-
Daily Must-Reads
July 2, 2010 | 1 comment
-
Governor Schwarzenegger’s Political Advice
July 1, 2010 | 5 comments
-
Daily Must-Reads
July 1, 2010 | 1 comment
-
Daily Must-Reads
June 30, 2010 | 1 comment
-
The Longest War?
June 28, 2010 | 3 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Senate candidate and real estate developer Patrick Hughes came out swinging at primary opponent Congressman Mark Kirk’s liberal and centrist voting record in a conversation with TAS on Thursday. When comparing his conservative candidacy to that of Marco Rubio running against the more moderate Charlie Crist for Senate in Florida, Hughes said, “I believe that Mark Kirk is far more liberal on all the issues than Charlie Crist is, and would be much more likely to vote outside a Republican line of thinking, or even in many cases a moderate line of thinking, than Crist would.”
Of particular concern was Kirk’s “yes” vote on Cap and Trade in June, but Hughes also raised questions over Kirk’s “F” rating from the NRA, his vote against a partial-birth abortion ban, his co-sponsoring of hate crimes law, his vote against the Iraq War surge, and the congressman’s opposing a Constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman.
When discussing Cap and Trade, the issue he said drove him to run for Senate, Hughes argued that Kirk’s vote has led to fewer capital investments due to price uncertainty that has resulted from the bill, and has in turn damaged job creation in Illinois — a state with 11% unemployment. He also cited the direct impact it would have on coal miners, as Illinois is the 7th-most coal producing state in the country.
Hughes went a step further in his attacks on Kirk by arguing that his vote for Cap and Trade allowed the political capital that President Obama needed to pass healthcare — saying that Obama’s approval would have fallen if Cap and Trade had failed, which would make it more difficult for healthcare to pass with some Democrats. “I believe we would have been able to pull off those three Democrats (that would have resulted in the House Healthcare bill not passing) and probably more. I think, ultimately, Congressman Kirk’s vote for Cap and Trade proved to be a vote in favor of the healthcare bill.”
Congressman Kirk has since signed the Americans for Prosperity pledge not to raise any climate taxes, but Hughes argued that Kirk has no credibility on this issue since he had voted for Waxman-Markey just three months prior to signing. “His switch on that position shows his willingness to do whatever it takes to win the election,” Hughes concluded.
On national security matters, Hughes supports the Afghan surge. He also spoke out against non-intervention conservatism. “I don’t support non-interventionism at all. To me, non-interventionism is extremely dangerous in a way that economic protectionism is extremely dangerous,” Hughes stated.
Despite the many left-of-center stances that Kirk has adopted, Hughes’s campaign has not yet taken off when looking at most polls, or gained much traction in terms of endorsements or fundraising to reach the level of support that Kirk has received. While Hughes and others have compared the Illinois campaign to that of the more conservative Marco Rubio running against a more liberal Charlie Crist for Senate in Florida, the amount of national attention and support that Rubio has received — endorsements from Club for Growth, DeMint, Huckabee, Karl Rove, and speaking at CPAC — has not yet materialized for Hughes. Even Red State has indicated that it “would be fine” with Kirk, albeit maintaining some suspicion.
A large concern is that Illinois is viewed as a liberal state, and the seat that Hughes and Kirk are seeking was the one occupied by President Obama. Looking at Illinois’s D+9 Cook Partisan Voter Index rating, which puts Illinois in a tie for 7th most Democratic, many have believed that the best way for Republicans to win is to put up a more centrist or even liberal candidate to run against front-runner state Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias. Another problem that some critics see is that Hughes has never held elected office, and thus has no record to cite.
Hughes, however, citing the successful candidacy of Peter Fitzgerald’s 1998 election run, argued that the key to winning was coalescing the conservative base in the primary rather than rushing to the center. He could be right about that, but he needs to coalesce the conservative base very quickly in order for us to see how it plays out. He has 47 days until the primary.
View all comments (16) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Brian O'Connell
http://spectator.org/blog/2009/12/17/patrick-hughes-busts-a-cap-on
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Pingback| 12.17.09 @ 4:19PM
Twitter Trackbacks for The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Patrick Hughes Busts a links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Kyle Smith | 12.17.09 @ 6:33PM
A Chicago Democrat filling Obama's old seat wouldn't be great, but that seat hasn't exactly been held by anyone long term in the past 20 years. Kirk seems like he'd be just the RINO to occupy it for the next 40 years. The new Arlen Specter. He's as pro-choice as they come and the type of political opportunist that could only thrive in a blue state like Illinois. The guy is completely two faced and makes his decisions based on how many left-wing phone calls his college age staffers and interns have to answer. I heard somewhere that the college kids in his office told him about their hard day answering phone calls from North Shore Chicago Suburbs old money, new age greenies and told him he had to vote for Cap and Trade. So he did. Nice principles the guy has. Perfect Senate material right. But, surprise surprise, he is the marxist Chicago Media's favorite Republican.
Concerned IL Voter| 12.18.09 @ 9:27AM
Hughes also accused Kirk of flip flopping on the closure of Guantanano Bay over HR 2892 which is often referred to as the "2009 the Homeland Defense Appropriations Bill". Kirk voted for the bill which funds anti-terrorism efforts, along with other Republicans.
However, Hughes will not state whether he himself would have voted for or against the Bill itself because he's using the vote as the premise for his "flip flopping" claim. Therefore, one has to assume that Hughes himself would have voted AGAINST funding anti-terrorism efforts.
Guess that tosses Hughes' claims that he supports our Military and anti-terrorism efforts right out the window.
Concerned IL Voter| 12.18.09 @ 9:32AM
I believe it also shows how unprepared Hughes is to become our next US Senator. He's fine with accusing someone of flip flopping based on that person's record, but is unwilling to discuss how HE himself would vote on the subject bills.
Some would call Hughes' tactics "business as usual" in Illinois politics, and we really don't need anymore of that.
Concerned IL Voter| 12.18.09 @ 9:37AM
I'll also add that the timing of Hughes' press release was unfortunate for his flip flopping claim against Kirk on the closure of Guantanamo Bay. See the following, which came out shortly after the release, I believe.
http://twitter.com/SarahPalinUSA/status/6718647044
Concerned IL Voter| 12.18.09 @ 9:48AM
Kyle said: "A Chicago Democrat filling Obama's old seat wouldn't be great,..."
++
Actually, that would be BAD, Kyle. I also like the way you're using the term "two faced" against Kirk, which is--I believe--the Democrats latest "buzz phrase" for him.
I can see why Democrats are upset with Kirk, Kyle. They've decided to MOVE Guantanamo Bay to Illinois and Kirk's been fighting hard against it since the "surprise" announcement was made a few weeks back.
Most in Illinois do NOT want the detainees here and many even want Guantanamo to stay open--but the Democrats just won't listen for "some reason".
How someone--besides Democrats--can say Kirk is NOT a good Republican is way beyond me.
Jeremiah| 12.18.09 @ 11:12AM
Well, I'll tell you how someone can say Mark Kirk is not a good Republican. He voted for Cap & Trade. He voted against the surge. He voted against traditional marriage. He supports partial birth abortion. He is a gun control absolutist. Why in heavens name would a Republican even consider him, much less call him a good Republican.
I don't vote for Democrats. If I did, I would vote for the honest ones who put the D next to their name, not the ones who put an R next to it.
And there you have the crux of the problem. The Republican establishment thinks the way to win elections is to get Republicans who vote like Democrats - and then they will get a lot of Democratic votes. Newsflash! guys...Democrats vote for the Democrats who are out of the closet and open with their liberalism. Conservatives increasingly vote only for conservatives, regardless of what letter is next to their name. So the Democrats vote for the Ds and the conservatives who vote either stay home or skip over the race when they have a choice between two liberals. That is why getting an R that votes like a D is almost always a bad strategy - no matter how seductive it is to the mind-numbed Republican establishment.
If this Hughes doesn't catch on quick enough in the Illinois primary, it virtually guarantees a Democratic victory in that state.
Pingback| 12.18.09 @ 1:58PM
American Fluorescent DLP113RDSCT Droplet Pendant, Red | myefficientplanet.com links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
cv| 12.18.09 @ 5:26PM
Of the four conservative candidates there is one, John Arrington, that may unite conservatives, including conservative African Americans and attract independent voters.
Pingback| 12.19.09 @ 4:43AM
Audi A3 awarded CAP Executive Used Car of the Decade | Car Classifications Automotive links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 12.19.09 @ 12:54PM
I have a dreamby – baixixia's Blog – REW Blogs : Real Estate … | Mississippi Real Est links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
racking | 1.5.10 @ 9:50AM
http://www.racking-shelving.com
http://www.cold-store-equipment.com
Pingback| 1.26.10 @ 7:03PM
Meet Mark Kirk - rightklik’s Diary - RedState links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 1.26.10 @ 7:03PM
Meet Mark Kirk - rightklik’s Diary - RedState links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Sally Killian| 7.6.10 @ 8:38PM
kirk refused to answer several questions on the IFI, he voted yes for the healthcare takeover, cap & Tax, he voted to give homosexuals / transexuals protected status, partical birth abortion, amnesty and supported gitmo prisoners to US prisons. He tells Illinoisians what they want to hear at the time and then you become "Obama's favorite Republican". He is a fake conservative and we will campaign for and support Patrick Hughes.