I agree on that. If Kirk is the nominee, the RATs are only in danger of "losing" on paper. In reality, Kirk is a defacto Democrat and will be Harry Reid's 61st vote in the Senate. It's a net gain for the Dems, since Kirk's "bipartisan" support for Obama's agenda will be much more effective for their cause than our current tainted lame duck RAT Senator Roland Burris is. Check Kirk's voting record (pro-abortion on demand, pro-banning all guns, pro-gay marriage, pro-amnesty, pro-TARP, pro-cap n' trade, anti-Iraq surge, just voted in favor of transferring terrorists out of Gitmo, etc.) He's so liberal he's actually to the left of over a dozen DEMOCRAT Illinois state legislators.
Pro TARP? Hell even George W Bush was for TARP. So was Cheney.
So was McCain and Palin......NONE of them voiced opposition to TARP. It was the politically “correct” thing to do at the time.
I don’t care about Kirk’s social agenda....I am mostly concerned about where does he stand on fiscal conservatism such as reducing/eliminating budget deficits, tax cuts for small businesses etc.
So you are saying that having a 100% rating by NARAL isn’t good? /sarcasm
BillyBoy, is anyone else (I mean republican or conservative) who is running for the Senate seat? Will there be a repub primary? Will we have a choice besides Kirk?