Skip to comments.IL-Sen. 2010: Dem. chief says Kirk "moderate" (hahaha)
Posted on 11/09/2009 9:59:58 AM PST by rabscuttle385
During two heated Democratic challenges, U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk of Highland Park was targeted by millions of dollars in TV ads painting him as a far right Republican in his north suburban district.
Much of the time, it was the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee paying for and writing those ads. Kirk spent millions of dollars himself on ads to cultivate a moderate, independent brand in the 10th District.
Now it seems the DCCC agrees with him.
DCCC Chair Chris Van Hollen said during a C-SPAN interview Sunday that Kirk is a "moderate," contradicting his own organizations efforts to paint him as the opposite and undermining attempts by Senate Democratic opponents to do the same.
When a reporter on C-SPAN remarked to Van Hollen that many moderate Republicans are leaving the House, the chairman agreed and pointed to Kirk as an example, among others.
"At one point the moderates were an endangered species. Now they are virtually extinct," Van Hollen said. "You have Mark Kirk. He is running for Senate."
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.dailyherald.com ...
Painting Kirk as a moderate is probably more damaging to him in the primary season than painting his as a conservative is.
That’s about what I have to say about it.
Van Hollen is a Trotskyist so Kirk seems moderate to him.
This sounds good on the surface, and like the whole bit about how "I didn't leave the Democrats, they left me when they stopped being honorable and patriotic", it is an effective argument until you examine the facts.
The first part is true, both hard core right-wing people and hard-core left-wing people can't stand Mark Kirk. But then you have to look into the details WHY they can't stand Mark Kirk.
Those are on the right despise Kirk because his voting record over the last nine years shows he's been a yes-man for Pelosi on the vast majority of hot button issues in America, whether it's abortion, guns, gays, stem cells, TARP, SCHIP, cap n trade, amnesty, minimum wage, global warming, surrender in Iraq, and so on and so forth. The right despises Kirk because his career in politics shows he belongs on the left.
Those on the left despise Kirk because he took a photo-op shaking hands with George W. Bush once, like around 2001 or so (even though Kirk long since renounced Bush and gloated about stabbing him in the back to win re-election). To those on the left, ANYONE who EVER appeared in public with "Bushitler" must somehow be a clone of him and therefore has to be purged from government. Accordingly, those on the far left will repeatedly accuse Kirk of being a carbon copy of Bush, which of course bears no resemblance to reality unless you live on some other planet where Bush loves abortion and wants to confiscate every gun in America, etc., etc.
In other words, taken constructively, one would notice that the right-wing is against Kirk based on his actual policies, whereas the left-wing is against Kirk (once their staunchest allies) because they're nutty moonbats out of touch with reality. And the fact they want to purge people who have gone to bat for them numerous times and helped advance all their pet causes proves that they are the ones who are "purists" demanding absolute 100% loyalty. Look no further than Joe Lieberman, who is 95% liberal but despised by them for similar reasons (hugged Bush in public once)
After reviewing his record objectively, no one can seriously buy that Kirk is a "centrist" and middle of the road on social issues and so on like most of the public. Kirk is on the left side of the political spectrum and more liberal than the average voter on many issues. It's just that the rank and file leftists hate anyone who has an "R" next to their name, including those who share their goals.