Star Trek's 7 of 9 and Senator Kerry = Potential Problem

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Dreadsox

ONE love, blood, life
Joined
Aug 24, 2002
Messages
10,885
How does Star Trek 7 of 9

seven.jpe


have any influence of the election?

Well, Ms. Jeri Ryan's divorce was supposedly sealed. Unfortunately, for Ms. Ryan, her ex-husband decided to run for Senate. He was one of the Republican partys' rising stars. He made lots of money, became filthy rich, then decided to teach in the deapest of darkest inner city areas. Then he began his campaign for senate.

Well, in a political move, someone tried to open the divorce records. The Ryan's did not want it known that Mr. Ryan had been bringing Mrs. Ryan to sex clubs in order to get it on with strange men in front of Mr. Ryan and others. The Ryans wanted this sealed to prevent it from getting in the news because they have a child.

Well, in a politically damaging result, the judge ordered the records unsealed, citing public interest outways the young childs. The records were unsealed and Mr. Ryan, favored to win an important senate seat, was forced to withdraw from the race.

Mr. Kerry, because this potentially knocked off a front runner from the Republican party should be concerned. His divorce records are sealed. They are now going to be requested to be opened because of the ruling in the Ryan case.

What will we find in here? Will it knock Kerry out of the race? Is it true that Mrs. Kerry wanted a divorce because of the hardship of being a politicians wife? Or is there something damaging that has been kept from the public for all these years? Unfortunately, it was done to a Republican and I am betting it is going to happen to Kerry next. Time will tell if there is anything in there that will effect this race.
 
The judge ruled that it is unfair to allow the wealthy to get their records sealed. It sets legal ground for Kerry's to be opened.
 
so because Mr. Ryan is a pervert
we also suspect that Kerry at least tried to sell his wife as a sex slave to some russian mafia bosses and that's why she wanted a divorce?

or am I missing the point of this touching story?
 
Since Kerry is already a senator, maybe he can claim 'executive privilege'. That seems to be getting a lot of people out of trouble these days.
 
What the hell is wrong with this judge claiming that public interest outweighs the interests of their child?

And Kerry's potential skeletons in the closet is somehow more important? Who the hell cares!

Priorities are clearly in the right place with this one.
:rolleyes:

Not you Dread, whoever decided to originally link these 2 random divorces.
 
Where did I imply that Senator Kerry was running around to sex clubs? the point is, it was done to a Republican Candidate, without any concern for his child, and he was forced out of the race because of it.

Senator Kerry has sealed divorce records. It is the window of opportunity to see if there is something that caused him to have them sealed.

Example: Senator Kerry was having difficulties with post traumatic stress, and it was too much for his wife to bear.

It does not have to do with sex necessarily.

It was done to a Republican and it is my contention that it will be attempted to be done to Senator Kerry.

Angela, I linked it myself, long before you heard it anywhere else. Political skeletons, or insight into the person running for office. This was opened up by people trying to take down a Republican, my big point is it was not necessary to do it this way, because it now opens up the same for potential democratic candidates. They won the battle at what price.
 
It appears as if the request for Ryan's records was short sighted. It creates a principle that people don't want universally applied.

I am sure requests have already been made for Kerry's records. With the Ryan precedent, it is hard to argue on principle why Kerry's records should be treated differently.
 
His marriage is not really anyone's business. A divorce even less so.

Dont you find it a little stomach churning that some people out there want to know details of someone's personal life? Is nothing sacred? Whatever happened in his marriage would have absolutely no consequence on his ability to run your country. Though I question whether he can, his marriage is not anyone's business.
 
nbcrusader said:
It appears as if the request for Ryan's records was short sighted. It creates a principle that people don't want universally applied.

I am sure requests have already been made for Kerry's records. With the Ryan precedent, it is hard to argue on principle why Kerry's records should be treated differently.

The precedent was wrong. That divorce should never have been unsealed and the judge should have some explaining to do. Pity it wont happen.
 
nbcrusader said:
It appears as if the request for Ryan's records was short sighted. It creates a principle that people don't want universally applied.

I am sure requests have already been made for Kerry's records. With the Ryan precedent, it is hard to argue on principle why Kerry's records should be treated differently.

You have said it better than I you lawyer you!:madspit:
 
Angela Harlem said:
His marriage is not really anyone's business. A divorce even less so.

Dont you find it a little stomach churning that some people out there want to know details of someone's personal life? Is nothing sacred? Whatever happened in his marriage would have absolutely no consequence on his ability to run your country. Though I question whether he can, his marriage is not anyone's business.

I agree with this in principle, however, a precident has now been set legally. And it was used against a darn good candidate for Senate. Should you allow your political enemies to use things that have knocked out a candidate, and then hold back? I do not think that is quiite fair.

Politics is sickening at times. On that we can agree.
 
Well if Kerry can swallow this, more fool him.

But I still reckon the precedent should never have been set in the first place. So perhaps it is only fair that now it will come back to bite him in the arse.

What's good for the goose etc.
 
I'm not sure I agree with that ruling. Divorce records, I think, ought to remain sealed in cases like these; they can be so messy and painful, and there's no reason for people to know most of this stuff.
 
What really bothers me about the release of the divorce records is that they contain unsubstantiated accusations. Frequently in custody battles, parties will paint the ex spouse in a negative light, much of which is unsupportable.

We never learn from the story of Pandora's box.
 
Dreadsox said:
And it was used against a darn good candidate for Senate. Should you allow your political enemies to use things that have knocked out a candidate, and then hold back? I do not think that is quiite fair.

Politics is sickening at times. On that we can agree.


WHOA WHOA WHOA....hold your horses folks.

Lets make sure we are ALL informed on exactly what happend here in Illinois with this court case.

First, it was a television station AND the Chicago Tribune (a traditionally REPUBLICAN newspaper based in aa VERY liberal camp) who sued to have the divorce records opened. They won the suit.

The judge weighed the concern of the parents for their son against the need to have NORMALLY public records remain public. The judge (I need to double check this, but I beleive it was a California judge...so again...not related to Illinois politics, no matter how dirty they are) ruled that it the public right to know was more important than the child's protection in this case (take that for what it is worth).

Divorce files released, and then the CHICAGO TRIBUNE really drops the ball. They placed a strong, super big and bold headline (I bought the paper, and thought "WTF" - but can't remember what is was now) on the top fold. The article, and the facts found in the divorce files really did not support the headline. The Trib screwed up! The Reader Representative (Ombudsman) wrote a column agreeing with a number of complaints that were e-mailed, called, etc. etc. to the paper that day. But, what are the repurcussions for that??? none.

Now....the Tribune is not the only one to point a finger at. Before the November Primary here in Illinois, there were three or four strong Republican candidates. One of the other candidates had his divorce records unsealed, and it revealed some spouse abuse. Not good. The Republicans went to Ryan and asked him about his sealed divorce papers...and he told them that there wasn't anything damaging in them. So, when the files were opened and there was something that was "somewhat" damaging, the State Republican leaders were a little pissed, and called for his resignation.

So, as always, before you start throwing barbs around, make sure you know the whole story. :up:

Ryan was a solid candidate. BUT BUT BUT......I really doubt he would be able to beat Barack Obama, the Democratic Candidate. This guy is the REAL THING. I cannot WAIT for him to hit the national scene. :hyper:
 
:up: Excellent post, zoney!

And let's also not forget that it was Ryan himself who opened up the issue of how someone's personal life relates to their politics by pulling stunts like this.
 
zoney! said:
So, as always, before you start throwing barbs around, make sure you know the whole story. :up:


SO basically somehow what I typed is wrong? I have not thrown barbs around. I do not care how "liberal" a newspaper appears to be, I have read enough to know that they are not near the center.

As for what I typed I sadi political enemies. I did not say Republican or Democrat. By your post, I am somehow supposed to admit I was wrong why? A reporter, or newspaper cannot be a political enemy?

Sorry, I fail to see what I have said that deserves a hold the horses and the comment posted above.
 
well, I see a lot of facts missing from a story you are trying to tell.

Go reread my post. I said that the Chicago Tribune is REPUBLICAN NEWSPAPER. I think I even did it in caps like that. You are now calling them liberal. Being a REPUBLICAN newspaper would make them more RIGHT of the center.

Second point...his mislead his OWN party. Shot himself in the foot. The Illinois Republicans asked him to step down. It wasn't the article/newspaper/TV station forcing him out...it was his own party. The sex allegations themselves are worth very little...you even said that.

Go ahead...reread.
 
To quote the intelligent members of the forum...its his personal sex life. Not anyone elses business.

The Boston herald is the "republican" paper here in Boston. That puts them just shy of communist.
 
Kerry's divorce was a long time ago and had a different judge. The Ryans' divorce is in the present. Secondly, it was up to the discretion of the judge, and if the Ryans wished to appeal the ruling, they could have; however, they declined, in spite of their right to appeal, and let the records be released. That is their own fault.

This whole thread is, frankly, stupid. This, and several other anti-Kerry threads in here seem to be the equivalent of grasping for straws, when, clearly, you already hate Kerry, although I'm not completely sure *why* yet. I know why most here hate Bush, whether it be his ineloquence or his lying to justify the war in Iraq.

But, really, I'm not quite sure as to the purpose of this thread, except to be petty.

(And, to clarify, I don't mean any of this personally. :wave: )

Melon
 
Last edited:
that demoral is really messing with you

Dreadsox said:
To quote the intelligent members of the forum...its his personal sex life. Not anyone elses business.

So now you are calling me "not intelligent?" :eyebrow:
 
Last edited:
melon said:

But, really, I'm not quite sure as to the purpose of this thread, except to be petty.

(And, to clarify, I don't mean any of this personally. :wave: )

Melon

You could make it personal if you want:wink:

The purpose of the thread was NOT to bash Kerry. If that is what you think, then you are sorely mistaken.

#1 I think sealed records should remain sealed.
#2 I think it was a mistake to unseal the Ryans records.
#3 I think it is opening up a door that should not be opened.
#4 I think Kerry is going to have to fight to keep his sealed.
 
Re: that demoral is really messing with you

zoney! said:


So now you are calling me "not intelligent?" :eyebrow:

you are reading that much into something I typed, I can only say no, that is not what I was saying....

But, whenever Clinton's sex life has been brought up in here, it has been said "Its his personal life."

The Ryan's had it sealed. Political enemies had it unsealed. He was forced out because of it.
 
Back
Top Bottom