Where Kirk was last night and what he said

Despite reports there would be some negotiating going on this weekend between 10th CD Mark Kirk and IL GOP Chairman Andy McKenna over who would be in or out in Illinois' 2010 U .S. Senate race, Kirk evidently escaped the intense discussion for a couple of hours Saturday evening to tell New Trier GOPers "he's in if Andy's out" and "he's out if Andy's in," ConservativeBrand local blogger Eva Sorock reports.

Sorock's assessment is that Kirk has figured out his 10th CD really doesn't care at all about him being the needed Republican vote for U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the House Democrats to pass Obama's Cap & Trade bill.  Sorock says Kirk's two reasons are 1. It will cost his 10th CD voters only $117 more a month (that's not what we've been told) and 2. Cap & Trade won't pass the Senate anyway, so his anti-Republican vote really doesn't matter.

And about what's going on between McKenna and Kirk and the Senate race, here's what Eva reports this went on:

When asked the BIG question about his on-again, off-again run for the Senate, Kirk put the onus on state GOP Chairman Andy McKenna - if McKenna creates the cost of a primary run, Kirk is out; if McKenna states out, Kirk is in. Seems that GOP primary challenges in Illinois have the terrible effect of moving candidates to the right. Sorry, Mark. Go Andy!

Eva, who was one of New Trier High School's Wilmette Elementary School's fiestiest board members for several years, gives a terrific account of last night's meeting HERE.  Take time to read.  It's fascinating and really kind of nerve-wrecking.  What kind of U.S. Senator would Mark Kirk be for Illinois?

Comments

[S. Sam]

Regardless of how one feels about Kirk's conservative credentials, the head of the state GOP has no business at all pursuing a Senate seat when a more viable candidate is available. It's the equivalent of a cop dealing drugs, a priest seducing his parishioner, or a politician taking a bribe. His job is to help the party win races: having him as our Senate candidate will kill any chance of picking up any other statewide races, as well as getting back any Congressional seats.

McKenna needs to be booted out of his position as head of the GOP immediately--and preferably out of the party as well.

[Dave]

Bingo

McKenna has don't squat as party leader and now its clear he'll even put himself ahead of whats best for the party

He has never been elected and has no base in any part of state

I could scream at how stupid some Illinois Republicans are; Kirk is our only hope to win if not I will hope Congresswoman Biggert gets in at least she also has some moderation in what is needed to win statewide.

[IR]

So, Dave and S. Sam, let's be honest -- you want Kirk to run, not McKenna.
Tell us why conservatives -- that's conservatives, not just Republicans -- should support your guy. Don't just tell us why you don't like the other one.

[Felix]

S Sam and Dave, are you members of Mark Kirk for Senate Facebook group ? Please join if you're not in it and get everyone in IL to join.
McKenna is now using an astroturfing group with a website and F-book groups specifically set up for him to make it appear his Facebook group shows widespread support. It's www.Republicansforprogressandsolutions.org

The website tries to make it look national and doesn't mention McKenna, but click on the Facebook logo on that website. Observe where the members of that Facebook group are from and who their admin is (Jim Ketcham). They also have another Illinois RFP&S to make it look like a state chapter.
Then look at the Andy McKenna for Senate Facebook group. Ketcham is the admin there as well. Look at how many of the people signed up are people not very active in Illinois politics and how many are Ketcham's friends (especially from Florida and other states).

[Felix]

IR, what candiadate do *you* think is the best for winning that general election for that US Senate seat ?
But when we miss an opportunity to cut the Dems' 60 Senate seats to 59, no doubt we'll *still* hear you piss and moan about how these Democrats are getting their Socialist agenda enacted into law.
Do you believe Mark Kirk Would vote with the Democrats or with us ? His record show he's mostly with us, and his cap and trade vote will not matter because it's dead in the Senate. In fact, it'll be safer for him to vote with us. Why was the DSCC already airing anti-Mark Kirk ads last week ?
Ifyou contribute to the nomination of a candidate with much less chance than Mark Kirk, you are functionally and objectively a Democrat no matter what thoughts go on in your skull or what you write here.
Are you about patting yourself on the back for your beliefs or are you about enacting those beliefs into law and stopping the Democrat agenda ?

[Dave]

Why should Conservatives support Kirk?

1. He opposed stimulus

2. He has strong nat'l defense record

3. He takes back Senate Seat for us ( the Presidents at that) and perhaps in this cycle or next Republican can regain control of Senate and Kirk will vote and support a Republican majority leader and thus that entails Republican controlling the Committees so people like Demint, Coburn, etc will be Committee heads and that should make u happy. Do you like winning every now and then?

4. Kirk will at least vote with us a lot time unlike a Durbin has or the Dem nominee every shall

[cottoneyejoe]

2. Really? A strong national defense record? He voted AGAINST the surge!!

[Felix]

Oh, fine, C.E.J. Since we don't agree with every vote he has to cast in a district that went for Kerry and Obama by comfortable margins, let's just turn up our noses and let the Democrats keep cloture power in the US Senate out of spite.
What other Republican do you think can win that Senate seat in this Blue state ?

[IR]

Thanks Dave, for citing the reasons, and they are interesting.

Now, explain why he was against a partial birth abortion, for embryonic experimentation, for funding Planned Parenthood, for allowing taxpayer funded abortions in the military, a sponsor of the highly controversial Hate Crimes legislation, shall we go on?

Those issues matter to us. That should matter to all of us, because it gives us a read on his basic political beliefs.

[IR]

IR is concerned about conservative principles like limited government, individual rights, free markets and traditional values. We're interested in candidates who hold to those same values. Mark Kirk has demonstrated that those principles are not a part of his political philosophy. Those principles are foundational to the Republican Party's platform. Mr. Kirk needs to decide whether he's going to support Republican principles or Democratic ideals. He's the one that needs to do what's right, not us ... we're already in line with the GOP platform. He's not.

[IR]

Sorry, should have said he was against the partial birth abortion BAN. Big difference.

[Fresh Air]

Kirk voted for Crap & Charade, which if enacted would make Smoot-Hawley look like a municipal ordinance. Ergo, the man is either craven or terminally stupid. It's not my place to decide, but he has no business seeking higher office as a Republican.

As far as I'm concerned, his candidacy is D.O.A. I would rather have another term of Roland than him. He can get out of the party and run as a Mediacrat, if that would suit him better. Enough of the RINOs.

[Nate Denson]

Okay, we all seem to be forgetting who we would be supporting other than Kirk...McKenna???!!!

IR, are you telling me you would support McKenna over Kirk? Sure, Kirk needs some work. Excuse me, Kirk needs A LOT of work on his voting record but look at Andy McKenna.

Lets judge success by results? Fair?

The state of Illinois is controlled 100% by Madigan and the Dems. When a state is controlled 100% by one party, the other party must not be doing their job.

Secondly, look at his run last time around. 4th? Nuff said.

Another reason is his blatant opposition to SB 600. This is not a HUGE deal to me but it is to many Conservatives and Andy is on the wrong side of the table of this issue for a GOP primary in Illinois...

Andy has shown no leadership with the party. Andy has shown no new ideas or direction. In fact, right before the 08' elections, he was on the Roe Conn show and I remember Roe asking Andy who we had in 2010. Andy responded with some bull filled answer along the lines of "some guys and girls that have shown leadership". The fact of the mater is that he has NO ONE in mind. Murphy is his last hope but his campaign doesn't look promising as it hasn't rolled out professionally. So before McKenna starts worrying about his potential run for the U.S. Senate, maybe he should square away the GOP race for Governor first...just an idea from a pee-on Republican. Whadduh I know...

[Felix]

Notice that IR does not answer my question about what candidate is more electable than Mark Kirk.
Tell us, IR, do you really think that's Andy McKenna ? What about his voting record ? Ooops, that's right, doesn't have one, because he never won a race for public office. Came in fourth in the last US Senate primary.
IR would rather have a Democrat who votes against us 70 % of the time than a Republican who votes with us 70 % of the time.
People like IR and Fresh Air cherry pick the 30 % of the time the aforementioned Republican strays and sniff that they're just as bad as that Democrat.
This is how we're winding up with no Republicans elected to Congress from the Northeast and soon none from the Upper Midwest and few from the Mountain States. Thanks to IR and the Club for Growth.
I'll bet if Dan Lipinski said he'd cross over and would vote slightly to the left of Kirk they'd tell him "no, stay a Democrat because you aren't conservative enough."
Because their brain's major relationship is with PRINCIPLE and their own ego rather than with political reality and success in enacting an agenda. Easy to do when you sit in the bleachers and never get in the arena and fight to win. Easy to judge and sniff and carp at those who compromise a little, because you're too pure to compromise.
Easier to root out heresy on your own side as a self-appointed inquisitor rather than to work at defeating Democrats (and the compromises that entails, especially in a Democrat-leaning district). Oh, much better to remain PURE.

[Felix]

Notice that IR does not answer my question about what candidate is more electable than Mark Kirk.
Tell us, IR, do you really think that's Andy McKenna ? What about his voting record ? Ooops, doesn't have one, never won a race for public office. Came in fourth in the last US Senate primary.

[Dave]

Felix

thank god for u my friend

If you don't like Kirk name candidate who can win? Name them! if not it seems you make just be Dem trolls

[IR]

A Republican candidate should hold to Republican ideals. That's not a difficult concept. Maybe that doesn't matter to you Felix and DAve, but it does to most Illinois conservatives.

[Zac M.]

Republicans like facts and figures, leave the opinions to the other party, so here goes.

Dick Durbin beat his last candidate by winning 67.8% of the vote, and roughly has about 50% of the vote to begin with, and his elections with 55% of the vote or more in his senate elections.

Peter Fitzgerald won only by 2.91% to Carol Moseley Braun, even when she was dogged with charges of corruption.

Can you think of any Republican that was able to win for a statewide election by more than 55% in the past 10 years? No, because there really is not one. Lisa Madigan had 72% of the vote in the last election.

It will also be easier to get Kirk to vote more conservative than it would be to convince Chris Kennedy or Alexi Giannoulias to get to vote your way.

Also, Andy McKenna doesn't even have a wikipedia page. He only got 97,238 of the Republican Primary vote and I don't think has the ability to draw as big of crowds of people to rallies and get out the vote as Kirk might. Kirk has a proven 125,000 votes in his district, and it takes about 2.5 million votes to win in this state.

Kirk is the definiton of Big Tent Politics.

Log Cabin Republicans+NARAL endorsement (women voters are why the republican party loses, if not for them, the democratic party would fail. Any West Wing fan even knows that.)+Environmental Voters+Conservative Democrats =Potential Votes for Kirk

Plus Republican Base of fiscal conservatives, the armed forces vote (I don't see any other recruits by Republicans who have served overseas fighting for our freedom, even while in office. The only one the media ever reports that does this is Beau Biden, and here Republicans got our own in our state. Promote that, Alexi played Basketball and lost our childrens funds for their education ,Kirk saved our lives, and will continue to help them by working in congress)

Voters who simply want a change and a candidate that makes them rethink why they are a democrat might also help to elect him.

I think all this might get him to Washington.

Can you think of anyone else? Honestly, he is the best and the brightest, and can be used to win back the moderates and soften the democratic stampede by working to find a good middle and get rid of even worse legislation that might otherwise pass.

[Dave]

Right and math is there. Kirk wins his current seat, Biggert, Roskam, Aaaron, Johnson, Manzullo and Skimus seat. I see him doing very well in Bean, Haverson, and Foster seat and in lane's old seat

I also think African American turnout is going to be down especially if no statewide candidates are up as it appears so right now

He has math on his side we just need to get motivated ( I am so excited at prospect of us winning another seat)

[Dave]

How has that been working out for you?

Please name the last true Conservative candidate to win statewide???

[elginite]

Judy Biggert should run.

[elginite]

McKenna does not seem like a viable candidate, but he should stay in anyway to keep Kirk out. Judy Biggert should enter the race. She has as good a chance as Kirk in the general election.

[IR]

Dave,
How can any Republican win without the party's conservative base's enthusiastic support? The conservative base demonstrated what they do with liberal Republicans in the 2006 governor's race. You can't shame or ridicule us into supporting someone that does not back Republican principles.

[spintreebob]

I want McKenna to run because I want Eric to win. McKenna loses a primary to anyone and everyone.

Kirk would be a hard man to beat.

[Dave]

Then you do realize you guys are enabling the Dems!

I am Conservative but you have to put a 100% litmus test on all issues u believe in on scale sometimes and look at the larger picture and if you don't then I guess you like losing

I hate losing

[Sam Pierce]

Dave,

No amount of being labeled "Dem trolls" by a Republican without principles will convince some of us to abandon our principles. If winning is what matters, why try to run a candidate that is a shadow of the opposing party candidate? Why effectively say 'we are a party of nothing, please vote for us anyway'?

[Bakersfield]

How about supporting a candidate who at least wants to run for the Seat? Kirk's putting his toes in the water over and over the past few days has been the last straw for me. If the guy was savvy he would have voted no on Cap & Tax and then called a PC announcing his run for Senate. Instead he lets EVERYONE ELSE dictate to him if he will run or not.

I could look past many of the votes, but I cannot ignore his lukewarm ambition to actually run for the seat.

[Louis G. Atsaves]

Let's see. In Moraine Township, I am represented in the U.S. Congress by Burris and Durbin. U.S. House by Mark Kirk. My President is Obama. Springfield House by Karen May. Springfield Senate by Susan Garrett. My governor is Quinn. All other constitutional state offices are Democrats.

All Democrats save for Mark Kirk.

Obama ran to the center during the election, got himself elected, and then moved back to his left base. This isn't new. Smart politicians do it all the time. All those "Reagan Democrats" voted for Obama the past election. Is anyone asking "why?"

So let's use the Moraine Township scorecard as an example right now:

So if Obama follows my wishes 0-out of 10 times;
So if Durbin follows my wishes 0-out of 10 times;
So if the unelected Burris follows my wishes 0- out of 10 times;
So if Kirk follows my wishes 9-out of 10 times;
So if the unelected Quinn follows my wishes 0-out of 10 times;
So if Garrett follows my wishes 1-out of 10 times;
So if May follows my wishes 0-10 times;

Then I should demand that Kirk be thrown out on his ear for not following the GOP platform 10 out of 10 times? That you folks would prefer that he be replaced by a Democrat so I can add another 0-out of 10 times to the above? Is that crazy talk or what?

I would be happy to settle for replacements of all of the above except for Kirk with Republicans that would at least follow my wishes 7 out of 10 times. That would be a VAST improvement! How many out there can do the same inventory I just did?

Rome wasn't built in one day. Wars are not won in one day. The same is true of politics. We either get SMART about how to turn around the State GOP, or we continue with the litmus tests and allow more 0-out of 10 types to get elected over 8 out of 10 types! We are not going to take back Federal and State Government overnight. And we are not going to do it by throwing everyone out who doesn't religiously follow our platforms at the moment. We don't have that luxury now.

If you have to get more flexible to get things done or moving back in the right direction, then get more flexible.

Having carefully read the Republican Platforms both nationally and locally, I fail to see any paragraph in either one of them that claims to "throw the bums out" who fail to follow those platforms zealously or those who stray from the platforms from time to time.

Let's remember that Senator Peter Fitzgerald squeaked out a victory against a flawed, ethically challenged and inept Carol Mosely Braun after spending several million dollars of his own money in that race. Would he have won against a stronger Democrat candidate that year?

[PeteSpeer]

As I said before, point me to the primary. But if Kirk wins, this 100% constitutionalist conservative will vote for him.

For more than six years I have been pleading the Republican Party to organize for victory.

Instead, some conservatives prefer to be dragged down to defeat, Again. And again.

That Organize for Victory starts at the precinct and township level, and all the blathering and blogging fail the test by trying to organize from the top down or to concentrate on single issues.

I have tried to point out the last single issue successful operation which won the nation on that issue. It did it by organizing from the bottom up - -at the local level, at the State level. It took its issue to the platform committees and won.

It did not start from the top down. The issue was Prohibition and it became eventually an Amendment to the Constitution.

It was the last successful social issue which won national approval on a single issue basis.

In the meantime, a Kirk general election bid will bring votes in for a new Republican governor. And we have a conservative caandidate to support there.

Let us Organize For Victory... after the Primary

[Bakersfield]

That's fine guys- then have him RUN. If this guy is really scared of Andy McKenna wait until he meets the DSCC and Alexi's buddy Barack.

Since it's clear that Kirk's campaign staff reads these comments here is the best advice I can give you:
Call a PC or write a release saying "I am in, if anyone else wants to run I welcome them and look forward to debating them on the issues, but I am in this to win it and represent the Republican Party and the State of Illinois in the US Senate."

DONE...

[Bakersfield]

oh, and Zac, it will be a cold cold day in hell before NARAL backs Mark Kirk over a Democrat, but thanks for trying.

[Sam Pierce]

I had no idea NARAL had the pulse of women. My wife will be surprised to learn she is represented by such a group.

[Dave]

I suspect you don't fight hard and play to win in real life then cause thats what I do.

How our your near and dear convictions you preach about been playing out for you?? Your litmus test is unrealistic in Illinois at this point. This is blue state now even getting more blue with new demographics. I mean the last federal office Republican holder to win has been what? Yet, it seems you don't care because you still will be going on and on about wanting to place 100% Conservative candidate as nominee

I am willing to bet u are not even a real Republican but a RINO

[Margaret]

Peter Roskam anyone?

[Jim Caldwell]

I have to laugh that people cite Kirks vote on the stimulus as evidence of his conservative credentials. No Republican voted for it, who knows what he would have done given a bit of cover, like on the C&T bill.

[PeteSpeer]

Judy said -- second hand from another Blog -- that she supports Mark.

[Felix]

You need some idea of the constraints Rep. Kirk faced and of the strategy that was necessary. When he cast the cap and trade vote, it seemed Lisa Madigan would enter the Senate race. So one reason (along with environmental conviction) he cast that vote was it was good for reelection in the 10th CD.
Now that Madigan isn't running he has a good chance of winning the Senate seat. Then came the backlash against his C&T vote.
Just give him a break, okay ? He gets it coming and going from Dems on the one side (his district has a PVI rating of Dem +6) and conservatives on the other.
In fact, we should applaud his ability to hold on in a Democratic district. Easy to be a rock-ribbed conservative when you're from a solidly Republican district.

[Felix]

Sure. If Mark Kirk gets hell for waiting before entering, what about Roskam ? Why haven't we seen his hat anywhere near the ring ? Why not Roskam for Governor ?

[Felix]

When IR says the conservative base will veto any non-conservative candidate, they are admitting that the only role they can play is that of spoiler. So they play it just to see some effect for themselves in Illinois. Even if conservative candidates can't win in the general election, they'll make sure a moderate can't win either. Bunch of babies.
Sen. Cornyn of Texas and the NRSC is very conservative, so why was he recruiting Kirk instead of someone more conservative ?
Oh, that's right, Sen. Cornyn must be a Beltway sellout as opposed to We In Illinois Who Hold Firm For Conservative Principles In A Blue State Despite Perpetual Failure (pat self on back again).

[Sam Pierce]

Is he really that much of a slime-ball? You say these things and still support him?

[Dave]

I agree he cast that vote thinking she was running for Senate so he would not run and thus that vote fit his distirct

[Felix]

Sam, learn to read and also to live in the real world. Note that I said "along with environmental conviction." Because Rep. Kirk has a demonstrated record of that.
Is that such a gasper to you ? You must be somone who does everything out of PRINCIPLE.
I see a lifetime of angry letters to the editor (and blog posts) before you ... what fun being the conscience of the whole community.

[Sam Pierce]

Doesn't have to be 100% Dave, but how is it winning if the person elected is a lib Repub?

You are somewhat correct, I no longer identify myself as a Republican, even though I have always voted for them (and used to belong to the party.) I found the run up to the 2008 election to be enough to turn my stomach and refuse to contribute any further to the state and national party. I see myself as a conservative, or if you prefer a Dem troll.

[Dave]

I hope that turns out good for you. South Carolina or Utah may be good fit for you

Kirk is moderate Republican

[Dave]

A lot suburb voters are pro envir, support gay marriage, and abortion.

Kirk can help us win these voters as he has proven

[Dave]

He is too Conservative to be elected statewide at this point and time for the state

[Sam Pierce]

Hanging your hat on his support for the killing of the innocent?

[urbanleftbehind]

I still dont get where Kirk is pro-illegal alien. When it mattered, he still voted against McCain-Kennedy and Kyl-Kennedy. He didnt tsk-tsk Waukegan when they did their 287g program. Maybe he has some side-action in Mexico, a la Mark Sanford (hence why he sponsors trips for the Grannies down there). Either way I'm more worried about the Greek-American conservative crossover vote for Giannoulous - this phenomenom still does exist. I had solid Greek-American conservatives in my workplace putting up Giannoulous literature in their cubes, etc.

Eric Wallace should be primed for the 11th Congressional District against Halvorson - it would be a hedge against the scenario of Illinois losing a CD in 2012 and having to maintain 3 majority black CDs...With Wallace in that seat, you can bump Bobby Rush or Danny Davis out of a seat instead of having to merge two downstate CDs. I feel if Wallace is so "revered" on this site, then 11th District conservative voters could put their money where their mouth is.