Posted on 11/08/2010 1:35:26 PM PST by Justaham
Sen.-elect Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) could buck his Republican leadership in his first two weeks on the job and vote in favor of a campaign-finance transparency bill that the GOP’s top brass ardently oppose.
Watchdogs are pushing for a vote on a stripped-down version of a campaign finance bill during the upcoming lame-duck session. That version of the legislation would force groups bankrolled by anonymous donors to disclose the sources of their funding, as well as their political spending.
Advocates for greater limits on campaign finance have been eyeing Kirk, as well as Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), as two possible votes that could revive the once-moribund Disclose Act and give it the momentum it needs to pass the Senate and be signed into law.
“Unless we enact new disclosure laws, secret contributions to outside spending groups are bound to dramatically increase in the 2012 elections, when both presidential and congressional races will be at stake,” said Democracy 21’s Fred Wertheimer.
Kirk takes his seat later this month after his win in the special election to replace appointed Sen. Roland Burris (D-Ill.), who filled President Obama's former Senate seat. When asked whether Kirk plans to vote in favor of the Disclose bill, spokeswoman Kirsten Kukowski pointed to comments her boss made in his last campaign debate.
“I broke with my party early. I think we should continue with further reforms,” Kirk said. “Federal candidates should disclose all of their campaign contributions within 24 hours on the Internet. I hope we can get that done in the next Senate and Congress. Also, for all of these outside groups we don’t want to silence any political voice ... we should have them disclose all of their donors, both from the left and the right.”
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
I do like your way of thinking, but it won’t happen. They have already rolled over on the BC issue and are up to their necks in this socialist takeover.
At the same time it's perfectly safe to think of it as being run by and for criminals.
Frankly I'd be quite happy to see them driven out of Lake County Indiana for starters.
Kurk may turn tail and become a Democrat.
Because they wanted a Republican hack to beat their dream hack?
Why would they orchestrate Kirk's victory?
Eagles UP Tea Party and KICK....HIS...ASS... (politically speaking of course). Do it!
Mark Kirk is another RINO inflicted on America by DuPage County Pubbie Establishment because “Kirk was electable.”
Of course, the fact that Alexi Giannolias was a corrupt Rat Mafia banker helped somewhat. Kirk is almost as slimy as Alexi and we're all stuck with this wanker.
I didn’t say the Combine runs all of IL, but they do control both parties via the leadership, and they have the muscle to enforce their will (both lawyers and thugs). They do indeed operate like the mafia. If you support a GOP candidate in IL, you’d first better find out if they are Combiners. If they are, you can forget about reform or curbing abuses. They’re just “business as usual” candidates.
Yep.
Anybody who is surprised that Kirk has already betrayed himself as a scumbag hasn't been paying attention has been sitting in a closet having fun with himself. This is why so many here were begging for the crooked scumbag Democrat to win this race.
"Better to be knifed in the face by an enemy than stabbed in the back by a 'friend'."
Oh well... At least Castle is retired. He was the same ilk as Kirk, except heterosexual.
Does anybody know anything about this bill? Why does the GOP “top brass” object to it? They haven’t been batting a thousand for quite a few years now, so I’m wondering why they don’t like the bill and why the fact that they don’t like it means I shouldn’t like it.
Just wondering.
Off the top of my head, the only reason I can see to not disclose is to keep the rat vermin fascists from attacking and boycotting donors who support pubs, conservatives and our causes.
If you lived in Illinois it wouldn't surprise you. Kirk sucks up to whoever is in power, and flip-flops all the time. For example, he was all for the war in Iraq until the polls said voters were weary of it, then the traitor stabbed up in the back and voted AGAINST the surge. Kirk said during the primary he would "lead the effort" to repeal Obamacare, then flip-flopped after the primary and said it was now settled law and he wouldnt' support repeal even if Republicans had gained control of BOTH houses and could pass such legislation.
There is not a single issue Kirk wouldn't be willing to sell us out on for the right price.
On the negative side, Kirk is a pathelogical liar who will say anything to get votes. During the primary his campaign told us we had to nominate him because he would "oppose activist judges". After the primary, he endorsed Kagan.
Yes, silly because that Democrat hack would have been indicated and sent to prison. So the machine orchestrated Kirk's victory.
Why would they orchestrate Kirk's victory?
Because Mark Kirk is just as socialist as Alexi is, without the blatant criminal baggage. Also, the Dems need another RINO to carry their water and that phony "bipartisanship" crap. Kirk will be the go-to clown for the Dems to portray the Republicans as far-right nutsos. He'll be the Republican who will appear on the Sunday shows attacking the GOP for being too far right.
Even Stevie Wonder can see this.
Yeah, and Obama promised to pay my rent and gas for me. I trust Bill Clinton before I trust Mark Kirk.
Surprise, surprise (not) Kirk and Burris agree on everything.
Who’s surprised? He’s worse than Scott Brown.
Unless us RINOs are accepted and you agree to work with us so called RINOs, the Dems will somehow find a way to win. So ripping on Murkowski, Brown, McCain, Kirk and some others is only going to spin the wheels. There are merits in passing a comprehensive finance reform - it goes both ways of the aisle. The same with reforming the healthcare bill.
Just curious. How was Kirk elected to run by the Republican Party of Illinois? They honestly couldn’t find anyone better than him?
The primary was fixed to ensure Kirk's nomination. In fact, Kirk waffled and refused to run until party leaders promised to "clear the field" for him. Any big name Republican candidates (Congressman Peter Roskam, State Rep. Jim Durkin, who was our 2002 nominee for U.S. Senate, etc.) who floated their names were "strongly discouraged" (threatened) from running by the state party.
We were then left with second tier candidates. The best of these was Dr. Eric Wallace, a former state rep. candidate and Vice Chairman of the IL GOP with an solid resume for the job. He was shoved out of the way by some useful idiot "conservative leaders" who recruited a unknown real estate dealer named Patrick Hughes and demanded everyone "get behind" Hughes on the sole basis that he "had money" to run a credible campaign. Wallace dropped out after nonstop harassment from our "conservative leaders", Hughes bumbled around for months, several other second tier candidates with far better credentials for the job than Hughes stuck around, and Kirk cruised to victory.
The state party and all the GOP officials in Illinois (and nationally) endorsed Kirk from the moment he announced, promoted him as if he was the ONLY Republican running, and mislead voters into believing Kirk was a "social moderate, fiscal conservative, and a hawk on defense." None if was true (Kirk is an extreme leftist on social issues, has a mediocre record on fiscal issues, and repeated stabbed us in the back on the WOT), but our state has 19 congressional districts and GOP voters in the other 18 weren't familiar with Kirk's treasonous record so they bought the lies. Kirk refused to debate any of his primary opponents and let his slick ads and mountain of money do the talking. We had the first midterm primary in the nation (Feb. 2nd), which basically left us with only a month to try and expose the real Mark Kirk to GOP voters. It was like trying to climb Mt. Everest barefoot.
Oh, and Kirk's "credible" conservative opponent (who finished in 2nd place with 19% of the vote), almost immediately endorsed the DIABLO after the primary and touted his candidate to conservatives (something he swore to the "conservative leaders" he wouldn't do). Wish I voted for the third place guy in the race, retired Judge & decorated Vietnam Vet Dow Lowery.
“Unless us RINOs are accepted and you agree to work with us so called RINOs, the Dems will somehow find a way to win. So ripping on Murkowski, Brown, McCain, Kirk and some others is only going to spin the wheels. There are merits in passing a comprehensive finance reform - it goes both ways of the aisle. The same with reforming the healthcare bill.”
This is sarcasm right?
If not, explain the “merits” of either finance reform or the health care bill?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.