV station sued for the right to have Ryan's custody proceedings file opened. They won, using the public's "right to know" arguement. HOW they knew to make a case of it in the first place is unclear. Hunch? Pure principle? Whispered tip from Democratic opposition researcher? Oh wait, they don't have those in Chicago, do they? Yet my outrage is temepered somewhat, as a journalist. Ryan was incredibly stupid to assume no one would look into his divorce file after he won the GOP nomination for U.S. Senate. Knowing what was in there to begin with, he probably never should have run. You've just got to assume people are going to try dig up skeletons if they're there, and possibly succeed. Whether we all agree it's right to do so, or not. Lurid revelations such as those that de-railed Ryan may also raise two other legit questions. What ELSE is the guy hiding? And, how does this reflect on his character and integrity? However, to be consistent, one wonders: should The Tribune not also mount a legal effort to make John Kerry's divorce papers public? Posted by: Matt R. at July 15, 2004 09:50 AMWell, I suppose one has to balance "the public's right to know" with the fact that both parties to the divorce wanted to keep the papers private. Secondly, what is interesting about "the big revelation" (i.e. the sex-with-the-wife-at-a-club) is that it is always and only termed "an allegation" by one of the parties, the wife. In other words, it was and is never proven. Divorce proceedings are often very messy with all kinds of true, exaggerated and downright fabricated allegations of all kinds. But I suppose that for a Republican, all that is needed to derail his once promising candidacy is a mere allegation in private divorce papers. On the other hand, Democrats usually get a pass from the media and the couts unless (as they used to say in the South), they are found with a dead girl or a live boy in a hotel room. Posted by: James J. Na at July 15, 2004 10:53 AMThe Club for Growth, which decided to back Ryan, informed its members that there were personal "issues" that might surface and complicate the race--though I don't remember how much information we were given about this. Ryan could reasonably conclude that a judge was highly unlikely to reveal divorce papers over the objection of both parties, when that disclosure might well cause injury to their son. He guessed wrong, but I would have made the same bet. Clearly, if the allegations are true, Ryan has (or had) some unusual entertainment interests. But in other respects, he is a man to admire. He went to Harvard Law, then made a fortune on Wall Street before he was 40, and gave all this up to teach history in one of Chicago's tougher schools. Apparently, he was as successful at that as he was at everything else. People like that don't come along very often. I am sorry he didn't make it. Posted by: Tom Rekdal at July 15, 2004 05:19 PMPost a comment
|
|
| Site design by Mystic Sludge Design© | |