GOP: It’s Sink or Swim in 2010

While waiting in the lobby, Christina offers Kyle a bit of advice: "Kyle, when you sit down, the first thing you should do is tell Ms. Flumptard that you can't wait to work for such a smokin' hot boss; and be sure to mention that, while in college, you regularly used pot. Oh, and tell her that, from time-to-time, office supplies will make their way home with you. She'll appreciate your candor." Kyle follows Christina's advice. Kyle is: a) likely to get the gig because "flattery will get you everywhere"; b) to be admired for his courage and honesty; c) a liberal; d) a bumbling dolt; e) both c and d. (Bear with me. This is going somewhere.) Now try this one: Republicans and Democrats are applying for the same job. Leadership is something they both desperately want and need, so competition is intense. Tim Kaine, chairman of the Democratic National Committee has a bit of advice for his Republican counterparts. He suggests that, to succeed, Republicans should run "moderate" candidates, kick conservatives to the curb and offer voters "Democrat Lite" instead of Reagan Republicanism in 2010 (you know, kind of like in '08 with John McCain). In a statement addressing the ouster of liberal Florida Republican Chairman Jim Greer, Kaine fretted aloud--genuinely, no doubt: "[T]he GOP's biggest liability this year will be its right wing that sees November's elections as an opportunity to purify the Party--at any cost." Kaine warned that the "unrelenting drive towards a smaller, narrower Republican Party" would "cost the GOP dearly." (Thanks for the heads-up, Timmy. How thoughtful.) He further lamented that conservatives have begun a "quest to purify the Republican Party, eliminate moderate voices (read: liberal voices) and enact an extreme right-wing agenda (read: conservative agenda)." Republicans should, therefore: a) follow Democrat Kaine's advice and drive the GOP further leftward; b) ignore Kaine altogether; c) do exactly the opposite of what this crocodile-teared partisan hack suggests, moving--post haste--to "purify the Republican Party, eliminate [liberal] voices and enact a [conservative] agenda." If you answered "b" and "c," then Cornhusker Kickbacks to you. To both take and implement the advice of those who seek your political destruction is a fool's errand. In many states, such as New York, Florida and elsewhere, the Republican establishment seems to get that. They're responding wisely to an unprecedented grass-roots groundswell (a "tea party," if you will) that demands both a return to the GOP's conservative roots and adherence to the Party platform. Unfortunately, like Kyle, obstinate RINO leadership in other states, such as Illinois, appear determined to play right into Democrats' hands. They're obtusely heeding Kaine's duplicitous counsel, throwing establishment weight behind candidates who appear as though handpicked by the DNC. Take Illinois Rep. Mark Kirk, for example. Kirk, who seeks to fill President Obama's old Senate seat is, based on his voting record, about 49 parts Democrat and one part Republican. In fact, a "Sen. Kirk" would, politically speaking, be largely indistinguishable from "Sen. Obama." According to Illinois based ChampionNews.net, Kirk:

• voted against a ban on the horrific practice of partial-birth abortion, having supported every demand of the pro-abortion industry;
• voted "yes" on cap-and-trade;
• voted "yes" to fund ACORN;
• voted "yes" to shut-down Guantanamo Bay;
• voted "yes" on CAFE standards;
• voted "yes" to prohibit drilling in ANWR;
• voted "no" on the successful surge in Iraq;
• voted "no" on school prayer;
• received an "F" from the National Rifle Association on gun rights; and
• publicly supports the U.N. "Convention on Climate Change";

But that's just the tip of the "oops-it's-not-really-melting" iceberg. Multiple media reports also indicate that this tax-and-spend liberal is widely rumored to be a practitioner of the homosexual lifestyle (a la Bawny Fwank). Although Kirk recently denied the charge, he has, nonetheless, eagerly supported nearly every legislative aspect of the extremist homosexual agenda. For example: Kirk has opposed a constitutional amendment to protect natural marriage. He also both co-sponsored the speech-chilling and freedom-killing federal "hate crimes" law and voted to grant homosexuals preferred government status through the so-called Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA). So, you have to ask: What business does Mark Kirk have even calling himself a Republican? And why is the Illinois GOP backing this Democrat in Republican's clothing rather than, say, Patrick Hughes (endorsed by Mark Levin), one of Kirk's solidly conservative primary opponents? If Kirk wins Illinois' Feb. 2 primary, voters are left an illusory choice. Republican vs. Democrat becomes a distinction without a difference: a dream come true for Tim Kaine. Did we learn nothing from 2009's conservative GOP sweep (Gov. Bob McDonnell, Va., Gov. Chris Christie, N.J., and AG Ken Cuccinelli, Va.)? Seriously, even in liberal New York, Doug Hoffman--a last-minute conservative, third-party dark horse--came out of nowhere to nearly defeat Democrat Bill Owens in the state's 23rd Congressional District. Remember? We remain a center-right country. In fact, a recent Gallup poll established that Americans identify as conservative vs. liberal by a nearly two-to-one margin. So, whose advice will Republicans follow in 2010? Will it be that of a fork-tongued Democratic emissary like Tim Kaine? Or will it be that of the GOP's highly motivated, itchin'-to-vote, grass-roots Party faithful? More importantly: Whose advice will you follow, Chairman Steele?