Skip to comments.Gay community pushes Mark Kirk out of the closet
Posted on 06/01/2010 3:34:32 PM PDT by DesertRenegade
click here to read article
IT WAS A RHETORICAL QUESTION- THE LIBS *LOVE* GAYS UNTIL THEY SPOT A REPUBILICAN ONE, ESPECIALLY ONE WHO IS *NOT* A LIBERAL
READ AN ENTIRE RESPONSE BEFORE YOU RESPOND TO ONE SENTENCE OF IT
Sorry about that, I thought you were defending the lifestyle. If people want to call me a “homophobe”, I have no problem with that. I just don’t want to elect someone to an important position if they have such serious personal problems. I cannot just look the other way and vote for a man who embraces abject degeneracy.
I found an image that would really fit this situation but it would be inappropriate to post.
Neocon1984, you need to pay closer attention if you live in Kirk's district and don't realize the reason he publicly repudiated his cap n' treason vote. I have (on numerous threads that you were part of) talked about how he made it clear at the time of the cap n' treason vote that he had "read the entire bill" and NO qualms about voting for it, saying his main reason for supporting it was because it would lead to "energy independence". He even admitted on a radio show that voted in favor of the bill even AFTER the MAJORITY of calls to his office from constituents were AGAINST the bill the final week of passage.
It was only MONTHS later, in response to statewide conservatives screaming hell and promising to take Kirk out in the Senate primary, that the proud socialist flip-flopped out of FEAR of losing a contested GOP primary. He then changed his "reasons" for voting for the bill and retroactively claimed he did so only because "my constituents demanded" it, DESPITE POLLS SHOWING A MAJORITY OF 10TH DISTRICT VOTERS OPPOSE CAP N' TRADE.
AT NO TIME IN THE PAST DECADE KIRK HAS BEEN IN OFFICE, DID HE REPUDIATE HIS LEFTIST AGENDA BECAUSE HIS REPUBLICAN CONSTITUENTS COMPLAINED ABOUT IT.
If you can think of any examples, feel free to cite them. Put up or shut up. You know damn well his cap n' trade flip-flop didn't come about until he was an announced statewide candidate and sweating bullets from the rest of the Illinois electorate threatening to hold him accountable. Has Kirk repudiated his vote in favor of slaughtering the unborn while they're being born because the vast majority of voters oppose it? Has Kirk admitted he was wrong about opposing the Iraq surge because the public now realizes the Iraq surge strategy worked? No, because Kirk was UNCONTESTED in GOP primaries at the time of those otherwise career-killing votes. He lied to GOP voters and screwed them over with impunity, and HE WILL NOT ADMIT WRONGDOING TO THIS VERY DAY BECAUSE HE WAS NEVER HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR BEING ON THE WRONG SIDE OF HISTORY.
Furthermore, you need to pay attention to the FACT that Kirk has already repudiated numerous "promises" he made to conservatives while facing a contested Senate primary. He's already tossed his "pledge" to lead the fight to repeal Obamacare under the bus, actually saying he regrets that pledge and that legislation is "settled law" for the foreseeable future. He's repudiated his pledge to support "the Republican position" on Gitmo, and voted with the RATs to close Gitmo (indeed, he's flip-flopped on the Gitmo issue at least 3 or 4 times now). Kirk has proven he will say anything to get elected. Given that track record, what makes you CERTAIN Kirk won't flip-flop on cap n' treason again when he's in the Senate and can do whatever he wants without facing voting for another SIX years? What convictions does Kirk have that he wouldn't change to increase his clout in Washington?
>> What else are you distorting? What makes you different from a lefty nihilist? <<
What else are you distorting, "neocon"? You're clearly ignoring the reason and timing of Kirk's flip-flop on cap n' treason to make it sound like he cares the opinions of GOP voters, when you know Kirk happily sided with Pelosi over the past decade and NEVER listened to his own base until he faced a statewide primary.
Isn't it a bit misleading to claim Kirk reaches out to conservatives and obeys constituents on the basis of ONE thing he did out of desperation, and ignoring his track record of being on the wrong side of the history the OTHER 95% of his career?
Are you also selling the media kool-aid and repeating Kirk's talking points about how he's "socially moderate, fiscally conservative, and an expert in military affairs"? Would you have us believe that Kirk is "thoughtful" and a "taxpayer's watchdog". Because no matter how much Kirk and his supporters would like his believe these things, his record since 2000 shows otherwise.
What makes Kirk any different from a "lefty nihilist"? I dare you to list his positions on issues of importance to conservatives and show me what distinguishes him from a typical RAT. Sure, he supported us a handful of times like tax cuts, Iraq war authorization and against Obamacare. Guess what? So did many card-carrying RAT Congressmen like Chet Edwards and Stephanine Hersch. They're still lefty nihilis on the MAJORITY of issues, as is Mark Kirk. Mark Kirk votes like a Democrat, he should have the guts to call himself that.
In fact, many loyal Madigan Democrats are not as liberal as Kirk. One of them in my state Rep, and I live in a district that gave Obama 60% of the vote, just like Kirk's district! Yet my RAT state Rep. isn't in favor of late term abortion, "transgendered rights", voting to the left of Obama on envirowackoism (as is the case for Kirk and his Sierra Club rating), and doesn't have an 100% rating from the ACLU (indeed, my Democrat State Rep. attacked his Republican opponent in 1998 for agreeing with the ACLU on abolition of the death penalty). Clearly even the RATs in my region don't "have to" be far-left moonbats to "win". What's Kirk's excuse?