http://newiprogressive.com/images/stories/S5/jim-jordan-2023-s448.jpgAs he runs for Speaker, a Green Bay progressive discusses Jim Jordan and his dubious qualifications.

GREEN BAY - I've spent a considerable amount of time diving into the world of politics, observing individuals and their actions. Jim Jordan, a Congressman from Ohio, has caught my attention on numerous occasions, but for all the wrong reasons. While everyone is entitled to their own opinion, the actions and behavior of Jim Jordan raise serious concerns about his integrity, both as an individual and as a representative of the American people.

1. The Ohio State Scandal

First, let's talk about the Ohio State scandal. During his tenure as an assistant wrestling coach at Ohio State University, there were allegations of sexual misconduct by the team doctor, Richard Strauss. Multiple wrestlers have come forward, claiming that they reported the abuse to Jordan, and he did nothing. It's deeply concerning that someone in a position of power and responsibility could overlook or ignore such grave allegations. If these claims are true, it reflects a lack of moral responsibility on his part.

2. The Freedom Caucus and Ideological Extremism

Jim Jordan is a founding member of the Freedom Caucus, a group that has often been criticized for its hardline stance and resistance to compromise. While it's essential to hold onto one's beliefs, it's equally important to understand the necessity of collaboration in a democratic system. Jordan's approach with the Freedom Caucus has been about digging in heels, often at the cost of progress and to the detriment of the American people.

3. The "Big Lie" and January 6

One of the most concerning aspects of Jordan's political career is his support for the "Big Lie" – the false claim that the 2020 presidential election was stolen. By perpetuating this unfounded claim, he contributed to the events that led up to the horrific attack on the U.S. Capitol on January 6. This wasn't just about a differing opinion or political strategy; this was about undermining the very foundation of our democracy: the belief in free and fair elections.

4. Boehner's "Terrorist" Remark

John Boehner, a fellow Republican and former Speaker of the House, referred to Jordan as a "legislative terrorist." This strong descriptor from someone within his own party highlights the divisive and confrontational tactics Jordan employs. It's alarming when a colleague feels compelled to use such language.

5. Liz Cheney's Perspective

Liz Cheney, another Republican representative, has been vocal about the importance of truth and integrity within the GOP. While she didn't call out Jordan by name, her insistence on holding members accountable for perpetuating the "Big Lie" and for their roles in the events leading up to January 6 speaks volumes. When individuals within the same party voice concerns, it's essential to sit up and take note.

6. Opposition to Bipartisanship

One of the pillars of a successful democracy is the ability of politicians from opposing sides to come together for the greater good. However, Jordan has frequently shown a lack of interest in bipartisanship. For instance, he voted against the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019. This was a deal crafted by both parties to prevent another government shutdown and increase spending caps. Voting against such a measure demonstrates an unwillingness to work across the aisle for the nation's benefit.

7. Disregard for Health Care

In 2017, Jordan was at the forefront of pushing for a complete repeal of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) without a clear replacement. The ACA, for all its controversies, provided millions of Americans with health coverage. Advocating for its repeal without a comprehensive replacement plan shows a disregard for the well-being of many citizens.

8. Skepticism on Climate Change

In a time when the majority of scientists worldwide are raising alarm bells about climate change, Jordan's position remains skeptical. He's made statements questioning the human role in global warming and has consistently voted against environmental regulations aimed at reducing carbon emissions. At a time when urgent action is needed, such a stance is both radical and dangerous.

9. Contempt for Congressional Oversight

Jordan has often been in the spotlight for his combative stance during Congressional hearings, especially those aiming to hold individuals accountable. Whether it was during the impeachment hearings for former President Donald Trump or questioning witnesses during the Benghazi hearings, Jordan's aggressive approach often seemed more about creating a spectacle than genuine oversight.

10. Stance on Gun Control

In the wake of numerous tragic mass shootings in the U.S., there have been widespread calls for tighter gun control to prevent further loss of life. However, Jordan remains an ardent defender of expansive gun rights. He has consistently opposed measures such as universal background checks, which have broad public support.

11. Obsession with Impeaching Joe Biden

Since the inauguration of President Joe Biden, Jim Jordan has been vociferously vocal about impeaching him. This isn't based on clear evidence of high crimes or misdemeanors – the Constitutional requirement for impeachment – but appears to be more of a political vendetta. It's important to understand that impeachment is a grave and consequential process that shouldn't be used as a tool for political retribution. Using such a critical constitutional tool in this manner undermines its gravity and can erode the public's trust in our democratic processes.

12. Relentless Pursuit of Hunter Biden

Jim Jordan's interest in Hunter Biden, Joe Biden's son, has also raised eyebrows. While it's essential for politicians to be held accountable, there's a thin line between legitimate inquiry and political witch-hunting. The relentless focus on Hunter Biden, especially in the absence of concrete evidence of wrongdoing tied to Joe Biden, has often been viewed as a retaliatory move, especially in light of the investigations into former President Donald Trump and his associates. This pattern of "tit for tat" politics isn't what our nation needs. Instead of focusing on genuine issues affecting everyday Americans, such distractions serve to further polarize and divide.

13. The Prospect of Jordan as Speaker of the House

The role of the Speaker of the House is one of great significance. As the leader of the House of Representatives, the Speaker wields considerable influence over the legislative agenda, and they play a pivotal role in guiding the nation's policies. With Jim Jordan's track record, his ascension to this role could be problematic for several reasons.

Given his history of deeply partisan behavior and confrontational tactics, Jordan as Speaker might further deepen the divide in an already polarized political landscape. Instead of fostering an environment of collaboration and bipartisanship, there's a genuine concern that under his leadership, the House could become even more fractious.

Moreover, his penchant for pursuing personal vendettas and retaliatory politics, as seen in his obsession with impeaching Joe Biden and investigating Hunter Biden, raises questions about his ability to prioritize the nation's needs over personal or partisan grudges.

The Speaker's role is also to represent the House on the national and international stage. Given Jordan's controversial stances on various issues, from climate change skepticism to his association with the "Big Lie" about the 2020 election, having him as a representative voice could send the wrong message about where America stands on critical global issues.

14. Jordan's Stance on Ukraine: A Dangerous Path

Last, but certainly not least, is Jim Jordan’s vow to not to fund Ukraine. In the complex web of international relations, Ukraine holds a crucial position, particularly given its ongoing conflict with Russia and its strategic importance to Europe and NATO allies.

By vowing not to fund Ukraine, Jordan not only undermines a key ally in a volatile region but also sends a message that the U.S. might be wavering in its commitments to its allies. This could embolden adversaries, such as Russia, to take more aggressive stances, knowing that Ukraine might lack the support it needs from powerful allies like the U.S.

The repercussions of such a decision could be manifold:

Increased Instability in Eastern Europe: A less-supported Ukraine might be more vulnerable to external pressures and aggressions, leading to increased instability in the region.

Strain on NATO: U.S. commitment to its allies is a cornerstone of NATO. By not supporting Ukraine, it could strain relations within the alliance and raise questions about the U.S.'s commitment to collective defense.

Loss of U.S. Credibility: Other allies around the world, seeing the U.S. not stand firmly by Ukraine, might begin to doubt America's reliability. This could weaken diplomatic ties and make international collaborations more challenging.

Potential Humanitarian Crisis: A less secure Ukraine could face intensified conflict, leading to potential humanitarian crises, with increased displacements of people and civilian casualties.

Strengthening of Adversaries: A weakened alliance between the U.S. and Ukraine might embolden not only Russia but other global powers looking to challenge U.S. dominance in various regions.

Wrapping Up

In the intricate dance of international diplomacy, every decision, every stance taken, sends ripples across the global stage. Jordan's vow against funding Ukraine isn't just about one country; it's about upholding the values, commitments, and strategic interests of the U.S. on the global front. It's a dangerous path, one that could have repercussions far beyond the borders of Ukraine, affecting the very fabric of global geopolitics and America's place within it. We need leaders who understand these nuances and act with foresight, ensuring that the U.S. remains a strong, reliable force for good in the world.Leadership positions, especially one as crucial as the Speaker of the House, require individuals who can rise above party lines, unify differing factions, and work towards the collective good of the nation. Based on Jim Jordan's past actions and stances, there's a genuine concern that his leadership might steer the House, and by extension, the nation, in a direction that amplifies division rather than healing it. The American people deserve leadership that is balanced, thoughtful, and prioritizes the well-being of its citizens above all else.