Friday, January 1, 2010

Looking Ahead in 2010

2010 is here, and for those of us of a certain age, it probably has the same psychological effect as when 2001 finally came around. Or perhaps it's just me and I've read too much Arthur C. Clarke. When I was growing up in the 70s and 80s, 2010 used to be a year that seemed so far off in the future that it could never really come.

Well, folks, now it's here, and we must now look ahead "in" 2010, rather than "to" 2010, to see what the ever-changing political landscape may bring to us in February, and then November.

On one hand, I am constantly reminded of the new dynamics in politics based on 24/7/365 news and the 24 hour (or less) news cycle, and the vast amount of political discourse that takes place on the Internet among bloggers, commenters to on-line news articles, social media like Facebook and Twitter, and of course, the omnipresent chatter of cable news.

On the other hand, I am also reminded that for the vast majority of the electorate, they are simply not paying attention, and many won't, even under the barrage of polticial advertising that we expect to endure in the next 30 days.

So where does that leave us? The primary election in February, given the chill and lack of general interest in the overall electorate, may hold more than a few surprises for us. But before we all go predicting that every dark-horse candidate will be victorious in February, we need to remember that money talks in politics, and outside of the Chicago Machine, I know of no candidate, or other political organization (including the so-called Tea Partiers) that has enough of a grass-roots organization that is capable of turning out enough of the vote on their own to counter-act the effectiveness of simply outspending your opponent. Yes, I know, there are plenty of exceptions that prove the rule. But so far this cycle, I see the advantage going to the proven fundraisers.

So, where does that leave us? Mark Kirk for U.S. Senate is about to unleash some killer fundraising numbers for the past quarter, I have no doubt. They will totally eclipse anything that any other GOP challenger has managed to scrape together -- and indeed, it seems that some are not even trying. I hope for my old chum Patrick Hughes's sake that he ends up with enough left in his campaign account on February 3rd to pay himself back the $250K of seed money he loaned his campaign so the kids can go to college.

Speaking of Pat, we haven't heard much out of him lately, although I did chuckle at this short article I found in which he claimed that he was the Republican candidate who could win independent and Democratic votes in the general election. Um, sorry? The candidate whose whole platform is based on dogmatic adherence to hard core conservative values, and that this election is a battle for the soul of the Republican party, thinks that HE'S going to appeal to independents and Dems?

Anyway, I digress. On the Dem side, I don't know where the numbers between Alexi Giannoulias and David Hoffman are going to fall out, but I think that while Hoffman has run a good race, he's just not going to be able to stop Alexi's momentum. But that's as we want it, so the Alexi-Kirk match up is going all according to plan.

In IL-10, from what I am hearing on the street, the GOP race is shaping up to be a two-person sprint between Bob Dold and State Rep. Beth Coulson. Dold may have an edge in fundraising once the numbers for this past quarter are reported (but keep an eye on the number of big donors who have already maxed out for Dold for the entire campaign cycle) but I hear that Coulson is expected to announce some huge endorsements soon, piling on the endorsements of most establishment Republicans, including former Governor Jim Edgar.

There has been a lot of talk about up-and-comer Dr. Arie Friedman here, but it seems likely that he isn't going to have the serious cash his opponents will have to be competitive. Businessman Dick Green is an earnest chap, but still seems to be struggling for traction, and it's likely that Green, Dold and Friedman will simply split votes (and we may include even 3 or 4 votes for Paul Hamann), allowing Coulson a potentially easy win.

On the Dem side, perennial candidate Dan Seals is giving State Rep. Julie Hamos a serious run, with some predicting that he will win, simply based on his name recognition. But many have thought time and again that Seals was poised to grab the ring, only to be beaten in the end. As we have said often, Seals' only credential for being in Congress is that he's run for Congress. I'll stack the accomplishments of any of the GOP contenders against Seals for a win in the general. Hamos has more accomplishments, but more negatives too, so this will be interesting no matter how it turns out in Feb. With the national trend looking favorable for the GOP (as of this week, anyway), it's not clear that IL-10 will be the easy pick-up that many Dems anticipated when Mark Kirk announced he was running for U.S. Senate.

I've said enough for one post. What do you all think?


Blue Wind said...

Happy new year. Although I disagree with you in general, I commend you for being open minded and allowing opposing opinions to be posted in your blog. You certainly deserve credit for that.

As for the races, I agree with you that at the end it will most likely be a Kirk-Giannoulias final (although Hoffman has a lot of momentum now and could still pull an upset in the democratic primary). I believe that Hoffman would be a stronger candidate in the general election than Giannoulias. But now I am convinced that either of them will beat Kirk. Although you obviously dont want to face reality on the issue, the damage that Martin did to Kirk was enormous. There was actually an article in the NY Times yesterday about it. Kirk will still win easily the republican primary, but he will lose big time in the general. Why? Because the religious right will not show up in big numbers across the state to vote for him, after Martin's attacks. In my opinion, the only way Kirk would have a chance is if he addressed directly himself the "rumors" and attacked harshly Martin, accusing him for lying. It does not seem though that he will be doing that and that is why he will lose.

As for IL10, it will be a very close race. The democratic candidate will likely be Seals. I was determined not to vote for him this year, but after Hamos endorsed the war escalation in Afghanistan, I did not have much choice left. And there are many democrats thinking like myself (I think). I still believe (and hope) that finally a democrat will win IL10. It is about time.

Team America said...

Thanks Blue Wind and Happy New Year yourself. We're always happy to have well-thought out responses from our friends across the aisle. You might mention that thought to Ellen, but then again, she might delete you for such seditious suggestions.

I saw the NYT article (even though I don't read it as a matter of course) but I believe Team Kirk is counting on the message being so diluted by the messenger (Martin) that in the end, it's a tempest in a teapot. Hopefully, the whole basic issue (is Kirk gay?) will not effect voters anyway -- despite the claim that all Republicans are Neanderthals, those of us on this side of the political spectrum know that it's not true, so it should be irrelevant, despite Martin's attempt at muckraking.

Seals is a loser, and always will be. Why can't he find a job?

Anonymous said...

Blue Wind,

I disagree with you on the Kirk issue. First off, I've known Mark an extremely long time and Andy Martin's comments are ridiculous.

Second, as a staunch Republican, I have pro-life friends that are not homophobic and in fact respect all of God's children.

That being said, I agree Mark should simply put the issue to rest by addressing it. However, if he does respond, will he have to respond to every outrageous accusation launched at him?

Image if Lisa Madigan being faced with similar rumors - would the papers publish the rumors? Would there be a response?

Just asking if the rules apply to everyone....

Lville Champ said...


Good post and Happy New Year. I think your thoughts on the Senate race are right on.

As for the 10th, I don't think Friedman should be written off solely on $ numbers. I would expect Dold to come out swinging and running a negative campaign against Coulson, it is all he can do at this point. Although I like him personally, I cannot get a straight answer out of him on Life vs. Choice.

Coulson, will be the GOP nominee, I would assume that she has enough money, more name id than the rest, GOP endorsements, she will get all the endorsements from the papers and whoever else is out there. But, Dold did get endorsed by Santa Clause. Very cute.

As for Green, I don't get him. Unlike some cases in business, you cannot dump hundreds of thousands into a bad investment and expect to be successful.

All and all, yawn.. Turnout will be low and you will have Coulson versus Seals and Kirk vs. alexi in the general.

Anonymous said...

For Arie, it isn't only $$$, it is lack of organization. I don't think he has walked any precincts, while Green, Dold & Coulson have each walked several. I have heard of no phone banks. No volunteer events. etc. I think Arie has no idea how hard it is to get the message our to those who aren't paying that much attention.

Anonymous said...

And we're off and running in 2010. Addressing all the comments this morning is pretty easy - Mark Kirk is on active duty and can't comment himself while in uniform. Those of us who know him, respect and admire him, are outraged that a subhuman like Martin can buy airtime and put out such vile and disgusting lies. I've often wondered why decent, honest people don't get out and expose the REAL Andrew Martin Trigona. It might have to come to that very soon. IF Mark Kirk was only running here in the 10th where he's well known and, other than Gill, Sheffey, Gash and some of the other odd ball kooks,he is highly respected as an outstanding legislator and stand up guy, this wouldn't be at issue. Because he's running State-wide, I do believe that as disgusting as all of this happens to be, it will have to be addressed when he returns and becomes a civilian again. No wonder it's hard to entice decent people to run for office these days. Until we rid ourselves, in BOTH parties, of disgraceful things like Andrew Martin Trigona, we're going to endure insanity like this.
Can Mark Kirk win the General this November? Nobody can predict that outcome. I can bet everything I have that the expanded Kirk team will not let a day go by without using every bit of their time, energy and passion to have what some of you think is impossible, POSSIBLE. I've watched this team in action. Enough said. Mark Kirk has earned the loyalty of some amazing people and that's the kind of thing that money can't buy. He has it, and to all you naysayers, just stand aside and watch this team get out and prove you wrong.

Anonymous said...

The sad truth is that GOP insiders view Coulson as a female Kirk and therefore can win a general. The truth is she makes Kirk look like Newt Gingrich. Conservatives who tolerated Kirk will skip Beth on the ballot. An a third party (NY 23) is already being discussed.

Dold and Green will spend and spend and beat each other up and Beth as well. That leaves Friedman standing.

It's fascinating that Friedman has the buzz while the others have the cash. He is without a doubt the best shot in the General and doesn't need sleepy Dick or Bob's money to win.

The next thirty days will be fascinating - If GOPers want to keep the seat they better get behind Friedman or Rep. Seals will be in our future.

Anonymous said...

Whoever says Friedman isn't doing anything needs to put down the pipe. I've already gotten a call from his campaign and he has received more media coverage than the other combined. He's been on Tom Roeser twice which is worth more than the lousy commercials Dick and Bob have.

Besides, nobody has been paying attention. This is a thirty day race and Friedman has momentum.

Also, Kirk was outspent 4-1 by three other candidates in 2000. Sounds too familiar.

Blue Wind said...

I dont think that approach (message being diluted by the messenger) will work for Kirk. After Martin launched this (totally despicable) ad against Kirk, one has to address it directly, otherwise it will stick.

I dont like Kirk's policies and positions, and I hope he loses. However, I dont like the fact that he may lose because of this story, as it shows how bigotry and personal destruction can affect policies. Just the fact that there are republican "conservative" voters who may not vote for Kirk because of a (very likely false) rumor that he is gay shows how terrible the situation is in the republican party. It has been hijacked to a large extent by wingnuts and lunatics, Palin-like or Glenn Beck-like, and that is very bad for the country.

Anonymous said...

Blue Wind, I'm not sure what policies you don't like that Mark Kirk supports. Can you state your objections? I'd like to read those statements. If you think that the Republicans have the lock on nut jobs and wing nuts I think we can list a whole lot on the Democrat side who fit those titles as well. It's fine to be a Democrat, but I'm just questioning what it is that turns you against a guy like Mark Kirk. IF you knew him, IF you really understood what he stands for rather than the false misrepresentations of his positions, perhaps you'd see what he continues to win, and will win again.

Anonymous said...

I know for a fact that Friedman has been personally meeting voters in all sorts of venues for weeks. He has walked some precinct and has hit a number of high volume events. He has been phone banking for 2 weeks and is even conducting in-house polling.

May not be enough, but his organization is not idle.

Anonymous said...

Exactly who is voting for Coulson? In a low-turn out off year primary, who is her natural republican constituency? Liberal, grey-haired, ex-hippie, baby-boom women? Sure, all of those who pick up a republican ballot will vote for her. But who else? Has anyone actually met a supporter of hers who isn't a member of her campaign? A regular voter who really thinks she is the best candidate?

Anonymous said...

Anon 12:14 yes, there are many in this district who are NOT what you describe as Coulson supporters. Several well known doctors are on her side, many who have known her over the years and realize that she has the background and the experience to carry on in the Kirk tradition. Arie Friedman is a good guy, but I think he needs to earn the right to jump into the big time right now. Just because he has an MD after his name doesn't do it for most of us. He's not been elected to anything in his short life. He might pull an upset, but don't discount Beth as someone only the oldies are supporting.

Anonymous said...

I know Mark Kirk, Mark Kirk is a friend of mine, and Elizabeth Coulson, you are no Mark Kirk.

Green, Friedman and Dold are more like Mark Kirk than is Coulson. Coulson is to the left of Mark Kirk on policy issues. For example, while Mark Kirk has been fighting government takeover of health care, Elizabeth Coulson has been forcing expensive new mandates from Springfield into our health care policies, driving up costs for all of us. Hate the rapidly expanding health care costs in Illinois? Coulson is part of your problem.

Mark Kirk understands what Dold, Friedman and Green understand, we do not need Springfield or Washington DC politicians getting between the patient/doctor relationship. Coulson now claims she is a fiscal conservative, but her record is so clearly to the contrary.

Also, Mark Kirk, Arie Friedman, Dick Green and Robert Dold have never cut political fliers with Blago or Obama. Its one thing to diverge from the GOP on policy issues from time to time, it is a a different animal who cuts fliers with scoundrel Democrats. Remember, we have precedent up in Lake Forest of a very liberal Republican woman switching to the Democratic Party. Mark Kirk would never be a traitor to his Party like she was.

We don't need to nominate someone who has voted more like Julie Hamos than Mark Kirk to bear our flag. We have three, actually four, other moderate republicans to choose from.

Anonymous said...

"He's not been elected to anything in his short life."

I'm confused. I thought Friedman was in his 40s, has a college aged daughter, and is on his second career. Am I thinking of another Friedman? Or was that just a gratuitous jab. Isn't Dold the youngest in this race?

And if we are looking for "experienced" polticians, it seems like we are asking for a Hamos v. Coulson race.

I guess it depends on what "experience" people want...

Anonymous said...

"Arie Friedman is a good guy, but I think he needs to earn the right to jump into the big time right now."

Oh, one more thing. The 406 shipboard landings as a navy pilot probably earned him the right to do anything he likes in this country.

D. Miller said...

What has Dold done to earn his place on the ballot??

Blue Wind said...

Anon 12;03

I am a very liberal democrat and I dont like most things Kirk stands for. I dont like that he was essentially a rubber stamp for the worst decisions of the Bush administration the last several years. For instance, I dont like his strong support for the disastrous Iraq war and, currently, his opposition to health care reform. I give him credit that on social issues he has voted very differently than the wingnuts and he is socially liberal. Like he was against a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, he has supported gay rights and he has supported abortion rights for women. However, being socially moderate/liberal is not enough. He is wrong on all other issues.

tikkunolam said...

Golly, this conversation is hard to follow. Pick some names, my friends.

TA and Blue Wind, I think you're ignoring the forest for the trees on the Senate race. This Martin thing is not a huge game changer. Rich Miller is right on this one: no money behind it, a tainted messenger and the worst time possible to bring it up. If Andy Martin had any ability to spread any kind of message, well... we would live in a much more damaged country, for one thing.

The real story of the Senate race is demographics. Kirk's been railing on all things Chicago since he came out of the womb. Essentially any criticism against him, however merited, is derided as "Chicago-style" politics. Any volunteer for his opponent is labeled a "Chicago machine thug," or even worse, a "union thug." Such rhetoric, while it may help him on the North Shore, has permanently damaged his prospects of picking up potential votes in the far-and-away largest constituency in the state, Chicago voters.

Without a significant share of Chicago votes, Kirk needs to walk an impossible tightrope in the rest of the state. Our state is about D+10, so he needs to win a significant share of the Democratic vote. He's accomplished this in the 10th by essentially running as a Democrat.

On the other hand, because of the potential low turnout for a midterm election, Kirk needs something to thoroughly and explosively activate his base. Even more difficult, he can't do anything to permanently alienate them. His apostasy on cap and trade is a good example of this.

Simply put, there's no way Kirk can unite the coalition of collar-county democrats, statewide independents and a monster amount of downstate republicans he needs to win this. Especially because, if he walks that tightrope too obviously, he opens himself to a line of attack he's already vulnerable too, having no core values.

Anonymous said...

"Coulson is to the left of Mark Kirk on policy issues. For example, while Mark Kirk has been fighting government takeover of health care, Elizabeth Coulson has been forcing expensive new mandates from Springfield into our health care policies, driving up costs for all of us. Hate the rapidly expanding health care costs in Illinois? Coulson is part of your problem."

Looks like someone has been drinking the Dold Kool-Aid again. They say she's been forcing expensive mandates down people's throats, but never site a specific bill. They ignore those drug-prescription programs that the seniors have relied upon, or the insurance expansion that allows young adults to stay on their parent's plans. How does that drive up cost? It doesn't, but Dold doesn't want you to know that.

It's all the same schtick Dold has been trying to force down people's throats to like him more because he hasn't done anything outside of being Dan Quayle's advance man and working at his parent's pest-control business. Yeah, those are great credentials to get you elected.

Anonymous said...

Those ship landings of Friedman's also probably entitle him to a lot more respect than he is getting from some of the nitwit commentators on this blog. I'm a Marine and I am under the assumption that Republicans - even if they support another candidate - know better. I also am under the assumption that people belittling any of the candidates in the way we've seen here are simply lib infiltrators.

Semper fi!

Anonymous said...


coulson beats dold. friedman does really well and gets recruited for another office.

pup beats hamos, loses to coulson.

mark obliterates alexi. the democrats make a big first push for alexi all the while underscoring the fact that he is a c-list candidate. when mark starts to pull away after labor day they leave alexi for dead not wanting obama to get hit for losing the seat. they point out that clinton and gore also lost their home state senate seats in 1994.

quinn over ryan.

rutherford elected.

catwoman increases medication intake after realizing she has 6 years of mark ahead of her with 5 years where she can't touch him.

the il gop is worse off after election day than now because soon we wont have the economy to hit the democrats with.

another terrorist attack, pakistan continues to disintigrate as mark's archnemesis in the region fails to put forth a solid agenda in south asia.

romney, rick perry, mitch daniels emerge as GOP POTUS contenders.

hastert is defeated, thankfully.

team america, foklaeas, king louis meet january 3, 2011 after kirk swearing in at the former hotel washington, get drunk and email catlady from a view overlooking the white house, that you are never wrong when you are right.

Anonymous said...

Just the fact that there are republican "conservative" voters who may not vote for Kirk because of a (very likely false) rumor that he is gay shows how terrible the situation is in the republican party.

Nope. A handful of Jack Roeser's followers might not vote because of a false rumor, but the others will because 1) they don't believe or don't care about the false rumor, and 2) what happened to Jack Ryan is still fresh in everyone's minds.

With both Ryans happily remarried and with new additions to their families already there, or expected soon, Republicans are scratching their heads even harder, wondering what the heck happened in 04.

Doubtful that the Democracts will ever be able to use this type of tactic against one of our Candidates again, and I'm absolutely certain that it won't work this time.

Anonymous said...

Sorry. 3:52 is from Anonymous?

Anonymous said...

Anon 1:45,

I completely agree with you.

Dr. Friedman, thank you for your service!

Anonymous said...

Elizabth Coulson voted against HB5954 (2008), this Bill would have permitted individuals with high-deductible, health-savings account insurance plans to voluntarily waive coverage for insurance mandates required by Coulson and her Springfield cronies' insurance mandates. In other words, Beth thinks Springfield politicians know better than you what type of mandates you need in your health insurance coverage. If it weren't for Beth, Hamos and the others who voted against this bill, catastrophic health insurance would be more affordable, and thousands of more people could afford insurance.

Also, Beth routinely says something like "Illinois law that allows young adults up to age 26 (30 for those with military service) was a great idea because it was a win-win and didn’t cost anything." While providing health insurance to more people is a noble cause, it is not free. This is yet another state mandate that unfairly adds to the burden of small business across our state.
The problem is that a 24 year old child is not an IRS qualified dependent. Under this law they’ll now go on dad’s employer provided group health plan. Dad’s employer pays a majority of this premium for dad and his family. But because the 24 year old is not a dependent, the portion of the premium attributable to the dependent is now seen as additional compensation to dad. But how much is additional compensation? When should it be added to his tax liability?
I’ve had to hire a law firm to interpret this law and tax ramifications for our clients. I just got a 6-page memo from them on what employers should do.

So, while Beth may have a MBA and have done some consulting…. her lack of business experience means that she is missing out on reality. I don't know about the rest of you, but I think Beth and her Springfield endorsers are out of touch.

Anonymous said...

Dear Marine,

I have posted a couple of times concerning my concern about Arie Friedman's fundraising. I hope you do not construe that as lack of respect for the man. I think he is a fine man from the time I met him. I haven't seen any personal attacks on Arie here (i.e. what Andy Martin did to Kirk), but I may have missed them, but I think it is worth mentioning that I believe decorum should prohibit us from personal attacks, but it should not prohibit legitimate discussion on policy and campaign related matter (i.e. fundraising). We, as Republicans, have an important decision to make on Feb. 2, and we must make sure our candidates are vetted and have what it takes to keep this in GOP hands. If he reveals his numbers, and he has raised a couple hundred thousand, then he should be considered 'a contenda' . If he doesn't report or has raised only miniscule, then I don't think he should be considered a contender. My opinion stated, but my opinion has nothing to do with the respect I have for him as an individual and Marine. So clarifies

The Oracle

Anonymous said...


Agreed. It is legit to question someone's positions or viability as a candidate.

It is statements such as "just because he has an MD after his name doesn't do it for most of us" that are disrepectful. I'd you've met Friedman, you probably know that comment is inappropriate. It isn't as bad as andy martin's garbage, but it is unfitting.

Again, Friedman's background entitles him to better on this forum. Criticize - ok. Belittle - you've crossed the line.

Me personally, I couldn't care less how much money a candidate has. I much more care about how much honor he (and his supporters) have. But that's just me.

One of the things that makes us different from the libs is that we treat our military and vets different. Let's keep it that way.

Semper fi!

Anonymous said...

Wow, looks like Dold's "Kool-aid" has some merit after all, Anon 1:18pm. I cannot believe that Coulson supported requiring all the mandate coverages in catastrophic health care. As a young man in good health, I purchase high deductible low premium care because it makes sense for me. It kinda sickens me to think that my State Rep voted for a bill that makes my insurance more expensive to cover mandates that I probably do not want or need. I'm actually kinda pissed off right now.

Anonymous said...

I sincerely believe that nobody is criticizing Dr. Friedman for his campaign, his fundraising, or his age. What IS a legitimate concern is, and should be, his lack of any kind of experience at any level before wanting to represent 700.000people in the 10th District. It's not showing a lack of respect for this man, it's making a point of anyone, be that person a doctor, a lawyer, an Indian chief, believing that one should start at the TOP rather than being a part of the process leading up to running for Congress. Mark Kirk was a Chief of Staff to former Congressman John Porter for a number of years. Immediately before he ran for office, he spent 5 years as the Attorney for the International Relations Chairman in the US House. He had great experience in how the process works, and that's very important, especially given today's Congress. Nobody has or should show disrespect to Dr. Friedman. I think he knows that it takes a lot of money to mount a campaign in any district in the US.

Anonymous said...

Sorry Beth Coulson, what you and your buddies have done in Springfield is not the type of 'experience' we want.

Anonymous said...

Under this law they’ll now go on dad’s employer provided group health plan.

Dear Lord. Don't even get me started on this particular topic and how it might apply to "absentee" Dads. You'd think that some--with their alleged, highly-developed homing skills--would actually manage to find their way Home for breakfast or dinner every once in a while when their 24-years olds are home from school--let alone figure out a way to pay for their insurance. Oy.

Anonymous said...

"I sincerely believe that nobody is criticizing Dr. Friedman for his campaign, his fundraising, or his age. What IS a legitimate concern is, and should be, his lack of any kind of experience at any level before wanting to represent 700.000people in the 10th District."

That is so laughable I can barely type! So, the only person who has the "experience" to represent the district is Beth Coulson? The only way we, as a district, can be properly represented is to choose a 12 year "veteran" of the most corrupt state legislature in the country! Wow. I truly have to wonder who thinks the voters will buy this line of hot air.

Let's export Springfield to Washington! That's the ticket!

I am a Dold supporter, but I will take Green, Friedman, Cadigan, Bird, or Hammon over Beth any day of the week. At least they won't take the stink of Springfield to DC with them in 2011.

Anonymous said...

One last comment from a grizzled old leatherneck. What sort of background do y'all think qualifies as experience? Saying Friedman has no background at "any level" is exactly what I was talking about. Most of us ordinary Americans think being on the point end of the spear qualifies a man for all sorts of things "at any level."

I'm starting to realize the behavior directed at Friedman isn't personal - it is just diffuse ignorance and distain for military experience in gen.

Still the libs sayin it, though. Just the ones on Rep Coulson's team, I guess.

Semper fi, folks. G'night.

Anonymous said...

Anon 1:18 "They say she's been forcing expensive mandates down people's throats, but never site a specific bill. They ignore those drug-prescription programs that the seniors have relied upon, or the insurance expansion that allows young adults to stay on their parent's plans. How does that drive up cost?"

Are you kidding? Who pays for the prescription drug programs for seniors? Taxpayers through higher taxes. And who pays for young adults to stay on their parents plans? Employees do in lost wages.

Coulson supported mandates for items like hearing aides, special foods, and even supplements. Illinois has 25 mandates that the legislature has added to the cost of insurance for small businesses in Illinois. These mandates have raised the cost of insurance here by 37%.

Friedman, Green and Dold all have business experience and understand the effects of such well intentioned legislation. Coulson has shown that either she doesn't understand or just doesn't care. Either way she has lost my vote.

Anonymous said...

I remember the day when this blog was 12 of my comments with one from king louis, one from team, one from baxters mom and then 12 more from me.

First, the dold people must answer to paraphrase the tribe, why is this guy different from a ll other guys, how is he different from mcsweeney.

then they must answer how a guy who looks as energetic on tv as the milk I drank last night is going to win.

then they must explain why their candidate doesn't smell of windows 95 and an old gop vanguard that hasn't worked here since tikun was in dipers and the pup was doing saki bombs in imperial japan.

he's yesterday everything, uncharismatic and that's a problem because it's been a surefire path to defeat here.


Anonymous said...

Friedman had a 'real' military career, as opposed to Kirk's. As for Friedman's lack of experience being inappropriate for congress, perhaps you should talk to Bill Frist about that.

Anonymous said...

All this serious prognosticating and wondering about finances and campaigns got me thinking. After a quick consultation with a specially appointed Blue Ribbon Panel (hat/tip: accidental Governor of Illinois Quinn), we are pleased to announce the First Annual 10th Congressional District Awards: Envelopes Please!

10th Congressional District Awards (2009):

(1) Most charismatic candidate: Bob Dold and Arie Friedman.
(2) Best Public Speaker: Bob Dold
(3) The I ran for this before Award: Dan Seals
(4) The Crowned Challenger Award: Julie Hamos
(5) Best understands issues: Elizabeth Coulson
(6) Best understands economic issues: Dick Green
(7) Best campaigner: Bob Dold
(8) Best Endorsements: Elizabeth Coulson
(9) Best Legislative Experience: Elizabeth Coulson and Julie Hamos
(10) Best Party Line Legislative Experience: Julie Hamos
(11) Best Business Experience: DIck Green
(12) Best Teaching Experience: Elizabeth Coulson
(13) Best Military Experience: Arie Friedman
(14) Best Medical Experience: Arie Friedman
(15) Best Personal Injury Suits: Eliot Richardson
(16) Best Explains Issues: Elizabeth Coulson
(17) Most Excited Supporters: Bob Dold
(18) Best Commercials: Bob Dold and Dick Green
(19) Best Mailers: Elizabeth Coulson and Bob Dold
(20) Most Responsive Campaign: Elizabeth Coulson and Bob Dold
(21) Best Debater: Arie Friedman
(22) Best Looking Yard Signs: Bob Dold
(23) Most Photogenic: Bob Dold
(24) Best "What a Wonderful Speaker, What Did He Say Again?" Award: Bob Dold
(25) Best Moustache: Dick Green
(26) Best Obama Impersonation: Dan Seals
(27) Best Name Identification: Dan Seals
(28) Most Creative Answers During Debates: Paul Hamann
(29) Best Non-Resident of 10th Award: Dan Seals
(30) Best Just Moved Into The District Award: Julie Hamos
(31) Best Fund Raiser: (We will know in a few more days!)
(32) Best Liberal: Julie Hamos
(33) Best Conservative: Arie Friedman
(34) Best Supporter of Israel: Arie Friedman
(35) Best Understands Budgets: Dick Green

Anymore to add to the list? Remember, only "Best" Awards, not "Worst." The number of awards is unlimited.

Louis G. Atsaves

Anonymous said...

Anon 11:02, what are you saying? Mark Kirk has served in war zones in Afghanistan, Kosovo and a few other places you've not heard of. Please don't ever say such a damn stupid thing about the service to our country that Mr. Kirk has given since 1989, and is, at this moment, on active duty in a place you will never see. Nobody is demeaning what Arie Friedman has done in the military, but let's not say such factually incorrect statements about Mr. Kirk. Those kinds of things are reserved for Gill, Gash, Sheffey and the other Kirk haters on that other Blog.

Anonymous said...


As one of your township's female members, I want dispute one award. Arie has my vote for most photogenic! Plus he is tall - very important.

On a more serious note, I really never got the impression that Beth undertands the issues all that well.

Anonymous said...

Top 3 astute political comments heard around the 10th this week:

"With regard to Berkowitz, I think he's a great guy. Great show that certainly does "it's part" to inform voters--and just a very "compassionate" and kind gentleman overall, if you will."
-Jeff Berkowitz

"Mom, wheres' my meatloaf"

"For some reason I'm not as pessimistic about the future of the 10th Congressional District as many posters are around here. Perhaps because I have interacted with the candidates on many occasions, from having them appear at a regular Moraine Township Meetings, to the debate our Township held in November with them, and seeing them in action in West Deerfield Township, Shields and Waukegan forums and debates, and at various fundraisers and meet and greets.

Before Cadigan dropped out, I would assure nervous Republican voters that any one of the top four candidates would do us proud in that race. Since Friedman jumped in, and Cadigan now has dropped out out, I guess I can still say this.

Coulson, Dold, Friedman and Green (in alphabetical order) bring different talents and perspectives to the campaign, but they are all extremely sharp and intelligent individuals. If you want to continue the legacy of "thoughful" representation, they would all fit the bill in varying degrees.

All four of them would out debate Hamos or Seals. They are sharper on their feet than either one of the top two Democrats.

Who is the most electable of the bunch? Who can raise money to get his/her message out? Who can everyone rally behind after the primary? Who will excite enough voters to win? Who will draw from independents and disappointed Democrats?

We should be focusing more on those questions right about now.

On the Democratic side I see a race to the far left by their top two candidates, which outside of my township and perhaps Waukegan/North Chicago, isn't going to register very well in the rest of the district.

So cheer up Republicans. The national Democrats are our best allies these days. And we are truly blessed to have strong candidates in our District that will keep it in the "R" column for the next few years."-Louis G. Atsaves

And so determines,
The Oracle

Anonymous said...

Anon 4:20 is apparently high if they think expanding parents coverage is either a mandate or more expensive. It's never a requirement to keep your own child on your insurance but an option you can waive. Also, if the child would keep the insurance and pay the difference it would be cheaper than paying for his/her own plan outright. But I guess that is what you gwt from Dold's own campaig-n manager - a lack of real common sense business practice and a misunderstanding of basic thongs like difference between mandates and options.

D. Miller said...

Let's turn the question around. Please list the health insurance mandates that Coulson has voted AGAINST.

D. Miller said...

Anon 10:57,

Also, please don't accuse us of misunderstanding basic thongs.

I pride myself on my understanding of each and every variation of the thong...

Anonymous said...

I don't eat meatloaf, although I had an amazing buff joes double cheeseburger last night.

As a diehard republican I am finished with the party koolaid until shown otherwise. greg hinz, a writer with crains predicts mark will lose and he's generally been a kirk lover. I am sick of pouring my guts out only to have thugs like mckenna and hastert abuse our trust and destroy our party once in power.

dick green couldn't inspire a starving dog to eat a steak. watch the tribune debate, it's ugly and fugly.

as for king louis awards here are mine

a few to add

36 biggest lover of job killing unions : coulson hamos

37 biggest RINO: coulson

38 most likely to win congressman of the year from tehran-dan seals.

39 most resumes posted on dan seals.

40 most distortions and lies: dan seals

41 most anti-israel candidate- seals/hamos

42 least likely to win green/richardson/hamos

43 most likely to get under 5 percent of the vote: pat hughes

44 jay footlik award for most overhyped campaign: hamos

45 lee goodman award for nuttiness: hamos

46 hank perritt award: dick green.

47 loleta didrickson award for being overhyped by party insiders but hated by grassroots: coulson


Anonymous said...


I generally agree with you, however, as a die hard Republican I am supporting Beth Coulson because:

She is most likely to win in the general election (we can't afford to lose the 10th)

She is independent and practical-she's in the minority in Springfield and is still able to pass legislation that is beneficial to the community, such as the Save Abandoned Babies legislation and the expansion of health care coverage to young adults. (which by the way in a recession is a good idea with the lack of jobs out there today - it is not required but an option and alot less expensive than government healthcare).

She is a tremendously hard worker - Madigan has NEVER given her a pass and the Dems are laughing at us now as we beat up the single toughest opponent for them in November.

If the goal is to keep the 10th in the GOP column the choice is Beth Coulson. If the goal is to punish elected officials that fail to be rubber stamps for Republican leaders then both Kirk and Coulson are out - but so are the Republicans!

Hamos and Seals support Obamacare, Beth does not. Hamos and Seals support Cap and Trade, Beth does not. Hamos and Seals support spending our way out of the recession, Beth does not. There is a line in the sand here and if we really want to stop the Obama/Pelosi/Reid machine we need numbers in the House and the Senate and our best choices are Coulson and Kirk.

Blue Wind said...

IL 10 will go democratic this year. Dan Seals or Julie Hamos will be in congress next year.

As for the US senate, anyone who thinks that Kirk can win, refuses to accept reality. He will be defeated by a landslide. The next senator will be most likely Alexi Giannoulias.

Sorry guys, but IL is a VERY blue state and this year IL10 will also become blue. We had enough of Bush-like mentality and policies.

Gold Fish said...

Blue Wind also wishes upon a star everynight before bed. The color of Illinois, while blue, is changing. Obama and his policies are changing the national scene. You think healthcare was a big issue. Wait until immigration reform takes center stage. Madigan and his policies or lake thereof are changing the state scene. If Madigan passess a tax increase he is doomed. If he does not pass a tax increase he is doomed. Then you have Blago going to trial. Sorry Blue Wind, even a prayer to the almighty cannot change what is coming.

With that said, the Repubs need a game plan other than "NO". Lots of time in this primary season and certainly lots of time before November.

Anonymous said...

Bue Wind, New Jersey is a blue state too, ask Chris Cristie. I can't wait to have a referenda on Obama

Anonymous said...

Geez Blue Wind, get yourself on over to Ellen's Blog with this kind of pie in the sky crap. Your guys are screwing up our country in a way that nobody thought would happen this quickly. Oh, we knew they'd turn sharply to the left, but these policies are absolutely game changers, and NOT for the good of America. I think you're going to find a strong wind blowing, Blue guy, and it will begin next November. 2012 should end the reign of this totally incompetent excuses for leaders. Bye Bye, Blue Wind. Oh, have you checked your stats lately? I think the Rasmussen poll shows this Obamination down to a record low of 47% approval which is the lowest approval of any first term president ever.

D. Miller said...

Remember, the most important feature of a sock puppet is its empty head.

(This applies to ours as well as theirs.)

Blue Wind said...

Anon 3:27

Regarding your comment

"Geez Blue Wind, get yourself on over to Ellen's Blog with this kind of pie in the sky crap. "

I do post there frequently. Are you implying that I should not be posting here? If so, I am not sure TA agrees with you. Do you think everyone agrees with your (apparently narrow) view of the world? Obama has been too centrist. That's his problem. He should have ignored completely the republican party of today that almost destroyed the country and the world during the 8 disastrous Bush years, instead of trying to reason with them.

Team America said...

Blue Wind - you're welcome to post here, it gets everyone's blood flowing with indignation. But I think that you are one of the few left at Ellen's, I don't see a lot of commentors there anymore, it's really just a big echo chamber. About the only time anyone bothers to comment is when the post is about Mark Kirk (or me).

I hop over there every couple days for amusement since she is almost more upset about the health care bill than the GOP is, although, obviously for completely different reasons.

Oh, BTW, please explain how you think Obama is "centrist"? His home-grown initiatives like heath care, climate change, etc., are totally lefty. True, when he's actually been confronted with governing in the real world (as opposed to the campaign world) he's had to adopt Bush tactics (um, duh, because they work) like the Afghan Surge. Hey, anyone want to waterboard that Detroit terror guy?

Blue Wind said...

Hey TA,
Obama is "centrist" mainly for 2 reasons:

1. His health care bill is weak. He could have done much better. There should have been a public option. Nevertheless, it is better than the status quo. I dont know how anyone on the right can be defending a flawed system in which greedy insurance companies can deny health coverage for pre-existing conditions. That is not just wrong, it is criminal. But republicans never thought that this needs to be corrected. Anyway, at least the health care bill addresses this.

2. He made a huge error to escalate the war in Afghanistan. That war has no longer purpose. I supported the original invasion and destruction of the Taliban regime, but 9 years later this war is without purpose, except that some people to make money out of it. The terrorists are in many places of the world. Not just in Afghanistan. Obama failed big time to stand up to the military industrial complex and he now owns a disastrous war.

Overall, his policies are not left. In fact, by european standards are no different than the policies of conservative european parties. The problem is that in this country the republican party has moved to the very extreme far right and you think Obama has "leftist" policies. Nope.

Anonymous said...

1. the democrats are going to get nicole kidmanned (translation beat up) in the south next year. if they couldn't hold the south when they had southern conservatives, their first midterm with a hyde park liberal is going to be fugly. That will give us at least 20 new seats, then we will pick up suprises-perhaps beans seat, halvorson looks done too. Then pelosi will have a majority of approximately 10 votes on major bills and those few blue dogs left will wake up every night in cold sweats worried about political death for voting for cap and traitor.

2. team i made a joke for pup and I don't get props?

3. blue wind much as we beat each other up here, this is the strongest republican organization in a deep blue congressional seat in the country. thanks largely to the efforts of team america and king louis and baxters mom and ant we still exist. this year we will have the wind at our backs for the first time since 1988 where we don't have gingrich or the far right running our party screaming god, guns, gays and abortion to scare away wilmette soccer mommies. Ask grace mary stern and every democrat that got his clock cleaned here during the halcyon days between the early 1950's and 1990 how easy it is to beat the gop when it actually tries to win up here.

4. Many of you republicans and I have differences on some of the candidates and their people, however we are all republicans and out to destroy the socialistic, anti-israel, teachers union loving, big government, corrupt kleptocrats that are the heart of the opposition. whether you are a coulson cat, dold head, part of gang green, friedman fanatic. February 4, we play pin the defeat on the donkey.


Anonymous said...

dear team dold,

in tomorrows chicago tribune there is an editorial savaging team coulson's work in springfield. While I realize you are budding lee atwaters because your guy set up a microphone for dan quayle in 1991, fo shizzle, you need to show voters you have teeth and are ready to go brass knuckles against the chicago machine.

you can do this by sending out a press release to team america using the editorial to blast team coulson (newspapers love it when you quote them-they get to feel like they matter (not)and are important). Then you can start doing what team kirk would be doing to coulson and what every red blooded reagan loving republican wants to see out of our team starting yesterday which is by obliterating the blago wing of the gop clowns like coulson for screwing up our state and for her fiscal recklessness.

enough with beating up the jewish doctor for fundraising on this blog, bring out the heavy artillery and start in on coulson. even dan quayle knew how to throw a punch.


Anonymous said...

I agree. Let's see what you got, Bobby.

Seals won't be pulling punches.

Crazy4glf said...

Let's throw caution to the wind:

When can we expect a modicum of bipartisanship at the County Level, at the State Level (Ms. Radogno may want to read the paper as her claim about cuts being 'not necessary' is inaccurate; social service agencies are having significant difficulties which CAN'T be good for the economy, either), and at the federal level.

The Florida AG's idea that requiring (health) insurance is 'Unconstitutional' lacks merit as the AG's own state directly or indirectly requires the purchase of a variety of types of insurance.

How is this relevant to the 10th District or to our area?
The question of what may occur next year was raised and the Florida AG is demonstrative of a reflexive jaunt toward a press conference, a press release and a possible less than admirable use of state funds in the near future to outline what a party does not stand for (this, by the way, in six sigma verbiage does not 'add value').

Unfortunately, it is unclear to me what card-carrying GOP'ers do stand for. This is, in part, due to the Presidency of George Bush (for those about to state I'm rehashing, are we not still hearing about the errors of Clinton?) who defied many a long-held GOP edict:

-Homeland Security: large bureaucracy that re-shuffled a variety of organizations (Coast Guard?).

-Significant spending/borrowing for tax cuts, an unnecessary war, and an incomplete Medicare Reform Act (none of which met with GOP opposition to a significant degree).

I believe that a bit more regulation may have even modestly diminished the difficulties we have experienced, which I would hope most would agree would have been better than the instability, uncertainty, and significant, long-standing paradigm shifts we can expect.

It is in no American's best interest to refer to someone as a 'cat woman', to call for a President's demise, waterloo, or related untoward event which as recently as a few years ago was recently deemed unpatriotic, and to not accept the wrongs of the past and work toward the future together, as Sen. McCain promised over a year ago (if you don't believe it, don't say it).

I would venture to guess that, if done right, more people would benefit from stemming the rate of increased healthcare costs than those who would not benefit.

Finally, back to my original point, it is easy to see how people who do not believe in climate change legislation, healthcare reform, and main street-focused programs are not given an indefinite amount of time to participate and/or hold sway. This is not the same as them not being offered a place at the table. The allegation of a go-it-alone Democratic Party is clearly untrue, and again, is most representative of the Bush Presidency and the Roberts/Thomas Court (more unanimous decisions?)

Anonymous said...

This thing I like about Crazygolfer's rhetoric is that it is the same tired rhetoric of 2008. They think it worked so well in 2008, it has to work in 2010 (didn't work that well for Seals, but I digress). People like Crazygolfer do not understand the different in Hope and Change and running on a record, which Obama now has.

But they will.

Anonymous said...


I suggest you read today's WSJ and look at what the Federal bailout to the states will actually cost the's scary - especially for Illinois.


Love to have drinks with you sometime to discuss Coulson - the only choice for folks committed to keeping the 10th in the GOP column. I know she does not have a uniform, but she is pro-Israeli and has a hell of a lot of common sense.

The Dems are hoping for a Dold or Friedman victory - I know it from reliable sources and so do you. Back Beth - because Beth backs the 10th - NOT Pelosi or Obama...

Anonymous said...

That's interesting, because I know for a fact that that the Seals dems are hoping for Coulson.

Anonymous said...

loleta didrickson was supposed to be a moderate who could win because she had the right profile.

coulson sat in springfield and let the dems destroy the state. i want a party that gets up in the morning and stands for something, not blago light. it only matters who our people are and what they are going to do. how hard they will work.

dold needs to show he can beat someone up. enough with the talk, walk or go away.


Anonymous said...

I don't think Mark Kirk was ever posted IN Kosovo, Haiti, or Afghanistan. He only served 'during' those conflicts. In fact, Kirk has never served 'in country' anywhere the bullets were flying. Kirk was what line officers refer to as a 'staff weenie.'

Anonymous said...

Kirk recently served IN Afghanistan.

Nice try there buddy. Try to be a little more accurate next time.

Louis G. Atsaves

Anonymous said...

Anon 11:03 YOU are ignorant of the truth, the facts that are easily substantiated by the Military. Point of fact: at this very moment Mr. Kirk IS in Afghanistan, is in harms way once again. Last year he was on the front lines and not in any way a weenie. How disgracefully ignorant you are to say such demeaning things. Mr. Kirk doesn't ask for special treatment nor is he given any special treatment. You and your buddies who say such things owe him an apology. But knowing you guys you'll continue to talk against a man who has legitimately earned his Commander designation. And yes, he WAS serving IN Kosovo and suffered an injury. There seems to be no end to the lies you guys like to spread. Sickening.

Anonymous said...

Mark Kirk's service has been honorable and meaningful. He is justly proud of his militar record.

Anyone saying anything else is welcome to put their own military record out there for scrutiny.

Anonymous said...


How can you expect Coulson to stand up and fight when the so-called "Leaders" of the GOP have not stood up to fight for or with her?

She is the only GOP rep with a significant portion of her district in the 10th - no thanks to Springfield.

I don't recall GOP leaders making any efforts in defeating Garrett, May, Link, Ryg, Nekritz and company. The GOP candidates were for all practical purposes on their own. Springfield didn't have the time, talent or money to invest in their own GOP candidates. So don't punish the candidates that are able to survive - they are on our side!

As to Seals and LBG, I KNOW they are hoping for a Dold or Freidman victory. Let's not give it to them.

D. Miller said...

Heh, I love this testimony as to whom our opponents want to face in November. I KNOW I couldn't care less what the Dems want, even if we could trust some anonymous commenter.

On another note, I just heard that Dold will be on the Tom Roeser show tonight opposite - wait for it - Jeff Berkowitz! I was a bit surprised that he did not promote it on his website or facebook page.

Should be interesting. Let's see how Bob does in an unscripted environment. I hope he shows some spirit! I think this will be one of the few such opportunities we will get between now and Feb 2.

Anonymous said...

No, I think Kirk was in the National Command Center while he was Tweeting, not in Afghanistan last year. And yes, he is a staff weenie.

One way or another, Dr. Friedman's experience shows a far greater ability to command. He's the only, and perhaps far better replacement for Kirk.

Anonymous said...

And yes, he is a staff weenie.

I can see where this conversation is headed.

"No, he's not."

"Yes, he is."

"No, he's not."

*sound of crickets chirping*

"I win!"

"No, you didn't."

"Yes, I did."

Face it, 2:02, when you're wrong, you're wrong. I believe he was in BOTH places--but even though it's been rumored--there's absolutely no proof that even Kirk can be in two places at the same time.

Anonymous said...

Did it again, sorry. 3:05 is from Anonymous?

Anonymous said...

Mark was in serbia for the bombing campaign in 1999 (hey dick holbrooke) and was in afghanistan last year doing cn work. he didn't get to stay at the serena hotel, but then again he's a little tougher than your average usaid hack. Mark knows his eikenberry's from his wild bill wood's.

pup btw did sake bombs, alexi played war of warcraft, and tehran julie probably pushed for a law banning gi joes in stores last year. I go with the e-ring dude.

btw, for those of you who just got here, in 1999 the gop wanted corinne wood because she was a woman-I am a big fan of her and her flack dave kohn btw-,we got some guy named kirk instead, wonder what happened to that guy?

gash is a loser, what she wants I am all for.


Kimberly Vertolli said...

Mark Kirk fought in the Kosovo War not once, but twice. In about April 1998, he did a 3 week AT (that's the Active Training Reservists do once a year in a addition to one weekend a month). Mark served at Aviano AFB in Italy, supporting his EA-6B Prowler-209 Squadron as their Intelligence Officer. Reservists are given choices in where to go and they typically don't force a person to go into a war zone unless they volunteer. Not only did Mark volunteer to go to a War Zone, he made the effort to go up with the pilots/NFOs he supported. Why? It helped him to better understand what they did and Mark knows that taking those kinds of hands-on risks garners respect from the 'front-line' pilots he supports. They were shot at by the Serbs and it was harrowing. The Prowlers job is to jam the SAM batteries so the fighter package can follow them and get their mission accomplished without worrying about being lit up by a SAM. (Surface to Air Missile) Mark could have sat in a cozy little intel center, sipping latte and preparing powerpoint briefs--he could have stayed somewhere else safe, checked the box and moved on. He WANTED to experience combat and asked to go to SERE School so he could fly with his guys (For those who don't know--it's Survive-Evade-Resist-Escape)and it's a course from Hell anyone who flies must go through--survival training. He came back 15 pounds lighter with bruises all over his body. He VOLUNTEERED. As a result of his hard work, he was awarded Intel Officer of the Year--that's huge! I know this because I began dating him in February 1998 and when his duty was over, I took leave from my own job as a Naval Intelligence Officer, at the Office of Naval Intelligence, took a MAC flight out to Aviano Air Force Base, toured his facility, went out with the squadron and then Mark and I had a beautiful post-war trip to Venice.

The following year, in 1999, Mark had just done the impossible and won his first Republican primary. Following that, he went back with his squadron. (I think this time it was to Incirlik, Turkey) where he again placed himself in harm's way by volunteering to go up with his squadron. They were fired upon and the pilot had to make some radical moves to avoid being hit by the Serbs' AAA fire (Anti-Air Artillery) and Mark suffered minor injuries as a result.

He may be in a "support role" but he's no 'staff weenie' weekend warrior--he has always taken his job as a Reservist extremely seriously and has generously shared his experience and understanding of the military and intelligence Community with appreciative bipartisan Congressional colleagues. As the number of veterans who serve in the Congress dwindles and the importance of understanding our military and national security increases, we're lucky to have a Mark Kirk in the Congress to educate the others. It's frightening that the Congress has so much authority with respect to military matters, yet so few have any experience to inform the heady decisions they must make.

By the way, Mark doesn't get paid for his service in the military either--not since he became a Congressman--it's prohibited--he does it because he thinks it makes him a better representative, loves the US Navy and loves serving with our men and women in uniform, for whom he has so much respect.

I think he deserves a lot of credit for his military service and record of bypassing easy jobs for the ones requiring heavy-lifting. The Prowler, in particular, is a highly complicated aircraft, used for EW (Electronic Warfare). There are much easier duties he could have accepted, in much safer locations, but as with so many things in his career, he chooses to do the hard things because he knows he has the brain power to handle it, knows he can make a difference and wants to lead by example.
--Kimberly Vertolli
USNA 1995
former spouse of Mark Kirk

Crazy4glf said...

1. Rhetoric is not expected to work in any tangible fashion. It is meant to score points. Why do you think Kirk has so many darn press conferences and so few pieces of legislation that get out of committee?

2. There is a distinct difference between rhetoric and stating of facts. I tend not to engage in rhetoric or talking points. Some of us happen to actually believe in what we say even if from time to time it is similar to what has been said elsewhere.

You can't be deemed a life-long fiscal conservative if you approved an unnecessary tax cut ($pending), you can't be supportive of our troops if you commit them to an unnecessary war without the proper equipment and then either dishonorably discharge them and/or bill them for equipment not returned to the government, and you can't be for the average American if you keep putting forth candidates like Topinka, most of those running for the 10th District seat on the GOP side, and most of the GOP'ers running for Governor.

Again, I have never said the Dem's are perfect or of superior morals. And, to a degree, that is the point. It is partially because the GOP holds themselves in such high regard that some of us are disappointed that when their public officials fail, they are not taken to task or removed from office. We know what would occur if it was a Dem!

In fact, one thing that separates the Dem's from the Repubs is their willingness to critique each other for the record and to recognize that you don't have to agree with a minority of your party all of the time.
If only the born-again fiscal conservatives put a stop to some of the anti-GOP tactics of George Ryan, George Bush, and possibly current or recent GOP governors, they'd have more credibility, and we'd possibly be in a better station in our national life.

Of course, for some it is better to score points, to be quoted as being impolite or aiming for the nation's destruction (wishing for attacks, a President's failure, etc.), than to roll up their sleeves and do what they were sent to Springfield and DC to do.

It was not to twitter from the Pentagon. It was not to fly to Argentina. It was not to say no to everything up for consideration only to offer amendments to legislation you don't agree with.

I cannot be the only one who does not see the logic in saying no for spite, for offering amendments to legislation you don't want to see the light of day, to delaying Presidential appointments for up to a year and then wanting to be deemed concerned, compassionate, and effective.

Call me what you want.
The country could be doing better and the labeling, inaction, and untoward comments by some public officials to people in China and elsewhere are not helping and I am hopeful that more of the same crop of the uncaring GOP are not elected to either allow the status quo or worse.

I'd like to see more GOP'ers like Rep. Cao. However, I think that the Tea Partiers that seem to have undue influence may make it harder and harder for him to stay in office as a GOP'er.

Finally, if Kirk was actually in favor of equal rights for women, environmental concerns, and didn't blame his own constituents, maybe I'd have a bit more respect for him. It is hard to respect someone who throws the people who pay their salary and PUBLIC OPTION health insurance under the bus while denying these constituents some stability when it comes to health insurance and an adequate infrastructure. Let the labels that this blog is so known for begin...

Anonymous said...

"I'd like to see more GOP'ers like Rep. Cao. "

You crack me up! I'd like to see more democrats like Zell Miller!!!

That aside, I wrote a couple of times yesterday about how it was unbecoming of republicans to demean anyone - especially those with a military background. I was speaking of Friedman at the time, but now I will apply it to those writing about Mark Kirk. If y'all are such hot stuff, when was the last time you were a member of a crew that took off and then landed on an aircraft carrier? The reason I ask is that I have never heard a pointy-end-of-the-spear person speak about ANYONE'S military background in a demeaning fashion.

Mark Kirk's military record is not up for question. Anyone who contributes is worthy of praise. Even the "staff weenies." By the way, most of my career after my first fleet tour were in "staff weenie" jobs. But the Marine Corps. still thought I was worthy.

Still think the posters talking negative about Kirk or Friedman are libs. Republicans might criticize - libs demean.

Semper Fi!

Anonymous said...


From one runner to another - thanks for your post, your service and your class! I expected nothing less.

I send you my best wishes for a Happy New Year!

Kimberly Vertolli said...

Thanks--and Happy New Year to you, as well!

Incidentally, regarding my previous posting that was taken down--I confirmed my identity with TA and I asked him to take it down. The crux of it was as follows:

Ordinarily, I'm not inclined to communicate publicly about my private life. Unfortunately, malicious and false allegations are being made about my previous marriage, in a desperate bid to hurt my ex-husband, that have hurt me, as well. Therefore, I want to set the record straight. Nobody knows the real Mark Kirk better than I do. We have known each other for 12 years and we were married for 8 years. We did live together in Highland Park for 5 years following our 2001 nuptials and lived together in Washington, DC, as well. He is 100% heterosexual and our marriage enjoyed many blissful times. Sometimes, two people can love and respect one another, yet the marriage doesn't work. It's time to stop being distracted by false, malicious hate-mongering and focus on putting people back to work, improving the economy and solving the issues like transportation and budget deficits that really impact the people of Illinois and are the real concerns the people of Illinois want their politicians to address.

Kimberly Vertolli said...

Correction: That was 1999 (not 1998) in Aviano Air Force Base (He did go to Serbia twice, but only once as a military officer) The second time was as a staffer when he was counsel to Ben Gilman (R-NY), then chairman of the House International Relations Committee. The second tour of duty I mentioned was in 2000, following the Primary (not 1999) Incirlik, Turkey. That mission was ONW (Operation Northern Watch), enforcing the No Fly Zone in Northern Iraq, in protection of the Kurdish people Saddam had launched a brutal chemical weapons attack against in Hallabjah (1994?). The Iraqis, not the Serbs fired upon their plane during the incident in which Mark sustained minor injuries.

Anonymous said...

"Businessman Dick Green is an earnest chap"

TA, the last time I heard someone use the phrase "earnest chap" I was surrounded by tweed jackets and pipe smoke in my never-ending hunt for a loving husband. Is this your native vernacular or do you seek to join the ranks of the elitist stiff-upper-lipped Gin drinkers?

Bitter Woman

Team America said...

BW, you know I'm trying to develop a taste for Scotch, not gin!

Rusty Magner said...

Employer Mandates passed by Coulson do cost all of us in additional premiums! So Anonymous from Jan 2 10:57 am, there are mandates and options - but we're paying either way - no matter if our 24-year old kids are on our plans or not. Insurance companies increase the premiums for all, to spread the risk.
I posted comments on January 1 at 4:26 after hearing Coulson speak, and getting my blood boiling – but note, I wasn’t high as you suggest. I’m also not anyone’s campaign manager as you also suggest. Finally, as a business owner and employee benefits consultant I know well the difference between mandates and options. We won’t be calling you for help on the additional tax ramifications for the employer and dad that this new law presents – it’s a hornet’s nest. Employer’s are fed-up with life long politicians that are out-of-touch with the reality of running a business.

Anonymous said...

A copy of what I posted on CapFax this AM as an FYI:

"Thanks, AA. That’s very kind of you.

As I told Rich yesterday in an email, I’ve decided to retire not only my handle, but from posting on blogs and “Illinois politics” overall. Things have just become a bit too crass in my opinion, and I just don’t have the tolerance for it.

It’s been an honor and a pleasure working with you and the others I’ve known here and on the other blogs I’ve enjoyed over the years. Illinois is definitely better off thanks to all of you.

All my best,

LostGeneration (Illinois Leader)
Anonymous (CapFax)
? (Illinois Review)
Anonymous? (Team America)"


(There...See, TA. I even managed to remember to sign my post. Good luck to you and your blog.)

Team America said...

Sorry to see you give up, Anonymous?. I especially enjoyed your well-thought out defenses of Mark Kirk over at IR, which I monitor closely but don't comment on because I don't have the energy to get drawn into a debate with some of the people over there. Maybe you'll reconsider after a break. Happens to all of us.

Anonymous said...

lol Thanks for your kind comments, TA.

I wouldn't say that I'm "giving up". There are plenty of other Mark Kirk supporters out there on all the blogs, who can do a much better job than I ever could. I'm just moving on.