Dems target Kirk on Iraq war

I really hope that this discussion included express concern for the lives and welfare of the troops and not simply concerns over the prospects of electing GOP candidates in 2008.

The DCCC spokesperson has it right; Kirk is trying to say that he's not a robotic Bush follower, while at the same time, his actions reveal otherwise.

I don't believe there is such a thing as a "moderate" Republican anymore.

Ah yes, but remember, Kirk claims he's "independent" & "moderate."

Yeah, right, & I've got the winning lottery number even though I haven't bought a ticket.

IL-10 deserves better than this. We will remember this in November 2008.

Let me see if I have this right:
Dems want a timetable to put pressure on the Iraqis to improve the situation in their own country and are accused of politicizing the "war";
Repugs dont want the "war" to ruin their chances for re-election, and thats called a frank, no holds barred discussion.

Is that how it works?

"We don't need no stinking "bench marks". we got "death marks". Watch the moderate Republicans run when the "death mark" hits 4,000 along about September or October. We could reach 5,000 by July or August of 2008. That "death mark" will also mark the end of the Republican party as a political power. It would be vulnerable to being replaced by a new party composed of the middle of both of the existing partys. I think the troops will be started home before March of the election year. Suicides are not a characteristic of politicians.

Dubya & Darth created "You're either with us or against us..." so...

Mark Kirk has supported Team Dubya and he has to pay the political price for the Iraq fiasco.

Dems want a timetable to put pressure on the Iraqis to improve the situation in their own country and are accused of politicizing the "war"; Repugs dont want the "war" to ruin their chances for re-election, and thats called a frank, no holds barred discussion.
Posted by: Smirky McFlightsuit | May 10, 2007 7:39:37 PM

John E,
Coming from you that's just ridiculous.

Most of your Iraq posts to date have been babbling about what a great opportunity this screwed up war has been for the Democrats' election chances. Careful in that glass house, Chimp.

If you were sincere and thoughtful in your opposition to the war, you would be celebrating Republicans coming out against it -- even if they have to temper their opposition.

Those of us the the 10th are used to this type of hypocrisy from Kirk.

And of course Kirk's office had no immediate comment. Kirk is waiting to hear back from the Commander Guy so that he knows what exactly what talking points he's "allowed" to say.

It sounds like the Republic Party is starting to "cut and run" from the Commander Guy.

Not surprising since they're worried about getting reelected in 08.
They can already forget the 08 Prez job.

I'm glad George W Bush is man enough to stay the course in Iraq and ignore all the cut and runners.

PS- Has anyone seen my hair piece, it fell off in The Swamp somewhere when I was on here accusing the Democrats and the Pat Tillman family of lying for political purposes?

The situation has now gone on so long, this political infighting has become irrelevant. The Saudis have made it official - they no longer support this failed Iraqi government.

Per the Houston Chronicle:

Cheney will attempt to soothe the Saudis

The kingdom has let it be known that it no longer supports Iraqi Prime Minister al-Maliki, and does not believe U.S. strategy in Baghdad will work

WASHINGTON — Vice President Dick Cheney faces a diplomatic rescue mission Saturday in Saudi Arabia, where King Abdullah has told top State Department and Pentagon officials over the past six weeks that the kingdom no longer supports Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and does not believe the new U.S. military strategy to secure Baghdad will work, U.S. officials and Arab diplomats said.

The oil-rich kingdom, which has taken an increasingly tough position on Iraq, believes al-Maliki has proved a weak leader and is too tied to Iran and pro-Iranian Shiite parties to bring about real reconciliation with Iraq's Sunni minority, Arab sources said.

Assuaging Saudi concerns is the primary reason for the vice president's trip — and even a key reason he went to Baghdad this week, U.S. and Arab officials say. During his stop in Riyadh on Saturday, Cheney wants to be able to tell the Sunni world's most powerful monarch that the Bush administration is leaning hard on the Shiite-dominated government in Baghdad to enact long-delayed political steps to help end the Sunni insurgency, U.S. officials said.

Seems more like political theatre to me. Rove says he's mad. He probably told them to stage all this.

Why doesn't this boy wonder Mr. Kirk take a public position against the occupation of Iraq?? He has always supported Bush's Iraq policy. He has been a rumber stamp for George Bush since the beginning. Now he wants it both ways. He says one thing then votes for another. He's the pretty boy flip flopper of the north shore. He's pathetic.

ebgill called it right.

From what I understand from republican participants on news shows yesterday and today, this meeting was a scam.

The Commander Guy invited the "Tuesday Meeting" club of the Republicans to come over and make like they are telling him off so they could have political cover in their districts.

It was all scripted, staged and leaked on purpose. It was faked to give the Repubs some cover as having some members who are "worried" about the war.

Like Kirk, none of them voted any differently. The White House and Republican leadership wanted to take news momentum from Democrats.

Never believe anything you see or hear from this administration and is sycophants...it is all fake. Even LaHood admitted it this morning on CSPAN. The Decider called them to meet at the White House, not the other way around.

We in the 10th district are well aware what a phony Mark Kirk is. In 2002 Kirk couldn't get enough pictures on his website of Bush and Kirk pictured together. Kirk was stongly in favor of this Iraq misadventure in 2002.He has blindly sided with Bush any time his vote has been needed but has been "independent" when the vote was non-binding or the outcome was not in doubt.
Hundreds of volunteers worked tirelessly to get newcomer Dan Seals elected to replace Mark Kirk in 2006. Kirk survived a close election but if Mr. Seals runs again in 2008 we can hopefully rid ourselves of another "Bushie."