Kirk to CL for Big Ticket Fundraiser

Mark Kirk waved from a Jeep at last year's Independence Day Parade.

Mark Kirk waved from a Jeep at last year’s Independence Day Parade.

The purposed of fundraisers are to raise money.

Generally when one is asking for $2,700 or $1,000 or $500, one does not schedule it for The Cottage in Downtown Crystal Lake.

1776 or a country club maybe.

Ordinary folks can get in for $75.

But, as you can see from the invitation below, Downtown Crystal Lake will be the place to meet U.S. Senator Mark Kirk:

Kirk invite 8-8-16 1


Kirk to CL for Big Ticket Fundraiser — 14 Comments

  1. Few Precinct Committeemen will be there.

    75 dollars to see a guy who supports sanctuary cities?

    I wouldn’t pay that kind of money to see a guy who actually upholds the Constitution.

  2. Extreme RINO Alert.

    Would not donate to him since he is left of Tammy Duckworthless.

  3. Every name on that list is a perfect example of party over principles or platform …:

    “We are Republican. We stand for nothing!”

  4. Yeh, sort of like the national race this year.

    Don’t like either one of them.

  5. Kirk is a pro-abortion “Republican.”

    When he loses in November (and he will), I hope it sends a message to all the other RINOs in the state that if you betray your base, they will not support you.

  6. A copy of a letter I sent to Kirk….I still stand by it…..but I will not vote for Duckworth


    Dear Senator

    I will do everything in my power to work against you in your bid for re-election

    whomever your opponent will be will get all my efforts and support….

    You Sir are a miserable sorry ass turncoat and should get drummed out of the Republican Party

  7. This guy is the poster child for what is wrong with the Republican party, second only to Paul Ryan.

    How wonderful to watch them both go down in flames….

  8. While I disagree with most of you on your characterization of Senator Kirk, I am troubled by those of you that wouldn’t vote for him because he’s not ‘conservative enough’ or ‘betrayed his base’.

    The fact is, the voters nominated him in the primary over the other candidate in the Republican race.

    That was the chance to show that “if you betray your base, they will not support you”.

    Now is the chance to be unified in preventing a Democratic Senate majority.

    While you may disagree with some of the Senator’s principles, he still adds a seat to the Republican side of the aisle.

    I’m pretty sure the conservatives out there don’t think a better alternative would be handing the Senate majority over.

  9. Mark Kirk is problematic as a candidate.

    He’s not fully recovered from his stroke so unelected staffers have taken more responsibility for what should be the decisions of a Senator.

    This is not new as a function of normal and customary practice for Senators but it is an issue for those who believe in a pure interpretation of a Representative government.

    Kirk also walks a middle line politically which irks the conservative Republicans.

    To understand political reality is to understand pragmatic politics.

    Reagan’s pragmatic statement sums this up when he stated his 80% friend is not his 20% enemy.

    Duckworth is openly the proven enemy of Americanism.

    Duckworth is part of a party which has openly now come out against American values entirely.

    Duckworth believes Kirk is weak enough to attack and win.

    What The politically uninitiated do not understand is Kirk cannot win his district only appealing to the Trump wing of the Republican Party.

    He is a mush out of political pragmatism.

    What we do understand in Illinois is how important it is for Republican leadership to control both the House and the Senate.

    With leadership comes agenda control.

    With agenda control for Republicans comes a four square fight against the anti American forces the Democrats are electing.

    Whatever your thoughts on policy Kirk espouses the bottom line is owning the seat.

    If you wanted a more conservative candidate you should have given time and treasure to a Primary opponent.

    Now is the time to get real about the existential crisis our nation faces under Democrat leadership, grow up politically and fight the battle you can win… Kirk retaining the seat for Republican leadership.

  10. Priest I respect your opinion, but what you are advocating, moderate Republican candidates, has led to the Republican loss of the last three Presidential elections — Dole, McCann, and Romney, all moderate establishment Republicans.

    However, I agree any Republican is better than Tammy Duckworthless.

  11. Paul, you have said quite a bit in a concise way so let’s look at your statement.

    I have not now, nor have I ever, “advocated” for mush.

    We are engaged in a civil war of ideas for the future of this nation.

    Should Americanism lose to Eurocentric socialist Godless values there is nowhere else on this planet for God fearing self sufficient people to go to be free.

    We will be utterly controlled by power mad insane people like Hillary with no hope.

    This is not a future sane Americans “advocate”.

    What was stated was pragmatic.

    Kirk is a legislator.

    He is a member of the Senate with 99 others he needs to work with and a specific area within a specific state he represents.

    The Senate passes legislation which then gets sent to the House of Representatives which is the second part of our Legislative Branch.

    Kirk is a mere cog in a very large wheel.

    The center of that wheel pivots on the leadership of these parts of our Legislative Branch.

    It is desperately important to win that leadership role.

    In our nation we have three branches of government.

    The other branch you addressed is the Executive.

    The Presidency.

    There are vast worlds of difference between the needed skill sets and values necessary to inhabiting these very different branches.

    This is why former legislators have no business in the executive branch.

    Of necessity legislators are followers of their constituency and their leadership.

    Of necessity executives are visionary leaders.

    None of the people you listed were visionary or leaders.

    Nor does their candidacy have anything whatsoever to do with why Kirk is or isn’t qualified, is or isn’t necessary or is or isn’t the person Republicans must vote for in November.

    Let’s be very clear.

    There is no defending or advocating for a Kirk election from a conservative values position.

    There is only acceptance of the pragmatic reality the Senate needs Republican leadership over anti American Democrat leadership and Kirk is the only tool in that particular contest to achieve this goal.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.