Inevitable: GOP Senate candidate applies for Palin endorsement
posted at 2:20 pm on November 4, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Some political analysts have tried to cast the NY-23 special election results as a disaster for Sarah Palin, but not everyone has ignored the obvious power and momentum she brought to a previously-obscure candidate over the course of two weeks. The Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza confirms that Rep. Mark Kirk has written to Palin asking for her endorsement in the upcoming Senate race in Illinois for the seat now occupied by Democrat Roland Burris:
Illinois Rep. Mark Kirk penned a memo to Republican poobah Fred Malek hoping to secure an endorsement from former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin for his Senate candidacy, according to a copy of the memo obtained by the Fix.
After noting that Palin will be in Chicago later this month to appear on “Oprah”, Kirk writes that “the Chicago media will focus on one key issue: Does Gov[ernor] Palin oppose Congressman Mark Kirk’s bid to take the Obama Senate seat for the Republicans?”
Kirk goes on to write that he is hoping for something “quick and decisive” from Palin about the race, perhaps to the effect of: “Voters in Illinois have a key opportunity to take Barack Obama’s Senate seat. Congressman Kirk is the lead candidate to do that.”
Kirk hasn’t exactly made himself a darling of the conservative movement lately. The boss has written extensively on Kirk’s support for cap-and-trade and his vote for Waxman-Markey, as well as his back-and-forth on running for the Senate seat at all. It doesn’t make for an auspicious start. The excuse that he did it to pander to his district doesn’t help his cause, either:
Specifically — a video of Mr. Kirk’s speech is posted on YouTube — a congressman known for his pro-environmental stances said he voted the way he did on this issue because, “It was in the narrow interests of my congressional district.
“But,” he quickly added as some in the Republican crowd booed, “as your (senator), representing the entire state of Illinois, I would vote ‘no’ against the bill coming up, and that’s because we are manufacturing, agriculture and coal state.”
Not exactly a Profile in Conservative Courage, there. And his letter can be interpreted as less of a request than a demand or a dare, but even that only exists if Kirk acknowledges the power of Palin and her ability to create momentum for a candidate. Kirk obviously wants her endorsement to establish credibility with the Tea Party movement, where the energy of the national party exists. That makes hash of the argument that Palin somehow diminished herself by endorsing a conservative in a Congressional race that resulted in forcing a liberal Republican to withdraw at the end.
Will Palin endorse Kirk? I’m guessing that he’ll have to do a lot more groveling on the cap-and-trade issue first.
Update: Well, perhaps even more groveling, as DoublePlusUndead notes:
For starters, the guy isn’t just vaguely pro-choice like a few GOPers, the guy is rabidly pro-abortion, he’s got a 100% rating from the ghouls of NARAL and similar high ratings from Planned Parenthood.
On top of that, he’s also a gun-grabber, and has a D rating from the NRA. I remember reading that he was endorsed by the Brady Fascists at one point, so there’s another thing. (Actually, I’m seeing elsewhere he now has an F, but I don’t have anything solid, if anyone wants to confirm this, that’d be great)
On energy, Kirk voted to allow more refineries, but of course knocked down any efforts to actually tap for more oil and gas, voting to bar drilling in ANWR and offshore.
Actually, a lot more groveling.
You must be logged in to post a comment.

















Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
More like “My easterbunny melted and all that’s left is a turd.”
I endorse this message, with gusto!
Schadenfreude on November 4, 2009 at 3:08 PM
Wait…. Hold on.
What if she doesn’t endorse anyone in IL?
*snorts*
upinak on November 4, 2009 at 3:09 PM
No sale with this GOP voter. I had a bad feeling about Ryan all the time in 04 — thought he was slimy — and was very disappointed that he won the primary. That was all before the sensational divorce proceedings got out into the public.
The Illinois GOP is a wreck. Very few people with good accomplishments or even name recognition (for positive things, anyway). Jim Ryan, to run for Gov, is probably our best, and he suffers from confusion over some of the other Ryans (like George the crook).
We need a couple of good draft picks from another state. :(
jwolf on November 4, 2009 at 3:10 PM
Wrong. Kirk wants her not to endorse him. Look at the way he worded it. He’s publicly demanding that she endorse immediately and using the wording that he chooses. Is she likely to do that? No.
So she wont endorse him, and thus Kirk wont look like a Tea Party wacko, which will help him in the general election. This is his plan.
(In the unlikely event that she does endorse him, then he gets it out of the way now – before the primary, when it could help him, but well ahead of the general election when it would hurt him)
Kirk actually understands what happened in NY-23. Maybe sooner or later you will too.
orange on November 4, 2009 at 3:10 PM
Yep. Kirk is the best we’re going to get here. He’s not my first choice, but he has my support.
ElectricPhase on November 4, 2009 at 3:12 PM
They’ve all been replaced (or died, in Hyde’s case) by moderates.Jimbo3 on November 4, 2009 at 3:00 PM
Roskam replaced Hyde. He is on WLS weekly in the mornings. I have never heard him utter anything that I disagree with from a fiscal perspective.
Social conservatism will not be the focus in 2010, and IL with all the crushing debts and taxes in this state, fiscal sanity will (or last should) be th focus in 2010.
WashJeff on November 4, 2009 at 3:12 PM
I will not know what to do! /sarc
WashJeff on November 4, 2009 at 3:13 PM
Don’t throw up. Grow up.
alliebobbitt on November 4, 2009 at 3:14 PM
Kirk, by the way, is no traitor in the Scozzofava mold. Whatever his faults, I believe he is a GOP loyalist. He’s not going to endorse the Democrat out of spite as happened in NY. Kirk is not my dream candidate, or anywhere near it, but he may well be the best we can do here in Illinois. I’ll probably vote for someone else in the primary, though. ;)
jwolf on November 4, 2009 at 3:16 PM
I for one am ecstatic that the Teabaggers haven’t been deterred at all by Palin’s various failures over the past year. There’s nothing I’d like more than to see her be the nominee in 2012, to the point I’d even consider volunteering for and/or donating to her (Primary) campaign should she decide to run. Go Sarah!
Typhonsentra on November 4, 2009 at 3:16 PM
Yep… it is time to just watch.
upinak on November 4, 2009 at 3:18 PM
It’s only poorly played if he’s actually trying to get the endorsement. He’s not.
As Jaibones and Sapwolf have also said, he’s going to position himself between Palin, the wacko conservative, and the allegedly wacko left – making himself look like a reasonable moderate. It’s the best way for him to win in Illinois.
orange on November 4, 2009 at 3:19 PM
Whats the point having republicans copying the democrats , why not just vote democrat?
the_nile on November 4, 2009 at 3:20 PM
Fairly certain our filing deadline was Monday.
Kirk
yuck
Aaron Schock needs to age quickly so he can challenge Durbin for his senate seat.
tehd on November 4, 2009 at 3:20 PM
Or Kirk just wanted to get his name in the paper. I doubt that one secures Palin’s (or anyone’s)endorsement, or anti-endorsement, by writing a memo to a third party and leaking it to the press. Now he’s in the paper today and may get a mention a few inches down when Palin hits the City of Broad Shoulders in a couple of weeks.
Bleeds Blue on November 4, 2009 at 3:20 PM
Wait!
According to Mikey Steele, outsiders have no place in these things!
Oh, wait, that’s right, Steele’s a moron.
Thompson for GOP Chair.
Time for Steele to go under the bus.
SuperCool on November 4, 2009 at 3:21 PM
My guess is this ambitious kid takes a few terms in the house, then shoots for the governor’s job, followed by a Presidential run.
WashJeff on November 4, 2009 at 3:22 PM
I actually agree with you. That idiot reporter is blinded by his own bias. Kirk is expressly asking for Palin not to endorse him. I do not agree with your assessment however, that Palin did not help Hoffman.
bloggless on November 4, 2009 at 3:23 PM
: )
Even better
tehd on November 4, 2009 at 3:26 PM
Kirk’s district includes the North Shore, including Highland Park, very liberal and very monied. They will not be supporting anyone Palin supports.
bloggless on November 4, 2009 at 3:26 PM
Repost…
.
Wait, I have a problem here. I’ve seen articles on HotAir denouncing congressmen who make a statement about voting against their constituents’ interests. Here, however, Kirk’s getting a bad rep for voting with them. Isn’t it right for him to represent the people who elected him as a representative? I mean look, I’m no fan of cap and trade, but can someone clarify the disconnect for me?
TouchingTophet on November 4, 2009 at 3:27 PM
good one, as is the whole Dede-Kirk linking. It’s going to take a while to flush some of These People out of the system, but it’s like any plumbing job: Better to do sooner rather than later, because if you wait too longyou’re gonna be standing in sh+t.
The problem with people like Kirk and Crist is what to do about RINOs who claim to have seen the Light and now sound conservative. Crist is running radio ads touting how ‘fiscally conservative’ he’s always been
It’s like those old Clairol ads on TV showing an allegedly blond woman: Does she or doesn’t she.
ARE they conservative or aren’t they?
Janos Hunyadi on November 4, 2009 at 3:27 PM
Why is Kirk suddenly groveling for Sarah Palin’s endorsement, after the last candidate she endorsed (Hoffman) LOST his election? Does he need some conservative credibility from Palin to fend off a primary opponent?
IMHO, Sarah Palin basically gave up all personal ambitions at higher office when she resigned from the Governorship of Alaska, and decided to become a “kingmaker” for others who share her political ideas and principles. It’s a tough, lonely road, although the one Ronald Reagan followed to the Presidency, although Reagan had far more experience than Palin when he was elected President. She should only endorse those whom SHE chooses, not those who try to buy or otherwise connive her endorsement.
Illinois is a tough state for Republicans to win, due to the huge Daley-Democrat machine in C(r)ook County, whose population dwarfs the conservative southern part of the state. For a Republican to win Illinois, he/she would have to win big in the south, and at least break even in the Chicago suburbs that Hillary called home. Could a candidate conservative enough to win Palin’s endorsement win in Illinois? Or should Palin save her endorsements for candidates in more winnable states?
Steve Z on November 4, 2009 at 3:29 PM
No Sarah No
bill30097 on November 4, 2009 at 3:31 PM
that is HUGE news for Palin. Kirk is kind of moderate. So much for the moderates hate palin
ousoonerfan15 on November 4, 2009 at 3:32 PM
Peter Fitzgerald was a conservative senator from Illinois.
bloggless on November 4, 2009 at 3:33 PM
Palin will endorse Kirk, if he gets a tattoo that says Drill, Baby, Drill.
Rocks on November 4, 2009 at 3:34 PM
You all are jumping the gun, here! He doesn’t want her endorsement. He wants her “nonendorsement”. Trust me.
bloggless on November 4, 2009 at 3:34 PM
I was not fuly paying attention to his campaign, but I do not recall him stressing social issues. He seemed very focus on fiscal sanity and good governence. Those two positions should be able to win in IL given present conditions.
WashJeff on November 4, 2009 at 3:36 PM
IMHO he was more mainstream Republican, whereas Kirk is more liberal (for a Republican). I thought Fitzgerald was great and I was disappointed he didn’t seek another term. In fact, it’s his fault we have Obama! Grr!! (only kidding)
jwolf on November 4, 2009 at 3:36 PM
Mark Kirk?
Sir, you have beclowned yourself.
To quote another well-known blogger
franksalterego on November 4, 2009 at 3:37 PM
Hughs for Senate in IL.
WashJeff on November 4, 2009 at 2:30 PM
I could see Palin following Ditka and endorsing this guy instead.
NebCon on November 4, 2009 at 3:37 PM
I always wondered if the Daly machine got to Fitzy.
bloggless on November 4, 2009 at 3:39 PM
Kirk is a pretty weak campaigner. He can use all the help he can get. He is good at making contacts at the local party level, but I’m sure his polling shows he is very unpopular with the base. He won’t win the general election unless his body gets washed ashore with a Republican tidal wave.
Ted Torgerson on November 4, 2009 at 3:39 PM
Hahaha, yeah right.
Kirk obviously wants the Palin endorsement because he knows that if she endorses another GOP candiate in the primary he will be toast, just like Scozzafava.
He is already on thin ice with conservatives in IL, he was booed at recent apperance in DuPage.
Norwegian on November 4, 2009 at 3:40 PM
His money ain’t coming from Dupage. It’s coming from the North Shore. Rich lib territory.
bloggless on November 4, 2009 at 3:42 PM
I’m in his district. I have been holding my nose and voting for Kirk since my old rep John Porter retired. Kirk was his Chief of Staff. I will always support Sarah.
Ted Torgerson on November 4, 2009 at 3:44 PM
But primary votes comes from DuPage and downstate. That’s what matters. And Palin is kingmaker in the GOP.
An alternative strategy would be to get Huckster/Mittens to endorse on of his opponents.
Norwegian on November 4, 2009 at 3:45 PM
I think Fitzgerald was the type of poltician we want. Did his service for six years and went home to his family. He did not run because he was a good man.
WashJeff on November 4, 2009 at 3:46 PM
I hope she doesn’t endorse him. It could be argues that he’s a RINO (argument’s over – he is a RINO).
matthew26 on November 4, 2009 at 3:53 PM
No political commentator with a shred of a brain would think this was a “defeat” for Palin.
Which, of course, means that they are trying to pitch to the public (and particularly to conservatives and the GOP) that it was a defeat for Palin, so as to try to — yet again — deter people from falling in behind her.
There are not so many more chances to take her out (barring her own mistakes on her comeback tour, of course) before the wind comes back under her sails. NY-23 provides such a chance, and Lord knows, the libs and their enablers in the media are all over it.
You could see this coming from the trolls in #tcot last night.
What is shows, as if we didn’t already know it, is the incredible level of fear the left has for Palin. They will do anything to try to stop her from being the 2012 candidate. Anything.
Ain’t nothing changed.
Paul F. Villarreal
PhoenixUniversal on November 4, 2009 at 4:07 PM
“I for one am ecstatic that the Teabaggers haven’t been deterred at all by Palin’s various failures over the past year.”
Please stop refering to us as “Teabaggers” – thanks.
Annie on November 4, 2009 at 4:07 PM
Publicly asking for an endorsement the way Kirk did, disingenuous or not, appears petty and stupid. Mostly stupid.
pugwriter on November 4, 2009 at 4:10 PM
Peter Fitzgerald was a conservative senator from Illinois.
bloggless on November 4, 2009 at 3:33 PM
IMHO he was more mainstream Republican, whereas Kirk is more liberal (for a Republican). I thought Fitzgerald was great and I was disappointed he didn’t seek another term. In fact, it’s his fault we have Obama! Grr!! (only kidding)
jwolf on November 4, 2009 at 3:36 PM
–Peter was a lawyer who lived in Inverness; he got his law degree from U of Michigan. His family owned a chain of banks based in Palatine that they ultimately sold for several hundred million. He was a social conservative, but generally didn’t push those issues. He was able to defeat Carol Mosley Braun, a Dem, because she came across as clueless. But he didn’t stand for relection, because he often butted heads with party leadership and Obama took over his seat.
Jimbo3 on November 4, 2009 at 4:12 PM
What is shows, as if we didn’t already know it, is the incredible level of fear the left has for Palin. They will do anything to try to stop her from being the 2012 candidate. Anything.
Ain’t nothing changed.
Paul F. Villarreal
PhoenixUniversal on November 4, 2009 at 4:07 PM
–I don’t think there’s any reason for the left to be afraid of Palin. I just don’t think she’ll be successful if she runs. Only about 30% of the US, and slightly over half of the GOP, thinks she’s qualified to be President. And slightly over half of the US don’t like her (technically, “have an unfavorable opinion of her”). Yes, she energizes the base, but at the cost of a large number of potential voters.
Jimbo3 on November 4, 2009 at 4:19 PM
Good concern trolls don’t give themselves away so easily. It’s Tea Partiers. Calling us by a homosexual slang term not only reveals your immaturity, it reveals your motives.
Now go see Axelrod for proper instructions in trolling.
BlueStateBilly on November 4, 2009 at 4:29 PM
Wow! That is some list. It really hits you hard when you see all of them names in one place.
Sapwolf on November 4, 2009 at 4:33 PM
She didn’t just “come across” as clueless — she really was. She was completely inept, a monumental embarrassment to the whole state, both Democrats and Republicans alike. And yet, she lost her reelection bid in 98 by only about 5%. That a candidate as bad as she could do so well speaks volumes about my state. It is quite possible that Kirk, for all his weaknesses, really is the best we can do here. But that battle is for another day.
jwolf on November 4, 2009 at 4:34 PM
I don’t doubt they will be asking. The money she brought in alone was impressive.
AnninCA on November 4, 2009 at 4:39 PM
Buford Gooch on November 4, 2009 at 4:40 PM
No
JusDreamin on November 4, 2009 at 4:43 PM
More groveling? Hell, he’s going to have to carry her bags while wearing a doorman’s uniform when Palin’s in Chicago, cook and deliver to her a breakfast (of her choice) in bed, do her nails, and carry a cross in the House while wearing sackcloth and ashes. Then, maybe, and only maybe, he’ll get Palin’s endorsement*.
* Palin may have her own ideas for proper supplication and penance.
RickZ on November 4, 2009 at 4:44 PM
If the “ashes” are the result of burning the abominable Cap and Trade bill, maybe. Otherwise, no deal, even with the yeoman’s service you suggested that he do for her. ;)
jwolf on November 4, 2009 at 4:46 PM
Kirk should seek Colon Powell & Scozza’s endorsement. It worked out well for Obama and Owens!
chickasaw42 on November 4, 2009 at 4:48 PM
If Mark Kirk wants to be a smart ass like this …
Then I have $50.00 for his Democratic opponent. I don’t even care if his opponent is a communist.
Nuff Said there I think.
Who’s with me?
I don’t mind RINO’s dis’ing Sarah Palin – but ridiculing her like this? Yeah dude – I’m contributing to your Democratic opponent.
HondaV65 on November 4, 2009 at 4:49 PM
This is guy thinks he can get an endorsement…Why again? He is terrible on the issues. Cap and trade? CAP and TRADE? Ugh.
I appreciate him reaching out but damn it’s like asking a girl to go to bed with you without at least buying her dinner first.
Daemonocracy on November 4, 2009 at 4:51 PM
I doubt Palin will endorse Kirk, Mark Kirk voted NO on ANWR and expanded offshore drilling, he’s D rated by the NRA and has a 100% rating from the ghouls at NARAL.
doubleplusundead on November 4, 2009 at 4:51 PM
Palin is great, but she isn’t a Messiah, although…she does know Him and isn’t ashamed of that. God bless her.
jimmy2shoes on November 4, 2009 at 4:52 PM
To whom it may concern:
Funny. If the candidate is winning … Palin’s endorsement doesn’t count, only others’. If the candidate lost, blame everything to Palin.
You’re actually making Palin as a GOP punchbag. Hits from both left and right.
Common guys. There’s always this thing called KARMA.
Now I understand why America is like this. We are all suffering from the results of our current biases and hatred.
Why can’t anyone accept his own fault, mistake and losses?
Just asking.
TheAlamos on November 4, 2009 at 5:00 PM
Are you an Illinois voter? I think WashJeff is, and some guy who is from Kirk’s district obviously is.
You’re all nuts. Kirk is unelectable, and the guy who says he’s “stong” on illegal immigration is simply lying:
Kirk is a liberal and he will not get elected as a Republican. It’s NY-23 all over again.
Jaibones on November 4, 2009 at 5:07 PM
Disagreed. As I stated earlier, I think he wants to pick a fight with her in some weird attempt to gain liberal favor. I hope she simply ignores him, rather than give him what he wants.
As for the conservatives here who believe this little twerp is tolerable, good luck. He’s Arlen Specter without all the style.
Jaibones on November 4, 2009 at 5:15 PM
i second.
alexwest on November 4, 2009 at 5:21 PM
how did Kirk’s private memo to Fred Malek become public ?
runner on November 4, 2009 at 5:22 PM
Disagreed. As I stated earlier, I think he wants to pick a fight with her in some weird attempt to gain liberal favor. I hope she simply ignores him, rather than give him what he wants.
As for the conservatives here who believe this little twerp is tolerable, good luck. He’s Arlen Specter without all the style.
Jaibones on November 4, 2009 at 5:15 PM
–The problem you have is that the Dems run very competitive races with the GOP in most of north/northwest/west suburban Chicago. Go back and look at the results for the last twelve years. Dumping Kirk for a more conservative candidate could cause a Dem win. These are not places where the GOP candidate generally has been winning with 60%+ of the vote, unlike in NY-23.
Jimbo3 on November 4, 2009 at 5:24 PM
I’m from the district south of Kirk’s (sadly, represented by Schakowsky) and speak frequently with a liberal friend of mine who is represented by Kirk. He tells me that Kirk is far more conservative than he’s usually credited with being. You may take that with the appropriate grain of salt.
All that said, I think that Kirk may be the best chance of getting this seat out of the hands of the Democrats. And when he’s not representing a relatively liberal lake shore district, he may prove to be a good bit more conservative than you’d expect. He’ll certainly be more conservative than whatever Democrat he’s running against.
Bill Roper on November 4, 2009 at 5:26 PM
+10
Hoffman gained, what 22-25 points in the pols (and the actual election) after Sarah endorsed. This is the real life example of what it would have looked like if McCain had picked another squish, instead of Sarah as his running mate!
Remember she was good for about 16 points to Saxby Chambliss in Georgia.
gary4205 on November 4, 2009 at 5:41 PM
Why would he want to gain liberal favor, when he is facing a contentious GOP primary in less than 6 months? He is by no means a shoe-in for the primary.
Kirk’s main problem is that he is viewed as too liberal. He needs some sort of conservative boost in order to overcome concerns among conservatives ahead of the primary.
Norwegian on November 4, 2009 at 6:11 PM
Kirk is a slime bag. First off the wussy wouldn’t take mail from people outside his district. Now he apologizes for cap and trade. He cannot be trusted.
Baby killer.
Gun stealer
No drilling, pro-ethanol, what a loser…
Love the ACORN rating of 33..
He even supported Defenders of Wildlife (score of 88).
So the man who supports no wolf hunting causes wants Palin’s endorsement?
Jeez, what douchebag. I am one of the Illinois tea-parties that WILL bring him down.
chicagotrauma on November 4, 2009 at 6:29 PM
You are absolutely wrong. I broke my fax machine sending him letters of despisement. He got an earful hear in Illinois for that cap and trade crap. He KNOWS that if any real conservative challenges him in the primary, the tea-partiers will rally with the conservative and he will burn. He is running scared. I can hear him weeping from my house.
chicagotrauma on November 4, 2009 at 6:39 PM
Your friend is a bonehead, if he thinks Kirk is conservative.
I’d rather have Giannoulias as a senator, than have Kirk in there, and not be able to rely on him. At least I know Alexi is a scumbag, and I don’t have to spend all my time wondering when Kirk is going to stab us in the back.
chicagotrauma on November 4, 2009 at 6:45 PM
Houston? Do we have a problem here in Illinois?
chicagotrauma on November 4, 2009 at 6:53 PM
I, for one, am surprised at such a weak kneed attempt at trolling.
Listen up SCUMBAG. Mrs. Palin has failed at absolutely nothing in the past year!
You and AC360 can do whatever it is scum sucking libs do when you’re alone. I don’t want to know.
Blacksmith8 on November 4, 2009 at 7:09 PM
Governor Palin would never endorse a abortion candidate. Really this just one liberal republican crying for attention.
Cut him loose. We don’t want or need him. Let go to the Powell-Brooks wing.
Blacksmith8 on November 4, 2009 at 7:12 PM
I don’t know if this was mentioned earlier, but shortly after his vote on cap-n-trade, Cong Kirk appeared on WIND 560AM and stated that he “heard and understood” the anger relating to this vote, and that he would withdraw his support for the bill. Kirk represents the north-shore suburban area of Chicago which is a very liberal area and he’s managed to hold off liberal democratic challenges, but when he looked towrds his statewide office he realized what a blunder that vote was and that some of his positions in representing that particular area will not resonate with more conservative down state voters. It makes sense that he would try to set up his bonafides through Palin. I’ve met the guy and am willing to see where this goes with his meeting with the Sarahcuda.
ChicagoBlues on November 4, 2009 at 9:49 PM
Good luck with that.
Assegai on November 5, 2009 at 12:59 AM
Kirk is trying to get Palin to back him before someone else in the race beats him too it. But does Chicago have a someone else?
- The Cat
P.S. My guess is if the ’someone’ gets that they could have Palin behind them, it may make them feel more comfortable in sticking their neck out.
P.P.S. Can you see the Palin Vs Jackson Op Eds?
MirCat on November 5, 2009 at 2:16 AM
I’m at a loss here on the environment thing. Palin made sure that the oil companies do nothing to harm her state’s environment as they pursue their business, so, unless Kirk came out as a person harmful to Alaska’s interests (meaning he was anti-drilling), how is his philosophy different from Palin’s?
Palin is quite centrist on environmental issues — at the same time as she is for energy self-sufficiency, she’s never been for having her state bear the costs of sponging petrochemicals off their coastline or off rocks in the interior…
That said, I can see the issues with cap and trade, which is little more than an excuse to pad Al Gore’s pockets with a bit of loose change gleaned from the rest of us…
unclesmrgol on November 5, 2009 at 7:01 AM
Because of his money and name recognition, and the near-anonymity of every conservative in the primary. There are, what, six conservatives running against him? They will totally fracture the vote. Eric Wallace just pulled out, which was smart. But if there is more than one choice for opposition to Kirk, Kirk will win the primary.
He’s already campaigning for the general election.
Jaibones on November 5, 2009 at 7:59 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2