Posted on 11/05/2009 12:20:20 PM PST by Mobile Vulgus
Only a few months ago, Representative Mark Kirk voted for Cap and Tax… er, I mean Cap and Trade. Conservatives and Republicans in general lit into Kirk with a vengeance. Then he started running for the Senate and at a subsequent September 5 campaign stop he reversed himself and decided he wouldn't support Cap and Trade.
Kirk is not a strong pro-life supporter, he is bad on the Second Amendment, Kirk is only middling on free trade, and he has drifted back and forth on sometimes support for Obama's left-wing, big spending agenda in Washington… though he is sometimes good on national defense. In all, Kirk is not quite as bad as N.Y. 23's Dede Scozzafava, but he is no Illinois Dough Hoffman if you want a current analogy.
Now comes a November 4 report by the Washington Post's Chris Cillizza that Kirk sent a memo to Fred Malek attempting to get Governor Sarah Palin's endorsement for his (Kirk's) Senate run. Cillizza claims that this Kirk request shows Palin's power and Kirk's worries for his campaign.
Kirk's memo is tangible evidence of the power of Palin's endorsement in a Republican primary. Kirk, a moderate by voting record in the House, is clearly very concerned about the negative impact a Palin endorsement of one of his primary opponents could have on his chances at being the party's nominee for the seat being vacated by appointed Sen. Roland Burris (D).
However, it is obvious by actually reading the memo that Cillizza is taking liberties with his claim that Kirk pleaded for Palin's support. The truth is that Kirk was far more cagey with his memo...
Read the rest at Publiusforum.com...
He will be unreliable at best on Life issues, guns, and taxes. He's about a 70%-ish Republican, which is Right-Wing here in Illinois.....sadly......
He is probably, in reality, the only Republican besides Mike Ditka who could win a Senate seat here - even during a GOP tidal wave year. Not an ideal choice, but worlds better than the Socialist IL Democrats that will fight for the seat.
Most interesting is his outreach to Sarah Palin. It demonstrates yet again that numbers, votes, and actual on-the-ground influence are in direct contradiction to the talking points of the press when it comes to Sarah.
Sarah could actually benefit from this if she chose to help Kirk. It would be the first true moderate “chit” built-up for a Presidential run, without having to stoop to a Scozzafava to show the GOP’s “big tent” credentials.
As one of the original Palin-istas, I hope that he does ask for her help, and that she helps (if only after the Primaries). It just makes her bigger, and the press more terrified.
Kirk is very moderate, but he at least falls on the side of Republican. It is Illinois, so he seems to be acceptable in the balance of viability versus Republican credential. Not my preference, but I can live with it.
By comparison, Dede Scuzz was a trojan horse in the make of Arlen Specter. It was better to lose that race than have her win and represent our party. If she had won it would have been a disaster.
If I remember correctly, Kirk’s district is more than 50% Democrat. As such, as a representative, he had to reflect his district. This explains his yo-yo’ing. It’s going to be hard to go for someone else, unfortunately, unless that person not only wows us, but demonstrates in polling that he could win. The sad fact is that for the longest time we have had two extreme left wingers in Illinois (Durbin and Obama), and to even have someone in the middle of the road may be a breath of fresh air. Of course, if we could get an electable conservative to run, I’d switch to him/her in a second, because we actually need to re-build the Republican party in Illinois, and RINO’s have done nothing but destroy it.
I also think she should wait until after the primaries, one way or the other.
I would also hope that, should she come out and support him, that part of the price be better support of the second amendment on his part.
I’m always wary of GOPers who are “bad” on the 2A. But, this being Chicagostan, there may be no help for it (although downstate may be a different story?).
First, as an IL resident I would be thrilled if a Mark Kirk type republican won. Remember, we have Dickie Dirtbag who is at the Pelosi level when it comes to contempt for socialism, spending other peoples money, and freedom — and Rollie Burris whose only concern now is getting more accolades to have engraved on his mausoleum. So even a Mark Kirk would be orders of magnitude improvement.
But, we deserve better. I hope the Club for Growth and other target IL as a state where a strong conservative might have a fighting change if the money were behind him. This election is an unprededented opportunity, yet it will still be hard to win “the Obama seat” away, especially when a sizable percentage of voters (living and otherwise) believe it is “an African-American seat”.
Read the truth for yourself. Kirk is so bad he's not even a RINO. This guy is a pure DIABLO (Democrat In All But Label Only), and he is totally unacceptable.
Mark Kirk's "moderate" record, 2007-Present
LEFITST GROUPS
- Voted with Planned Parenthood 100% of the time
- Voted with NARAL Pro-Choice America 100% of the time
- Voted with Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence 100% of the time
- Voted with National Council of La Raza 100% of the time
- Voted with the Sierra Club 96% of the time, which is more often than Obama does
- Voted with the ACLU 50% of the time
- National Education Association gave Kirk a grade of A+
- Citizens for Global Solutions gave Kirk a grade of B+
CONSERVATIVE GROUPS
- Voted with Taxpayers for Common Sense 33% of the time
- Voted with The Club for Growth 19% of the time (9 / 48 votes)
- Voted with Citizens for Tax Justice 17% of the time
- Voted with The Family Research Council 12% of the time
- Voted with American Family Association 0% of the time
- Voted with GOPUSA 0% of the time
- Voted with FAIR (Federation for American Immigration Reform) 0% of the time
- NRA gave Kirk an “F”
- Gun Owners of America gave Kirk a grade of “ F- “
Voted NO on troop surge in Iraq. (In May 2007, when 11 republican congressmen went to the White House and told Bush that they opposed the Iraq surge, Kirk was the group’s leader.)
Voted NO on allowing school prayer.
Voted NO on constitutionally defining marriage as between one-man-one-woman.
Voted NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions.
Voted NO on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime.
Voted NO on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad.
Voted NO to HJ Res. 3-Releasing Funds for Economic Stabilization Act (this act was sponsored by Republicans after the first 300 billion dollars went unaccounted for to block the remaining funds from being released without oversight)
Voted NO on a bill that would have required hospital employees to notify ICE agents when they treat illegal aliens.
Voted YES on Cap-n-Trade ( the ONLY Republican member of the Illinois congressional delegation that voted yes!) [HR 2454]
Voted YES on Democrat Charlie Rangel’s 90 percent bonus tax
Voted YES on allowing human embryonic stem cell research.
Voted YES on raising CAFE standards; incentives for alternative fuels.
Voted YES on prohibiting oil drilling & development in ANWR.
Voted YES on Overseas Military Facilities Abortion funding
Voted YES on Section 245 amnesty for illegal aliens in 2002
Voted YES on H.R.2 - the Democrat's SCHIP Program-basically an expansion of welfare (includes $1 tax on cigarettes to "fund" the program)
Voted YES on H.R. 3997-First Economic Bailout Package (this is the one that failed the first time through) and voted YES on HR-1424:Second Economic Bailout Package (this one was bigger than the first!)
Voted YES on final passage of legislation to transfer terrorist prisoners out of Gitmo and send them to the mainland.
Supported Nancy Pelosi's minimum wage hike that exempted businesses in her own district (Kirk excuse is that he didn't read the bill)
Co-sponsor of the anti-family, anti-faith "Hate Crimes" bill.
Co-sp onsored re-introducing the Equal Rights Amendment.
Co-sponsored signing on to UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Co-sponsored H.R. 6257, gun banning legislation which would "reinstate the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act. "
Co-sponsored Democrat bill to make "cyber bullying" a federal crime (ONLY Republican co-sponsor!)
• Mark Kirk voted to approve nearly $200 million for the Air Force to purchase three luxury aircraft for ferrying top government office and Members of Congress.
• Claims that he opposes all congressional earmarks, but he earmarked at least $5 million, each, in his limousine liberal district (the wealthiest in Illinois), for HUD, Head Start, local police departments, and commuter trains
• Only one of two Republicans NOT to co-sponsor auditing the Federal reserve.
Yeah! Just what we need! More Jim Jefford, Linc Chafee, and Arlen Specter type "Republicans" in the Senate! Why elect the official Democrat when we can elect the unofficial one?
If you think Roland Burris is bad, just wait to see what happens when "Republican" Mark Kirk is out there cheering for the exact same agenda but the media is able to milk it for all its worth by saying a "well respected Republican Senator" supports Obama's "bipartisan" plan. Mark Kirk will be more of an asset to Obama in the first month than the tainted lame duck loser Roland has ever been. Mark my words if you vote for Mark. I tried to warn conservatives about George Ryan, too.
You make some good points...damn I just wish they’d chop Chicago off at the collar counties and leave the rest of this state alone! I hear you - Mark Kirk is a rat. Maybe Rollie the Boo would be preferable, at least we know he wouldn’t be able to get anything done...
Thanks for the wake-up call!
=====================================================
Kirk Seeks Palin Endorsement One Year After Trashing Her
Kirk was one of the first elected Republican officials to raise concerns about Palin's selection as John McCain's vice presidential candidate. Back in October 2008, the Illinois Republican told the Chicago Tribune that he "would have picked someone different." Asked later whether he thought Palin was qualified to be one heartbeat away from being commander in chief, Kirk replied: "Quite frankly, I don't know."Quite a few other Republicans were distancing themselves from Palin around the same time. But Kirk was actually associated with the McCain campaign -- having bundled for the Senator -- making his remarks all the more of a distraction for the Arizona Republican.
Defeating Kirk has to take first priority because he is neither an economic nor a social conservative.
The race for New York's 23rd District is not over, just postponed until 2010 ... The real victors in this election are the ordinary men and women who voted for positive change and a return to fiscal sanity. Your voices have been heard.
I live in Rep. Kirk’s district, so I know that he’s more liberal than many Democrats. He’s pro-choice, pro-gun control, pro-gay marriage, pro-illegal alien, pro-spending increases, and anti-Iraq surge.
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.
– 
–