It’s always possible that Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL) just bailed on
his anticipated Senate run upon hearing that Roland Burris would
neither be his opponent in the general election nor drain
the actual Democrat nominee’s resources and standing in certain
quarters of the minority community.
I like to think the truth is closer to Kirk having found little
love (but instead much indifference, even revulsion) after his
craven vote in favor of the Waxman-Markey global warming tax
(passed 219-212), surely made with an eye toward running a
race along the lines of other failed, squishy “look at me
I’m a non-threatening Republican…media, where are you
going, I thought you’d love this…?” predecessors.
It is tough, after all, to raise money when people wonder
why bother given that you’ll flee on the votes that
really count, and otherwise on those votes presenting a clear-cut
distinction between philosophies. I also like to think that that
word is getting around. 7 more House Rs, a few Senate candidates
and 2 aspiring governors to go.
But is there any chance Kirk can change his vote now?
Richard Baker| 7.10.09 @ 6:43PM
Kirk gives duplicitousness a bad name. Just another political whore.
rentacar | 10.28.09 @ 5:37PM
This article is very interesting. Thank you very much for sharing .
CMJ| 10.30.09 @ 4:59PM
I think that this site is great. It has so much news. I think that you should spread the word about drug addiction and Narconon. That would be fantastic.