Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Mark Kirk on Immigration: Not As Bad as I Feared

I may live to regret this, but I have decided today that I will vote for Mark Kirk for the U.S. Senate.

Today, I unearthed the Numbers USA analysis of Mark Kirk's cumulative voting record on immigration issues. This issue is paramount to me and as determinative of my electoral choices as guns are to an NRA member or abortion to a Right to Lifer.

The Numbers USA analysis is, I think, the most reliable rating system that I have seen on any issue. It considers not only floor votes on final passage, but a number of behind the scenes maneuvers, such as co-sponsorships of bills, signing of discharge petitions to force votes on controversial issues and committee votes. This gives you a more lucid picture of a legislator's actual commitment to immigration control.

And to my great amazement, Mark Kirk got a B rating on immigration control for his recent legislative activities. He voted for immigration control 78% of the time. His career rating is C+. According to Numbers USA, that means he, "leans toward less immigration, less population growth, less reliance on foreign labor."

See Mark Kirk's votes on pivotal immigration control measures: here.

Surprisingly, Kirk was not the worst Illinois Republican on this score. That distinction belongs to the supposed, conservative boy-wonder, Aaron Schock, who garnered a meager C, voting for immigration control only 52% of the time.

But Kirk is running against, Alexi Giannoulias (banker to the mob) who fashions himself a clone of socialist Congresswoman, Jan Schakowsky and lefty Sen. Dick Durbin.

They both merited F- ratings on immigration control.

Giannoulias unabashedly advertises his support for the ridiculously named, "Dream Act," which would give taxpayer subsidized college educations to illegal aliens. Moreover he chided Kirk for not joining him in supporting it.

You can see the complete immigration control ratings of the Illinois Congressional delegation: here.

So as much as I still harbor fears of Mark Kirk's squishy. RINO "moderation", my concern over the very imminent Congressional battles over the protection of our borders and consequent preservation of our language and culture, trump all.

So I will vote for Mark Kirk.

Even tho, I have a lingering suspicion that he will emerge as a Charles Percy-styled, pain-in-the-ass and that I will come to rue this decision.

How's that for a left-handed endorsement?


  1. I'm up here in his rep district, the 10th. *sigh* He drives me crazy with his RINO-ness. I have him on Twitter and FaceBook so I can say, "Not happy with your vote on ..." whatever the bill-du-jour is.

    But if I have to choose between a RINO and an ASS, I guess I'll hold my nose and pick the RINO.

  2. You will live to regret it. I know this guy. He's a pathological liar.

  3. I ran into Kirk at a Republican picnic in '94 or so and when I buttonholed him to talk about the need for serious immigration control measures, he tried to run off as if I had the plague. He seems to hire real liberals on his staff and they are very dismissive to conservatives. So maybe you're right. He could end up being the one liberal Republican that the media trot out on a given issue to show that the liberal measure has "bi-partisan" support. I'll think about it. I haven't voted yet.

  4. my fear is that his independence will vanish if he's elected--i expect Kirk will be forced to join the herd of republicans whose only answer to all problems is 'no.' we can ill afford to have legislative seizure right now, and a big republican win will guarantee that.

  5. My fear is that with the luxury of 6 years in the Senate, he will continue with his persistent propensity to show his "independence" by constantly sticking his fingers into the eyes of conservatives. Is this guy going to end up being Arlen Spector Jr.?


Comments invited, however anonymous commentors had better deal directly with the issues raised and avoid ad hominem drivel. As for Teachers' Union seminar writers -- forget about it.