Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

IL-Sen: Kirk Seeks Palin Endorsement

Illinois Rep. Mark Kirk penned a memo to Republican poobah Fred Malek hoping to secure an endorsement from former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin for his Senate candidacy, according to a copy of the memo obtained by the Fix.

After noting that Palin will be in Chicago later this month to appear on "Oprah", Kirk writes that "the Chicago media will focus on one key issue: Does Gov[ernor] Palin oppose Congressman Mark Kirk's bid to take the Obama Senate seat for the Republicans?"

Kirk goes on to write that he is hoping for something "quick and decisive" from Palin about the race, perhaps to the effect of: "Voters in Illinois have a key opportunity to take Barack Obama's Senate seat. Congressman Kirk is the lead candidate to do that."

Malek confirmed the authenticity of the memo in an e-mail exchange with the Fix.

Kirk's memo is tangible evidence of the power of Palin's endorsement in a Republican primary. Kirk, a moderate by voting record in the House, is clearly very concerned about the negative impact a Palin endorsement of one of his primary opponents could have on his chances at being the party's nominee for the seat being vacated by appointed Sen. Roland Burris (D).

The memo comes on the heels of Palin's decision to endorse Conservative party candidate Doug Hoffman in the special election in New York's 23rd district. Palin's endorsement helped force state Assemblywoman Dede Scozzafava (R) from the race although Hoffman ultimately came up short against Democrat Bill Owens.

By Chris Cillizza  |  November 4, 2009; 1:44 PM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2012 , Senate  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: CA-Sen: Fiorina's in
Next: The most important number in politics today

Comments

ok. i read some of the comments...dont they have to have SOMETHING to do with the story in question? ...now, on to the question at hand. does this qualify as a 1."loose nut" allert? 2. political joke of the moment? 3. "what cave has he been living in" ? 4. all of the above. am i wrong or wasnt former governor palen almost impeached for ...oh, say, crimminal activity.....was she not, at least in part, resposable for the g.o.p. defeat....is she not in many circles, a political liability or the worst joke in town? and this man actually wants her indorsment for political office? VOTERS OF THE GREAT STATE OF ILLINOIS! TAKE CAREFUL NOTICE OF THIS MAN! AND HE WANTS TO HOLD HIGH POLITICAL OFFICE IN YOUR FINE STATE!

Posted by: dhousand1 | November 6, 2009 4:26 PM | Report abuse

"Worked well for Hoffman."

Word. He went from 15% to 46% after her endorsement. My only regret is that Obama didn't campaigned personally for Owens. The Republicans might have had a sweep.

Posted by: member8 | November 5, 2009 9:40 AM | Report abuse

You're 3/5 of a person, because the government takes 3/5 of what you make? Doesn't that make 6/5 of a person? Math not being a strong point of Wash13.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | November 5, 2009 8:42 AM | Report abuse

You must be a real treat to hang out with being both the smartest and strongest person in the room.

You should push for a bill in Maine where you can marry yourself.

You should run as a Democrat.

Also, don't forget to wipe down your machine when you're done using it. You liberals tend to carry lots of diseases. Then again, that may be you're version of 'spreading the wealth around'.

Posted by: Washington13 | November 5, 2009 7:00 AM | Report abuse

Don't forget to exercise your brain and do plenty of squats.

==

I don't do "squats," I use a leg press machine, and like every machine I work out on, I set it at maximum. Fifteen hundred pounds. The pectoral butterfly press I do one arm at a time, maximum weight. Even with one arm still recovering from tendon repair I could pick you up with the other arm and throw you across the room.

Huh huh huh about the brain being in the butt. Huh huh huh. Idiot.

Lot of "liberals" at gymnasiums. "Conservatives" are the guys who let the escalator carry them and take elevators down one floor.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 5, 2009 12:57 AM | Report abuse

Since Democrats have destroyed New York State and people are leaving in record numbers, the state will have less seats after the next census.

==

For example.

FEWER seats, you illiterate. FEWER is for countable things like seats, LESS is for infinitely subdivisible things likewater. I speak four languages, you can't even manage your native tongue. No wonder you're a Republican.

Anyway do you have ANY evidence to support this assertion?

Didn't think so.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 5, 2009 12:46 AM | Report abuse

Of all the many lies these nincompoops all tell it's the money BS that I find most insulting. I suppose I should be more irate about their anti-science stuff since that's even more objectively falsifiable (when Kansas is the west coast they'll still be denying global warming), but it's this stupid-azz crap about economics as some sort of perfectly deterministic perfectly scientific field that I find most offensive.

Cutting taxes increases revenue. Nobody works in Socialist countries. Markets are infallible. The stock market knows the future.

And they ALL believe this sh*t.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 5, 2009 12:43 AM | Report abuse

"Employers hire when they need and can afford new workers, and can afford them now. They don't go into debt to hire based on "future prospects."

Employers *fire* people who underperform or cause problems, irrespective of economic conditions.

Employers *lay off* workers when they don't have work for them, or can't afford to keep them on.

Damned idiot.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite"

It's insane. All the wannabe Republican pundits come on here acting like they know all about business, but can't even get these big details right. Remember the guy who came on here and insisted that businesses suffering had nothing to do with the lack of customers, but all of Obama's taxes.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 4, 2009 10:32 PM | Report abuse

Since Democrats have destroyed New York State and people are leaving in record numbers, the state will have less seats after the next census.

Posted by: Washington13 | November 4, 2009 10:19 PM | Report abuse

"Why do you people insist on repeating that trope? You can look here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York%27s_23rd_congressional_district

and see that NY23 has been Dem. nearly as often as Rep. in that time (Dem. as recently as 1992). Get a clue."

Oh, the stupidity. Einstein, we're talking about the geographic area now included in the 23rd district, not whatever district has been numbered 23, which has moved all over the freaking state as NY has lost seats and been redistricted.

My god, you are an idiot.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | November 4, 2009 10:09 PM | Report abuse

"Why do you people insist on repeating that trope? You can look here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York%27s_23rd_congressional_district

and see that NY23 has been Dem. nearly as often as Rep. in that time (Dem. as recently as 1992). Get a clue."

Oh, the stupidity. Einstein, we're talking about the geographic area now included in the 23rd district, not whatever district has been numbered 23, which has moved all over the freaking state as NY has lost seats and been redistricted.

My god, you are an idiot.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | November 4, 2009 10:09 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Washington13 | November 4, 2009 10:07 PM | Report abuse

"By the way, according to the New York Times, a guy named Samuel Stratton (D) represented the NY-23 in Congress as recently as 1988. He retired and was succeeded by Mike McNulty (D).

http://www.nytimes.com/1990/09/14/obituaries/samuel-s-stratton-73-former-congressman-dies.html

So even your 137 talking point is kinda bent."

Um, no. Try reading a little better. This guy represented the Albany-Schenectady area, which is nowhere near the current 23rd. When this guy was in Congress NY had many more congressional districts. The numbers have obviously changed over the years.

Bye and thanks for playing.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | November 4, 2009 10:00 PM | Report abuse

Don't forget to exercise your brain and do plenty of squats.

Posted by: Washington13 | November 4, 2009 9:30 PM | Report abuse

Since 60% of what I earn is absconded by the government in the form of Income Tax, Property Tax, Gasoline Tax, Sales Tax .. etc., I'm pretty much 3/5th's of a person already since the government takes 3/5th's of what I make.

==

Then declare your independence and go live in the woods on bark on berries. Since you have no need for fire departments, schools, roads, defense, police ....

Damned idiot.

I've had enough of arguing with a moron. Off to the gym.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 9:24 PM | Report abuse

And besides, the Democrat Party has the slavery thing all to themselves. They own it.

In fact, if Democrats did not love slavery so much, the Republican Party would have never existed.

Posted by: Washington13 | November 4, 2009 9:23 PM | Report abuse

Since 60% of what I earn is absconded by the government in the form of Income Tax, Property Tax, Gasoline Tax, Sales Tax .. etc., I'm pretty much 3/5th's of a person already since the government takes 3/5th's of what I make.

If the children have to pay for new useless government programs, they won't have to take your sick route to slavery, Democrats will already have put them there.

Posted by: Washington13 | November 4, 2009 9:20 PM | Report abuse

Employers, hire and fire people based on their future prospects.

==

What. Bloody. Nonsense.

Employers hire when they need and can afford new workers, and can afford them now. They don't go into debt to hire based on "future prospects."

Employers *fire* people who underperform or cause problems, irrespective of economic conditions.

Employers *lay off* workers when they don't have work for them, or can't afford to keep them on.

Damned idiot.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 9:19 PM | Report abuse

You've run out of material too.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 9:16 PM | Report abuse

2008 - Everyone Employed
2009 - Three Collecting Unemployment as of May, June and July of this year.

Employers, hire and fire people based on their future prospects.

The future is not looking bright for employers. The future is in front of them. They see the business conditions ahead and they hire an fire accordingly. If they saw good in their future, they would not plan for misery by letting people go.

I didn't know 'fundamental change' meant critically unemployed with no end in sight.

Because several of my family members have had their standard of living fundamentally change in 2009.

Posted by: Washington13 | November 4, 2009 9:15 PM | Report abuse

Hey W13 if you're so confident in returning Republican leadership why don't you beat the rush? You can get out of your current economic dilemma by selling those children as slaves, since that's what your Republican pals have planned for them anyway.

Besides, once those unstoppable market forces kick in the value of slaves may drop quite a bit.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 9:10 PM | Report abuse

When the Republicans ran things and my family was fully employed that was a bad thing then?

==

If you really think that the economy only started to go south on 1/20/09 then you should stick with the GOP because we don't want you.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 9:05 PM | Report abuse

When the Republicans ran things and my family was fully employed that was a bad thing then?

Posted by: Washington13 | November 4, 2009 9:03 PM | Report abuse

I don't understand. Something is different. I can not put my finger on it, but when I figure it out, I'll get back to you.

==

Let me spare your weak mind all that hard work.

We had eight years of Republican economics. You're seeing the result.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 9:02 PM | Report abuse

I have to be funny. I live in New York State .... On Purpose.

My Property Taxes went up 30% this year alone and I'm still here.

Something changed. This time last year it was different. 2008, everyone in my family was employed. 2009, we are struggling with several family members WITH CHILDREN who are now unemployed. I'm helping as best I can.

What changed. Will someone enlighten me. Why are employers letting people go in 2009 and 2010 when they kept them employed in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008?

I don't understand. Something is different. I can not put my finger on it, but when I figure it out, I'll get back to you.

Posted by: Washington13 | November 4, 2009 8:59 PM | Report abuse

"The way you obsess on Hoffman one would think you guys didn't just lose two states (badly - with Obama campaigning for your candidates and everything) - not to mention gay marriage in Maine."

The reason we obsess about Hoffman was the idiotic way the higher ups in the Republican party handled this election. The district will probably go back to red next election without all the hoopla. One district in an off year is meaningless. The behavior of the Republican party is not. If their strategy is to try and prop up unelectable candidates, they are in big trouble. For your sake, you'd better hope they see this as a rebuke of their meddling. Obviously they are going to spin it the way you are spinning it, but you'd better hope they privately learn from their mistakes.

They need to take an example from the RGA and how they won VA and NJ. They got guys who could speak to the moderate elements of the state. McDonnell did relatively well in NOVA as a result. Christie did well for the same reason. The RGA didn't bring in guys who would institute mandatory prayer in schools or some nonsense like that. They kept the guys who could speak to their voters. Hoffman simply could not do that.

RGA has every reason to celebrate. Kudos to them. It is meaningless in terms of 2012, but kudos anyways. However, the RNC had better exercise some introspection. They screwed up NY23 badly. Fortunately for them, it's just one seat, but it's a seat they should have won easily and it's a mistake that can be costly if repeated all over the country.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 4, 2009 8:58 PM | Report abuse

As the GOP continues to spin last night as a repudiation of movement conservatism, taking away exactly the wrong lesson (YES!!!!), the Democrats are taking the right ones:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/05/us/politics/05cong.html?hp

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 8:57 PM | Report abuse

"Dude you ran out of material about ten posts ago. Hang it up."

Quoth the raven to the crow - you are one heck of a funny guy.

By the way, according to the New York Times, a guy named Samuel Stratton (D) represented the NY-23 in Congress as recently as 1988. He retired and was succeeded by Mike McNulty (D).

http://www.nytimes.com/1990/09/14/obituaries/samuel-s-stratton-73-former-congressman-dies.html

So even your 137 talking point is kinda bent.

Posted by: martinknght | November 4, 2009 8:53 PM | Report abuse

I think Obama should appear with Democrat candidates more often.

I drove through northern New Jersey today and picked up one of the OBAMA/CORZINE signs that were on the side of the road.

It's a keeper.

Posted by: Washington13 | November 4, 2009 8:48 PM | Report abuse

By 2012 Palin will be doing stunts like promising to chainsaw off one of her limbs on a live webcam or something. The arc of her trajectory is not upward, it's earthward.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 8:48 PM | Report abuse

martin,

Dems won the DA spot in Westchester County NY too. First time a Republican lost in 100 years.

'That was the real race in these elections' - Quote the Raven

Posted by: Washington13 | November 4, 2009 8:46 PM | Report abuse

"Sarah Palin is going to win all 50 states in 2012 by a campaign run entirely from facebook."

DDAWD - Okay. You said it, not me.

Posted by: martinknght | November 4, 2009 8:44 PM | Report abuse

The way you obsess on Hoffman one would think you guys didn't just lose two states (badly - with Obama campaigning for your candidates and everything) - not to mention gay marriage in Maine.

McDonnell/Deeds = 58/41
Christie/Corzine = 49/44

==

Dude you ran out of material about ten posts ago. Hang it up.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 8:43 PM | Report abuse

"...he's locked up .. staring out the window as the rain pounds in the parking lot, doctors leave for the day, the lights come on .. month after month after month."

Sheesh this is too real. Just yesterday a guy walked with me talking rag time all the way over to the painted line at the steps down and over to the parking lot. I drove away I felt a twinge. I looked back and he had turned around to face the hospital but he was still standing there...and still talking.

Posted by: shrink2 | November 4, 2009 8:40 PM | Report abuse

Bob McDonnell and Chris Christie were real 'moderates' when they appeared repeatedly on Sean Hannity's radio program and television show, and Mark Levin's radio show.

That's real moderation.

Bob and Chris ran as Conservative Republicans and they won.

Posted by: Washington13 | November 4, 2009 8:39 PM | Report abuse

The way you obsess on Hoffman one would think you guys didn't just lose two states (badly - with Obama campaigning for your candidates and everything) - not to mention gay marriage in Maine.

McDonnell/Deeds = 58/41
Christie/Corzine = 49/44

Heh ...

Posted by: martinknght | November 4, 2009 8:39 PM | Report abuse

BTW; Define "moderate.

==

Let me introduce you to a new resource you may not be familiar with. It's called a "dictionary."

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 8:38 PM | Report abuse

"NJ - solidly Democratic, Republican outspent 300%, Obama campaigning and Corzine still lost. You just lost a whole state. Sorry, two states. Heavily. All with candidates endorsed and campaigned for by Obama."

So the fact that states split tickets all the time is meaningless to you?

Ok, then. Fine. Sarah Palin is going to win all 50 states in 2012 by a campaign run entirely from facebook.

Jeez.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 4, 2009 8:38 PM | Report abuse

It's sad to see Democrat party grasping at straws after their accross the board defeats in Virginia, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New York, and Maine.

And before some of you folks blow your stack, New York is a very big state and the GOP performed very well in Westchester County, and Nassau County. The two major counties that border the five boroughs of New York city.

In Westchester, which has 2-1 registered Democrats, the Pro-Life Conservative Republican who runs an XM Satellite Catholic Radio station defeated the Democrat 12-year incumbent for County Executive by 15 points. It is the first time in the history of Westchester that the incumbent has ever lost this race.

On an aside, Democrats are reeling in Westchester, but they did elect a Democrat to the District Attorney for the first time in the 100 year history of the position. The fact that Democrats won something that a Republican held for 100 years is not making Democrats in the county feel any better. They lost the BIG Prize and only those Democrats with the most partisan blinders are crazy enough to use the DA win as cover for their overall resounding defeats.

Also, Andy Spano, the Democrat county executive, was endorsed by Former President Bill Clinton and State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo.

Posted by: Washington13 | November 4, 2009 8:35 PM | Report abuse

Sure ... McDonnell and Christie ran away from conservatism; funny I don't recall them promising tax hikes and same sex marriages.

BTW; Define "moderate." Is it when a Left-Winger registers as a Republican?

Posted by: martinknght | November 4, 2009 8:32 PM | Report abuse

Doesn't look like Obama is any better than Palin at this stuff, does it? Worse, she's a private citizen with a facebook profile, he's the President of the United States with all the gilt and trim.

==

The way you swagger one would think Hoffman had won or something.

Yessssss, see you next year. Why don't you send Hoffman a Sonicare?

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 8:29 PM | Report abuse

NJ - solidly Democratic, Republican outspent 300%, Obama campaigning and Corzine still lost. You just lost a whole state. Sorry, two states. Heavily. All with candidates endorsed and campaigned for by Obama.

Doesn't look like Obama is any better than Palin at this stuff, does it? Worse, she's a private citizen with a facebook profile, he's the President of the United States with all the gilt and trim.

See ya next year.

Posted by: martinknght | November 4, 2009 8:26 PM | Report abuse

Point is that Hoffman pretty much ONLY got corporate contributions. 95% of his money was from out of the state. It's VERY difficult to win if you can't get potential voters to open their wallets.

==

Even if he'd been a local it wouldn't have made a lot of difference, NY23 is old-style conservative, not Palin/racist/Beck conservative. Palinites are not electable outside the rural south.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 8:25 PM | Report abuse

"And finally, so what if Hoffman got "corporate" contributions - so did every other person running (both R and D)? So did Obama last year and in 2004. What's your point?

Posted by: martinknght"

Point is that Hoffman pretty much ONLY got corporate contributions. 95% of his money was from out of the state. It's VERY difficult to win if you can't get potential voters to open their wallets.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 4, 2009 8:21 PM | Report abuse

wow-- this is so telling. I have never seen a psycho case unfold on a public board like this before -- too much information!!

==

Can you even entertain the possibility that someone as malevolent as that stay out of the nuthouse?

Hold a job?

Work with other people?

Of course he couldn't, and of course he's locked up .. staring out the window as the rain pounds in the parking lot, doctors leave for the day, the lights come on .. month after month after month.

But hey he has his catharsis .. calling strangers "moonbats." And believing he's smarter than they are!

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 8:20 PM | Report abuse

Of course, the governors elections are pretty meaningless in predicting presidential elections. First of all, states split the ticket all the time. Blue states elect Repub govs, red states elect Dem govs. Nothing interesting. Kansas isn't going blue in 2012 and Cali isn't going red in 2012. Virginia might revert to red in 2012, but no way NJ will.

NY-23 is meaningless in and of itself. It's an off-year election. I'm willing to bet that it goes red next year. The real significance is what the Republican party learned from this. Are they going to continue to push unelectable people who fit some abstract ideology or are they going to push people who are the best suited for individual political climates. NY-23 goes Republican, but they aren't going to vote in some neanderthal just because Sarah Palin tells them to. They want their person. If Republicans fail to learn this lesson (and it seems like they have) then they are in big trouble for 2010 and 2012. They need to look at Christie and McDonnell. They ran AWAY from conservatism and they won. That is how you expand your party's influence. You don't like how moderate the governor of California is? Well, tough. It's either a moderate or a Democrat. You don't like the moderation of the senior Senator of Pennsylvania? Well, now you no longer have to worry about a moderate Republican there, do you?

Republicans MUST learn to enlarge the tent. Strict ideology is for small groups. If Republicans can learn this, they will have a relatively easy time getting back into power with the help of the main stream media. If they can't, then they are doomed to regionalism. They just can't expand the party without relaxing standards.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 4, 2009 8:18 PM | Report abuse

Anyway, *when* we take it back next year

==

I wouldn't be counting my chickens like that if my party had lost so very many seats in the last few years.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 8:15 PM | Report abuse

wow-- this is so telling. I have never seen a psycho case unfold on a public board like this before -- too much information!!


"when your military father is so ashamed of you that he basically disowns you, there are severe psychological reprecussions. the teenage stuttering, instead of the typical lisp didn't help either. All those years getting passed over for promotion, still doing the job that is usually assigned to a 20 year old. these things leave scars. they leave you angry and anti-social.

all the refusals by girls leave you misogynist. the job that is so non rewarding that all your time is spent antigonizing fellow liberals on some lefty blog. the late nights staring at the screen, hoping for a friend. the trolling through schoolyards hoping for a sleepover, followed by the shiny penny to go away before the guilt sets in. what would Dad say?

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 7:30 PM "

Posted by: drindl | November 4, 2009 8:12 PM | Report abuse

2009 - 1993 = 16 not 137.
Anyway, *when* we take it back next year, you'll still have the 137 to keep you warm at night.

And besides, if you all liked Scozzafava so much, why didn't you nominate her to run on your side? She was certainly far enough to the Left for even you guys.

Oh yeah ...

McDonnell 58
Deeds 41

Christie 49
Corzine 44

Gay Marriage (ME!!)
No 52
Yes 47

{grin} Spin that all *you* want.

Posted by: martinknght | November 4, 2009 8:11 PM | Report abuse

Right-Wing Extremist Terrorist Misogynist Racist Death Beasts

Posted by: martinknght | November 4, 2009 7:55 PM


evil Right-Wing Death Beast

Right-Wing Terrorist Extremist Death Beast

Posted by: martinknght | November 4, 2009 7:34 PM


Right-Wing Extremist Terrorist Death Beast

Right-Wing Extremist Terrorist Death Beast

Posted by: martinknght | November 4, 2009 7:21 PM

==

Not too bright, I see.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 8:05 PM | Report abuse

And finally, so what if Hoffman got "corporate" contributions - so did every other person running (both R and D)? So did Obama last year and in 2004. What's your point?

==

How sour are those grapes? All that money, all that hype, a solid GOP district, and he lost.

But you hitch your wagon to Palin, and don't let anyone discourage you. She'll carry you guys to victory, I promise!!

(*guffaw*)

"pry-vit secter"

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 8:00 PM | Report abuse

GoldAndTanzanite (& lindarc)

Yeah sure ... McDonnell and Christie did not run as Republicans or conservatives. And I guess that means that the people of NJ and VA went to the polls not knowing that the two Governors-Elect were Republicans, right?

Despite the millions in ads from Democrats saying they were Republicans and Right-Wing Extremist Terrorist Misogynist Racist Death Beasts?

Okay ... if that helps you sleep at night.

And by the way, it wasn't just Hoffman who conceded before the evening was out. I'm pretty certain a guy named Creigh Deeds and a Governor named Jon Corzine (BTW: if having worked on Wall Street is such a bad thing why the heck did you guys elect him in the first place?) also conceded before the evening was out as well.

How sour are those grapes?

And finally, so what if Hoffman got "corporate" contributions - so did every other person running (both R and D)? So did Obama last year and in 2004. What's your point?

Posted by: martinknght | November 4, 2009 7:55 PM | Report abuse

Doug Hoffman, unpolished and unknown, [...] still managed to garner 45% of the vote against your guy's 49%

==

... in a district that's been GOP for 137 years, and where Scozzafava would have won without question.

Spin all you want.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 7:43 PM | Report abuse

zouk your malevolence is so amped up and extreme that no matter how hard you try to hurt you end up being comical, and you just don't get that, do you.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 7:40 PM | Report abuse

So, thanks for your concern about Palin and her deleterious effect on the GOP, my liberal friends - after all, everyone you know knows she's a Right-Wing Terrorist Extremist Death Beast, right? But I think we'll take our chances.

==

You do that, champ, you put all your eggs in that Palin basket, and don't let anyone discourage you. Nosirree!!

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 7:39 PM | Report abuse

And remember, Doug Hoffman, unpolished and unknown, and an evil Right-Wing Death Beast (who I would guess wants to put gay people in concentration camps, legalize rape and force you to go to Church while evilly cutting your taxes) still managed to garner 45% of the vote against your guy's 49% - Owens couldn't even get a majority with the Far Left Scozzafava's support.

PS: Considering the amount of changes NY-23 has gone through in terms of redistricting, including the fact that significant chunks were part of other districts, it's really interesting to see y'all jumping up and down celebrating with the Civil War talking point.

Oh well ... enjoy your "victory." Round 2 is next year. In the mean time, I'm guessing Bill Owens would be getting acquainted with his fellow ObamaCare-blocking Blue Dogs.

PPS: From 13% to 45% in one month in a district Obama won last year: The Palin Effect. A 17% loss in VA and 4% (100,000 vote margin) loss in deep deep Blue NJ with a 3-to-1 spending advantage: The Obama Effect.

So, thanks for your concern about Palin and her deleterious effect on the GOP, my liberal friends - after all, everyone you know knows she's a Right-Wing Terrorist Extremist Death Beast, right? But I think we'll take our chances.

Posted by: martinknght | November 4, 2009 7:34 PM | Report abuse

barn's over THERE, champ

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 7:32 PM | Report abuse

when your military father is so ashamed of you that he basically disowns you, there are severe psychological reprecussions. the teenage stuttering, instead of the typical lisp didn't help either. All those years getting passed over for promotion, still doing the job that is usually assigned to a 20 year old. these things leave scars. they leave you angry and anti-social.

all the refusals by girls leave you misogynist. the job that is so non rewarding that all your time is spent antigonizing fellow liberals on some lefty blog. the late nights staring at the screen, hoping for a friend. the trolling through schoolyards hoping for a sleepover, followed by the shiny penny to go away before the guilt sets in. what would Dad say?

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 7:30 PM | Report abuse

the hot breath of unemployment is breathing down his neck

==

yeah that's why I'm going permanent here

you remain in the nuthouse

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 7:27 PM | Report abuse

"McDonnell and Christie ran away from Palin's conservative right and the GOP as hard as they could, all but hiding their party affiliations, and both had weak opponents.

The only guy who ran as a conservative, and with corporate money and corporate endorsements, went down in flames with Palin's endorsement...

I hope the GOP deludes itself as you are deluding yourself and continues to run."

YEAH...please do seek her endorsement. The crowds come but they don't translate into votes...

Posted by: lindarc | November 4, 2009 7:26 PM | Report abuse

the towering intellect of the left reverts to the "I know you are but what am I " reply.

In his sandbox all the boys are naked.

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 7:25 PM | Report abuse

Obama won NJ by 15 points last year and not only he, but Biden, Clinton and a Kennedy went down to NJ *repeatedly* to campaign for Corzine. And Corzine got beaten by 4.

==

Corzine was a Wall Street type, like Bloomberg, and people are pretty damned sick of Wall Street types. And which party is the more beholden to the extremely rich?

Christie didn't win by running as a conservative, on the contrary, he all but ran screaming from any mention of the Republican Party.

So did McDonnell.

The only one of the three who ran as a conservative lost decisively and conceded before the evening was out.

But please by all means, "learn" the lesson that if you want to win as a Republican you do so by running to the right of Genghnis Khan. And keep it up.

Palin/Pawlenty '12!

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 7:25 PM | Report abuse

Another poster, known for his pederast predilictions, is still threatened daily with unemployment since his job could be accomplished by half of a real code writer. but moving to India is not an option as he would be immediately jailed. But, he offers business advice as if he was actually successful at anything but tasteless insults.

the hot breath of unemployment is breathing down his neck, and not in that good Viet boy way.

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 7:22 PM | Report abuse

like you're one to talk

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 7:21 PM | Report abuse

This is pathetic.

Obama won NJ by 15 points last year and not only he, but Biden, Clinton and a Kennedy went down to NJ *repeatedly* to campaign for Corzine. And Corzine got beaten by 4. That's a 19-point turn-around in one year. And worse, Chris Christie is not some pro-abortion pro-gay marriage "moderate" like Christie Whitman - he is a full-fledged Right-Wing Extremist Terrorist Death Beast. And he was outspent 3-to-1.

And in Virginia (Obama +7) McDonnell just positively crushed your candidate. And if you are going to whine that he avoided social issues, let me remind you all that Deeds sure as heck did not. Obama campaigned for Deeds and Deeds clasped himself to Obama like a lamprey to a shark and he still got crushed. Worse, Ken Cucinelli - Right-Wing Extremist Terrorist Death Beast extraordinaire - stomped his opponent all over the state.

And Maine - liberal Blue State Maine - gay marriage went down in flames ... in a high turnout election.

And yet you guys are crowing about winning a Congressional District in a special election by little more than 4000 against divided opposition?

When you basically lost three STATES?

Okay.

Posted by: martinknght | November 4, 2009 7:21 PM | Report abuse

still not a single intelligent thought. but then look at the community here. what a waste of bits and bytes CC.

Is this what you had in mind when you decided to start a political blog?

These numbskulls couldn't manage a thoughtful remark if they all cooperated on the project.

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 7:17 PM | Report abuse

Semiotics is fun! says Barbie.

Well, it is.

Posted by: drindl | November 4, 2009 7:09 PM | Report abuse

So looks like this is the lesson the Republicans are taking away from this. Give MORE credence to the far right.

Awesome.

==

Remember when we talked about them "drinking the Kool-Aid" and then being a "suicide cult" and we were kinda joking>

No more.

Thelma and Louise reach the cliff, and decide to keep driving.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 7:09 PM | Report abuse

"So looks like this is the lesson the Republicans are taking away from this. Give MORE credence to the far right.

Awesome."

Yeah, that's about it, dawd. This is devolution at its finest.

Posted by: drindl | November 4, 2009 7:06 PM | Report abuse

Man, can you guys believe it's already been a year since the election?? Time flies!
___________________

Call me sick, but I can't wait for each next election. The way people transact power, the use of language and symbols in the process. I could go into the work of Claude Levi Strauss and the birth of structural semiotics at this point, but maybe,

go running at sunset is better.

Posted by: shrink2 | November 4, 2009 6:57 PM | Report abuse

I guess we could think about that, but I'd rather take the day to focus on the good that has come about so far rather than the bad that was averted.

==

well to my mind nowhere near enough bad has been averted. We're still in Iraq and Afghanistan, still doing nothing about global warming, Guantánemo is still open, financial sector is still unregulated, banks got bailed out and homeowners didn't, and organized terrorists are calling the shots instead of honest and educated men.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 6:55 PM | Report abuse

bsimon1 writes:
"In a state like Illinois, is that a viable strategy?"

The last R IL Senator was Peter Fitzgerald, who beat the RNC's candidate (can't remember her name) in the primary. He was pretty conservative, but really only won the seat because Carol Moseley-Braun was such a disaster as a Senator. Before that, the only R Senator from IL in my lifetime was Chuck Percy, who was certainly not a conservative R. Oh, maybe Everett Dirksen was alive when I was born.

In any case, Illinoisians seem to like their Rs to be fairly moderate for state-wide office (mostly Govs -- Jim Thompson, Jim Edgar, George Ryan). I tend to agree that courting the conservative wing will backfire on him in the general. I don't think there is even a viable conservative challenger to Kirk in the primary, but maybe he's trying to head that possibility off early so as not to get "Hoffman"ed.

Posted by: mnteng | November 4, 2009 6:52 PM | Report abuse

"Just imagine what kind of shape we'd be in if McGoofy and his monkeygirl had won. The world would probably be a radioactive cinder by now.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite"

I guess we could think about that, but I'd rather take the day to focus on the good that has come about so far rather than the bad that was averted.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 4, 2009 6:36 PM | Report abuse

For some reason, I get emails from the Newt.

Looks like he is doing an about face on Dede Scozzafava.

"In retrospect it is clear Dede Scozzafava should never have been nominated because she was far too liberal to be acceptable.

Republican leaders in New York must recognize that Mike Long and the Conservative Party in that state have to be consulted before decisions are made. The national conservative movement is a force that has to be recognized and respected.

I certainly heard from enough friends to know that my decision to support the unanimous vote of the 11 New York county chairs was very unpopular with conservative activists.

In New York, after two failed special elections, it is clear the state party has to fight to change the election law so there are primaries in special elections. The insider nominating process is simply unacceptable to grassroots populists and guarantees a sense of illegitimacy. "


So looks like this is the lesson the Republicans are taking away from this. Give MORE credence to the far right.

Awesome.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 4, 2009 6:34 PM | Report abuse

Sarah who?

Posted by: kogejoe | November 4, 2009 6:34 PM | Report abuse

Man, can you guys believe it's already been a year since the election?? Time flies!

==

Just imagine what kind of shape we'd be in if McGoofy and his monkeygirl had won. The world would probably be a radioactive cinder by now.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 6:29 PM | Report abuse

Man, can you guys believe it's already been a year since the election?? Time flies!

Posted by: DDAWD | November 4, 2009 6:27 PM | Report abuse

Just being able to do a wikipedia search doesn't earn you a seat at the grownups table.

==

Frantic googling to support a wrong argument is the stock in trade of conservatrolls.

They never actually read the links they post in such triumph, and it usually turns out that they don't support the argument.

They think they're the only ones who know about google.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 6:25 PM | Report abuse

"The area currently represented as NY 23 has been reassigned and redistricted many times. The area that is currently NY 23 has had republican representation since 1872. Just being able to do a wikipedia search doesn't earn you a seat at the grownups table. Thanks for playing

Posted by: mtjames"

Yeah. According to the aforementioned wiki page, that District used to contain areas such as Manhattan and the Bronx.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 4, 2009 6:24 PM | Report abuse

@ iamfelix
Why do you people insist on repeating that trope? You can look here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York%27s_23rd_congressional_districtand see that NY23 has been Dem. nearly as often as Rep. in that time (Dem. as recently as 1992). Get a clue.

*******

The area currently represented as NY 23 has been reassigned and redistricted many times. The area that is currently NY 23 has had republican representation since 1872. Just being able to do a wikipedia search doesn't earn you a seat at the grownups table. Thanks for playing

Posted by: mtjames | November 4, 2009 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Au contraire, but both online & in meatspace, I find the Libs nattering on about her nonstop. Even her most ardent conservative fans generally stop to draw breath and talk about something else. If you weren't worried, you'd ignore her.

==

And what would be the basis of this "worry?"

Everything she touches turns to mud. We're excited about her because she's tearing the GOP apart. If you had someone dropping off expensive gifts week in week out you'd natter about her too.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 6:16 PM | Report abuse

"If you weren't worried, you'd ignore her."

This is a non sequitur. There are many, many people about whose destiny I have no worries, none at all, whose lives I follow, this is just for fun!

It is a guilty pleasure to watch people you despise destroy themselves, but it is still fun. Michael Steele is in the same category.

You can trust, if leftists are worried about someone, you'll hear all about it. They love to fret about the threat. Sarah Palin just makes us laugh that is all there is to it.

Unlike those bad outcome, 10 replay in slo mo shows that are the stock in trade of cable tv, the Sarah Palin OMG disaster happens in real time, week after week, month after month.

Posted by: shrink2 | November 4, 2009 6:13 PM | Report abuse

Au contraire, but both online & in meatspace, I find the Libs nattering on about her nonstop. Even her most ardent conservative fans generally stop to draw breath and talk about something else. If you weren't worried, you'd ignore her.

Posted by: iamfelix | November 4, 2009 5:57 PM | Report abuse

Also, if Palin is such a nothing (or worse), why do y'all spend so much time fretting over her, hmmmm?

==

(shades eyes, rotates head)

I don't see any on the liberal side "fretting" over Palin. Au contraire mes enfants, she's the gift that keeps on giving.

THANKS SARAHN FOR NY23!!!

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 5:51 PM | Report abuse

"Pawlenty likes it to be really safe before he makes a peep."

They don't call him conservative for nothing. He's no CINO.

Posted by: shrink2 | November 4, 2009 5:50 PM | Report abuse

I wonder how much the Palinites will now spend to retake NY-23, the district they caused the Republicans to lose for the first time in 137 years. Another year of Green Teeth Hoffman? Dear Lord.

Posted by: koolkat_1960

*********

Why do you people insist on repeating that trope? You can look here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York%27s_23rd_congressional_district

and see that NY23 has been Dem. nearly as often as Rep. in that time (Dem. as recently as 1992). Get a clue.

Also, if Palin is such a nothing (or worse), why do y'all spend so much time fretting over her, hmmmm?

Posted by: iamfelix | November 4, 2009 5:45 PM | Report abuse

Kirk seems to be taking a very high school approach to Palin. He's asking Fred Malek to find out if Sarah *likes* him. She won't say now. She'll enjoy withholding for a bit, that's the kind of thing Queen Bees really like to do.

Palin wasn't the first to back Hoffman. She held back until a few other influential groups had stepped behind him first -- and Pawlenty is even more cautious. Pawlenty likes it to be really safe before he makes a peep.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | November 4, 2009 5:42 PM | Report abuse

Reading complaints about KOZ is even more boring than reading KOZ's complaints about everyone else.

Posted by: Blarg | November 4, 2009 5:22 PM | Report abuse

It takes a while. I haven't responded to a single one of his posts all week, but he's still including me in his moonbat/loony/stooges posts.

==

I used to feel sorry for him, a poor dumb brute in pain and not comprehending what's happening to his mind, but he's so damned nasty that now I hope the hospital decides to revive the lobotomy and give him one.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 5:12 PM | Report abuse

"jrm2 writes
"Dang!, I didn't make Zouk's list"

If you ignore him, he'll ignore you. He only includes me when I use one of his posts to expose his illogic. For instance, he posts day after day, then claims everyone with more than a 6th grade education has left. Most people would see the joke coming, but not the Z man."

It takes a while. I haven't responded to a single one of his posts all week, but he's still including me in his moonbat/loony/stooges posts.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | November 4, 2009 5:06 PM | Report abuse

jrm2 writes
"Dang!, I didn't make Zouk's list"

If you ignore him, he'll ignore you. He only includes me when I use one of his posts to expose his illogic. For instance, he posts day after day, then claims everyone with more than a 6th grade education has left. Most people would see the joke coming, but not the Z man.

Posted by: bsimon1 | November 4, 2009 4:57 PM | Report abuse

So Congressman Kirk wants former Governor Palin's endorsement. Why is he asking Fred Malek for it? Is our former Governor a Trilby, and Mr. Malek her Svengali?

Mark Regan
Fairbanks, Alaska

Posted by: Mark_Regan | November 4, 2009 4:46 PM | Report abuse

Dang!, I didn't make Zouk's list

Posted by: JRM2 | November 4, 2009 4:43 PM | Report abuse

"Yet he never goes away... you'd think he'd want to spend every minute of his waking life with people he likes, but no. It's a strange psychosis, but psychosis it is.

Posted by: drindl"

Well, JakeD was someone who was desperate for attention. Snowbama is someone who is desperate for approval. He wants to hear about how smart he is. Did you just see his list of like 15 people that he thinks he is smarter than? His thought is that everyone is dumb, but him. Now why won't we all just recognize that??? But he doesn't realize that you don't get respect from copy and pasting other people work, you don't get respect from childish one-liners, you don't get respect when you are unable to engage with others. Will he learn? Of course not. Will he continue seeking approval. Almost certainly.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 4, 2009 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Other posters post about the topic.

Zouk posts about other posters.

This is not a syllogism, there is no third statement.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 3:16 PM | Report abuse

CC, You should do an article on the role of the Watertown Daily times in the NY-23 election. They did a great job reporting on this and I think not only held their own under the bright lights of the national spotlight, but I think their indepth reporting had a major impact on the race.

Posted by: AndyR3 | November 4, 2009 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Can you "SPOT THE LOONY"?

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | November 4, 2009 1:54 PM
Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 1:58 PM
Posted by: drindl | November 4, 2009 1:58 PM
Posted by: margaretmeyers | November 4, 2009 2:10 PM
Posted by: DDAWD | November 4, 2009 2:25 PM
Posted by: bsimon1 | November 4, 2009 2:34 PM
Posted by: koolkat_1960 | November 4, 2009 2:42 PM
Posted by: drindl | November 4, 2009 2:43 PM
Posted by: koolkat_1960 | November 4, 2009 2:44 PM
Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 2:54 PM

It's such an easy task, even an out of work liberal barking mad moonbat could do it.

Cc - what has happened to your blog?????

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 3:04 PM | Report abuse

It makes no difference if Palin endorses Kirk or not, the fact that he wanted her endorsement will come back to haunt him in about 8 months or so. Palin is on a crash course to a complete meltdown and the GOP can't seem to get off the plane. I think this interview with Oprah is a mistake. Oprah is ten times smarter than she is and a 30 minute or one hour interview could be disaterous.

Mark my words (all pun intended) this will bring down Kirk in the end.

Posted by: AndyR3 | November 4, 2009 2:59 PM | Report abuse

Kirk must have a death wish. Palin's endorsement led to one of the reddest districts in the northeast to go blue for the first time since Grant was president.

Can't make this stuff up. Dickens couldn't. Kafka couldn't. Palin's poison.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 2:54 PM | Report abuse

Maybe Palin can hold a debate among the GOP hopefuls to see who gets her blessing. Best winker wins! You betcha!

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | November 4, 2009 2:44 PM | Report abuse

it's pretty funny, isn't it bsimon? I mean, in a sad way. here's a guy who, every day for years. has sat at his keyboard alone, howling at the moon at this site, and complaining bitterly every day about how awful the people are here.

Yet he never goes away... you'd think he'd want to spend every minute of his waking life with people he likes, but no. It's a strange psychosis, but psychosis it is.

Posted by: drindl | November 4, 2009 2:43 PM | Report abuse

"Does he really want the endorsement, or is he gambling that Malek & party leaders will encourage Palin to remain agnostic on the issue? i.e. Is Kirk's move designed not so much to win the endorsement, but to get her to _not_ endorse & perhaps state that the IL GOP should pick their own candidate? For the record I think that would be a longshot - the former Governor appears to be quite interested in staying in the headlines, and that will require commenting on party politics wherever she appears."

For the record, I completely agree. There is no way she'll stay on the sidelines in any race she is asked to participate in.

I wonder how much the Palinites will now spend to retake NY-23, the district they caused the Republicans to lose for the first time in 137 years. Another year of Green Teeth Hoffman? Dear Lord.


Posted by: koolkat_1960 | November 4, 2009 2:42 PM | Report abuse

As only the immortal William Shatner could put it:

"Kirk out!"

Posted by: Bondosan | November 4, 2009 2:41 PM | Report abuse

king of zouk writes
" this blog will continue to drive away anyone with an education above sixth grade."


According to his own theory, the King of Zouk does not have an education above the sixth grade. No other available evidence refutes this conclusion.

.

Posted by: bsimon1 | November 4, 2009 2:34 PM | Report abuse

I also seek for Mark Kirk to get the Palin endorsement.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 4, 2009 2:25 PM | Report abuse

CC - Once again the trimuverate of loony stooges have overtaken the blog and emptied all intelligence from it.

Until the likes of drivl, Loud and Dumb and NAMBLA depart for the unemployment check, this blog will continue to drive away anyone with an education above sixth grade.

Let's review the insight and discourse in case the evidence is not clear:

groveling for a touch from the fairy queen's wand.

just put a gun in his mouth and pull the trigger

empty-headed Barbie wannabe is the Kiss of Death

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Massive losses and utter humiliation only seems to spur them on.

Posted by: snowbama | November 4, 2009 2:21 PM | Report abuse

Worked well for Hoffman.

Posted by: JRM2 | November 4, 2009 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Me! Me! Touch me!

Posted by: margaretmeyers | November 4, 2009 2:10 PM | Report abuse

kk60, we eat anymore popcorn, we're going to have to start throwing our weight around (I hate parking tickets too). Seriously though, just kidding, this is hilarious.

something "quick and decisive" from Palin

Posted by: shrink2 | November 4, 2009 2:05 PM | Report abuse

koolkat_1960 writes
"This poor sap, a formerly respected moderate, is groveling for a touch from the fairy queen's wand."

Does he really want the endorsement, or is he gambling that Malek & party leaders will encourage Palin to remain agnostic on the issue? i.e. Is Kirk's move designed not so much to win the endorsement, but to get her to _not_ endorse & perhaps state that the IL GOP should pick their own candidate? For the record I think that would be a longshot - the former Governor appears to be quite interested in staying in the headlines, and that will require commenting on party politics wherever she appears.

Posted by: bsimon1 | November 4, 2009 2:01 PM | Report abuse

CC--

How did you obtain this memo re: Kirk seeking Palin's endorsement? Was it released to you? Insider?

It seems like a pathetic move by Kirk, coming so soon after the NY23 election. I wouldn't think he'd want people know he is begging Palin for her endorsement in an effort to ensure that no one runs successfully against him in the primary.

Posted by: prairiepopulist | November 4, 2009 2:01 PM | Report abuse

Another hour, another column praising Sarah.

CC can't seem to stop talking about her, somehow.

Agree with you koolkat, these poor saps on the right have shown no capacity for learning.

Perhaps soon they are going to figure out this empty-headed Barbie wannabe is the Kiss of Death. You'd think McCain AND Hoffman going down in flames would be enough, but they are slow on the uptake.

Posted by: drindl | November 4, 2009 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Why doesn't he just put a gun in his mouth and pull the trigger, it'd be easier and the end result would be the same.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 4, 2009 1:58 PM | Report abuse

As an independent voter, I'd be recording a mark against Kirk for seeking the endorsement. Kirk's move reminds us of the narrow path that moderate Repubs have to follow: tack right to win the nomination, then tack back towards the middle to win the general election. In a state like Illinois, is that a viable strategy?

Posted by: bsimon1 | November 4, 2009 1:56 PM | Report abuse

Oh this is rich. This poor sap, a formerly respected moderate, is groveling for a touch from the fairy queen's wand.

Illinois! Palin! Pass the popcorn!

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | November 4, 2009 1:54 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company