Rep. Kirk abandons his principles for right-wing rhetoric

I try hard not to hate. Hating is bad for your health. Plus, the holiday season has officially begun, so hating should be put off until at least after New Year's Day.

But I have to admit that I absolutely hate the infantile, ear-splitting, hyperpartisan politics that emanates from our nation's capital.

So, I probably should've known better when Republican Rep. Mark Kirk announced his bid for the U.S. Senate.

Soon afterwards, a national Democratic operative called to see what I thought about Kirk's chances. I told her that Kirk would probably be a lock.

As a liberal Republican on issues such as gun control, abortion and gay rights, and as a strong voice within his party for paying attention to the needs and wants of suburbia, he fit the ideal Illinois profile.

One of the biggest problems that Republicans have had in this state, I explained, is that their nationally conservative party has scared the living daylights out of suburban women, who tend toward liberalism on guns and abortion and are more open to discussing gay rights. Without those votes, the statewide math doesn't add up. You just can't win without them, as the extraordinary Democratic surge in suburbia over the past decade or so clearly has shown.

Not only that, I told the operative, but the Chicago media tends to dote on socially liberal Republicans. No way, I said, would the city's media turn on Mark Kirk.

The flaw in my argument was that I failed to take into account Kirk's long exposure to DC-itis, first as a staffer and then as an elected official.

After initially citing strong national security concerns as a reason why he voted for the "cap and trade" energy bill in the U.S. House, Kirk flip-flopped almost immediately after he announced for Senate and blamed his vote on his congressional district's liberal bent. Why? Because his party's right wing viscerally opposes the legislation and it has become a touchstone issue, so he abandoned principle for party.

Then, Kirk reached out to former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, who is way more unpopular with women than she is with men, but is the darling of his party's far right.

And if that weren't enough, Kirk's head all but exploded along party lines when the Obama administration announced that it wanted to buy a state prison and transfer in terrorist detainees currently held at Guantanamo Bay.

Kirk's over the top, hyperbolic, error-riddled, extremely partisan fear tantrum finally tipped the media against him. Just about every significant newspaper in Illinois, including this one, which endorsed Kirk's re-election last year, mocked Kirk's meltdown and severely chastised him for needless and baseless fear-mongering.

The general election is 11 months away, and the Republican primary is Feb. 2, so I figure Kirk will lurch back leftward sooner or later. Maybe that'll be enough to regain his mojo with the media. Reporters and editorial writers could just chalk up his recent rhetoric to standard-issue politics and move on.

But I think there's more at work here than just the usual rightward drift during a Republican primary. Kirk is clearly showing that he's far too susceptible to our disgusting and mindless national political wars, which endlessly play out on those idiotic cable TV "news" channels. And all this makes me question how Kirk would behave if he were elected next November.

Somehow, Kirk needs to forget the stupid and divisive D.C. wars and find his own center and stick with it. Maybe some holiday introspection is in order.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/miller/1907193,CST-EDT-miller27.article
November 27, 2009
BY RICH MILLER