Posted on 10/07/2010 8:49:15 PM PDT by Inyokern
In 2010, the citizens of Illinois should send to the Capitol a senator who will bring expertise and independence. The candidate who fits that bill is Mark Kirk.
Today the Tribune endorses Kirk, a Republican, for the U.S. Senate seat that Roland Burris soon vacates. To understand our verdict, watch Giannoulias and Kirk's appearance before us this week. You'll find the video at chicagotribune.com/senate. Judge each man's depth and preparedness for the job. Judge knowledge and scope. Judge accomplishment. Judge which candidate has a proven record of thoughtful independence — of bucking his party when the good of this nation is at stake. You won't have difficulty making these judgments.
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...
This is a strange example of "class warfare" in which one group, the quite wealthy and comfortable (and more power to them and congratulations) feel entitled to be the first and perhaps only priority for a far more complex political coalition, constantly costing that coalition the ability to attract many socially conservative but economically moderate Democrats and thereby cause the election of leftists in many places (South Boston, New Haven, Springfield MA, the Buffalo area, for four examples of many).
If this is "class warfare" it is being waged against the general population by the spoiled Muffies, Skippers, Junior Leaguers, polo afficionados and yacht basin mavens. If you think that 39.5% on marginal income over $250,000 for those enjoying such income is some sort of intolerable burden compared to 35% for those just below that level, you are eating your own. The word parasite comes to mind as more descriptive, particularly when social issue conservatives have NEVER moved against those upper bracket tax cuts, have never thrown the politically inconvenient and costly off the movement wagon and have gotten little in return.
I tend to be a populist conservative and there are far more of us in American history and in conservatism than there are folks who lose sleep over what the tax code does modestly on taxable income above $250,000. Our nation and its people are being hammered relentlessly by the results of complex and ultragreedy maneuvers of Wall Street manipulators: derivatives, a relentless drive for issuance of tax-free municipal and state bonds to effect tax-free transfers of income from the general population to the investor class (by no means are all of them conservative in the slightest). I tend to think and so did Reagan that we would be better off living within our means even if that disappoints gummint employee unions and socialist dream merchants as well as those who work the tax code to avoid any burden.
In Illinois, there is NO GOP candidate describable as such, just Nancyboy Kirk, plaything of the spoiled who wants to kill babies, end the status of marriage, encourage moral corruption of the young, resist the military expenditures that are among the few actually constitutional expenditures if the fedgov, etc.
I am still waiting for your resume of actual conservative activity and accomplishments. I gather I wait in vain and that there is nothing you can credibly post other than relentless support for the likes of Nancyboy because the corruptocrats who run the Illinois GOP rig primaries to nominate such trash. I will venture the guess that other than running your keyboard for designer tax cuts even at the expense of everything else conservative, you have zero, zip, nada to point to. Opinions are like, ummmm, noses. Each of us has opinions and, ummm, noses. So what?
I also await your response as to whether, like me, you reside in the specially corrupt state of Illinois and will therefore have to live with the non-existence of a meaningfully conservative Illinois GOP with the corruptocrats posing as such being fueled by money raked in for them by Nancyboy and his ilk. I would venture a guess that you do not live here or we would be hearing about it.
If you keep on ignoring all other actually conservative issues in your single-minded willingness to throw the entire movement overboard for a single issue designer tax cut, then we may reasonably draw the conclusion that you are not very conservative much less qualified to attack the bona fides of those who are and have the track record to prove it.
Adding to my previous resume, I acted for many years as a volunteer pro bono attorney for arrested pro-lifers, 1100 of them. 30 were convicted of anything (even the equivalent of parking tickets), mostly because it was more convenient to pay a fine of <$100 on a plea of nolo contendere (I choose not to contest) than to keep traveling back for repeated court appearances. Only 10 of the 30 did any jail time post-conviction and none more than 30 days. Their individual militancy produced the results. I also was a volunteer attorney for several tax protesters and NRA members arrested by overexuberant and liberal authorities. None were ever convicted.
Now, what were your credentials and residence again? Oh, wait....
Let's reshuffle the deck. Suppose that we have the choice between a who is pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, anti-morality, anti-gun, anti-military BUT who would nonetheless keep the Bush tax cuts on taxable income above $250K per annum while caring little about taxes below that level unless the cuts on the BIG income are included (someone like Nancyboy Kirk) and is nominally a Republican and another candidate who is pro-life, pro-marriage, pro-sexual normality and morals, pro-gun, pro-military and places first priority taxwise on extending the moratorium on the marriage penalty and other cuts for folks of modest means even if that means no cherry or whipped cream on the sundae of the uppercrust but is nominally a Democrat (like, say Ben Nelson of Nebraska). Which one is the conservative candidate? Is it because of the D or R next to the name or because of the upper crust tax policy? Or is it Ben Nelson because he is with us (despite party affiliation) on far more issues and far more important issues? If you run and hide and refuse or fail to answer, your silence will be your answer and define you out of the conservative movement.
I have no political or moral obligation to vote your class interests and to ignore the interests of others. That is no more class warfare than is your insistence that the entire conservative movement jeopardize itself and our nation to satisfy the single issue incessant demands of those who focus exclusively on uppercrust tax cuts at the expense of everything else.
Reagan was verrrrry careful about who he campaigned for. He chose Richard Schweiker as a running mate in 1976 and Schweiker was reliable on babies, morality and guns but a lot less so on spending and taxes. The price of Poppy Bush being his running mate in 1980 was Poppy's abandonment of the traditional Bush family adherence to Planned Barrenhood, on whose national board of directors, his mother long served along with Peggy Goldwater. Those days of Planned Barrenhood connections for the GOP and "conservatives" are over and they ain't coming back.
See #141. Meant to ping you.
Yeah, another sermon fixated on ONE issue telling everyone else that THEY should not be fixated on one issue even though they are not. That is sooo convincing.
“Socially conservative” democrats LMAOFOTF. Are they riding unicorns, too?
Just as I said you are not espousing conservative ideas merely populist ones. Not that I am against populism per se but don’t pretend that it is conservatism. If either word has any meaning today.
No one says that taxing high incomes is particularly harmful to those earning such. The point is that it damages the WHOLE economic structure because it reduces investment and slows economic growth. I could care less if someone has to buy a cheaper caviar.
And apparently you are unaware that the rich actually wind up paying MORE when the tax rates fall or that government actually takes MORE taxes. Fortunately the RATs have not understood this either.
Tax reductions are necessary to get the economy moving and not temporary cuts but PERMANENT ones. Raising the capital gains tax is particularly stupid and counterproductive and harms the entire economy.
You will also find FAR more support for the list of issues you are concerned about among those pushing for tax cuts than you will among the class warriors you join. EVERY single issue The Greek comes down on the opposite side of you. He is much worse than Kirk on everything.
And now you are embarrassing YOURSELF by adopting wholesale the class warfare rhetoric Reagan abhorred.
I'm not a pro-life absolutist or a single issue pro-life voters.
I've held my nose and voted for the occasion "pro-choice" Republican because they were still clearly better than the than the Democrat. Some of the "pro-choice" Republicans at least supported parential notification and opposed late-term abortion, for example.
That being said...
Kirk is such a leftist scumbag that he brags about scoring a 100% rating from NARAL and Planned Parenthood every year. The socialist combiner is so damn liberal he even convinced Planned Parenthood to endorse him OVER an Chicago machine slated Obama clone on several occasions. He even continues to support partial birth abortion when the vast majority of voters are against it. So much more "Kirk only votes that way because he's a blue state and doing what the voters wants" blah blah blah.
And after continually voting the extreme left position on abortion and gloating about how much he's done to support the abortion industry, this man has the gall to call himself a "Social moderate". And his friends in the liberal media shamelessly repeat the lie over and over again.
Any person who supports partial birth abortion is so out of touch with basic human decency that they're not fit to serve as village clerk... let alone U.S. Senator.
I assume you saw this thread?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-gop/2608332/posts
More similarities between CA and IL
By saying that the overwhelming majority of Americans, folks of modest means, ought be able to defend their own interests, I am not embarrassing myself nor could I. Oh, and you certainly don't speak for Ronald Reagan.
The resume please!
The reason that conservative positions are more likely to be supported by "those pushing for tax cuts" is because, contrary to the hilarious fantasies of the single-minded tax obsessives, most who push for tax cuts (for everyone and not just for the poor offended wealthy and single-minded) do so as part of the conservative movement as a whole, a coalition of many issues. You don't like to be called to account over the failure of the spoiled to rally to conservative causes OTHER than their own economic self-interest. In Connecticut, nineteen years ago, the anti-tax movement (a part of the conservative movement) was abandoned by the wealthy whom we had loyally supported for decades when Lowell Weicker (Connecticutese for the AntiChrist) made them a better deal as part of a general state income tax. We thought through their political treason, divorced them and felt liberated to be done with them. Either these folks do their part within the movement or they should not let the door hit them in the derriere on their way out.
We cannot do without social conservatives but we can do very well and prosper politically by divorcing folks like you.
No resume yet from you which one expects. What COULD you possibly point to in self-defense? Also no indication that you live in Illinois which would help qualify you to tell me whom I should support to be MY US Senator or that you have any stake whatsoever in the continued dominance of the Illinois GOP by a self-perpetuating clique of corrupt tools of the Chicago Demonratic Machine who would be funded by the efforts of their marionette, the despicable Nancyboy.
Just as Carter was elected as the prelude to Reagan, so will Giannoulias be elected as a prelude to the destruction of DIABLO control of the Illinois GOP and the election of actual conservatives to run this state. Check the polls on Illinois and you will find that Bill Brady is far more electable than is Nancyboy Kirk, the Demonrat in faux GOP drag. You also have no clue as to the politics of Illinois.
You apparently do not get the point. Giannoulias is a temporary expedient that facilitates long-term better results by having him be a Demonrat holding Demonrat views rather than giving Nancyboy a Senate seat to continue the dominance of Illinois by anti-American social revolutionaries posing as either Demonrats or Republicans. First, isolate the bad guys in one party, the Demonratic Party. Then, controlling the GOP, systematically (politically) exterminate the force of evil that is the Demonrats (whatever they may call themselves in the cases of Nancyboy, Jim Thompson, Judy Topinka, Tom Doublecross, and the abortionist witch who is the "GOP" State Senate leader. Nancyboy is the current posterboy of the corruptocrats running the Illinois GOP. Nancyboy must be driven from public life and not promoted. His scalp must be added to those elsewhere of Mike Castle, Charlie Crist and their ilk. They will not be missed. You are all hat and no cattle and have posted nothing yet to demonstrate that you are other than a single and minor issue obsessive. You have demonstrated no claim on membership in the conservative movement much less in Illinois and no grip whatsoever on reality.
Oh, and I probably read Jude Wanniski's The Way the World Works before you ever heard of it so I scarcely need instruction from the likes of you on supply side economics. AND I care less whether people buy caviar at all. If they earn their money, it is theirs to spend as they wish.
It seems from that thread the IL GOP has only themselves to blame because they delayed printing the ballots for so long in order to throw the Constitution Party off the ballot. Sure will be ironic if RINO scumbag Kirk loses on election night because the military votes aren't counted. Probably won't affect Brady, he's ahead by 9 points. But Kirk is dead even with the Chicago machine goon in the polls.
Another interesting twist (Oct. surprise?), the Green Party nominee for Governor, Richard Whitney, is expected to take votes away from the Dem. But now they're apparently a "typo" on the ballots that misspells his name as "Rich Whitey", and of course this "typo" is only in regions with large black populations. Hmmm.
One parrell I see between IL and CA is we're always told that it's such a "blue state", but we have an large number of Reaganesque state senators that the state party will never support for higher office. But many of them manage to make it thur primaries and win in the general election anyway, and make fine Congressmen. They'd win statewide as well, if the state party would lift a finger to help them instead of the "electable moderates" who routinely get about 40% of the vote statewide.
Oops... you took me too literally. Similarities: idiots running the state party, going to great lengths to support RINOs, etc.
I read on another thread that they will be working overtime to correct the “Rich Whitey” thing. It’s amazing that the public had to shame election officials into coming to that conclusion.
I agree about the claims to being a “blue state.” I try to challenge every 100th poster that says “it is the best we can hope for in a blue state” or some similarly shallow comment. It’s like an army of those wind-up dolls with the voicebox in their back. Someone winds them up and sends them on threads to repeat the same thing, over and over, LOL.
Kirk and Ben “Obamacare” Nelson can both go to hell as far as I’m concerned.
“Just a dim with an R behind his name.”
Didn’t the idiot vote for cap and trade? Any politician that votes to tax breathing isn’t a fiscal conservative.
No one needs justify their posts to YOU of all people. And no one cares about your alleged activity forty years ago when you are working NOW to put another corrupt RAT in the Senate.
You ability to spew meaningless crap by the yard does not help any argument you posit.
Nor does it justify putting another RAT in the Senate. Or using the favorite class warfare rhetoric of the Leftists.
Your silence as to your non-existent conservative credentials is deafening and defining. You aren't kidding anyone. You imagine that all of conservatism can be reduced to your obsession with cutting your upper bracket taxes now and always and everything else (including all important issues) be da*ned. Try and succeed without social conservatives.
If we are going to have a war for the soul of the GOP, may it start with the defeat of Nancyboy Kirk in Illinois. The life of one baby is worth infinitely more than your mind-bogglingly inane and politically counterproductive tax cut for the big shots scenario. Are there more social conservatives or more folks with annual incomes exceeding $250,000 and therefore panting for that upper bracket tax cut.
BTW, there was a NY Times article by Christopher Caldwell of the Weekly Standard dated 10/18?/10 in which he writes that of the 20 wealthiest zip codes in the USA, 19 are Demonrat in orientation, and performance. Maybe you should go over there with those other guys. And good riddance.
Social conservatives electing Ronald Reagan massively cut your precious taxes. They can see how grateful you are. Your economic and political attitudes are every bit as much an entitlement mentality as any welfare queen and about as welcome.
Why is it that neither major party has ever bragged that it gets more money from the fat and satisfied??? Both try to claim the allegiance of more economically modest Americans. Neither party wants to be associated with the image of airheads Muffy and Skipper down at the polo club or yacht basin and their embarrassingly snobby and brain dead ways.
Liberals (like Nancyboy and Giannoulias) are resp0nsible for 50+ million dead babies (sliced, diced, flayed alive and hamburgerized). Eliminate the Nancyboy baby killers from the GOP and then isolate them in the Demonratic Party where they belong and then destroy the Demonrats. Giannoulias is a lightweight and a temporary distraction on his way to prison and in a party on its way to oblivion. Nancyboy is more likely to become a permanent pestilence supporting and being supported by the worst elements ever to infest the GOP.
At least the "corrupt RAT" reflects the beliefs of his party's members in Illinois. See: Obama, Hussein and Durbin, Dick. When, in the future, he goes, they all go. Nancyboy reflects the "values" of San Fransicko, Greenwich Village and Fire Island, is utterly opposed to the GOP agenda on issues that matter and will fund and reward and serve as a political and financial life support system for that narrow slice of left Combine "Republicans" who are his only real constituency.
Social conservatives who cannot bring themselves to cast a full vote against Nancyboy Kirk by voting for the equally corrupt and immoral (as to public issues) Demonrat, can vote for Mike Labno the pro-life, pro-marriage and pro-gun Libertarian nominee. That would also help the Libertarians to gain ballot access and be a permanent thorn in the feet of the corruptocrats, destructocrats, RINOs and DIABLOs (all like Nancyboy posing as "Republicans") who have brought us Jim Thompson, Jim Edgar, Lyin' George Jailbird Ryan, Judy Baahbaah Toopinka, and, of course, Nancyboy Kirk. When the GOP is effectively purged, then we can consider letting Libertarian ballot position fade.
Retired Boston University professor (and Reagan White House staffer) Angelo Codavilla is right in identifying a narrow numerical Ruling Class (that would be Obama, Nancyboy and the Combine, i.e., THEM and apparently YOU, for this argument) and a much broader and larger (if not quite as unanimous) Country Class (that would be the US but not YOU). See his American Spectator article of July/August 2010 and the book that grew from it. Codavilla is likely the first accurate analyst of the GOP and conservative future.
IF Nancyboy Kirk manages to be elected (may God forbid), his destruction as a political figure will be every bit as important to Illinois conservatives as destroying Lowell Weicker was to Connecticut conservatives. May the Cook County hearses roll on election day as never before. It is about time that the cemetery vote did something for America and destroying Kirk (and Topinka too) is a something well worth accomplishing. The Country Class is more beer and brats and less brie and chablis, more NFL and MLB and NASCAR and LESS Robert Mapplethorpe and NPR and Nancyboy, if you are able to get the point.
Don't like it??? Create your own rich boys' party. See how that works for ya.
On reflection, you are probably right as to Nelson as well. It is sooooo hard to find a Demonrat worth voting for on the basis of positive reasons. Nelson is 70 and needs to go home to enjoy his retirement. We need to elect a Nebraska senator to replace him who is not a Chuck Hagel type.
Wow buying that class warfare, lock stock and barrel.
Since there is no pressing need to address your insane babble it may molder for quite a while without being honored with my attention. In any case most of your screeds are merely debates with straw men of your own making there is nothing I can add to them.
Keep on trying to elect RATS we have no need of such RINOS as yourself.
Anyone knowledgeable of economics knows that taxing “the rich” just reduces the ability of the economy to grow. Let me guess: your unemployment has run out.
Most real social conservatives recognize the foolishness of class warfare and tax the rich mentality and want no part of either. Nor do they want any part of pseudo-conservatives like yourself.
ping to previous post. I forgot to include you in the list.
This Senate Seat’s history. In ‘92 it was occupied by centrist Dem Al-the-pal-Dixon. House Minority Leader, Bob Michels (R-Peoria) said the Republicans would never get a majority in congress and therefore Republicans should vote for Al-the-pal-Dixon because he funneled money to the Republican side of the establishment (later called the bipartisan combine).
House Minority Leader Michels and the bi-partisan combine put up Williamson (now IL GOP Committeeman) to take a dive against GOP supported Al-the-Pal.
Talkradio people and Ross Perot people were outraged and voted en-masse for the obscure Carole Mosley-Braun who beat the unbeatable Dixon. She went on to beat Williamson, who seems to only know how to take a dive as that seems to now be his counsel as IL GOP Committeeman even when it is a GOP year.
That loss to Braun set up the win by Peter Fitzgerald in ‘98 against Braun. 100% of us who supported Braun in ‘92 supported Fitz in ‘98. Fitzgerald is clearly the best thing that has ever happened to IL politics, and to the IL GOP in our lifetime.
So in that case, the long range strategy of supporting the Dem over the bipartisan combine worked. Such a strategy doesn’t always work. It is up to us to make it work.
I voted for Labno. I won’t need to apologize.
If any of you vote for Kirk, you will need to apologize to the rest of us repeatedly in the coming years. Some of you will be so embarrassed you will cease to post here ...or change your screen name.
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.