Kris Jordan, Ohio GOP State Senator, Gets Wasted Then Assaults Wife

Totally, Pete.  Again, I realize I'm late to the game and Pete may be gone (which is why I no longer come to this site, fuckers!  Pete is awesome!  I don't  need to agree with every word out of his  mouth.  I just need to respect him.  And, I respect Pete more than anyone else I've ever read on this site.  Pete tells you what the fuck is up and I love him for that.)

...but I agree.  A man who can't respect the one person who he's sworn before God to protect and cherise?!  I don't care if you believe it, do it cause you swore to do it.  Fuck.    

The actual duties aren't much, Roocifer, but here in Ohio it's usually one of the top four jobs in every county. The more important thing is that it allows you to hire the party faithful for patronage jobs, which makes you something of a big fish in local party politics.

I don't know if they're Bible thumpers or not. It's suburban Columbus, where they usually don't elect the crazy religious nuts like they do down south. But they could just be closet weirdos about those things.

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh I have so missed this voice of reason ;), you kill me Jeremy...with every post.....;)

Yeah, there's no doubt staying with him strengthens her political hand, Jeremiah. And the brave wife standing by her man is a long tradition in politics, though you see it going away lately in the cases like Anthony Wiener's.

But I know if I ever did something like this, my wife would tell me to fuck off. And her brothers would kill me. And I would deserve it.

But don't you think a guy who's dick enough to knock his wife around even once isn't worthy of leadership, Jeremiah?

Wife beating is one of the biggest pussy moves ever, and it usually means that you're an insecure piece of shit unqualified to lead even yourself.

And it's often a stepping stone to bigger and better positions.  And for that she'll want to retain the backing of the Republican party.  And therefore she probably doesn't want to be a divorced person.  Which totally supports your position that she appears willing to tolerate being abused in the interest of furthering her political career.  To each his own, I suppose, but I think the law should be able to tell her she's on her own.  After 8 times, you know who the bastard is and choose to stay.  Therefore, when he really pushed it over the top, don't call us, we don't give a shit.

Most women aren't going to admit that they sell their physical safety and emotional well being for financial stability.

I have Dictionary.com bookmarked on my browser menu bar for just that reason. Of course, I also have that pesky issue of correctly spelled words sometimes looking wrong. That's the one that drives me crackers. :D

I'm speaking to the position, not so much the person. I'm in no way complimenting her on her job nor on her rung position on the social ladder. If anything, I'm pointing out that she can't be an bubble-headed trophy wife if she's actively soliciting and holding a public office. I never claimed her to be a trophy wife - characterized by only being concerned with social status and spending her stepchildren's inheritance. I said she desired the social status that political life provides as well as the power gained in her community. One can desire both political influence AND social privilege without being a piece of marital arm candy.

To be appointed you still have to submit your name for consideration; names are not just drawn form a hat containing all the names of voting age county citizens. She still had to campaign for it although not in the traditional sense. I didn't say she was a power-hungry bitch. I simply believe she is selling her soul cheaply for social status and a level of personal and public power. She may not want to rule the world, but I believe she likes having people look up to her, seeing her as someone in charge, as a community leader and role model. I believe she also enjoys the social position of being a senator's wife and all that comes with it - money, status, access. You ask how much power and money can you have when you're dead. I answer that for some women, their short-sighted desires outweigh the deadly risks thinking that even a short period of living their dreams is better than never having them at all. Harsh reality, but true.

Just as you view my opinion of her as skewed toward her being desirous of power and privilege, I see your opinion being overly apologetic for her. I'm sure you're just trying to make sure we all see both sides and, believe me, I do.From my own family experience (Aunts/Uncles/Cousins), I am more than aware of the affects a male dominant religious upbringing on a woman's psyche. I see it on display yearly at my family reunion. I have an aunt (my father's sister) who, along with her daughters, granddaughters and great-granddaughters, won't make a single decision without their men's input/instruction/approval. These women are very intelligent - in fact any one of them could have been full ride college scholarship winners IF my uncle would have allowed them to go beyond high school. My first cousins were the last generation of my Aunt's family to attend public school. All the grandchildren and great-grandchildren have been home-schooled. The boys and girls get married pretty much right after graduating with the males getting jobs and the females staying home. IF any woman has a job outside the home, it is only within the church. My male cousin that's my age was a grandfather twice over by his mid-30's! It kills me every year to see my female cousins slip further and further down the submissive ladder. We all grew up together, and I remember how smart, confident and socially outgoing they were. Now they seem shells of their former selves. The thing is, I know full well that they CHOSE this life. My very large family stays in touch with each other and we all have differing religious and political views, but everyone is accepted and all views are irrelevant to our relationships. My aunt and female cousins know that there are options and they can walk away at anytime - some other family member have left that church and/or spouses - but they continue in their way of life and teaching it to each new generation.

Before commenting, I thoroughly read the articles with an open mind and if I have doubts or questions, I search for more info. I consider all sides and weigh my comments carefully before publishing them. I have repeatedly said, I do have sympathy, patience and empathy for women who are, for lack of a better term, trapped. It's just from reading about the Jordan's relationship, public image and political aspirations, my gut just tells me she is not among them. My gut is rarely wrong.

Very true, sites like this and others greatly expand social awareness on how many amoral politicians exist. And I find that itself bittersweet considering the cons seemingly outweight the pros, and we're literally looking for Roses in a Field of Weeds when trying to determine who is most capable.

You could be right about it effecting his ability as a politician; yet to a certain extent I see things like that in the " man can be a saint on the streets, while  monstrous at home"  light; which leads me to wonder if a man can possibly screw up certain aspects of the world while assisting it in others simultaneously. (crazier shit has happened.)

i just realized i'm replying to myself, but this is an intended response to you Roocifer. (and i'm too tired and lazy to try my hand at copy-paste roulette at the moment.)

Goodnight Sir, or Ma'am.

I agree.  One thing that I really appreciate about the 24-hour news cycle is that stories about politicians that would otherwise go unnoticed are displayed for all to see.  At the very least we are being confronted on an almost daily basis with stories of how our elected representatives are so very flawed.  Knowledge is always a good thing. 

Although I disagree that it would affect his ability to be a politician only because if a person can't treat their spouse well then what hope do we have that he'll give the electorate a fair shake?  At least we know that he's not a good person now.  We can use that to assume that he treats a lot of people this way which is more evidence then we have on the rest of these bums.  I do think there are a few, very few, politicians who are good people but the trick is in finding out who they are.  Stories like this help us weed out the people we do not want in politics. 

I think you make a lot of sense, and its always good to view things from a variety of angles while remaining objective, and realizing that in such matters we're all basically tossing stones into the Bottomless-WHAT-iF? pool of conjecture.

Not to sound cynical, but things like this occur with such frequency that everyone is choosing between a lesser of perceived evils at any rate; so we can only hope the lesser of evils happen to have more power than the worst of them, and share our insight into matters we feel most passionate about.

I think society puts too much emphasis on maintaining the I'm Morally Perfect and Never Make Mistakes illusion so much that some of them genuinely believe that even ONE individual involved in politics is morally flawless.

If this nut has a terrible history of repeatedly knocking his wife around I would say can his ass, but an isolated incident that got press coverage because of the individuals status is certainly a lesser of evils and would not in, and of itself effect his ability as a politician. (it would just make him a hypocrite in a world full of them)

Many of them are scumbags, who would only be replaced by a lesser of lesser-evils anyway.

Good posting.

Pete, I've wondered if its not simply a more selfish motive on her part, perhaps their continued relationship strengthens her own political ties somehow. Or shes being pressured by others to stay with him and put on the "brave, forgiving wife standing by her man" Face for the cameras. Who knows, I agree with your assessment of the weirdness involved.

I have to spell check.  I am the worst!  Like, ever!  Epically bad speller.  I was always the first person out in the spelling bee.  :(

This is another interesting thing.  You only seem to give her credit in any area when that credit serves to make her look even worse.  She's a shallow money grubbing trophy wife when she's not pressing charges against her husband and she's a an important member of the political establishment when she's keeping track of important documents (a number of which are kept by the federal government, IRS, military, while she merely files them).  Those two views are not in opposition, but it's interesting because you seem to want to put her down as a person when it suits your assumption that she's a money grubber and compliment her when it suits your assumption that she's a money grubber. 

LOL! I never even thought to try that. : )

So apparently you can't cut and paste from Word.  Good to know.  lol

Argument against limited intelligence: 

I did not mean naive about her relationship.  Many women, and I'd even say especiallyreligious women, are naive about life. It's a powerful motivator in relationships if someone is telling you howto handle the big scary world out there, and you were raised to defer to yourhusband.  And, there are plenty of intelligentyet naive people.  They are usuallyreferred to as idealists. 

Argument for desire for Power:

I read that she was appointed to the position.  That usually requires very little forpositions of such little power. 

Argument for desire of Privilege:

See, this is my real issue. I just think you're jumping to one conclusion out of a number ofpossible ones.  Sure, it's totallypossible that she's loving every bit of the power that being the wife of astate senator brings.  It's also totallypossible that she loves the attention, that she's scare if she leaves him he'llkill her, that her parents don't believe in divorce and she doesn't want toanger them, that her church friends will ostracize her, that she thinks divorceis a sin, that she thinks that men have a right to beat their wives, that shebelieves everything he says after years of verbal abuse and thinks she's a badperson who deserves it.  You see mypoint.  There are many possiblereasons.  I just don't think there's anyevidence that definitively points to her being so hard up for power that she'lllet a guy take out a gun and, presumably, insinuate that he's going to killher.  How much power and money can youhave when you're dead? 

Argument for leaving her shallow, dumb ass to deal with the shit she insists onfeeding herself until she chokes on it:

This is why I question your position.  It's normal to think she's being stupid.  It's normal to wonder what the hell is wrongwith her, whether she has emotional problems, whatever.  You seem to actively dislike this woman forno reason other than the fact that she wouldn't press charges, and then youactively assume that you know exactly why she won't and that, surprise, it'sall about her being a shallow, power-hungry leech which is another way you'reshowing that you actively dislike her.

I'm confused because there doesn't seem to be a way for thiswoman to be anything but a power hungry trophy wife.  It seems tautological in the sense that youassume she must be a selfish power hungry bitch because she stays and then you usethat assumption to justify having no sympathy for her.  Your evidence and conclusion seem to be thesame thing: She's a power hungry bitch. 

I don't totally disagree with you in your assessment of theissue.  I just don't understand thevitriol and assumptions.    

While it's not a job that people are fighting to have, there's a little more than pushing papers in a Recorder's Office. Her description is pretty dumbed down. Filing, recording, tracking, processing all those legal docs takes quite a lot of attention to detail. One misfile, can far reaching effects in property ownership, county revenue, taxes (local and federal), construction (and thereby public safety). Also, as you mentioned the keeping of Military Service Discharges, any misfile of those records could very well affect an individual's receiving government entitlements due him/her or descendants. Not glamorous, nor exciting, but important none the less.

Exactly!

Maybe, MAYBE she is insecure and depressed, but I won't give you naive. She's been in the relationship long enough that claiming so would only indicate a severely limited intelligence. From what I have read, I do not believe her to be lacking in that area.

Argument against limited intelligence: She holds a public office and, while that particular office may not be considered one of the most mentally demanding, a certain level of intellect is required to navigate the various governmental channels and legal processes with which it comes. Now, granted she could be a true dim bulb relying on others to do her work, but then that would insinuate the whole county is of an even lower intellectual level. Or maybe they are insecure and naive.Argument for desire for Power: Unless she ran for this publicly elected position against her will (meaning her forced her) and her winning was rigged as a political favor for her husband, she obviously has some political savvy and desire to be in a position of power (even if it is somewhat limited). She  also continues to publicly support her husband' political career and aspirations by playing along as the morally upstanding role model to all women.

Argument for desire of Privilege: I don't have to look much further than her own words, "Because I called you, he wants, he says it's over . . . I made a mistake. I don't want to go through this anymore." The last could be interpreted at fearful remorse, but when taken along with ALL her remarks, I see it as her realizing that by calling the police that everything becomes public record thereby threatening her social position. Her refusal to press charges is her attempt to keep the status quo - that being socially privileged life of a state senator's wife whose husband has plans to continue climbing the political ladder.

Argument for leaving her shallow, dumb ass to deal with the shit she insists on feeding herself until she chokes on it: She has had multiple, MULTIPLE opportunities to leave prior to this event and I will grant her the benefit of the doubt for only those times. I will not, however, give her ANY slack over not taking THIS opportunity to leave. She now has it on public record that not only was he being abusive on that particular evening, but stated that it is a common occurrence, yet she decides NOT press charges and stay with this  morally corrupt immature asshat. Opportunity knocks, and for some it knocks often until he's heard, but at some point Opportunity gets tired of constantly putting himself out there, says "FUCK YOU IF YOU CAN'T TAKE A HINT!" and walks away forever. My gut says Opportunity isn't coming back any time soon for her delusional ass.

It sounds to me that she's more nterested in trying to keep up the picture perfect image of the all American couple. Some people will put up with anything for the appearance of perfection. All it is, is an illusion.

I read that her job is county recorder.  It's not that important.  Let me give you an example.  Her website says this about her job:

As your recorder, I am responsible for all real estate and personal property records for Delaware County.   Real Estate records include such items as Deeds, Mortgages, IRS Liens, Mechanics Liens, Land Contracts, Plats, Zoning Resolutions, and similar instruments.  Recorders are also responsible for keeping records of  Military Service Discharges."

She's basically a secretary, a paper-pusher, and she was appointed to this position so she didn't even have to do things like speak in public or go door-to-door. 

I attribute her personality more to the fact that they are apparently avid churchgoers, although every politician in even the most remotely middle-American town has to be, they are apparently pretty involved beyond the "normal" obligatory Sunday service.  

I totally and completely agree it's really, really weird that she's calling her parents and stuff.  I don't know what purpose it serves to tell your parents that you think your husband is abusive and then stay with him.  What kind of passive aggressive BS is that?  She may just want attention.  Maybe that's why she stays.  Maybe their twisted little romance is what they both want in a relationship.  She gets to be a victim to everyone and he gets to be an asshole to her.  It's postmodern S&M. 

The weird thing about this case, Roocifer, is that the woman is apparently fairly big in the Republican Party, otherwise she wouldn't have that job. I suppose that still doesn't rule out being insecure or naive, but she doesn't fit the stereotype of the cloistered and controlled women you usually find in these cases.

Then again, she also married a guy who still has an 1800s view of women -- "Oh, the fairer sex, they're so emotional!" And then she calls him mom when he misbehaves.

It's kind of like they're both in their 30s but with the maturity of 16-year-olds or something. It's really weird.

I agree that it's her choice after a point.  I also agree that I have little sympathy for a woman who stays when it's an ongoing pattern of abuse.  But, I don't agree that the conclusion must then be, "She's obviously in it for the power and privilege."  She could be in it for the same reasons why poor women stay in abusive relationships. 

As far as her calls are concerned, maybe she wanted help, advice, to threaten him into not abusing her again.  Who knows?  My personal belief is that abusive long-term relationships are too complicated to boil down to a generalization that she likes being a trophy wife.  She's probably an insecure, naive and possibly depressed woman with a lot of ambivalent feelings about her situation. 

I think we should look at these women as having a mild form of Stockholm syndrome.  Some people are just emotionally more likely to excuse this kind of dominant behavior in a partner.  I assume you would not say that a kidnap victim likes being held prisoner (a la Bill O'Reiley and the Shawn Hornbeck case, yeah, he said it.  That guy's an asshole.).  A abusive relationship can mirror that dynamic.  I'm sure not all of them do, but I can't say for sure on this one. 

Have we ever heard from someone married to a powerful man who admits they stayed in an abusive relationship because of the perks?  Some famous actor or politician's wife maybe?  With all the tell-alls people do nowadays I wouldn't be surprised.  I'd be curious to see what they say.  I'll try to look up some.  

Whats your point then Gryp? She shouldn't leave because he will kill her? He may just do that if she stays. I understand what you are saying. But to me that is just another way in reinforcing that these women are somehow "powerless" to leave. Thats just what these S.O.B.'s WANT them to believe.

Yes, the most dangerous time for the abused is when they leave the abuser.

I'm not saying you don't know.  You clearly do.  I am simply saying I was not weak, you were not weak, this isn't an issue of weakness.The abuser tells us we're weak or makes us think we are.  That doesn't mean we are.  Society - and even well-meaning people such as yourself - saying an abuse victim is weak matters, because it reinforces what the abused have already had ingrained into them.Like I said, using words like that - and words matter - helps the abuser.  You can make a different choice.  You can recognize that you were naive, or that your perception was skewed, and still see that you were not weak or you wouldn't have made it here.She's not weak, either.  She's powerful, as powerful as you or I have allowed ourselves to be.  Don't help her abuser hide that from her.A wise woman told me very recently:  There's a word I wish people would focus on: encourage. Think about what gives you courage. Is it when someone tells you you're a coward? No, it's when someone says, "I know how scary this is, but I believe in you and I know you have overcome before and I know you can overcome this."

Words matter.  You found the doorway, the way out.  Hold that door open.  You see what I'm saying?

Okay so "weak" might be a blanket statement but it is a realistic word none the less. One might say, she has been made "weak" by the systematic abuse. But I just think that it is a form of weakness. I am sorry if that offends you, I don't in any way shape or form think it is okay to beat a woman. Anymore than I think it is okay for a woman to stay with a man for years as he all but kills her every other day in front of her children. I know leaving isn't easy. IT takes strength just as much as staying alive does.  And if someone finds the word 'weak' as shaming....STAYING THERE seems shameful to me. But I am not trying to shame anyone who has been abused. I KNOW it is a difficult cycle. With multifaceted psychological issues involved. But we are talking about "supporting" such victims and I think we do that by getting them out....we can only do that if they willingly go. AGAIN I was a victim of domestic violence. I can accept my part in being naive enough to be blinded from the truth that was in front of my face. But when and until I saw what I needed to do for myself...I did it. If I can, anyone can. It just takes it coming to a point for the woman  finally decides it's time to go. But sometimes it comes to late. Compounded by the issue of "leaving him" being the most dangerous of all. Believe me I know.

Thanks Whit.....;)