I’m not attempting to imply that Kirk is a conservative by any means. And I wouldn’t want to recommend him as a prom date.
However there are some votes (such as when picking the Senate Majority Leader or protecting US sovereignty - http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3007232/posts ) where I’d much rather have him as a Senator from Illinois than have another Democrat replacing him and voting like Dick Durbin. In the very strong Republican year of 2010, Kirk won his Senate seat with less than a majority of the vote (thanks partially to a Green Party candidate).
So, on the RINO removal front, I’m saving my ammunition, time and very limited funds to devote to efforts to get rid of Senators such as Lindsey Graham where we could almost certainly replace the RINO with a true conservative after that conservative defeated the RINO in the primary.
What I’m looking forward to in 2014 is for conservatives to be able to say “mission accomplished” upon the removal of Harry Reid as Senate Majority Leader. I just don’t like to see things that are counterproductive to those efforts advanced—particularly things that cause us to take our eyes off of the prize.
Same argument used by conservatives who urged everyone to vote for Arlen Specter in 2004. "At least he's not a Democrat!" Then Specter defected to the Dems and made it official. Kirk would switch parties too, if he "needed" too. RINOs like him would drive over their own mother if it got them fawning coverage from the MSM.
>> In the very strong Republican year of 2010, Kirk won his Senate seat with less than a majority of the vote (thanks partially to a Green Party candidate). <<
Yeah, the kool-aid drinkers will tell us it's because Kirk "worked harder" in the suburbs than the conservative candidate for Governor, though every single voter I know like myself who actually LIVES in the suburbs (not counting the 10% of the suburbs in Kirk's congressional district) never ONCE saw Kirk or "his people" knock on doors here or lift a finger to have any kind of ground game here. You don't suppose vote fraud caused the conservative to lose? Nahhhhhhhhhh. It's because RINOs are magically more electable and can "win" more votes by never campaigning.
>> So, on the RINO removal front, I’m saving my ammunition, time and very limited funds to devote to efforts to get rid of Senators such as Lindsey Graham where we could almost certainly replace the RINO with a true conservative after that conservative defeated the RINO in the primary. <<
Ah, the tired of "we should only go after RINOs in "red states" talking points. ::YAWN:: You guys break you own "rules" anyway, by gushing over GOP senators in "safe" states who go wobbly on us anyway (no one lifted a finger to challenge John Thune in the primary after he stabbed us in the back, a bunch of you guys wanted to give him a promote to President instead). Fire all your ammo at Lindsey Graham if it makes you feel better, but in the long run it won't change things much because Kirk is 10X worse. Even on his worse days, Graham didn't go around worshiping Planned Parenthood and demanding we surrender in Iraq. You are failing to see the big picture. If we took advice from conervatives like you, we'd never get a conservative majority because MOST states in this country voted for Obama so any Republican we run from states can make the excuse they're just voting how the voters want them to.