Wednesday, June 2, 2010

Kirk Releases Statement From His Commanding Officer Regarding Award Flap; Let's See the Left Try to Discredit This, Now

Congressman Mark Kirk released this statement from his former commanding officer yesterday:

Statement by Captain Clay Fearnow, United States Navy (Retired), Former Commanding Officer, VAQ-209

June 1st, 2010

As a retired Navy Captain and Mark Kirk’s commanding officer during Operation Allied Force, there are two things that have deeply troubled me since I read the Washington Post’s story about Mark’s intelligence officer award.

First, the complete lack of a benefit of the doubt – the idea that someone could make an honest mistake has become so foreign that the immediate assumption has become – you misrepresented or worse you lied. In Mark’s case neither is factual.

And second, that an honest mistake related to the identification of a military award is the same as pretending to be in Vietnam when you were not. This also doesn’t apply to Mark Kirk

Mark Kirk served under my command in Aviano, Italy, during Operation Allied Force – the Kosovo campaign. For his exceptional service as the lead intelligence officer of a combat intelligence action team – the largest EA-6B intelligence shop in the history of naval aviation which he assembled – I nominated then Lieutenant Commander Kirk for a Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal and the Rufus L. Taylor Intelligence Award. He received both.

When I nominated Mark for the Rufus Taylor award I thought it was more specific to Mark and not his team. But the reality is, there would have been no team without Mark Kirk’s leadership and there certainly would have been no award. I can certainly understand why he would have referred to this award over the years as intelligence officer of the year – it’s how I viewed the award. And in actuality, the two awards in question are of equal stature and significance.

Mark Kirk is the finest intelligence officer I have ever served with – hands down. His wealth of knowledge during this conflict put him in a position to take charge of intelligence members from the four deployed squadrons and meld them into a combat intelligence action team.

Any suggestion that Mark Kirk did not earn or receive the Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal and the Rufus L. Taylor Intelligence Award is incorrect. I would further add, assertions I’ve seen that Mark Kirk embellished or exaggerated his record are ridiculous – he is one of the finest Naval Officers I have had the honor to work with. His intelligence, leadership skills, and keen understanding of global affairs are an asset that the Navy and, today, the Congress are fortunate to enjoy.


You would think that would be enough to satisfy anyone about this issue. But I doubt we've heard the last of this from the Giannoulias camp, who likely feels like a drowning man thrown a thin lifeline.

My prediction: the left will now shift its attack to anyone who backs Kirk, no matter what their record, no matter if they are a veteran, no matter what they say.

Our friend Ellen of the Tenth, who (along with her sidekick Carl Nyberg) has been working 24/7 to perpetuate this issue, already took a poke a few days ago at Captain Fearnow, suggesting that, of course, he has every reason to lie for Kirk as "Fearnow is now in a position to want to keep a Congressman running for Senate happy as the Senior Program Manager at Lockheed Martin Aeronautics."

Yes, of course, Ellen/Carl: everyone's a liar except your guy. Please keep calling the integrity of vets such as Captain Fearnow into question as they all line up behind Mark Kirk, and perhaps that will show the electorate your true colors.


Blue Wind said...

LOL. Dont you think that this undermines a little the intelligence of people?

There has been a lot of discussion about Kirk in the news after the lies about the military award. Joe Scarborough who is a republican was especially critical and during his show it was suggested that Kirk should drop off the race. Watch the clips.

Now, the statement of the commanding officer is totally irrelevant. It expresses the opinion (wishful thinking) that Kirk made a honest mistake. But this does not change the facts. An award to his unit was mis-represented for many many years as a personal award to him. Beyond dishonesty, this shows in some ways disregard for the other members of his unit IMO.

And there is more. Kirk has argued that he served in operation Iraqi freedom and he has argued that he is a combat vet, when he is not.

What makes you think that such issues are only serious in Blumenthal's case, but not in Kirk's case. Sorry, but after this, the honorable thing for Kirk to do would be to drop off the race. He will not do it and he will be defeated in November.

Blue Wind

Anonymous said...

Active duty in Afganistan twice in the past 2 years (corrrect me if I'm wrong TA), but I'd call any duty in Afganistan combat duty these days. It's not pushing papers stateside like blumenthal did.

Blue Wind said...

ANON 7:21

Kirk Embellishments About Military Service Go Back Years.

Kirk has claimed among other things to have served in operation Iraqi freedom when he did not. The link above leads to other links that document this. Why on earth would anyone defend someone who would make false claims of military service like that? Blumenthal seems to have lied on a single issue. In Kirk's case there are several lies or exaggerations (award, combat vet in Iraqi freedom, Pentagon war room). There is a pattern. I think TA and you are attempting to defend the indefensible. Sorry, but facts are facts.

Anonymous said...

Then by your twisted standard, Blue Bag of Wind, YOUR guy damn well better exit today, right? For all that Alexi has done that far exceeds what you point as flaws in Mark Kirk's record, he should have excused himself months ago. You have shown more than your true colors. Mark Kirk has 21 proud years of service to our nation as a badge of honor. You have nothing in your guy and surely nothing in your stupid attacks.

Anonymous said...

Blue's sick comments show that he has not read the Commanding Officer's statement. Blue and his buddies see everything through their own eyes and don't and can't deal with reality. Kirk's service in the military is well documented over the past 21 years. He has served in places Blue and his crew can't find or pronounce. He and they think that they have wounded Mr. Kirk. Sorry, wind bag, just the opposite is true.
Veterans groups nationally have come out in support of Kirk and money is rolling in to support his Senate run. Blue, take a hint. Go find someone else to annoy. No, I take that back. Go for it. It's helping the campaign move faster than ever as we move towards November 2. You and yours have done us a great favor.

Anonymous said...

The commander works for Lockheed Martin and Mark Kirk is on the Appropriations Committee. There's the quid pro quo.

Anonymous said...

please ask the commander why he nominated someone from VAQ-209 when VAQ-140 took the lead on the mission.

Anonymous said...

TA, one would think that the last 2posts have something in common. They waste no time in denegrating a man with no current ties to Mr. Kirk. In 1999 he was Kirk's Commanding Officer. This would appear that someone with some sinister intent is hell bent on trying to destroy anyone associated with the Military in our country in addition to casting a shadow on Kirk. Rather sick, isn't it. The implication that Kirk would have used his position on Appropriations is so out of line, so disgusting, that this smells like the work of the other side of the aisle. All they're doing is casting disgrace on themselves, not on our Congressman. I knew this race would get ugly but I never could have or would have thought that these low life excuses for decent people would stoop this low.

Rob_N said...

C'mon TA. I know you enjoy carrying water for Rep. Kirk but Mr. Fearnow clearly has an agenda here.

Fearnow is retired from the Navy and is now, according to his LinkedIn page, working for Lockheed Martin.

Hmm... Why on earth would a defense contractor want to curry favor with a wannabe Senator?

Nobody is saying Rep. Kirk doesn't have an honorable service record.

It's his repeated, long-term lies which inflate that record that voters are questioning.

Team America said...

Oh, lordy, Rob_N. I guess we'll just lump you in with Ellen, Carl and the rest of the kooks.

So, by your logic, Captain Fearnow predicted that Congressman Kirk would be in a position to help him gain military contracts with a future job at Lockheed Martin almost 10 years ago when Fearnow recommended Kirk for the award in the first place? And now, of course, he's lying for Kirk because he wants to see him in the Senate.

You really can't truly believe that, can you?

Anonymous said...

It is really amazing that some still support Kirk after this. So many lies for so long are an insult to the honest men who serve their country without exaggerating their records or lying for personal advancement as Kirk obviously did.

Anonymous said...

What a disgusting, disgraceful attack on a decent, honest guy. TA, this needs to end. For the good of everyone, please close this down right now. The truth will win out. Mark will win because the majority of voters in this State can and DO see the difference between the two candidates. To continue this unwarranted bashing of Mark Kirk, to continue to allow these twisted people to allege some of the most outrageous charges does everything Kirk has stood for, and continues to stand for, a disservice. ENOUGH. Let it go. They have their talking points, we have the truth. Neither will bend.

Anonymous said...

I disagree, this is a mark kirk fuckup but it's also a campaign fuckup that they did not vet him. When you run for office for congress and above you hire an outside consultant who does opposition research on you. These books are roughly 80-110 pages, minimum, they include your grades, your speeding tickets, the law cases you worked on, the clients your law firm took on, your votes and yes


I know it's a tight bunch, but I also know we are not in the politburo, someone should have had the balls to look to see if Mark actually went to Iraq, and had the certificate for this award. Having the candidate say "I don't remember or I am right so forget about it" is how clusterfucks like this happen.

Now the washington post is reporting that mark misstated his work in Iraq. Which means another round of stories and if not for the blago trial this could drag on through the summer, especially bad because now is when independents, downstaters and western and southern suburb voters are starting to go to bbqs and see candidates in parades and you don't want the story they see in the paper to be their local columnist blasting the military liar.

This on top of a double barrelled attack in the tribune where he was called a liar and the suntimes where he was compared to alexander haig by the ancient carol marin.

Someone's head has to roll for this clusterfuck because now a media and a narrative that was in love with him has flipped.

when it's catlady talking and thinking with ellen (translation derriere), it's one thing, when it's a story from a dead weekend slipping into a week with multiple follow ups and newspapers questioning his credibility it shows a campaign that needs more toughness and experience, we're not in aaron lawlor territory anymore, dodo. I would bring in steve schmidt or mike murphy who are national veterans at electing moderates like schwarzenegger and christy whitman.


Rob_N said...

For a lawyer TA you sure have a knack for missing the point.

Kirk's attack wing was recommended for the Taylor Award. Not Kirk. Not his unit. Not any squadrons he may been assigned.

The entire attack wing was the group that won the Taylor Award.

Now, for Mr. Fearnow to, ten years later, help muddy the waters for Rep. Kirk by claiming that this group honor was supposed to have been meant just for Kirk makes no sense whatsoever. There are two individual Taylor Awards available, in addition to the group honor with which Kirk is associated. Kirk never received either of the individual Taylor Awards.

The award was for the entire group. Not for Kirk.

It was not called "Intelligence Officer of the Year" nor was it even awarded at the time Kirk claimed it was awarded.

Kirk's been repeating the incorrect info, in his own words and with his own mouth, repeatedly for a decade.

To give you another perspective, say a person was an adjunct professor at a local, internationally-renowned university -- teaching a class to university students so they could earn credits. He then lists "professor" as one of his jobs.

I seem to recall some voters questioning whether or not that was resume inflation.... Hmmm....

Now, to me, "adjunct professor" and "professor" sound quite a lot alike.

But to others, lets say that perhaps this line from a certain Senate candidate's official Congressional website:

"The U.S. Navy named Kirk 'Intelligence Officer of the Year' in 1999 for his combat service in Kosovo."

Sounds nothing like:
"I was the recipient of the Rufus Taylor Intelligence Unit of the Year"

It wasn't his award. It was his unit's. In fact, it was the entire wing's.

Again, there are three Rufus Taylor Awards. The one associated with Kirk is a group award.

The other two are individual awards. Kirk never got it. If Fearnow wanted to actually honor him individually why didn't he?

There is also a "Navy Reserve Intel Officer of the Year" award. Kirk never got that one either.

Finally, why did Kirk originally claim his staff made the mistake?

HE was the one repeating it ad nauseum for a decade.

Anonymous said...

the left wing attacks here on mark are absolutely full of crap. The same people who are ripping kirk here from the left are the ones who knowing the north shore, have spent the last 40 years burning their bras, smoking joints, ditching the draft, ripping the military, disrespecting fort sheridan, attacking the troops, supporting the draft dodger clinton over the war hero hw bush, supporting john kerry-the infamous only stupid americans go to the army.

give me a break, this is still a race between a mob banker and a public servant. I am upset, because team kirk screwed up and it is taking away from what should be an easy path to victory over a guy who makes carol mosely braun look like an honorable politician.


Joe said...

You guys have wrapped yourself so tightly with the American flag, claiming a monopoly on patriotism & military careers. Now you find out that your hero has been lying to you about his military record. Or perhaps you knew about these lies & falsehoods all along. It doesn't matter. What matters is that the true facts are revealed about Kirk. Is he the kind of truthful "leader" we want representing us in the Senate? Obviously not.

Anonymous said...

This is the most outrageous display of nothing I've ever read. If this is all you have to talk about when we have the highest unemployment rate since the great depression, a State that's bankrupt, towns across IL and our country in dire straights, the Gulf coast mired in oil and mud, turmoil around the world and you silly idiots are talking about this crap? No wonder we're in this shape, world-wide. Nobody gives a rat's behind about something as trivial as what you're trying to make it, Blue Bag and you other lame brains. A man with the history and accomplishments of Mark Kirk will get out there and end all of this in one debate with that 34 year old do-nothing. We DO have a clear choice and it will be made again by voters who understand the difference between what Kirk offers and what Alexi does not offer. But your posts are silly, do nothing to advance your cause, Blue, Ellen, and you other perpetual Kirk bashers. Shame on all of you. Get reality based and get a grip on what this country is facing from a dangerous world that this guy named Mark Kirk has been out there protecting for the past 21 plus year. You are pathetic and way off base.

Anonymous said...

Anon 10:13,
Does the truth bother you? Is that why you want TA to shut down the comments? The evidence that Kirk lied repeatedly is all over the Internet and it is now in mainstram news media and the Washinton Post. Eveyrhing mentioned about the lies of Kirk is based on facts. Even Kirk himself has acnowledged that for years he has been giving out the wrong information about his award. You should face reality. Kirk has beem lying and misrepresenting his military record for a long time and that is shameful.

Anonymous said...

Rob_N, you have a selective memory on Seals. It wasn't "professor" vs. "adjunct professor" it was "night school lecturer" (reality) vs "adjunct professor" (his claim). Big diff.

Kimberly A. Vertolli said...

Anyone who SERIOUSLY believes that Mark's error of semantics is on par with Richard Blumenthal's intentionally deceitful military service record aggrandizement--is either too stupid to 'get it' or just doesn't care.

Kimberly A. Vertolli
U.S. Naval Academy, 1995

Kimberly Vertolli said...

Mark Kirk is a U.S. Combat Veteran, who earned the Navy/Marine Corps Achievement Medal and accepted the Rufus Taylor Award for being the officer in charge of the Naval Reserve Intelligence Unit of the Year.
Worked it, earned it, OWNS it.

1999: Operation Allied Force

2000: Presentation of Rufus Taylor Award to Mark Kirk, lead Naval Reserve Intelligence Officer
of the Naval Reserve Intelligence Unit of the Year (1999).

He accepted it.

2010: He owns it.

No twisting of semantics can change what Mark and his team achieved together under Mark's leadership over the skies of Serbia, protecting Muslims from Milosevic's murderous terror campaign, putting their lives on the line, while Alexi Giannoulias played basketball in Greece.

Kimberly Vertolli said...

Witness to Military Heroism:

In 1999--during the Kosovo War, Operation Allied Force--I witnessed the heroic work, at Aviano Air Force Base, Italy Mark Kirk and HIS team performed to earn the Rufus Taylor Award. I witnessed what Mark Kirk did as the leader of his Naval Reserve Squadron, he assembled. Mark's team received the award. As an individual--the leader of the Naval Reserve Intelligence Unit of the Year--Mark earned the prestigious Navy/Marine Corps Commendation Medal.
In 2000, I proudly stood at his side, at the military gala in Washington, D.C., as Congressional Candidate, Mark Kirk was presented with the Rufus Taylor Award. I took the pictures that memorialize one of the greatest honors of Congressman Mark Kirk's life.

I am proud of his military service and you should be, too.

Does anyone still want to take cheap shots at Mark Kirk?


More where that came from--I've got plenty of other first-hand accounts that demonstrate Mark Kirk's record of heroic self sacrifice, service to our country and great accomplishment. I'm happy to share them with the haters, doubters and Alexi Giannoulias.
--Kimberly Vertolli
U.S. Naval Academy 1995
Proud fellow Veteran of Mark Kirk

Rob_N said...

Anon 1:24pm,

Re-read the Northwestern University records.

You can make up all the fallacies you want. It doesn't change facts.


Ms. Vertolli (if that's you... actually, even if it's not),

For one thing, it wasn't just one error of semantics. Claiming a military honor intended for his unit was for him alone is not an issue of semantics. And, unfortunately, it was clearly part of a long-standing pattern regarding other claims which have turned out to be false re combat service and more.

Let me put it to you this way: My high school won our conference in football and basketball during my senior year. That doesn't make me the quarterback or the lead point guard.

For another thing, let me quote Alexi Giannoulias re Rep. Kirk's record, since I agree with what he has to say on this:

"I think he's got an honorable record," Giannoulias said. "I don't know why he feels the need to embellish the record and not tell the truth."

(That's from today's Trib editorial, Pants on Fire Award.)

Nobody's taking cheap shots at Rep. Kirk.

Some who are not batting their eyelashes at him are simply pointing out he had no need to repeatedly lie about so many aspects of his already-distinguished record... And, if he would repeatedly lie about something like this (when there was no need to), what else would he lie to us citizens about?

(As I've said elsewhere re this topic, none of this is to defend Giannoulias. He can sink or swim on his own.)

Kimberly A. Vertolli said...

Dear Lexi Lackeys and 'Mark Kirk Haters":

The silence is deafening...I'm bored. Don’t you have another cheap shot to take at Mark Kirk?

Please don't force me to go back to attorney work that generates an income for my household--it's technical, time-consuming and non-profit work is much more interesting.

Maybe we can talk about Alexi Giannoulias' military record?

...oh...that's right--he doesn't have one...

Well, let's talk about his proud service as Senior Loan Officer (SLO) at Broadway Bank. He bragged about his critical SLO role, when he ran for Illinois State Treasurer against a woman who is smarter, more qualified and more experienced than he'll ever be. I'll bet Illinois State Senator Christine Radogno wouldn't have lost $79 million, intended for needy Illinois families, if Bright Star had been in her trust...but I digress...

So, Alexi--TALK to me--YOU have the floor--you were telling me about your brilliance, your drive, your fiscal acumen--you're the reason Broadway Bank is the thriving pillar of the community it is today...ok, you don't want to talk about that...ok, fine.

Your tax returns! Let's talk about that. So, Mark Kirk released his returns--we know public service has been non-profit in his household.

How about you? How did you become so wealthy and powerful? Surely, it's related to the brilliant work and public service you performed at Broadway Bank. How about sharing those tax records? Undoubtedly, we would be very impressed by what you did to earn your munificence.

BTW--Lexi--HEY! Sexy Lexy--listen to me! (Stop wasting your money telling your political hacks to dig up dirt to discredit me--waste of your ill-gotten gains and time—you would have to use your imagination and creativity--then you're going to have to collude with your Washington Post buddy, publish your false "but incredible" revelation(s) and THEN hope people are dumb enough to believe it… Just between you and me—TOTAL WASTE of opposition research and destruction funds--the only people who would really care: my friends. (Trust me--you REALLY don't want to shake a hornet's nest ;)

Well, Mr. Alexi Giannoulias--thanks for your "service" --you haven't kept me or my fellow Americans safe in your basketball uniform, but I'm sure you intend to bring the same keen judgment and financial savvy you brought to Broadway in service to the people of Illinois as our Senator. (gulp)

By the way, Sexy Lexy--(Can I call you that? I just LOVE that moniker's alliteration!)--I'm still waiting to see your tax returns. You do realize, don't you, that if you want to represent us in the U.S. Senate, you MUST adhere to transparency rules and ethical standards. So, call your accountant—NOW.

Looking forward to seeing your tax returns.

Thanks for sharing,

--Kimberly Vertolli
Highland Park, Illinois

Anonymous said...

The skipper is retired and is free to say what he feels. However, an embellished record is still wrong and does not sit well with this 30 year vet. For those who have never worn the cloth of our nation, it is hard to fathom the difference between a unit award and a personal award. There is a MARKED difference and even a junior officer (as Kirk was then) knows the difference. You just don't make these types of mistakes unless you are hedging your audience doesn't know one award from another. This was the case with the Congressman. He is fortunate that the majority of people assigned to Great Lakes cast their ballots in their home of records and not in Illinois, or he would be facing perhaps an insurmountable challenge of several thousand vote deficit.

Anonymous said...

I was following along until the 5:21 post.

"BTW--Lexi--HEY! Sexy Lexy--listen to me!"

Please tell me that that one was not written by Ms. Vertolli.

The media are already criticizing Kirk and his staff for error upon error on this issue, particularly with the way they're responding to it--and that post, specifically, would be the icing on cake.

It's an unfortunate situation overall, but please stop making it worse. Strong supporters, and even some who were willing to ignore this, are becoming concerned.

Anonymous said...

That last sentence should have read:

Strong supporters, and EVEN SOME WHO ARE STILL UNDECIDED, are willing to ignore this, but are becoming concerned.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, TA. 8:26 and 8:30 were mine, and I'll take responsibility for them.

Anonymous ?

Anonymous said...


Thank you for your service and comments.

The only thing better than you still being mrs.kirk and the future mrs.senator kirk would be if you were running for the seat, or beans or jan's yourself.

While I recognize you have never been a limelight hogger and like your exhusband and unlike the local democrats here, a hard working honorable public servant in dc, we need you and would back you 120%.

As you know your exhusband once served with one of the great members of congress from new mexico, heather wilson who like you was an accomplished career woman with a national security and navy background. She was a great asset to the state of new mexico and I had hoped would have been a future cabinet secretary/senator/governor or even president.

You are still very young-younger than mark was when he ran and leaders like you are in short supply here.

Did I mention, we could use a few good women?

plus the food and baseball-for now are better in Illinois.

FOKLAEAPS/BFOKVTAS (Bigger fan of kimberly vertoli the alexi slayer)

Anonymous said...

Anon 8:49,

You do realize the real Kim Vertolli is a Dem, don't you?

Anonymous said...

I'm waiting for "FOKLAEAPS" to post a link to this thread on both CapFax and IR.

Come on, FOKLAEAPS. I double dare you.

Anonymous said...

How about putting it under the:

"Digging a hole in the ocean"

thread on CapFax?

Anonymous said...

Does anyone have any doubts that the person posting here isn't the real Ms. Vertolli?

TA seemed to be diligent about checking out his "source" the last time she posted here. Even removing the post until he received verification.

Getting sloppy TA, or just allowing for "plausbile deniability"?

Anonymous said...

From the subject thread, which I'm sure you've seen shore:

"Today, Kirk dug the hole deeper by sending out a press release touting a statement by his former commanding officer…"

"The Kirk campaign is acting like a gambling addict. It just can’t let it go. They keep sending our press releases and stirring things up."

Tell me. Is that how you win elections in the 10th? EVERYTHING is conidered good PR?

Even at the risk of turning the Voters off?

Do you care about this State at all? Do you really THINK than when the rest of us say that, we're just flapping our jaws?

Anonymous said...


Your 2nd post was fascinating. You didn't defend Congressman Kirk from a single attack, and went right into an attack on Alexi, so I've got to assume that all of the charges that Rob_N are accurate.

Thanks for confirming that your ex-husband is a dirtbag.

Political Pro

Anonymous said...

"Kimberly"--as if there's any doubt, Political Pro? You should be ashamed of yourself.

As I asked before, "Plausible deniability" followed later by "scrubbing" IF and when required?

Who are you trying to kid?

Oh, hail, Kimberly 'Ann'"--huh, shore?

All of you are SO going down the wrong path. I never realized that there were so many "passive-aggressives" in the Military.

Anonymous said...

Nice job "building up" all that trust you need with the Voters, Kirk & Co.

I can't tell you how many people would love to send all of you back to DC right about now--if only it meant that you didn't have to represent our State.

Anonymous said...

You didn't defend Congressman Kirk from a single attack, and went right into an attack on Alexi, so I've got to assume that all of the charges that Rob_N are accurate.

I'm sure she was too busy concentrating (ha ha--"your" phrases on recent "posts" on various blogs) NOT being a "limelight hog"--or whatever shore claimed.

Do us all in Illinois a favor--go put on your party dress, and go "attend" a party, Kimberly. Take your best guy with you, too.

Anonymous said...

1. Blago trial starts tomorrow. We will go back to putting Illinois corruption on trial. As I have said for nearly 2 years, that plus alexi's idiocy will do him in. As many have pointed out in the lamestream media, Mark's record in the service is incredible. This is a few commas and misstated words, not a failed bank and loans to killers.

2. Mark needs a better staff. This was sealsian in how awful it was handled. Beating dan seals makes you good enough to beat dan seals, it does not make you good enough to face major league political pitching. You can't count on 30 years of porter-kirk good will from voters, and seals to screw everything up.

3. much as I am a fan, the last thing a senate candidate needs is an exwife debating his campaign on a blog. Mark has taken the highly unusual step of not publicly announcing campaign stops and done it because he wants to control his message. A lose cannon can put a hole in that-something none of us wants.


Anonymous said... we're going to try to pretend we know how to win "honorably", shore?


Anonymous said...

And if you think that the Blago trial is going to provide you all of the cover you need, rather than relying on the VOTERS to elect you based on merit...

...well, we'll just have to wait and see if you were right to *bet*/put all you "hens" eggs in that basket, too.

Anonymous said...

The term "turncoat" comes to mind whenever I read anything you or Kimberly post, shore.

Especially when you're back-peddling as you just did in your last post.

I can hardly wait until you say something ridiculously stupid again so that Rich bans you from CapFax again--but for good this time.

Anonymous said...

Do you care about this State at all? Do you really THINK than when the rest of us say that, we're just flapping our jaws?

We = ILLINOIS (emphasis added) Dems, Indies, and Repubs.

Media's obviously changed. Our (i.e., the "Activists'") primary sources for comms and debate in this STATE--just in case you haven't figured it out--are CapFax (Left and Moderates) and IR (Moderates and Right-Wingers).

One thing we ALL have in common is our love for, and dedication to, this State--and our Country.

That's what unites ALL of us.

Tough crowd to break into sometimes--as I'm sure you might have noticed--because we can see right through the "BS"--because we've been around for a while, TOO.

But our focus re: elections has been ILLINOIS.

Anonymous said...

And just one parting comment on the following:

By the way, Sexy Lexy--(Can I call you that? I just LOVE that moniker's alliteration!)

Wow. Such big 25-cent words and phrases. And sooo witty, too.

I'm so impressed. Must be that "humble" 10th District culture that all of us in IL share.

Joe said...

--Kimberly Vertolli
Highland Park, Illinois

June 2, 2010 5:21 PM

Did Ms. Vertolli move back? Or is this just another example of the Kirk campaign lies?

Good work! Keep it up!

Anonymous said...

=Did Ms. Vertolli move back?=

As if that "solution" wouldn't raise any eyebrows or questions--especially with Ms. Vertolli's recent demonstrations with regard to what a true "lady" she really is.

Politics are now at an all-time low in this State, folks. Thanks to the "outsiders"--or do they consider themselves "insiders".

Anonymous said...

I believe Mark Kirk has always said he served stateside during Operation Iraqi Freedom. He never said he served in Iraq as Blumenthal had said he "served in Vietnam". So anyone suggesting this is a lie needs to check their facts. It's perfectly legit to say he was the only member serving during Operation Iraqi Freedom. Say all you want about the "Intelligence Officer of the Year" award, but don't you dare suggest he is lying about his service during Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Carl Nyberg said...

Maybe Jim Edgar will agree to replace Mark Kirk on the ballot.

Joe said...

Are all Kirk supporters delusional or just the ones who post here?

Team America said...

Joe - it really bothers you that even with all the swill you peddle, you still can't convince people not to support Kirk, doesn't it?

Also, since you have come back, I'd like to know if you are homophobic, or just trying to irritate people who are against Mark with your links?

Most reasonable and educated people don't give a hoot what someone's sexual orientation is.

Joe said...

Well, TA, here's the fact of the matter: I truly don't care what Kirk's sexual orientation is. In fact, if he were a Democrat, it wouldn't be an issue to us. We've got a big tent. It's you (homophobic) Republicans that seem to want to keep it in the closet, so to speak.

Team America said...

Sorry, Joe, I call Bullshit. We (Republicans) are not the ones bringing it up (over and over).

Andy Martin doesn't count, but it's swell to be counted among such company, huh?

Rob_N said...

Anon 5:45 said, "I believe Mark Kirk has always said he served stateside during Operation Iraqi Freedom. He never said he served in Iraq as Blumenthal had said he "served in Vietnam"."

Actually, there's video of him on the House floor saying he was shot at by Iraq defenses while flying at 20,000.

So, yes, he did say he served IN Iraq and doubled-down by claiming to have been shot at while there.

Kirk now admits that may have been "imprecise" since the Navy has no record his recon plane was shot at while 4 miles up in the air.

By the by, is "imprecise" the new euphamism for "lie"?


TA, you forgot Roeser.

Y'know, the guy who funds scads of GOP candidates throughout the state year after year.

Does he not count seeing as how he's part of the GOP/Conservative Establishment in this state?

Then again, I absolutely agree with you. Who cares who Mark Kirk, or anyone else, enjoys company with.

Except, if borne out, it would just be another lie on Rep. Kirk's pile of 'em. That, and the irony of him voting against the repeal of DADT.

Rob_N said...

Anon 5:45, To clarify: there are two distinct claims Kirk makes about Iraq.

He claimed to have served IN Operation Iraq Freedom.

False. He was serving stateside (in Washington) while Operation Iraq Freedom was happening.

He also claimed to have later been flying recon over Iraq during the No Fly Zone era and to have been shot at while airborne.

Apparently also false, by Kirk's own admission.

He first blamed his staff for making a mistake (of course, since it seems to be his go-to M.O.... I wonder if Elk will ever tire of being his whipping boy).

C-SPAN Video has surfaced of him making the "I was shot at" claim during a speech on the House floor.

Carl Nyberg said...

TA, what are the odds Kirk is the GOP nominee in November?

I assume Edgar won't make himself available to replace Mark Kirk on the ballot.

The three strongest replacement candidates I can think of are:

Adam Alphabet
Kirk Dillard
Steve Rauschenberger

Any other suggestions?

Anonymous said...

1. Kirk isn't leaving the race, if 1 is a jack ryan/scott lee cohen style shitstorm and 10 is a lee goodman at centernetwork attack on kirk, this is maybe an 8.

2. Mark leads in the polls, fundraising, credibility, command of issues, credibility, practically everything except the hearts and minds of an old woman in deerfield upset at the world that she never had a legal career of team america's or mark's or kimberly's.

3. Mark has fought and won 5 tough general elections. Alexi has fought and wont 5 dozen drinking games at fancy downtown nightclubs. This is a better team, better prepare, with a better candidate and a better chance of winning.

4. Alexi has 4 massive weights taking his campaign down right now that mark does not. 1)his party is not completely behind him 2) the failed bank 3) the blago trial 4) his party's ownership for the failed economy.

5. I saw the suntimes interview. mark is right he had a lot on his plate and it's easy to forget things when you are trying to do about 30,000 things at once. I disagree that donnelly was his real competition in 2000-as I recall they were sweating it out over corinne wood running and mark damisch making a push. There are lots more pressing issues right now.

6. Mark has caryn garber, team america and king louis astaves.

Alexi does not.

game over.


Anonymous said...

FOKLAEPS, is that desperation I hear?

You seem to be working awfully hard to convince yourself that something, which you say is a done-deal, is actually the case.

1. Mark has never run statewide before
2. Issues aren't going to get much play this cycle between Broadway Bank, and Kirk's lies
3. I think you'd be surprised by how much lying about your military record will unify the opposing party.
4. Kirk is only up by 5 points and there hasn't been any polling since Kirk's little incident:
5. Mark lied for 10 years, its hard to claim absentmindedness for a decade.
6. The economy is getting better

Political Pro

Anonymous said...

I don't think it's desperation, I don't think it's sinister or anything close to that, Anon. When a decorated Veteran, a Veteran with the kind of Fitness Reports, oh yes, those have nothing to do with fitness but rather his performance as a Naval Reservist, are read by you and other bashers, you will see that this man, Mark Kirk, has earned the rank and position he holds in our Navy Reserve. The man has said he's sorry. The man never intended to deceive, he just embellished what clearly didn't need embellisment. Those without blemish should cast the first stone.
The voters in Illinois on November 2 will have the final say on who's the better person to become our Senator. Those who hate this man, that wicked witch without a shred of approval ever for this man, her sidekick, Carl, and her twisted few friends, have made Mark Kirk their personal whipping guy for over 10 years. The guy on the street doesn't give a damn about all this crap. Voters want a man who's done what Kirk has done for his country, his nation, his Congressional District. Mark Kirk is a man who has earned the right to serve in the US Senate. If this is the worst that can be said about him and his past record in the US Navy Reserve we and he will be served well going forward.

Rob_N said...

Foklaeaps said, "mark is right he had a lot on his plate and it's easy to forget things when you are trying to do about 30,000 things at once."

That was 2000.

Kirk made his false award comment in Congressional testimony (taped by C-SPAN) a few years later, and has also said it every year since including in a Senate campaign commercial and even right up until this week.

Plus, he has a clear pattern of making other unnecessarily embellished, false statements about his already decent record in the years since. (Getting shot at in Iraq - which he admitted was not verified .... commanding the Pentagon's War Room - meaning he somehow magically leapfrogged commanding Generals and Admirals ...)

So, now you're telling us that he only told these lies because he had too much going on his life? He's been lying about his record the ENTIRE TIME he's been in the House.

And you're asking us to trust that he can handle EVEN MORE going on his life if he's elected to the Senate?


Thanks for the Friday lulz!

In addition to Kirk ruining what should be an asset by needlessly fibbing about it over and over for years, you (and Kirk himself) are now saying that his other asset (Washington insider / incumbency experience) has been too much for him to juggle these past many years.



And Anon 5:07am said, "Voters want a man who's done what Kirk has done for his country, his nation, his Congressional District."

Unfortunately, Kirk habitually lied about the otherwise honorable service he had for our country.

With a record like he had, if he would have been honest about it for the past decade it would've been impressive enough.

Now Kirk's shredded whatever credibility he had there.

And as for having served his district, Kirk's already sold his constituents down the river by saying he'd flip-flop if he's elected to the Senate to vote against things he voted for while in the House.

Why he flip-flopped I don't know, but maybe his stated goal of leading the fight to put people out of work and get sick people kicked off insurance by repealing Obama's agenda was part of it.

Carl Nyberg said...

Do any of you Kirk supporters feel lied to or misled?

Don't you feel like Kirk has put you in an awkward situation?

He's led you to believe things that aren't true. You guys have made the logical inferences. You've gone to bat for Kirk.

And now you find out that most of what Kirk has told you about himself is not true.

I gotta figure you guys are upset.

But why be upset at Ellen and I?

We were the messengers. Kirk was the guy who made the immoral choice to take advantage of you.

Does it make more sense to be angry with Ellen & I or Mark Kirk?

Team America said...

Carl, I guess we could ask the same question of you and Ellen about Giannoulias, except that you guys seem to completely ignore his issues.

I think most Kirk supporters are probably disappointed with the needless distraction this recent flap has caused, but what you guys fail to understand is that we believe in Kirk, and his qualifications, service, intelligence and integrity far outweigh what you and the MSM are trying to blow up into a Blumenthal. Even Rich Miller agrees this has been overblown.

The reason we're pissed at you and Ellen is because you're trying to make us pissed at Kirk. What do you really care what we think, except to the extent you and Ellen are devoted to bringing Kirk down by any means necessary, and you are wondering if your propaganda is having any effect behind the lines. You will get no such satisfaction from me, pal.

By the way, it's "Ellen and me," not "Ellen and I."

Anonymous said...

Great post, TA. The Kirk haters, Gill, Nyberg, Blue, Joe, Rob, and the other bashers refuse to read or acknowledge the truly outstanding Navy Fitness Reports which had been posted but they refused to read. They have been given to the Trib, the Sun Times, the Daily Herald and others. Those documents clearly state and show who is the man behind the name Mark Steven Kirk.
Why those have not been made public is easy to answer. Kirk never thought it was at issue. It is now.
TA, these hateful people will not break down the huge numbers of Kirk dedicated supporters which, by the way, is growing by the minute. The more they try their ugly tricks, the more the support, both financial and moral, pours in.
Those of us who support this man, those of us who know why we support him will never change based on what these single minded, hateful, hurtful people try to foist on the voters out here and in our State.
Mark Kirk stands tall among the true heroes in our country. That's not going to change.

Rob_N said...

If you're going to put words in Rich Miller's mouth at least get them right.

What Miller said in his 6/3 headline was "Kirk defended, criticized and over-exposed."

That's a far cry from saying this is 'overblown.'

Moreover, Miller has also said:

- [Kirk] got some very big details wrong for about a decade about something that pertained to himself and he ought to just admit it and move the heck along. (link)

- Kirk looks ridiculous in Bernie’s piece today.... (link)

- But he's darned lucky that the media has decided not to count his "I command the War Room" comment as the first instance of Kirk’s exaggerations. Instead, they started with the "Intelligence Officer of the Year" award and moved on to "in" rather than "during"... [...] Usually, three strikes and you're out, figuratively speaking. The media is only giving him two strikes now. Like I said, he's darned lucky. (link)

- MSNBC's First Read asks a good question...

But what puzzles us, what makes no sense about this, is that his record — on its own — is admirable. And his opponent Alexi Giannoulias (D), as Kirk points out, never served. So what was he doing? The truth seemed good enough, but apparently wasn't for Kirk.

That’s bothered me as well. Why embellish a pretty darned stellar record? Why, as the Sun-Times editorial points out, constantly refer to “combat” service when you really just flew over the scene in a plane? Why say you were “deployed,” which is a term of art, when you actually weren’t? Why say you “served in Operation Iraqi Freedom” when, as the Sun-Times again points out, you served “during” the conflict? (link)

- As the Tribune notes, Kirk has a hubris problem. (link)

- As someone who has served with distinction and with honor, Kirk should know better. Is he overcompensating for something? Is this just a personality tick which is no big deal, or is there a deeper problem here? And was even last week’s explanation untrue? (link)

- Today, Kirk dug the hole deeper by sending out a press release touting a statement by his former commanding officer...

1) From what I’ve seen, nobody has ever claimed that Kirk didn’t earn or receive those awards except Mark Kirk, who claimed he alone received a different award.

2) There is no doubt that Kirk has embellished and exaggerated his record.

Stop digging the hole and move on. (link)

And, the coup de grace, today Miller had this to say: "There’s just something really odd about Congressman Mark Kirk." (link)