LMAO!! Sure, that's why Kirk wouldn't lift a finger to oppose Obama in 2008, got thousands of dollars from Obama's guy Tony Rezko and why he admitted he working behind-the-scenes to help Chicago machine goons like John Frichley (who's such a blantant crook even RAT primary voters wouldn't take him!).
I suggest you read fieldmarshaldj's post on Kirk's ties to the combine and educate yourself: www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2573067/posts?page=35#35
And if you're going to bring up the fact the DailyKos type moonbats were gung-ho to defeat Kirk with Dan Seals in 2008, that's like trying to "prove" Joe LIEberman isn't Al Gore & Bill Clinton's yes-man because the DailyKos moonbats tried to replace him Ned Lamont. In both cases we know they do the RATs bidding on 90% of the issues and are tied-to-the-hip of Obama's biggest allies in the mainstream media, regardless of what the Kucinich lunatics say.
These arguements remind me of how California Republicans were told to put the Kennedy clan in charge of California to "stop Democrats"
It still boggles the mind, don't it?
Worse: voters fell for it.
I prefer the 50% disaster the the 100% disaster.
If the Greek gets in it will be for the next 24 yrs.
I prefer the 50% disaster to the 100% disaster.
If the Greek gets in it will be for the next 24 yrs.